Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
SDR2000-00004
EXPIRED SDR2000 - 00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW [SORT 2000-00004 CITY OF TIGARD FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK communityDevelopment Shaping Better Community 120 DAYS = 6/27/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK CASE NO.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2000-00004 PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct two new buildings of 63,187 and 42,174 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. APPLICANT: Brian Smith OWNER: Smith-Gerig Properties, LLC Smith-Gerig Properties, LLC PO Box 930 PO Box 930 Wilsonville, OR 97070 Wilsonville, OR 97070 APPLICANTS Jim Waddle REP: 1927 NW Kearney Portland, OR 97209 LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light-Industrial; I-L. The I-L zoning district provides appropriate locations for general industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production, research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics such as noise, glare, odor, and vibration. APPLICABLE Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, REVIEW 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, CRITERIA: 18.795, 18.797 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004—FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 1 OF 20 • 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: Julia-Hajduk. 1. Submit a revised landscape plan with confirmation from a landscape architect that shows parking lot landscaping that will achieve a balance of low lying and vertical shrubbery. 2. Submit a revised plan that clearly shows all service facilities will be screened in accordance with Section 18.745.050.E.2. - 3. Submit a revised plan that shows the refuse containers will be screened in accordance with Section 18.745.050.E.4. 4. Submit a revised plan that shows the location and size of proposed trash enclosures. 5. Submit verification from the franchise waste hauler indicating that the location of the proposed trash enclosure meets their needs. 6. Submit details of the trash enclosure and refuse container for Staff to confirm that the standards of Section 18.755.050 have been met. 7. Submit a revised parking plan that shows the curbs around the perimeter of the parking lot will be at least 4 inches in height. 8. Submit a revised parking plan that shows at least 9 of the parking spaces will be designated as carpool/vanpool spaces. 9. Submit a revised parking plan that shows one (1) additional parking space (for a total of 166 parking spaces)). 10. Submit a revised parking plan that shows at least one (1) of the ADA spaces will be van accessible. 11. Submit a revised plan that shows a bicycle rack, accommodating 11 bicycle parking spaces will be located on the site in accordance with the siting standards for Section 18.765.050. 12. Submit details of the bicycle rack to be used. 13. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall install temporary orange construction fencing adjacent to the required buffer from Red Rock Creek. 14. Submit a revised landscape plan that shows no trees or shrubs exceeding 3 feet in height will be located in the vision clearance areas. 15. Submit to Jim Wolf in the Tigard Police Department, an outdoor lighting plan for review and approval. Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: 16. Prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new driveway work in SW Hunziker Street and any other work in the public right-of-way (ROW) or public easements. 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 2 OF 20 17. 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 that 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. 18. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit a suite layout map showing the proposed suite numbers. The map should be submitted to Kit Church, Engineering Department. The City will then calculate the address fee; it shall be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of the site permit. 19. The applicant's construction plans shall indicate that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW Hunziker Street as a part of this project: 6-foot concrete sidewalk; driveway apron to City standards. 20. The applicant's construction plan water notes shall refer to City of Tigard details, not Washington County. The existing 4-inch water meter and vault shall be relocated near the end of the existing 8-inch public water main next to the proposed double check detector assembly (DCDA). The applicant shall also abandon the existing 10-inch cast iron (CI) water line and fire hydrant that stubs to this site from the 12- inch public line. The domestic water service shall be protected by a reduced pressure principle device (backflow) assembly. 21. The applicant shall provide evidence as to whether or not there are existing public easements over the existing 8-inch and 12-inch public water lines across this site. If no easements exist, the applicant must provide new public easements over these lines. 22. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the site and building drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994." THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION BEING PERFORMED OR OCCUPANCY: 23. 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. 24. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Hunziker Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $1,650 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. 25. 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. 26. 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 NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 3 OF 20 confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. 27. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management for the proposed onsite storm water treatment facility. 28. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall construct a fence (split-rail) to prevent employees from inadvertently disturbing the buffer area. 29. Install all improvements as per the approved plans 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 based on the address 8200 SW Hunziker and the "Western Foundry" project name. The only land use case Staff found was attached to the address (SDR 29-77) but actually involved the lot to the north of the Foundry site. The Foundry site is shown as existing on those plans which indicates it was approved prior to 1977. Vicinity Information: The subject site is located on the south side of SW Hunziker Street. The site is bordered on all sides by property zoned Light Industrial (I-L). Red Rock Creek runs along the eastern edge of the property. To the west are railroad tracks. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site currently has 3 buildings on site in varying degrees of disrepair. The proposal is to remove the 2 eastern most buildings and reduce the size and renovate the western most building to create a 3,000 square foot building. The development will construct 2 new buildings of 63,187 and 42,174 square feet. The property is located at 8200 SW Hunziker; WCTM 2S101 BC, tax lot 2500 and 2S10100, tax lot 700. The property abuts Red Rock Creek and associated floodplain and wetlands on the east. The applicant has proposed to have no impact on the floodplain or wetlands and will maintain the required 25-foot buffer (as required by USA for applications submitted prior to February 5, 2000 and deemed complete prior to March 15, 2000.) SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA A. Applicable Development Code Standards 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) 18.775 Sensitive lands) 18.780 Signs 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) 18.797 Water Resources Overlay) B. Specific DR Approval Criteria 18.360 C. Street and Utility Improvement Standards 18.810 D. Impact Study 18.390 NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 4 OF 20 SECTION V. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS The Site development Review approval standards require that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of the Community Development Code. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. The proposal contains no elements related to the following Development Code Chapters which are also listed under Section 18.360.090.A.1: 18.350 (Planned Developments), 18.715 (Density Computations), or 18.750 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations) These Chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards, and are not discussed in this decision. 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 plans submitted by the applicant indicate that a walkway will be provided from street to all building entrances. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum 6-inch vertical separation (curbed) or a minimum 3-foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; The plans show the proposed walkway will be concrete across the asphalt parking lot. This is a clear distinction in materials which will satisfy this requirement. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. As stated above, the plans indicate the walkway will be concrete, therefore, this standard is 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 more than 100 parking spaces is one 50-foot access with 40 feet of pavement or two 30-foot accesses with 24 feet of pavement. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. The development will have over 100 parking spaces and has 1 point of access into the parking lot. This access is over 50 feet wide and will provide 40 feet of pavement. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 5 OF 20 FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the access and egress standards have been satisfied. Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street or a private drive more than 100 feet in length shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.0 Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). The applicant has provided a plan that shows street trees will be provided along the access drive. Phone conversations with the applicant's landscape architect indicate that the plans may be revised. If this is proposed, the applicant must submit a revised plan to the Planning Staff for approval PRIOR to any on-site changes. Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.080 states that no buffer is required between a proposed industrial use and existing Industrial uses. The surrounding uses are all permitted uses in the I-L zone. The buffer matrix indicates that when an I-L use abuts an I-L use, no buffer or screening is 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 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. While the majority of the site is not visible from the street, this standard applies to all parking areas abutting adjacent lots. The plans provided indicate that kinnikinnick will be planted along the perimeter of the parking lot, however, this low growing plant does not provide a balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery. Parking lot landscaping is spaced with one (1) tree for every 7 spaces in all areas. 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 applicant's plans do not show service facilities, therefore, Staff can not determine if the standards have been met. If the applicant submits a revised plan that clearly shows all service facilities will be screened in accordance with Section 18.745.050.E.2, Staff can determine that the standards are 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 applicant's plans do not show the location of the proposed refuse container, therefore, Staff can not determine if the standard is met. If the applicant submits a revised plan that shows the refuse containers will be screened in accordance with Section 18.745.050.E.4, this standard will be met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 6 OF 20 FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the landscaping and screening standards have not been fully met. If the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be met. CONDITIONS: • Submit a revised plan with confirmation from a landscape architect that shows parking lot landscaping that will achieve a balance of low lying and vertical shrubbery. • Submit a revised plan that clearly shows all service facilities will be screened in accordance with Section 18.745.050.E.2. • Submit a revised plan that shows the refuse containers will be screened in accordance with Section 18.745.050.E.4. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage (18.755): Chapter 18.755 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard, Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign-Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The applicant's narrative states that trash enclosures will consist of walled and gated enclosures completely screening trash handling and recycling equipment and that enclosures meeting the minimum requirement for industrial uses is shown on the plans. Staff did not identify any such proposed structure on the plans provided. In addition, the applicant has not submitted a letter from the franchise hauler, indicating the location meets their needs. 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 applicant is conditioned to submit plans that show the location of the proposed refuse containers. In order to insure that the refuse containers are in a location accessible to collectors, the applicant must submit written sign-off from the trash hauler that the proposed locations are sufficient to meet their needs. 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 7 OF 20 The applicant has not submitted detail of the trash enclosure or refuse container. The applicant must submit details addressing the design standards in order for Staff to determine that this standard has been met. FINDING: Because the applicant has not provided evidence of compliance with the mixed solid waste and recyclables standards, this standard has not been met. If the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be met. CONDITIONS: • Submit a revised plan that shows the location and size of proposed trash enclosures. • Submit verification from the franchise waste hauler indicating that the location of the proposed trash enclosure meets their needs • Submit details of the trash enclosure and refuse container for Staff to confirm that the standards of Section 18.755.050 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 by the disabled. Preferential carpool/vanpool spaces shall be full-sized per requirements in Section 18.765.040N and shall be clearly designated for use only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. The plans provide for more than 20 parking spaces, therefore, carpool/vanpool parking is required. The plans do not reserve parking spaces for carpool or vanpool spaces. Based on the number of parking spaces required (166), 9 spaces must be designated for carpool/vanpool. Disabled-accessible parking: All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. The applicant is providing 159 parking spaces, therefore, 6 ADA handicap spaces are required, one (1) of which is van accessible (9 feet wide with and 8-foot aisle). The applicant's plans show 6 spaces will be marked as ADA accessible, however, none of these appear to be van accessible. 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 driveway and parking will be asphalted in accordance with the requirements. The number and size of the access drives is regulated by the standards specified in Section 18.705.030 and has been discussed previously in this decision. Vision clearance will be addressed further in this decision. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 8 OF 20 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 and conditioned 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 plans submitted show the parking spaces will be clearly marked with striping. All interior drives are two-way and do not require additional markings. Wheel Stops: Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. The dimension of the parking spaces provided assumes a 3-foot overhang into the walkway. Because the walkway is 13 feet wide and only 6 feet is required, the applicant's plans meet the requirement for parking spaces adjacent to the walkways. The applicant's plans do not clearly show a 4-inch curb will be provided for parking spaces adjacent to landscaping, therefore, a condition is needed. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Section 18.765.040.N states that: "except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2 the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet for a standard space and 7.5 feet x 16.5 feet for a compact space; aisles accommodating two direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. The applicant's plans indicate the standard parking spaces will be 9 feet by 15' —6" feet with 3-foot of overhang into the walkway or landscape area. The access aisle will be between 24 and 30 feet wide, thus satisfying the criteria. No compact spaces are proposed. 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 plans do not indicate that a bicycle rack will be provided. A condition is necessary for the applicant to submit plans that show a bicycle rack will be located on the site in accordance with the siting standards for Section 8.765.050. 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 9 OF 20 Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers, asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. The applicant has not provided a detail of the bike rack to be used, therefore, Staff is unable to confirm that this 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. Table 18.765.2 states that for Light Industrial Uses, .1 bicycle parking spaces are required for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, therefore, 11 bicycle parking spaces must be provided. The applicant's plan does not show bicycle parking spaces will be provided, therefore, a condition of approval is necessary. 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 Light Industrial Uses is 1.6 spaces per 1000 square feet and there is no maximum. The applicant is, therefore, required to provide 165.37 parking spaces which is rounded up according to the Code (Section 18.765.070.C.1). The plans provide only 165. Because there is a significant portion of the site that is not being developed at this time, Staff finds it feasible for the applicant to provide one (1) additional parking space. 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 buildings are designed to have several loading docks for each building, therefore, this standard is met. 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 revised plan that shows the curbs around the perimeter of the parking lot will be at least 4 inches in height. • Submit a revised plan that shows at least 9 of the parking spaces will be designated as carpool/vanpool spaces. • Submit a revised plan that shows one (1) additional parking space (for a total of 166 parking spaces). • Submit a revised plan that shows at least one (1) of the ADA spaces will be van accessible. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 10 OF 20 • Submi, a revised plan that shows a bicy rack, accommodating 11 bicycle parking spaces will be located on the site in accordance with the siting standards for Section 18.765.050. • Submit details of the bicycle rack to be used. Sensitive Lands (18.775) Landform alterations or developments which are only within wetland areas that meet the jurisdictional requirements and permit criteria of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Division of State Lands, Unified Sewerage Agency, and/or other federal, state, or regional agencies do not require a sensitive lands permit. The City shall require that all necessary permits from other agencies be obtained. All other applicable City requirements must be satisfied, including sensitive land permits for areas within the 100-year floodplain, slopes of 25% or greater or unstable ground, drainageways, and wetlands which are not under state or federal jurisdiction. There are wetlands and floodplains on-site, however, the applicant has proposed to stay out of the required 25-foot buffer, including utility connections. Because the elevation plans show doors will be provided to the rear of Building "B", Staff will impose a condition that requires permanent marking of the buffer areas to insure that there is no disturbance. In addition, the applicant must construct temporary fencing prior to any site work to insure that there is no disturbance of the buffer area. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the standards have not been fully met. If the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, Staff can determine that there are no sensitive land concerns as a result of this development. CONDITIONS: • Prior to any site work the applicant shall install temporary construction fencing adjacent to the required buffer from Red Rock Creek. • Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall construct a fence (split-rail) to prevent employees from inadvertently disturbing the buffer area. Signs (18.780): Chapter 18.780.130.D lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the I-L 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 rovided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. There are no trees over 12 inches caliper on the site, therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Because there are no trees over 12 inches caliper on the site, this standard does not apply. Visual Clearance Areas (18.795): Chapter 18.795 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight (8) feet in height (8) (trees may be placed NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 11 OF 20 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. Because the only street frontage is the 60-foot-wide flag pole portion into the development site, the vision clearance triangle areas are mainly off-site, beyond the applicant's control. The landscape plan submitted shows trees within the vision clearance triangle areas on both sides of the driveway. These trees must be removed in order to meet the vision clearance standards. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the vision clearance standards have been not been met. If the applicant complies with the condition below, the standards will be met. CONDITION: Submit a revised landscape plan that shows no trees or shrubs exceeding 3 feet in height will be located in the vision clearance areas. Water Resources Overlay (18.797) Section 18.797 identifies Red Rock Creek as a Minor Stream. The required buffer from this creek is 25 feet. The applicant's plans show the required 25-foot setback from top-of-bank or wetland edge. The proposal involves no development within this setback, therefore, no further Water Resources Overlay review is necessary. B. SPECIFIC SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL STANDARDS Section 18.360.090(A)(2) through 18.360.090(A)(15) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.360.090.3 (Exterior Elevations);); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 18.360.090.6 (Private Outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces). The following sections were discussed previously in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses; 18.360.090.13 (Parking); 18.360.00.14 (Landscaping); 18.360.090.15 (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. The applicant's plans have considered the natural environment on the site by locating the building and all site improvements outside of the buffer area. There are no trees on the site. There are no known areas subject to sliding. Fire fighting considerations have been made by the Building Division, however, they have indicated that the plans satisfy the fire code requirements for hydrant location. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, this standard has been satisfied. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 12 OF 20 Crime Prevention and .afety: 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. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this project and requested that the applicant submit a lighting plan for review and approval. FINDING: Because information from the Police Department indicates that a lighting plan is needed in order to verify that the lighting meets the crime prevention and safety criteria, this standard has not been satisfied. If the applicant provides a lighting plan to the Police Department for review and approval, this standard will be met. CONDITION: Submit to the Police Department, an outdoor lighting plan for review and approval. Public Transit: Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route; the requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: the location of other transit facilities in the area; and the size and type of the proposal. The following facilities may be required after City and Tri-Met review: bus stop shelters; turnouts for buses; and connecting paths to the shelters. The site has frontage on SW Hunziker which is a Tri-met transit route. Staff sent a request for comments to In-met, however, they did not respond with a request for the applicant to provide additional transit facilities along the frontage. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, this standard is satisfied. 100-year floodplain Where landfill and/or development is allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/ bicycle plan. The project site is adjacent to the 100-year floodplain of Red Rock Creek, however, no development is proposed within the floodplain area. There are currently no trail studies or trail plans for development along Red Rock Creek, therefore, a condition to dedicate land for a pathway is not warranted. 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. Use Classification: The applicant is proposing to construct two new buildings as part of a light industrial park. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 13 OF 20 The zone is I-L, which allows light industrial uses in this zone. It is the applicant's burden to insure that all prospective tenants fall within the use classifications for light industrial zones. 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. STANDARD I-L'ZONE PROPOSED Minimum Lot Size None 395,318 sq. ft Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. >50 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 30 ft. 61 ft. - Side facing street on corner & through lots [1] 20 ft. N/A - Side yard 0/50 ft. [3] 18 ft. min. - Rear yard 0/50 ft. [3] 10 ft. min. Maximum Height 45 ft. 29 ft. Maximum Site Coverage [2] 85% 81% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% _ 19%.*see discussion [1] The provisions of Chapter 18.795(Vision Clearance)must be satisfied. [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3] No setback shall be required except 50 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. The applicant's plans indicate the landscape percentage is 19 percent. As discussed previously, this number included the areas used for the 3-foot bumper overhang. Regardless, the total area subtracted for the 3-foot bumper overhang is 1,539 square feet. Once this figure is subtracted, the applicant continues to comply with the 15% landscaping requirement. All other dimensional standards are clearly met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the provisions of the underlying zone are met. C. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS (18.810) 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 major collector street to have a 60 to 80-foot right-of-way width and a 44-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Hunziker Street, which is classified as a major collector street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 60 feet of ROW along this street in this vicinity, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The street is currently improved to an adequate pavement width and curbs. No additional ROW dedications are necessary. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should reconstruct the driveway entrance into this site to meet current City standards. The applicant's plan indicates that this entrance will be reconstructed. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 14 OF 20 Sidewalks: Section 1o.a10.070.A requires that sidewalks ue constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. There are no sidewalks on the south side of SW Hunziker Street. The applicant shall construct a 6-foot-wide concrete sidewalk adjacent to their short frontage. 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. There is an existing 8-inch public sanitary sewer line adjacent to the eastern property line of this site. An existing private sanitary sewer line extends westerly from the public line and runs through the site to serve the existing office building. The applicant's plan is somewhat unclear as to what they intend for the old private sewer line. It appears that they plan to replace the old line with a new 8-inch private sewer line into the site to serve the new buildings. No work within the public sanitary sewer easement is necessary or proposed. The applicant will just need to clarify for the Building Division how the new private sewer layout will relate to the existing private system. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are developed parcels adjacent to this site. No additional measures are necessary to accommodate upstream flows. The proposed onsite storm water conveyance system will adequately handle the runoff within 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 15 OF 20 There will be a net increase in impervious area on this site. The applicant's engineer estimates that there is currently approximately 5.29 acres of impervious area on this site. When this project is completed, the impervious area will increase to approximately 6.39 acres. The applicant has proposed to provide onsite detention by way of a 36-inch diameter storm drainage pipe. An orifice control structure will be provided to meet the design criteria in the USA standards. Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. There are no identified bike or pedestrian ways on this property. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under- grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case- by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in- lieu of under-grounding. There are existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 60 lineal feet; therefore, the fee would be $1,650. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings: The applicant submitted a traffic impact report, prepared by Stein Engineering, dated January 28, 2000. Stein analyzed the following intersections to determine any impacts that may result from this project: • SW Hall Boulevard/SW Scoffins Street • SW Hall Boulevard/SW Hun;iker Street • SW Hunziker Street/SW 72' Avenue • SW Hunziker Street/Site Access. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 16 OF 20 Stein found that uncle, existing traffic conditions, all study intersections operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS D or better). All four intersections currently operate at LOS B during the PM peak hour. The intersections of SW Hall Boulevard/SW Hunziker Street and SW Hunziker Street/SW 72nd Avenue both operate at LOS C during the AM peak hour. Stein estimated what background traffic will be like during the year 2002, when this project will theoretically be operational. They considered the new traffic that will be generated by the Eagle Hardware and Superior Signs projects in the vicinity, plus a growth factor of 4%. Stein also considered the potential traffic generation from this site if the existing buildings were occupied for typical light industrial uses. This site could potentially generate approximately 466 average daily trips. Under background conditions alone in 2002, Stein estimates that all four study intersections will operate at acceptable LOS during both the AM and PM peak hours. Stein then estimated the added traffic generated from this development. They estimate that the new development, which will be made up of approximately 120,000 sf of industrial park uses, will generate approximately 835 trips per average weekday. As was stated above, the existing 66,920 sf of light industrial use on the site could feasibly generate approximately 466 trips per average weekday. Therefore, the net increase in trip generation for this development is 369 trips per average weekday. When the new site generated trips are added in, all four study intersections will continue to operate at acceptable LOS during both the AM and PM peak hours. In summary, this project will not create an undue burden on the existing transportation system. Fire and Life Safety: The Building Division and Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVFR) will both review the construction plans for this project to ensure that adequate fire protection is provided. Public Water System: The City of Tigard public water system serves this area. There are two existing public main lines on this site: an 8-inch line within the existing driveway area, and a 12-inch line adjacent to the eastern property line. Public Works provided comments regarding the water system design for this project. They state that all water notes on the plans must refer to City of Tigard details, not Washington County. The existing 4-inch water meter and vault must be relocated near the end of the existing 8-inch public water main next to the proposed double check detector assembly (DCDA). The applicant must also abandon the existing 10-inch cast iron (CI) water line and fire hydrant that stubs to this site from the 12-inch public line. The domestic water service shall be protected by a reduced pressure principle device (backflow) assembly. Public Works also notes that it is uncertain whether or not there are existing public easements over the existing 8-inch and 12-inch public water lines. If no easements exist, the applicant must provide new public easements over these lines. 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 issuance of the site permit, 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 17 OF 20 The applicant's plans indicate that they will provide a StormFilter on this site, manufactured by Stormwater Management. The engineer provided preliminary sizing calculations for this facility and notes that it will require an 8-foot by 16-foot vault, and 18 filter cartridges. Staff concurs with the calculations and approves the proposed water quality design. The applicant will be required to enter into a maintenance contract with Stormwater Management to ensure that this facility will be adequately maintained. 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 Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb five or more acres of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. The applicant will be required to provide a detailed grading plan as a part of the Building Division plan submittal. In addition, the applicant will be required to obtain a NPDES permit prior to construction. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). An addressing fee in the amount of $30.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of a site permit. For multi-tenant buildings, one address number is assigned to each building and then all tenant spaces are given suite numbers. The owner or property manager is responsible for assigning suite numbers for their tenants. This information must then be given to the City so that building permits for tenant improvements can be adequately tracked in the City's permit tracking system. Based upon the information provided by the applicant, this building will be a multi-tenant building. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall provide a suite layout map showing the proposed suite numbers. The addressing fee will then be calculated based upon the number of buildings and suites that must be addressed. In multi-level structures, ground level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "1", second level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "2", etc. 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 improvements necessary to meet City standard,and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 18 OF 20 In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.040 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. The applicant has provided an impact study addressing the project's impacts on public systems. The Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) is a mitigation measure that is required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. The applicant will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $24,698 based on the use proposed. Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $77,181 ($24,698 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 $52,483. The applicant will not be required to construct any off-site improvements. SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: 1. The single accessible parking stall on Building A, doesn't comply. The access aisle is on the wrong side. 2. Marked crossings along the accessible route area where it crosses a public way are required as well as the two stalls on the east side of the building. 3. The applicant must comply with OAR 741, Sections 300 - 335, "Railroad Rules and Regulations. We will require an approval letter from ODOT. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and requested a lighting plan be submitted for their review and approval. The City of Tigard Operations Utility Manager has reviewed the proposal and provided the following comments: All water notes need to refer to the City of Tigard "Water Standards" and not Washington County. Existing 4" water meter and vault is to be relocated near end of existing 8" c.i. Water main next to proposed DCDA. Owner/Developer to plug existing 10" c.i. water line stubbed to property at Red Rock Creek and abandon that portion of the 10" water line and fire hydrant. Domestic water to be protected by reduced pressure principle device (backflow) assembly. Please note that there are two other fire lines north of the access road from the existing 8" c.i. (from Hunziker) that services the properties that are not shown on the plans. Easements shall be provided for existing 8" c.i. and 12" c.i. if there are none currently recorded. The City of Tigard Property Manager has reviewed the application and have not provided comments or objections. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 19 OF 20 SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS Unified Sewerage Agency has reviewed the proposal and provided comments which were incorporated in to the body of this decision. A complete copy of the comments are a part of the file and are available for review. US Army Corps of Engineers has reviewed the proposal and indicated that a Corps permit will not be required unless there is an alteration to the wetland or creeks, including utility lines. ODOT, TCI cable, PGE, GTE, US West, DSL, Tri-met 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 APRIL 24, 2000, AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MAY 9, 2000 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. AApeal: 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. 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 3:30 PM ON MAY 8, 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. April 24, 2000 PRE ED BY: Julia P,6well Hajduk DATE Associate Planner Air April 24. 2000 APPROVED BY: Richard H. Bew rdorff DATE Planning Manager I:\curpin\julia\sdr\foundry.doc.dot NOTICE OF TYPE H DECISION SDR2000-00004—FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 20 OF 20 I." i. •4 • • . • Li. • • I- , . , . 2 41,41.1111= LIJ WM*Are•• ,- '---.^3 ' \ % 2 CC _, , __,-.-2,_.....s-t.,-..-4-:-.-----z,-_-...,,,,i-... .7:.---...„7---,.....:_ _...,-;:-..--- ,--:----::.... . i• <IC 4--L------2------- ---4— - - ' -7 .—...;---7, -- or; • (1. -----4 W ft—I- -F Mk• I awirals.„„ - :7-::.- , : ..,...,- --."1-'i'.--:1(.1::;>., 1 - a ..:......,,-:::.-:.:.-..k.i--,- -.......7., - ...C..-'' , f- "....40,0 - ,I:or° ------1/ - gililld• Z ',I --'....• ---_ , / I -Agri' Z • 06400 . . ..'. ., 1,, ': • 1 Z I .1 i I , ■ 1 I . I< : 6 ...-.1‘ . t ; .3 ; 1 ; ; , 1,.„ , mat i ii 1 si .- I ii I II 1 --..\ I 1 ■IlV. I I .4' 1—r- I I I I 7 I I I — ;\1 I ..1-. -I-{-^-A. -I-I- ..6 -..1-I- 1- 0.1 ■ a.a J.A. 1-1- l• 1. , i I I 1 1 1 , I _. . ' 1 .., . i. I i Cil 1 -- ':-.=;- ---1 t- -r--, 1--- -t -7 Ce t I \i I I 113U I L 1 1:p I NG 1 1 i I ••-• !p 1 al _ 414 — , i I I I 1 1 . (..9 '. --L.— ----I 1 I ,•':it 1 ! , 1 .....-!--_. -i I- , .1 7 I ,■ I 1-1■ ! 1. :-.1 i 1 i:i:i i. .' 1 . ' Li.. , , .,..•,,, $ I ,T.,., ! .p., ; i;4 i . ..;-r-ii R2.,i _.,,..:14! i i IHL113_,i r ' 1,,••• :.: i L -=-.......--f... -- ; I : --- : i 1.-,1,7.1..1.•— ■ 711 I- W.,.....1 1-77' IT ! 1 i, ! i 1, ! : T . . LEGEND l'! -c. 0 • i , , ________,.....,_...._______ ._ --1/ -,— -, I. „.. , ii 11114 I ' ..Ni BUIL-PING 14 I 1:. . 1 i 1 ■ ‘j •, -Os , i ! , ........e_s._,..4 8 ,...."..z.—...... (..) .11.W . 01: _., .. , .: ... ,_:=4,f. _--— --- g: ■W., sir. --■••—4,- I-, - --- 0 SITE PLAN 1,410. _ . ......—■ ---....-- ——--.... . . .......--.. ■....--......———■-.............. -......-.--... —--..-- . —...■....— ..----_ SITE PLAN t FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK EXHIBIT MAP N SDR2000-00004 (map is not to scale) CITY of TIGARD • .n GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM `Pc,,, ti � VICINITY MAP ' 1 4°t FOUN INDUSTRIAL PARK 4,44 I I 41 PAIIIMPA I I I I h- . TD rIMF SDR2000-00004,A1:4 4 Ala F • , rAtiA r t Ilk ♦ ,. / 1, ,%s,,,�� �\ SUBJECT SITES �,0,10 1 9 „:‘,\‘ , \ \\\ \\,:z\-\\SNA.\\,\\ „,„\ x . .,/ . / , , .‘k,\ \\\.\\\ 111111110 \\\\kW N 0 100 200 300 400 500 Feet 1111114111111L. 84‘: _� 1".378 feet Ci�ffty�����111�off�f Tigard Inlormation on this map is for general location only and should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd f Tigard,OR 97223 I r— (503)639.4171 Il 11 hltpafwww.ci.Nerd.or.us Community Development Plot date: Mar 1,2000;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 2000-00004 CITY OF TIGARD FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK Community(Development Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 6/27/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK CASE NO.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2000-00004 PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct two new buildings of 63,187 and 42,174 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. APPLICANT: Brian Smith OWNER: Smith-Gerig Properties, LLC Smith-Gerig Properties, LLC PO Box 930 PO Box 930 Wilsonville, OR 97070 Wilsonville, OR 97070 APPLICANTS Jim Waddle REP: 1927 NW Kearney Portland, OR 97209 LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light-Industrial; I-L. The I-L zoning district provides appropriate locations for general industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production, research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics such as noise, glare, odor, and vibration. APPLICABLE Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, REVIEW 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 and 18.810. CRITERIA: 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 located at City Hall. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (250 per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 24, 2000 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MAY 9, 2000 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. VA eal: ector's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. Any Ndrty with standing as provided in Community Development Code Section 18.390.040.G.1 . may appeal this decision in accordance with Community Development Code 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 3:30 PM ON MAY 8, 2000. Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner at (503) 639-4171 , Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. I- . z I- CC rs a• LLJ I :- 4.i= z '!': �: ;,,va•' ; ,. -� .- 2 ' i•1'1 '' 14114. 14 .tir Aitt '"4 ii a r't f� o ce i } ,at''`,,pmnipnlio I!v a'i1-. 'pl. �,..` i LL P. I 11: Cp ----r—r--r-4-n � O ��dne y = I - I ' b� u i s — a 1 -- _ 1..;it �d it SITE PLAN t FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK EXHIBIT MAP N SDR2000-00004 '_ haursnolwacme] • OC. 1111 . 142•V VICINITY MAP IIII ii II . / / FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK MI ' SDR2000-00004 I V I I O ►j i •"1 4 wilily . 4, 4 g \O SUBJECT SITES 41/14 ebb \\\ N • City ofTiµard Comma* Plot data Mar 1,2000,C Mag MAGIC03 APR DATE: 4/373/77 PLANS CHECK NO.: PROJECT TITLE: T _ , COUNTYWIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE APPLICANT: WORKSHEET MAILING ADDRESS: (FOR NON-SINGLE FAMILY USES) CITY/ZIP/PHONE: RATE PER TAX MAP NO.: LAND USE CATEGORY TRIP SITUS NO.ADDRESS: RESIDENTIAL • $201.00 BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL $51.00 OFFICE $184.00 INDUSTRIAL $193.00 INSTITUTIONAL $83.00 PAYMENT METHOD: CASH/CHECK CREDIT INSTITUTIONAL ONLY: BANCROFT(PROMISSORY NOTE) LAND USE CATEGORY I DESCRIPTION OF WEEKDAY AVG.TRIP 1 WEEKEND AVG.TRIP DEFER TO OCCUPANCY /l O 1 USE 1 RATE (!J 1 RATE BASIS: epIN L4nfi .Or.:1,05e5 an /nc r-e /P> �p 3 Co S '-(--1 CALCULATIONS: A J4_-1?, x 45)5 )( Q n�! Try 9r) -/ I $ r3G. / Jq3''r2 � ��. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION: )' 7 1 ��3 �! FEE: , p0 FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES ONLY ADDITIONAL NOTES: C� E' S�l {MI�TQ.J n ( ,GePwJ �,r Jh ROAD AMT: /77 TRANSIT AMT: - a� DetA__o 4'0 6(1 11.e400-1(--- PREPARED BY: /JJ 6x7/99 f:\shared\ping\wpshare\scottk\1 procedures manuahworksheet 99-0O.doc CC: WASHINGTON COUNTY TIF NOTEBOOK Kristie.Peprman -TIF estimate �.E Page 1 From: Julia Hajduk To: Debbie Adamski; Geo Oberkamper; Kristie Peerman Date: 4/19/00 5:34PM Subject: TIF estimate Whoever is"on" right now: could you do a TIF estimate for me. The project involves a net increase in 18,360 square feet of building for a light industrial office park. Not sure of exact users as they do not have tenants yet(existing site is Western Foundry). Hope this is enough info. Julia Hajduk Associate Planner (503)639-4171 x 407 julia @ci.tigard.or.us www.ci.tigard.or.us A NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIE, )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 CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping/i Better Community 500-FOOT PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE: March 1, 2000 FILE NO./NAME: SDR2000-00004/FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. 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 MARCH 15, 2000. All comments should be directed to Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate 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 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 : relevant approval criteria with s■ ;ient 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." • / "NJ CITY of TIGARD VICINITY MAP ,# • FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK ■ SDR2000-00004 ,v4k1 • gip , 44* - [\ 4 •4.. J\‘ .� FSUBJECT SITES A Iryo n r ��erd isA curpinAmasters � �-\ v REQUEST FOR COMMENTS 410 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY TIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community DATE: March 1,2000 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer MAR 0 3 2000 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Najdu*,Associate Planner Phone: (503)639-4111/Fax: (5031 684-7291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR]2000-00004 >FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is 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: March 15, 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: 9‘gootVc- 6341,,,MA k,*ke,q‘ci \ste.c■,(3 09,mvo Otitt iv:MA . (Please provide the folrming information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: o c I Phone Number's): *1.4 SDR2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community DATE: March 1,2000 TO: John Roy,Property Manager 77(� RECEIVED PLANNING • FROM: City of Tigard Planning DiviSiOn MAR 0 6 2000 STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner CITY OF TIGARD Phone: 15031 639-4171 I Fax: (5031684-7291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK: REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is 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: March 15, 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: i/' 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: v Please proviife the foffnuing information)Name of Person(sl Commenting: Phone Number(s): I SDR2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY O TIGARD Community(Development Shaping A(Better Community DATE: March 1,2000 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: Lori Dorney,US West Communications/Engineering MAR 0 6 2000 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: (503)639-4171/Fax: 1503)684-1297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK` REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is 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: March 15, 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: A!.ems— 1. (Please provide the following information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: I Phone Number's]: SDR2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST FOR COMMENTS • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIIGARD Community Ueve(opment Shaping Better Community DATE: March 1,2000 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: Brian Moore,Portland General Electric 1AR 0 6 2000 FROM: City of T igard Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: [5031639-4111/Fax: 15031684-7291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR]2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK` REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicants 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: March 15, 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: v � (Please provide the following information)Name of Personfsl Commenting: — A ? Phone Numberfsl: SDR2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY TIGARD Community(Development Shaping A Better Community DATE: March 1,2000 TO: Gary Lampella,Building Official RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division MAR 0 9 2000 STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: [5031639-4111/Fax: [5031664-1291 CITY OF TIGARD SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISM 2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is 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: March 15, 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: - &Mit SIG/?v ti (Please provide the foltawing information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: J 'Phone Number[sl: SDR2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community DATE: March 1,2000 RECEIVED PLANNING TO r�417n Michael Miller,Utilities Manager MAR 1 0 2000 FROM: re, ; City of Tigard Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Najdult,Associate Planner Phone: 15031 639-4111 I Fax: [5031 684-7291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK-. REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is 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: March 15, 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: A u. /JA TE dl. A.MTES ti1EE6 7 hFFt4 to (? D.1 OF 7/601 'Y,J47 — 5-74A/ae e03" /uQ Ado T 014514/n/G.Ton.l eAX %.)ry. Ek(S7in/Lc 4u l4i'ir &L METER" ,4No VR«T XS RELA 7o AIEM2. A7vo QE" Ek/Sriw1L. . LIATEi . MM k1E%T T, P2opnSEn N 1'A . 6-/AIE pE_VECDPE2-- 1 Pw Er[7STinJCc /Dk C.,(. C.> ,'JE S71,613E0 72 ?2vpEz A-r 1REO ANv/O 4154A10 n1 7714 7" 45 2Tlvn.) aF 71.16" 10"1U475'L 14 NJE 4-ivO / é Lyon gArr. _r Jc 1ESr/C. 1,1A7 - 7 L C/P_LriCre 7 7. By A?EDucep PiZ f cc2E PjL,NGPLC evr cE, (fit C. _Fc .i) A5sEm3c y, Pc-EA 3E A/eTE 77✓0"r 77,/E"RE Aki,g 44 10:'&ase provide the foffowing information)Name of Persons)Commenting: /W,L /',/Jir-�,E✓L� 1 .1O OTue2, CtPhone Number[sl: y 3ei;- ,.,,., �E ��STiN�c �./. (F�..,� /.l«,�z•kF�) 77,fA r SE2V/c�s TAE P/Lu�i¢.77� A1oeaw OF 71/6 AC[.ESS X0.4 p/�/Ar Aa- Nor Sf/ow ) DN 77, / Jc, �ASErnE,UT3 �E' PIZCV/OEn hut- E.-34I 7/A.fCc f3" C.I. /dnvo /2.0 , IF 7WE'E As( Gunn-c."nw1 , Lti..o! 0. SDR2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST FOR COMMENTS 03/17/00 14:51 FAX 503 6403525 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY IJ001/003 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS OFTICiARD Community Development '9ECEi�EQ PLANNING Shaping Better Community DATE: March 1,2000 7 TO: Julia Huffman,USA/SWM Program 2040 77777-77-7- it OFriG ARO J FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division Ui] r 2 0 ' Lin STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Halduk,Associate Planner [5031 639-4111/Fax: 15031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR)2000-00004 ➢FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK< REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is 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: March 15, 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: Csl Y ; 1 \i\-) trx N.N--,r,s +V ace)_s 6,\ OLL,2"-rwiLlk berr—c) es v (Precise provide thefo[wwing information)Name of Person[sl Commenti c »1o* Phone Number[sl: — 0 03/17/00 14:52 FAX 503 6403525 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY Cj002/003 u A f f UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY MEMORANDUM DATE: March 17, 2000 TO: Julia Hajduk, City of Tigard FROM: Julia Huffman, USA j ,,� SUBJECT: Foundry Industrial Park, SDR 2000-00004 On February 22, 2000 the Unified Sewerage Agency ("USA") Board of Directors adopted USA Resolution and Order 00-7 (R&O 00-7). R&O 00-7 applies immediately to all development, unless the development is authorized by approval of a land use application that was received by a land use authority on or before February 4, 2000 and was approved or deemed complete by the land use jurisdiction on or before March 15, 2000. SANITARY SEWER The development should be provided with a means of disposal for sanitary sewer. The means of disposal should be in accordance with Unified Sewerage Agency's Design and Construction Standards. Engineer should verify that public sanitary sewer is available to uphill adjacent properties, or extend service as required by R&O. STORM SEWER The development should have access to public storm sewer. Engineer should verify that public storm sewer is available to uphill adjacent properties, or extend storm service as required by the R&O. Hydraulic and hydrological analysis of storm conveyance system is necessary. If downstream storm conveyance does not have the capacity to convey the volume during a 25- year, 24-hour storm event, the applicant is responsible for mitigating the flow. WATER QUALITY Developer should provide a water quality facility to treat the new impervious surface being constructed as part of this development. 155 North First Avenue,Suite 270, MS 10 Phone: 503/648-8621 03/17/00 14:52 FAX 503 6403525 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY 003/003 • March 17,2000 Julia Hajduk,City of Tigard Foundry Industrial Park Page 2 SENSITIVE AREA A "Sensitive Area" exists. Developer must preserve a corridor as described in the R&O separating the sensitive area from the impact of development. The creek, wetland/sensitive area shall be identified on plans. A Pre-Screening and Sensitive Area Assessment will need to be completed. FLOODPLAIN Site may contain flood plain/flood way designations. Grading within the flood plain/flood way shall be done in such a manner as to preserve the flood storage and flood conveying area without effecting any upstream or downstream properties in accordance with R&O. DIVISION OF STATE LANDS/CORPS OF ENGINEERS A DSLJCorps of Engineers permit is required for any work in the creek or wetlands. EROSION CONTROL A joint 1200-C erosion control permit is required. REQUEST FOR COMM TS CITY O TIIGARD ENED PtA�N` {iEC Community De topment Shaping Better Community DATE: March 1,2000 �.... t.^.P.4-t 2 2 200 � �:I t r TO: Julia Huffman,USA/SWM Program uF TIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division L STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner y� Phone: [5031639-4111/Fax: [5031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is 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: March 15, 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: I" 7.� �v sti.J v C.4 r k v•r�.y...-,-/1 s r. C1 / v �► (rPCease provide the following information)Name of Person[sl Commenting. ( 144,, I Phone Number(s): -3 1-1 SDR2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST FOR COMMENTS - r UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY MEMORANDUM FAEC \\JF_D ANN1NG R,pR 2 2000 G►►r ur i IGARD DATE: March 17, 2000 TO: Julia Hajduk, City of Tigard FROM: Julia Huffman, USA J Wit; SUBJECT: Foundry Industrial Park, SDR 2000-00004 On February 22, 2000 the Unified Sewerage Agency ("USA") Board of Directors adopted USA Resolution and Order 00-7 (R&O 00-7). R&O 00-7 applies immediately to all development, unless the development is authorized by approval of a land use application that was received by a land use authority on or before February 4, 2000 and was approved or deemed complete by the land use jurisdiction on or before March 15, 2000. SANITARY SEWER The development should be provided with a means of disposal for sanitary sewer. The means of disposal should be in accordance with Unified Sewerage Agency's Design and Construction Standards. Engineer should verify that public sanitary sewer is available to uphill adjacent properties, or extend service as required by R&O. STORM SEWER The development should have access to public storm sewer. Engineer should verify that public storm sewer is available to uphill adjacent properties, or extend storm service as required by the R&O. Hydraulic and hydrological analysis of storm conveyance system is necessary. If downstream storm conveyance does not have the capacity to convey the volume during a 25- year, 24-hour storm event, the applicant is responsible for mitigating the flow. WATER QUALITY Developer should provide a water quality facility to treat the new impervious surface being constructed as part of this development. 155 North First Avenue, Suite 270, MS 10 Phone: 503/648-8621 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124-3072 FAX:503/640-3525 March 17, 2000 Julia Hajduk, City of Tigard Foundry Industrial Park Page 2 SENSITIVE AREA A "Sensitive Area" exists. Developer must preserve a corridor as described in the R&O separating the sensitive area from the impact of development. The creek, wetland/sensitive area shall be identified on plans. A Pre-Screening and Sensitive Area Assessment will need to be completed. FLOODPLAIN Site may contain flood plain/flood way designations. Grading within the flood plain/flood way shall be done in such a manner as to preserve the flood storage and flood conveying area without effecting any upstream or downstream properties in accordance with R&O. DIVISION OF STATE LANDS/CORPS OF ENGINEERS A DSL/Corps of Engineers permit is required for any work in the creek or wetlands. EROSION CONTROL A joint 1200-C erosion control permit is required. - .u- leg 7 au= am 6, , ., mean 111K Z' Ir- 111161 ime ET' rgerl RN" °ore - ii i iltillsipi Ili t° - 111, '11161:4 si` alrilre3A02.1114'741141 -•1' ..,,'"H .• • ',..P. -.I - , ,- 14.-VA i ill, , -;;-- f ift, ink Pit•"7 ei: .._ _ 1401;-'acil T, -Ad° 1141 .-,-,4 .d'''''.** 4/' 111=-1 Illin es 0,IN. pp , '.' gal 4 .-;4111■1''' th,-.. -. .... ..1k IP"! __lap -11 -""z ---- imp 11:..:` :ftbi44C. rid CO riql,ilahriliati(41:4:'. 1Ace ' ft. !"_.......zuwwito -----k:',. . -,3■44. ., • ipp, itcirEcalicikid: 34r IliprAdi„. _ alf--1 X iglik, . larrti■rulr-diA.._ IS41111111104r2/111111111Z ' / 4 APPill''' 1111.imm sr,' 8,111..ri,„7,.. r. ..11.11.3`,..0:40.,,,;!-04,......trAtkci ksigillgo.":71Fra24;6'11...!.452', 1-0.9e; /- 1,41 , u■., * a .,,,„„?.........,, \ "A ... . PY - Ivir t:IN illilw1414:7.) ,„: ,„.: ,,,, fri...„,... :0,•::.-....,7,:;4,,,,;:: e, ..11/?1`Tipprow,i 111111n totiott„,,W. imrimr:,(1:14fir•47°_,:111pp.dina :Qji-joillx°1 aT72;''' I itilillignirllral-1171.4' '1,m.-A,Ialgi.rAdkVh::'2:T4_Lvl-414:t.if;.16?'aIn2'ITTaz:ll'14ejr'rr;s11!el'P::If:::: "L:41:1'T::::.111:,':je:11.&*::::*''kif-';-f'P:_TLotj''-r-'Cll'. t 47 N"112104, Alliler man— .----4 `,./".-1--N IN • • gr#si,- •- t. - i Of jp, 11111,40211 ir en „41,; „.....41,1k,druj ;4,i-rt., --t-, IP -7-■ • 4 w•lit'j , 4,%:,::'•-, -,14/, .:::;;;:. 1/111/abia- 1.....1:111 :61110- t. r ifto 4 10,,inti5112 ritirlogrrile aim tl sst:vdrotitwis ,tg.... .. .- ....7: is s .aillw: sr eipsi kAams P.11, 111111.111j■41 Ill il,OP riFrAll, g lak-Pallittpas Or lif aranT iie 4,d4,r101 ,. , ‘,::::TA441hi__ - s sFiifF47- ,111,4L:1111 1 Alf... 0-4.1.ig_ f• NI 111141). LP' illita. 4111 ' N ly .., ,.;. , • ,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,...,,,,, amova 41 gum 11111111.111111111 ma lig' ...-64''' C'.''11411*41 "L'!" "m gm; ra rm. rum gsli is : ' *vit L‹ , S . / ;.,6 , hilobittlititk 0#1---7- ' 4 713111111" NI, Any. -.. . _ RS liti igiff4F. ,rgoliaismir. Iii imp-1.-ar.,..rda ,,avik.-7. al It 'Mr1177-%** 317-41, AT S T * - Ittpiiipr ......•...i "a.= itiar,,,wi tii:. r'''`-' ,4: e--- l'bro gw-,"--:::.; ._-74. • ........ :---;,' _ IN■ai I - ail IN 1), , / ', /1111111hik 111( ;44 .\.. Li ii NZ- ill .aim LI ... Kt:51YMil - - .P-7-'.',-- - iiiiirfr • ' r *"44,w.w _ . - - —4 Illillia ' ,..„ , 4.4e 11, liaNip..-iiii . . . ,.. .. ..._ a 40Y . ,• i , .,,,, ,0 411.111,,,„00,,,, •0,•,, , !if. ‘ II 41§,, .T/P4 "- .\.. -\ 4itiriLl 111OZEMIN.* t'" rillIN ..4,:li . :- 40,...46,7):-..„._:::„-mp.:-:.lik-w--itc.7..."1,....'::::::"*Ah.'4^\''' ar 1, Al .44:-/::' 141'''' ''''6-41 V 1 c:-ii . N i, „ „.. .....__ ales ,,--r,- :.:• - - ...a.vologgligink,S*, 4 :11 Ilir- ailmil smini griaik .44 1111b ■ ., mg-1-11 .k ,.. 0.-+‘ •-.!.. qr. -. :-. .01■1. lli Ilitaltilliqr!...---t -Lia 611111°41111H1141111146k r .P. ''.1 41k7*100.4174 .411tir":' o' t ...LA 1,0•''' , -- - , - ' ' -.....--- * VIA lir '1 . m IWIIPIP ,. ....,AK no.0 P ',vsm ei"•-c.m.q-..i•--._u-i ii.f_n ri_;'i--i,,..ai.---,mI a-w n-hv.,.,n4,:...il.-,y".A'd.',i-rt-taavP-".e w.,0 gt 4'1,,N:1m:11.1‘.,`23.'_.-.-::/..6..',i--,.,,{-.1,.-:.,.',,*'--,--,'f'",',-I",r.•,i imli''''.?1-*''!..o'„p'' .':'.. ,z+ ..,- t....--,i,,-,-.- ..,,Q'=.r,•-?..--r. ,a_1 1,1 d1'Ii3j lt b 3Ik 4 i4I4I-1PI1 4 n .i. , , . A.,.i ,. A'i'rer.r‘„A,,e p,,og•..,.,A_-‘"44,,- :.'-...16..-7 l. tA:.,:d''bc'' ,•,.,.b,.:*1,1 i„:O,..A7.sit.,. otl-1l f iv•1,.l,. r,- 4•.,-.A:r;A•..l..1 a„7 I.N .r.. k : : 1 x ,7 , REQUEST FOR COMMENTS - TIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community DATE: March 1,2000 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: US Army Corps of Engineers ;9AR 2 2 2000 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division CITY QF TIGARD Witk STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: [503)6394111/Fax: [5031 684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 2000-00004 ➢FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK: REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is 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: March 15, 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: 0,617tv/d, ,z4Lio,i/idA .24 0/4 lizyibe)D _/i1 A p _//_/ �� _i ,% ...I te, �� �'./ -, � ��' ✓ ti ti (Please provide the following information)Name of Pers [s)A.orvitati Phone Num s): --' -v3 SDR2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST FOR COMMENTS Mar-06-00 09 : 59A TCI Si- _Helens 503 397 5686 P.02 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD (unrmunIt y.l)Crefopnenl Shaping (13ellerCommunity DATE: March 1,2000 TO: Pat McGann,TCI Cablevision of Oregon FROM: CliiI of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: (5031639-4171/Fax: [503)684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR)2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK.. REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is 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: March 15, 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: X- We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: (ruse procure the f)fining in un anon,Name of Person[sl Commenting A c Phone Number[sl: G. �_;�— _ SDR2000-00004 Fni HNfRV INru icTamI Dean/ - ___...._..__ Mar-06-00 09: 58A TCI Fi _Helens 503 Z97 5686 P.01 • �+ 1 IC ' FAX COVER SHEET DATE : CF / •4(; TIME : /C 4 : G.4 < J yTO: 6"lam. ea t >✓1C�' Lyz.: "Lne AZ; FROM : Ci. mo cf� '-ci-Ze.tLl-csa71, fiT.'7 Lr+L. .S�izytc£s 14200 S .W. BRICADOON CT. BEAVERTON , OREGON 97005 PHONE : (503) 605-4895 FAX : ( 503) 646-8004 NUMBER OF PACES IN THIS TRANSMISSION INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET : NOTES : 70 01 Tualatin Valley Inc 14200 S.W.erigadoon Court Beaverton,OR 97005 (503)605-4895 FAX{503)646-8004 An Epuai OAoorrun.ty Ernprryyr �2,0m, (l RE a°Do —pU Page 1 of 1 Comments: 1.The single accessible parking stall on Building A, doesn't comply. The access aisle is on the wrong side. 2. Marked crossings along the accessible route area where it crosses a public way are required as well as the two stalls on the east side of the building. 3. The applicant must comply with OAR 741, Sections 300 - 335, "Railroad Rules and Regulations. We will require an approval letter from ODOT. Bob Poskin file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\GW}00002.HTM 03/09/2000 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: April 19, 2000 TO: Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer t4✓ RE: SDR 2000-00004, Foundry Industrial Park 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 major collector street to have a 60 to 80-foot right-of-way width and a 44-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Hunziker Street, which is classified as a major collector street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 60 feet of ROW along this street in this vicinity, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The street is currently improved to an adequate pavement width and curbs. No additional ROW dedications are necessary. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should reconstruct the driveway entrance into this site to meet current City standards. The applicant's plan indicates that this entrance will be reconstructed. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00004 Foundry Industrial Park PAGE 1 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. There are no sidewalks on the south side of SW Hunziker Street. The applicant shall construct a 6-foot wide concrete sidewalk adjacent to their short frontage. 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. There is an existing 8-inch public sanitary sewer line adjacent to the eastern property line of this site. An existing private sanitary sewer line extends westerly from the public line and runs through the site to serve the existing office building. The applicant's plan is somewhat unclear as to what they intend for the old private sewer line. It appears that they plan to replace the old line with a new 8- inch private sewer line into the site to serve the new buildings. No work within the public sanitary sewer easement is necessary or proposed. The applicant will just need to clarify for the Building Division how the new private sewer layout will relate to the existing private system. 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 2000-00004 Foundry Industrial Park PAGE 2 There are developed parcels adjacent to this site. No additional measures are necessary to accommodate upstream flows. The proposed onsite storm water conveyance system will adequately handle the runoff within 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. There will be a net increase in impervious area on this site. The applicant's engineer estimates that there is currently approximately 5.29 acres of impervious area on this site. When this project is completed, the impervious area will increase to approximately 6.39 acres. The applicant has proposed to provide onsite detention by way of a 36-inch diameter storm drainage pipe. An orifice control structure will be provided to meet the design criteria in the USA standards. 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. (Julia???? N/A????) Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.6 states that development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions, and other developments, which will principally benefit from ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00004 Foundry Industrial Park PAGE 3 such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements. 777227'92'' 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 ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00004 Foundry Industrial Park PAGE 4 right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under- grounding. There are existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 60 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $ 1,650.00. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings: The applicant submitted a traffic impact report, prepared by Stein Engineering, dated January 28, 2000. Stein analyzed the following intersections to determine any impacts that may result from this project: • SW Hall Boulevard/SW Scoffins Street • SW Hall Boulevard/SW Hunziker Street • SW Hunziker Street/SW 72nd Avenue • SW Hunziker Street/Site Access. Stein found that under existing traffic conditions, all study intersections operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS D or better). All four intersections currently operate at LOS B during the PM peak hour. The intersections of SW Hall Boulevard/SW Hunziker Street and SW Hunziker Street/SW 72nd Avenue both operate at LOS C during the AM peak hour. Stein estimate what background traffic will be like during the year 2002, when this project will theoretically be operational. They considered the new traffic that will be generated by the Eagle Hardware and Superior Signs projects in the vicinity, plus a growth factor of 4%. Stein also considered the potential traffic generation from this site if the existing buildings were occupied for typical light industrial uses. This site could potentially generate approximately 466 average daily trips. Under background conditions alone in 2002, Stein estimates that all four study intersections will operate at acceptable LOS during both the AM and PM peak hours. Stein then estimated the added traffic generated from this development. They estimate that the new development, which will be made up of approximately 120,000 sf of industrial park uses, will generate approximately 835 trips per average weekday. As was stated above, the existing 66,920 sf of light industrial use on the site could feasibly generate approximately 466 trips per average weekday. Therefore, the net increase in trip generation for this development is ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00004 Foundry Industrial Park PAGE 5 369 trips per average weekday. When the new site generated trips are added in, all four study intersections will continue to operate at acceptable LOS during both the AM and PM peak hours. In summary, this project will not create an undue burden on the existing transportation system. Fire and Life Safety: The Building Division and Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVFR) will both review the construction plans for this project to ensure that adequate fire protection is provided. Public Water System: The City of Tigard public water system serves this area. There are two existing public main lines on this site: an 8-inch line within the existing driveway area, and a 12-inch line adjacent to the eastern property line. Public Works provided comments regarding the water system design for this project. They state that all water notes on the plans must refer to City of Tigard details, not Washington County. The existing 4-inch water meter and vault must be relocated near the end of the existing 8-inch public water main next to the proposed double check detector assembly (DCDA). The applicant must also abandon the existing 10- inch cast iron (CI) water line and fire hydrant that stubs to this site from the 12- inch public line. The domestic water service shall be protected by a reduced pressure principle device (backflow) assembly. Public Works also notes that it is uncertain whether or not there are existing public easements over the existing 8-inch and 12-inch public water lines. If no easements exist, the applicant must provide new public easements over these lines. 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 issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00004 Foundry Industrial Park PAGE 6 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's plans indicate that they will provide a StormFilter on this site, manufactured by Stormwater Management. The engineer provided preliminary sizing calculations for this facility and notes that it will require an 8-foot by 16-foot vault, and 18 filter cartridges. Staff concurs with the calculations and approves the proposed water quality design. The applicant will be required to enter into a maintenance contract with Stormwater Management to ensure that this facility will be adequately maintained. 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 Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb five or more acres of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. The applicant will be required to provide a detailed grading plan as a part of the Building Division plan submittal. In addition, the applicant will be required to obtain a NPDES permit prior to construction. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). An addressing fee ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00004 Foundry Industrial Park PAGE 7 in the amount of $ 30.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of a site permit. For multi-tenant buildings, one address number is assigned to each building and then all tenant spaces are given suite numbers. The owner or property manager is responsible for assigning suite numbers for their tenants. This information must then be given to the City so that building permits for tenant improvements can be adequately tracked in the City's permit tracking system. Based upon the information provided by the applicant, this building will be a multi-tenant building. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall provide a suite layout map showing the proposed suite numbers. The addressing fee will then be calculated based upon the number of buildings and suites that must be addressed. In multi- level structures, ground level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "1", second level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "2", etc. 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 and/or building permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new driveway work in SW Hunziker Street and any other work in the public ROW or public easements. 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 that 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. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00004 Foundry Industrial Park PAGE 8 Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit a suite layout map showing the proposed suite numbers. The map should be submitted to Kit Church, Engineering Department. The City will then calculate the address fee; it shall be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of the site permit. The applicant's construction plans shall indicate that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW Hunziker Street as a part of this project: A. 6-foot concrete sidewalk; B. driveway apron to City standards. The applicant's construction plan water notes shall refer to City of Tigard details, not Washington County. The existing 4-inch water meter and vault shall be relocated near the end of the existing 8-inch public water main next to the proposed double check detector assembly (DCDA). The applicant shall also abandon the existing 10-inch cast iron (CI) water line and fire hydrant that stubs to this site from the 12-inch public line. The domestic water service shall be protected by a reduced pressure principle device (backflow) assembly. The applicant shall provide evidence as to whether or not there are existing public easements over the existing 8-inch and 12-inch public water lines across this site. If no easements exist, the applicant must provide new public easements over these lines. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the site and building drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994." 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. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Hunziker Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00004 Foundry Industrial Park PAGE 9 the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $ 27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $ 1 .650.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. 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. 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. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management for the proposed onsite storm water treatment facility. i s\eng\bn an r\comments\.sdr\sdr2000-00004.doc ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 2000-00004 Foundry Industrial Park PAGE 10 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community cDeve(opment Shaping A Better Community DATE: March 1,2000 TO: Per Attached FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: [5031639-4111/Fax: [5031 684-7291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SDR]2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is 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: March 15, 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: V - !► Please provide the folrowing information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: I Phone Number[sl: I SDR2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CIF*TIGARD REQUEST FOR COI*ENTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE&COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CITArea: [CI tEl(SI [WI CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS Li] Place for review ln Library ClTBooktsl FILE NO[S].: jDE 2a,30 -0000v FILE NAME[S]: f � c./n o17 In dt-sir,T,I �qr 1 - CITY OFFICES _LONG RANGE PLANNING/Nadine Smith,s,,perve _COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./ov,pmnt Sirs Technicians L./POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crime Prevent..Officer BUILDING DIVISION/Gary Lampella,Bwmgonnizl ENGINEERING DEPT./Brian Rager,o„Ipmnl RnVKWEng,neer .-WATER DEPT./Michael Miller,utaaieemanager _CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,cay Recorder !OPERATIONS DEPT./John Roy,Property Manager _OTHER ")V,,e-,;,, ,;,,,,,,: SPECIAL DISTRICTS ' y. _TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.*_TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE I _TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT* UNIFIED SWRGE.AGENCY Planning Manager Fire Marshall Administrative Office Julia Huffman/SWM Program 15707 SW Walker Road Washington County Fire District PO Box 745 155 N.First Street Beaverton,OR 97006 (place in pick-up box) Beaverton,OR 97075 Hillsboro,OR 97124 . : - LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS CITY OF BEAVERTON * _ CITY OF TUALATIN * _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE _OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS Planning Manager Planning Manager 2501 SW First Avenue 775 Summer Street,NE Irish Bunnell,Development Services PO Box 369 PO Box 59 Salem,OR 97310-1337 PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 Portland,OR 97207 Beaverton,OR 97076 _ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING * _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street,NE CITY OF DURHAM * 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland,OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 PO Box 23483 -IS ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. Durham,OR 97281-3483 _ Paulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP. 333 SW First Avenue Mel Huie,GreenspacesCoordlnator(CPAzoA) Larry French 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(PoweninesinArea) _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) „--S- onya Kazen,Development Review Coordinator _Jim Tice(b A) David Knowles,Planning Bureau Do. Regional Administrator _Cart Toland, Right-of-Way Section(vacations) _Tom Harry(General Apps) Portland Building 106,Rm. 1002 2020 SW Forth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders Phil Healy(GeneraiApps-) 1120 SW Fifth Avenue Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 Sr.Cartographer tcvuzcu>OAS 1 Portland,OR 97204 _Jim Nims(zca)Ms is _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A * _Doria Mateja(zCA)MS 54 Jane Estes,Permit Specialist 5440 SW Westgate Drive,Suite 350 Portland,OR 97221-2414 10. UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES >4j,,. 3 . . PORTLAND WESTERN RJR, 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 _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 Michael Kiser,Project Planner 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court 710 NE Holladay Street Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 Portland,OR 97232 Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC _NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY _GENERAL TELEPHONE _ US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Brian Moore,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer Elaine Self,Engineering Lori Dorney,Engineering 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue MC: OR03O546 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 11( 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 E of HaluN.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 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN SOO'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/ALL CITY PROJECTS(Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify). h:\patty\masters\Request For Comments Notification List.doc 5-Oct-99 PT ANNING SECRETARY MATERIALS AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY oFno.Ro Community(Development Shaping 11 Better Community STATE ofOREGON- ) County of Washington )ss. City of igard ) I, Patricia L. Gunsford, 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: (Check Appropriate Box(s)Below) ❑ NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) • City of Tigard Planning Director El NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR2000-00004/FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK AMENDED NOTICE (File NolName Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: I r— AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council 7 NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR:. � AMENDED NOTICE (File NoiName Reference) (Date of PubicHearu(s) 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 Pubic Hearing,if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICE'S] of which is attached, marked "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked EXhibit"B',on April 24,200 gn i depos .-/d in th: United States Mail on April 24,2000, postage prepaid. ( on that P par-. Not•-) / Subscribed and sworn/affirmed bef r e on the /c ' day of7jii, , 2000. OFFICIAL SEAL ii T PUB IC 0 EG SHERMAN S.CASPER NOTARY PUBUC-OREGON My Commission Expires - COMMISSION NO.3234)9 / z � MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 13,2003 , F. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR] 2000-00004 CITY OF TIGARD FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK LDeuefopment Shaping_A(Better Community 120 DAYS = 6/27/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK CASE NO.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2000-00004 PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct two new buildings of 63,187 and 42,174 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. APPLICANT: Brian Smith OWNER: Smith-Gerig Properties, LLC Smith-Gerig Properties, LLC PO Box 930 PO Box 930 Wilsonville, OR 97070 Wilsonville, OR 97070 APPLICANTS Jim Waddle REP: 1927 NW Kearney Portland, OR 97209 LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light-Industrial; I-L. The I-L zoning district provides appropriate locations for general industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production, research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics such as noise, glare, odor, and vibration. APPLICABLE Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, REVIEW 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, CRITERIA: 18.795, 18.797 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004—FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 1 OF 20 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SITE/BUILDING PERMITS: Submit evidence of complying with the following conai ions to the Planning Division. Staff contact: Julia-Hajduk. 1 . Submit a revised landscape plan with confirmation from a landscape architect that shows parking lot landscaping that will achieve a balance of low lying and vertical shrubbery. 2. Submit a revised plan that clearly shows all service facilities will be screened in accordance with Section 18.745.050.E.2. 3. Submit a revised plan that shows the refuse containers will be screened in accordance with Section 18.745.050.E.4. 4. Submit a revised plan that shows the location and size of proposed trash enclosures. 5. Submit verification from the franchise waste hauler indicating that the location of the proposed trash enclosure meets their needs. 6. Submit details of the trash enclosure and refuse container for Staff to confirm that the standards of Section 18.755.050 have been met. 7. Submit a revised parking plan that shows the curbs around the perimeter of the parking lot will be at least 4 inches in height. 8. Submit a revised parking plan that shows at least 9 of the parking spaces will be designated as carpool/vanpool spaces. 9. Submit a revised parking plan that shows one (1) additional parking space (for a total of 166 parking spaces). 10. Submit a revised parking plan that shows at least one (1) of the ADA spaces will be van accessible. 11 . Submit a revised plan that shows a bicycle rack, accommodating 11 bicycle parking spaces will be located on the site in accordance with the siting standards for Section 18.765.050. 12. Submit details of the bicycle rack to be used. 13. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall install temporary orange construction fencing adjacent to the required bufer from Red Rock Creek. 14. Submit a revised landscape plan that shows no trees or shrubs exceeding 3 feet in height will be located in the vision clearance areas. 15. Submit to Jim Wolf in the Tigard Police Department, an outdoor lighting plan for review and approval. Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: 16. Prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new driveway work in SW Hunziker Street and any other work in the public right-of-way (ROW) or public easements. 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 2 OF 20 17. 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 that 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. 18. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit a suite layout map showing the proposed suite numbers. The map should be submitted to Kit Church, Engineering Department. The City will then calculate the address fee; it shall be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of the site permit. 19. The applicant's construction plans shall indicate that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW Hunziker Street as a part of this project: 6-foot concrete sidewalk; driveway apron to City standards. 20. The applicant's construction plan water notes shall refer to City of Tigard details, not Washington County. The existing 4-inch water meter and vault shall be relocated near the end of the existing 8-inch public water main next to the proposed double check detector assembly (DCDA). The applicant shall also abandon the existing 10-inch cast iron (CI) water line and fire hycrant that stubs to this site from the 12- inch public line. The domestic water service shall be protected by a reduced pressure principle device (backflow) assembly. 21 . The applicant shall provide evidence as to whether or not there are existing public easements over the existing 8-inch and 12-inch public water lines across this site. If no easements exist, the applicant must provide new public easements over these lines. 22. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the site and building drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994." THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION BEING PERFORMED OR OCCUPANCY: 23. 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. 24. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Hunziker Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $1,650 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. 25. 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. 26. 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 NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 3 OF 20 confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. 27. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall demonstrate that they have entered into a maintenance agreement with Stormwater Management for the proposed onsite storm water treatment facility. 28. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall construct a fence (split-rail) to prevent employees from inadvertently disturbing the buffer area. 29. Install all improvements as per the approved plans 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 based on the address 8200 SW Hunziker and the "Western Foundry" project name. The only land use case Staff found was attached to the address (SDR 29-77) but actually involved the lot to the north of the Foundry site. The Foundry site is shown as existing on those plans which indicates it was approved prior to 1977. Vicinity Information: The subject site is located on the south side of SW Hunziker Street. The site is bordered on all sides by property zoned Light Industrial (I-L). Red Rock Creek runs along the eastern edge of the property. To the west are railroad tracks. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site currently has 3 buildings on site in varying degrees of disrepair. The proposal is to remove the 2 eastern most buildings and reduce the size and renovate the western most building to create a 3,000 square foot building. The development will construct 2 new buildings of 63,187 and 42,174 square feet. The property is located at 8200 SW Hunziker; WCTMg2S101 BC, tax lot 2500 and 2S10100, tax lot 700. The property abuts Red Rock Creek and associated floodplain and wetlands on the east. The applicant has proposed to have no impact on the floodplain or wetlands and will maintain the required 25-foot buffer (as required by USA for applications submitted prior to February 5, 2000 and deemed complete prior to March 15, 2000.) SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA A. Applicable Development Code Standards 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) 18.775 Sensitive lands) 18.780 Signs) 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) 18.797 Water Resources Overlay) B. Specific DR Approval Criteria 18.360 C. Street and Utility Improvement Standards 18.810 D. Impact Study 18.390 NOTICE OF TYPE H DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 4 OF 20 SECTION V. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS The Site development Review approval standards require that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of the Community Development Code. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. The proposal contains no elements related to the following Development Code Chapters which are also listed under Section 18.360.090.A.1: 18.350 (Planned Developments), 18.715 (Density Computations), or 18.750 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations) These Chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards, and are not discussed in this decision. 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 plans submitted by the applicant indicate that a walkway will be provided from street to all building entrances. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum 6-inch vertical separation (curbed) or a minimum 3-foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; The plans show the proposed walkway will be concrete across the asphalt parking lot. This is a clear distinction in materials which will satisfy this requirement. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. As stated above, the plans indicate the walkway will be concrete, therefore, this standard is 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 more than 100 parking spaces is one 50-foot access with 40 feet of pavement or two 30-foot accesses with 24 feet of pavement. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. The development will have over 100 parking spaces and has 1 point of access into the parking lot. This access is over 50 feet wide and will provide 40 feet of pavement. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 5 OF 20 FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the access and egress standards have been satisfied. Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street or a private drive more than 100 feet in length shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.0 Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). The applicant has provided a plan that shows street trees will be provided along the access drive. Phone conversations with the applicant's landscape architect indicate that the plans may be revised. If this is proposed, the applicant must submit a revised plan to the Planning Staff for approval PRIOR to any on-site changes. Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.080 states that no buffer is required between a proposed industrial use and existing Industrial uses. The surrounding uses are all permitted uses in the I-L zone. The buffer matrix indicates that when an I-L use abuts an I-L use, no buffer or screening is 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 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. While the majority of the site is not visible from the street, this standard applies to all parking areas abutting adjacent lots. The plans provided indicate that kinnikinnick will be planted along the perimeter of the parking lot, however, this low growing plant does not provide a balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery. Parking lot landscaping is spaced with one (1) tree for every 7 spaces in all areas. 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 applicant's plans do not show service facilities, therefore, Staff can not determine if the standards have been met. If the applicant submits a revised plan that clearly shows all service facilities will be screened in accordance with Section 18.745.050.E.2, Staff can determine that the standards are 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 applicant's plans do not show the location of the proposed refuse container, therefore, Staff can not determine if the standard is met. If the applicant submits a revised plan that shows the refuse containers will be screened in accordance with Section 18.745.050.E.4, this standard will be met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 6 OF 20 FI'NDING: Based on the analysis above, the landscaping and screening standards have not been fully met. If the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be met. CONDITIONS: • Submit a revised plan with confirmation from a landscape architect that shows parking lot landscaping that will achieve a balance of low lying and vertical shrubbery. • Submit a revised plan that clearly shows all service facilities will be screened in accordance with Section 18.745.050.E.2. • Submit a revised plan that shows the refuse containers will be screened in accordance with Section 18.745.050.E.4. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage (18.755): Chapter 18.755 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard, Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign-Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The applicant's narrative states that trash enclosures will consist of walled and gated enclosures completely screening trash handling and recycling equipment and that enclosures meeting the minimum requirement for industrial uses is shown on the plans. Staff did not identify any such proposed structure on the plans provided. In addition, the applicant has not submitted a letter from the franchise hauler, indicating the location meets their needs. 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 applicant is conditioned to submit plans that show the location of the proposed refuse containers. In order to insure that the refuse containers are in a location accessible to collectors, the applicant must submit written sign-off from the trash hauler that the proposed locations are sufficient to meet their needs. 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 7 OF 20 The applicant has not submitted detail of the trash enclosure or refuse container. The applicant must submit details addressing the design standards in order for Staff to determine that this standard has been met. FINDING: Because the applicant has not provided evidence of compliance with the mixed solid waste and recyclables standards, this standard has not been met. If the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be met. CONDITIONS: • Submit a revised plan that shows the location and size of proposed trash enclosures. • Submit verification from the franchise waste hauler indicating that the location of the proposed trash enclosure meets their needs • Submit details of the trash enclosure and refuse container for Staff to confirm that the standards of Section 18.755.050 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 by the disabled. Preferential carpool/vanpool spaces shall be full-sized per requirements in Section 18.765.040N and shall be clearly designated for use only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. The plans provide for more than 20 parking spaces, therefore, carpool/vanpool parking is required. The plans do not reserve parking soaces for carpool or vanpool spaces. Based on the number of parking spaces required (166), 9 spaces must be designated for carpool/vanpool. Disabled-accessible parking: All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. The applicant is providing 159 parking spaces, therefore, 6 ADA handicap spaces are required, one (1) of which is van accessible (9 feet wide with and 8-foot aisle). The applicant's plans show 6 spaces will be marked as ADA accessible, however, none of these appear to be van accessible. Access Drives: With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: access drives from the street to off-street arking 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 driveway and parking will be asphalted in accordance with the requirements. The number and size of the access drives is regulated by the standards specified in Section 18.705.030 and has been discussed previously in this decision. Vision clearance will be addressed further in this decision. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 8 OF 20 • 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 and conditioned 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 plans submitted show the parking spaces will be clearly marked with striping. All interior drives are two-way and do not require additional markings. Wheel Stops: Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. The dimension of the parking spaces provided assumes a 3-foot overhang into the walkway. Because the walkway is 13 feet wide and only 6 feet is required, the applicant's plans meet the requirement for parking spaces adjacent to the walkways. The applicant's plans do not clearly show a 4-inch curb will be provided for parking spaces adjacent to landscaping, therefore, a condition is needed. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Section 18.765.040.N states that: "except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2 the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet for a standard space and 7.5 feet x 16.5 feet for a compact space; aisles accommodating two direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. The applicant's plans indicate the standard parking spaces will be 9 feet by 15' —6" feet with 3-foot of overhang into the walkway or landscape area. The access aisle will be between 24 and 30 feet wide, thus satisfying the criteria. No compact spaces are proposed. 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 plans do not indicate that a bicycle rack will be provided. A condition is necessary for the applicant to submit plans that show a bicycle rack will be located on the site in accordance with the siting standards for Section 18.765.050. 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 9 OF 20 • Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers, asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. The applicant has not provided a detail of the bike rack to be used, therefore, Staff is unable to confirm that this 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. Table 18.765.2 states that for Light Industrial Uses, .1 bicycle parking spaces are required for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, therefore, 11 bicycle parking spaces must be provided. The applicant's plan does not show bicycle parking spaces will be provided, therefore, a condition of approval is necessary. 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 Light Industrial Uses is 1.6 spaces per 1000 square feet and there is no maximum. The applicant is, therefore, required to provide 165.37 parking spaces which is rounded up according to the Code (Section 18.765.070.C.1). The plans provide only 165. Because there is a significant portion of the site that is not being developed at this time, Staff finds it feasible for the applicant to provide one (1) additional parking space. 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 buildings are designed to have several loading docks for each building, therefore, this standard is met. 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 revised plan that shows the curbs around the perimeter of the parking lot will be at least 4 inches in height. • Submit a revised plan that shows at least 9 of the parking spaces will be designated as carpool/vanpool spaces. • Submit a revised plan that shows one (1) additional parking space (for a total of 166 parking spaces). • Submit a revised plan that shows at least one (1) of the ADA spaces will be van accessible. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 10 OF 20 • Submit a revised plan that shows a bicycle rack, accommodating 11 bicycle parking spaces will be located on the site in accordance with the siting standards for Section 18.765.050. • Submit details of the bicycle rack to be used. Sensitive Lands (18.775) Landform alterations or developments which are only within wetland areas that meet the jurisdictional requirements and permit criteria of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Division of State Lands, Unified Sewerage Agency, and/or other federal, state, or regional agencies do not require a sensitive lands permit. The City shall require that all necessary permits from other agencies be obtained. All other applicable City requirements must be satisfied, including sensitive land permits for areas within the 100-year floodplain, slopes of 25% or greater or unstable ground, drainageways, and wetlands which are not under state or federal jurisdiction. There are wetlands and floodplains on-site, however, the applicant has proposed to stay out of the required 25-foot buffer, including utility connections. Because the elevation plans show doors will be provided to the rear of Building "B", Staff will impose a condition that requires permanent marking of the buffer areas to insure that there is no disturbance. In addition, the applicant must construct temporary fencing prior to any site work to insure that there is no disturbance of the buffer area. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the standards have not been fully met. If the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, Staff can determine that there are no sensitive land concerns as a result of this development. CONDITIONS: • Prior to any site work the applicant shall install temporary construction fencing adjacent to the required buffer from Red Rock Creek. • Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall construct a fence (split-rail) to prevent employees from inadvertently disturbing the buffer area. Signs (18.780): Chapter 18.780.130.D lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the I-L 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 rovided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. There are no trees over 12 inches caliper on the site, therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Because there are no trees over 12 inches caliper on the site, this standard does not apply. Visual Clearance Areas (18.795): Chapter 18.795 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight (8) feet in height (8) (trees may be placed NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 11 OF 20 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. Because the only street frontage is the 60-foot-wide flag pole portion into the development site, the vision clearance triangle areas are mainly off-site, beyond the applicant's control. The landscape plan submitted shows trees within the vision clearance triangle areas on both sides of the driveway. These trees must be removed in order to meet the vision clearance standards. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the vision clearance standards have been not been met. If the applicant complies with the condition below, the standards will be met. CONDITION: Submit a revised landscape plan that shows no trees or shrubs exceeding 3 feet in height will be located in the vision clearance areas. Water Resources Overlay (18.797) Section 18.797 identifies Red Rock Creek as a Minor Stream. The required buffer from this creek is 25 feet. The applicant's plans show the required 25-foot setback from top-of-bank or wetland edge. The proposal involves no development within this setback, therefore, no further Water Resources Overlay review is necessary. B. SPECIFIC SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL STANDARDS Section 18.360.090(A)(2) through 18.360.090(A)(15) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.360.090.3 (Exterior Elevations);); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 18.360.090.6 (Private Outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces). The following sections were discussed previously in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses; 18.360.090.13 Parking); 18.360.090.14 (Landscaping); 18.360.090.15 (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. The applicant's plans have considered the natural environment on the site by locating the building and all site improvements outside of the buffer area. There are no trees on the site. There are no known areas subject to sliding. Fire fighting considerations have been made by the Building Division, however, they have indicated that the plans satisfy the fire code requirements for hydrant location. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, this standard has been satisfied. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 12 OF 20 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. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this project and requested that the applicant submit a lighting plan for review and approval. FINDING: Because information from the Police Department indicates that a lighting plan is needed in order to verify that the lighting meets the crime prevention and safety criteria, this standard has not been satisfied. If the applicant provides a lighting plan to the Police Department for review and approval, this standard will be met. CONDITION: Submit to the Police Department, an outdoor lighting plan for review and approval. Public Transit: Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route; the requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: the location of other transit facilities in the area; and the size and type of the proposal. The following facilities may be required after City and Tri-Met review: bus stop shelters; turnouts for buses; and connecting paths to the shelters. The site has frontage on SW Hunziker which is a Tri-met transit route. Staff sent a request for comments to Tri-met, however, they did not respond with a request for the applicant to provide additional transit facilities along the frontage. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, this standard is satisfied. 100-year floodplain Where landfill and/or development is allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/ bicycle plan. The project site is adjacent to the 100-year floodplain of Red Rock Creek, however, no development is proposed within the floodplain area. There are currently no trail studies or trail plans for development along Red Rock Creek, therefore, a condition to dedicate land for a pathway is not warranted. 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. Use Classification: The applicant is proposing to construct two new buildings as part of a light industrial park. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 13 OF 20 The zone is 1-L, which allows light industrial uses in this zone. It is the applicant's burden to insure that all prospective tenants fall within the use classifications for light industrial zones. 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. STANDARD I-L ZONE PROPOSED Minimum Lot Size None 395,318 sq. ft Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. >50 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 30 ft. 61 ft. - Side facing street on corner & through lots [1] 20 ft. N/A - Side yard 0/50 ft. [3] 18 ft. min. - Rear yard 0/50 ft. [3] 10 ft. min. Maximum Height 45 ft. 29 ft. Maximum Site Coverage [2] 85% 81% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% 19%•*see discussion [1] The provisions of Chapter 18.795(Vision Clearance) must be satisfied. [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3] No setback shall be required except 50 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. The applicant's plans indicate the landscape percentage is 19 percent. As discussed previously, this number included the areas used for the 3-foot bumper overhang. Regardless, the total area subtracted for the 3-foot bumper overhang is 1,539 square feet. Once this figure is subtracted, the applicant continues to comply with the 15% landscaping requirement. All other dimensional standards are clearly met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the provisions of the underlying zone are met. C. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS (18.810) 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 rtion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030(E) requires a major collector street to have a 60 to 80-foot right-of-way width and a 44-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Hunziker Street, which is classified as a major collector street on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 60 feet of ROW along this street in this vicinity, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The street is currently improved to an adequate pavement width and curbs. No additional ROW dedications are necessary. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should reconstruct the driveway entrance into this site to meet current City standards. The applicant's plan indicates that this entrance will be reconstructed. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 14 OF 20 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. There are no sidewalks on the south side of SW Hunziker Street. The applicant shall construct a 6-foot-wide concrete sidewalk adjacent to their short frontage. 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. There is an existing 8-inch public sanitary sewer line adjacent to the eastern property line of this site. An existing private sanitary sewer line extends westerly from the public line and runs through the site to serve the existing office building. The applicant's plan is somewhat unclear as to what they intend for the old private sewer line. It appears that they plan to replace the old line with a new 8-inch private sewer line into the site to serve the new buildings. No work within the public sanitary sewer easement is necessary or proposed. The applicant will just need to clarify for the Building Division how the new private sewer layout will relate to the existing private system. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are developed parcels adjacent to this site. No additional measures are necessary to accommodate upstream flows. The proposed onsite storm water conveyance system will adequately handle the runoff within 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 15 OF 20 There will be a net increase in impervious area on this site. The applicant's engineer estimates that there is currently approximately 5.29 acres of impervious area on this site. When this project is completed, the impervious area will increase to approximately 6.39 acres. The applicant has proposed to provide onsite detention by way of a 36-inch diameter storm drainage pipe. An orifice control structure will be provided to meet the design criteria in the USA standards. Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. There are no identified bike or pedestrian ways on this property. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under- grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case- by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in- lieu of under-grounding. There are existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW Hunziker Street. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 60 lineal feet; therefore, the fee would be $1 ,650. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings: The applicant submitted a traffic impact report, prepared by Stein Engineering, dated January 28, 2000. Stein analyzed the following intersections to determine any impacts that may result from this project: • SW Hall Boulevard/SW Scoffins Street • SW Hall Boulevard/SW Hunziker Street • SW Hunziker Street/SW 72'� Avenue • SW Hunziker Street/Site Access. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 16 OF 20 Stein found that under existing traffic conditions, all study intersections operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS D or better). All four intersections currently operate at LOS B during the PM peak hour. The intersections of SW Hall Boulevard/SW Hunziker Street and SW Hunziker Street/SW 72nd Avenue both operate at LOS C during the AM peak hour. Stein estimated what background traffic will be like during the year 2002, when this project will theoretically be operational. They considered the new traffic that will be generated by the Eagle Hardware and Superior Signs projects in the vicinity, plus a growth factor of 4%. Stein also considered the potential traffic generation from this site if the existing buildings were occupied for typical light industrial uses. This site could potentially generate approximately 466 average daily trips. Under background conditions alone in 2002, Stein estimates that all four study intersections will operate at acceptable LOS during both the AM and PM peak hours. Stein then estimated the added traffic generated from this development. They estimate that the new development, which will be made up of approximately 120,000 sf of industrial park uses, will generate approximately 835 trips per average weekday. As was stated above, the existing 66,920 sf of light industrial use on the site could feasibly generate approximately 466 trips per average weekday. Therefore, the net increase in trip generation for this development is 369 trips per average weekday. When the new site generated trips are added in, all four study intersections will continue to operate at acceptable LOS during both the AM and PM peak hours. In summary, this project will not create an undue burden on the existing transportation system. Fire and Life Safety: The Building Division and Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVFR) will both review the construction plans for this project to ensure that adequate fire protection is provided. Public Water System: The City of Tigard public water system serves this area. There are two existing public main lines on this site: an 8-inch line within the existing driveway area, and a 12-inch line adjacent to the eastern property line. Public Works provided comments regarding the water system design for this project. They state that all water notes on the plans must refer to City of Tigard details, not Washington County. The existing 4-inch water meter and vault must be relocated near the end of the existing 8-inch public water main next to the proposed double check detector assembly (DCDA). The applicant must also abandon the existing 10-inch cast iron (CI) water line and fire hydrant that stubs to this site from the 12-inch public line. The domestic water service shall be protected by a reduced pressure principle device (backflow) assembly. Public Works also notes that it is uncertain whether or not there are existing public easements over the existing 8-inch and 12-inch public water lines. If no easements exist, the applicant must provide new public easements over these lines. 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 issuance of the site permit, 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 17 OF 20 The applicant's plans indicate that they will provide a StormFilter on this site, manufactured by Stormwater Management. The engineer provided preliminary sizing calculations for this facility and notes that it will require an 8-foot by 16-foot vault, and 18 filter cartridges. Staff concurs with the calculations and approves the proposed water quality design. The applicant will be required to enter into a maintenance contract with Stormwater Management to ensure that this facility will be adequately maintained. 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 cuality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall .fie 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 Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb five or more acres of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. The applicant will be required to provide a detailed grading plan as a part of the Building Division plan submittal. In addition, the applicant will be required to obtain a NPDES permit prior to construction. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). An addressing fee in the amount of $30.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of a site permit. For multi-tenant buildings, one address number is assigned to each building and then all tenant spaces are given suite numbers. The owner or property manager is responsible for assigning suite numbers for their tenants. This information must then be given to the City so that building permits for tenant improvements can be adequately tracked in the City's permit tracking system. Based upon the information provided by the applicant, this building will be a multi-tenant building. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall provide a suite layout map showing the proposed suite numbers. The addressing fee will then be calculated based upon the number of buildings and suites that must be addressed. In multi-level structures, ground level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "1", second level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "2", etc. 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 improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 18 OF 20 Iri situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.040 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. The applicant has provided an impact study addressing the project's impacts on public systems. The Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) is a mitigation measure that is required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61 , TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. The applicant will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $24,698 based on the use proposed. Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $77,181 ($24,698 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 $52,483. The applicant will not be required to construct any off-site improvements. SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: 1. The single accessible parking stall on Building A, doesn't comply. The access aisle is on the wrong side. 2. Marked crossings along the accessible route area where it crosses a public way are required as well as the two stalls on the east side of the building. 3. The applicant must comply with OAR 741, Sections 300 - 335, "Railroad Rules and Regulations. We will require an approval letter from ODOT. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and requested a lighting plan be submitted for their review and approval. The City of Tigard Operations Utility Manager has reviewed the proposal and provided the following comments: All water notes need to refer to the City of Tigard "Water Standards" and not Washington County. Existing 4" water meter and vault is to be relocated near end of existing 8" c.i. Water main next to proposed DCDA. Owner/Developer to plug existing 10" c.i. water line stubbed to property at Red Rock Creek and abandon that portion of the 10" water line and fire hydrant. Domestic water to be protected by reduced pressure principle device (backflow) assembly. Please note that there are two other fire lines north of the access road from the existing 8" c.i. (from Hunziker) that services the properties that are not shown on the plans. Easements shall be provided for existing 8" c.i. and 12" c.i. if there are none currently recorded. The City of Tigard Property Manager has reviewed the application and have not provided comments or objections. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004-FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 19 OF 20 • SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS Unified Sewerage Agency has reviewed the proposal and provided comments which were incorporated in to the body of this decision. A complete copy of the comments are a part of the file and are available for review. US Army Corps of Engineers has reviewed the proposal and indicated that a Corps permit will not be required unless there is an alteration to the wetland or creeks, including utility lines. ODOT, TCI cable, PGE, GTE, US West, DSL, Tri-met 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 APRIL 24, 2000, AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MAY 9, 2000 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Amu" 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. 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 3:30 PM ON MAY 8, 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. ELI April 24. 2000 PREP ED BY: Julia P well Hajduk DATE Associate Planner Al!.' p'o- April 24, 2000 APPROVED BY: Richard H. Bew -dorff DATE Planning Manager I:\curpin\julia\sdr\foundry.doc.dot NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00004—FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PAGE 20 OF 20 . . • S • . , I_ Z PC.�. ' --"Y w .roe C AccadeLe ce _ a UJ �?' ,-- "'�� _ PI •li. III - _�I�- ,r 11 r i i oorx• .I,rn �_, Arid.■ Z t - i . e • • 71 i'I 1 1 1 i i 1 1 l I I Iilk • 1Z 1 1 I I ,.- 1 1 1 I � - --- - I J li1 I I -. 1�'1 I i I � p- ._- yam( �.'n.-�.. I.1. n i a.,I.. a I.4 r. i- ^I '1.1.... 1.11, , 11 I .. - I 1 Ow 1C I 1 I Q i ' I = I '1 LPL —'I i r I :-a: —I 7 H I 1 �! i?U i!''7`i u 1 r1 10 ilo eti l i. 1 i,, 1� ( Ll. ,y, (J r r 1 iJ,-. i I I l;,�.,1 I II I ll11\�I� "°-`..,1 O ..':... 1 ' ' ` 4 ? LEGEND { Y 1 1 'f BUILDING 9 I U ...e.. -r RI t, SITE PLAN I FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK EXHIBIT MAP N SDR2000-00004 (map is not to scale) ,- , CITY of TIGARD -n GE OG RAPMIL INFORMATION SYSTEM 0 V^ `�,� VICINITY MAP 1p 4 94p:1, . �< SDR2 00 -00004 STRIAE PARK w*, FOUNDRY I 4 ,s . iSS '461 411C:4 .•• '?'? 'w SUBJECT SITES 90 I/0 / \ - , • \ N a. 4 0 100 200 300 400 500 Feet„‘, , \ ` 1"=378 feet 40 City of Tigard I Information on this map is for general location only and should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd IIIII _�� Tigard,OR 97223 (503)639171 _ _ hltp:fiww.v.ei.ligard.or.us Community Development Plot date: Mar 1, 2000;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR Brian Smith Smith-Gerig Properties LLC FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PO Box 930 Wilsonville, OR 97070 SDR2000-00004 Smith-Gerig Properties LLC PO Box 930 Wilsonville, OR 97070 Jim Waddle 1927 NW Kearney Portland, OR 97209 Alik AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING TIGARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community STA'1'L OE OREGON' ) County of-Washington )ss, City of igard ) 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: (Check Appropriate Box(s)Below) C NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR: C AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) _ City of Tigard Planning Director E3 NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR2000-00004/FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: . `- / AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (Dale of Public Hearing) LI City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council 7 NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR:. . AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Pubic Hearings) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director O Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission O Tigard City Council C NOTICE OF: (Type(Kund of Notice) FOR: — I (File No./Name Reference) (Dale of Public Hearing,if applicable) A copy--o{the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICE(SI of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each na -d person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit'B", on April 24,2000, i d lep• ited the /ited States Mail on April 24,2000, postage prepaid. )/A/4-/-/ - Ilk , Id , (Person that Pr:.- -•_■ : Ice) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed befor- e on the /6 day of /f?/jGzi,--- , 2000. f OFFICIAL SEAL ee% - SHERMAN S.CASPER F( Y PUBLIC OF OR .) NOTARY PUBLIOREGON � '� COMMISSION N .323409 MY COMMISSION EMPIRES AAY 13,2003 My Commission Expires: ,/�7r ? NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 2000-00004 �►� CITY OF TIGARD FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK CommunityDeve(opment Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 6/27/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK CASE NO.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2000-00004 PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct two new buildings of 63,187 and 42,174 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. APPLICANT: Brian Smith OWNER: Smith-Gerig Properties, LLC Smith-Gerig Properties, LLC PO Box 930 PO Box 930 Wilsonville, OR 97070 Wilsonville, OR 97070 APPLICANTS Jim Waddle REP: 1927 NW Kearney Portland, OR 97209 LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light-Industrial; I-L. The I-L zoning district provides appropriate locations for general industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production, research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics such as noise, glare, odor, and vibration. APPLICABLE Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, REVIEW 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797 and 18.810. CRITERIA: 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 located at City Hall. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (250 per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 24, 2000 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MAY 9, 2000 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Awl e�al: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Community Development Code Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Community Development Code 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. ITHE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 3:30 PM ON MAY 8, 2000. I Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner at (503) 639-4171 , Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. I- 2 . 7* Lj . ce a o : W iT Via- 414,4= z ?� i z •'f - t ba a �- - I o ;.....1 ; `'- - : - -I I- i I I k LEGENV 1.- msµ- --- au I L SITE PLAN FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK EXHIBIT MAP N SDR2000-00004 as i,�c, — \/ VICINITY MAP l• - FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK il 1 4 SORZODp Opppt' I ' #14441 ir - ''''''`.‹,,._,. I /% 4) W** ., !7/11 , , It . * Zip: ., l l N78., 1 Iftl% \ \p �� SUBJE S �� � ; N MI ' --7--} a.4now . w.ww.r • • nn 1. .M1pWI1T� • • 2S10100-00500 2S101BC-00101 GAZELEY H WILLIAM KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC PO BOX 230414 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10100-00600 2S101BC-00103 GAZELEY HARRY W WETLANDS CONSERVANCY INC THE PO BOX 230414 PO BOX 1195 TIGARD, OR 97281 TUALATIN,OR 97062 2S10100-00700 2S101BC-00200 SMITH GERIG WESTERN PROPERTIES L US NATURAL RESOURCES INC PO BOX 930 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10100-00701 2S101BC-00201 GAZ EY ILLIAM WESTEC AMERICA INC PO B 0414 8255 SW HUNZIKER TIGP,RD, OR 7281 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10100-00800 2S101BC-01700 FIELDS FRED W DEFOE JUDITH A MCGEE& 1149 SW DAVENPORT 4900 SW MEADOWS RD#100 PORTLAND, OR 97201 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 2S10100-01100 2S101BC-01801 Fl S F D W MILLER LORI M 1149 AVENPORT 8365 SW HUNZIKER RD PO LAND, OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97223 2510100-0120. 2S101BC-01900 FIELD' F' D W DE LAO ALICIA& 1149 f 'AVENPORT 8335 SW HUNZIKER RD PO' LAND,'.OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10 0-012 2S101BC-02100 COE M ACTURING CO THE ANNAND JOHN D II&EDNA N P 0 BO 0 8260 SW HUNZIKER RD PAI SVILL , OH 44077 TIGARD,OR 97223 2510100-01202 25101BC-02200 COE MANUFACTURING COMPANY HHO&B ASSOCIATES LLC PO BOX 520 PO BOX 23755 PAINESVILLE,OH 44077 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S101BC-00100 2S101BC-02201 KNEZ JOHN S SR&JEANNE M ROACH MICHAEL A AND PAMELA S 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD 956 WEST POINT RD TIGARD, OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 • • 2S101BC-02401 KING JAMES F 12650 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD,OR 97223 23 41 BC-02500 SMIT ' G WESTERN PROPERTIES L PO BO ° 0 WI :ONVIL. ,OR 97070 2S101BC-02501 PALMER G LEWIS COMPANY PO BOX 1041 CHESTERFIELD, MO 63006 2S101BC-02700 KING JAMES F PO BOX 23819 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 BC-02800 SEVERSON JAMES A& ROBIN 0 29404 SW HEATER RD SHERWOOD, OR 97140 2S101BC-02900 WESTPHAL EDGAR A&PATRICE M 1811 NW 93RD PL PORTLAND,OR 97229 25101 BD-00300 LOSLI E HOWARD TRUSTEE AND 208 E WOODLAWN RD#200 CHARLOTTE, NC 28217 2S101 B D-00302 TIG D TY OF 131 HALL T ARD,O 97223 2S102DA-00100 MAGNO LLC 8800 SW COMMERICAL ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102DA-00500 TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL 13137 SW PACIFIC HWY TIGARD,OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci CITY OF TIGARD 1 1285 SW 18`h Avenue EAST CIT SUBCOMMITTEE Tigard, OR 91223 Sue Rorman 1 1250 SW 82°d Avenue i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc UPDATED: 12-Apr-00 Tigard, OR 97223 John Snyder 11100 SW 82od Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Jack Biethan 15525 SW 109`h Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 S4-312_ Naomi Gallucci CITY OF TIGARD • 11285 SW 78th Avenue EAST CIT SUBCOMMITTEE Tigard, OR 97223 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue i:\curpin\setup\labels\ClT East.doc UPDATED: 12-Apr-00 Tigard, OR 97223 John Snyder 11100 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Jack Biethan 15525 SW 109th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Ellen Beilstein 14630 SW 139th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 • Alk AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OF•IL Community(Development Shaping Better Community STATE. of OREGON ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Shirley L. Treat, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist I for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check Appmpriate Box(s)Below) ® NOTICE OF: PENDING APPLICATION FOR: FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK/SDR2000-00004 ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (Type/Kind of Notice) (File No/Name Reference) (14-Day Comment Penod) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director NOTICE OF TYPE I DECISION FOR:: ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director Li NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: 0 AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council I I NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: i7' ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Puofc heap lg) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICES] of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B", on March 1, 2000, and deposited in the United States Mail on March 1, 2000, postage prepaid. X a,/- (Pers n that Prepared Notice) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the /3 day of kn..A"-c.L , 200o. Jl ors-yi- `-" OFFICIAL SEAL NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON w SHERMAN S.GASPER `�, ; ' NOTARY Pusuc-OREGON My Commission Expires: f 3 , 2 c o 3 COMMISSION NO:323409 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 13,2003 --A-C-444.4-e-u, 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. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CITY OF, 1� CITY Community'Deve(op men t ShapingA Better Community 500-FOOT PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE: March 1, 2000 FILE NO./NAME: SDR2000-00004/FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however, because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. 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 MARCH 15, 2000. All comments should be directed to Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate 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 WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: ♦ Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; ♦ Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; ♦ Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Planning Commission must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity on that issue. Failure of any party to addres ,e relevant approval criteria with : ;cient 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." \ CITY of TIGARD C'''' \It_\/ VICINITY MAP ,,./ >, V- _ ' FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK /'` SDR2000-00004 - Sj 0 �Py • v ����� SUBJECT _. / �� , A . \ , \ N i 1 ••••■■V• I____ o .w 700 wo 400 SOO f ow A, \ //, City of TIgerd i:Acurpin\masters � /// I M.o; -,�^ p%},IBIT B 2S10100-00500 2S101BC-00101 GAZELEY H WILLIAM KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC PO BOX 230414 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10100-00600 2S101BC-00103 GAZELEY HARRY W WETLANDS CONSERVANCY INC THE PO BOX 230414 PO BOX 1195 TIGARD,OR 97281 TUALATIN,OR 97062 2S10100-00700 2S101BC-00200 SMITH GERIG WESTERN PROPERTIES L US NATURAL RESOURCES INC PO BOX 930 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10100-00701 2S 101 BC-00201 GAZ EY ILLIAM WESTEC AMERICA INC PO B 0414 8255 SW HUNZIKER TIG RD,OR 7281 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10100-00800 2S101BC-01700 FIELDS FRED W DEFOE JUDITH A MCGEE& 1149 SW DAVENPORT 4900 SW MEADOWS RD#100 PORTLAND,OR 97201 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 2S10100-01100 2S101BC-01801 Fl SF D W MILLER LORI M 1149 AVENPORT 8365 SW HUNZIKER RD PO LAND, OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10 00-0120. 2S101BC-01900 FIELD' F' D W DE LAO ALICIA& 1149 DAVENPORT 8335 SW HUNZIKER RD PO' LAND, •R 97201 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10 10-0121 2S101BC-02100 COE M• . ACTURING CO THE ANNAND JOHN D II&EDNA N P 0 BO '0 8260 SW HUNZIKER RD PAI 'SVILL , OH 44077 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10100-01202 2S101BC-02200 COE MANUFACTURING COMPANY HHO&B ASSOCIATES LLC PO BOX 520 PO BOX 23755 PAINESVILLE, OH 44077 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S101BC-00100 2S101BC-02201 KNEZ JOHNS SR&JEANNE M ROACH MICHAEL A AND PAMELA S 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD 956 WEST POINT RD TIGARD,OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 2S 101 BC-02401 KING JAMES F 12650 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD,OR 97223 23 41 BC-025110 SMIT ' G WESTERN PROPERTIES L PO BO 0 WI :ONVIL. ,OR 97070 2S101BC-02501 PALMER G LEWIS COMPANY PO BOX 1041 CHESTERFIELD, MO 63006 2S101 BC-02700 KING JAMES F PO BOX 23819 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BC-02800 SEVERSON JAMES A&ROBIN 0 29404 SW HEATER RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S101BC-02900 WESTPHAL EDGAR A&PATRICE M 1811 NW 93RD PL PORTLAND,OR 97229 2S 101 BD-00300 LOSLI E HOWARD TRUSTEE AND 208 E WOODLAWN RD#200 CHARLOTTE, NC 28217 2S 01 BD-00302 TIG D TY OF 131 S HALL T ARD, 0 97223 2S 102DA-00100 MAGNO LLC 8800 SW COMMERICAL ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102DA-00500 TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL 13137 SW PACIFIC HWY TIGARD,OR 97223 .-II • CITY of TIGARD , GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM ` ,viii, `Vi / Illenill ) AREA NOTIFIED `` n , ■�:,�\ TSi0iBC00103 (500') �. � ., /�IS701BC00101 751011000302 �.2/1� ,tS1016C01J00 gS1016C002 i ■ ,' °� . ,. FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK - 231016C 01801 f` e�E(y■��, SDR2000-00004 n1016000701 j ' `��y' • 15101002200 •■ �.<. 4 n1010000100 251018002207 � ' .. , /'2010113002401 1ST •-�,- 251011D0030 40* 251010000500 23250 16 80 St 9W 10 C0 500 iii 7S101D000601 ` 201010601501 - 231021800100 \ 251010001202 I =10, i \ \ 111111 IIiIL4h 251010000800 1111 ■_____. 751010001701 t, , 1111 ME 111 2s1o7oa0050 0 11111 / ■ 11111111 1gal iiiI <. • IIkIIi "- 701010001100 �ij Sim OM �■. ji = OM 0 400 !00 Fist 111111111116/ - 751010001200 ..■ [ 1".eBhot. .411‘;k City of Tigard I . • nil 7-- =' -�� . .., ..r .. ,O � shou d beliverifiedh,T grid OR Hall Blvd ry n only arM ices Division. •' IN SW Hall Blvd ate■ `` � _ __ l_�"-1,,"� (503)639-4171 I. -- _,��-S-t _ ________- htlpa/www.ci.ligard.or.us Community Development Plot date:Mar 1,2000;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR • 2S10100-00500 2S101BC-00101 GAZELEY H WILLIAM KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC PO BOX 230414 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10100-00600 2S101BC-00103 GAZELEY HARRY W WETLANDS CONSERVANCY INC THE PO BOX 230414 PO BOX 1195 TIGARD,OR 97281 TUALATIN,OR 97062 2510100-00700 2S101BC-00200 SMITH GERIG WESTERN PROPERTIES L US NATURAL RESOURCES INC PO BOX 930 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10100-00701 2S101BC-00201 GAZ EY ILLIAM WESTEC AMERICA INC PO B 0414 8255 SW HUNZIKER TIG RD, OR 7281 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10100-00800 2S101BC-01700 FIELDS FRED W DEFOE JUDITH A MCGEE& 1149 SW DAVENPORT 4900 SW MEADOWS RD#100 PORTLAND,OR 97201 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 2S10100-01100 2S101BC-01801 Fl S F D W MILLER LORI M 1149 AVENPORT 8365 SW HUNZIKER RD PO LAND, OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10100-01251 2S101BC-01900 FIELD' FP D W DE LAO ALICIA& 1149 •" IAVENPORT 8335 SW HUNZIKER RD PO' LAND, OR 97201 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10 10-012' 2S101BC-02100 COE M• ACTURING CO THE ANNAND JOHN D II&EDNA N P 0 BO '0 8260 SW HUNZIKER RD PAI 'SVILL , OH 44077 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S10100-01202 2S101BC-02200 COE MANUFACTURING COMPANY HHO&B ASSOCIATES LLC PO BOX 520 PO BOX 23755 PAINESVILLE, OH 44077 TIGARD,OR 97281 2S101BC-00100 2S101BC-02201 KNEZ JOHN S SR&JEANNE M ROACH MICHAEL A AND PAMELA S 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD 956 WEST POINT RD TIGARD,OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 2S101BC-02401 KING JAMES F 12650 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD,OR 97223 23 *1 BC-02500 SMIT ' G WESTERN PROPERTIES L PO BO ' 0 WI 1ONVIL. ,OR 97070 2S 101 BC-02501 PALMER G LEWIS COMPANY PO BOX 1041 CHESTERFIELD,MO 63006 2S101BC-02700 KING JAMES F PO BOX 23819 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S1 01 BC-02800 SEVERSON JAMES A&ROBIN 0 29404 SW HEATER RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 2S101BC-02900 WESTPHAL EDGAR A&PATRICE M 1811 NW 93RD PL PORTLAND,OR 97229 25101 BD-00300 LOSLI E HOWARD TRUSTEE AND 208 E WOODLAWN RD#200 CHARLOTTE, NC 28217 2S 01BD-00302 TIG D TY OF 131 S HALL T ARD,O 97223 2S102DA-00100 MAGNO LLC 8800 SW COMMERICAL ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 102DA-00500 TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL 13137 SW PACIFIC HWY TIGARD,OR 97223 APPLICANT MATERIALS SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ZVI?' TYPE II APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223(503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 GENERAL INFORMATION PRE-APP. HELD WITH: %J t- /r.1-- DATE OF PRE-APP.: 11" l 79 _9 Property Address/Location(s): g .i)O FOR STAFF USE ONLY TV.4, Tax Map "Lax Lot#(s): 5/0/ 00 Case No.(s): S p R a oo - Op p p 1 ocj-0 4z,ta - x cr 100 Other Case No.(s): / Receipt No.: 0 0 3 I S/r Site Size: A � CkL' 7 LL Application Accepted By:1-H Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)*: ti� 'G i1 L' Date: V3, A.. Address: J?J2.A��- 936 Phone: 663"' to q"(..R( City: RI 1(,(, j (1f. Zip: 9 70 70 Date Determined To Be Complete: Applicant*: 611 etik S 14-(A, Address: r P34in a Comp Plan/Zone Designation: p � 9362 Phone:�. City: Li,(- 4-)EACL )t)g-. Zip: el 7O 10 CIT Area: * When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession _ Rev.11/26/93 i:lcurpin\masters\sdra rloc 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 SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS application. ✓ Application Elements Submitted: PROPOSAL SUMMARY [Application Form (I) [Owner's Signature/Written Authorization (1) The owners of record of the subject property request Site D j itle Transfer Instrument or Deed (1) Development Review approval to allow (please be specific): ,may �( / 7 a-Site/Plot Plan (1$) Peoel mULVT ( l` L^L57i 1.LJC'7 (#of copies based on pre-app check list) i L)O()STtav -3 1M 22-00 j1O [r Site/Plot Plan (reduced 8'12"x 11") (I) L" Ot11 -L 12D _ AS OtSe-gte,07 Q"Applicant's Statement (10 (#of copies based on pre-app check list) I L') 1V tJ1isr Construction Cost Estimate (I) EL/USA Sewer Use Information Card (Distributed/completed at application submittal) Sets of Pre-Addressed/Pre-Stamped Legal Size Envelopes ❑ Filing Fee (Under$100,000) $ 800.00 V ($100,000-$999,999) $1,600.00 ($1 Million&Over) $1,780.00 (+$51$10,000) ❑ INrfi'.A.1D R.P Potz1 (2l 0 1) Pc419 PT ( 2 p pF/AO LI kEl E sTv0"r Zz ❑ ui ' ( 1M(W,r '1t, () - r List any VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE, SENSITIVE LANDS, OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: t- ) e=7 ,A-TA46-60 - APPLICANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as described on the front of this application in the "Required Submittal Elements" box. 1p (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request,for all types of Land Use Applications.) THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject property. • If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, may be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property. DATED this day of p .- 01111111110 of Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 CITY OF TIGARD Community DeveCopment .S/lapingA(Better Community LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION 120 DAYS = 6/27/2000 FILE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDR] 2000-00004 FILE TITLE: FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK APPLICANT: Brian Smith OWNER: Smith-Gerig Properties LLC Smith-Gerig Properties LLC PO Box 930 PO Box 930 Wilsonville, OR 97070 Wilsonville, OR 97070 APPLICANT'S Jim Waddle REP: 1927 NW Kearney Portland, OR 97209 PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct two additional buildings of 63,187 and 42,173 square feet with associated site improvements. The site is adjacent to Red Rock Creek, however because the applicant is not proposing any development in the Creek or in the 25-foot riparian setback area, no Sensitive Lands Review or Water Resources Overlay review is required. LOCATION: 8200 SW Hunziker Road; WCTM 2S101 BC, Tax Lot 2500; and 2S10100, Tax Lot 700. ZONE: Light Industrial; I-L. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. CIT AREA: East CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request DECISION MAKING BODY: COMMENTS SENT: 3/1/2000 DUE: 3/15/2000 © STAFF DECISION DATE OF DECISION: [Tentatively] April 20,2000 - ❑ HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 ❑ PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 ❑ CITY COUNCIL DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PROJECT RELATED COMPONENTS AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION F3 VICINITY MAP p NARRATIVE p TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY p ARCHITECTUAL PLAN p SITE PLAN p LANDSCAPE PLAN p GEO-TECH REPORT la WETLAND REPORT STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner (503) 639-4171, Ext. 407 SDR2000-00004 FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK LAND USE PROPOSAL PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN Ct.—CKLIST Pro _ .: FOR Date: Z)e 2-tavo LAND USE APPLICATION SUBMITTALS ❑ COMPLETE INCOMPLETE G' • DING M Existing and proposed contours shown? dm# Are adjacent parcels impacted by proposed grading? El Yes E to COAdjacent parcel grades shown? tzT rET ISSUES Right-of-way clearly shown? Centerline of street clearly shown? UName of street(s) shown? Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown? 12-„IA Profiles of proposed streets j2-04 Future Streets Plan provided? (subdivisions and some partitions) ❑ profiles ❑ topo shown on adjacent property? Traffic study required/submitted? ❑` Do proposed street grades comply with City standards? ECheck widths proposed on public streets Are private streets proposed? ❑ under 6 lot minimum? ❑ commercial driveway entrance required. ❑ width appropriate? ❑Other: 1 SANITARY SEWER ISSUES fri-yk 5-144A -S,AKJ► wvR 1L GgNkt, [r Existing/proposed lines? _ t [� Stubs to adjacent parcels required? -ct►� °-�ptE ) t_..04> 4.- S. 1 AUK ki ( s WATER ISSUES A13 S td l-An11)S [r Existing/proposed lines? eft_ p , SCro LANDS izp $ 60_ [ r Existing/proposed fire hydrants? -rMl -f,�,/L� , * STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES Fl-09e1.,117i.1 • Er Existing/proposed lines? E1 Preliminary sizing calculation of water quality provided? [r Water quality facility shown on plan? Er- does area provided match calculations for size requirement? Stubs to adjacent properties required? Er Water quality and/or detention shown outside of any wetland buffer? ileng\brian tnasters\public facility plan checklisl.doc • C ��ll� "[�'h�-AL S'C -G, Sd pc,...41A-( v._ lnr F �►.l 1C•5‘-ES tt/ f F�• cA Ks< AS '(Z ¢ SKI. RECEIVED February 11, 2000 FEB 2 8 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY OF TIGARP Jim Waddle 1927 NW Kearny Street Portland, OR 97209 OREGON RE: Incompleteness letter for Foundry Site (SDR2000-00004/SLR20I 5-00006) Dear Mr. Waddle: Staff has received the application materials for the Foundry Site Development Review. After review of the application materials, staff has determined that the application can not be deemed complete until additional information and materials are submitted. The following information and/or items are needed in order for staff to deem the application complete: fio,,I-dc.✓. Submit 3 additional copies of the Wetland Report. Submit 2 additional copies of the Traffic Study. ,o,fj«1 • Submit details on the floodplain elevation. The City records show a large portion t�P � of the site is covered by floodplain. I realize there is a large amount of pre-existing fill on the site, however, staff needs information on the current floodplain elevation, �'"P "k't° as well as confirmation that this elevation is pre-existing as opposed to an illegal fill. 45 sAct-P,.h —. Provide information on the amount of ground to be disturbed by the utility rev'Sd.ap/9„5._ crossing of Red Rock Creek. This information is needed to determine the type of i1. 4/-hv9i4• n5 review that is necessary (based on the amount of land alteration in the floodplain). (c-3) . Submit additional fee and narrative for the Sensitive Lands Review (SLR). The AJA qs Slc+c.° fee for SLR in this project is 20% of the original fee because it is associated with 46U;Jc another application. The fee at 20%, thereore, is $149. The narrative must be revised (or an addendum submitted) to show how the project complies with the applicable standards. Submit grading details on adjacent parcels. The plans provided do not clearly c-if show how the proposed grading will impact adjacent parcels. Please be aware that, in accordance with the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards revision, this application must be deemed complete prior to March 15, 2000 in order to be exempt from the recently adopted standards. I am very aware of the need to get this project deemed complete within the stated timeframes and will do everything I can to answer questions and resolve any issues in a timely manner. Once the information listed above is submitted, staff will deem the application complete and schedule the project for review. Please contact me at 639-4171 , x407 if you have any questions regarding this letter or the application. Sincerely, /e"e/t/ ulia Powell Hajduk Associate Planner I:\curpin\julia\sdr\Foundryacc.doc c: SDR2000-00004 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 02/10/00 16:33 $503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD 0 001 M-t ACTIVITY REPORT $$$ TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. 3609 CONNECTION TEL 503 221 1709 CONNECTION ID START TIME 02/10 16:32 USAGE TIME 01 '18 PAGES 2 RESULT OK Post-it°Fax Note t 7671 °b'aa-fog DIP 1' 2. To -TM �CI c r , From Jk4 Q��— COIQepL G0. /)Q 9, Phone It Phone N , DRAFT Fax%22/—/7°Y Faxl} Jim Waddle 1927 NW Kearny St. Portland, OR 97209 RE: Incompleteness letter for Foundry Site (SDR2000-00004/SLR2000-00006) Dear Mr. Waddle: Staff has received the application materials for the Foundry Site Development Review. After review of the application materials, staff has determined that the application can not be deemed complete until additional information and materials are submitted. The following information and/or items are needed in order for staff to deem the application complete: Submit 3 additional copies of wetland report Submit 2 additional copies of the Traffic study Submit details on the floodplain elevation. The City records show a large portion of the site is covered by floodplain. I realize there isa large amount of pre-existing fill on the site, however staff needs information on the current floodplain elevation, as well as confirmation that this elevation is pre-existing as opposed to an illegal fill. Provide information on the amount of ground to be disturbed by the utility crossing of Red Rock Creek. This information is needed to determine the type of review that is necessary (based on the amount of land alteration in the floodplain) . _ - - - Aar February 29, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Jim Waddle 1927 NW Kearny Street Portland, OR 97209 RE: Completeness letter for Foundry Site (SDR2000-00004/SLR2000-00006) Dear Mr. Waddle: Staff has received the additional application materials for the Foundry Site Development Review requested in our 2-11-2000 Incompleteness letter. This letter is to inform you that staff has reviewed this additional information and finds the application is complete and will be processed for review. Staff has set a target decision date for this application for April 20, 2000. Please be aware that this is a target date for project scheduling purposes only and the actual decision may be rendered before or after this target date. Please contact me at 639-4171, x407 if you have any questions regarding this letter or the application. Sincerely, ulia Powell Hajduk Associate Planner i:\curpin\julia\sdr\Foundryacc2.doc c: SDR2000-00004 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 `'r4TE OF OREGON• unty of Washington ss I, Jerry R. Hanson, Director of Assess- ment and Taxation and Ex-Officio County Clerk for said county, do hereby Certify that the within instrument of writing was received and recorded in book of records of said county. Jerry R. Hanson, Director of Assessment and Taxation, Ex- Officio County Clerk Doc : 95024480 Rect: 14.1500 48. 00 04/10/1995 03: 23 : 03PM f.. BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE'S DEED • GRANTOR: ROBERT K. MORROW, INC. in the capacity as Chapter 7 Trustee for the bankruptcy estate of In re Western Foundry Company 394-30613-dds7 of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Oregon GRANTEES: BRIAN SMITH and REX GERIG 25440 SW Newland Road Wilsonville OR 97070 TRUE AND ACTUAL CONSIDERATION: FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO/100 ($450,000.00) DATE: 3/ 7 , 19 wGrantor conveys to Grantee the real property described on the attached Exhibit A (the "Property"). The Property is conveyed AS IS AND WITHOUT REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, and by recording this deed Grantee accepts the Property and improvements in that condition. THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES. ROBERT 2 RROW, INC. ��J By: ►�!I�� Robert K. s crow, Presi.e STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of Multnomah ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on t-t ck4 \`1 , 1995, by Robert K. Morrow, President of Robert K. Morrow, Inc., acting in the capacity as chapter 7 trustee of the estate of In re Western Foundry Company 394-30613-dds7 .fUnited States B. ptcy Court for the District of Oregon. ' OFF1 ..At- (� ��: :<• ' : L 3tw Satre c 0 ti teat/OYPveLIC-OREGIon NOTARY PUB • OREGON a�r�r�siar�r:a Qo7s�a � MY COME.9!'�'aION EXfl S 1.11G.9. 1995 U My Commission xpires: 0 8-OR -"\S AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: SEND TAX ' TEMENTS TO: Brian Smith and Rex Gerig Brian Smith and Rex Gerig 25440 S.W. Newland Road 25440 S.W. Newland Road Wilsonville, OR 97070 Wilsonville, OR 97070 251761Trdeed.vc/3/16/95-3 F. r .....71.1" SCHEDULE A, Page No. 2 Legal Description, Continued Order No. : 800036w PARCEL I A tract of land in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows: Beginning at the most Southerly corner of tract described in Deed to R T & E Corporation, recorded in Book 396, Page 711, Deed Records, Washington County, Oregon; thence South 41° 46' East 613.80 feet to an iron rod on the Northwesterly line of a tract described in Deed to Tillie Zurcher, et vir, recorded in Book 315, Page 388, said Deed Records; thence North 46° 50' East along said Northwesterly line 600.00 feet to an iron rod; thence North 41° 46' West 651.10 feet to an iron rod on the Southeasterly line of the tract described in Contract recorded in Book 399, Page 626, said Deed Records; thence South 43° 19' West along said Southeasterly line and an extension thereof 602.68 feet to the true point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion conveyed to H. William Gazely by instrument recorded November 27, 1979 as Recorder's Fee No. 79048879, Washington County Deed Records. PARCEL II A tract of land in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows: Beginning at the most Southerly corner tract described in Deed to R T & E Corporation, recorded in Book 396, Page 711, Deed Records, Washington County, Oregon; thence South 41° 46' East 613.80 feet to an iron rod on the Northwesterly line of a tract described in Deed to Tillie Zurcher, et vir, recorded in Book 315, Page 388, said Deed Records; thence North 46° 50' East along said Northwesterly line 600.00 feet to an iron pipe at the true point of beginning; thence North 41° 46' West 651.10 feet to an iron rod on the Southeasterly line of that tract described in Contract recorded in Book 399, Page 626, said Deed Records; thence North 43° 19' East 109.02 feet along said Southeasterly line to an iron pipe; thence North 29° 01' East 334 .60 feet to the center line of Southwest Hunziker Street, from which point an iron pipe bears South 29° 01' West 20 feet; thence South 60° 59' East along said center line 690.90 feet to the most Northerly corner of tract described in Contract recorded in Book 398, Page 482, said Deed Records, from which point an iron pipe bears South 29° 01' West 20 feet; thence South 29° 01' West 333.36 feet along the Westerly line of said tract to an iron pipe; thence South 46° 50' West 337.65 feet to an iron pipe at the true point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion conveyed to Palmer G. Lewis Company by instrument recorded April 20, 1977 in Book 1159, Page 693, Washington County Deed Records. EXHIBIT 4 3 PAGE _L._ OF . .rtap Provided As 2ourtesy Of Oregon Title Insuranke Cotnpany N . .;„ .;,,'Vic: This sketch is wade solely for the purpose of assisting in locating said premises, ..:.;',;:!i:1;::::., and the company assumes no liability for variations, if any, in dimensions and Alit • locations ascertained by actual survey. �- V O 0 N2i,r9°` x— �R \ . • r • • 'L .1 NE COR p�O w O /1' 0& 3/6' OO 6, 6g O. a' ur v ti ry �2 �S' �, NE O tee �' p �Qc . �� ......j./...."-- .." � 0�0 3�'4c P. o O q ti 1 i •tr) 6'- ..--\/_1 O F O s,, N 0 E 6 i �Pa N♦. ...• -1, • 'a I c� 0 Q/� s oa 4 4D 'Nei �` o �`' s �9 v� •9� V • ,� N 650 0, 0.9. ae.w ,• P yN4o • 44,/3'4. i A y t i, • 7, ../f\•„, �\ • '• 1 r 0\ �, I .rte 1 II I/. t { ,t A� ',. �v } ,.T J' r, • --- � 12 000 �, 1489° 51' 30"E 0) ° 26..32 Ac, 26.8' 99 8 4' � " Co EXHIBIT ri A' 0 PAGE OF ISt . I' ' s �O. A f • HE CORNS 11 1 ti Provided As A Courtesy Of Oregon Title ltisuu ' Company N This sketch is made solely for the purpose of assisting in locating said premises, and the company assumes no liability for variations, if any, in dimensions and \ �%� locations ascertained by actual survey. ''�. • • y 4 • R .lit'.1c A .1 J ... ...... _ 3 "../St / /J 102 _ " - - - J Irl 1.,, .�c. r; I I / Y I� I •<i li ! J I� I • . I u I.14 .i �. , /Y f J w.. I I A I • kER I I 2 201 �- �° +a I i "+°4 1.05 Ac.• 07 s I 1 2100 o o ,o, •' 8 .x2 Ac. :.�� M I I . •y ^ - p Cs.3Be6 `t i��� tw .1pt LI I 0 1 1 ■ V R 1 2500 0"t D \ � .34d .s7Ac 00 « • . `� r 2501 r t��°� /`ti 7.57.4c sj .4 240 0 _ • fiP $ 3 04Ac. • c .4 ft b . • J • ' • .Qh 1• ■ S. . to • ■ • 444,e't!.. t • t♦ Jso'' EXHIBIT • 4 5 PAGE OF 3 'E OF OREGON .nty of Washington SS I, Jerry R Hanson Direotbr of Assess- ment and Taxation and Ex-Officio County Clerk for said County,do hereby certify that the within instrument of Wtiting Was received and recorded in 63bk<iof'records of said county,. ' ' 't3< • •411f f� ;Jerry-R: Han;3o Director of AA�'esi;rti�b`flt`and-taxation, Ex- Offigly,lolTrity Clerk Doc : 95025009 Rect: 141584 38. 00 04/11/1995 02: 16: 14PM , — = _ ATUTORY BARGAIN AND SALE DEED (CONTINUED) LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Continued) Order No. : 800036w PARCEL II A tract of land in Section 1, 'Township 7 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows: Beginning at the most Southerly corner tract described in Deed to R T & E Corporation, recorded in Book 396, Page 711, Deed Records, Washington County, Oregon; thence South 41° 46' Fast 613.80 feet to an irons rod on the Northwesterly line of a LLdCt described in Deed to Tillie ZurcIer, et vir, recorded in Book 315, Page 388, said Deed Records; thence North 46° 50' East along said Northwesterly line 600.00 feet to an iron pipe at the true point of beginning;iing; thence North 41° 46' West 651.10 feet to an iron rod on the Southeasterly line of that tract described in Contract recorded in Book 399, Page 626, said Deed Records; thence North 43° 19' East 109.02 feet along said Southeasterly lime to an iron pipe; thence North 29° 01' East 334.60 feet to the center line of Southwest Hunziker Street, from which point an iron pipe bears South 29° 01' West 20 feet; thence South 60° 59' East along said center lire 690.90 feet to the most Northerly corner of tract described in Contract recorded in Bode 398, Page 482, said Deed Records, fran which point an iron pipe bears South 29° 01' West 20 feet; thence South 29° 01' West 333.36 feet along the Westerly line of said tract to an iron pipe; thence South 46° 50' West 337.65 feet to an iron pipe at the true point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion conveyed to Palmer G. Lewis Canpany by instrument recorded April 20, 1977 in Bode 1159, Page 693, Washington County Deed Records. 3 (0) OREGON TITLE STAB BARGAIN AND SALE DEED Insurance Company (Individual ) l t Brian Smith and Rex Gerig � 1 1�-- conveys to Smith Gerig Western Properties, L.L.C., an Ort x1 limited liability company 8 the following described real property in the State of Oregon and County of Washington V PARCEL I ilA tract of land in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, p in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows: ¢ Beginning at the most Southerly corner of tract described in Deed to R T & E Corporation, 0 recorded in Book 396, Page 711, Dead Records, Washington County, Oregon; thence South 41° 46' Fast 613.80 feet to an iron rod on the Northwesterly line of a tract described in Deed to Tillie Zurcher, et vir, recorded in Book 315, Page 388, said Deed Records; thence North 46° 50' Fast along said Northwesterly line 600.00 feet to an iron rod; thence North 41° 46' West 651.10 feet to an iron rod on the Southeasterly line of the tract described in Contract recorded in Boo{ 399, Page 626, said Deed Ri x rds; thence South 43° 19' West along said Southeasterly line and an extension thereof 602.68 feet to the true point of beginning. EXCEPTING TfRRCM that portion conveyed to H. William Gazely by instrument recorded November 27, 1979 as Recorder's Fee No. 79048879, Washington County Deed Records. (Continued) Tax Account Number(s): 2511-00700 and 2S11BC-02500 The true consideration for this conveyance is $ none. The actual consideration consists of or includes other property or value given or promised whict, is the whole consideration. THIS ERST 3I 1E T WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED D IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLA- TION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRU- MENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PI.D.:'d'F.TT G DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DEPEP.MINE ANY LIMITS ON LAW- SUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. DATED e 's day of April, 1995. ,..gidie...„ , 9 th ig f STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF MUL'I'NU AH)ss. The foregoing instrun nt was acknowledged before me this 'Z ' day of p }ril, 1995, by 0,Brian Smith and Rex Gerig. a l 01116_ �\ rTGDt1-.•tary • ,x oregaz f _ ;.- NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON P `j Caniniss A is' - : I(1 `,.~ COMMISSION NO.007573 t' ( MY COMMISSION ECPI ; 'S:`.JG.9, 199 9 l VOrder No. : 800036w THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE iii After Recording Return To: •qg Smith Gerig Western Properties, LLC .• 95; 25440 S.W. Newland Road -U wilsonvilie, OR 97070 • • • UD . 0;Until a chant-: is requested, tax statements 4 ,i>,shall be sent to the following add mss: Smith Gerig Western Properties, NC C . 3 25440 S.W. Newland Road • Wilsonville, OR 97070 • Jan-31 -00 05 : 47P WADDLE DESIGN 503 221 1709 P . 01 Wa-aidle DESIGN / PLANNING / ARCHITECTURE 1927 NW Kearney Street Portland, Oregon 97209 TEL: 503/221-2003 FAX: 503/221-1709 FAX COVER SHEET TO: Julia Hejduk COMPANY: City of Tigard FAX: Le i/y-7Z9 7 DATE: 1/31/2000 FROM: Jim Waddle R E: The Foundry Industrial Park Number Of Pages Including This Sheet: 3 MESSAGE: Julia - Here is the list with the X out addresses I did not include envelopes for. Looks like they are exact duplications of addresses except for "King". Let me know if I need to do more on this subject! Thanks!! James H. Wa.die, Architect COPIES:: Brian Smith OPERATOR: If this transmission does not come through properly or there are missing pages, please notify us immediately for re-transmission. If this fax was received in error, please notify us immediately. Thank you. Jan-31 -00 05:47P WADDLE DESIGN 503 221 1709 P. 02 / 25101 -0 01 2S101: -025�:c KING JA S F SMITH G• : WESTERN PROPERTI 12650 S ALL BOULEVARD PO BO 0 TIGAR ,O 97223 WIL .NVILLE, •' 97070 2S101BC-02501 2S1018C-02700 PALMER G LEWIS COMPANY KING JAMES F PO BOX 1041 PO BOX 23819 CHESTERFIELD,MO 63006 TIGARD,OR 97223 J 2S101BC-02800 2S101BC-02900 SEVERSON JAMES A&ROBIN 0 WESTPHAL EDGAR A&PATRICE M 29404 SW HEATER RD 1811 NW 93RD PL SHERWOOD,OR 97140 PORTLAND,OR 97229 2S101 BD-00300 • 2S -00 LOSLI E HOWARD TRUSTEE AND TIGARD Y OF 208 E WOODLAWN RD#200 1312 H LL CHARLOTTE,NC 28217 ARD,OR 3 2S 102DA-00100 2S 102DA-00500 MAGNO LLC TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL 8800 SW COMMERICAL ST 13137 SW PACIFIC HWY TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 J4n-31-00 05 : 48P WADDLE DESIGN 503 221 1709 P .03 2510100-00500 / I00 :y LLIAM BOX 2304 TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGAR ,OR 7281 2510100-00700 2S10100-00701 SMITH GERIG WESTERN PROPERTIES L G•: H LLIAM PO BOX 930 PO BO 0414 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 T • -D,OR 97281 151 2510100-00800 2S 100-01100 F W I FIELD FR 1149 D PORT 114 VENPORT TLAND,OR 9 201 RTLAND, 97201 2510100-01200 r 2S1 00-01201 --Th FIELDS FRED W COE CTURING CO THE 1149 SW DAVENPORT P PORTLAND,OR 97201 ( PAINESVILL ,OH 44077 �S10100-01202 25101 BC-00100 COE MANUFACTURING COMPANY KNEZ JOHN S SR&JEANNE M PO BOX 520 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD PAINESVILLE,OH 44077 TIGARD,OR 97223 . 5 5� -ki'l .__ - 2S101BC 0010 \ V ' 2S101BC-00103 KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC WETLANDS CONSERVANCY INC THE 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD PO BOX 1195 TIGARD,OR 97223 TUALATIN,OR 97062 2S101BC-00200 2S101BC-00201 US NATURAL RESOURCES INC WESTEC AMERICA INC 8185 SW HUNZIKER RD 8255 SW HUNZIKER TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101BC-01700 2S10IBC-01801 DEFOE JUDITH A MCGEE& MILLER LORI M 4900 SW MEADOWS RD#100 8365 SW HUNZIKER RD LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97035 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101BC-01900 2S101BC-02100 SOLIS MANUEL AND DIOEMA ANNAND JOHN D II&EDNA N 8335 SW HUNZIKER RD 8260 SW HUNZIKER RD TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 25101 BC-02200 25101 BC-02201 HHO&B ASSOCIATES LLC ROACH MICHAEL A AND PAMELA S PO BOX 23755 956 WEST POINT RD TIGARD,OR 97281 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 V1• rte, uV £O.Vi/ ......-..... .....•... .... .■-, . MUCH construction OREGON IRC111111511I P.O.BOX 767 BEAVERTON,OR 97075 503 641-2500 503 643-0646 FAX January 28,2000 Jim Waddle Waddle Design-Planning-Architecture,AIA 1927 NW Kearney Street Portland,OR 97209 Subject:Industrial Tilt Up Complex—Tigard,OR Dear Jim, Thank you for the opportunity to give you a budget cost for the above referenced project. We were excited to hear about this project, and look forward to discussing it further with you and your client. Pursuant to your request,the following represents an average cost of construction for these types of facilities. Based upon two (2) "cold shell" industrial concrete tilt up buildings, with a composite wood and steel roof structure,a combined square foot area of 107,360 sf,and proportional site developments,the cost of construction will b_c approximately re foot of building area.The total extended construction cost would be ,542,8 As you well know,there are many variables that affect the cost of construction.We would like the opportunity to review the construction documents,and discuss what we can do to meet the constraints of this project. Please call me directly at(503)526-3133 with any questions. Sincerely, Mike Doran BAUGH CONSTRUCTION OREGON,INC. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, , being duly sworn, depose and say that on ,OQeel16-Py 1 , 19`, 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) r 261 SL!/ a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at S7'z- Octit.izs d /17dr with postage prepaid thereon. 41111EilirAlaiti Signa. r- (In the presence o a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) JATO Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the J/ day of , . OFFICIAL SEAL f AO swe' LYNN A.DUNN 414„,r,NOTAI2 GO COMMISSION NO. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG.16,2003) NO A' ( P U OF OREGON My C. mission Expires: (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) rNAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: The 1D24,0(c4' TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: (tiduit -isd/ Name of Applicant/Owner: Sin/ 41'i f ,17/,001-res /LL G I Address or General Location of Subject Property: $2.00 3t.) f/L(KL/4t' ` 7714:20-0, I ISubject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): 2S101dU_ 0070o1 cum 70..QL L O ZS OV h:Vog inlpattylmasters\affma il.mst Re: The Foundry, an Industrial Park Development Dear Interested Party: Smith Gerig Western Properties, LLC is the Owner of the property located at 8200 SW Hunziker Road, the former Western Foundry site. We are considering proposing a site development review for the redevelopment of this site for light industrial uses. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, we would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Wednesday, December 15, 1999 Between the hours of 5:00 and 6:00 PM Northwest Demolition and Dismantling Office at the site: 8200 SW Hunziker Road Tigard, Oregon Please notice this will be an informational meeting on Preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. We look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 503 638 6900 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Brian Smith Smith Gerig Western Properties, LLC --""4411111181k. t i.z- ', ' 9 t:' C Jµ Cr t(✓ y et WI'\ Sit ��( 0/ 7 t7thçy'oundi '\R ''� r 1 Industrial Park i T la '- Existing Site Conditions / Survey ‘ \',\.* r e ' \a Gp5t1 4 F VV addle DESIGN/PLANNING/ARCHITECTURE rah \, ��� V PER 3 4e, /1-_, , \ ', k \e7— 1, .1'titi \ 0y°5 e� \ O. fJ'l 4) ea, \\\1 ,, L/0 <� r le ,. � 0 lis". ' \ ti ili si � -4- � � R I r R. I I iP. III I I (F, r _ 1I�1I1 1 j �, n- Y I I II 1I� 1 1 ..41•30.36w 590.67 �� n4 = , II r I�� _ V G_ .0.x L x — ---.-----.1= !`Cl �e r• III 1 ' ' ,: ��4.C.DRIvEy1A7 ye ti o � / "��� , r, iI 1 1 1 4....).. � • x ry> y .�• ry 11 J1.' C1 \' I 1 ' \uIr� A (I / �a BUILDING BUILDING x �� 1 m- — ,f. J: ' 1 4 AC.DRIVEWAY`a 'I gl+ E/5e1E]1T TQ P li�PlB-D- D ✓� .Q � J / BOOK 408 PAGE 131 ' ) 4 \ x % - x \ i 6. x 1 , / V V .?,....," I' ,� x r 0� 4. e 'f _o; • oTh -• ± ,CO.<2..4/v() ) . . . ! \ , 1 .,,,,p,,,,,," .4,, / 1 . a Q ^: I $ v r `� ; P"p P I I ��II 1 � . a, / ^; d � ) I # ,-'1 ' xa' \ / BUILDING / )0.' ', ,tit''''' ^�, • a . • Ii - . / '' °•S`' I' w • ti I 4 \ C •. r t r�1 e` .pia 41,r" '`fix /' `1 I 1 ty• o°9a 1°'\\\ \ 1 �'s II Q� \\ � 9� p{b_ \e .`� b A '7 1 1 `�/ i' O `1 11•a l l a ;' ,{� 1 0 \ \\ y 1 I „ r. 4. 4 1 71 ,\I < q \ \ ` \ ., r'~i 7 / 11 , Sr` N41°41'40111 160.•= I \ -_- _ p EXCE TIGN PER )11 �-l1 ./)�. i -_ 1O EA5Erl' T PPOE 776 1 Y / 19o4ce19 V \ - �,�`�, PER . - b ,---±;41L _ _ r ' AC DRIVEWVY trim 561°4Y40'E 4S3.3T "^•de: ♦142.2 \ • ❑ .Tilil.!' ' / , - uI • •I .11.0 ...* i _ __ ___ - A , ` e Lund - \ , \ Industrial Park \ �ddl DESIGN/PLANNING/ARCHITECTURE \\\ C copyright 7999 \1 \ Site Area: 9.07 Acres \ Building Area: 120,000 sq. ft. \ \ I ' \ I _ _ _ _ i , , t so 1 \ ' ' _ ....---- L__ i CT 11_ . ---11-77)_., — , I I I I \ C__ ) C —1 1 t Y) C ' ) I1 I l I C- \ ‘, 1 \ I :1 \ I I ...\1\s, cl—L___L ,____ i___ \ _--- 1 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 I A V i i .211\ 17" rf , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed ✓ c- o F' t N i affecting the land located at (state the approximate/location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax. lot(s) currently registered) 8 O 2 •Gc) . t Li ) z IA" , -776 Fl. , and did on the /41 day of 7a,t 19 9 ci personalloost notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a ST Fe:---- fr I/r-Cc PO) t,.'7 `r�t V I c aJ application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. � The sign was poste at ZA-Iiirn 4./C 6 _ r d ' �'o P6' a f- led d a G(4C/Z fie o f I I G /7"? e • (state location you posted notice on property) 7L- tifre.-64 411, 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 2 day of oCe-• , 19/57 ) f :, OFFICIAL SEAL DENISE GALL . 1J v., ./!/ / ' ( � NOTARY PUBLIC OREGON l ( `1 $1" COMMISSION N0.327856 NO ARY PUBLIC OF OREGON MY OCT. EXPIRES ION E COMMISSXPI7,2003 �-� ) My Commission Expires: Dal • �r a`D a 3 (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) INAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Name of Applicant/Owner: Address or General Location of Subject Property: LSubject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): h:UoginlpattyVnasterslattpost mst Smith Gerig Western Properties, L.L.C. P.O. Box 930 Wilsonville, OR 97070-0930 December 15, 1999 To: City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Following are the names and addresses of those attending the neighborhood meeting held on December 15, 1999, at 5:00 p.m. at 8200 S.W. Hunziker, Tigard, Oregon, regarding the proposed development at that location. Name Address Questions - Concerns James H. Waddle, Architect Brian H. Smith, Owner Mavis Smith, Owner There was no one else in attendance at the meeting. gaddt- GZ.I�Cif 51)04,1eco- 4 ... . - 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 RECEIVED PLANNING Tigard,OR 97223 ULC 2 7 1999 4 CITY OF TIGARD I, i9 v f a .2 rn t r tf , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed e ✓ t '- o P ill 2 st1 7 affecting the land located at (state the approximate/location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax,lot(s) currently registered) 8AU o Z' •4J . i./6(.4.1z ilk'r 76 r9iqD C , and did on the /4--r day of c ten.- h� , 19 / personal)most notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a S r %e t I//CO Pih 64.)r `75 t V 1 e Gc. application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at 2-4I-/> tr/c/ &C, i d 4%= .61 F'E'i I a I 2Ud0 ‹ Z J / ZWZ! Keie I 1 6F9I (state location you posted notice n property) ./) 7 4._4,, ' S-77,6(VL 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 day of Dee-• , 19/5 f'st OFFICIAL SEAL J f)r ti- DENISE GALL 1 i III i2/Z �L �' i t- 1 � + NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON () 0 ∎:;' COMMISSION NO.327856 () NO ARY PUBLIC OF OREGON () MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCT,7,2003 0 My Commission Expires: (Dca .-7 a 3 (Applicant,please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: I TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: 1 Name of Applicant/Owner: I Address or General Location of Subject Property: LSubject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): h:llogin\patty\rnasters1affpost.mst ..,y,,,rMWGDfi∎V.h.sATEUn.44 Pokm aW-wwl —r'1).rt .... OP i --- I I I _�w 11 ,, fig I - , 111 _ I1r, i tr ;� .. I T •� �__ h- P-ri _ 1 �� 'W''�I "� �. �2 1 �, I q ;lay ,y ;I ,r�1 ■ I- f I I',,1,,,, $_--1-Tr '1 7 ' 1 -10 ICI 11,\ ■ ., 1 I i itt_ — �, , 1'1 1�,�' 14 A ,;:i1 ' 1 1 1-- 4-11 111 / li t 'ter 11 . . tl t J ` r �'I l I l l f} � __—_ fir t, I Kji ;/ 141't_____H___4 __), It !41g i I II : ._ 'L.}.. :1,,,,,,.:. , ,- - -, .„,,,i__ i, I 1 , I , . , ,,,„,„ : . , '''k' i!' . + 1 3 w{ 11t+ ..., j j 1i\, I:IV, ; ® rIi „ y lOi D rfl-i delk. ;j1 r \ \ k ■ F r REV1S,ONS I Ap- S THE FOUNDRY �j a�E moo OVi:iffig "—' 1�' INDUSTRIAL PARK •.j F __ DWI ow SHEET 1111E 8200 SU NUNZIGER ROAD DESIGN PLANNING ARCHITECTURE -,''' TIGARD,OREGON Dim n SITE PLAN as Q s 7 n.oY ao ID-a nm 4 7vl al e 970 . g.kchtecture Proposai �lVav' rafiv2. Applicant's Statement The Foundry Industrial Park Summary of Proposal Applicant proposes to re-develop this existing site of the former Western Foundry into an attractive and successful light industrial park with rail access. The purpose of this application is to obtain approvals of the masterplan concept and to proceed into construction of the buildings and public service facilities as the market dictates on phased basis not to exceed three years. The plan submitted reserves an area in the vicinity of the existing office building and rail spur which, in the long term, may be redeveloped with one additional building. The traffic report addresses this long range plan for the additional larger building, but planning of that building is beyond the scope of this proposal. Narrative The proposed development complies with all applicable approval standards and criteria of the City of Tigard zoning code as follows: Chapter 18.360 (Site Development Review) 1. All applicable street and utility standards are met. 2a. All buildings are located to provide for logical vehicular circulation on or close to existing grade. The buildings will be at least 100 feet apart guaranteeing plenty of light and air between them. No existing trees will be affected. Buildings are-located on sound fill at least 25 feet from the nearest top of bank at sloped conditions existing on the site. 2b. No existing trees exist on site. 3a. Does not apply 4a. Does not apply 4b.Trash enclosures will consist of walled and gated enclosures completely screening trash handling and recycling equipment. Rooftop HVAC units are expected to be relatively small and be located well in from perimeter parapets eliminating the need for additional screening devices. Primary service areas i.e. loading docks for the main building are oriented toward the rail spur where similar activity is envisioned. The more public street serves both buildings and incorporates the office frontages facing one another. Interior parking areas will meet code criteria for landscaping and tree islands. 5. Does not apply 6. Does not apply 7. Does not apply 8. This is the re-development of an existing site which was originally developed and filled sometime prior to 1975, and as a result is categorized as "prior converted". The bank adjacent to the existing waterway is unsuited to greenway/public access/bicycle path development. 9a.The design demonstrates a clear demarcation of public/private spaces relative to crime prevention and maintenance responsibility. 10.The location of windows and doors provide for maximum security and crime prevention. Lighting of street and parking areas will meet established standards for this purpose. 11. Does not apply 12. Landscape materials are in accordance with 18.745. Current plan has 19.5% of the gross area in existing or new landscaped area, and the final development will have no less than 15% of the gross site area landscaped. 13. Drainage has been addressed in the Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative and the Utility Impact Study produced by the consulting civil engineer, submitted as an attachment hereto. 14. Accessibility requirements and facilities for the disabled will be in accordance with ORS chapter 447. 15. Provisions of the underlying zone are met. Chapter 18.390 (Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) The proposed development is being submitted and processed as a Type II procedure, Site Development Review. A pre-application conference was conducted on November 18, 1999. Notes resulting from the conference have been complied with. A neighborhood meeting was held on December 15, 1999. Documents pertinent to the meeting are submitted as part of this submittal. The impact study required by this chapter is a part of this submittal, and includes contributions from the Architect, the Civil Engineer, the Wetland Specialist, The Environmental Consultant, and the Traffic Consultant. The required application form and fees, along with two sets of stamped envelopes addressed to all parties subject to notice accompany this submittal. Chapter 18.530 (Industrial Zoning Districts) The current zoning is I-L (Light Industrial). Proposed development is in compliance with the Development Standards Table 18.530.2 and includes an existing rail spur (permitted). Chapter 18.705 (Access/Egress/Circulation) The proposed design meets all requirements for vehicular access and maneuvering, fire department access and maneuvering, and public walkways. Chapter 18.720 (Design Compatibility Standards) The provisions of this chapter do not apply to the proposed development. Chapter 18.745 (Landscaping&Screening Standards) Landscape buffering to adjacent properties is not required. Street trees are provided on both sides of the access driveway within the access easement. Internal landscape trees and buffering of the parking areas is provided. Re- vegetation of the wetland buffer area is not required. Chapter 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) Enclosures for trash and mixed solid waste and recycling storage meeting the minimum requirement criteria for industrial uses are provided as depicted on the site development plan. Chapter 18.765 (Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) Required on-site parking is provided. Loading zones are provided. Truck parking and storage areas are provided based on expected occupancies of the proposed buildings. Access drive is designed in accordance with Chapter 18.705. Clear vision requirements of Chapter 18.795 are met. All parking spaces are full sized. Chapter 18.775 (Sensitive Lands Review) A wetland delineation for the Red Rock Creek located adjacent to the east property line has been completed and staked. This creek is a minor stream classified as a non-significant wetland. Chapter 18.790 (Tree Removal) No trees exist on the site. A significant number of new trees are provided along the access driveway and within the re-developed parking areas. Chapter 18.795 (Visual Clearance Areas) Visual clearances are maintained at the access driveway intersection, and all on- site private vehicular circulation intersections. Chapter 18.797(Water Resources Overlay District) The existing site was filled sometime prior to the end of 1975 and is categorized as "prior converted". No indigenous vegetation exists on the buildable portion of the site. A 25 foot water quality buffer is being provided, with building orientation designed to further protect and buffer the existing drainage way. A wetland delineation for the Red Rock Creek located adjacent to the east property line has been completed and staked. This creek is a minor stream classified as a non-significant wetland. The wetland report is included in this submittal. Chapter 18.810 (Street & Utility Improvement Standards) The requirements of this chapter are met and documented on the Site Dimension Plan, the Grading Plan and the Utility Plans. Impact Study The proposed re-development of this site will result in a number of significant benefits and improvements to the environment and existing infrastructure: Traffic: The impact on the transportation system was evaluated by a professional traffic engineer, whose findings and report are included with this submittal. Improvements include the re-construction of the access driveway to meet current criteria, provision of an accessible pedestrian path, and bicycle parking areas. Utilities: Water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer systems have been evaluated. Refer to the Utility Impact Study, attached hereto. Water Resources and Sensitive Lands: A wetland delineation for the Red Rock Creek located adjacent to the east property line has been completed and staked. This creek is a minor stream and is classified as a non-significant wetland. The wetland report is included in this submittal. The existing site was filled sometime prior to the end of 1975 and is categorized as "prior converted". No indigenous vegetation exists on the buildable portion of the site. A 25 foot water quality buffer is being provided, with building orientation designed to further protect and buffer the existing drainage way. No re-vegetation of the buffer is required. Solar Access: The building heights are forecast to be less than 35 feet in a zone that permits up to 45 feet. The largest of the existing structures exceeds the height limit and will eventually be torn down. Site Pollution: The site is the subject of an on-going assessment and remediation program that has been in place since it was purchased by the present owners in 1995. Refer to the Environmental Consultant's letter, attached hereto. Noise and Odor: The re-development of the site will result in significant reduction in noise and odors characteristic of the original foundry use. Operations will, for the most part, be contained inside concrete structures as opposed to exterior operations and "shed" activities. Referenced Materials: Traffic Study: Stein Engineering Wetland Report: Schott and Associates Storm Drainage Narrative: Westlake Consultants Utility Impact Study: Westlake Consultants Attached Materials: Environmental Consultant letter: Agra Excerpts, Storm Drainage Narrative: Westlake Consultants Excerpts, Utility Impact Study: Westlake Consultants LnAG RA AGRA Earth& ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Environmental, Inc. 7477 SW Tech Center Drive January 27, 2000 Portland,Oregon 21-7953 USA 97223-8025 Tel (503)639-3400 Fax (503)620-7892 Mr. Jim Waddle Waddle Design 1927 NW Kearny Portland, Oregon 97209 Dear Jim: RE: FORMER WESTERN FOUNDRY SITE TIGARD, OREGON On behalf of Smith-Gerig Western Properties, LLC, AGRA Earth & Environmental, Inc. has been providing environmental consulting services at the former Western Foundry site since Smith- Gerig's purchase of the property in 1995. AGRA's work at the site has primarily included site assessment. We have installed 10 monitoring wells, and sampled subsurface soils in more than 50 borings/test pits. In 1996, remediation of an underground storage tank release was successfully completed by AGRA. In 1998, Smith-Gerig signed a letter agreement with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), with the intent of obtaining a "No Further Action" (NFA) finding. AGRA prepared an Environmental Site Assessment and Cleanup report for submittal to the DEQ to describe all work completed at the site. After reviewing the report and other file materials, the DEQ completed a file review memorandum which identified a number of data gaps. In response to the file review memorandum, AGRA conducted further site assessment activities in December 1999. A report documenting the results of this work is currently in preparation. AGRA hopes to obtain NFA status for the upland portion of the site early in the Spring of 2000. Further work to resolve potential historical discharges to an adjoining intermittent stream (Redrock Creek) will be addressed in the Summer of 2000. If you have further questions regarding our work at the former Western Foundry site, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-3400. Sincerely, AGRA Earth & Environmental, Inc. G O�� Leonard C. Farr Jr., P.G. Associate c Brian Smith, Smith-Gerig Western Properties The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative January 26,2000 Given: The Foundry Industrial Park is located south of SW Hunziker Street and east of SW Hall Boulevard in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, Oregon. Existing site conditions consists of three buildings surrounded by gravel parking and storage areas. Site topography, as shown on the attached Existing Conditions Plan, show mild slopes in the range of 1 to 3 percent falling to the southeast. The southeastern property line borders on Red Rock Creek that is designated as a "Minor Stream". This development project proposes the construction of 110,400 square feet of light industrial building space, 168,200 square feet of vehicle and pedestrian access surfaces, along with associated infrastructure amenities. Required: Provide evidence that this proposed development complies with the applicable approval standards and criteria of the City of Tigard zoning ordinance. According to City of Tigard, as specified in the "Pre-Application conference Notes"dated 11/18/99, storm water quality treatment and detention will be required. The design and construction of the required storm water quality treatment and detention facilities shall be in accordance with regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency, (USA). Methodology: Water Quality Treatment: Section 3.11.5 c-1 and c-4 of the Unified Sewerage Agencies "Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management", July 1996, was utilized to determine the water quality treatment flow rate. As per Section 3.11.5 c-1 and c-4 the storm water quality facility shall be designed for a dry weather storm event totaling 0.36 inches of precipitation falling in 4 hours with an average return period of 96 hours. In addition the storm water quality facility shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the total phosphorous from the runoff from 100 percent of the newly constructed impervious surfaces. Detention: Based on Section 3.10.3 of the Unified Sewerage Agencies "Design and Construction • Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management", July 1996, the rate of runoff from the developed site shall not exceed that of the pre-development condition based on storm events having a return frequency of 2, 10, and 25-years, and a duration of 24-hours. The hydrograph method as specified in Section 3.02,was utilized to determine the quantity of storm water runoff for the 2, 10, and 25-year, 24-hour, storm events for both the pre- development and post-development conditions. 140301-Prelim-SD-rpt Page 2 of 5 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative January 26,2000 Results: Water Quality Treatment: The water quality treatment proposed for this development does Stormwater Management of 2035 NE Columbia Boulevard, Portland, Oregon 97211 provide the StormFilter as. As per Section 3.11.5 c-1 and c-4 the storm water treatment flow was determined to be 0.57 cubic feet per second as show in the equation below. Qt = C * I * A Where: Qt=Treatment Flow C = 1 I = 0.36 in/4hr= 2.08*10-6 ft/sec A=6.29 Acres = 274,038 ft2 Therefore: 3 Qt =(2.08*10 -6 ft )(274,038ft2)=0.57ft sec sec The StormFilter treatment system is designed to treat a peak flow rate of 0.57 cfs as shown on the attached FAX from Stormwater Management dated January 26, 2000. In addition, the phosphorus removal efficiency of the StormFilter is expected to exceed 65 percent when the influent concentration of suspended solids exceeds 200mg/L. Therefore, The Foundry Industrial Park complies with the applicable approval standards and criteria of the City of Tigard zoning ordinance with respect to water quality treatment. Detention: A 36-inch diameter pipe with a multiple orifice control structure was chosen to detain the • difference between the pre and post-development storm water run off for the design storms, having a return frequency of 2, 10, and 25-years, and a duration of 24-hours. Pre-Development Conditions: Existing site conditions consists of three buildings surrounded by gravel parking and storage areas. The site topography is such that minimal off-site area will contribute to on- site runoff. Approximately 80 percent of the underlying soil is of the Aloha type, with a hydrologic grouping of C. The remainder of the on-site soils has a hydrological grouping of D, approximately 15 percent Cove type and 5 percent Verboort. 140301-Prelim-SD-rpt Page 3 of 5 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative January 26,2000 Following are the characteristics used to determine the pre-developed site runoff. Area pervious = 3.78 acres CN = 89 (Table 111-1-12) Area impervious = 5.29 acres CN = 98 (Table 111-1-12) Total Area=9.07 acres Tc= 5 min. 12 = 2.50 in (from USA Design Manual) ho =3.45 in (from USA Design Manual) 125= 3.90 in (from USA Design Manual) Results: From attached hydrograph: Q2= 3.89 cfs Qio= 5.84cfs Q25= 6.78 cfs Post-Development Conditions: The post-developed site conditions are shown on the attached Site Dimension Plan, Grading Plan and Utility Plan. Following are the characteristics used to determine the post-developed site runoff. Area pervious = 2.68 acres CN = 86 (Table III-1-12) Area impervious = 6.39 acres CN = 98 (Table III-1-12) Total Area = 9.07 acres Tc = 5 min. 12= 2.50 in (from USA Design Manual) ho= 3.45 in (from USA Design Manual) 125= 3.90 in (from USA Design Manual) Results: From attached hydrograph: Q2=4.21 cfs Qio = 6.17cfs Q25=7.11 cfs • Design Storm Event Pre-development Runoff Post-development Runoff 2-year 3.89 cfs 4.21 cfs 10-year 5.84 cfs 6.17 cfs 25-year 6.78 cfs 7.11 cfs A 36-inch diameter pipe will be used for the detention of the 2-year, 10-year and 25-year storm events. An outlet control structure with multiple orifices is designed to limit the rate of runoff from the post-development site to that of the pre-development condition. This multiple orifice structure is summarized in the following Discharge Structure List. Additional information regarding stage, storage, and discharge is available in the Level Pool Table Summary and Level Pool Routing. Report attached. 140301-Prelim-SD-rpt Page 4 of 5 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative January 26, 2000 Conclusion: The StormFilter water quality facility proposed for The foundry Industrial Park provides water quality treatment for a dry weather storm event totaling 0.36 inches of precipitation falling in 4 hours with an average return period of 96 hours. In addition this storm water quality facility meets the requirement to remove 65 percent of the total phosphorous from the runoff from 100 percent of the newly constructed impervious surfaces. Therefore, this proposed development complies with the applicable approval standards and criteria of the City of Tigard zoning ordinance as they pertain to storm water quality treatment. The storm water detention facility proposed for The Foundry Industrial Park provides over 2,500 cubic feet of storage. This detention facility limits the rate of runoff from the developed to that of the pre-development condition based on storm events having a return frequency of 2, 10, and 25-years, with duration of 24-hours. Therefore, this proposed development complies with the applicable approval standards and criteria of the City of Tigard zoning ordinance as they pertain to storm water quantity. 140301-Prelim-SD-rpt Page 5 of 5 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Utility Impact Study January 26,2000 Page 1 of 2 DRAINAGE SYSTEM: The Foundry Industrial Park is located south of SW Hunziker Street and east of SW Hall Boulevard in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, Oregon. Existing site conditions consist of three buildings surrounded by gravel parking and storage areas as shown on the attached Existing Conditions Plan. Currently there are no provisions in the on site storm drainage system for water quality treatment or detention. The topography of the site indicates slopes in the range of 1 to 3 percent falling to the southeast. The adjacent property to the west is slightly higher and therefore contributes to the on-site storm water run off. The existing Conditions Plan indicates the collection and conveyance of this off-site storm water to the southeast corner of The Foundry Industrial Park site. The southeastern property line borders on Red Rock Creek,which drains to the southwest. Red Rock Creek is designated as a "Minor Stream" with associated wetlands. The Existing Conditions Plan shows the delineated wetlands on The Foundry Industrial Park property. The Foundry Industrial Park development project proposes to provide water quality treatment and detention. The proposed water quality treatment system will be design to treat the run off from 100 percent of the newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, this facility will meet or exceed the phosphorus removal requirements as established by the Unified Sewerage Agency. The proposed detention system will be designed to limit the post-development run-off to that of the pre-development condition for the 2, 10, and 25-year storm events. Therefore, The Foundry Industrial Park will enhance and protect the existing drainage system, which is part of the Red Rock Creek basin by providing water quality treatment and detention. The provision of these water quality treatment and detention systems will have a beneficial impact on receiving storm drainage systems. WATER SYSTEM: A 10-inch main in SW Hunziker Street and 12-inch main adjacent to the southeastern property line provide water service to the site. The proposed water system plans to utilize these existing services in the same manner. Domestic water will be provided by the relocation of an existing 4-inch compound meter from the main in SW Hunziker Street. Fire protection water will be provided by the extension of the existing system in the access road from SW Hunziker Street. The existing fire protection system provided hydrants for adjacent properties as shown on the attached plan set, sheet C5. The relocation of these existing hydrants will be completed to minimize the affects to adjacent properties. The Foundry Industrial Pa Site Development Review Utility Impact Study January 26,2000 Page 2 of 2 Since the proposed water system is reconfiguration of the existing system minimal impacts are anticipated. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM: An 8-inch main in SW Hunziker Street and an 8-inch main adjacent to the southeastern property line provide sanitary sewer service to the site. The proposed sanitary sewer system plans to utilize these existing services in the same manner. Sanitary sewer service to the site will be provided by a connection to the existing 8-inch main at the southeastern corner of the site as shown on the attached Utility Plan. Since the proposed sanitary sewer system is comparable to the existing system no adverse impacts are anticipated. Site De Ut�ypment Review Impact Supplemented January 26,Study February 28, 2 p00 1 THE FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL STR/AL P ARD, OREGON ARK Prepared d For WA p pLF DESIGN/PLANNING/ARCHITECTURE 7n�earnY St Street OR 87249 RECEIVED � FEB 2� 2000 Prepared COMMUNITY p Westlake Consultants, 6'Y 15115 estl DEVELOPMENT SW sequoia Park Suite 15c. Tigard Parkway, 97224 224 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Utility Impact Study January 26,2000 Supplemented February 28, 2000 Page 1 of 2 DRAINAGE SYSTEM: The Foundry Industrial Park is located south of SW Hunziker Street and east of SW Hall Boulevard in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, Oregon. Existing site conditions consist of three buildings surrounded by gravel parking and storage areas as shown on the attached Existing Conditions Plan. Currently there are no provisions in the on site storm drainage system for water quality treatment or detention. The topography of the site indicates slopes in the range of 1 to 3 percent falling to the southeast. The adjacent property to the west is slightly higher and therefore contributes to the on-site storm water run off. The existing Conditions Plan indicates the collection and conveyance of this off-site storm water to the southeast corner of The Foundry Industrial Park site. The southeastern property line borders on Red Rock Creek, which drains to the southwest. Red Rock Creek is designated as a "Minor Stream" with associated wetlands. The Existing Conditions Plan shows the delineated wetlands on The Foundry Industrial Park property. The Foundry Industrial Park development project proposes to provide water quality treatment and detention. The proposed water quality treatment system will be design to treat the run off from 100 percent of the newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, this facility will meet or exceed the phosphorus removal requirements as established by the Unified Sewerage Agency. The proposed detention system will be designed to limit the post-development run-off to that of the pre-development condition for the 2, 10, and 25-year storm events. Therefore, The Foundry Industrial Park will enhance and protect the existing drainage system, which is part of the Red Rock Creek basin by providing water quality treatment and detention. The provision of these water quality treatment and detention systems will have a beneficial impact on receiving storm drainage systems. WATER SYSTEM: A 10-inch main in SW Hunziker Street and 12-inch main adjacent to the southeastern property line provide water service to the site. The proposed water system plans to utilize these existing services in the same manner. Domestic water will be provided by the relocation of an existing 4-inch compound meter from the main in SW Hunziker Street. Fire protection water will be provided by the extension of the existing system in the access road from SW Hunziker Street. The existing fire protection system provided hydrants for adjacent properties as shown on the attached plan set, sheet C5. The relocation of these existing hydrants will be completed to minimize the affects to adjacent properties. The Foundry Industrial ..irk Site Development Review Utility Impact Study January 26, 2000 Page 2 of 2 Since the proposed water system is reconfiguration of the existing system minimal impacts are anticipated. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM: Supplemental Statement: An 8-inch main adjacent to the southeastern property line provide sanitary sewer service to the site. The proposed sanitary sewer system plans to utilize the existing service that is currently in use. Sanitary sewer service to the site will be provided by an existing connection to the existing 8-inch main at the southeastern corner of the site as shown on the attached Revised Utility Plan. Since the proposed sanitary sewer system is comparable to the existing system no adverse impacts are anticipated. Therefore, this proposed development will not disturb any ground within the riparian corridor Therefore, this proposed development will not disturb any ground within the riparian corridor. Site Development Review Utility Impact Study January 26, 2000 THE FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK TIGARD, OREGON Prepared For WADDLE DESIGN/PLANNING/ARCHITECTURE 1927 NW Kearny Street Portland, OR 97209 Prepared By Westlake Consultants, Inc. 15115 SW Sequoia Parkway, Suite 150 Tigard, OR 97224 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Utility Impact Study January 26, 2000 Page 1 of 2 DRAINAGE SYSTEM: The Foundry Industrial Park is located south of SW Hunziker Street and east of SW Hall Boulevard in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, Oregon. Existing site conditions consist of three buildings surrounded by gravel parking and storage areas as shown on the attached Existing Conditions Plan. Currently there are no provisions in the on site storm drainage system for water quality treatment or detention. The topography of the site indicates slopes in the range of 1 to 3 percent falling to the southeast. The adjacent property to the west is slightly higher and therefore contributes to the on-site storm water run off. The existing Conditions Plan indicates the collection and conveyance of this off-site storm water to the southeast corner of The Foundry Industrial Park site. The southeastern property line borders on Red Rock Creek, which drains to the southwest. Red Rock Creek is designated as a "Minor Stream" with associated wetlands. The Existing Conditions Plan shows the delineated wetlands on The Foundry Industrial Park property. The Foundry Industrial Park development project proposes to provide water quality treatment and detention. The proposed water quality treatment system will be design to treat the run off from 100 percent of the newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, this facility will meet or exceed the phosphorus removal requirements as established by the Unified Sewerage Agency. The proposed detention system will be designed to limit the post-development run-off to that of the pre-development condition for the 2, 10, and 25-year storm events. Therefore, The Foundry Industrial Park will enhance and protect the existing drainage system, which is part of the Red Rock Creek basin by providing water quality treatment and detention. The provision of these water quality treatment and detention systems will have a beneficial impact on receiving storm drainage systems. WATER SYSTEM: A 10-inch main in SW Hunziker Street and 12-inch main adjacent to the southeastern property line provide water service to the site. The proposed water system plans to utilize these existing services in the same manner. Domestic water will be provided by the relocation of an existing 4-inch compound meter from the main in SW Hunziker Street. Fire protection water will be provided by the extension of the existing system in the access road from SW Hunziker Street. The existing fire protection system provided hydrants for adjacent properties as shown on the attached plan set, sheet C5. The relocation of these existing hydrants will be completed to minimize the affects to adjacent properties. The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Utility Impact Study January 26, 2000 Page 2 of 2 Since the proposed water system is reconfiguration of the existing system minimal impacts are anticipated. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM: An 8-inch main in SW Hunziker Street and an 8-inch main adjacent to the southeastern property line provide sanitary sewer service to the site. The proposed sanitary sewer system plans to utilize these existing services in the same manner. Sanitary sewer service to the site will be provided by a connection to the existing 8-inch main at the southeastern corner of the site as shown on the attached Utility Plan. Since the proposed sanitary sewer system is comparable to the existing system no adverse impacts are anticipated. 1 6 w v r 1 u v r t ✓i �' at * t ' iI1 t f t 4 3 I ! i a t 9 ; 1 Q i Ui 9JI i jU EY i ; 4 it ks 111 i ! 1• M i I= i, , ail gA 1 a9 '8 I 1 I.,6 1, 0 1 .. I- y ! 1 '?1 a2 ` ! !47 !6 I:j h Ir ap 6 1 b 1' l6 i 5e� li 1 § 69 j o i 1 5a t Ii ,i i�� g qe a 6 � � ;i!It E idea ill a i� 6� ��� � 4 8 � �� , E` t i � �a t � �t 66 aa a ,g jiya€ !1i: 19; 11 e . I Sil t aY Sa 0� �1 A y a a A it a.6,y @ � llt o1a s Ia 9! y8l9 I 6 iI a I V Pi 9 �l]e I id a E a ° 8 11 I E f I P E l` ?! a s J99 �� fl g 1 ZS a � i i� 4A ` ,�! S i a � Ili j 11 14 i >< . ii a . 1" i 9 I o is IN•itli ja _a �� iag � @ 4 a ,g �� Ii! i � i9 ' rn ii 401 ill p1 1 I I I 1 1 1 o$ !U tt a 1 a a ' $ ' t .ii ' �r 1 1 1� � �� � �4�� 4 � � �16 a �`i „,g1 q.; i; if1i s I i'! ,F 'F i ii i d I�6 6 1 [ i Qg" 211 :a R ° = 6 1/1 O�t Iai' 6 ,�9 .Fa� i a• ° a �, i :� �� ��� � 4 n 1 111 �a i � nil g ; 11 II $`1 f g a` i i I. E [ii i 999 $ 81 }i v! j a4i ° e it p S ¢ai '�� �i � � � '9� 1q Z ii ri4 9 [' gyya �' �ja� y° ` ° �� E j �jCa �. q 6X C 6 iiai 666` i ii i ? !°4 1 ° I 1 0 ') '' !a, 1 6 .; 116 kill j a"# al 1 i 11' i/ 0 s e i § a a 6 FF¢ a $ 9 a 9 5 a L t ! 6t L t L L II r�� L L C t > Z * C • k 1 a a 1 E a 1i ' 9itJiB ESaI 110 iIa a1 .4 ' �ila 1 ; a 11 a :11 1a1 iq II iir 111 °>< a,aa l6 $- :.11€ I �,0 61j !e $I 6 - ! g6fa 115 ' a 4E iy, ; Irg� s 1J 0 a # • Wiz ¢¢ I iI . 1 !II 6 1 , is !I! ii ,1 . s i • li R1 1, ill f [ go ' di it ! g gg 1 . 6I 'i i a1E1 ° i .i 1$ a 01 f a x r.2 i 8 �8 r e 13 9 a ✓1yyyppp i 6 6 •I �1' a 1 -I -i° 6 �FE} 4 <Y g+ II � nF � iii ! � ,iii � Q E� I 1 i1 E "' 1' DJ Fri i, ! dQ g• $ 1 !; 1a 4 `` iii a . iig3 1 f[qa' ° a IN t� i g}6 E i r� 61 a 6{ a ; � 6 a .i A �' i if !it 6 gg,g ai. i i 91 s �Ii it 0 ii • t Ii! a d $iii 1i tit !t! §3 !I ij9 is� a� E i; 'i1"rh ' i i , 11r 11 6 1 i }! ,, i lk j i sp i h i; 1, `a }! ! n' LJ (/n� — t 6. i fi II 1 i fix{ 11 6 I 1.5 1 i 19 ° 1 kd i6 11 7° )t g 6 INI ai i a " ' ! 1 a id �6 i ! is I a 4 r ai i O Z `` F3 r a 6 9' Y l: Y Y r C. V P f V Y r r V 0• IEr Z" 4 it a p f ° ° ! gg t R . •}} ¢¢ 9 • a•"q g I__7, yr f � g1� ar �1K �>< � � ��7 i� � �� �a �Q ����� i��� ia�a iR aR psi H ,�a`R ia��� 5 q7��� �ag� �a��A .0 j•J Ria aY �6 1 I � 4 p i ; 1 112 a :1 g k , ,aa'° I4 f ° p" lam g i ° i g 1° A 4 -6 i 9 g f a 6s<ai Ea 4t >f "a r i a1`iii 1 6r ` 6"a I fc 6 ES i 1tf 1� o f a 8 _ r6 4 o 1 a4 / �� { pi; � E'i : 1; ¢a �i� ;� a ry� as .s a a$ °� � �� i r ���� �° �(r ;� 1>>p, 4 i1 4 Y 6i 4 it i !i 4 11 N P Oi iiii g ii 1° 1 1 O (1) S °�� i � iii, �� a ° p� g6 I 1'; uI•� �6ua 160-iii 6 al i �s h, ��6� ��� s gg $ � �4j a giii 1: !-E gli , a yi I ai it 1 A hl _ E g a n 4 1l i 1 I• L a�9 g• IS a E r 1 eg 5118 _ s ! EE i ig ! 1 E !a ,� HE ., ; 8E �� S�Ea � � � � �` �`eg [ �, , Q I a - ° ' i ,t a II a a as §I a•Ra a a s$1a,9 111 1j, i t is v e1 g p li, it ai 1 h 11r1 f a e1 1 . izl Z aj 1� 1,gE a 1 is ii) , 11 ill i Et 1 ri , li i, ill iii li 1 ¢l !oil Rio lig alp a a Q ' jaa ;E` sit '4 Ii i ; ga 1 `.�l � l� EI .a Eat• aia III 1ir .Q ai ; 11 ! aI M e i i +t aR0 II i i , i ¢ l I ills ➢ -W�igs� YQ 1 i� °°g i! 1g ¢ I 1 i s � a �� [ �a �rl6§ i�g � � ��e a s ilk': r ill 6 id i l i s It ° i ; 1 1► a q ;1 4 1;! Jill a F� lit 1 4 i' q , —0 i ii iii pil:. Ili 114 � 11! k r,�b : 1 X111'.1111 E >< [ lit H1 a + 6 I; 616 i � ;t' ill; I�� IFI, . ., .np � � � � pnnp m gz 11 21 304 I�1 �, A 0 tD 0) J S lP A W N — fil C 6 1 09g a 4• J I u ro i O r n ,Y ` a 6 1 ! 1 O . A M rn C Gl (P rn Cl 1rn1 1 Q a at .2 = � '. D -i Ll A t Xp 171 D D D D Q 14' m N —a iD A D N D 3 N A Z .� A rn z 2 L L L = � Z Cl = n ` Z ° m m rn rn rrnnn z z � p rn am,, -4 rn Z A Z ° O x IC H�G� 4Y 1 /� I m m Q D 0 z /9 1` �u m Z aZ A n Ps�. 2 r `gym A lti r Z c ei t fi4° 4 JOB + 103 01 REVISIONS — - i DA>E Rcc I,30,� _ — __ THE FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK 9ddk SEC. 1, T. 2 S., R. 1 W., W.M. DRAWN SHEET TITLE CITY OF TIGARD DESIGN PLANNING ARCHITECTURE DRAWN WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON 1917 NW.Keaney Slreel Palbnd OR 97109 CHECK RDB COVER SHEET 01999 Welds Design.Pkroinq.NchilscMw lEt(SO7)111-1007 Ftt(50!1111-1709 • UTILITY STATEMENT 411111IP THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN ARE PER FIELD MARKINGS AND RECORD DRAWINGS PROVIDED BY THE RESPECTIVE UTILITY AGENCIES.LOCATION OF NON-OBSERVABLE AND/OR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE SHOWN FOR INFORMATION ONLY AND ARE NOT GUARANTEED TO BE COMPLETE OR ACCURATE NOTES I. TIE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR TFWS MAP IS PER SURVEY NU IBER GRAPHIC SCALE • W 16036.WASHINGTON COUNTY SURVEY RECORDS. R • fY 2. TIE BENCLPIA.RK newts OF ELEVATIONS)FOR TWIG SURVEY b A BRASS ` % ■` , NI ° U DISC SET IN TIE NORTNIEST CORNER OF THE SIDEWALK ON THE (IM TM)� F ....7, BRIDGE OVER FANNO CREEK.ON WALL BENCHMARK N STAMPED TAX LOT 2500 (�J i t • q'3,< a 3 TRM 150 1•14 WASHINGTON COUNTY BOJCFNTIVWK NO.43. 1�► M. •T 1 L'LEVATX�1'1.14110. AREA = 038 ACRES �� 3. FIELD WORK PERFORMED MARCH II,1996 �'F�. $,) i �s7sT2 C7 4. TIE EASEMENT Slaw HEREON ARE PER OWNERS POLICY Nt1BER L�`-(y"Ip G� WATER LINE cowrplwANCR •O00364&TITLE POLICY BY OREGON TITLE COMPANY. 'Re •'a. c ii 1L NOD ssduLT►LANs FworL ,�yD� e 1_ �a s- '4 Y. `O it(,.V O WATER OMRCr 11001**>144,. e 44*•'N•4'.' \_..601' .. _ ......-Wt 0 � be �7 R • '.G•� .e. Z zSi 4. `,i AygQ ' )c _ - ./J. . //ice i ry, /,` J? 3 7• J '4•451 _ _� A1' -� WV /s "ice /.\ , jQYC\ 9•R ` CC• 04319ODr mots s __ _—_— _ _ —� �•���''V � %\ U1L—. .''3' .,....,,,,,,. .. -'-' Ilig:1111: 11111 rf, -.7•-:175-;3_,,r——--+ —_:-.........AIIIIIIMillimummer — V -E. 4;'At., z S 3 q a $91, cil I.I v �, 1 rs ms a „,o,...-... '' • * •', •!U' J •� OJ 9J J Z_ Ly(, Jg/ OW'/ 92 'J1 J 0114 y J I `I 9 4 4- I I ' / ...../402, Z : i % � � e . H = j J �' a ....2 ...Jo --0 _ . aJ r • Z � F• § BUILDING ^ ' £ O , N 0 I ,. : LEND W Y •,:,,, c - In a 1 4 d EXCEPTION BOOK DX DRIVEWAY IL 1 I ( ' ,J CATCH BASIN W ,la, 1 • � a TAX LOT 100 J J x TARO LIGHT a 4�1 Js\\ AREA = 8.49 ACRES 1—c��j " :o +. DG WATER VALVE v It, °',\ G�4�asa TOTAL AREA = a,JJ ,. '' , TG FIRE H7DRANr ',',.:-"I 1 .1 9.01 ACRES — STREET SIGN W `iD�l1 II • ' •'s \ Q p a * r.pWTORING WELL 11 'u(C01 I1. _1r--_--'-\ - .. y s D0 GA9vALVE cm J- - . 2.a �- Q CONCRETE a II CJLVERT H ' __ a a _ O s a ,..\ '\ I I- -� GUT ANCHOR W . s - \ ' • • • ° / e' `9J A I (( � P POWER POLE 6jK�r = •. �s m t o•_ °a •6Oa \E:7✓ 4 \ 1'�{, Iv,'I J RAILROAD TRACKS a 1 W U w� �`..� �- \ C•;7�:L • • � a• `ri,4 �'s7 0 I\\\�� —X- FENCE C' V1 Z •t _3•• -2 , ZJ'2 e • • - - r, ` 0. sa �\ N i/ - FP - EDGE OF PAVEMENT • oilI • '3., • • o\ •O►A6OILi rLMO.RP'.� I i//// -STSA- SANITARY E •I'l� • i1pN►p►ATCR DIlTWOCT \ IJI/ SBUER LtN 1 •., ,, ml '',1:° •,J ;a, •'s \ • • • • • ° • _ f\ s a �I 1I. • FOUND A9 NOTED .•i' a 7 ,• • • • . c��r,�G I I `l +137.0 SPOT ELEVATION I r s ,-., BOUNDARY FCIND 3/4•IRON PIPE � PER SURVEY NUMBER A II '�-4-':et•e1 •'e _ 9, s •$ P ss ( ^. fE MvERT ELEVATION 5.460 1 11.140 ' �a � _ _� a.. - I 9•(WELD) _ ° o -�,__ 1 �' *0 du.u+mdR aT. GR GRATE ELEVATION A ��t --77---=--- -- .•:+.�:•... !:i ::❖. :..:_- 'ter =�r - .... 0 I Qa N46b{'12E - •.. �:_ _ ,�5.�� ^-NyN�4.1TE `•%�•,•m '. '•, ••^^^ ••.._ APPROXIMATE ON-SITE WETLAND AREA (4.312 S.F.) _ ce 1 St • 195.0{ J /V y RED ROCK ._._, a •��_ —_e-sA 9• 4'ly46. DIRECTION OF FLOW ; 6 Ir5A ppa AI.ARWL CENTERLINE p < /. *.3:,,,,,,, /6YC 'P O K .J R,,y 'b, O EXISTING CONDITIONS V2 FM 140.0/CA0IO 61) GRAPHIC SCALE L. ' eeeel (IN PD.T) �_ ��Wu: -• 0• 0a K t_ U 6 3o'z3o' CLEAR VI5ION _ o g TRIANGLE = C7•(TYP) ! N Rl — 41 P N' Y Z J a � HAN01 RAMP PER Z a SEE • IGARD STANDARDS U ag Ji �' '���j SEE DE IL SHEET N i s .p R25 TYP) \ • 5011,001M Vela __ ——— • TYP) '\ ---;� Q CC cRit T- y z 1WR'// 1 1 g�T 'rn []❑ 8 54.9' \ _ _; mos/ern PRGPOSE 1 ''" L 1 / 1 -. 33:7' }_ BuILOiN• a l7 L- . { v Z . ❑ 1 NQ CURB ON THIS AREA ��16. CO N L,-(, ...Ayr- No ASPHALT RUSH WITH GRAVEL (TYR) ❑ I. TA >"'.(U}Z o ❑ r 1 i. I l 1 I ^ IR t I I t LI I i 1 1 £ U z._ _ E n Li C (, 1 — av W RETAINING WALL BETWEEN 61' I �.GENQ 2 10' �7'. UP AND DOWN RAMPS(TIP) v I 441' ` I • 2 COCKEYE SDEWMJC C 7, 9\ - 1 ��/ PROPOSED BUILDING 16' PROPOSED BUILDING 1 \� F IN' \\\� \ \ \\ \ \\ ,� .`\ 9 ,, I •F ':. -. ASPHALT ROADWAY Z E %� tN• \ \ \ s'' 1 ¢ 0 ee>_ ee_� 1 J STD. ' { I I i. .fit I Ln..II I- I-t U t 16 I.I i' [J•I I:I I I I-(! I I i'1 1.1:I -sro: a'+ PARKING LOT INFORMATION Z I CURB® i a O F 9 pi CURB 159 REGULAR PARKING SPACES h -I 1 Q) u v R m f 1 (TIP).' .�Li' ®. ) 6 HANDICAP SPACES O (n 1 1 j �' I 3 40 TRUCK SPACES VI ~ bO4 . I I. t a1 I I 1 I I I. - -., 14;41. i. I 1+ 1. f I �.I; -I ' f.. , I:I 1 W w L .1 .... fiSR 1 h I' I } _lSAW r I. .I I ac 69' 1 T 1 � 1 1 ' N X . i i L'. ..r ,_ :. SITE INFORMATION q \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\' \ \ AREA A \,,,,,\,.;„\\\\.\\\\;\ \\\\\ \ \\\\\ '\. \ \ I U.6 qI \ I (BUILDINGS.ASPHALT.40EWAU(S) I- C , (((���"16.5' PERNOUS AREA.2.ea ACRE 10.4' PROPOSED BUILDING m I (LANDSCAPE) N 51 L0' \\\\\Avvvv\\VAVv\A\VAVAVAVvV\\\\Av\\\AAV\\ \\VA\\\\\\\Vv\\A A\VA\VA\\A\\\L\\\\A\\A\\\\VA\V\\ _ 1 I I I<KQ $10. 540.007 —TH:4 (4 Ei 3 U Oj 017E DIMENSION PLAN C3 �..5� R@ I6ati1COep 1461.) GRAPHIC SCALE w igniPli■ IMI.111 \ U E- ((01F!ET) i�S a ems.. m. E.:,, \ i d _ // zS G —_ — ` , / c \ z 1 � � .. w I• •I �fn I-3 �°° I - ' -' '' _ Moe. �°" CD,_ a r z tLLt .ti } • I {] 4 rik i, c- 2 U Z� ? a ■ I • T _ t t t t 2 1( Mom ...T :ti - \ 3 . I \ '�\ ` rte. (n I LEGEND of ...ma- PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION !Y POMPOM wu,ol.e -P_ • CATCH BASIN I- I '11 1 &\ �� nals.6 ♦ '" ® STROM DRAIN MANHOLE Z I `� ,\ w\ , mw SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE �� ��_� i O CLEANOUT"�' I j`-'I DIRECTION OF FLOW L T r!. T �!! ' t FIRE HYDRANT Z Ih ��,-' � 1 I I 1 'I . I I�r•?sl I ,I . .I ` I �I' \ 31 r—�!I xc --I 11 I. �» W Z CI �-, ,11,.., �---\ _ ,�-= L7�._ ��_�I , �; ii BIOFILTERS AT CATCH BASINS Q• irTr r7-I- • -r-1 �L `III �.— SILT FENCE w I I I `,r, 11.E g,I 11 J_1 okA I� I i%1 I I �. ,�, 1 1 •}.1\ `1�� W LJ I II : o_____ I 1- 1 1370 444 nem I I I I serve 117 y I'111 \ w1�IN0 11 \ I _ ` � a a ■\1,T&\ ,-\ \ ....\\.. , ..... .. .... \ \1 CZ �M I:1MM�ti�.S��iiif::Nrtrt fgg:Wqi 4Fra►t i%�y t4 i 7 0."1"" < 0 �..-�..... —.. -____) J/�✓�.::.00i`�6��.�••.., /.�.�.:�;. 1... `– i0P 6 SAM ...+ K O[ 0 .v•�a><Iw.iE a■slrz KiW105 Msw RED ROCK CREEK a .wr*vox CEl+*E4LI1! s 0 3 a = U OCTRADING AND ERDBIGN CONTROL PLAN C4 L ,...),......, 44111111ilil GRAPHIC SCALE - r �CC $$ U m Gre R- u*.QISr rvO 11Y W o no•e[) rT WAIN.CwlTr = FS I leaf 110 R. CORRECT O _ +_ CORRECT NIAIOM §a OdKSTIC NATO 1 7 LIM TO ERra INO.•ItTOt Q 1,2 { g' t?R¢00AC on STNO OMER L0!COfKORATON M eon. 5.0m4.,. ROE A4-0./LT PLANO PLAN IR '.'•. NOT WASH C0MTT OCIAN0 uRTE 0Ig1 0ROCT Z =A STArgA CIS �\ „fr.—. -- Q J k I R[L0ATE MISTING e[ IN SI ��/ 3� Z P OI WAIN.COMET sT410M0f U a RE IwN-NIssaR ` \ N IE WT.ISI3A i W COMM?TINE - O LINE t0 pl TINO . y�� RI Y.I 5..O f C.I.LINE �� 1 - E 1-I57,37 , /Y \� It Ou...∎••3 ' -_ -� ___-__ Aa ''� = 5 .... �'`� a"DOMESTIC WATER LINE CC ''' _'_- '' Z Z ip,I A�� _- '' r�'� J iC M-1lilr ' \ - 1 8"FIRE WATER LINE rn 3 t ` i�l IE OuT-1!1.11 M I I Q} 2 le I ��'' R Yys]o L J - n • 1 ALL UTILITY WORK O I a 1 i:Z /11-1.114=152.6 ! UNDER TRACKS i0 BE z . a IL IN-1.7.70 RIYI 0 [IN.In.70 E N.IKSa QR-.N,a7 I Ni ISSO� COORDINATED MATH Q Q U .�IE our.IKa.I I ouT-IIr.7e SPUR OPERATOR\ _ rc ar.Islas (U Z S L-1110.3 n 1.0..511 ro,A 1 1.17).)rt s.efs11 fb1A . . . SN.fs11 CO 11 �� tt CC >-C / "d�- I PAL db;� I I 1 .;.t,4f3 I �iW .-� +. n .Y II7C Ra row ? _ ■ Q i I W —�`. RI WIl0.7 RIY.1l0.7 RIY.130.7 RIY.150.7 RIY-Is3.e \ I[COT=i44.117 I[OOf.1A9.19 I[OYr-Iq,TE I OYT-1!0.77 I[IN.IS0.S ` 1 RIY-IS . I 111..157.1 d .T IE Our-ISO.y ,° r� 11 IN15 4 NE 1 KM :1 r \` - IE 0.7.130.« I[GIT-IKfe :1,CO L-w0.e rt 3.711 S ' ' I- II I T. \ I 1 ma OIR.IAa.If + 1 wlaas LEGEND f•I[04.145.1111 RIW15t5 sf IC IN.L7M \ DCDA DOUBLE CHECK DETECTION ASSEMBLY )r a■E Qt.i«n E}�Sl i IL IM.IKlI _ I '� i i I[art-IKl1 \ \ .O I 6" STM LINE • CATCH BASIN E IN-1«.7] 1 '! �.\\• i\ c our-Ia.7s �iriw�Iin \\ i \\\\\\\ ���r 4 0 STROM DRAIN MANHOLE RIY 1575 \� 1 •m SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE RECUT-1«.73 I - �� \\ a `♦ -,.\\ 1 000 aEANOUr pa A FDC FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTOR Z �. � I U I I III I 16 6' I I .I I I l I I 1 1 I . I i r 3T XL FIRE HYDRANT Q s.I . •, �'a • — I STORM UNE w J L-1]0.0 IT s-0.0!11 lf•JI L-IM.O FT $�e311 Jf•OIA L-169.7 FT 3-O.EOi]e•01A ( Z -✓ .. I I A0- _ ` SANITARY LINE RIY-137.9 WATER LINE (FIRE) VO_i F' >- L-'.6517 • (((��1 I ---- WATER LINE (DOMESTIC) g w !.0.6311 ( I' VII �4 QI ' I I ' IE N I«.eI ( )ObIA u I loon ...I L'' IL l}f I[Out,44.6. L S min 1 l ;;;7.:540: IY 30.] IC I? . ,, OCOA MONKS IN91a y1 - E our_IA9,0 IC AIbIKO �1 ... CO eONDINO(RI.) r71 RIY-.ls0 �� I SEE DETAIL sNEET R Y iC OUT....4.0 \V �TO. O.IMISN=AIX Zv Nr V \A "J' y L\\AV\\\\3\\Vv\A\\A\\\\VAV7VAV AVA\AAvVA\\VAVv;_vy�\VVAVv7'\V :'N i o1� t I �1 1 I � ! � YI _ t. 2JTIMI. 1 _I •O!uI HHZAOR 5T. S 2, C Wr•IA7.If ITC: a o 1.0 00 II rr x s rt y f 0 RED ROCK CREEK .. \ Cam "°"1113'.CIONTERLOC C9'] $S tr RIY r0 IINI.N LINE 0 01R,ACTCO 0 LINE NE TO 41011/4 LOCATION ANO IC OUTILITY'PLAN C5 PM I4OX0ICOIII - MEE AO AP IP NW. 01.24J 70 00.011/1 E M• a (7 : oo SN A• CS ac Ilk 0 J' O © O ..•' kJ1 E 'IG4 W w MIR m ow"O'e., I- • - �N)�"i r,�r..wry■ TE b v c..ETee� ��A=: mum srwii eaw w, 9YQA� '�1 Nom' _� ••anw Ian�v,a w.wa rua)e°' W Iy I n= ID • ;;R OM= t OM.Ere J^�•.��_"- .y yPWlr a•rfn MP U i' CnE r I ]A.r I N.E . ?6 .•y�• e D '.W.� ! iIE �Tr- . hill .j..0: .e ,44 g ¢i I I �..:a o ••eY.�:�•.1e w+M 'PRa.a"•�i�i. •, Z I ]r w 02ic Ns..+Iaw nwar C... ..P.M. W P•P.M. I I 1 I NN WOW,IA NO SW M MO Z "Q .111114F OP PPILMCCEE EL EAMMIDE ON 12.110t To OR III j/ •• J 14 . Sao TN.... �� � : r ! a ow.Now PP MPLOT l•Mmillo.CP 0.13.00 TO It ieuMaoraws ro s wrDla EIS ; ; PAT r.+.•TaE,rE McAS NRMwPMa enlwm w CZ.7 ��y Tt.)P•lW Iy.�� IY M.NO COON.WOO E r4r.T� qF CV ne.culur..LL MRl.MLw m0 ��� ])' .I G�aA �i.n.' '....DEL r .A W I 91JBURBAN AND sAL.mAm OaParEa wM.wN A E • o 24-.1 I STANDARD L MANHOLE PLAN=CaDvFR fim AOeYOS w.DLO.Y ARAM•t USA COS.H0.❑p.ST,IIO.SA MOTILE A•aReS..E o MTV rw Er...PN.ATRD n..Macro.POLLED COPaT.w PMTPNiRmM .FRN er o®s EM IETMTO MA0 1`1At•MOLE pw2P PM 13. Tee MORl* co.PR l e+ema.11Ra�+TT!NOT FOR MIN TRAFFIC MEAD OF COLLECTORS an T.E.TTRV.TOP 1 Cao•E E REAFle4MW DE GRA'•CA•T D•OR ASTM A..•CLAM]O. R�1!CAAIICET rvea Da>M P.TTa 111 141 0 N•M°` `°oT�'Lo FSM rw°•M +•m O A Ear WARM A.A.Miaw QAee a CLAM'A' ro..,A. CL p Ammo.L>ab.ro Ta.AO..T PLAT Tar rNV'r`:°e"° •••ra.a.Pe°`Pie wT.M�... ill ELM a:..0 COP'S l Z 'I'.I • .,'I 1 DEM MNiNM JOIE ADM ua er eA--I ��K7' • %��� <■ml El V w • NwNeD.ma� I _ I—v� �•X p 0 / W b erillik� ]IA '1—"�1•�1II7i ,s..•RAT TOP r �_ +E.•.� \ r I w [] .::-..v. ?Q . „..i,T«. • •-_POP veal oawr:eM T T aGpoD MI"°s m� IPPIP VJ 3 EAM NAT••ML l . L-�oDr o❑ MOVE DP N PLACE I s. .RAT MP m0 O w�� DAM ' .4. aDL eaD IP OEM PAM TOEMMETPNaEwe. EASIERAAeeT L7 ET trasczanazwaitaz `1\\\\ //////ry `DD 00 ME ....mo.o anew vases Q � ),.asNDDDxDDeT �0� } w e.eA , .�t.. : ;�, L Et CAMPOL1 PM MO OP ORM. n ,�: _ . e ro..... . I o • ��• z v�o _ "ate°PTV.:. >w +•�-r> %' oj•._•a•ow'o'/ (U Z MOOS.0 MCA rowel any .w�a Wean /111M11111. SECiI�I 9- B .uare.e.re = T M � ; fq/ff MI IIi 0E000 MEWLS ,N DODO Al AT LIMP �� ■ . ir arlAa P. A . O. 071.•COM NV 011112.0.101.7 fa ��6 .R.L sfrnaR A-A R„�E \f I i O v) Q ■r;re / ; EATeNwn PIPS PILO ©� y • w PPE m PuE..w AMR PPE!MO LArM LL .etie"" !M erw+ '\\\\\\ .\\\/ "MINN w MALT NMT.E. P..Oa MAE.Mt ME PPE DMA.,w.r CLE DOP N•TALLATOES M N ` ..% P.wM r V..0. •„.0��° A°_ APO I MINIM o r ARaPa � TRENCH BACKFILL f7ETAiL9 LFITIO TO[ANN CE:. ' ammo• •AML....Ter='5 I I 1 u4 du.Ia a000ae OR I'MAr•!ALLQm ON M MAVE WU OON GM. �!1 _ _ II ImMroauTa .�\- #AtA FIAT TOP MAI.610L .R'+k�lu. d>mm.uTMRK u!A 120.Pa Ol6Y 1'A MAMA NOY Ar I i ISOM 10 R�ATI°N 7-4!!!' 9- ' _ . i rl EAN�]IT FRAI•s M C1]VER A�ILL981 4FDIi1 E I-4TFRAI .:3<.1� .s.OM..a NA7M SO•T 01.16L -'USA MCA PD. -- _ TDeA]eoeT b9P 9 RECESSED CNN!INLETS info]a.._ -'l t k r OG A A iE CNNB OtG � ST 1• TOP Of IL Tr SR �• J W'•• PAVEMENT .wii� "wn[r 6<<".1:= T ro e.. mama xeem I N r-o C •wTa.o+.E ]a' W J gglijs No MANIC PPE 0 NcEP E TITRI O M ru •e• SECTION A-A K = Q HOLES D. \ U •o.E WOW".E:A...E MC,EN.,00'EEa.OPe.,.PPE C. �'V �e\ PLAN M., f e " " OVERSIZE CATCH BASIN ,rANOARO cLeANOUr -J �'• FRAME AND GRATE ,e+GU.rA w.4O. ]YrST ^� o. ° "P�, ' PLAN 1 DRAWING NO. 170-ST - L ]1,] ], - r,eTeNT„P 7 I/E e1•Iii.Iutit.l a .,—. ,-6... :I�IfTN v v M..ST�e OR 01.0.E Pw .I .1 a e'���e e ®� a PST• au. � X111141 it r.,=•': SECTION A-A SECTION B-B 1 11111111111111 'Ii i'I'I'I'Il1 11111111111/1 0 S p ) III I II II IIu > I'I'I'Il.II i � 9 o w NOTE � e m 3 I CATCH USN N RE CONSTRUCTED N A000ROANCE s0.AST+C-.]e Ire PATS J 111111111111 I " IIIIIIIIIIIIII!f - ce i` S ®. STEPS 0..FOt CAM BASINS OVER.6'(SEE DRAMG PQ II w . C XPLIMM ET , � ) II II II II I III 1� rL�IIIIIIIII I a o , RONfpCE+EMT TO B[RSM ME EnNG AST+A613 GRADE 60 OR rIE111ED RARE MEETPG A 2,R'NNIPISINIIIN MIPINISHMIM SU+P v UME REOUiRENEO6S r / B I PLAN VIE,. OVERSIZE GUTTER & CURB SECTION A-A Imam• T.cEUO.n4 15 Q�P ,,,.e r R,,, row*,nN ORS eJ ��• ...DIEM MPS PLAN ,E We SECTION 8-8 INLET CATCH BASIN TER .1�� v WA TER •' ALJTY MANE AND CRATE+ATERIAL SHALL SE FIAT EIAR STEEL Get APPROVED MA.. DRAWING NO. ISO-ST MANHOLE OtA,ENf N0.,00-56 'WOnO1AL M.CNNESS APO REIKORC(UCIII 5M41 SE RE0URCO FOR 56.1E wP.*V'APPUCA GOIS. AL MOW D•0 1 1 l ' 6F` . c �% E e e a e = zz ,i 01 4 4,11111111. li 41 Hlil 0 u q. 11 i A I 6£ 1 Ili I 1 • a b ii S h 8g15 ky J f < b °g} p 2 c ` 1 4 a / c ER R "�l`j� .q). b A ` P p ] g� •i 1100010 O I � _■' 1" wig< '\l;� —��_II'I,= �,III �� 1101 N � 1 310:1„... --1+jjlt�l L � S A A m e •�� . i il ii I' RQgRy 1 V" \ \ \ I l Ci li j 9 a 0,6 r ii: F f 1. f/ p/ Y 6i1 144 �1 8 § �s� n is A zPq 3 " —_ 9 `AF�aj�3 I k 1 g II T Y o 4 ¢• I «rt i R e : 4V WATER!✓.pl - 1i .C�,\\'`4 ' .4. Pt a �o d Hi �cum _ �a fd �� ,, "t ii" 01 z,1 �� T� " III �� ' �� .(--411 4: I: g Milli 4 —11 : II i8 Ai N 1 3 :i; ;rv § \ A a a = 1 411 1 p 6Cf\ 1 ;: rtO ]Qp�IETNf E ■ Ikiv i i , '::g k 11 d 1 NL 5t ' , mi 44' p 6,11 ‘„S;r) 1 a{ P; of �w_I - D T Fa f ,; _J�77 • 0 I I • \ / i< `JX P �rF� e4 � I P4 t -1 �l �eJ y�! 4. x o n 1 v YT\/G i Z A 7Jl 4 g A t il ^ la P ii:; i'/ 1't. • Y �A$a o" yT� e < d 1' 011 5% 1S �! \ �'r� il <1 P i 0 1 I 1 i'`9 ' i 4 11 • 1_ : < S y ��ii' q.;, 1: t G R 9 —e. i. $'I rr II } s . ` v $' 7e i di ill I- _ I ` 1 . izsiD•� • • ti i I IB b si b g /"a . 10 eE cSuc i g �Ai ; °oO� 0g tt k • " s A f? § i v � �R � w aR a E$ a i f 110 814 _ f a t g ; 11 jII{ I 1 0 a� ! l-II /J�D Ry / ♦__, la 3 PeLC66b �L� r 7.------: �CM ICI �� pH ' 4 °9'9j'''�1 C c►2 ill g ., '�' HP L r. L.1 ee 7 ; 11 z ii♦ Y Ls �- ' gk p lII�1 `r ill C 4E11-1 F l ram" S • b©n®�I I� II II`' �� ELK • s X? ` s�3 a,%4 \ 12I C J I OD M 'i". Pi 111 ] ILA OD.t Q k i� V o JOB I 99303 REVISIONS DALE 3m�m0 _ - -_ - THE FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK SEC.1, T. 2 S., R. 1 W., W.M. tiaai DRAWN ROD SHEET TITLE CITY OF TIGARD DESIGN PLANNING ARCHITECTURE WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON CHECK ROB DETAIL SHEET o1999 Waddle Design.Planning.Architecture 1911 150)t1115""1 FAX 2221-91)09 r, i I 11 r- r-r I 7•r• I 1 y ker n , p E,I A a[a t W N l N A i c y f� T 5 I u �� H�• ASR � 1 A 1 ill • D (ir r' ;511 31 ;,:::::::,:: � F , iiiq- r 1• t6$i T i f ' IN 11r 11 p 11 Y i �. I.. 1 i1!; 3 • A 91 — In Ifi IN gz s... i C: [1': rs ..„ ill -n • J; 'i '�lll I � �, � 4LII II iawe ■ u 1, P M , K A � tI Ii w s s 7 il i4 •� id 1 a <ill IA 1 1 6R n S y� Sao k �` e R 4W OW � lib A C 1 K p 5a !1 '!I n v:�•'••\ o AA9 6 II i f e III �1 / /..::1;i;;\ �iA Q �_C y• n m ill". ^i J S z IF,•.21 b �' g n t T pFF g$ A is 41 a /I e T Y e 4; •T.iii�T•ii = x� C! �6t I 9 -ya �1 a i 111 ��3 ___ ; i a . N€ a6 �W i p a F# E° o f, _ io F JI!1t! Whø s S ~ ill� !ill 5 °, \` � gg,JO d PEI uo ... ; . 3 S = € o—. Dr / � ` 1 ] ,,y °� T 0a q 2 9 °t�'r i I q if 1 O .are.Mi..n m y a T '`[ ii K 7` �i 6a y �_ o �1 1 g IiTf1■ 9 R 19 Ir ^ t 1 � ' ' y' n q Q F ii .....0__ p Ir t 9 f p6p6ii7p7$o 10 •a 4 . i g JOB # 99303 REVISIONS 1 ^ DATE (/30/00 ° THE FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK ���j/� J Q SEC,1, T. 2 S., R. 1 W., W.M. /l 1 pp DRAWN ROC SHEET TITLE CITY OF TIGARD DESIGN PLANNING ARCHITECTURE WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON CHECK RDB DETAIL SHEET N.W.Kearney Street Portland, R 97209 0 1999 Waddle Design.Planning.Architecture 1F1(503)221-2003 FAX(503 221-1709 I L. I r )F ) t `r i { I IR . I ' ' d a r MN 1rr �.� !ati ; � n 9n I 0 r�Rl sto �� g �. ¢ ip _aa_ a_ : i 'g 1C l�rr FFF4 333 R 9 7€�� e I� ail �fI': I 'q B. �!i �� Ian � 1 � g �� 7 , p:eim ,_._„. > m Z " i e s a�cc i� "" 1 i 1 .ti . 1 a .#4:21: 116 E e a " B iml: z RI m 0 —I 1-T7 �k x� 11: Fig g aaa a Q z 1" 4a F_ 10 eve pia as +" p $ �i Sl III O p O� �' Y 2� $ gg g $ 4 4 C a� iJo= " g i44i?S " e� g t Z E� 4 "Y Y 9 (TI Y $ m +� die �1 � �4 1- .; I i ? P m- 1 ICI ICI ICI �a i i. 1 II Z; ®®44000;a M1) f1 0411111 rA L � � —a p ;/ ! 1; Q ! ! i � 0 0 0 ? � a III a gg — E _ � Y Ag A i 5 4 1 1 1 z F- Dre 1 1 t O O O Z o I I � �� 1 _�yet ;1• PlJ(3L1G ROAD � � „ "N ! 1 ! r •®��r i 0 gk pi. w N ' . 't. ��O 4 11 11 - �� ax- , �i a ,4„, , z ii 911 Alik . -• al 1 -1 Ilk I\ -V,. \ \ , 1 •. Air :. _ vt '"k'Y I � g 1 , . r13;"i V 1111■111111111111f,....y Al 5 A, ‘ \ '■i,f 0 ,, volk 6 i 4 o © o o a n o O ' 9 m R 1 a iic r roc '' S i i o V 6 d 1 a i g JOB i 99303 __ REVISIONS 1 THE FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK Oddl DALE 1/30/00 -- � SECT, T, Z 5., R. 1 W., W.M. i (C) DRAWN RGG SHEET TITLE CITY OF TIGARD DESIGN PLANNING ARCHITECTURE WASHINGT❑N COUNTY, OREGON 1927 NW.Kearney Snl Portland,DR 97709 CHECK ROB DETAIL SHEET 01999 Waddle Design.panning,Architecture I l(50J)221-2003 FAX(5O 221-1109 PRECAST STORMFILTER' IN SERIES DATA I GENERAL N O T E S: S I G N 1NITER Q U A L I T Y F L O WC O Q 0.07 �/: PEAK FLOW(clt) 7.11 IM:, 1.) STORMFILTER BY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT. PORTLAND. OREGON (503-240-3393). RETURN PER600 OF PEAK FLOW(yes) 23 "WI.:, I 2.) ALL STORMFILTERS REQUIRE REGULAR MAINTENANCE. REFER TO OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL FOR RADIAL Fla,CARTRIDGES REQUIRED 16 TOTAL v DETAILS. PRECAST STORYfIL1ER SIZE 5'.16• 3.) PRECAST CONCRETE VAULT CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH AST'S C858. FLIER- Bahr -„ (IA-Oul).2.3'MAL LE MATERNA WIETER � Qd 4.) EXTERNAL PIPING AND COUPLINGS PROVIDED 8Y OTHERS. INLET PIPE /1 144526 • HOPE 6' ..F Cq° 5.) FLEXIBLE COUPLINGS TO BE SET 18' OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL FERNCO OR ENGINEER APPROVED. *BET PIPE Iz N/A N/A N/A gt`': C,i L..I CDNNEC11.. PIPE N/A N/A 10' - W 6.) SEE PRECAST STORMFILTER DATA SHEET FOR VAULT DIMENSIONS, ELEVATIONS AND NUMBER OF CARTRIDGES. OUTLET PIPE 142.96 HOPE 6" • 7.) ANTI-FLOATATION BALLAST TO BE SET ALONG ENTIRE LENGTH OF BOTH SIDES OF FILTER AS SHOWN. RIM ELEVATION(S): 6�6�'`•` 445 U g SEE PRECAST FILTER DATA BLOCK FOR BALLAST WIDTH AND HEIGHT DIMENSIONS. 1 154.0 4 N/A III•<:' Y+ $ 2.N/A oS � �U�\3 DIN/A ¢ 6- ADJUSTABLE UD YES/NO h U ° DOOR OPENING DIRECTION:(FACING i Z DOWNSTREAM -SEE FIGURE ABOVE 1 r0 2 z EXAMPLE.'2 TO I.OR•I TO 2.• Q USE•N/A'FOR METAL GRATE). J i- H-20 TRAFFIC RATED UD YES d LADDER es A MOTH HDGNT Z ANT-FLOATATION BALLAST UPSTREMI FLIER N/A N/A V w 0 (USE N/A IF BALLAST NOT REQUIRED) Er., - ANTI-FLOATATION BAUAST - /(BY OTHERS) - • . P CC RE-CAST 4'-Y .. . . 1.-s- 1'-t1 1/7' ' CONCRETE VAULT • _ - .• - W Q• 1 ft A •'_I Z ' / / \ A J Z ■ ct :�IMI11168�11?I: II _I.�$I f�p:•ai 1.1 op, 1.1 ;1[•:11 I'-6' A ca l2 ` \ i. ),.• 1 C' 1' x 1' ::'I 8�:1.0 liiiiiinl t x 1P rn 3 } i 111011111 Ct Q t S' T-la I/j ,� IIIIIIIIII 0 z 1- D l.1— I Dump _ Ft- 0 4, z /LAODE (TYP) _ _ _ IIIII11111 — s111 _ — — {-. �= O ❑ nil n6uun �\ IIIIIIIIII 8' INLET PIPE Z I� I _ _ IIIIIIIIII (BY OTHERS) U >-R)}❑ 8' OUTLET PIPE Ofll - - impa,,Ii7m/n :I!M- I I IIJSn W O O Cr I— I �__ J IIIIIIIIII (BY OTHERS) � �.��/ ..•,1n Q � .4t �~U Z a I. 0� �n� INLET BAY Z y Z Li = o milll@IBEiI,"..I: Il D^I zo 1 1 11: 1 1 d' 11 L-) (n y W q O• O: 2 . ... ... RADIAL FLOW PIPE MANIFOLD (TYP) CARTRIDGE (TYP) (BY OTHERS) - 8'x16' PRECAST STORMFILTER — PLAN'vVIEW ill i SCALE: N.T.S. 73i w N -I t v 'n L,.I 3-3'43'OIMONO PLATE DOORS(TYP) TRAFFIC BEARING LID(TYP) _ W W ADJUST DOORS WITH RISER TO MATCH TOP ELEV 1645.15 In _ FINISH GRADE I ZO.(K<IE (-' N o - W J W �- u i Q I 3'-T I/LADDER(TYP) 3.-7. ... a ~3 ya LJ I n u z \' O RADIAL FLOW u g CARTRIDGE TYP ( ) it S 111111111111m a �c 111111111111 111111111111 8" IE�Ia5.26 W �I �I�©,-1 _' ''' IIIIIIIIIIII 5 111111111111 _ 1 u 9 0 A m A 8 2 Aa q' 1.182 96 ; 3 W m m O' a a U c m S2 t The STDRYRATER MANAGEYENT `g g a _ _ ] 1 8'x16' PRECAST STORMFILTER — SECTION VIEW SLomFiIter' 6 CIO U.S. PATENT No. 5.322.529, SCALE: N.T.S. Na. 5.624.575.AND OTHER U.S. w !� o AND FOREIGN PATENTS PENDING V) H 4 ALA 1111313141.3110 'vje±Iayid Pterri'rlthovl and Ddiviea±ov <- SCHOTT & ASSOCIATES Ecologists & Wetlands Specialists 11977 S.Tollver Rd. • Molalla, OR 97038 • (503) 829-6318 • FAX: (503) 829-3874 Jurisdictional Wetland Determination and Delineation for The Foundry Industrial Park Tigard, Oregon Prepared for: Brian Smith Prepared by: Claudia Steinkoenig Martin Schott January 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 2 Site Description 2 Wetland Definition and Authority 2 REGULATORY CONTENT 2 METHODS 4 Literature Review 4 Site-Specific Field Investigation 4 Vegetation 5 Soils 6 Hydrology 7 Wetland Determination 7 RESULTS 8 Vegetation 8 Soils 8 Hydrology 11 Wetland Determination 12 REFERENCES 14 APPENDIX A: Data Forms 15 APPENDIX B: Plants Found at Site 16 APPENDIX C: National Wetland Inventory Map 17 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map 3 Figure 2 Soil Map 10 Figure 3. Wetland Delineation and Sample Plot Locations 12 Table 1 Definitions of Indicator Status 6 Table 2 Summary of Vegetation, Soils, and Hydrology 13 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The property is located west off of Hunziker Road in Tigard, Oregon and is 9.07 acres (Washington County, T.2S, R1 W., Sec 1, Tax Lot 100). The site was formerly an old foundry and currently is used for industrial/commercial purposes. There are three existing buildings near the center of the site and the surrounding area is used as a storage yard. Most of the site is either paved or covered with gravel. The southeastern portion contains old fill material, which was evident on the aerial photos dated from1975 and used for the soil survey. At the edge of the fill material the lot slopes down to the flood plain of Red Rock Creek. The creek forms the southeastern boundary of the site. It flows northeast to southwest and is a tributary of Fanno Creek. Surrounding properties are all industrial/commercial except for an open, mowed field located across the Creek. Vegetation is found primarily along the perimeter of the property. It consists of a thick band of Himalayan blackberry(Rubus discolor). Several plant communities were identified on the southeastern portion of the lot along the creek. The dominant species at the top of the bank and slope consists of Himalayan blackberry and trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus). A scrub-shrub community is found along the toe of the slope and scattered within the flood plain. The dominant species consists of Pacific willow(Salix lasiandra) and Douglas Spiraea(Spiraea douglasii). An emergent community is found along the creek on the adjoining flood plain. The dominant species includes small-fruited bulrush(Scirpus microcarpos), soft rush (Juncus effusus), common cattail (Typha latifolia) and colonial bentgrass(Agrostis tenuis). The hydrology of the wetland is associated with Red Rock Creek and seeps found along the toe of the slope. The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) mapped two soils series on the property: Aloha silt loam and Cove silty clay loam. The Aloha silt loam was found on the entire parcel. The Cove silty clay loam is found along the creek. The Cove silty clay loam is list as a hydric soil. A jurisdictional wetland determination and delineation was completed on January 25, 2000. The Routine Onsite Determination method, outline in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Determination Manual, was used to delineate the wetland boundary. There are 0.13 acres of scrub-shrub and emergent wetland on the site. The delineation confirmed the presence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology along Red Rock Creek. The National Wetland Inventory classifies the wetland along Red Rock Creek as a palustrine srub-shrub (PSS) and emergent (PEM) wetland. The soil mapped is Cove silty clay loam which is a hydric soil. Three sample plots were established and the boundary flagged. 1 Introduction Site Description The property is 9.07 acres and is located west off of Hunziker Road in Tigard, Oregon. Legal description for the property: Washington County, T.2S, R1 W., Sec 1, Tax Lot 100 (Figure 1). The site was formerly an old foundry and currently is used for other industrial purposes. There are three existing buildings near the center of the site and the surrounding area is used as a storage yard. Most of the lot is either paved or covered with gravel. The southeastern portion contains old fill material. The fill area is evident on the 1975 aerial photographs used by the SCS for the soil survey. At the edge of the fill material the lot slopes down to the flood plain of Red Rock Creek. The creek forms the southeastern boundary of the site. It flows northeast to southwest and it is a tributary of Fanno Creek. Surrounding properties are all industrial/commercial except for an open, mowed field located across the Creek. Wetland Definition and Authority The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(COE) regulates the discharge of dredged or fill materials into waters and adjacent wetlands of the United States under authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Federal Register, 1986). For purposes of the Section 404 permitting program, the COE and other federal agencies define wetlands as follows (Federal Register, 1980, 1982): Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions In Oregon, the Division of State Lands (DSL) regulates removal/fill permitting in wetlands under ORS 196.800 to 196.990, and rules OAR 141-85-005 to OAR 141-85-090, and uses the same definition. REGULATORY CONTEXT In 1987 the COE published a manual (Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual or 1987 manual) which describes methods for determining the extent of jurisdictional wetlands under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). Two years later The Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands, published as a collaborative effort by the COE, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA), and U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS), revised the 1987 manual (Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation, or 1989 manual). 2 t--�-;- -T ■ --1 ' L" _ 1WAIII SW Garden IHame Rd 1-'r :- — "' ss' �; ; " '∎`' li 1 I ' ; r-AC . _ IT 1 i I Q 5 Exit'`i• ___fiii, _7p� i� I"' _ .` _ + ` it I I {i. '�,''173—"...-:;-;Uri I�i Jr 7 , 1 t i z " 1 . ii. ' �1 , J • ��y �; 1 Q ; L•; • 4 ;4, (J j w:,iE� uT..r' ? _� EIA%1 L 1 s ✓~ G --'burg !. `ems r 011,,•-' :: .� 1___---.-: �. 1 _ 6`o -11----= ',..1._./ 4. ' &filial, _ . „LAP .; ' ` i 1 ;\• `'•� y , - y. 'wl G PROJECT AREA 3 ; ` ��_ ' , girl rrr":1 I -al- 1" \ ':.., `• (.7)\...1111 AP--' ilt i lr. l!iii 1 1.. L1 I. 1 ___A .‘,.. "ckriefr qmpit, s \--/. I 90, • �% / /T. `. 0 IMO el:z S • S?� ■ ^ .�/� >;9..._,,,_,,.j / 1'� ; 4 ;4W'' �■ ,•yt.4; . ;l l•." : re r J.► G.'.rd:.:- CL' Donald Nil A 121 ., Bonita Rd G'�� •. - .a. ' INEMINi �Buy : .iI I J S �.r •' T \\ \• 4iei$ T ��� „lanurrgini ' ' ' millprr stp-P', F.1 .4-- -,.. , / 141e, / ,a) Alva ka L I" � s" =! 1 - WI .. \� . �':.�.yl�® �e►j Giro �c • ` I I °satin Rd .�a ,- •'i.Y,.,.' r SW Leveton D �, '-i.. ~Child#Rd al Exit 2 L. -ber � ■ata SW N LrL 1 ' • a �1 4 7: ®Tua tin mu , . j 1 -1 ' —• �i f'' Waker corner • • • SW Ave .`� _ h=,/ ,,y os f 11 — - jI' 4 1. ---- I f ,15 Utz I -,; ^, : 1 ii r,, -. . t. . . xit e, ' r I I — — 0.5 1 1.5 2 Figure 1: Site Vicinity Map • 3 Both the COE and DSL used the 1989 manual until 1992 when the 1992 Energy and Water Development Appropriation Act went into effect. The Act limited the COE (federal permitting agency)to using the 1987 manual for determining the extent of wetlands under federal jurisdiction. Oregon continued to use the 1989 manual until March 23, 1993 , when the Director of DSL signed a policy statement requiring the agency to use the 1987 manual. The policy statement was the result of the EPA agreement to use the 1987 manual. METHODS The analysis of wetlands conducted on this site was based on published methods for implementing Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The 1987 manual was used to satisfy the requirements of the COE on non-agricultural land. For agricultural land, the Food Security Act Manual and the Interim Operating Procedures for Completing Wetland Delineation/Determinations on Agricultural Lands(August 18, 1997) is used. Each manual requires three parameters to be examined: vegetation, soils, and hydrology. According to the 1987 manual, independent evidence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology must be present for an area to be declared a wetland. The analysis of wetlands on the project site was conducted by reviewing and analyzing existing site-specific literature and by field investigation. These two approaches are described below. Literature Review The following sources were examined for indications that jurisdictional wetlands may exist on the project site (see REFERENCES for complete citations): Hydric Soils of the United States, 1991 edition Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon 1982 Topography Map Nationa Wetland Inventory Map, Beaverton, Oregon These sources were reviewed for information about the vegetation, soils and hydrology of the site prior to field investigation. Site-Specific Field Investigation The Routine Onsite Determination Method (1987 manual, pp. 52-69) was used to determine the wetland boundary on non-agricultural land or agricultural land where natural vegetation was not significantly modified. On agricultural lands, where vegetation is not a reliable indicator, the Food Security Act Manual was used to determine the wetland boundary. Areas of homogeneous vegetation were identified for sampling vegetation type, percent cover, hydrology and soil characteristics on either side of the 4 wetland boundary. Sample plots were established to represent the different plant communities found at the site. For each sample plot data on vegetation, hydrology, and soils was collected, recorded in the field and later transferred to data forms(Appendix). Transects were established in wetlands estimated to be greater than five acres with the transect running either parallel to the major watercourse, or perpendicular to the hydrologic gradient. The decision on the orientation of the transect is based on field conditions, and was made in the field. Vegetation Plants growing in wetlands must be specifically adapted for life under saturated or anaerobic conditions and are commonly referred to as hydrophytic vegetation. The U.S.F.W.S. in cooperation with the National and Regional Interagency Review Panels publishes regional lists estimating the probability of plant species' occurrence in wetlands (e.g., Fish and Wildlife Service, 1988). Each species is given an indicator status which represents the likelihood that it will be found in a wetland. Categories defined in Table 1 are obligate (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), facultative(FAC), facultative upland (FACU), or upland(UPL). Plants with an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC are considered adapted for life in saturated or anaerobic soil conditions. The percent coverage of each plant species within the herb, shrub, and tree layers was estimated at each sample plot. Shrubs within a five-foot radius and trees within a 30-foot radius of the center of each plot were identified and recorded. Within the plot, all species were recorded in descending order of coverage, and dominant species were determined. Dominant species were calculated as those that exceeded 50% of the aerial cover for each vegetative stratum plus any additional species individually representing 20% or more of the total area cover for each vegetative stratum. The presence of wetland vegetation was determined according to the indicator status of the dominant species within each vegetative stratum. According to the manual, a sample plot is considered to have wetland vegetation if more than 50% of the number of dominant species present have an indicator status of OBL,FACW, and/or FAC. By 1987 standards, dominant species are chosen by selecting the three most dominant species from each of the four strata(herbs, saplings/shrubs, woody vines, trees). If only one or two strata are represented, then the five most dominant species from each strata are selected. 5 1: Definitions of Indicator Status Indicator Symbol Definition OBL Obligate. Species that occur almost always (estimated probability >99%) in wetlands under natural conditions. Facultative wetland. Species that usually occur in wetlands FACW (estimated probability 67 to 99%), but occasionally are found in non-wetlands. FAC Facultative. species that are equally likely to occur in wetlands or non-wetlands (estimated probability 34 to 66%). FACU Facultative upland. Species that usually occur in non-wetlands (estimated probability 67 to 99%), but occasionally are found in wetlands. UPL Upland. Species that occur almost always in nonwetlands under normal circumstances (estimated probability>99%). No indicator. Species for which insufficient information was NI available to determine an indicator status. Sources: Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation, 1989. Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Reed, 1988. Soils Hydric soils, defined as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part of the soil profile, are one characteristic of wetlands (USDA Soil Conservation Service, 1987). A list of hydric soils of the United States was compiled by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS), in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS). All soils are mapped in county soil surveys. However, the mapped boundaries of SCS soil types are not at a fine enough resolution for delineating boundaries of jurisdictional wetlands. Errors of omission can occur on SCS maps. Inclusions of upland (nonwetland) soil may exist in hydric soils and uplands may have inclusions of hydric soil. Therefore, field examination of soils is important for accurately delineating the extent of hydric soils. Hydric soils exhibit certain characteristics that can be observed in the field. Field indicators include: high organic content, accumulation of sulfidic material (rotten egg 6 odor), greenish or bluish gray color(gley formation), iron and manganese concretions, spots or blotches of color (mottling), and/or dark soil colors(low soil chroma). A soil auger, excavating down to a depth of at least 18 inches, was used to sample soil along the wetland boundary. Soil samples were checked for presence of sulfide gases; organic content was estimated visually and texturally; and soil colors were determined by using a Munsell soil color chart (Kollmorgen 1975). The Munsell soil color chart provides the standard for three attributes of color: hue, value, and chroma. According to the 1987 manual, hydric soils are required to be inundated or saturated for seven or more consecutive days during the growing season. Soil color is examined in the horizon immediately below the A-horizon or within 10 inches of the surface, whichever is shallower. Hydrology Wetlands, by their very name, must have water. Jurisdictional wetlands are characterized as having permanent or periodic inundation, or soil saturation for five percent or more of the growing season. Saturation occurs when the capillary fringe is within the major portion of the root zone(usually within 12 inches of the surface). Areas meeting one of these criteria are considered to have wetland hydrology. Ponding or soil saturation for five percent or more of the growing season during the growing season is direct evidence of wetland hydrology. Bare soil and dried algae are evidence that a site was previously inundated. Oxidized rhizospheres along live root channels also indicate soil saturation for five percent or more of the growing season. At each sample plot, wetland hydrology was assumed if positive indicators were present. Wetland Determination Presence or absence of wetlands was based on soil, vegetation, and hydrology data collected at sample plots. Following procedures outlined in the 1987 manual, sample plots with homogeneous vegetation were determined to be wetlands if wetland characteristics were present or judged to be normally present (barring human or unusual natural events) for all three parameters. Difficulties in wetland determination can arise as a result of disturbance or in problem areas. Both human(e.g., clearing vegetation, agriculture, filling, and excavation) and natural (e.g., mudslides, fire, and beaver dams) events have potential for obliterating field indicators of the three wetland parameters. In disturbed sites, both field and offsite data may be used to determine the presence of a wetland. Offsite information such as historical records, aerial photographs, previous soil, and vegetation surveys may indicate the presence of a jurisdictional wetland. 7 Some sites are difficult to evaluate because field indicators may not be present throughout the year. Field indicators may vary because of changing environmental conditions that occur seasonally and not necessarily the result of human or natural disturbance. According to the 1987 manual, all three parameters (hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and wetland hydrology) must be present for an area to be determined as wetland. Drumlins, seasonal wetlands, prairie potholes, and vegetated flats exemplify areas that are difficult to evaluate. RESULTS A review of available literature indicated possible wetlands on the site. The Natural Resource Conservation Service(NRCS)mapped a hydric soil series on the site. The National Wetland Inventory indicated wetlands on the site. A wetland determination and delineation was completed on January 25, 2000. Three sample plots were taken. Vegetation Vegetation was found primarily along the perimeter of the property. Most of the vegetation around the perimeter consisted of a thick band of Himalayan blackberry(Rubus discolor). Several plant communities were identified on the southeastern portion of the site along the creek. The dominant species at the top of the bank and slope was of Himalayan blackberry and trailing blackberry(Rubus Ursinus). Scot's broom(Cytisus scoparius), Nookta rose(Rosa nutkana) and teasel (Dipsacus sylvestris)were found in isolated clusters along the slope. A scrub-shrub community was found along the toe of the slope and scattered along the flood plain. The dominant species consisted of Pacific willow(Salix lasiandra) and Douglas Spiraea(Spiraea douglasii).). The understory contains isolated patches of common cattail(Typha latifolia), bittersweet nightshade(Solanum dulcamara), common horsetail (Equisteum arvense), and small-fruitedbulrush (Scirpus microcarpus). An emergent community was found along the creek banks and adjoining flood plain. The dominant species included bulrush(Scirpus microcarpos), soft rush (Juncus effusus),and colonial bentgrass (Agrostis tenuis). Soils The NRCS mapped two soils series on the property: Aloha silt loam and Cove silty clay loam.(Figure 2). The site visit confirmed the presence of the Cove series. All the area mapped as Aloha soils had been filled, paved, or developed. The Aloha silt loam is found on near level terraces. This soil is somewhat poorly drained and has a moderately slow permeability. It is classified as a Xerochrept, an Inceptisol with 8 an ochric colored epipedon, and a xeric moisture regime. The Ap horizon is 0 to 8 inches deep and is dark brown (10YR 3/3). The B1 horizon is 8 to 15 inches deep and is dark brown (10YR 4/3). Runoff is slow and the hazard of erosion is slight. The capability unit is I1w-1. As stated earlier, all the area mapped as this soil had been developed. The Cove series consists of poorly drained soils with a slow permeability. It is found on nearly level flood plains and occurs in slightly concave areas along streams. It is classified as a Haplaquoll, a Mollisol with an aquic moisture regime. The Ap horizon is 0 to 8 inches with a very dark-gray color(10YR3/1). It has few, fine, yellowish-brown and red mottles. The B21g horizon is 8 to 18 inches with a very dark gray color(N3/). The capability unit is IVw-1. These soils are listed as a hydric soil series. 9 ___.:>".1 _ Greenburg 13 ' � 12 35 �.� q 1 1 t 'i .1 giffilir 37A + 13, J7C [17 I 37B 37.4 ` / � �-7� t ' f 1 378 ` 37A . ` 1 ' ik;:i J `∎ , 22 0 13„, 3 37B !� 1 � �� 37:". �. 42 TIGARD F(112170 1 3/B CD� 22 ,,,4 4 2 i t , p �r .� S o 1 22 13 1 - -158 Ti ' ':' ,a,�.�. ,378 4.',.- 4ti PROJECT AREA 1 a e 1 42 45B 45A 1 "C + TO 78 22 CreN_ •� . .,..,,,, ----- - 2 1 42 40,fres. ,,,, _. , . 320 30 a _ 37B / 37B/ 7ABTh 30; 1 1C ` 37D 21B 37A / ' . a ,' 378 'a 4237B 22 i: -,y . // 37A- ! 22 II 31,5 4, " t' 37B , .t-4'• .}-�� ,14 �� 1 37B i - --� �2 21D 22, 11 370 11 „ : -3,7!",.-,:, AP 21C - 0 ill -'1 SOIL LEGEND FOR SYMBOLS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA 1 Aloha silt loam i 1 4 - 13 Cove silty clay loam 1 Source: Soil Survey of Washington County,Oregon 1982. Sheet 44 Figure 2. Soil Map 10 Hydrology The property is bordered by Red Rock Creek to the southeast. A floodplain is found on the northwest side of the creek. The creek is braided with a few small channels cutting though the floodplain. At the time of this field study the flood plain was saturated, with scattered pockets of inundation. Also, small seeps were observed draining from the slope. Wetland determination Based on the hydrology, vegetation, and soil data, one wetland was delineated at the site, (Figure 3). The total area of wetland on this site is 0.13 acre. Three sample plots were established. Along Red Rock Creek,there is a clear shift in plant communities at the base of the slope that rises above flood plain on the north side. Himalayan blackberry and trailing blackberry are very dense on the slopes(Plot 2). The blackberries extend only to the base of the slope and then are replaced by diverse wetland communities. The wetland is located at the base of the slope and along the floodplain along Red Rock Creek. The wetland is classified as a palustrine emergent and scrub-shrub wetland. The scrub-shrub wetland was found at the base of the slope. Dominant shrub species include willow and Douglas spiraea. Sub-dominant species include colonial bentgrass, common cattail and bittersweet nightshade. The reminding floodplain is classified as an emergent wetland. Dominant species include small-fruited bulrush, and soft rush. Sub-dominant species include reed canary grass and colonial bentgrass. Soil at the wetland plots(1 &2) had a matrix color of 10YR3/1 with mottle colors of 10YR4/4, which matched the description of the Cove clay soils mapped along the creek. At the time of this field study the soils were saturated with a depth to free-standing water between 4-8 inches. The delineation is not valid until confirmed by the Division of State Lands and Army Corp of Engineers. 11 IFigure 3: Wetland Delineation Map & Plot Points l 61.11) • UTILITY STATEMENT TI-1E UNDERGROUND UTILITIES Se-Cum ARE PER FIELD MARKINGS AND RECORD DRAWINGS PROvIDED BY THE RESPECT1vE UTILITY AGENCIES.LOCATION OF , NON-OBSERVABLE AND/OR UNDERGROUND UTIUTIE9 ARE 5140(IM FOR INFORMATION ONLY AND ARE NOT GUARANTEED TO BE COMPLETE OR ACCURATE. NOTES I THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR TI1L$MAP 1.5 NRT PER SURVEY BER GRAPHIC SCALE w- 16A36.WASHINGTON COUNTY SURVEY RECORDS. - € ? o 2. THE BENCHMARK[BASIS OF ELEVATIONS)FOR TW15 SURVEY 1S A BRASS r y C]� V ',I$ DISK SET IN TIE NORTNLEST CORNER OF THE"'DEIUALK ON THE `�`•j� BRIDGE OVER FANNp CREEK ON HALL BOULEvARD,STAMPED (p LT) , w •RM1 350 1967 WASHINGTON CCUNTY BENCHMARK NO.43. '�� R �. % �Y S ELEVATION•143.10. TAX LOT 2500 aA r �; t./J '3b < a 3. FIELD Y10RK PERFORMED MARCH II.1996. AREA = 0.58 ACRES • !!! 4. THE EASEMENT SNK+W[HEREON ARE PER OWNERS POLICY NUMBER % w>�L►E CONFIGURATION 'i e00036e1,TITLE F'OWCT BY OREGON TITLE COMPANY. N�,� F ,D.�T PLAWI vy,‘ .�. .Si A b Z \44.4%,_.p >IU.�WATER ouTwc> .QH� ; � � 3r i -- • \ Z ■0 � 5...-S. tl,z.„‘ , x For_ --_--.... ___.t., r______jma,_______•,- • s. '5 .„4....z.,' . \ r'te r \ \ ASP(- � -}% �'b - -- CC 643Wroow woo J --- _ �V L .4" $.,, Z Vi ••i •' d i - �`� ` '7� :�� \\\ �JSI Q BS !M p�T ''` 3 q O S .. .:1, -) �S J p.41,o * / .'� •;L� •�' I`TJOJ �'6 �"� Z C7 if ir, ptis �o4/ ,/J / /?� p� • Q V7 0 iillT *: ..r.-',p,- ., _.,-,----,,. . .,.,.0,— ,„ 49 4 V Is.�,.,, BULLRING ,�nrJ* 4'� # _ = O Y J�. :•, *) \ • d LEGEND W Q ( 1' 3 .J.1'4\ 1B9 AC 694 BOOK DR DRIVBWY LL 1� , Q GATCN BASIN I � ' TAX LOT 100 JJ �J 15( .. . : rARD LKitT•}y AREA = 8.49 ACRES ° V ' 1I f;N ,4y,Z TOTAL AREA = , . ,,A. 4 oc WATER VALVE r- y (Wi1 1 ' °\ I( FIRE HYDRANT [ 9.01 ACRES c q, �•- STREET SIGN p�1 I ?r \ S * MONITORING'ELL Y � m„!"' \\\\\ e ' L J,r---__ ,sue.. cc GAS vaLVE N L- �'T ,-- 'O■�- '�11 Id CONCRETE Z �l `: �-� •J a� sta�� •a�� _� \6J 1�1 OLvERT O 4 �7 t • • ° ,J :l.` II -3 GUI'ANCHOR q . ' J \ 7 `b `/ . .° . ,�.' °J 1 p F�OYIER POLE O F- C7 o° g *, • \) • • 113 RAILROAD TRACKS S W U ��,4Qm ` \ L J ?I \ W W 'J -[••. �� £ •;6� a s'l • _� ` si.9 Ts J �,szo —x— FENCE Z \ EDGE OF PAVER N7 in V• \ wTei LIIE[4,lIW„AfCN F- ','�i I % • • • • • a• . ■ • PER MEILT RAM I / �'SA---SANITARY SKIER UM (n '07 • -K "• r4' 6. �•a • • • • • ` . •* I •s, l� ' • FOI1N0.U' NOTED x -1y!E71 I I LJ J �i' Al a .�• '• �( e • r0t' 1 4.TARA SPOT ELEVATION 3 II o • < q,4- APPROXIMATE ON-SITE WETLAND AREA (5,631 S.F.) r0 • 4e FOWp 3,4•IRON PIPE J� I I ,,' - - '1?° �.a •a'J Ir BOUNDARY y T PER SURVEY NUMBER I 4•+.e. _ ter--- Plot 2 / ';� ., 5.4!!0 f(1140 ~CTo•,'o • —Z [HELD) _ _ 'J IE INVERT ELEVATION Ly F�l Q�_' : �� -- _ � OR GRATE ELEVATION R i/ N4644'17E 4t I "••"A. ::.... ........,. ... ....... ..:....:H`..�:.•.•::. `c_y-.. - � •,° ' : : : • ___ --6-SA r Plot 4 • V. •• •\ RED ROCK CREEK _ '.�--�SJH---- �"b�.\(. Plot 3 a J .r OEXIBTNG CONDITIGNB C2 12 MD 111111011111.01110 Table 2: Summary s°mma r y of vegetation ► Soils, and hydrology We lland droki Soils -p ermina tion I HYdrpphytiG U etland Ydric U etland 2 No h °ph3tic Upland pland 3 flydr pi Wetland l Wetland 13 REFERENCES Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation, 1989. Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Cooperative technical publication. 138 pp. Federal Register, 1980. 40 CFR Part 230: Section 404(b)(1), Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites of Dredged or Fill Material, Vol. 45,No. 249, pp. 85352- 85353,U.S. Govt. Printing Office,Washington, D.C. Federal Register, 1982. Title 33,Navigation and Navigable Waters; Chapter II, Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers. Vol. 47, No. 138, p. 31810, U.S. Govt. Printing Office,Washington, D.C. Federal Register, 1986. 33 CFR Parts 320 through 330,Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule,Vol. 51,No. 219 pp. 41206-41259, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington,D.C. Kollmorgen Corporation, 1975. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Macbeth Division of Kollmorgen Corporation, Baltimore, MD. Reed, P.B., Jr., 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 88 (26.9) 89 pp. Reed, P.B., Jr., et al., 1993. Supplement to List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington D.C. 10p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service 1991. Hydric Soils of the United States in Cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. Misc. Pub. No. 1491. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1982. Soil Survey of Clark County, Washington. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C., 138 pp. 14 APPENDIX A: Data Forms 15 FIELD DATA SHEET WETLANDS DELINEATION ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(s): 0cuAstk..et e -vkL I\��1 Sc1w\k Date: 10512.o o0 Project/Site: 1h Fotirt �Sfate: n1Z County: e► V%Ve or% Applicant/Owner: ,o.►•1 Sw..�1't Plant Community //Name: [-o} Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebcok. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes L No _ (If no, explain on back) Has the vegesation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No, (If yes, explain on back) VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Scientific Name Common Name Stre um .n icat r % Cover 1. A ro 4t1 42hu.1 Cola aQ t. M. • 50 A- 2. . Q. Q. a r �li___._ f 5 3. ' wWs, - a ta`r�:W! ■ . I� �hGw — .5 4. cc:1'14.i r t o CATO 1, u . a u IL O.\ O r6 L __ , 5. 1 6. 7, 8. 9. 'ercent of dominant species that are PK, FACW, nd/or FAC 100 1.., 5 the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No Rationale: ._ f ',Ai 4 C-3r p1.. IC VA_ 47 1:421 Iwo • SOILS ,eries/phase: C 0 u st i 1 - C,oak 'toy y Subgroup': o the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes ,,,Z do _ Undetermined is the soil a Histosol? Yes _No _.iHistic epidedon present? Yes No• "--. '- the soil: Mottled? Yes AZ No _ Gleyed? Yes—No latrix Color: I v`/ R 3/l Mottle Colors: I f y g 4/q ther hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes be No _ ationale: HYDROLOGY the ground surface inundated? Yes _No iL Surface Water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No _ _epth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole: 0 all st other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes yt No _ , ationale: x61.--t_dr..A ars ' '-, ' - JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE ._ the plant community a wetland? Yes -y,/No Rationale for jurisdictional decision: AIll Q. .. FIELD DATA SHEET WETLANDS DELINEATION ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field lnvestigator(sl: ow,d,co. Slut p to ' Mcut4 sv\ ct 14-111 Date: 1(2.S'. Zoo Project/Site: irtti co J State: O IZ Coun b�Jo� h i n — ApplicantiOwner: j/u�r� kvv� '% - Plant Community #/Name: Iro'2_, — Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes /, No flf no, explain on back) Has the vege ation, soils, andior hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes _ No (If yes, explain on back) • VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species ci n ifi Name Common Name Stratum indicator % Cover t. , tA.T c for 1-�•m l� ay] ilutk S _ rAcut- _ '-! O 2. a '4 h s o I . i.s Scytr � 10 i. �f1 Nz— 5- 3. _ 0.rq • ♦•_ a +A II FDSC.�rL, H VvC-- ZC] V- A r a Sd is f?r �s CrsCo rv��Q ti c r�i U0.S5 {� s C. J 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 'ercent of dominant species that are QBL, FACW, and/or FAG s the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No Rationale: CAA.kitiulk. i t V tfk +v1R T SOILS • ;eriesiphase: C O uk. Si OA Subgroup': s the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes -o Undetermined is the soil a Histosol7 Yes No✓ Histic epidedon present? Yes _ No _✓ Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No ✓ Gleyed? Yes _No V Aatnx Color: 1 ON/ K-3-/-2- Mottle Colors: )ther hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No rationale: HYDROLOGY the ground surface inundated? Yes No ZSurface Water depth: _ Is the soil saturated? Yes No "'epth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole: _ ist other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes _ No,/ ationale: No t n•4L a%ors JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE the plant community a wetland? Yes Not2 Rationale for jurisdictional decision: IT—Cs A.- rerlivTa FIELD DATA SHEET WETLANDS DELINEATION ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(s}: C`_(a.ur�-A J'ot,t L e Alf J (An-111114 c cL,+i Date: I I' 12o aU Project/Site: Tvot rJKN Slate: Oft. County: Won%.11.1—..-0 Applicant/Owner:_ En&o.vt w.-i'+k ?'ant Community 1/Name: P1 vi Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the tack of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant communit-f? Yes No _ (If no, explain on back) Has the vege ion, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes — No (If yes, explain on back} VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species ,Scientific Name .mm'r 'Na . e Stra/um indicator % Cover 1.Selrp ac me(tomrettS ,,1• e• uhta � H o€L (Z 3. - ' 1 -.. c; a1 ■ u • a,I1 CO . b — 5A 1,1 - l O 4. o (a nAtinft. c*nnat w s p a.ei rat S V FA C t I O 5 4 Q ruA.4.4 a,. • n . ate H_ F/ L ( O 6. 7. 6 9.. 8 --- 1 . 'ercent of dominant species that are OIL, FACW, and/or FAC i Cly s the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes 4„ No Rationale: t- ice'`1 �} SOILS ieries/phase: ( o v Q S t } C 1 C`'\ 10 a Subgroup':_ s the sod on the hydric soils list? Yes�,[No . J Undetermined is the sod a Histosol? Yes No _Z Histic epidedon present? Yes Na✓ 's the soil: Mottled? Yes No _ Gleyed? Yes No ✓ (4/ Aatrix Color: I ()`!P, /1 Mottle Colors: IOy IZ 1 Ccf (L ether hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes _✓No _ lationale: L..kQ �y, t t JJ HYDROLOGY the ground surface inundated? Yes *Co J Surface Water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes I No _ u " lepth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole: 7 ist other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met7 Yes No — ationale: _ • JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE the plant community a wetland? Yes ✓ No Rationale for jurisdictional decision: A APPENDIX B: Plants found on Site SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME INDICATOR STATUS Agrostis tennis colonial bentgrass FAC Bidet's frondosa leafy beggartick FACW+ Corylus cornuta beaked hazel-nut FACU Cytisus scoparius Scot's broom NI Daucuscarota Queen Anne's lace NI Dipsacus sylvestris teasel NI Equisetum arvense horse tail OBL Epilobium ciliotum Watson willowherb FACW- Festuca arundinacea tall fescue FAC- Juncus effusus soft rush FACW Mimulus Guttalus common monkey flower OBL Phalaris arundinacea reed canary grass FACW Polystichum munitom sword fern NI Rosa nutkana nookta rose FAC Rubus discolor Himalayan blackberry FACU- Rubus ursinus trailing blackberry FACU Rumex crispus curly dock FAC+ Salix lucida Pacific willow FACW+ Scirpus microcarpus small fruited bulrush OBL Solanum dulcamara bittersweet night shade FAC+ Spiraea douglasii douglas spiraea FACW Typha latifolia common cattail OBL Veronica anagallus water speedwell OBL 16 APPENDIX C: National Wetland Inventory Map 17 %.,- .I P`�4._ --✓..y '..c:-;, ::s r 1;11)10.'4k r • ( ! '- " .�=j/�• /'POIN ZX. •'�'7 _ ..-` mayam. :c--- --. 6. .' ___ • \ y • MCe .c • I -\ ..- r � � C a• . . . ,. . Ettl,, 11,4.-_, '.i,,-- _,• --,,.,--..._.:-.: •,:•-• .-•- -------_ii,:..-1:1"...1,....• , .._:. __. __ .,_,_,..... a., .� -POW �C •- _ -� t:. ----• _ sr t 1 'jWKZh_.z��' S; _ `- m • •,- - 7 •i.'1 �PEibt1W.� } ` .fa `ti �, )_ _Green ti _-� - _ ' {r✓'• ' •R a. 27. •s stir t' ,.i '-- - — ��-r.;=.. .»�0 ,1: ... •.j•IfY G,r it jp 4 2oo t'- .1-•.. :. ; • , I' W • ....4 •i --f to_ a --- PeM.IW/ • Jfv ,o -• . . = 3 ,�•• .. 'a• G " U K 1 . Sr it ��� ._ v • .• f L • .: Vii . •a• . t ig, ±' 0` PROJECT AREA E .• `! -wt:.•pFO1�I-.-. /..,„, -•'Sr :crtn,rn}xF'• - n• • •• �\v- �• -F IY \ •eu-,.l i ' sas tit E) ',POWKZ •• \'. - _ , -, _.' . -..f+- :+' •PFOt r•:� . . •-• �•BO Ili Cdj /\ s - _ •, ``. .•y,�' -.p1=e Y .��—•,_' ... .' •.. - -_■ 1' ‘•••\, '_.i- '.�`v!, --e - •'rte. , - J ---• �.- aoo - ;-1,1' -y• POWKZ.x fY - - • • 1 �._ /` `.-. - •s.i. :s.3 r_t.``X P •--- - MIY . ''• National Wetland Inventory Map, Beaverton, Oregon S1rvi PY'CLIY1O3 € Report Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative January 26, 2000 THE FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK TIGARD, OREGON Prepared For WADDLE DESIGN/PLANNING/ARCHITECTURE 1927 NW Keamy Street Portland, OR 97209 Prepared B,v Westlake Consultants. Inc. 15115 SW Sequoia Parkway, Suite 150 Tigard, OR 97224 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative January 26,2000 Given: The Foundry Industrial Park is located south of SW Hunziker Street and east of SW Hall Boulevard in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, Oregon. Existing site conditions consists of three buildings surrounded by gravel parking and storage areas. Site topography, as shown on the attached Existing Conditions Plan, show mild slopes in the range of 1 to 3 percent falling to the southeast. The southeastern property line borders on Red Rock Creek that is designated as a "Minor Stream". This development project proposes the construction of 110,400 square feet of light industrial building space, 168,200 square feet of vehicle and pedestrian access surfaces, along with associated infrastructure amenities. Required: Provide evidence that this proposed development complies with the applicable approval standards and criteria of the City of Tigard zoning ordinance. According to City of Tigard, as specified in the "Pre-Application conference Notes" dated 11/18/99, storm water quality treatment and detention will be required. The design and construction of the required storm water quality treatment and detention facilities shall be in accordance with regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency, (USA). Methodology: Water Quality Treatment: Section 3.11.5 c-1 and c-4 of the Unified Sewerage Agencies "Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management", July 1996, was utilized to determine the water quality treatment flow rate. As per Section 3.11.5 c-1 and c-4 the storm water quality facility shall be designed for a dry weather storm event totaling 0.36 inches of precipitation falling in 4 hours with an average return period of 96 hours. In addition the storm water quality facility shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the total phosphorous from the runoff from 100 percent of the newly constructed impervious surfaces. Detention: Based on Section 3.10.3 of the Unified Sewerage Agencies "Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Server and Surface Water Management', July 1996, the rate of runoff from the developed site shall not exceed that of the pre-development condition based on storm events having a return frequency of 2, 10. and 25-years, and a duration of 24-hours. The hydrograph method as specified in Section 3.02, was utilized to determine the quantity of storm water runoff for the 2, 10, and 25-year, 24-hour. storm events fcr both the pre- development and post-development conditions. 140301-Prelim-SD-rpt Page 2 of 5 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative January 26,2000 Results: Water Quality Treatment: The water quality treatment proposed for this development does Stormwater Management of 2035 NE Columbia Boulevard, Portland, Oregon 97211 provide the StormFilter as. As per Section 3.11.5 c-1 and c-4 the storm water treatment flow was determined to be 0.57 cubic feet per second as show in the equation below. Qt = C * I * A Where: Qt =Treatment Flow C = 1 I = 0.36 in/4hr=2.08'10-6 ft/sec A = 6.29 Acres = 274,038 ft2 Therefore: Ot =(?.08*10--6ft )(274,038 ft') =0.57 fA sec sec The StormFilter treatment system is designed to treat a peak flow rate of 0.57 cfs as shown on the attached FAX from Stormwater Management dated January 26, 2000. In addition, the phosphorus removal efficiency of the StormFilter is expected to exceed 65 percent when the influent concentration of suspended solids exceeds 200mg/L. Therefore, The Foundry Industrial Park complies with the applicable approval standards and criteria of the City of Tigard zoning ordinance with respect to water quality treatment. Detention: A 36-inch diameter pipe with a multiple orifice control structure was chosen to detain the difference between the pre and post-development storm water run off for the design storms, having a return frequency of 2, 10, and 25-years, and a duration of 24-hours. Pre-Development Conditions: Existing site conditions consists of three buildings surrounded by gravel parking and storage areas. The site topography is such that minimal off-site area will contribute to on- site runoff. Approximately 80 percent of the underlying soil is of the Aloha type, with a hydrologic grouping of C. The remainder of the on-site soils has a hydrological grouping of D, approximately 15 percent Cove type and 5 percent Verboort. 140301-Prelim-SD-rpt Page 3 of 5 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative January 26,2000 Following are the characteristics used to determine the pre-developed site runoff. Area pervious = 3.78 acres CN = 89 (Table 111-1-12) Area impervious = 5.29 acres CN = 98 (Table 111-1-12) Total Area = 9.07 acres Tc = 5 min. 12= 2.50 in (from USA Design Manual) ho = 3.45 in (from USA Design Manual) 125 = 3.90 in (from USA Design Manual) Results: From attached hydrograph: Q2= 3.89 cfs Qio = 5.84 cfs Q25= 6.78 cfs Post-Development Conditions: The post-developed site conditions are shown on the attached Site Dimension Plan, Grading Plan and Utility Plan. Following are the characteristics used to determine the post-developed site runoff. Area pervious = 2.68 acres CN = 86 (Table 111-1-12) Area impervious = 6.39 acres CN = 98 (Table 111-1-12) Total Area = 9.07 acres Tc = 5 min. 12 = 2.50 in (from USA Design Manual) lio = 3.45 in (from USA Design Manual) 125 = 3.90 in (from USA Design Manual) Results: From attached hydrograph: Q2= 4.21 cfs Qia = 6.17 cfs Q25 = 7.11 cfs Design Storm Event Pre-development Runoff Post-development Runoff 2-year 3.89 cfs 4.21 cfs 10-year 5.84 cfs 6.17 cfs 25-year j 6.78 cfs 7.11 cfs A 36-inch diameter pipe will be used for the detention of the 2-year. 10-year and 25-year storm events. An outlet control structure with multiple orifices is designed to limit the rate of runoff from the post-development site to that of the pre-development condition. This multiple orifice structure is summarized in the following Discharge Structure List. Additional information regarding stage, storage, and discharge is available in the Level Pool Table Summary and Level Pool Routing. Report attached. 140301-Prelim-SD-rpt Page 4 of 5 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative January 26,2000 Conclusion: The StormFilter water quality facility proposed for The foundry Industrial Park provides water quality treatment for a dry weather storm event totaling 0.36 inches of precipitation falling in 4 hours with an average return period of 96 hours. In addition this storm water quality facility meets the requirement to remove 65 percent of the total phosphorous from the runoff from 100 percent of the newly constructed impervious surfaces. Therefore, this proposed development complies with the applicable approval standards and criteria of the City of Tigard zoning ordinance as they pertain to storm water quality treatment. The storm water detention facility proposed for The Foundry Industrial Park provides over 2,500 cubic feet of storage. This detention facility limits the rate of runoff from the developed to that of the pre-development condition based on storm events having a return frequency of 2, 10, and 25-years, with duration of 24-hours. Therefore, this proposed development complies with the applicable approval standards and criteria of the City of Tigard zoning ordinance as they pertain to storm water quantity. 140301-Prelim-SD-rpt Page 5 cf 5 1/27/00 1 :31 : 52 pm Shareware Release page 1 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: 10yr-pe NAME : detention l0yr pre-development SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 9 . 07 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 3 . 78 Acres 5 . 29 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 86 . 00 98 . 00 TC 5 . 00 min 5 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 PEAK RATE : 5 . 84 cfs VOL: 2 . 00 Ac-ft TIME: 500 min BASIN ID: 10yrpost NAME : lOpost dev SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 9 . 07 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP _ PRECIPITATION • 3 .45 inches AREA. . : 2 . 68 Acres 6 . 39 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 86 . 00 98 . 00 TC 5 . 00 min 5 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF : 0 .20 PEAK RATE: 6 . 17 cfs VOL: 2 . 11 Ac-ft TIME : 500 min BASIN ID: 25yr-pre NAME : detention for 25yr pre-dev SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 9 . 07 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 3 . 78 Acres 5 . 29 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 86 . 00 98 . 00 TC 5 . 00 min 5 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 6 . 78 cfs VOL: 2 . 32 Ac-ft TIME : 500 min BASIN ID: 25yrpost NAME : 25 yr post dev SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 9 . 07 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 2 . 68 Acres 6 . 39 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 86 . 00 98 . 00 TC 5 . 00 min 5 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF : 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 7 . 11 cfs VOL: 2 . 42 Ac-ft TIME : 500 min 1/27/00 1 : 31 : 52 pm Shareware Release page 2 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: 2yr-post NAME : 2yr post dev SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 9 . 07 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 50 inches AREA. . : 2 . 68 Acres 6 . 39 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN 86 . 00 98 . 00 TC 5 . 00 min 5 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 4 . 21 cfs VOL: 1 . 44 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min BASIN ID: 2yr-pre NAME: Detention for 2yr pre-dev SCS METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 9 . 07 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2 . 50 inches AREA. . : 3 . 78 Acres 5 . 29 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 86 . 00 98 . 00 TC 5 . 00 min 5 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF : 0 . 20 PEAK RATE : 3 . 89 cfs VOL: 1 . 35 Ac-ft TIME : 490 min BASIN ID: wq NAME : wq for impery @ 1/3 of 2yr SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 9 . 07 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 0 . 86 inches AREA. . : 3 . 78 Acres 5 . 29 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 . 83 cfs VOL: 0 . 33 Ac-ft TIME : 480 min 1/27/00 1 :32 :25 pm Shareware Release page 1 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative STAGE STORAGE TABLE UNDERGROUND PIPE ID No. 36"Pipe Description: 36" Detention Pipe Diameter: 3 . 00 ft . Length: 375 . 00 ft . Slope. . . : 0 . 0015 ft/ft upstr: dnstr: STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 5.00 0.0000 0.0000 6.00 506.40 0.0116 7.00 1566 0.0360 8.00 2479 0.0569 5.10 2.4098 0.0001 6.10 601.52 0.0138 7.10 1675 0.0384 8.10 2544 0.0584 5.20 13.492 0.0003 6.20 700.83 0.0161 7.20 1782 0.0409 8.20 2592 0.0595 5.30 36.788 0.0008 6.30 803.55 0.0184 7.30 1886 0.0433 8.30 2624 0.0602 5.40 74.704 0.0017 6.40 908.99 0.0209 7.40 1988 0.0456 8.40 2643 0.0607 5.50 129.06 0.0030 6.50 1017 0.0233 7.50 2085 0.0479 8.50 2650 0.0608 5.60 191.84 0.0044 6.60 1126 0.0258 7.60 2179 0.0500 8.60 2651 0.0609 5.70 256.80 0.0059 6.70 1236 0.0284 7.70 2267 0.0520 5.80 332.64 0.0076 6.80 1346 0.0309 7.80 2348 0.0539 5.90 416.38 0.0096 6.90 1456 0.0334 7.90 2420 0.0556 1/27/00 1 :32 :38 pm Shareware Release page 1 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. orifice Description: Outflow Control Structure Outlet Elev: 3 . 00 Elev: 3 . 00 ft Orifice Diameter: 8 . 8945 in. Elev: 6 .40 ft Orifice 2 Diameter: 7 . 2188 in. Elev: 7.40 ft Orifice 3 Diameter: 2 . 6250 in. STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs 3.00 0.0000 4.60 2.7156 6.20 3.8405 7.80 6.4951 3.10 0.6789 4.70 2.7992 6.30 3.9000 7.90 6.6165 3.20 0.9601 4.80 2.8803 6.40 3.9587 8.00 6.7342 3.30 1.1759 4.90 2.9593 6.50 4.4636 8.10 6.8486 3.40 1.3578 5.00 3.0361 6.60 4.7058 8.20 6.9601 3.50 1.5181 5.10 3.1111 6.70 4.9042 8.30 7.0691 3.60 1.6630 5.20 3.1843 6.80 5.0794 8.40 7.1758 3.70 1.7962 5.30 3.2559 6.90 5.2397 8.50 7.2803 3.80 1.9202 5.40 3.3259 7.00 5.3891 8.60 7.3828 3.90 2.0367 5.50 3.3945 7.10 5.5302 8.70 7.4834 4.00 2.1469 5.60 3.4617 7.20 5.6646 8.80 7.5824 4.10 2.2517 5.70 3.5277 7.30 5.7934 8.90 7.6797 4.20 2.3518 5.80 3.5924 7.40 5.9175 9.00 7.7755 4.30 2.4478 5.90 3.6560 7.50 6.0965 4.40 2.5402 6.00 3.7185 7.60 6.2373 4.50 2.6294 6.10 3.7800 7.70 6.3691 1/27/00 1 : 32 : 53 pm Shareware Release page 1 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE < DESCRIPTION > (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) 2yr-pre 3.89 4.21 36"Pipe orifice 6.29 1 3.89 793.90 cf 10yr-pre 5.84 6.17 36"Pipe orifice 7.34 2 5.84 1924.48 cf 25yr-pre 6.78 7.11 36"Pipe orifice 8.04 3 6.78 2507.09 cf 1/27/00 1 :33 : 13 pm Shareware Release page 1 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative ROUTING REPORT UNDERGROUND PIPE ID No. 36"Pipe Description: 36" Detention Pipe Diameter: 3 . 00 ft . Length: 375 . 00 ft . Slope . . . : 0 . 0015 ft/ft upstr: dnstr: MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. orifice Description: Outflow Control Structure Outlet Elev: 3 . 00 Elev: 3 . 00 ft Orifice Diameter: 8 . 8945 in. Elev: 6 .40 ft Orifice 2 Diameter: 7 .2188 in. Elev: 7 .40 ft Orifice 3 Diameter: 2 . 6250 in. ROUTING CURVE STAGE STORAGE OUTFLOW 0+2S STAGE STORAGE OUTFLOW 0+25 STAGE STORAGE OUTFLOW 0+25 (ft) (cf) (cfs) cfs-min (ft) (cf) (cfs) cfs-min (ft) (cf) (cfs) cfs-min 3.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.90 0.0000 2.9593 2.9593 6.80 1346 5.0794 9.5663 3.10 0.0000 0.6789 0.6789 5.00 0.0000 3.0361 3.0361 6.90 1456 5.2397 10.094 3.20 0.0000 0.9601 0.9601 5..0 2.4098 3.1111 3.1192 7.00 1566 5.3891 10.610 3.30 0.0000 1.1759 1.1759 5.20 13.492 3.1843 3.2293 7.10 1675 5.5302 11.113 3.40 0.0000 1.3578 1.3578 5.30 36.788 3.2559 3.3785 7.20 1782 5.6646 11.603 3.50 0.0000 1.5181 1.5181 5.40 74.704 3.3259 3.5749 7.30 1886 5.7934 12.080 3.60 0.0000 1.6630 1.6630 5.50 129.06 3.3945 3.8247 7.40 1988 5.9175 12.543 3.70 0.0000 1.7962 1.7962 5.60 191.84 3.4617 4.1012 7.50 2085 6.0965 13.048 3.80 0.0000 1.9202 1.9202 5.70 256.80 3.5277 4.3837 7.60 2179 6.2373 13.500 3.90 0.0000 2.0367 2.0367 5.80 332.64 3.5924 4.7012 7.70 2267 6.3691 13.924 4.00 0.0000 2.1469 2.1469 5.90 416.38 3.6560 5.0440 7.80 2348 6.4951 14.320 4.10 0.0000 2.2517 2.2517 6.00 506.40 3.7185 5.4065 7.90 2420 6.6165 14.682 4.20 0.0000 2.3518 2.3519 6.10 601.52 3.7800 5.7851 8.00 2479 6.7342 14.996 4.30 0.0000 2.4478 2.4478 6.20 700.83 3.8405 6.1766 8.10 2544 6.8486 15.329 4.40 0.0000 2.5402 2.5402 6.30 803.55 3.9000 6.5785 8.20 2592 6.9601 .5.600 4.50 0.0000 2.6294 2.6194 6.40 908.99 3.9587 6.9886 8.30 2624 7.0691 15.817 4.60 0.0000 2.7156 2.7156 6.50 1017 4.4636 7.8521 8.40 2643 7.1758 15.985 4.70 0.0000 2.7992 2.7992 6.60 1126 4.7058 8.4578 8.50 2650 7.2803 16.114 4.80 0.0000 2.8803 2.8503 6.70 1236 4.9042 9.0229 1/27/00 1 : 33 : 13 pm Shareware Release page 2 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE 2yr-pre MATCH Q (cfs) 3 . 89 INFLOW Q (cfs) : 4 . 21 PEAK STAGE (ft) : 6 . 29 PEAK OUTFLOW 3 . 89 PEAK TIME : 520 . 00 min. INFLOW HYD No. : 2yr-post OUTFLOW HYD No. : 1 LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE I1 I2 2S1 SUM 01 02+252 STAGE TIME < cfs min > (ft) (min) 0 . 0000 0 . 0001 0 . 0000 0 . 0001 0 . 0000 0 . 0001 3 . 00 60 . 00 0 . 0001 0 . 0117 0 . 0000 0 . 0118 0 . 0001 0 . 0117 3 . 00 70 . 00 0 . 0117 0 . 0117 0 . 0000 0 . 0233 0 . 0117 0 . 0117 3 . 00 80 . 00 0 . 0117 0 . 0124 0 . 0000 0 . 0241 0 . 0117 0 . 0124 3 . 00 90 . 00 0 . 0124 0 . 1092 0 . 0000 0 . 1217 0 . 0124 0 . 1092 3 . 00 100 . 00 0 . 1092 0 . 1092 0 . 0000 0 . 2184 0 . 1092 0 . 1092 3 . 00 110 . 00 0 . 1092 0 . 1100 0 . 0000 0 . 2192 0 . 1092 0 . 1100 3 . 00 120 . 00 0 . 1100 0 . 2062 0 . 0000 0 . 3162 0 . 1100 0 . 2062 3 . 00 130 . 00 0 . 2062 0 . 2062 0 . 0000 0 .4124 0 . 2062 0 . 2062 3 . 00 140 . 00 0 . 2062 0 . 2068 0 . 0000 0 . 4130 0 . 2062 0 . 2068 3 . 00 150 . 00 0 . 2068 0 . 2870 0 . 0000 0 . 4939 0 . 2068 0 . 2870 3 . 00 160 . 00 0 . 2870 0 . 2870 0 . 0000 0 . 5741 0 . 2870 0 . 2870 3 . 00 170 . 00 0 . 2870 0 . 2874 0 . 0000 0 . 5744 0 . 2870 0 . 2874 3 . 00 180 . 00 0 . 2874 0 . 3343 0 . 0000 0 . 6217 0 . 2874 0 . 3343 3 . 00 190 . 00 0 . 3343 0 . 3343 0 . 0000 0 . 6687 0 . 3343 0 . 3343 3 . 00 200 . 00 0 . 3343 0 . 3346 0 . 0000 0 . 6689 0 . 3343 0 . 3346 3 . 00 210 . 00 0 . 3346 0 . 3678 0 . 0000 0 . 7024 0 . 3346 0 . 3678 3 . 00 220 . 00 0 . 3678 0 . 3678 0 . 0000 0 . 7356 0 . 3678 0 . 3678 3 . 00 230 . 00 0 . 3678 0 . 3682 0 . 0000 0 . 7360 0 . 3678 0 . 3682 3 . 00 240 . 00 0 . 3682 0 . 4176 0 . 0000 0 . 7858 0 . 3682 0 . 4176 3 . 00 250 . 00 0 . 4176 0 . 4176 0 . 0000 0 . 8352 0 . 4176 0 . 4176 3 . 00 260 . 00 0 . 4176 0 .4182 0 . 0000 0 . 8358 0 . 4176 0 . 4182 3 . 00 270 . 00 0 .4182 0 .4913 0 . 0000 0 . 9095 0 . 4182 0 . 4913 3 . 00 280 . 00 0 .4913 0 . 4913 0 . 0000 0 . 9827 0 . 4913 0 . 4913 3 . 00 290 . 00 0 . 4913 0 . 4920 0 . 0000 0 . 9834 0 . 4913 0 . 4920 3 . 00 300 . 00 0 . 4920 0 . 5772 0 . 0000 1 . 0692 0 . 4920 0 . 5772 3 . 00 310 . 00 0 . 5772 0 . 5772 0 . 0000 1 . 1543 0. 5772 0 . 5772 3 . 00 320 . 00 0 . 5772 0 . 5779 0 . 0000 1 . 1550 0 . 5772 0 . 5779 3 . 00 330 . 00 0 . 5779 0 . 6701 0 . 0000 1 . 2480 0 . 5779 0 . 6701 3 . 00 340 . 00 0 . 6701 0 . 6701 0 . 0000 1 . 3403 0 . 6701 0 . 6701 3 . 00 350 . 00 0 . 6701 0 . 6709 0 . 0000 1 . 3410 0 . 6701 0 . 6709 3 . 00 360 . 00 0 . 6709 0 . 7655 0 . 0000 1 . 4364 0 . 6709 0 . 7655 3 . 00 370 . 00 0 . 7655 0 . 7655 0 . 0000 1 . 5309 0 . 7655 0 . 7655 3 . 00 380 . 00 0 . 7655 0 . 7667 0 . 0000 1 . 5322 0 . 7655 0 . 7667 3 . 00 390 . 00 0 . 7667 0 . 9278 0 . 0000 1 . 6945 0 . 7667 0 . 9278 3 . 00 400 . 00 0 . 9278 0 . 9278 0 . 0000 1 . 8556 0 . 9278 0 . 9278 3 . 00 410 . 00 0 . 9278 0 . 9297 0 . 0000 1 . 8575 0 . 9278 0 . 9297 3 . 00 420 . 00 0 . 9297 1 . 1666 0 . 0000 2 . 0963 0 . 9297 1 . 1666 3 . 00 430 . 00 1 . 1666 1 . 1666 0 . 0000 2 . 3332 1 . 1666 1 . 1666 3 . 00 440 . 00 1 . 1666 1 . 1689 0 . 0000 2 . 3355 1 . 1666 1 . 1689 3 . 00 450 . 00 i 1/27/00 1 : 33 : 13 pm Shareware Release page 3 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE I1 I2 2S1 SUM 01 O2+2S2 STAGE TIME < cfs min > (ft) (min) 1 . 1689 1 .4550 0 . 0000 2 . 6239 1 . 1689 1 . 4550 3 . 00 460 . 00 1 . 4550 1 .4550 0 . 0000 2 . 9101 1 .4550 1 . 4550 3 . 00 470 . 00 1 . 4550 1 .4769 0 . 0000 2 . 9320 1 .4550 1 . 4769 3 . 00 480 . 00 1 .4769 4 . 2099 0 . 0000 5 . 6869 1 .4769 4 . 2099 3 . 00 490 . 00 4 .2099 4 .2099 0 . 7228 9 . 1427 3 .4871 5 . 6556 5 . 64 500 . 00 4 . 2099 4 . 1932 1 . 8966 10 . 300 3 . 7589 6 . 5407 6 . 07 510 . 00 4 . 1932 2 . 1000 2 . 6463 8 . 9395 3 . 8944 5 . 0451 6 . 29 520 . 00 2 . 1000 2 . 1000 1 . 3889 5 . 5888 3 . 6562 1 . 9326 5 . 90 530 . 00 2 . 1000 2 . 0956 0 . 0000 4 . 1956 1 . 9326 2 . 2630 5 . 00 540 . 00 2 . 0956 1 . 5541 0 . 0000 3 . 6497 2 . 2630 1 . 3867 5 . 00 550 . 00 1 . 5541 1 . 5541 0 . 0000 3 . 1081 1 . 3867 1 . 7214 5 . 00 560 . 00 1 . 5541 1 . 5511 0 . 0000 3 . 1051 1 . 7214 1 . 3837 5 . 00 570 . 00 1 . 5511 1 . 1784 0 . 0000 2 . 7295 1 . 3837 1 . 3458 5 . 00 580 . 00 1 . 1784 1 . 1784 0 . 0000 2 . 3568 1 . 3458 1 . 0110 5 . 00 590 . 00 1 . 1784 1 . 1775 0 . 0000 2 . 3559 1 . 0110 1 . 3449 5 . 00 600 . 00 1 . 1775 1 . 0690 0 . 0000 2 . 2466 1 . 3449 0 . 9017 5 . 00 610 . 00 1 . 0690 1 . 0690 0 . 0000 2 . 1381 0 . 9017 1 . 2364 5 . 00 620 . 00 1 . 0690 1 . 0681 0 . 0000 2 . 1372 1 . 2364 0 . 9008 5 . 00 630 . 00 1 . 0681 0 . 9565 0 . 0000 2 . 0246 0 . 9008 1 . 1238 5 . 00 640 . 00 0 . 9565 0 . 9565 0 . 0000 1 . 9129 1 . 1238 0 . 7891 5 . 00 650 . 00 0 . 9565 0 . 9559 0 . 0000 1 . 9123 0 . 7891 1 . 1232 5 . 00 660 . 00 0 . 9559 0 . 8815 0 . 0000 1 . 8374 1 . 1232 0 . 7141 5 . 00 670 . 00 0 . 8815 0 . 8815 0 . 0000 1 . 7630 0 . 7141 1 . 0489 5 . 00 680 . 00 0 . 8815 0 . 8812 0 . 0000 1 . 7627 1 . 0489 0 . 7139 5 . 00 690 . 00 0 . 8812 0 . 8454 0 . 0000 1 . 7267 0 . 7139 1 . 0128 5 . 00 700 . 00 0 . 8454 0 . 8454 0 . 0000 1 . 6909 1 . 0128 0 . 6781 5 . 00 710 . 00 0 . 8454 0 . 8451 0 . 0000 1 . 6906 0 . 6781 1 . 0125 5 . 00 720 . 00 0 . 8451 0 . 8086 0 . 0000 1 . 6537 1 . 0125 0 . 6412 5 . 00 730 . 00 0 . 8086 0 . 8086 0 . 0000 1 . 6172 0 . 6412 0 . 9760 5 . 00 740 . 00 0 . 8086 0 . 8083 0 . 0000 1 . 6169 0 . 9760 0 . 6409 5 . 00 750 . 00 0 . 8083 0 . 7711 0 . 0000 1 . 5793 0 . 6409 0 . 9384 5 . 00 760 . 00 0 . 7711 0 . 7711 0 . 0000 1 . 5421 0 . 9384 0 . 6037 5 . 00 770 . 00 0 . 7711 0 . 7708 0 . 0000 1 . 5418 0 . 6037 0 . 9381 5 . 00 780 . 00 0 . 7708 0 . 7330 0 . 0000 1 . 5037 0 . 9381 0 . 5656 5 . 00 790 . 00 0 . 7330 0 . 7330 0 . 0000 1 . 4659 0 . 5656 0 . 9003 5 . 00 800 . 00 0 . 7330 0 . 7330 0 . 0000 1 . 4660 0 . 9003 0 . 5656 5 . 00 810 . 00 0 . 7330 0 . 7353 0 . 0000 1 . 4683 0 . 5656 0 . 9026 5 . 00 820 . 00 0 . 7353 0 . 7353 0 . 0000 1 . 4705 0 . 9026 0 . 5679 5 . 00 830 . 00 0 . 7353 0 . 7350 0 . 0000 1 . 4702 0 . 5679 0 . 9023 5 . 00 840 . 00 0 . 7350 0 . 6964 0 . 0000 1 . 4314 0 . 9023 0 . 5291 5 . 00 850 . 00 0 . 6964 0 . 6964 0 . 0000 1 . 3929 0 . 5291 0 . 8638 5 . 00 860 . 00 0 . 6964 0 . 6965 0 . 0000 1 . 3929 0 . 8638 0 . 5291 5 . 00 870 . 00 0 . 6965 0 . 6983 0 . 0000 1 . 3948 0 . 5291 0 . 8657 5 . 00 880 . 00 0 . 6983 0 . 6983 0 . 0000 1 . 3966 0 . 8657 0 . 5309 5 . 00 890 . 00 0 . 6983 0 . 6980 0 . 0000 1 . 3963 0 . 5309 0 . 8654 5 . 00 900 . 00 0 . 6980 0 . 6589 0 . 0000 1 . 3569 0 . 8654 0 . 4915 5 . 00 910 . 00 1/27/00 1 :33 : 13 pm Shareware Release page 4 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE I1 I2 2S1 SUM 01 02+2S2 STAGE TIME < cfs min > (ft) (min) 0 . 6589 0 . 6589 0 . 0000 1 . 3178 0 .4915 0 . 8263 5 . 00 920 . 00 0 . 6589 0 . 6589 0 . 0000 1 . 3178 0 . 8263 0 . 4915 5 . 00 930 . 00 0 . 6589 0 . 6604 0 . 0000 1 . 3193 0 . 4915 0 . 8278 5 . 00 940 . 00 0 . 6604 0 . 6604 0 . 0000 1 . 3208 0 . 8278 0 . 4930 5 . 00 950 . 00 0 . 6604 0 . 6601 0 . 0000 1 . 3205 0 . 4930 0 . 8275 5 . 00 960 . 00 0 . 6601 0 . 6205 0 . 0000 1 . 2806 0 . 8275 0 . 4531 5 . 00 970 . 00 0 . 6205 0 . 6205 0 . 0000 1 . 2409 0 . 4531 0 . 7878 5 . 00 980 . 00 0 . 6205 0 . 6205 0 . 0000 1 . 2409 0 . 7878 0 .4531 5 . 00 990 . 00 0 . 6205 0 . 6217 0 . 0000 1 . 2422 0 . 4531 0 . 7891 5 . 00 1000 . 00 0 . 6217 0 . 6217 0 . 0000 1 . 2434 0 . 7891 0 . 4543 5 . 00 1010 . 00 0 . 6217 0 . 6217 0 . 0000 1 . 2434 0 .4543 0 . 7891 5 . 00 1020 . 00 0 . 6217 0 . 6229 0 . 0000 1 . 2446 0 . 7891 0 . 4555 5 . 00 1030 . 00 0 . 6229 0 . 6229 0 . 0000 1 . 2458 0 . 4555 0 . 7903 5 . 00 1040 . 00 0 . 6229 0 . 6226 0 . 0000 1 . 2455 0 . 7903 0 . 4552 5 . 00 1050 . 00 0 . 6226 0 . 5824 0 . 0000 1 . 2050 0 . 4552 0 . 7498 5 . 00 1060 . 00 0 . 5824 0 . 5824 0 . 0000 1 . 1649 0 . 7498 0 .4151 5 . 00 1070 . 00 0 . 5824 0 . 5824 0 . 0000 1 . 1649 0 .4151 0 . 7498 5 . 00 1080 . 00 0 . 5824 0 . 5834 0 . 0000 1 . 1659 0 . 7498 0 .4160 5 . 00 1090 . 00 0 . 5834 0 . 5834 0 . 0000 1 . 1668 0 . 4160 0 . 7508 5 . 00 1100 . 00 0 . 5834 0 . 5831 0 . 0000 1 . 1665 0 . 7508 0 .4157 5 . 00 1110 . 00 0 . 5831 0 . 5426 0 . 0000 1 . 1257 0 . 4157 0 . 7100 5 . 00 1120 . 00 0 . 5426 0 . 5426 0 . 0000 1 . 0852 0 . 7100 0 . 3752 5 . 00 1130 . 00 0 . 5426 0 . 5426 0 . 0000 1 . 0852 0 . 3752 0 . 7100 5 . 00 1140 . 00 0 . 5426 0 . 5434 0 . 0000 1 . 0860 0 . 7100 0 . 3760 5 . 00 1150 . 00 0 . 5434 0 . 5434 0 . 0000 1 . 0868 0 . 3760 0 . 7108 5 . 00 1160 . 00 0 . 5434 0 . 5431 0 . 0000 1 . 0864 0 . 7108 0 . 3757 5 . 00 1170 . 00 0 . 5431 0 . 5023 0 . 0000 1 . 0453 0 . 3757 0 . 6696 5 . 00 1180 . 00 0 . 5023 0 . 5023 0 . 0000 1 . 0045 0 . 6696 0 . 3349 5 . 00 1190 . 00 0 . 5023 0 . 5023 0 . 0000 1 . 0045 0 . 3349 0 . 6696 5 . 00 1200 . 00 0 . 5023 0 . 5029 0 . 0000 1 . 0052 0 . 6696 0 . 3355 5 . 00 1210 . 00 0 . 5029 0 . 5029 0 . 0000 1 . 0058 0 . 3355 0 . 6703 5 . 00 1220 . 00 0 . 5029 0 . 5029 0 . 0000 1 . 0058 0 . 6703 0 . 3355 5 . 00 1230 . 00 0 . 5029 0 . 5035 0 . 0000 1 . 0064 0 . 3355 0 . 6709 5 . 00 1240 . 00 0 . 5035 0 . 5035 0 . 0000 1 . 0070 0 . 6709 0 . 3362 5 . 00 1250 . 00 0 . 5035 0 . 5035 0 . 0000 1 . 0071 0 . 3362 0 . 6709 5 . 00 1260 . 00 0 . 5035 0 . 5041 0 . 0000 1 . 0077 0 . 6709 0 . 3368 5 . 00 1270 . 00 0 . 5041 0 . 5041 0 . 0000 1 . 0083 0 . 3368 0 . 6715 5 . 00 1280 . 00 0 . 5041 0 . 5041 0 . 0000 1 . 0083 0 . 6715 0 . 3368 5 . 00 1290 . 00 0 . 5041 0 . 5047 0 . 0000 1 . 0089 0 . 3368 0 . 6721 5 . 00 1300 . 00 0 . 5047 0 . 5047 0 . 0000 1 . 0094 0 . 6721 0 . 3373 5 . 00 1310 . 00 0 . 5047 0 . 5047 0 . 0000 1 . 0094 0 . 3373 0 . 6721 5 . 00 1320 . 00 0 . 5047 0 . 5053 0 . 0000 1 . 0100 0 . 6721 0 . 3379 5 . 00 1330 . 00 0 . 5053 0 . 5053 0 . 0000 1 . 0106 0 . 3379 0 . 6727 5 . 00 1340 . 00 0 . 5053 0 . 5050 0 . 0000 1 . 0103 0 . 6727 0 . 3376 5 . 00 1350 . 00 0 . 5050 0 .4637 0 . 0000 0 . 9686 0 . 3376 0 . 6311 5 . 00 1360 . 00 0 .4637 0 .4637 0 . 0000 0 . 9274 0 . 6311 0 . 2963 5 . 00 1370 . 00 1/27/00 1:33 : 13 pm Shareware Release page 5 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE I1 I2 2S1 SUM 01 O2+2S2 STAGE TIME < cfs min > (ft) (min) 0 .4637 0 .4637 0 . 0000 0 . 9274 0 . 2963 0 . 6311 5 . 00 1380 . 00 0 .4637 0 .4641 0 . 0000 0 . 9278 0 . 6311 0 . 2968 5 . 00 1390 . 00 0 . 4641 0 .4641 0 . 0000 0 . 9283 0 . 2968 0 . 6315 5 . 00 1400 . 00 0 .4641 0 . 4641 0 . 0000 0 . 9283 0 . 6315 0 . 2968 5 . 00 1410 . 00 0 . 4641 0 .4646 0 . 0000 0 . 9287 0 . 2968 0 . 6320 5 . 00 1420 . 00 0 .4646 0 . 4646 0 . 0000 0 . 9292 0 . 6320 0 . 2972 5 . 00 1430 . 00 0 .4646 0 .4609 0 . 0000 0 . 9255 0 . 2972 0 . 6283 5 . 00 1440 . 00 0 .4609 0 . 0000 0 . 0000 0 . 4609 0 . 6283 -0 . 1674 5 . 00 1450 . 00 1/27/00 1 :33 : 14 pm Shareware Release page 6 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative ROUTING REPORT UNDERGROUND PIPE ID No . 36"Pipe Description: 36" Detention Pipe Diameter: 3 . 00 ft . Length: 375 . 00 ft . Slope . . . . 0 . 0015 ft/ft upstr: dnstr: MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. orifice Description: Outflow Control Structure Outlet Elev: 3 . 00 Elev: 3 . 00 ft Orifice Diameter: 8 . 8945 in. Elev: 6 . 40 ft Orifice 2 Diameter: 7 . 2188 in. Elev: 7 .40 ft Orifice 3 Diameter: 2 . 6250 in. ROUTING CURVE STAGE STORAGE OUTFLOW 0+2S STAGE STORAGE OUTFLOW 0+2S STAGE STORAGE OUTFLOW 0+2S (ft; 'cf) (cfs) cfs-min (ft_) (cf) (cfs) cfs-min (ft) (cf) ;cfs) cfs-min 3.00 0.0000 C.0000 0.0000 4.90 0.000C 2.9593 2.9593 6.80 1346 5.0794 9.5663 3.10 0.0000 0.6789 0.6789 5.00 0.0000 3.0361 3.0361 6.90 1456 5.2397 10.094 3.20 0.0000 0.9601 0.9601 5.10 2.4098 3.1111 3.1192 7.00 1566 5.3891 10.610 3.30 0.0000 1.1759 1.1759 5.20 13.492 3.1843 3.2293 7.10 1675 5.5302 11.113 3.40 0.0000 1.3578 1.3578 5.30 36.788 3.2559 3.3785 7.20 1782 5.6646 11.603 3.50 0.0000 1.5181 1.5181 5.40 74.704 3.3259 3.5749 7.30 1886 5.7934 12.080 3.60 0.0000 1.6630 1.6630 5.50 129.06 3.3945 3.8247 7.40 1988 5.9175 12.543 3.70 0.0000 1.7962 1.7962 5.60 191.84 3.4617 4.1012 7.50 2085 6.0965 13.048 3.80 0.0000 1.9202 1.9202 5.70 256.80 3.5277 4.3837 7.60 2179 6.2373 13.500 3.90 0.0000 2.0367 2.0367 5.80 332.64 3.5924 4.7012 7.70 2267 6.3691 13.924 4.00 0.0000 2.1469 2.1469 5.90 416.38 3.6560 5.0440 7.80 2348 6.4951 14.320 4.10 0.0000 2.2517 2.2517 6.00 506.40 3.7185 5.4065 7.90 2420 6.66165 14.682 4.20 0.0000 2.3518 2.3518 6.10 601.52 3.7800 5.7851 8.00 2479 6.7342 14.996 4.30 0.0000 2.4478 2.4478 6.20 700.83 3.8405 6.1766 8.10 2544 6.8486 15.329 4.40 0.0000 2.5402 2.5402 6.30 803.55 3.9000 6.5785 8.20 2592 6.9601 15.600 4.50 0.0000 2.6294 2.6294 6.40 908.99 3.9587 6.9886 8.30 2624 7.0691 15.817 4.60 0.0000 2.7156 2.7156 6.50 1017 4.4636 7.8521 8.40 2643 7.1758 15.985 4.70 0.0000 2.7992 2.7992 6.60 1126 4.7058 8.4578 8.50 2650 7.2203 16.114 4.80 0.0000 2.8803 2.8803 6.70 1236 4.9042 9.0229 1/27/00 1 : 33 : 14 pm Shareware Release page 7 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE 10yr-pre MATCH Q (cfs) 5 . 84 INFLOW Q (cfs) : 6 . 17 PEAK STAGE (ft) : 7 . 34 PEAK OUTFLOW 5 . 84 PEAK TIME : 520 . 00 min. INFLOW HYD No. : l0yrpost OUTFLOW HYD No. : 2 LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE I1 I2 2S1 SUM 01 02+252 STAGE TIME < cfs min > (ft) (min) 0 . 0000 0 . 0005 0 . 0000 0 . 0005 0 . 0000 0 . 0005 3 . 00 60 . 00 0 . 0005 0 . 0651 0 . 0000 0 . 0657 0 . 0005 0 . 0651 3 . 00 70 . 00 0 . 0651 0 . 0651 0 . 0000 0 . 1303 0 . 0651 0 . 0651 3 . 00 80 . 00 0 . 0651 0 . 0665 0 . 0000 0 . 1317 0 . 0651 0 . 0665 3 . 00 90 . 00 0 . 0665 0 . 2410 0 . 0000 0 . 3075 0 . 0665 0 . 2410 3 . 00 100 . 00 0 . 2410 0 . 2410 0 . 0000 0 .4820 0 . 2410 0 . 2410 3 . 00 110 . 00 0 .2410 0 . 2421 0 . 0000 0 .4830 0 . 2410 0 . 2421 3 . 00 120 . 00 0 . 2421 0 . 3752 0 . 0000 0 . 6173 0 . 2421 0 . 3752 3 . 00 130 . 00 0 . 3752 0 . 3752 0 . 0000 0 . 7505 0 . 3752 0 . 3752 3 . 00 140 . 00 0 . 3752 0 . 3761 0 . 0000 0 . 7513 0 . 3752 0 . 3761 3 . 00 150 . 00 0 . 3761 0 .4812 0 . 0000 0 . 8572 0 . 3761 0 . 4812 3 . 00 160 . 00 0 . 4812 0 . 4812 0 . 0000 0 . 9623 0 . 4812 0 . 4812 3 . 00 170 . 00 0 . 4812 0 .4816 0 . 0000 0 . 9628 0 .4812 0 . 4816 3 . 00 180 . 00 0 . 4816 0 . 5346 0 . 0000 1 . 0162 0 . 4816 0 . 5346 3 . 00 190 . 00 0 . 5346 0 . 5346 0 . 0000 1 . 0691 0 . 5346 0 . 5346 3 . 00 200 . 00 0 . 5346 0 . 5349 0 . 0000 1 . 0694 0 . 5346 0 . 5349 3 . 00 210 . 00 0 . 5349 0 . 5713 0 . 0000 1 . 1061 0 . 5349 0 . 5713 3 . 00 220 . 00 0 . 5713 0 . 5713 0 . 0000 1 . 1426 0 . 5713 0 . 5713 3 . 00 230 . 00 0 . 5713 0 . 5719 0 . 0000 1 . 1432 0 . 5713 0 . 5719 3 . 00 240 . 00 0 . 5719 0 . 6502 0 . 0000 1 . 2221 0 . 5719 0 . 6502 3 . 00 250 . 00 0 . 6502 0 . 6502 0 . 0000 1 . 3003 0 . 6502 0 . 6502 3 . 00 260 . 00 0 . 6502 0 . 6512 0 . 0000 1 . 3013 0 . 6502 0 . 6512 3 . 00 270 . 00 0 . 6512 0 . 7738 0 . 0000 1 . 4249 0 . 6512 0 . 7738 3 . 00 280 . 00 0 . 7738 0 . 7738 0 . 0000 1 . 5476 0 . 7738 0 . 7738 3 . 00 290 . 00 0 . 7738 0 . 7748 0 . 0000 1 . 5486 0 . 7738 0 . 7748 3 . 00 300 . 00 0 . 7748 0 . 9018 0 . 0000 1 . 6766 0 . 7748 0 . 9018 3 . 00 310 . 00 0 . 9018 0 . 9018 0 . 0000 1 . 8037 0 . 9018 0 . 9018 3 . 00 320 . 00 0 . 9018 0 . 9029 0 . 0000 1 . 8047 0 . 9018 0 . 9029 3 . 00 330 . 00 0 . 9029 1 . 0333 0 . 0000 1 . 9361 0 . 9029 1 . 0333 3 . 00 340 . 00 1 . 0333 1 . 0333 0 . 0000 2 . 0665 1 . 0333 1 . 0333 3 . 00 350 . 00 1 . 0333 1 . 0343 0 . 0000 2 . 0676 1 . 0333 1 . 0343 3 . 00 360 . 00 1 . 0343 1 . 1673 0 . 0000 2 . 2017 1 . 0343 1 . 1673 3 . 00 370 . 00 1 . 1673 1 . 1673 0 . 0000 2 . 3346 1 . 1673 1 . 1673 3 . 00 380 . 00 1 . 1673 1 . 1692 0 . 0000 2 . 3365 1 . 1673 1 . 1692 3 . 00 390 . 00 1 . 1692 1 . 4014 0 . 0000 2 . 5706 1 . 1692 1 . 4014 3 . 00 400 . 00 1 . 4014 1 . 4014 0 . 0000 2 . 8028 1 . 4014 1 . 4014 3 . 00 410 . 00 1 . 4014 1 . 4042 0 . 0000 2 . 8056 1 . 4014 1 . 4042 3 . 00 420 . 00 1 . 4042 1 . 7466 0 . 0000 3 . 1508 1 . 4042 1 . 7466 3 . 00 430 . 00 1 . 7466 1 . 7466 0 . 0000 3 . 4933 1 . 7466 1 . 7466 3 . 00 440 . 00 1 . 7466 1 . 7499 0 . 0000 3 . 4966 1 . 7466 1 . 7499 3 . 00 450 . 00 1/27/00 1 :33 : 14 pm Shareware Release page 8 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE I1 I2 281 SUM 01 02+252 STAGE TIME < cfs min > (ft) (min) 1 . 7499 2 . 1603 0 . 0000 3 . 9102 1 . 7499 2 . 1603 3 . 00 460 . 00 2 . 1603 2 . 1603 0 . 0000 4 . 3206 2 . 1603 2 . 1603 3 . 00 470 . 00 2 . 1603 2 . 1922 0 . 0000 4 . 3525 2 . 1603 2 . 1922 3 . 00 480 . 00 2 . 1922 6 . 1736 0 . 0000 8 . 3658 2 . 1922 6 . 1736 3 . 00 490 . 00 6 . 1736 6 . 1736 2 . 3336 14 . 681 3 . 8400 10 . 841 6 . 20 500 . 00 6 . 1736 6 . 1488 5 . 3869 17 . 709 5 . 4540 12 . 255 7 . 05 510 . 00 6 . 1488 3 . 0492 6 . 4149 15 . 613 5 . 8404 9 . 7726 7 . 34 520 . 00 3 . 0492 3 . 0492 4 . 6306 10 . 729 5 . 1420 5 . 5871 6 . 84 530 . 00 3 . 0492 3 . 0429 1 . 8393 7 . 9314 3 . 7478 4 . 1835 6 . 05 540 . 00 3 . 0429 2 .2468 0 . 7026 5 . 9923 3 . 4810 2 . 5113 5 . 63 550 . 00 2 . 2468 2 .2468 0 . 0000 4 .4937 2 . 5113 1 . 9824 5 . 00 560 . 00 2 . 2468 2 . 2425 0 . 0000 4 .4893 1 . 9824 2 . 5070 5 . 00 570 . 00 2 . 2425 1 . 6989 0 . 0000 3 . 9414 2 . 5070 1 . 4344 5 . 00 580 . 00 1 . 6989 1 . 6989 0 . 0000 3 . 3978 1 . 4344 1 . 9634 5 . 00 590 . 00 1 . 6989 1 . 6976 0 . 0000 3 . 3966 1 . 9634 1 . 4332 5 . 00 600 . 00 1 . 6976 1 . 5380 0 . 0000 3 . 2357 1 . 4332 1 . 8025 5 . 00 610 . 00 1 . 5380 1 . 5380 0 . 0000 3 . 0761 1 . 8025 1 . 2736 5 . 00 620 . 00 1 . 5380 1 . 5367 0 . 0000 3 . 0748 1 . 2736 1 . 8012 5 . 00 630 . 00 1 . 5367 1 . 3737 0 . 0000 2 . 9104 1 . 8012 1 . 1092 5 . 00 640 . 00 1 . 3737 1 . 3737 0 . 0000 2 . 7474 1 . 1092 1 . 6382 5 . 00 650 . 00 1 . 3737 1 . 3728 0 . 0000 2 . 7465 1 . 6382 1 . 1083 5 . 00 660 . 00 1 . 3728 1 . 2642 0 . 0000 2 . 6370 1 . 1083 1 . 5287 5 . 00 670 . 00 1 . 2642 1 . 2642 0 . 0000 2 . 5284 1 . 5287 0 . 9997 5 . 00 680 . 00 1 . 2642 1 . 2638 0 . 0000 2 . 5280 0 . 9997 1 . 5282 5 . 00 690 . 00 1 . 2638 1 . 2109 0 . 0000 2 . 4746 1 . 5282 0 . 9464 5 . 00 700 . 00 1 . 2109 1 . 2109 0 . 0000 2 . 4217 0 . 9464 1 .4753 5 . 00 710 . 00 1 . 2109 1 . 2104 0 . 0000 2 . 4213 1 . 4753 0 . 9460 5 . 00 720 . 00 1 . 2104 1 . 1567 0 . 0000 2 . 3672 0 . 9460 1 . 4212 5 . 00 730 . 00 1 . 1567 1 . 1567 0 . 0000 2 . 3135 1 . 4212 0 . 8923 5 . 00 740 . 00 1 . 1567 1 . 1563 0 . 0000 2 . 3130 0 . 8923 1 . 4208 5 . 00 750 . 00 1 . 1563 1 . 1019 0 . 0000 2 . 2582 1 . 4208 0 . 8374 5 . 00 760 . 00 1 . 1019 1 . 1019 0 . 0000 2 . 2038 0 . 8374 1 . 3664 5 . 00 770 . 00 1 . 1019 1 . 1014 0 . 0000 2 . 2033 1 . 3664 0 . 8370 5 . 00 780 . 00 1 . 1014 1 . 0464 0 . 0000 2 . 1479 0 . 8370 1 . 3109 5 . 00 790 . 00 1 . 0464 1 . 0464 0 . 0000 2 . 0929 1 . 3109 0 . 7820 5 . 00 800 . 00 1 . 0464 1 . 0465 0 . 0000 2 . 0929 0 . 7820 1 . 3109 5 . 00 810 . 00 1 . 0465 1 . 0488 0 . 0000 2 . 0952 1 . 3109 0 . 7843 5 . 00 820 . 00 1 . 0488 1 . 0488 0 . 0000 2 . 0976 0 . 7843 1 . 3133 5 . 00 830 . 00 1 . 0488 1 . 0483 0 . 0000 2 . 0971 1 . 3133 0 . 7839 5 . 00 840 . 00 1 . 0483 0 . 9926 0 . 0000 2 . 0409 0 . 7839 1 . 2570 5 . 00 850 . 00 0 . 9926 0 . 9926 0 . 0000 1 . 9851 1 . 2570 0 . 7281 5 . 00 860 . 00 0 . 9926 0 . 9926 0 . 0000 1 . 9851 0 . 7281 1 . 2571 5 . 00 870 . 00 0 . 9926 0 . 9944 0 . 0000 1 . 9870 1 . 2571 0 . 7300 5 . 00 880 . 00 0 . 9944 0 . 9944 0 . 0000 1 . 9889 0 . 7300 1 . 2589 5 . 00 890 . 00 0 . 9944 0 . 9940 0 . 0000 1 . 9884 1 . 2589 0 . 7295 5 . 00 900 . 00 0 . 9940 0 . 9376 0 . 0000 1 . 9316 0 . 7295 1 . 2021 5 . 00 910 . 00 1/27/00 1:33 : 14 pm Shareware Release page 9 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE I1 I2 2S1 SUM 01 02+2S2 STAGE TIME < cfs min > (ft) (min) 0 . 9376 0 . 9376 0 . 0000 1 . 8752 1 . 2021 0 . 6731 5 . 00 920 . 00 0 . 9376 0 . 9376 0 . 0000 1 . 8752 0 . 6731 1 . 2021 5 . 00 930 . 00 0 . 9376 0 . 9391 0 . 0000 1 . 8767 1 . 2021 0 . 6747 5 . 00 940 . 00 0 . 9391 0 . 9391 0 . 0000 1 . 8783 0 . 6747 1 . 2036 5 . 00 950 . 00 0 . 9391 0 . 9387 0 . 0000 1 . 8778 1 . 2036 0 . 6742 5 . 00 960 . 00 0 . 9387 0 . 8818 0 . 0000 1 . 8204 0 . 6742 1 . 1462 5 . 00 970 . 00 0 . 8818 0 . 8818 0 . 0000 1 . 7635 1 . 1462 0 . 6173 5 . 00 980 . 00 0 . 8818 0 . 8818 0 . 0000 1 . 7635 0 . 6173 1 . 1463 5 . 00 990 . 00 0 . 8818 0 . 8830 0 . 0000 1 . 7648 1 . 1463 0 . 6185 5 . 00 1000 . 00 0 . 8830 0 . 8830 0 . 0000 1 . 7660 0 . 6185 1 . 1475 5 . 00 1010 . 00 0 . 8830 0 . 8830 0 . 0000 1 . 7660 1 . 1475 0 . 6185 5 . 00 1020 . 00 0 . 8830 0 . 8842 0 . 0000 1 . 7672 0 . 6185 1 . 1487 5 . 00 1030 . 00 0 . 8842 0 . 8842 0 . 0000 1 . 7684 1 . 1487 0 . 6197 5 . 00 1040 . 00 0 . 8842 0 . 8837 0 . 0000 1 . 7679 0 . 6197 1 . 1482 5 . 00 1050 . 00 0 . 8837 0 . 8263 0 . 0000 1 . 7100 1 . 1482 0 . 5618 5 . 00 1060 . 00 0 . 8263 0 . 8263 0 . 0000 1 . 6526 0 . 5618 1 . 0908 5 . 00 1070 . 00 0 . 8263 0 . 8263 0 . 0000 1 . 6526 1 . 0908 0 . 5618 5 . 00 1080 . 00 0 . 8263 0 . 8272 0 . 0000 1 . 6535 0 . 5618 1 . 0917 5 . 00 1090 . 00 0 . 8272 0 . 8272 0 . 0000 1 . 6545 1 . 0917 0 . 5628 5 . 00 1100 . 00 0 . 8272 0 . 8268 0 . 0000 1 . 6540 0 . 5628 1 . 0913 5 . 00 1110 . 00 0 . 8268 0 . 7690 0 . 0000 1 . 5958 1 . 0913 0 . 5045 5 . 00 1120 . 00 0 . 7690 0 . 7690 0 . 0000 1 . 5380 0 . 5045 1 . 0335 5 . 00 1130 . 00 0 . 7690 0 . 7690 0 . 0000 1 . 5380 1 . 0335 0 . 5045 5 . 00 1140 . 00 0 . 7690 0 . 7698 0 . 0000 1 . 5388 0 . 5045 1 . 0342 5 . 00 1150 . 00 0 . 7698 0 . 7698 0 . 0000 1 . 5395 1 . 0342 0 . 5053 5 . 00 1160 . 00 0 . 7698 0 . 7693 0 . 0000 1 . 5391 0 . 5053 1 . 0338 5 . 00 1170 . 00 0 . 7693 0 . 7112 0 . 0000 1 .4805 1 . 0338 0 . 4467 5 . 00 1180 . 00 0 . 7112 0 . 7112 0 . 0000 1 .4224 0 .4467 0 . 9757 5 . 00 1190 . 00 0 . 7112 0 . 7112 0 . 0000 1 . 4224 0 . 9757 0 . 4467 5 . 00 1200 . 00 0 . 7112 0 . 7118 0 . 0000 1 . 4231 0 . 4467 0 . 9763 5 . 00 1210 . 00 0 . 7118 0 . 7118 0 . 0000 1 . 4237 0 . 9763 0 . 4474 5 . 00 1220 . 00 0 . 7118 0 . 7118 0 . 0000 1 . 4237 0 . 4474 0 . 9763 5 . 00 1230 . 00 0 . 7118 0 . 7124 0 . 0000 1 . 4243 0 . 9763 0 . 4480 5 . 00 1240 . 00 0 . 7124 0 . 7124 0 . 0000 1 . 4249 0 . 4480 0 . 9769 5 . 00 1250 . 00 0 . 7124 0 . 7124 0 . 0000 1 . 4249 0 . 9769 0 .4480 5 . 00 1260 . 00 0 . 7124 0 . 7130 0 . 0000 1 . 4255 0 . 4480 0 . 9775 5 . 00 1270 . 00 0 . 7130 0 . 7130 0 . 0000 1 .4261 0 . 9775 0 .4485 5 . 00 1280 . 00 0 . 7130 0 . 7130 0 . 0000 1 .4261 0 . 4485 0 . 9775 5 . 00 1290 . 00 0 . 7130 0 . 7136 0 . 0000 1 .4266 0 . 9775 0 . 4491 5 . 00 1300 . 00 0 . 7136 0 . 7136 0 . 0000 1 .4272 0 .4491 0 . 9781 5 . 00 1310 . 00 0 . 7136 0 . 7136 0 . 0000 1 .4272 0 . 9781 0 . 4491 5 . 00 1320 . 00 0 . 7136 0 . 7141 0 . 0000 1 . 4277 0 .4491 0 . 9786 5 . 00 1330 . 00 0 . 7141 0 . 7141 0 . 0000 1 . 4283 0 . 9786 0 . 4497 5 . 00 1340 . 00 0 . 7141 0 . 7137 0 . 0000 1 . 4278 0 . 4497 0 . 9782 5 . 00 1350 . 00 0 . 7137 0 . 6551 0 . 0000 1 . 3688 0 . 9782 0 . 3906 5 . 00 1360 . 00 0 . 6551 0 . 6551 0 . 0000 1 . 3102 0 . 3906 0 . 9196 5 . 00 1370 . 00 1/27/00 1 :33 : 14 pm Shareware Release page 10 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE I1 I2 2S1 SUM 01 02+2S2 STAGE TIME < cfs min > (ft) (min) 0 . 6551 0 . 6551 0 . 0000 1 . 3102 0 . 9196 0 . 3906 5 . 00 1380 . 00 0 . 6551 0 . 6556 0 . 0000 1 . 3107 0 . 3906 0 . 9200 5 . 00 1390 . 00 0 . 6556 0 . 6556 0 . 0000 1 . 3111 0 . 9200 0 . 3911 5 . 00 1400 . 00 0 . 6556 0 . 6556 0 . 0000 1 . 3111 0 . 3911 0 . 9200 5 . 00 1410 . 00 0 . 6556 0 . 6560 0 . 0000 1 . 3115 0 . 9200 0 . 3915 5 . 00 1420 . 00 0 . 6560 0 . 6560 0 . 0000 1 . 3120 0 . 3915 0 . 9205 5 . 00 1430 . 00 0 . 6560 0 . 6508 0 . 0000 1 . 3067 0 . 9205 0 . 3863 5 . 00 1440 . 00 0 . 6508 0 . 0000 0 . 0000 0 . 6508 0 . 3863 0 . 2645 5 . 00 1450 . 00 0 . 0000 0 . 0000 0 . 0000 0 . 0000 0 . 2645 -0 . 2645 5 . 00 1460 . 00 1/27/00 1 :33 : 16 pm Shareware Release page 11 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative ROUTING REPORT UNDERGROUND PIPE ID No. 36"Pipe Description: 36" Detention Pipe Diameter: 3 . 00 ft . Length: 375 . 00 ft . Slope . . . : 0 . 0015 ft/ft upstr: dnstr: MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. orifice Description: Outflow Control Structure Outlet Elev: 3 . 00 Elev: 3 . 00 ft Orifice Diameter: 8 . 8945 in. Elev: 6 .40 ft Orifice 2 Diameter: 7 . 2188 in. Elev: 7 .40 ft Orifice 3 Diameter: 2 . 6250 in. ROUTING CURVE STAGE STORAGE OUTFLOW 0+2S STAGE STORAGE OUTFLOW 0.25 STAGE STORAGE OUTFLOW 0,25 (ft) (cf) (cfs) cfs-min (ft) (cf) (cfs) cfs-min (ft) )cf) cfs) cfs-mil 3.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.90 0.000C 2.9593 2.9593 6.80 1346 5.0794 9.5663 3.10 0.0000 0.6789 0.6789 5.00 0.000C 3.0361 3.0361 6.90 1456 5.2397 10.094 3.20 0.0000 0.9601 0.9601 5.10 2.4098 3.1111 3.1192 7.00 1566 5.3891 10.610 3.30 0.0000 1.1759 1.1759 5.20 13.492 3.1843 3.2293 7.10 1675 5.5302 11.113 3.40 0.0000 1.3578 1.3578 5.30 36.788 3.2559 3.3785 7.20 1782 5.6646 11.603 3.50 0.0000 1.5181 1.5181 5.40 74.704 3.3259 3.5749 7.30 1886 5.7934 12.080 3.60 0.0000 1.6630 1.6630 5.50 129.06 3.3945 3.8247 7.40 1988 5.9175 12.543 3.70 0.0000 1.7962 1.7962 5.60 191.84 3.4617 4.1012 7.50 2085 6.0965 13.048 3.80 0.0000 1.9202 1.9202 5.70 256.80 3.5277 4.3837 7.60 2179 6.2373 13.50C 3.90 0.0000 2.0367 2.0367 5.80 332.64 3.5924 4.7012 7.70 2267 6.3691 13.924 4.00 0.0000 2.1469 2.1469 5.90 416.38 3.6560 5.0440 7.80 2348 6.4951 14.32C 4.10 0.0000 2.2517 2.2517 6.00 506.40 3.7185 5.4065 7.90 2420 6.6165 14.682 4.20 0.0000 2.3518 2.3518 6.10 601.52 3.7800 5.7851 8.00 2479 6.7342 14.996 4.30 0.0000 2.4478 2.4478 6.20 700.83 3.8405 6.1766 8.10 2544 6.9486 15.329 4.40 0.0000 2.5402 2.5402 6.30 803.55 3.9000 6.5785 8.20 2592 6.9601 15.600 4.50 0.0000 2.6294 2.6294 6.40 908.99 3.9587 6.9886 8.30 2624 7.0691 15.817 4.60 0.0000 2.7156 2.7156 6.50 1017 4.4636 7.8521 8.40 2643 7.1758 15.985 4.70 0.0000 2.7992 2.7992 6.60 1126 4.7058 8.4578 8.50 2650 7.2803 16.114 4.80 0.0000 2.8803 2.8803 6.70 1236 4.9042 9.0229 1/27/00 1 : 33 : 16 pm Shareware Release page 12 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE 25yr-pre MATCH Q (cfs) 6 . 78 INFLOW Q (cfs) : 7 . 11 PEAK STAGE (ft) : 8 . 04 PEAK OUTFLOW 6 . 78 PEAK TIME: 520 . 00 min. INFLOW HYD No. : 25yrpost OUTFLOW HYD No. : 3 LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE I1 I2 2S1 SUM 01 02+252 STAGE TIME < cfs min > (ft) (min) 0 . 0000 0 . 0008 0 . 0000 0 . 0008 0 . 0000 0 . 0008 3 . 00 60 . 00 0 . 0008 0 . 1028 0 . 0000 0 . 1036 0 . 0008 0 . 1028 3 . 00 70 . 00 0 . 1028 0 . 1028 0 . 0000 0 . 2057 0 . 1028 0 . 1028 3 . 00 80 . 00 0 . 1028 0 . 1045 0 . 0000 0 . 2073 0 . 1028 0 . 1045 3 . 00 90 . 00 0 . 1045 0 . 3105 0 . 0000 0 . 4150 0 . 1045 0 . 3105 3 . 00 100 . 00 0 . 3105 0 . 3105 0 . 0000 0 . 6210 0 . 3105 0 . 3105 3 . 00 110 . 00 0 . 3105 0 . 3117 0 . 0000 0 . 6222 0 . 3105 0 . 3117 3 . 00 120 . 00 0 . 3117 0 .4600 0 . 0000 0 . 7717 0 . 3117 0 .4600 3 . 00 130 . 00 0 .4600 0 .4600 0 . 0000 0 . 9200 0 . 4600 0 .4600 3 . 00 140 . 00 0 .4600 0 .4609 0 . 0000 0 . 9210 0 . 4600 0 .4609 3 . 00 150 . 00 0 .4609 0 . 5759 0 . 0000 1 . 0368 0 .4609 0 . 5759 3 . 00 160 . 00 0 . 5759 0 . 5759 0 . 0000 1 . 1517 0 . 5759 0 . 5759 3 . 00 170 . 00 0 . 5759 0 . 5763 0 . 0000 1 . 1522 0 . 5759 0 . 5763 3 . 00 180 . 00 0 . 5763 0 . 6307 0 . 0000 1 . 2070 0 . 5763 0 . 6307 3 . 00 190 . 00 0 . 6307 0 . 6307 0 . 0000 1 . 2614 0 . 6307 0 . 6307 3 . 00 200 . 00 0 . 63C7 0 . 6311 0 . 0000 1 . 2618 0 . 6307 0 . 6311 3 . 00 210 . 00 0 . 6311 0 . 6783 0 . 0000 1 . 3094 0 . 6311 0 . 6783 3 . 00 220 . 00 0 . 6783 0 . 6783 0 . 0000 1 . 3567 0 . 6783 0 . 6783 3 . 00 230 . 00 0 . 6783 0 . 6791 0 . 0000 1 . 3574 0 . 6783 0 . 6791 3 . 00 240 . 00 0 . 6791 0 . 7730 0 . 0000 1 . 4521 0 . 6791 0 . 7730 3 . 00 250 . 00 0 . 7730 0 . 7730 0 . 0000 1 . 5459 0 . 7730 0 . 7730 3 . 00 260 . 00 0 . 7730 0 . 7741 0 . 0000 1 . 5470 0 . 7730 0 . 7741 3 . 00 270 . 00 0 . 7741 0 . 9144 0 . 0000 1 . 6885 0 . 7741 0 . 9144 3 . 00 280 . 00 0 . 9144 0 . 9144 0 . 0000 1 . 8288 0 . 9144 0 . 9144 3 . 00 290 . 00 0 . 9144 0 . 9156 0 . 0000 1 . 8300 0 . 9144 0 . 9156 3 . 00 300 . 00 0 . 9156 1 . 0605 0 . 0000 1 . 9761 0 . 9156 1 . 0605 3 . 00 310 . 00 1 . 0605 1 . 0605 0 . 0000 2 . 1211 1 . 0605 1 . 0605 3 . 00 320 . 00 1 . 0605 1 . 0617 0 . 0000 2 . 1222 1 . 0605 1 . 0617 3 . 00 330 . 00 1 . 0617 1 . 2102 0 . 0000 2 . 2719 1 . 0617 1 . 2102 3 . 00 340 . 00 1 . 2102 1 . 2102 0 . 0000 2 . 4204 1 . 2102 1 . 2102 3 . 00 350 . 00 1 . 2102 1 . 2114 0 . 0000 2 . 4216 1 . 2102 1 . 2114 3 . 00 360 . 00 1 . 2114 1 . 3626 0 . 0000 2 . 5740 1 . 2114 1 . 3626 3 . 00 370 . 00 1 . 3626 1 . 3626 0 . 0000 2 . 7251 1 . 3626 1 . 3626 3 . 00 380 . 00 1 . 3626 1 . 3647 0 . 0000 2 . 7273 1 . 3626 1 . 3647 3 . 00 390 . 00 1 . 3647 1 . 6309 0 . 0000 2 . 9956 1 . 3647 1 . 6309 3 . 00 400 . 00 1 . 6309 1 . 6309 0 . 0000 3 . 2617 1 . 6309 1 . 6309 3 . 00 410 . 00 1 . 6309 1 . 6340 0 . 0000 3 . 2649 1 . 6309 1 . 6340 3 . 00 420 . 00 1 . 6340 2 . 0268 0 . 0000 3 . 6608 1 . 6340 2 . 0268 3 . 00 430 . 00 2 . 0268 2 . 0268 0 . 0000 4 . 0535 2 . 0268 2 . 0268 3 . 00 440 . 00 2 . 0268 2 . 0305 0 . 0000 4 . 0573 2 . 0268 2 . 0305 3 . 00 450 . 00 1/27/00 1 :33 : 16 pm Shareware Release page 13 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE I1 I2 2S1 SUM 01 O2+2S2 STAGE TIME < cfs min > (ft) (min) 2 . 0305 2 .4998 0 . 0000 4 . 5303 2 . 0305 2 .4998 3 . 00 460 . 00 2 .4998 2 .4998 0 . 0000 4 . 9996 2 .4998 2 .4998 3 . 00 470 . 00 2 .4998 2 . 5365 0 . 0000 5 . 0362 2 .4998 2 . 5365 3 . 00 480 . 00 2 . 5365 7 . 1140 0 . 0000 9. 6504 2 . 5365 7 . 1140 3 . 00 490 . 00 7 . 1140 7 . 1140 3 . 0820 17 . 310 4 . 0320 13 . 278 6 . 41 500 . 00 7 . 1140 7 . 0852 7 . 1098 21 . 309 6 . 1682 15 . 141 7 . 55 510 . 00 7 . 0852 3 . 5019 8 . 3570 18 . 944 6 . 7838 12 . 160 8 . 04 520 . 00 3 . 5019 3 . 5019 6 . 3453 13 . 349 5 . 8149 7 . 5342 7 . 32 530 . 00 3 . 5019 3 .4945 3 . 2565 10 . 253 4 . 2777 5 . 9751 6 . 46 540 . 00 3 . 4945 2 . 5765 2 . 1658 8 .2368 3 . 8093 4 . 4275 6 . 15 550 . 00 2 . 5765 2 . 5765 0 . 8909 6 . 0440 3 . 5366 2 . 5074 5 . 71 560 . 00 2 . 5765 2 . 5715 0 . 0000 5 . 1481 2 . 5074 2 . 6407 5 . 00 570 . 00 2 . 5715 1 . 9464 0 . 0000 4 . 5179 2 . 6407 1 . 8772 5 . 00 580 . 00 1 . 9464 1 . 9464 0 . 0000 3 . 8927 1 . 8772 2 . 0156 5 . 00 590 . 00 1 . 9464 1 . 9449 0 . 0000 3 . 8913 2 . 0156 1 . 8757 5 . 00 600 . 00 1 . 9449 1 . 7608 0 . 0000 3 . 7057 1 . 8757 1 . 8300 5 . 00 610 . 00 1 . 7608 1 . 7608 0 . 0000 3 . 5216 1 . 8300 1 . 6916 5 . 00 620 . 00 1 . 7608 1 . 7593 0 . 0000 3 . 5201 1 . 6916 1 . 8285 5 . 00 630 . 00 1 . 7593 1 . 5717 0 . 0000 3 . 3311 1 . 8285 1 . 5026 5 . 00 640 . 00 1 . 5717 1 . 5717 0 . 0000 3 . 1435 1 . 5026 1 . 6409 5 . 00 650 . 00 1 . 5717 1 . 5707 0 . 0000 3 . 1425 1 . 6409 1 . 5015 5 . 00 660 . 00 1 . 5707 1 . 4458 0 . 0000 3 . 0165 1 . 5015 1 . 5150 5 . 00 670 . 00 1 .4458 1 . 4458 0 . 0000 2 . 8915 1 . 5150 1 . 3766 5 . 00 680 . 00 1 .4458 1 .4453 0 . 0000 2 . 8910 1 . 3766 1 . 5145 5 . 00 690 . 00 1 . 4453 1 . 3842 0 . 0000 2 . 8295 1 . 5145 1 . 3150 5 . 00 700 . 00 1 . 3842 1 . 3842 0 . 0000 2 . 7684 1 . 3150 1 .4534 5 . 00 710 . 00 1 . 3842 1 . 3837 0 . 0000 2 . 7679 1 .4534 1 . 3145 5 . 00 720 . 00 1 . 3837 1 . 3218 0 . 0000 2 . 7055 1 . 3145 1 . 3910 5 . 00 730 . 00 1 . 3218 1 . 3218 0 . 0000 2 . 6436 1 . 3910 1 . 2526 5 . 00 740 . 00 1 . 3218 1 . 3213 0 . 0000 2 . 6431 1 . 2526 1 . 3905 5 . 00 750 . 00 1 . 3213 1 . 2587 0 . 0000 2 . 5799 1 . 3905 1 . 1895 5 . 00 760 . 00 1 . 2587 1 . 2587 0 . 0000 2 . 5173 1 . 1895 1 . 3279 5 . 00 770 . 00 1 . 2587 1 . 2582 0 . 0000 2 . 5168 1 . 3279 1 . 1890 5 . 00 780 . 00 1 . 2582 1 . 1949 0 . 0000 2 .4531 1 . 1890 1 . 2641 5 . 00 790 . 00 1 . 1949 1 . 1949 0 . 0000 2 . 3899 1 . 2641 1 . 1258 5 . 00 800 . 00 1 . 1949 1 . 1950 0 . 0000 2 . 3899 1 . 1258 1 . 2642 5 . 00 810 . 00 1 . 1950 1 . 1973 0 . 0000 2 . 3922 1 . 2642 1 . 1281 5 . 00 820 . 00 1 . 1973 1 . 1973 0 . 0000 2 . 3945 1 . 1281 1 . 2665 5 . 00 830 . 00 1 . 1973 1 . 1968 0 . 0000 2 . 3940 1 . 2665 1 . 1276 5 . 00 840 . 00 1 . 1968 1 . 1328 0 . 0000 2 . 3295 1 . 1276 1 . 2020 5 . 00 850 . 00 1 . 1328 1 . 1328 0 . 0000 2 . 2656 1 . 2020 1 . 0636 5 . 00 860 . 00 1 . 1328 1 . 1328 0 . 0000 2 . 2656 1 . 0636 1 . 2020 5 . 00 870 . 00 1 . 1328 1 . 1346 0 . 0000 2 . 2674 1 . 2020 1 . 0655 5 . 00 880 . 00 1 . 1346 1 . 1346 0 . 0000 2 . 2693 1 . 0655 1 . 2038 5 . 00 890 . 00 1 . 1346 1 . 1341 0 . 0000 2 . 2688 1 . 2038 1 . 0649 5 . 00 900 . 00 1 . 1341 1 . 0695 0 . 0000 2 . 2037 1 . 0649 1 . 1387 5 . 00 910 . 00 1/27/00 1 :33 : 16 pm Shareware Release page 14 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE I1 I2 2S1 SUM 01 02+252 STAGE TIME < cfs min > (ft) (min) 1 . 0695 1 . 0695 0 . 0000 2 . 1391 1 . 1387 1 . 0003 5 . 00 920 . 00 1 . 0695 1 . 0695 0 . 0000 2 . 1391 1 . 0003 1 . 1387 5 . 00 930 . 00 1 . 0695 1 . 0710 0 . 0000 2 . 1406 1 . 1387 1 . 0018 5 . 00 940 . 00 1 . 0710 1 . 0710 0 . 0000 2 . 1421 1 . 0018 1 . 1402 5 . 00 950 . 00 1 . 0710 1 . 0705 0 . 0000 2 . 1416 1 . 1402 1 . 0013 5 . 00 960 . 00 1 . 0705 1 . 0054 0 . 0000 2 . 0759 1 . 0013 1 . 0746 5 . 00 970 . 00 1 . 0054 1 . 0054 0 . 0000 2 . 0108 1 . 0746 0 . 9362 5 . 00 980 . 00 1 . 0054 1 . 0054 0 . 0000 2 . 0108 0 . 9362 1 . 0746 5 . 00 990 . 00 1 . 0054 1 . 0066 0 . 0000 2 . 0120 1 . 0746 0 . 9374 5 . 00 1000 . 00 1 . 0066 1 . 0066 0 . 0000 2 . 0132 0 . 9374 1 . 0758 5 . 00 1010 . 00 1 . 0066 1 . 0066 0 . 0000 2 . 0133 1 . 0758 0 . 9374 5 . 00 1020 . 00 1 . 0066 1 . 0078 0 . 0000 2 . 0144 0 . 9374 1 . 0770 5 . 00 1030 . 00 1 . 0078 1 . 0078 0 . 0000 2 . 0156 1 . 0770 0 . 9386 5 . 00 1040 . 00 1 . 0078 1 . 0073 0 . 0000 2 . 0151 0 . 9386 1 . 0765 5 . 00 1050 . 00 1 . 0073 0 . 9416 0 . 0000 1 . 9489 1 . 0765 0 . 8724 5 . 00 1060 . 00 0 . 9416 0 . 9416 0 . 0000 1 . 8832 0 . 8724 1 . 0108 5 . 00 1070 . 00 0 . 9416 0 . 9416 0 . 0000 1 . 8832 1 . 0108 0 . 8724 5 . 00 1080 . 00 0 . 9416 0 . 9426 0 . 0000 1 . 8842 0 . 8724 1 . 0118 5 . 00 1090 . 00 0 . 9426 0 . 9426 0 . 0000 1 . 8851 1 . 0118 0 . 8734 5 . 00 1100 . 00 0 . 9426 0 . 9420 0 . 0000 1 . 8846 0 . 8734 1 . 0112 5 . 00 1110 . 00 0 . 9420 0 . 8760 0 . 0000 1 . 8181 1 . 0112 0 . 8069 5 . 00 1120 . 00 0 . 8760 0 . 8760 0 . 0000 1 . 7521 0 . 8069 0 . 9452 5 . 00 1130 . 00 0 . 8760 0 . 8761 0 . 0000 1 . 7521 0 . 9452 0 . 8069 5 . 00 1140 . 00 0 . 8761 0 . 8768 0 . 0000 1 . 7529 0 . 8069 0 . 9460 5 . 00 1150 . 00 0 . 8768 0 . 8768 0 . 0000 1 . 7536 0 . 9460 0 . 8076 5 . 00 1160 . 00 0 . 8768 0 . 8763 0 . 0000 1 . 7531 0 . 8076 0 . 9455 5 . 00 1170 . 00 0 . 8763 0 . 8100 0 . 0000 1 . 6863 0 . 9455 0 . 7408 5 . 00 1180 . 00 0 . 8100 0 . 8100 0 . 0000 1 . 6200 0 . 7408 0 . 8792 5 . 00 1190 . 00 0 . 8100 0 . 8100 0 . 0000 1 . 6200 0 . 8792 0 . 7408 5 . 00 1200 . 00 0 . 8100 0 . 8106 0 . 0000 1 . 6206 0 . 7408 0 . 8798 5 . 00 1210 . 00 0 . 8106 0 . 8106 0 . 0000 1 . 6212 0 . 8798 0 . 7414 5 . 00 1220 . 00 0 . 8106 0 . 8106 0 . 0000 1 . 6212 0 . 7414 0 . 8798 5 . 00 1230 . 00 0 . 8106 0 . 8112 0 . 0000 1 . 6218 0 . 8798 0 . 7420 5 . 00 1240 . 00 0 . 8112 0 . 8112 0 . 0000 1 . 6224 0 . 7420 0 . 8804 5 . 00 1250 . 00 0 . 8112 0 . 8112 0 . 0000 1 . 6224 0 . 8804 0 . 7420 5 . 00 1260 . 00 0 . 8112 0 . 8118 0 . 0000 1 . 6230 0 . 7420 0 . 8810 5 . 00 1270 . 00 0 . 8118 0 . 8118 0 . 0000 1 . 6235 0 . 8810 0 . 7426 5 . 00 1280 . 00 0 . 8118 0 . 8118 0 . 0000 1 . 6236 0 . 7426 0 . 8810 5 . 00 1290 . 00 0 . 8118 0 . 8123 0 . 0000 1 . 6241 0 . 8810 0 . 7431 5 . 00 1300 . 00 0 . 8123 0 . 8123 0 . 0000 1 . 6247 0 . 7431 0 . 8815 5 . 00 1310 . 00 0 . 8123 0 . 8123 0 . 0000 1 . 6247 0 . 8815 0 . 7431 5 . 00 1320 . 00 0 . 8123 0 . 8129 0 . 0000 1 . 6252 0 . 7431 0 . 8821 5 . 00 1330 . 00 0 . 8129 0 . 8129 0 . 0000 1 . 6257 0 . 8821 0 . 7437 5 . 00 1340 . 00 0 . 8129 0 . 8123 0 . 0000 1 . 6252 0 . 7437 0 . 8815 5 . 00 1350 . 00 0 . 8123 0 . 7456 0 . 0000 1 . 5579 0 . 8815 0 . 6764 5 . 00 1360 . 00 0 . 7456 0 . 7456 0 . 0000 1 . 4912 0 . 6764 0 . 8148 5 . 00 1370 . 00 1/27/00 1 : 33 : 16 pm Shareware Release page 15 The Foundry Industrial Park Site Development Review Storm Drainage Narrative LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE LEVEL POOL ROUTING TABLE I1 I2 2S1 SUM 01 02+252 STAGE TIME < cfs min > (ft) (min) 0 . 7456 0 . 7456 0 . 0000 1 .4912 0 . 8148 0 . 6764 5 . 00 1380 . 00 0 . 7456 0 . 7460 0 . 0000 1 .4916 0 . 6764 0 . 8152 5 . 00 1390 . 00 0 . 7460 0 . 7460 0 . 0000 1 .4920 0 . 8152 0 . 6768 5 . 00 1400 . 00 0 . 7460 0 . 7460 0 . 0000 1 .4920 0 . 6768 0 . 8152 5 . 00 1410 . 00 0 . 7460 0 . 7464 0 . 0000 1 .4925 0 . 8152 0 . 6772 5 . 00 1420 . 00 0 . 7464 0 . 7464 0 . 0000 1 .4929 0 . 6772 0 . 8156 5 . 00 1430 . 00 0 . 7464 0 . 7405 0 . 0000 1 .4869 0 . 8156 0 . 6713 5 . 00 1440 . 00 0 . 7405 0 . 0000 0 . 0000 0 . 7405 0 . 6713 0 . 0692 5 . 00 1450 . 00 0 . 0000 0 . 0000 0 . 0000 0 . 0000 0 . 0692 -0 . 0692 5 . 00 1460 . 00 . , , . .,.. 1[111 0 . . . .•-• ii ‘1Y1—,." 91-11A' ' , -. '.0 1 . •••••- ,.., -'t'", . ;" ',• I.. , *i- .• .....1.t. F.'•ri) ...i --. '-' . V .•• r.--..?.:..... .,..4C, ..... i,::-.4...\'''''`,1::.;. 0 ,. ',' J...1 4 El, 4, •-- -1. ..I- - ' •-•.... • • ,..t:t•• r ,:A ..., 44-,,..., ..!. rob.,. •:''' Z.' 1. r • . t.4:-' • .f • ' " ••...AI-".v.,....-/ f. 4115 .- • •,"4"fic,, 1., - 214._. *X rz•:, . `.:'. 7.r.' •1• i„miiia?"t..",,,...,,, ..; ,, . .... ilk.i.,, ...;.-,!•4- .-. - •%.,.V....;..% . -.K • i ,,/111::'i,-.- .'.‘ -. -.". . ', ",..tti,_.„;,,,,,of.y,Ir.-Apagile,.. '.• • ' „ ••,,,.' ,,,,,i v.i.A.• .r.•••. • • ;,. t - . 1, •,,..;:c411 -,,•.• '4'.,4.., ,L4,... •11. •,',•..4"..•1.I.,: ••••■,_. 4• ••.1......• g P .,77.-- -IMINaile -•s! 4. ,-;',1,111..',. - .' .....14,44: 1. .• •...I,t 4! ' ,••...,,. ',,' •!,..-e,:i. , . , 4 4"--Ir.'4,•N • 61-i.,47,„-- - .... ..: r_Ft" 41;j+.: ,Is&,,41,. ?,1),..„"•7, . ••„14.2.,...1•4,.••' I- r . , .... sl ' 1 Vti '`,A. 1 .,,,44.Li',...i. ! qt•••.:•. „„,..adip..,? , ‘0,=ttr.,,.;,,,,..."'.,-.4,•.4_,_,',....-..- • -.,'ftril'•lil..$ •••4r4'....../• `„NITA,' 1‘.......‘ C,11•_,K. -. • 1-U:',--'-'•••=4 it-L,.. •1'' '-'''•' . i • `• •• 1' ''', • : 11-'••-•:•.••'t WI,' •,,•:,t „'-:••'4.4,.. ...!. ..•'•;.'1:At •-•'-.1., , ,r-• oa - r.. ':',••• '- r ,,—,,i. (Agit,',../..,•'. . %.A4...0 ' . 0). .: ' •C.f:,.7, r '''.-N.f......,..17,:i• • ■.• ,:.•. .,4'.•,•1*,.. 7s ?... 41:.,..-e,,'1;r1 • 41.. , - - -"- :• ' *Alec ... 'Fla.-0 I • ; ' ",-•-•.` -1 ••• .:4144.,4t-j..-•*!.. . +.1.-v:-. 149. r.??1,,,d!„.54:11....ii! -,t ..,,‘',,tb; 0, ,1•4% .-:* i '- -. ig '•4?'\ '., A. .siel,c,t4...1 ' 1 . •l' • -k ' -,, .*' "f Aka VI•k,114....1 • -.4 - , ' • ,:. - ..'; . .411:.'kei Wt.A:: -..',V%:': t''. > 4.i. it'. 4),. .4.!.. . , t.: •--#714 lir .VIlk 4 kia'.•... .'•:. 4.. ,(1,•••4! ••••1: t''••.•;..'•'i :•.;:.•,-..-,-. •:•,..Lc?.. , , • ••' '`" :2-it'="•._•_.e....1.. ..,•:..1.•_ . ..',. .'. Co Le4„..-., • ;tr; ...,.., , ,. 1.f, •g I.. . 4,‘ NE,V;04,.._, ia,j• '... X . f.,=•,r... AO-,-. . ,...-, „-,.... ,,. ,,,,- ,.,.. ,.i. ‘ • 4 v/f-. ....::,-.-11"..-.iree ;,:ti.:" 41'"•••''14--i.i 1 . ..,.. , „4. V' ,••/, ....,..0,111.t.'' 'i t, ., r,,,.•Sok_ t ,,Iti, ••• 'T. .: • /111) t' IV N'i 61. .-L.A..1.1'.1 -•,. '4.,, *,1 ■•,,i, .'„ t 4■1 • '"/Vh" • ...---'1 411k \4, '.•-:. ;TA • -•,;,._kii. . .•# , ••-' • 1101'..:,--; 7.•••.i.11‘. 14't. ,,A 4:-.,,,'' i43.,- ,,,ory, . it... ,..if: 9'4,:- . ..4. •,,,,, . It .4... '''• ..!,.7i.•; .i. .: .,7,,,..u. ..4.440:-.--i[v .•;1•74,Lei..i1/40,0t,,....sy.:. . . . ks-.1$4 -• .,'',..-•.-- ,,* .....-.? ,-,-,•• vtortgi.--‘ •----.i----,.....-2,--t-r. s4 ..;;..... , ,-.••,,,trit711,,,•4....yt ,_.st., , ,. .adR .. ....,_7-7, ................. .,..... le ..t,I.,,, ...:. ..41:::,,. i , .r".,.• , ...f'..„y 20-v; -41.641.- :-.,:;•.A. y41 4, Itt. .t;,,,,.: ,. .1 . ''"''t '14:1;14'."-4043(0"."''.-ft'' .3"4- *-, . 1,k4'- -,z ■Illitliv. s-.f- -ftt."• ...0- ' iifiiz,--,-.. Wilte iiti'ZA,./,.: .1+•'..&•71', ,t . .r... -8,-- Vi't,i)6, '",t7,414tp_..,:117, ,, •,.., 144,0 , t •11. •,'''",•-••• 7.‘;',,f. • , :•40,4 , --,•i .. •'- hi; ,.•-.;;;'..vez. 4 .4.3...- •-,-,; „ -,,,'-- .. ‘ 11 ft (i ,, V t jt.,,-,.47 .• ''1, .'-ir'm ."'• •'ivat-,,,. ..-: -,' L ''4 I't, ...)' •••4'.': 4 4.3i 7 4.1 .•;",-...4' Ilit;Fir' 1 tit '''11. 41-•!7;•'•"1!"..-..'' 74 ..if•"•-K ' ';#t; •'';''-.• r-4• k • '''7.11 4 .e 1...4 471 Ft'- 11 ,t) ilia , ‘, .s aii,. ..,7.--i.: . < 4. -4' 4b7,41.,..0 ....,:w ..!:i;;,. -7 i .*:.i:e3P. '''.-- ..' s_:.--- iiti-- ,,,,,.• :•0-•-% 1.) . ., ,--;11 .$1 1. ,• I:: gqi.J....... r---: A ..:1*. N• ' '"'4.1,,i ,',., •P., .•`•...• 4-4".1.•'4, ,-. • i ,'• ••"`• "4.t''''', Ap.;.31t-15-.,.. -.1•Ii• -•'..1t,44,,;•••a, (..„•'t ..:..: X l'''. , .,..irk.ii;.! '••• •• ' I!:N itt 'ANt$:::::.;!$,!,,‘.,.,:r:i.w,71-4,I,,,,,,...", ;44A.,e;:o. ,1/40q-c,:::::it.**T•iiii..1.1, ,..,, .. ' ,.4: '4;-.46,11‘. ' 41,1A'—'.....`,: .Allf.. - .., .ak, .,...,.._v.,1;t7ir,", It'll 1 Ifil il:).. •■ ' •:,,. Iti:. , , 1 A ,.!... •! ' . . A. ...A.. 1 AQ.1p::.' •■• Ni./..,.,411 /...1;").,e; ..tA,,1101/ ''No'' (i! il.. ' 1', . . po. .7.. , t.. . .4 .,..o.,. .;.1...-...,.r.E.4,,t,',,,.,,•,,,,:i..:. ....; .. - #,,,,, ..... A,'•.: , ..Akkil il t.- .•4';' ,11111,,,t.b',,: It.•."', .4--swe..4.,/ .. .,. .4.14).,.e.,1,...:,.. . `164i‘iN..!,7 .:;10..' .„1 . r '='...• f,, ... if..,••■*•4 ' 1-' 1,•• 1 4•—411.',...`.f... p -: ., is7,-,4...;,N,‘‘,...;,,ithi,;.-..*....:::::,44- -\\v—,t,;:i:,;,..iii4, .dir?..,,ei.„..i,r4Holifes.H40:444...,,...,:;3'...-,::.. '... ....ii.‘,,;:ii.:_if.je,:,,,Fik.i..71,.itil,...,,i4),41,4.4:0,01:04. ,r.,.,,,!..t7.,:_..,: 0/4//00. .;.,. '.. i,_...„,„.: ,c.........1i,e::...,,... ..,,.i,st, ,•,,,i....,,, •-,:....r.i.:,....,....,,. , 1.14.0,..4...1......1,,.1.;‘, f•'. • ,„.fitrca,,,,.1 ,-. '„. .,,'•. *' ,, ' ",\",,T,.: i it) ... •., , 4.,, ,.,... ,,,If ;...• - .,+1.- A.• ...SA, . • / a. .*-.'.'•:ii,30,‘'7' it,.11!". • , . 4 ,,,,. ,,,;. : L ,.,..,,,,,, , .i .t, 1., ty;t5TA:,.v. ......% ,t..ix. N . . :`,.. &rl,.A. ..-b 01,01,4..4.•',. ' .,.. •0.tv.•',' ' ti.a.ad st',0". .4,a .;..c.,-'11,1,;:akir:, oris.,. „ ,i,,,,,'•''., , -114 .5 ,;I ki vlehricleit'A': ‘. i,.. '. .7K-.,if$,,,...-: ., 4 11411///,'Ir,11741 ...411'14ellq ItliY7;f.: 4.,41'411.FirIsticrit: .?•;•".• ''''..;• Ai, 17,,/: ,.N. 1. . ft/ ' ,.t.....1s.:110,111,,,..* to: -1.,,,. ,;:‘,,,• , -4,44-41.10•4 ....,‘. .p4„.. • .1,,,,14,..., ,. it.%Ef.r. ....i•.../.., f',.;■,. it1/4,i, I; i ,.,.1..,,,,...:04;...„...!! y . '• 1 .k. ,•1• \.. ,.;., A,..,, 4, ,,h t till', - v, ,:,. .;. :' .' 7. 'It' '' • 1511&.".'.t..0'4il'il!\ •t 1'if •F"--.,if '16.1.;a:r4.4'a ..f.!■`; •'.4'.•.A, •''' 1,;14••••••-i' I, ...'..-,,„r 7.14•:.,',.. ,,- ,-,117.,•;;;Alt,..44...4.....0..,.....: ‘...-ri,15vAte,••-,4 ...: •,., . 1,1,,,;,..i.m4.:-:.. t,_ 1:,*:',.. ,...,.. 3-wei.,$ ),i , ';.i. t -Ai',Z-4,:is.f!,cf-T.-4,4.!....,- .. -://..ibc;A tt : • ..t liikt,ill i• . I 71 NO '..',r . ••• •:''''''tit./•' .1.,...4.•.'''i i 4411'••2- . .t. t.'Illie,„•,,,,'• .: Jr• ye,' • t. -• Is...• 'lat,4,,,,,if.t. •••• .• ' , i,.:•,• ' f.L.l'.+ 1;?••"..•,46,,,t,7*.• 4 : ,• •. •, 1:. IA...., •ic,•.. . ,s. r. pre:i'.••••••Ivuraf. I. •...' •-,,'.• , .-: ;',,,:".r..4..v-0.4i.J-,Y." ..x4,.. -,4,a4 „i',0; ,q.N..;4-44, .'.-;*--i-t.foi‘1%-...T.,;•f?4.../,..',.-. •: ...:,,,:4,,!)1k, -;`.t.. . ":' ,'.' Ai.' .t9;■;'71?°. 1.1., 1 ...4‘....r... . gr„.:.-:, ....• . 0 ,,,, iiito,•4 ---‘,4!7,41.,,,,, to..;,,,, .itei: „It, :.,!...,1-:.,11•441-0.4..;//, ,.., . .:-i,.,:;14,$::`_-,. - ..4 - . . .. ,.-, .. !fie-- -...-.,.... 6%.,„---,..•,:.. ... Ac.,,..::<•,.....-:,.di .4,,, ,.....4 ,........ ,-,,44-7/,), , ■t .,.iin.y„,:t •,,f-•-I.,- t,' :* i•.L ..e.i1Z.,. i ' _,,1 3.44 ‘. :•. ...t•••• -•r4) r.41-4-'','"' ••:4,-.17!i'S' -1,..1',•' •. . ..•t•.a'4....itelry, -,Y -4-7,'.1 ')4:; .."'•i :141+AL-••v.. ' el a IS TO r 11 -••' . • h..r..VI ' .' ti,-•"•:::::''.;.;';• •''13-1P4R0 1410 ,i.".7. .4.• , •' ..: .‘k : ..-- •.f4pa a' -''' ...4kiveilik,Weer; ' i--. :Frtit. ,l,' 114.4.,....-.4,•. 2 :.:1-t.j,..70.44 c'ilaitIfir, •IA iatt. t et"..tAk,1 c .4'yr \ • ,f :•00'('''' 1 kev%'• V`,11VV-.P•-•, ', ' rl-'•• ,•",.,.., :.•,•>,,, . 04...t,i,......:,-.i,, ,/ . . i !..,,, •,... ,,,,i,-,... ‘,..1 .....:,,v. ,..-, ,.olyt ,.;,,,,,..4...., • . :-...;,...44„,.. ,,,. ,...v4a, ,.,..%0-‘,,to....7 ,.. ,, , ,N, -,1,,. ,-7,!,.:-Axitir. =- ,,142, .,' 4,..„,, ...• ,.., .,,•,.::. '. i.:-..i.,,. . , ! :.1 ...,.441.):„ttt.t..34p •P.A.., .........,.. • • ... 4, . . • .1,..., , . r.:,. 4.1.04.....4,4 • _e•r,..,.. ..., .. .. :•• ,; .........,:?-4;or•.„0.100.:....; ?.4z..1..1..1 44.: :.',.. OV•ki, •:.. - ..e. .",... 1.**, 7..i 1.'. ,7 v. .../ ,,.. ..., „., ,-....,..,...;A-0,,....--,!,„, _, ../,..;.. .. ..4 li•'•:.6 i„.•■ .:.'., ! ....,,„ ..- .*; ,i•..... 44.444.:, A lt ilj a ,.• ; 411, ".1■1111P .,'e. i.• lkltie Si l'e•iftSr ..\.•• • \ .' 4•:•••_\• .* 41`S ,'"'.'31 47414 • •''; ...1'.' tOr4.1:*:451; *.i.". •' !--4 ' ••4 . •••' -•.•r .•':,,ilitg,pi•-, ,--.',..1*)"..i...) ‘4140„.411 ' -•1 .u, . ' ••• „„-k-‘,:;,,, ..,:ttp,..• - -,:,,..3,-• ..• , ‘,- .; ‘;',14p•r.„ ,...r /. ',..*:-‘,,.. ,,, : .• ;•-•„,,.!,.., ., .4 ...,,,:•;.,4t, J. i...”,... ,.,.&,,. , .....,17.- .. 4.*Flit::.,!;. .:., - • .....,- - J.... R. %•:'...4%.••..-", ',...."ilk I;.. . : 0;•" ,......• -.....•:;..,77;\ i..::! ;..7,:. ,•'' ''- riga.'',..IliCts-;!'.•OA*: .311.16,.;se.-li,....;$11';'.t••.•Ili sf,•;..'.• , "iiiialt,,,'• ; -4. .. ., e:.. ,..;.,..-40 :"a. V'''-':•.''.c . 4••••'' ' r•..• •':..•••.. i'••••:Art'OM /4 t:•1 1 .111'„,Ii..v.e-,.:4' '.• ;''- VUSrt..:.•ry1;111,W..."'• :p,,..,; ..t.:;,......14„i",.-.,:---- :-:::.:_ar--3217,--.0),;,',%.,' , 4.4..::.,...;,-,-;,'''F•,pft.r.:••••,•,.,:',..4`.57,r4.4•,,*-, tt`i,S46,1el . . •.-,.1 10;1:'rde..An:,„■,. • t".ti*i,(1,.•14,""A tj;:'..1 lilt-. '.,,,...N,,,,..„,,,....,,.....,,--- ,. It .,,00-'..-......- I,— .. 9'' 4.ji.•91firl; ..1',;''''.71‘..;,.,...,,,v.„,. / 3'!ti:,,, ..:Ii.... ..-...1„ ,tv.:1,,.........,..1. .....„.1....r...f.,,....,....,.,,Iy..: -..... „t., ... -ilf... . ---....,,... -,. ff, / VS' 1.4 •■•••.0 .-1' ''1'.'" el''' '''. A.° .,''• • .' .V. :V....,;....44 ..• :1011.'7: •'iti !'.11•At..417 .'if.' ••.! • r • , • - ••••••••-. ......;„.-.N.. :-.. 4::r-# ... :: •'.--..- •,,,•i.,.;,:711.-NV*.:6 -, -•;:.• 4.7,1, :,...1.64444‘1\:,■14q:::,...:.1.:";--A I "V' v ' /VI#11:•••: 1.414e. A . ..A.,-.2e.'11'4',.• =4:i ii•7.1 , ._. . t • LA, I. , • ...h. ,•.• , .•!... 4...,,k, ,.g„,-,4,., .1,04,..i.h.,.....„.. • .,, , .4 . t,••:, t..... ,-- 0 A' ' 4 .9 .1 !L... 1.• i•-; ,.. . t •.. „IT....4i,01, . .:q ''' - 4/0:. ..,'. -,-. ..'.. .,:•ViV,.,4.4,,`"?.. : NAR,0 '.,.,„1„1,„.... i . .e3.-.e. .'''' •--..V"' ' -4 . . . \ / i■ 1 . . r , t.••,-,. ...• .,..-, . .:.0!.. •• ...-..4, •. .s. ...„. .,._..,„,•,._ • .„.,,, . , ., •• ... , ... .t, ,..., .. Ca 4 ,. i.f.A., .4 441•••• r•-. , •. ,- ki. - 4.• . . .r ',.•..:4., 't•i, ...., ... ■:.• tr,lirCt.......e'd.,4. •'!:16$.'..'k 1.;._ :4„... •;,, ,. ;, ‘4..4.-••••.•,444-11, 1 .,,gtve, ..,,..,._Alr,,..:, ,..,.„I ..., ,, 11• •••ti•kokil -•••'.. ,./ •,:: • ---...e... . ' ... .•,'' .t'' v.A.kg ae./,.:144....ill • • •,,ef. latil. a *. 'Itn.'',• .fr",',.. ' ••At - " •015'.4211', 4.40-'i'• % -t itlit■ .1 .-. 7-Arip--4 •/,.1.4',. ....i.i. .• ,....\ .,, ,or,......F.4.....:.:;.....,.:: ....:.:i,1,...vs tp,., — "...... .• r,: - t 41' .t",:-..". :14 • 7, "••• ,..i,i• I., .i. .3i,i ,,..‘,....,,,.,...7.14:!. .....4 •••.. '',,..,•vfO'l.441 lits-',.zs .J..:' 0/.•v. .' ''' 6..4.1*,..4j1 ral ( ..,..;4' ; ..6 6,' .6'N'S .6 ' . (kItil 1 ' 11 '.• . 1;/, ..' ...I;,..11.2!w t,.•••-411)•Atito,N0,0 1,,ift,,,,Ilti Iwo), ,..1 4 . • • iatjtjiv...j; ,t.....,...,.,„.4 it• ,:tyikt-,„ ,.,,,... ....,..., ...- , ,:,:'4.:-..iiik.tir A f 44 i ...1.,11-,14 0. Ft-. : ar,/- . •Arif,, t'1.4t „,,,,,.,..04,,•.:-.- -_- -,,s, .... ,- .., . , „,,..trotit. II: -•,,,„.., .,..,-7',1:• ••t• ''1-4.,'.9,, .-'•••‘' .'', .4,:6.....-i''1,4L.'''•••1.'*.,••,14`, '''';',-1,A. ;...•'1 ,,. •-,,, ,' ,,,' . ! , ••',•.• • Ir•-1.,....:f,-Ye;'•;,q,i. "1.4./..1.11. 14' 1---.!,, .43.Ar• a a 5,,.. tit. ;.ti 44,43040.: J., ,. !.-....-.- , ,I.ei,:,.1.1 d a.. • ,. z, ......... ,, ,. °•,,_•./.:•':;.%-..$11.1i1LAti.T. 4-4.•'‘V.y.".• •. •• ■it'.i•• ...•"' f ••/..:• •. lii.1 ....111.91:...? \. ,•*rift .4 1. : •456 ;.•••: . Itt,.• . ...?". ,. ., ' 4e' ' .......: -•,;•141 .pt, 1 f ,it A. •,11,ilt....A . . f,.4 ":4,..• . ' 4, 'ip_%; •1*t t.-.me' ''I. .''i.41'.,".e:'!:"1..1......,, . Illr .14%:..te74141•11i4"14(I.. 41111. „,,,:j,„,,,, • .,, , ,_ ,.-,,, .. , ,A' ' ....,..0 !,'t.,`• '1 NIC,'Y '44. yr i 1 • 1.` .4. . 1 F1, ... ..,. , . IX • • , 4 7-r",;„, .. , --...•■ ' ••'' ”9 •- — • w 660 000 FEET ,13 0 (Joins inset A,Aetst 12) ti., n n'•..41 ....It i• li. :i. OYU Net mod IOW based SO SIMS CaPdINSIS limiest l and&OSHA COMMIS.II SSOINn.Sid spy.0.111.1.1 y pus ttlu.d ' ' t•'■li.:•i .-,..........--.- 1.... .!... 4.MS u s, ...tu...s.11 IS.woo!a 0..1.8.a.1 bu•'s,bolltubbulhavaphy bp 114•U thy a.irtx■o 1.4141:::1.17.:,.&nieti,‘1441polrooseir k•••••...--"'---- .••"'",1%.:"! , .,1 j'.■' . . . , • ' is.T."'""4"."'s moot.•......7";71.47.5 U S 707:::::::„,,:,::1.,:;:.i ro:1,7.:::;:la.te ayste;l'aittl d ttttt tot coutets.a SnosOn. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN Table III-1.3 SCS Western Washington Runoff Curve Numbers (Published by SCS in 1982) Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural, suburban and urban land use for Type IA rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration. LAND USE DESCRIPTION CURVE NUMBERS BY HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP A B C D Cultivated land(1) : winter condition 86 91 94 95 Mountain open areas: low growing brush & grasslands 74 82 89 92 Meadow or pasture: 65 78 85 89 Wood or forest land: undisturbed 42 64 76 81 Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 86 Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, landscaping. Good condition: grass cover on 75% of the 68 80 86 90 area Fair condition: grass cover on 50-75% of 77 85 90 92 the area Gravel roads & parking lots: 76 85 89 91 Dirt roads & parking lots: 72 82 87 89 Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs etc. 98 98 98 98 Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds etc. 100 100 100 100 Single family residential(2) : Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre %Impervious(3) Separate curve number 1.0 DU/GA 15 shall be selected for 1.5 DU/GA 20 pervious & impervious 2.0 DU/GA 25 portions of the site 2.5 DU/GA 30 or basin 3.0 DU/GA 34 3.5 DU/GA 38 4.0 DU/GA 42 4.5 DU/GA 46 5.0 DU/GA 48 5.5 DU/GA 50 6.0 DU/GA 52 6.5 DU/GA 54 7.0 DU/GA 56 PUD's, condos, apartments, %impervious commercial businesses & must be industrial areas computed (1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve numbers refer to National Engineering Handbook, Sec. 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, August 1972. (2) Assumes roof and driveway runoff is directed into street/storm system. (3) The remaining pervious areas ( lawn) are considered to be in good condition for these curve numbers. III-1-12 FEBRUARY, 1992 -- - -- —--120- — buu. MutcrEi -- _ ii 1 TABLE 13.—S0il and [Absence of an entry indicates the feature is not a concern. See Glossary for descriptions of such Hydro- Flooding t Soil name and logic - map symbol group Frequency Duration Months . 3 Aloha: C -_ * None _— ____ i 3 Amity: a 2 C None -------------- Astoria: 1 3E. 3F w_—� B None Briedwell: B None 48, 5B, SC, 5D - ---- Carlton: 68, 6C B None Cascade: 7B, 7C, 7D, 7E, 7F C None Chehalem: 8C _ C None Chehalis: 9, 10 B Common Brief Nov-Mar y Cornelius: 1 f 13, 1 1 I C, 1 1 1 D, '1 1 E, 3 I I F: Cornelius part C None Kinton part ____ C None Cornelius Variant: 12A, 128, 12C C None Cove: I3, I4 DY Common Brief Dec-Apr Dayton: 15 D None Delena: I 6 D None Goble: 179, 17C, 17D, 17E. 18E, 18F C None Helvetia: 198, 19C, 190, I 9 C None Hembre: 20E, 20F, 20G B None Hillsboro: 2 I A, 218, 2 IC, 21 D B None Huberly: 22 D None Jory 238, 23C, 23D, 23E, 23F __ C None Kilchis: 1 24G: Kilchis part C None Klickitat part B None • THE FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK 114._,,,,,,,, 4, WASRNG *N COUNTY _,,,,„.....BFAVEFtTON-TIGARD■461-121A7( .•' _ 3I1 -4. U p^..- CR I 104P CC Q �u ,�, 1tz cil c�e�no�a 9. P a. o........_w be per...rd.o.T,...r,v aV \ a L Al vt row be•cwu.'i Ma t. a..ga.+en.corgi 1c.coo.. IC CONTRACT.b hoe.Mara^.w d coo..ru pee..=to r row. •.y uw�awcr wd.o oa==ten d'11.'•40^C o•••••'•r•Sr Agoal ea Greg.9...A'Qg •1•'•4e.�y o..t..•a w.DeveLOPEls9 ewe r.w be Per b w roc. c Rstomencel aeon co=rn gee...1 re. J a.r..ty Casan eb tee...•.C.e. pera.a0.a,•=.....wag me..b......west A a O T b V. .�a a.T�lt.e...w argre to ales..woe. 1� O- 1 TI'.CONTRACTOR w o=no.•o. apoP..•}'•1 9q rb.peua��C 4 .e r+L CONrRACiw.w MEW'an ITS h.r.g! ••'•'0,'a&b9 u..cY1eY �` 2 i^ �... y to a._ u.caret a e .u..n.v •.mans. w We noseg Data.moos.a.y •nor.to..e 1.0.Co..re!b no.b.... . - �y 4P•+i•g=12y moll/mow.NO 0,..w• y La Poona.•U•..••Pvl.. a. ra.CONTRACTOR ST be•e e.t.a.ro.a'..g a cad,b....*AA L O.....I' ..9d.E rev.D..nes w be coon..Oa Pe CONTRACTQt e F Caen Poo.wy.gr.la 122 4 7• .a.etc-w...ra Ol ca .no.meo a t r•.r.9••'• 910. r..rm V..m.aa.a wry c°eeY Ciwa.g Ra&Am.lo.•Y m. W 3. T.CONTRACTOR w 1.•.o cPraP•r.a P.P.brCDa.owrcrg.ex a R. n....nc..ee.w..•n2reee b w rte..e w..ner•a+•.a.a away gar•.lon rate 00 pa.r.o aree.a pR acre \\ Q pa. .ti oars 2. balm.rte.am to be es my core.r to O.sr tate pas b t b b. A TT.CONTRACTON a r m..re proecr.a.r..we.g.a. raa.a de eel Al on fee.r.w.Dear.pass..,rd.be.aq we a...rd.r.ncb.w a CG a/.ACT.par sari.......e T.V.ow...p..Asa d ..Strata Cie ra - 90e.s=]Gee no CONTFCTON w o. robe.• am..d.•.seal a and.a..Ur 01..d r....g.o s......� Taf 4 sca tC al•Igo .ro.m.wra_ad c•.a.e..am fell.a U.re. N. 9po.S.w trace a a.aa•.e d a rare saw.g m.or veto raw•rbel •� '�ce!�y...r per•d+ VICINITY a.a, MAP et CC N. IT.COORACTCM w..o a 4......w d Pea can•.cotta.re...e a P•e.r..la.0 art=. Ow n=eat r a•..owe Ary arRgr.w ea.ores=a v.r4...1 a r..r..a.re gee.re•At w rupoeea rece.r beam Ago. ape.. L Cavc.o w.t. owl..4..!aw.bn Cord C... . 90 r_d re baa..b. ...e.ow&ear• ewe.to r e. a 11O of y.el ow erosion Fe.. 'a......r 10.0. �` . nee.CONTRACTOR ea P nett.e sees.,•e.o.r..a it al,a A. 9...10.Cord M Toe.C.O.W.maon•a...NW.. der e to 4......pNe new or we an tree or.g w be.o..a/ q!•...I 9rge Ag=cy o.4m.11Coretrucllon a •••oleo•..ea.rwa.....a...b.sew. .11.1 a M.CONTRACTORS wee. Es..errs.raw.•0 rem.w 91.b.A R t O 9•••,0.0,5 a 9•• �+'y as.......a bong rot or ay a.e.. Ow.or' a Let u..our..rest o.v.d.. .aR...rt. uw sfle et....r.d.d ba Co..o..a b pr.. J ❑ _ ..seen..ratan ro art. aA!L�TARr!.n_ww 1 or•WOo•d Vow.Re.ay..d..a.bw contra rlx0 M der.t �a•9 1 Pe CONTRACTOR at.rw• aro..nee oe..d few to eanag.g on, Appro.of p=ee..road or ergs a.lgt log. r. Nolo�io•fo ....:.r um ea Rb..i+.a b < W K..,pe•'�9 L era wee or stns.»........a..w w0,w b..ra...ah•w per n.• a.Ie.w r WIC/ p�fn....,w•r.rwS•r• a The etas..•ab cP.2.1...bc•..un d.pr•ad fct.ner a w.ca.. so...0.c.Amoy.w 2.St fee de•M �porno 9�. A.Ya. 4P•oorr....eea..e.r.b ow...•c•••• ` ;Ma gave ==sass= d a••.Y apse recta., To 1 Tar b...n d Uwe 9 Ex per r rb..aaa.ere.. a To CONTRACTOR w fb... .. .o...b asp....-Ur.A.r re rroe tar noon..=.etlw fa.la 1 Al rwg.r pea.w a P.0 ape reee..g b AST d1o7..r9OR Ma fee...p`•*l d Mr Ex rbvo•ue repeat. d a re. p.we.wa Wong...r.y b ea.rob ew.on Q❑ - n.Pa...•a....by Mtn ASO,0-212...0 otta..rota& d WO Ca cb.r• A COYYa ea{q a.'o by Xj Cl.11 EN d V.CONTRACTOR. Na 100.V.CW.O! aa•.f a��.�...�� 'c o.ti e]•n.NeE2a fa car ••• e � 1 Al.tune 0.4...ronecUore..b b....w..0a..r neon .tcw.a 101..a..Rma w�r .a9• ». R.r.rar.Twee ro.R ov id..w••.m.mr.re r.R. Q 2 9. Co..La.Le naty Cx9 wet,MOT we•deo e.o•p...•sae.d a rot. •••use a.lst•aped...N• as...o.. . R be...C1.y.1 Per d CWCUee er cog ram err a 24M.!e A. rW...w.a 0 foot rm.aP+•a..tan.O.t�n s ea.e try row 1-.0.0-117-I1.•.••d...M..'+.. e.w eaa�own•ch. .r....r ....Pe...a.b....a d b apt.nee- •. *ry taa.fat.d.r.cwpy..0..peen a..ew Isola r..b.eeag Q " D .G rge.r.or OAR 952.0040010 0 992ODtGViD aaar....r ono.ones,e.,N_ ^.99..a the a 0 Pb a as cua Meng o.c.P �NEET INDEX pent.b d.vb rr tarp=u..go .a...g r..W p.n. . O - .rggdrgr rose ay./.ACPSf•./r•.r/cue re.. Zvi ti(� p Arlan b1 to .ee.N.d..d rwy ts.p.e.....prbrnar bass.coNTRACroR !. pa.I.r..a&w.g........e.w.........�..r.gwg eea.w .creeriotion w pot.b v.Dial.d dm PWa.oePru.ayo.Roy�a on of• a cone..•coop...es.drg aer. 4••d••.9.b .rnagbd..Aa...Orb .r. •..a par. romp.r.d bas rpra e 1011•. 1.1.1 a..a S. T^.Ex rare.r.ee d.r.pr e.oe ao,a.rla& con.. Si-BEET DESCRIPTION oa�u tees.♦ ..sPep...•rrpscao.7.e....ars a.g et Al r.e...e... .w.lab••..e.a of 0 root.d..poesy b W .�.a.. .e v..�le�em�rya r-..s=tns N r Z ° .ego a Ms ad..any.r..a ems weer noted a to nee .e..r Oar root n.. 1 b w e•aag..ea..g.Y••t Y h-❑ . The COORACTOR w r re.pa.w re rma..g w..o A..d.ere.b 105.w..r afar re.•..w.gale d 2A .y..atlas.d oar W.a.a. C I COVER ER SHEET Q F-- Ca.n..d as 1 .TM...onofof .......a.ia. eb•t.:c iMARC*a. • r•�xr.a..N �a.,,..pr....e,..,.,...,.re 02 EXISTING CONDITIONS eel b.CONIR1cTOR w r..•Er.b.Co.d.Orr.lac.o bete.co... Co.too coennen o.w.tier Ex L] s vwe..bu..E21GamR f.wrwd z a 11 N..ng as cone...•4........1..par.e tree sae eertf A. e.tr=rota on p.e.c stet.r.w.•]V Irv.....m d w ape b now* .e to eve u. warm ewe r.ew 1a&..ev..net In.. T q .e•.e.a9 r•.wt.e Ny..T..o olauv eT.we Tn.ccarrR•crw w... .. �n,„� C3 SITE DIMENSION PLAN d , ur w eve••10•9•....g..eap....e e1n a.Pr b Ne a ti D.a.r.e r g'Oi Scale °'°rr"y ""•""�""P woo. =owes C4 GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN M were mar.rs.peupn w unmoved....1......•90► 1 Teen Ex r.en.R w be I e.�.0.a...... .o 0 W .t •rar.e..Di r..Row•rode a pee.rat.woe MOO ad.......ant b b b.w AA9.IT0!g9 M..ea.cog...r b .eon a a.'p.m..w.v .b tec•r d•ra. a. con•...=fwooar' CS UTILITY PLAN N 3 ewe,ore.6.1.w rw be apt..a L.spscen.•ge.a/ a the Ex ran=.o.nnecu.f••.w b.....ow.....d r.....a..a , ;..".y at ba aaaq. a...e ono....twee.a tang. •on..d ••onto.•rue.l•see.fame..•oar...." DETAIL SHEET W .peg.e tare.is.. trap..r rsM.w 9. Al woo..o.w be prase.fr.ra=t G6 P. nowctb.m.=voot a w Gey a.r.ENCP NELR w rpm•.goo CONTRACTOR rob..y op.gw�♦ eta w Naar.ranee.b.g..,, b eras w e.....a.a v,r+u p. re.y yr C•9 Deae.o..-...tree b....r9..et a ry•-••ra "`r 6•Raped c t:.AI r.b co....r,..a. C� DETAIL SHEET ti op.........e..corvol D..e.w a.W.a. CO rwcTOR w Po...• �QgAb ^"err.wosent....°a°.,a.pe.�ormee. op.� w 05 DETAIL SHEET cMp.wa pe.0..1.R: y to..ea..soh ewpn pr le..a ..r.r Ay ae..c a C....0 by ear=s W be Coal. by Ve CONTRACTOR C 41 ao.ea.ca. t...to be r......Neu..not•. 114 9as.d.gr.r...r.12.wra..•...n.o.gr.gd Gj DETAIL SHEET Fl O.ore.b.w....ev..d•.asps....$)nabn tats Cofew..• 1 Al rat ear o rop.Y,ear.w be pp.d a Cannata&to•d•'.... . . .be rg.ed.a.v. • d V.cosec.. eee fen .w.•.sgN.ww..e pr.urg taro nme..ro.a,.eon w a.de n.pewy •ye••O e..�Pella.•w p.pa a a.b.ro..w a.oy oar ltd do ro v.a":�P.d. p'"'a°'Die'"�'°"' DETAIL SH EE T d tti CONTRACTOR 11..p.. O.oe.aw..e b bee U41ae!re=fro-pcpaty.n. �pe.c1 G10 Al<p.cuLLI g of�ngg a'-'.r..�p.dad Fla AC.rm r..wNryl a la 1 u raw.r aVe w ba.a.•.d rte ara-.M)a WD..a e....n tar �1 N..w a e tr.en rsn.r w b.Pa.1 Le rroe Rw.L.e nian ne.a v.. d a. r sot art awn c.+.g.. bus r.o.rem.to ra rat g d s.pore n..Paso...ore A n1 A.van..c as M.be a5ra....a Co==st=a.n.r.row blew d the Me.s 4. 91ew.r pc.,a•.r a.....e net.P p..w b. .po...b weenra.a.r d•'4•••12"w u..a..g..b ro.uac.Na d Wae bane Cove pare.ONTCDI re.o.rd by V..Or ..9.rar=er Nq.aer. r..da0♦..d 20.P go....g.Ct Vb...N0•me..v054oae No..e..,...w..r ♦ rase gore urn 1..ch � pa.n-OPel. ft.r..b. '1 S.a.aa.ur...aa...a ar ear w w po..cs W .ee/y•a.r. YVCW.b AASNTO M-29• p...wra.rr.r a.coo...d aao..g tapn•.r-..•s.r.d 2L Al pta bong w be 1M••.O awed ro4 r.Ow•..r..w••bee.v.bob. • ca..rr.a..y..a A.Tn C.1.a..•,.r(acb Co.v.0 N. a ro.e.a ...re....awn....wes t.avow d..r eta . W d w PV.to...peg w re pat•a.Vow•.0...as s•e..#ro.s p.MCP. ..e.a•cad.bee.o....oboes Li w aA.tar P 102. i....cn ban w r a.tea a try TrRra ecN pw•L p.� yaw p 1 �p� I 116Kn AYYYW OI9Pr.ae.r era M.'a.n 1�1(: 90 .9. P•.wR.t arts.wC..y.a...r u a.P. a.Qty a (n J n. •pTarrowc.a..erg r.aror.e..um•r.ev.Pmo b a^Y19 N eta c w.R r u.w v.. . Z F- 71 COARACrOR.o be..•Oda..g prWey.a..w.•pop b..i,t en Ary !- Caer.r b..c ...b to•aa.4 d 9..w A•SNTO Ty9 a per.a r Soso.r..be peee.a&ro roar err Ed a..ae.f4 tar.p.. H T- No.w..awed.Nog COrewctw d tN.pond w w n.bead O.• .ae.r.n a.. n.e.e rapetw a a ..b o...coed n.r r 90. d cow.ct.be a weer..pRwt.....g. 5 W REGatERED LAWO&eve• a We Ca.TRr.crows apt La l e.ca n.w.Rea&.ceeog to ne Tee►.rat d W War t ...wed.logo we V..ue Cr.1C coo..wa p... ...a a... .�. a 24. •TTE. .c Ceg•n.r...en b face nee.t=oed a.n.0,121%UtAte .tag w be pm...e Div corers.r cd.1.1 endow.WOW.ab W tn. r..414.run a 0 oa 9S3-n Ceaa.bbr.r w r fa.w n OAR 9Sl<aO.<ca•'•'p•r a d tee r..s row a•lcuen.r a a.5lmb a tree etol Oct `tea �w OAR y.lswlco9o.roll.o.rar.Ca.d.^..nee ay Ce t.L..e w..A la1P.MN.a.•04.o...r r.rowra Al Nee Date..ee b. .a .vow o =card eta o 0,..t rely wed.no..4 0 a. WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS.INC. 0•Mae bnr...Ter nee.=.M.On..le.tWF r.Go.=r 09014 32.1W aeag a cr..a pro.b nag.y..ergo...terg Wr��.A .a.a..Iii.e Ua oo ..ri�a..a....4 ei r PACIFIC CORPORATE CENTER ❑ . i err ee=a ao.012.a..Warr a pee w•s 10.0 be Mod ran•a.Disci r.pPM.N♦ r.••w..n•neon it m..a gave wn.1.ee perd.ewe 19119 9ALL SEOUOLA PARKWAY,SUITE 150 .. Proem g bag a.w be•pr.ary esan me D"•"harth'ofea,ur..an..rr A.tcn..g.12 as 1.d.u.7x•w 109..y.•79P9T2. i9, err asveopar w rave.•Ex err..bee.uR wg..wr.r o..y oar a w gang p. a .Nar9 yaw r C any.d.io.s+..or.a p.fowg ay wet P '. a.a••••rd..e.a.b Pascua r.aw=asps py TIGARD.OREGON 902• 1 ea.*gee.w bs..Dane.•awl.gee resat.Mao rw.rotas n. (503)GEI.0652 reel ate...owes.•rb.. WATER LME5 20. Y EEC.r.•.b b.a Pa.ea new a.tP.par a a e.t.a a .aa V9•ararcia.Pr b conametbt 1 A•pop....rvamr.an .1 te co.b.aa.v a own tree..ease I •w s pp.w bs 0.!2.cm.rt Aar wee acne ran ao. 0(0.g .rCNary r.rrr..d.tppa9.urn oa.r..rani •STN 936.eel•21.51 WAWA CP5u.r Ale A 21-e IO.r1A c.NU Mtn 21 USA ex reea..•-.a••.Ca WO.41.at Leos 9••e p e1..:L iyy.a Ja aactEab.. A=mt w a l:i...TA<drro.g b 4401•2H .an butt ern ..Dap*foe..24 lle nand.r d • 0..a.�.w De. ...0 a.rydaa•we ...N.Ye C-.w/w And•lap rAY.N C-..Olt Poe..P'e-carwaClNOr. �. 'r ar.g d u.=a ...rg..b Ge....ci sod.awl d of I el•..a raw.•2.We b be w opeo d.lea....∎.b As rep..•.•a. i Al.wa s pp.w r..a•.wow.d 1•rr.a d fora.o now g.ea 22. It w re.d .OQ��TTF€T Oemelo.d ar...:L.ga&r.g rya+ .t-rsg...d.'r`.p=�..M•a°"..."q pr u WADDLE DESIGN/PLANNING/ARCHITECTURE E. 0 1 A reek tabs.=ea d sane..w r Pot....n pct.ad w ce.cape. . C �ce b•n m�no w=ar.IA. .art cm.a co=af to re...r ruse.v,wear dean were saw 0114.Dina ri C.,,,,, ,a,w.=.y w•wc...r r D.r.ran v..paNp9 IWO 9.W.<TFI AVE SUITE 105 ro 0 sl L.� mo ormang r tn..a Wear away nor too.Le..g.woad.tar cm oC gDiwa ..t be.ea re.r.^e one g•on per ea bees One g tee..au PORTLAND.OR 97101 •. a.ter.w be a.rr.a•owes.Was T1eea v0y wee orca.e.aaa.w w be (9035 711-7003 t err.e...•d 0000 b.rN w be oar a ca..abn*ore 0OL. ha.!.b d.aa..d 1 55...rw tee.tool ba apd.a.a i L. 74 4eee erra.••041... t]YrIn1EER lin.a•t0.weN w a e.r.d d a aaar.w.e o.art 904.. lti i troy Wear D.r12l peer b.y..end arc.rbohnp. deg conw.cuo....b r row..rp.bra _ eNG1NEER Ir etas rw.v r re..e.b r.a...r w.w r ma.t. a re.a..w a ops...a.asst...a ape.from w ruY..try era ONY.ct • �yeowsn w r epee run gee •rti d 1000 blAera Q CGNTRACTOR9 ea.=per tfi. trnrm i0...yawwed we i.d w..N cP.d urn• O .7 r, a rho CONTRACTOR e.ate.41010 eag•ee Oi.re•run Al 1..a MONO . Toe CONTRACTOR w be r.m.el.ro.w•ag v 0405.arrwba boa 5l .1. App. 1pobgl.o te pR'and peat ter as b b.2.d.a.Vow T.a CONTRACTOR w co.f.eeen erl b bete,we.b r.ear e....gr.by t.D.wu.A d E.....o.m. tM 991 d AAb.r0 T...0.re 0,r...rota&a toe repot. .e Salt Oepe.•d NYn or j ..r ..d.we t s.ar rea bac.sage d pwrn.g.rani roe....e �y �eOY' o.; +r•xo=Laws. do., ur L WeNraa t=.NC.b r.dl ropp5•A M ratar.g 11 4 6.. Y w.cr oqy 9. ._Ayi`nap....p•d.b.w be ra.peu. the n w be cwUre b w w a.a.d Dar^t=ar bon we..e.R nap b9.. nay Wear 0.0121 I....a testa o.5e tea VD.`-e.CA 1ir1.w e faro.....d do Afoot O..Coax °'19 Doll r•m+•9 D••e5 . tiro n nt rr.a.Pe.d be testy.Cat Cava......Pace.o JO .rt a 1 Ppa.-roc .m....Pbed act. .g.d..blew.aea 0. Mason.bee.w a...c..a ro w..t..ub r7...aa.•b a.ra ar a roro..g b MOW 9ueea G907....t.«.rot .ye.e w b.y.d ..W.o note. .doe.. ..., ranee ar 0,...0..0.a.w pr. 910 50511 re.awn dw51 a•e.a.ant .na sp.a ray.5.d two.amoe g a vac...... OAeg ..op.to..•..•pea..d awe nonce a t0 Dabcd.r0,a r o on... 0.0.o per.va..•r a.Tor.o b r.L FILL I4puotQl. UTILITY STATEMENT el) THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN ARE PER FIELD MARKINGS AND RECORD DRAWINGS PROVIDED BY THE RESPECTIVE UTILITY AGENCIES.LOCATION OF NON-OBSERVABLE AND/OR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE SHOWN FOR INFORMATION ONLY AND ARE NOT GUARANTEED TO BE COMPLETE OR ACCURATE NOTES I. THE 152/515 OF BEARINGS FOR 71415 MAP IS PER SURVEY 1-12-115ER GRAPHIC SC ALE • III 162/38.WASHINGTON COINTT SURVEY RECORDS. • .. .2/4 11 all 2 THE BENCHMARK(BASIS OF ELEVATIONS)FOR THIS SURVEY 155 A BRASS t i Rid O `r��®�\\7 U DISK SET IN TFIE NORT:4LEST CORNER a THE SIDEWALK OM TFIE ( IN FELT) �'` P9 /� $ W ^' BRIDGE OVER FANNO CREEK ON HALL BOULEVARD. .43. ED TAX LOT 2500 . * r I eee SO M1 ARM 350 %T WASHINGTON COINTY BENCHMARK N0.43. `%3 S�3/� V ELEVATION•43.10. � ,bye .�� 7 �< 152 AREA = 0.58 ACRES 3. FIELD WORK PERFORMED MARCH II,n�96, ,�y_ 4y� "?� 4. THE EASEMENT SHOW HEREON ARE PER OWNERS POLICY IA-r13ER "b RATER UK CONFIGtRATSDN R Z 500036UL TITLE POLICY BY OREGON TITLE COT?PANr. 44%10 yb+k Aw4.b �' Lr F'' ���1 �A z 1. \ r Y a •IGMD WATER D lT6CCT a "N ASR , • r ^ P° %'i ' ! \ U r∎• M -� -� /�`T` )..Y. ',.1�9 n /.yam i�.�i .� s-- _- ., . \ t _ ` • S I 1 y ice :!i•�� ..;�� f tJ (1 e (? :k\\3 I•• 0 VI 61/405101e,ap o i'3 $ (] e •, s o a. 1 101 14(40 ,,,...'",„y tr,,t, -',...--';- :c'!1L. AI to 3 ''' --r7-Ts.--.------:1 ' / I .. i LEGEND w I '1 '?t/ C 's r Ov) Q I - II d 3 "' I,_ r. EXCEPTIGN PER BOOK Diu ORIVEWAT `I�":1�'Y II`i3 PAGE 694 CATCH BASIN W ,III ' �� TAX LOT l00 sJ , ' � YARD uGHT I 4:1 AREA r 8.49 ACRES •.:".1., DC WATER VALVE r1' 4 a4;TtJ TOTAL AREA = , L. + H FIRE HYDRANT I 'w,'s1 i \a 9.01 ACRES �'sJ \ STREET SIGN 1 � 1 I � .,,,,l';:,...,....,.,,..._ Q �' * nONITORING ulELl ',1 I .•h11 L-1r- ,J ,, A GAS VALVE ���� •d 1 H L- \ �� . �:- tii Q CONCRETE z - �� `t�� J t4f'�� 3]9�./ 4 \ �1 CULVERT C •S?J t�Y ' S, I ,�( r e =•• • !r::` I I I GUT ANCHOR O -�vs J� • I Ay /�� eJ \ 1 1�1 G POUTER POLE O��.`k a .. '$a�sO0, \ �/�` • •< • J• 'L•• \® \�I;I RAILROAD TRACKS W _ L,� . ` /3..� j'.0� • FT,BS i 52.0 %— FENCE L. ^'.'r � I z \ •5J•D �s • Q:V. . • ��\ 6 9 e 5, Ik34;4 — — EDGE OF PAVEMENT N• • ',III',I • • • • . . ASSuLLT 1 S� / "SAr—• SANITARY 9EUJER LINE (� 1,III �'\ • . • °• o r..NO RATER aerwlcr I ! _ Il ' • , ;• 00LLARD X 01^ ° •'' i•2t • ° • ', . \I •JI t 110, IIIIII I. e W v p41111� �.1' �,o' • • • • * 1 FOUND 49 NOTED•y_ ^li Ad - �� ,. ° • • • I x�.p 4Y ll +,s2.0 SPOT ELEVATION J �, FOUND 3/4•IRON PIPE A I II ',� s •)fit -� [ 1$; }�,a •J't BOUNDARY PER SURVEY NUMBER •,O {I � •�T.\ _ =r_-_�\\ __Z �/�� ,.4„ 7„ a IE INVERT ELEVATION �` 5.480 t 11,140 '.;t 1 1 - ,71�--\ J (FIELD) - III ,��_ _ Z—` 1 JJ��. ro mu,wacen er. GR GRATE ELEVATION p �.. to ' `� s z 5.04. 'R ••��° .-.--. — ----'•:•// 1a N46'}s17E• +ti'J�, �' ��'a .---- APPROXIMATE ON-SITE WETLAND AREA (4,312 S.F.) • i95.0a' �`b"IG 5.�--ers*-- °•5.` 6-g•• �.�.+� RE CREEK DIRECTION OF FLOW ss; s �.,°1� � S E v /6•75,,,R� [b�fQ�'P O9 F O EXISTING CONDITIONS V2 •.sm i 1{D 140.101C.IMI . oil GRAPHIC SCALE W -_-.:•— .__:— E T 1$ ( IN T ) U I iccA- so ri dR _ CLEAR VISION = • i.g TRIANGLE (Ty!) 7..:1- a O °Z E e, r -, Vg _ - HAND! RAMP PER Z iR d%"- ,/�"4 CITY • I CARD STANDARDS U a, .•Id� o�- .,/. -- R2�i SEE DE IL SHEET Q At. \,''` CC—-. TYP) 9,1140091 11110 I l EI l i ' I- \ � �, �- _ Et; .�i pb y1114ow '— rn :i! :zI'p _ ';___ —1 Ow MR __'�' PROPOSE` I _, Q r Y NO CURB ON THIS AREA . /� I Y Z -~D 1 � ' ASPHALT RUSH WITH GRAVEL I 7 �yd (TYP) Q (]U 'o A. I Z } y: a Fi ~C7 € 45i , , I. 771111 , 1 1 IJ ( 4:- r1ijn.$.' 1 \\.\\\\• \\\\ j \ - \ .\\`\ e�' X 0 N a I a F \ \\ \ \\\ \ \ N \\\\N u d u 3 ry 1 RI v RETAINING WALL BETWEEN �'61' 1 LEGEND I'' IO' UP AND DOWN RAMPS(TYP) - x "'�' \ 30. I a 30' = b ° COCKEYE SIDEWALK t ftt I ' 44 t' 1 \ I ��/ PROPOSED BUILDING OS , _ 16 S•‘ PROPOSED BUILD INC I -- a \ N\\\\ \\\ \\\\ \ \\ IL\.\\ ,P -,�, I r- : ASPHALT ROADWAY Z I s g i�II 'AA Vv\V' \\VAvvv\\V I Q STD. 113`� � II { 1 I.i � { :6J I 1 ! WI' I I , �sto '' PARKING LOT INFORMATION Z CL • 1 CAB' '7I 159 REGULAR PARKING SPACES N/p/�/J -'1 ®® y p> g m I F1 TTf (TIP) L1 f1J® I 6 HANDICAP SPACES O<1�J\"I 6I t • 1 l /W I 1�19PI.i I`I...` .-i I i I i '1 I I I_.1_ I I 40 TRUCK SPACES W W Z LI • In 6 £ `Y+* ��� \\I -- $ITE INFORMATION q t. \\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\�\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ I TOTAL SITE AREA-9.07 ACRE IMPERVIOUS AREA.6 39 ACRE W 2 - I (BUILDINGS,ASPHALT, SIDEWALKS) e o -'? (''�16.5' PERVIOUS AREA-2.66 ACRE 10.4' PROPOSED BUILDING m I (LANDSCAPE) \ p V\v\\Avyvvv\y A yVvvvvvy vN\Vv \Vv vy.yvvVvVvVvNVNV\AVAVVAvv-VAvvy:v':vN vvv yv.v Vv\v,.yvVAv'- 1 1 -- -- -- -- - -- -- n 0 m 3 v o I..� DIMENSION PLAN C3 eta vionwaws 611.II) GRAPHIC SCALE W el11#.111M1 --------'" \ R Es W m ( UIF€?1 3fi mss- Ca n = a � ,R C4-) Q i g i� '1C, . ilii - Cz L r-h- -- ':-- -- ------_7_- -- — -- -_ \ . --............... .•*;.i- i 3 1-------- -"------.0 0:\*."---2 .“...''''''''' \ 1 CC ......„zr....7-;,-;,...„,::1T00-0„,iw. IMNI merniiii Jail ' c___ -'-- _.:!,•'...-: 1.0........ CL r 1 .-ipirl 3 b, -z- < s I lii A -.P\ D t-0 1— / t Ot/..---'AW:1 ./-- -Tc .''' Iltl ILD I MG v ' Q no 5. 11111.1,00r,.4,--- .,, -• 719,j......i 71/4* a 12. Ile" doh- .7- red.1- •••••••• ---, 4 II'\ CC 1 :'4 \ � .A I I9 q!{Tri :I I� 'r I 1 •• f{r 1. •I I •_ er �Lj a ,I O W ` / r V -�I �.I- rl l-. V I M .1.1r.,::,; , :•: (- ,� a , IV\ \•_'S• • \•.4 • a 1 . ''- �' - f t f f � _ MOPE AWAY I S \ \ ��µTM� IN �'� I �I LEGEND a .yva- PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION CE °91 ` DmN POMO=SYN6 F-, • CATCH BASIN I- I 1 �\ .R_�SIS '��� ® STROM DRAIN MANHOLE Z I4 . ��� 1 ,\ �la m SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE 0 S��lr■1�sE ` 000 CLEANOUT LJ _ i r`1 OIREC7IGN OF FLOW I ``-', '1 I ' 1 1 I I I.IT. I I I 11'7 ICI I I \ ��J\1:- r--�i xL FIRE HYDRAN7 Z `• 7 y, !�-\ ''∎" .'_+ ••∎∎ �"" �:� , I' j BIOFILTERS AT CATCH BASINS o a z rrr .�. rT-1- -T —'. �T -r'� "i- °�� I \�7 —.— SILT FENCE I I I •. IA ,y,1 1 1, ikail IA i Al I I I .- , I ' vl \\1 \�r > '.. LEA d i I I I I T I •� —' ' I I • ......... I S>®r.¢ N -�I I ,I 1 ._ I JI I I I I 1 al I1 II \ ~MED Su1tD�W �,Il" �_,�3 ,I i , z i� l� �i'l`�' __ 11` a \\ 1� \ _ \\\\\\ \\\ \ \ __ \ . A. \\ \ \\\ I .!.Mho•. .2 .=. ���:t icobt l .��44.4;!o• .D ,4.70 :5 04.rice oy} ' sumac "c" ce \ 1 I _____ .!.-_-__ <. __-�t. �ti--!.�v�-i�!.vS.��.�.�.?.��.!,.S_ ,91.!.-.-. 1.!�','--� o rJ s e 3 m TOP Of SAW ..""An'MITI"E^A"°5""E` .RED ROCK CREEK z x • A►.I.WC CWRI6.t m �` 3` .tee R 6 O U II C4 ME: Oil GRAPHIC SCALE hmr-mw U tw R¢OGTE DIMING w (O 7T) TN 991 MINN 1" O STANDARDS t 4s ••60 M1 2 d - CONNECT PROPOSED U Y TOMEST,C..TIES TO GRIST INO 014?O 7 n.,mow E7115TIN0 YATETt l3! 61-.RATION II b�. 2 yam, a eENINO mum: M E ANNULI C RICA ATION P07•R11911701MTY TIGYiO;YTER OtlTIRICr Z STANINOS \ _IN" '>f•� Y CL F R[EOGFE[nsrmc \ 97a FN MIND SIOE9ALX A.- Z- Pu7 NAN..COUNTY STANDARDS RIM.154.4 if IN.IS3.]6 �� ' 014 L. ._ IC MINIUM w COICC7 rIRC 1 O LINE TO E),ITINO IC IN.13217 • i' ' /' \ - lE OUT-1513] y ' ___ - '� >o'•° ° 5 ',�''>/ a"OOMESTtC WATER LINE Cr '11011111.11//IA resx.,um imi 111111'4:1"----er., .•. ..��• R I W 154.6 N 3 LE N - If DUT.13360 Qx \\\\ 8"FIRE WATER LINE q Si -, A ��~ � If OUT.151.. �'- d� �����.�,I 7 tlOgC Z c I ''' L J _mi A, ALL UTILITY WORK 0 Rir-Iy1b Rlwlsz6 1 '� f IN-I.7.7b �- ^0 1 UNDER TRACKS TO BE - O IE IN.I47.70 RIW1516 IE N.14a, E N-640.63 If aR-I4A� _ Ir RIr-6530 COORDINATED *ITN Q Q IE QIr.147.70 f wr.1415J of IN-ISI.n SPUR OPERATOR ` f OUT.151.33 1.1:7.7 FT S.a65s !MI6 L. O.3 FT S-Q65R 6roIA 1.1x4.707 5-QSSR 6ro1A I.I. N }p I ' � Q . �I- yQg ON �• I opw I I I�C� I j b Fi] I , ...: CONNECT TO.. i NO/ I wl. I . I I T.0 I I yg• '.:..�..._:..: = o Hour[Half To MN I 1 I I I I , I I0 ` \,6 v -: . '1 i 3 1 \\N \1 \\' "E• • LL I e \V \V \ \ ,% N. ' \ 8 3 " I 91n m19 CAM mm 60001 \ ! I. I `I RIr.150.7 RIN ISp7 RIW150.7 RIS l Q7 RIY.ISSS if 018.14667 IC a1JI.IMIe OE OUT.149.7x if ONT-ISdxa IC IN.19Q3 N I RIM.DSx•4 W ZICO If OUT.15Q 2 AIM,57.1 If . \ • if 111.1SQY IC IN.I46a6 ~ \ I� IE OUT.ISQ46 •If OYT.I46a6 I L-4.a6 r 3-22 U. ' ' I 1 Joe.a I " f Wi31a 1 w1y13 I LEGEND Y IE IN.141N RIY.1523 36• E IN-I x.a c N.I4as1 DCDA DOUeIE CHECK DETECTION ASSEMBLY 74x•oR�rF1a.E D1T-146xa four-Iys1 d 6" STM LINE ■ CATCH BASIN EallEM I 5 \aIVEUE out.I.7.x6 REr N-�i xx \\\\ \. \\ ® STROM DRAIN MANHOLE Rir.ISx.s I i ' if0u7,..6.23 I li ��\\\V 'rvOtlJ"l• "VA"VA TIM. CI I m� SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE CLEANOUT y W I I FOC FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION o °,i.„ I RI FIRE HYDRANT Z 1 ' a•c + I STORM LINE w J L-130.0 FT s-0.655 36"DIA LL-,99.0 FT S-Q•SS 36.016 L-169.7 Fr 5-0.e0a 6 016 SANITARY LINE 1 �\ WATER LINE (FIRE) o s-n6s�xT '�•I I IE�I"I: '.P�41 ! ' I p I I 1(119.i 6.61 ---- WATER LINE (DOMESTIC) W L. ~ MA m 1` - If QIr.IN.61 0: S J t I N° N I',FOG I- I RIY.I SQ7 RIY-I A.7 N OCDA FR0r1GED INSIOf IE gIT.I49.0 IE OUi.I49.0 .3 . I \ OF BUILDING(TYP) o o �I RIY-1510 \ ( SEE DETAIL WET Rlwlsya If OUT-146.0 $TORY 6r.4PTFR E 6X.141.30 TOP NO FIN15N OAOE 6 IE OUr.I4I.30 �' if .645.x6 NI \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\ \\ \\-'\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\`\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\�\\\:- i 1f WT.I■x.911 Fill _ I �'� A~ I 9 IVITUI 7 1 _-___` '0 941 6A7.LKER 5T. �• 0 IC OUT.14x.16 :7-C' _ Q 00 TYPE I RIPRAP� 6 FT;e rT \RED ROCK CREEK 3 . - ss11N .4•74770A.CENTERLINE E <�<''I RIM 10 FINISH GRADE o U Ova.EXISTING LINE CONMACTOR TO TO vf171FVY LOCATI011 ROTNOLL AND if Ounurr PLAN C5 F1L 166IDICO90 INwe 22 1.220 a 1.222 Or ea. N01IM31i TO COPP02. • • 0 .1.AWN of AO A OIUMOS Iro 010.02 O O O .1222.0. .r Iw I..rr ►..r • O O 0 0 S 0 0 .,, r0., ;117_______ © Q -. 1 --- -pw- P o W Minn 1�1 r N..�....H.ree�R 2221112 01211 Ma Tr P022 1M.a...1lMrpr INI ro MP 0 mar NI.a c.R*eo Fmk\ A1UOR �? W �1 w.ws I ma+.w.s+wswa..are •.ate m. .�.. MR 2 2112.1 3 E221lc t Mt Ere /•• . C--)3 0.. Y>�1ii r wa IN..wc Iur.rt>s 2 d"" • 219...Rr.r IIII -:r. e • • ,� *�'210.22 MI 0220 2 002 002 0.RI.+ ^ 03.ecra 1p •WORM,COI R-.1. I I. .1I Ell 32 ill Or 2114011 PO Y F; :▪:ro RR . \ � OK. �•L A \I, 3. T j/w'Pr oNrRa•o�Wt ie.,-. r 3. 3. ESECeMT r/fr10LTi M/NYI F PL.s N.I..RRI bll,O.io W -. U ,y 1.1 YpMWgRf roll..m MN1a I -.--nLL Na OID .OION --- AAVr� 2 qF A OMIT a ILI. �� I I- :r ,I� 'IJBURCAN AND ea.............r.m m�i'a..r Ymai°i ARM•02.gym•r y..q.n .- O. .-A.rA RR'e.Mir r0 7i•1" DTANCARD MANE OL! "1°"° O.22 PM 5311 CC X I FRAME L COVFR ..sm�oOP�'0..Ia�'o n.w 1.22.2 .01.01.01.a Ye.ONO 1.101 170.-0T,IOWA �.e Ra.ea.n o wn.w nc.neaA+m None • T[ L rp,A7l�e NOT 7A 1!!M TRAFFIC AIWA.Q CQLeCrOIY r....ri..r*.r0. ],r0.eR!MRM'l9yy.T�e[fi�RA7 CAST o.ON MOM A-411 CLASS l°. p Ii GASKET •rR•e0.o+ AM 12E1•110 21122011 w - '..TO NOME 1 COWAN AIO PRAMS f0 e!RAOI.m r0.•(IRI.eeYURY • Y.RI Q �W a • a-•�•A to rlo OKA 21904 V Rc+s A.•vlo'LID raR....ms NOGG PLAT TQ 1Y•a•••Mb •PIA2012 022 TO 029102 "'.1 • .,'I ■ a 0121...baw. [O�7IONAL7 mama Z MN I •;P21•11.12221 20 °la "°'� �!'/ice Pl ;<li _Q 3 4-- - 1 0.7.0 W o.. ��� >,> � Ii�ll�ll�X11!;; , FEE ' 1 I H �,o 3Q ar�•° A //� A 8 0140 `0 facer 1.i.0.'w NRm.wvr N....a 1J //H//�� Q� 5 1.0 0223 0 4 • �r'M 222'00. // � ( °°� °°°� eeRw Nw r...r.cur is A 1` ■ 41222202 N'.�.w.ar �uN"� ..n./ •°"u ewe Q 2 11' J 0.s e°v ; wure.r TO PRE°22'°2'°• IFFP L7 a0.QQa0.// .IMIw .P'1°ROe a°.P's°�'rb° Q oz s usA 0.1.22.r.0.o1aeA 0.■0.012 _� t 1� r r 0.c so..•,n Er �..0 tit \\� z ~p S - f e-I- eYN.w... I , 22/2 02 0022 Pon 121 10 OP rid-"t V . % , °•a� n : / 0 I , ,• 21 0.. PMN N. ...R.01. ���, / o'OL. 00 o `/ 1229110 C.21 MOP EWE<COKEE swot Met .4411116. 51.01011 11 r....c re P T i E �l Vw swamp • •• t ' _ .IH~ y • • o z _U 7 PER 1 ' °°.°.e° boo: p;OQ ` Z �RI nwai Ac a >Q r.AR1Q M �- _J 2 Er r'mRw'a Li _ � ♦ riwn r 11122, O � � sL10E A- ♦ R101D \//•\i .\/ (n Q '4.: - it . ■� O L1.2212 h....e.YRrNMr2P21112 11911 tr .A„t . Y11enw.raw 1.11.2 © y„ • N...2.122 H,.r..w rrPlA.ew 10.»2012 I :.; rR..roM '\� ��o\N\\NDR: __ r..3,v H.Mw• .ewR Can °7� +' ^i° TRENGN BAGICFILL DETAll9 2 Ll1T®r0.�EAeQlNr AEtE6'1 . aawAA.Rr r•1.012 :u1QO.e. cv•.oun I StI _ _ Y.A.0.0.w.0300.00• OW NAT eC ALLOPO COI A N..i OEM 0.31202/01 ✓ �� ��. .�gi'.'. ICPOIRAIR•eAem a `j"• 7 �1�•ic31:.a's FLAT TOP M4NHOLE grAAKPA.Te. 'i - . C.A/ �% '1.14. / % --�L'1:, 2092 ALCM POOR• L201321.NaF . IY G219 N3.0160.4• MIR 22321,1102 r if A 2•012 IMO 29 imilii e � C F I iT AIw,.:ACID OVER �ANITARr SERVICE LATERA ( 1 /5;2 t i . . a,y, AA 13.0 Kt upOA 7.6eT �� �.wIe NO.•170.eA 79601 --_ -__-- -_ '4 RECESSES 41IIf INLETS : t ) A I I e A A :' _92 _• °° PAI�EMENT I 0. r-o 1 21.21.I t u wur EC212 OP a .EEP STION A A_ NOlES C2122..N: / ' 1 °, YAM PLAN r7►r " OVERSIZE CATCH BASIN� . � �..' le) e. ..-" � _ FRAME AND GRATE n DTANDARD GLEANC IT rtrtMnn�ttt ueA p16.N0.i56eA 776lT '.F O .. .1� PLAN O17AINNC NO 170-ST !/r i 7 1/7'MI 926 ., ...•.. . 0.3.'21!.r1G1IP.!- '- e 4.11;I•ce mIRR • '° : v.• 1 -r. -� 7 1/7.1l1.1l1•1l1.1.1 I�I�I�I�I�ISi�!d ®� '- MASK a O KRi.. )- 1111111 II Illlillllllill� s,-7 e- e• e- .. SECTION A-A SECTION B-8 I PIR. N i, I I 1111111111Ii e� a A J NOTES 1 MI L7 4 11111111111111,. iiiJiI ' o IQ �°K e.Nm s, 1111111111 r::a=t1.ErE P ,�3C,PG 1111 I I MK NY.tT3.9T wKCA$T GTCN 9A9M , 1 �-�^ 1111111111 1 fd1 rRA1.E A21 0 MONO.MAL L ISKANESS TO eE S• RE.IEp10EYENT TO BE PEW YEETINO ASfl ARTS GRACE 60 OR.1.0€0 •R(uEETING A 711/r7•I1I1I0IOI�I5I�I I�1/IlIBI/IaINI MIIIIMMINEINI L - J PLAN .nEW OVERSIZE GUTTER Sc CURB SECTION A-A 2Yir A ;o L /'�/�AAT 0221121712 E9 Hose OT DOI�I PLAN ,/IR • WAS SECTION B-8 I fa'1 INLET CATCH BASIN WATER QUALITY rRAYE AM GRATE 1IATERIAL SNAl.9E MT am STEEL OR A▪RYRO'€0 Mum_ V ORA2MN0 NO. 100-ST Maus ORArr.O I.0..100-ST A00rf10NAL TN.CIINESS 000 REN.EORCEYENT 9001.RE REOUREO•01 STATE NON.,APPUCATONS, Mt 911.10.10.1.0110 • J .1 . — I ;i i 1 , C '4 _ r t e r6 I € $Y a 1 6 4 - f 11.11 4 1" ' q 11 iii x , iP 1 V 1 IP , . F ` r. iii A d° 41. .,. g t' ► /15, �S N I F ,/ I�MII ��1 d a �� fit' �ii AT• i <<< /�� �� -ADO �lJ�a ,II (01‘4i m R -- _ ' gig ,r1 1: G__—?p B 3t 3!3t Y R it ;i• t it It �I1 al '�t.e,f.,f.), ••..�o 9 e i 45 bar j FQ v i Y < a `� 1 I la 4 P 0 ' �r �¢ a ►a II \ . IS I 6, I p= s / ''"1 I if '. „, —01 li f8 y.',.,� EE a, r gP I b �� ` alap a i aPi 1 ''.. il , _ > I yT ! P. B :.; J;:. y t, C :�. O ,at =MI 11•111:11 mot, !� - ■i a g F. g x 111! :.l. 4�,,� e I 1 ti i .. . " �" !+ $' I ill %\ ,,. ii p a C G d i Y 1 e \ \ISO _ �S I `\ i\` b f? R �9 5i fill ii i 1 g A 1' ' t r e .<0;'`r 1 ` .4•a �s � 8 s qel 01 c 6 - ; f 6�'-r r o i! : e 11 gg�a1 s • `/'• 4 / 2 lil6 a 1a 111 u % c{5 o �� Pa A1Y P�?Z ! •< ■ / gkq]�I� i @ yytt ELrC66o =il RJ O;3 ?_ !!I C) 1 i I 1 j §411 m ,, \, pp _dE iY .r ` io •e ' N �I h \mil/ 11 B yy�tR 4X4,,e �.' I E b j CtI gy Y 4 ;Ai �j� No.,J S i 81/ ` '��ar pi 991 9 g ., s i a;s a L u 11 Ni ti b r.G ,� �r` + 2= r imm j I, .,:;.'stt .. :`LS`:J;'..����i�:�? 1ii .:a i.��a a`�'.a`:rS < 4 1' I� ` 'Er , ` '�x�`�kz ..l 71s ] ` i hi II i ii OD 11 I 14 11' ?,s A • ill 1 g JOB I 99303 __ REVISIONS Dm( 1/30,00 ___ A - — THE FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK SEC.I, T. 2 S., R. 1 W., W.M. latal� 1 DRAWN RGG SHEET TITLE CITY OF TIGARD DESIGN PLANNING ARCHITECTURE WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON 1921 Nw.Kearney Street Portland.OR 97209 CHECK RDB DETAIL SHEET C1999 Waddle Design.Planning.kchilect«e RI(503)221-2003 FAX(50 221-1109 : i °\::A... ./:: :i sil , j, i 1c �� i ` to Ipl , a� r. h. I ..N, i vt::, „ ,/ii4 -:‘:.. • 1 li / 1 11 ii ; a .,:.,4.:::.1 I 1 i i VI 1 I I i 7.. I P lid 111 1 P t. fl Nil 1 s • i 9 i ri i kj R s ` 9 I hiq r I. ]ij Z �' _ ► I ,I-11 R,. n D F` A flT73 1,7/ "E 1 �1 bit f i i • +111 i . -i ' ' 1 1 II ,. ;, r - —.4,- .... - r„.!1"... . ii tC� 1 •R10• • P l V I gi ill li II i R u I!I 1 I. R I p ; 11 4 li! ii 1 i ; i i . , 1 Ti 1, vt 0 q i 1. .. R c /r--, % R .? t.:` G 6p .i1 11 ,t P' F • Y e it li .,70.904V0 Pi I ,.,.5. 7 Itl� � r 7.7. y��i.W.•:��� ill 2 I il F •>iHY m A if-- ! 1 11 z ce?.„„t`�� ` ill L. 9 R q p... • i \ 11 i4 - 1'1;1;5; (r, z Iiii ,, r.,, il $g 4p+r$a 1F'N. I I v.! g ER n n p0Fgl 2 i I Call 1' CI El ill ' r m41 �� _ _ c 7i�i= '� �J i� m n N 0.4i i i. I I i a . CD F � tat; �i 1 1 r f '; E° ti/ rAiiit1 �,� r �n1 e III1h{I1!1I1jjI1iJ �,�? b I i t it P 3 0' �- i I I q� Nq 44 li• e •II! — — —•iIo s iI! I "Vs 17 1 11 1 j ° «w. 6 4 q II t 7 1 rww••• x i I9 ■ L �� i 1 o • _•_f 1” t j:i 111" " R3 .+'mod:- i g V — — 1 ilk 10 1' BC 11 i i g SOD • 99303 _— REVISIONS 1 \ '( , DATE I13m/1130/0° _ THE FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK DPI/ g co SEC.1, T. 2 S., R. I W., W.M. g DRAWN RGG SHEET TITLE CITY OF TIGARD DESIGN PLANNING ARCHITECTURE WASHINGT❑N COUNTY, OREGON 19Y7 w.w.IGan.r SUM valueq OR 97Y09 CHECK Rue DETAIL SHEET 01999 Waddle Design.rl nv.Architecture (sO3)nl-Im! rM(501)rn-1109 �4 •1' rl; , •I )! 4 'ii 1 p II > Z ——yyy F— t $ yp •• f1r O b O� y `e �a ;i1 � q flea aie i � � ; 7A i A ii e TTT■ p a 9� ■■■ Px€N . '_ I'�d H N I I !! 1 IT1 i �1 I I fi Ili -t� ..i 18a di 1 el 'iiih; d 9 A 0 •x T. ;1 Q; 44444 IA g! :ii 0 la is ii i X z 4a °R $ il 1a gall ; ga e b 4 1? A �a R w .f da iA ! a aaaaai G9 P4 p p z 1 —� Z —� 9 Ali is At 1 " j d e. 1 "' - • IA 11 i 1 li i 1 at IA a IA 4; 14.144. f! 0 . 11 m C-7 fl 1 It Bs R4 4 v G i I C7 at ap9 eR IX . !I 1 4 ._... x — —�G � 9 44444 : 0 rn a Y 5 s &I sea R;` :1 4 R e aJ 5 : '''' ''•.'"'""'HLI!I 7i; ®®44®CDO z ru F9 A 111 Ofilill $ lp Z 1 : 0 B i I —a � Q 4 4 a 4 () 0 > 0 3 g (n Y A � : o ,� 0 0 ® z 4, FIE -=', I I �� PUBLIC ROAD QB� Q ! N • N ( ♦ .,-‘.7i% 0 G� a D ill Q KN� a 11 q rn N +) At ����� z 0 VII\ ' a .•1 -4 : %. \ N ,17 1 --1 4! ‘ \V‘ri,l'. i 1 may ■ T�t��`,,� Au a f Vt:'s O a k, r / lit A i I "i 1, r: f .I( © © CD CD 4) ' N E o ' 0 0 m 9 F. iii iii : "J log b /1 1 s 14 g JOB }' 99303 - - REVISIONS 1 ^ DATE &30,00 THE FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK l daJle-= i (0 DROWN RGG SHEET TITLE CITY OF T I GAR D DESIGN PLANNING ARCHITECTURE WASHINGT❑N COUNTY, OREGON 1917 NW.Kearney street Pa(kn 0R 9/209 CHECK RDB DETAIL SHEET 01999 Waddle Design.Planning.Arrhilectare 11.(503)771-7003 FAX(503)221-1109 ...--...-.--..,- - --...--...;.---..--;,..;:.;...---...7:"...7----.7;;;;:.,_....-.--• -=,._.,,,-- 7.:..:;.....--..-- ._ _. _ _ ._ .- --------- --- -- -- - . . - - - - I PRECAST STORMFILTER" IN SERIES DATA I GENERAL NOTES: DESIGN WATER QUALM FUN/(de) 0.57 PEAS FLOW(ds) 7.11 I.) STORMFILTER BY STORMWATER mANAGEmENT. PORTUINCI. OREGON (503-240-3393). RETURN PERKO OF PEAK FLOW(yrs) 25 2.) ALL STORmFILTERS REQUIRE REGULAR MAINTENANCE REFER TO OPERA-DON AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL FOR R .FLOW CARTRIDGES REQUIRED 18 TOTAL NI DETAILS. PRECAST STORLIFILTER SIM II's 1 6' FILTER 4 1.E*16' M:::: 3.E 3.) PRECAST CONCRETE VAULT CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C858. (In-O )-2. MM. LE. SARIS& MATER :U.:, 1* 4.) DCTERNAL PIPING ANO COUPUNGS PROOTHERS.vIDED BY O INLET PIPE C 145.26 HOPE l e • g- INLET PIPE/2 N/A N/A N/A 5.) FLEXIBLE COUPLINGS TO BE SET 18- OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL FERNCO OR ENGINEER APPROVED. Ct...'' Li 14.J CONNECTION PIPE N/A N/A TO- I a." (Y 6.) SEE PRECAST STORMFILTER DATA SHEET FOR VAULT DIMENSIONS. ELEVATIONS AND NUMBER OF C.ARTRIDGES. OUTLET PIPE ' 142.96 HOPE ar 7.) ANIL-FLOATATION BALLAST TO X SET ALONG ENTIRE LENGTH OF BOTH SIDES OF FILTER AS SHOWN. RBA ELEVATION(S): IWO''. 2: ,; SEE PRECAST FILTER DATA BLOCX FOR BALLAST WIDTH AND HEIGHT DIMENSIONS. I -154o 4 N/A 401:.:::: ,-G---- C;■:, 1=. SE .411-71 OK::"-:-. ...". 2 3 ...W .P31/A/ ..„.}..,/___,I/A < '11 Uostroom u■ ADJUSTABLE UD YES/NO s il (. 00OR OPENING DIRECTION:(FACING 1 t A = ..._.--. DOWNSTREAM -SEE FIGURE ABOVE _ 1 Z 4 2 EXAMPLE:'2 TO 1'OR'T TO 2.' TO 2 USE'N/A'FOR METAL GRATE). -.5 E H-20 TRAFFIC RATED UD YES eL se.4 LLGOER YES t g WON IIEIGHT Z AN1I-FLOATATION BRIA5T LI ;240 UPSTREAM nsit u N/A N/A (USE N/A IF BALLAST NOT REWIRED) ANTI-FLOATAnON BALLAST /(BY OTHERS) - Ne CC PRE-CAST . CONCRETE VAULT • . C; 4:t In,,r 1 Ct. - . A . • ,.-6" 1:millEsium 11 17,2:66 I :1301 I ION I I 11:0:11 I I 11'9'11 Liil o • Viii&i/-A` ._-_-,44- ___}A- NC. ,. x ,. sump I- z 3 § lialikYlAIONIZIO ., 1 - ...-..! . :,,m ,1001211:211111111WW11•1181311,1701 1111111111 1. X 1. SUMP •""" .444.1 . Wei\Vir W ___} minim CX -,.. vic D 01- - worn ■.._ o - I- I' 5' 1.-lo ip' i" -. ,-- 0 taj '- .1 LADDEr (TYP) milli!!! --.. 1 v) Z _(./5 1- L) • ? ID 4-•----- 0311 - .....-•"--- - - 7 1 666666 111. 1 -...'. '-'' 1111111111 11-■ I 9 (..) I._ La 0 0 / ..-------., C/_,* mum nun . --, 1111111111, 8' INLET PIPE • (BY OTHERS) en V/ Ck 'RC ic >-cu Z / >-0 . 8• OUTLET PIPE *DI =-- IwpoEllamm &tempi(35no,tri i - 1111111111 1111111111 . () CI CI CC .1-i_ (BY OTHERS) V i VI rA i i•• __}A/ __/-j 4i Z Z a I-(7))L3 cc ,c ic Z 4. . CL IL. Z•-■ - 81 INLET BAY ' 4 Z In D Li c, -...' ■••• 1 l-1 v) ¢ U_ CO 8 I • . yd, Ob ei W • . .. ce I .. ... .'. - - '- • * . . • .. ... •- .. o_ RADIAL FLOW I-- PIPE MANIFOLD (IYP) CARTRIDGE (TYP) (BY OTHERS) 8'x16' PRECAST STORMFILTER - PLANniVIEW 40 i o SCALE: N.T.S. In a .., < ,- ,.., ,„ 1.L.1 3-2j D I MONO PLATE DOORS(TYP) TRAFFIC BEARING LID(TYP) L.L1 Lu ADJUST DOORS WITH R 1 SER TO HATCH TOP ELEV I 218.I 5 5,5. I E I In . I f I NI SH GRADE 3 <<:= v, . 6 ■.,.. - ce 1 <r ,:..:.... 'LA11O D ER=(T YP' ■ )Th RADIAL FLOW 4CARTR1OGE(TYP) ..-t. . H I a . ..--.1I:: 111111 iuk1 - liTh-l-ulu" it- mInIMm r !E. 45.25 Mlrdi ■ 1 l ■ i =/ - : 15-182.86 a 3 a a Z X 8 da 6,?.S,. a 3 i t.a,1 i 1 ccc. i Ccn o0§h. I Ln S C■0 z 3*. Erx16' PRECAST STORMFILTER - SECTFON VIEW ill The STORM WATER MANAGEMENT StonnINter U.S. ATENT No. 5,322424 No. 5424.574 AND OTHER U.S. .! 1 5 * - a _ SCALE: N.T.S. a n.1, ..... 1.... ,.,, AND FOREIGN PATENTS PENDING V 5- Tc MD 1630141.0113 Tr--af-PIC Ariabsiss Step , 8196 SW Hall Blvd, Suite 308 Engineering Beaverton, OR 97008 �ng�rieering (503) 641-1437 Transportation and Planning Fax (503) 350-1698 January 28, 2000 Project 510, Foundry Industrial Park Mr. Brian Rager City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 SUBJECT: Traffic Analysis for the Proposed Foundry Industrial Park located at 8200 SW Hunziker Street in Tigard, Oregon Dear Mr. Rager: Based on your request, I have performed an analysis of the traffic impacts of the proposed Foundry Industrial Park. This development will contain three buildings that will have an access driveway along the south side of SW Hunziker Street. Existing usable buildings on the site contain approximately 66,920 GSF. The proposed building will contain approximately 120,000 GSF(see Figures 1 and 1A). This traffic analysis includes an assessment of the traffic impact of the redevelopment of this site as well as growth in background traffic due to other sources. Based on the results of this analysis, it is concluded that the proposed Foundry Industrial Park can be constructed without adversely affecting the traffic operation or safety characteristics of the adjacent street system. Specific findings of this study are as follows: • Based on standard ITE trip rates, redevelopment of the site with the Foundry Industrial Park is estimated to generate approximately 369 additional new vehicle trips on the adjacent roadway system during a typical weekday. This will include 45 vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and 44 trips during the PM peak hour. • In the future, all intersections in the study area will operate at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS D) or better. Major traffic movements at the intersection of SW Hunziker Street and the site's access will operate at acceptable LOS C or better. Observations at the existing intersection of SW Hunziker Street at SW Hall Boulevard and SW 72nd Avenue, and SW Hall Boulevard at SW Scoffins Road, did not reveal any traffic safety or operational problems. • No specific off-site improvements are necessary to accommodate traffic generated by the Foundry Industrial Park or mitigate its impact. The following paragraphs document the study's methodology, results, and major findings. I Traffic Impact Corridor Planning Parking Traffic Calming Signal Design Foundry Industrial Park Page 2 January 28, 2000 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Figures 1 and 1 A show the vicinity and the proposed site plan. The applicant is proposing to construct the Foundry Industrial Park development, which will contain approximately 120,000 GSF. This project will redevelop an old foundary site at 8200 SW Hunziker Street which currently contains about 66,920 GSF of existing buildings that could be leased out for use.. The site is currently zoned I-L (Light Industrial), which would permit the proposed development. The existing access driveway will be used for the proposed redevelopment. STUDY AREA Based on discussions with the City engineer and staff, the impact of this development must be evaluated at several intersections along SW Hunziker Street at SW Hall Boulevard, SW 72nd Avenue, the site's access driveway, and SW Hall Boulevard at SW Scoffins Road. AREA CONDITIONS Study Area Land Uses Land uses in the immediate vicinity of the site consist mainly of industrial uses. Along the west side adjacent to the Foundry Industrial Park site is the Centrex Construction Building, to the east is Huttig Building Products, and to the north is the Knez Buildings. Site Accessibility Area Roadway System Figure 2 shows the approximate location of the proposed Foundry Industrial Park and the surrounding roadway network. The main roadways in the study area include SW Hunziker Street at SW Hall Boulevard, SW 72nd Avenue, the site's access driveway, and SW Hall Boulevard at SW Scoffins Road. Table 1 presents the characteristics of these roadways. Table 1: Summary of Study Area Roadway Characteristics Road Width Posted Side- Bike On-Street Street Name Class (Feet) Speed walks Lane Parking SW Hunziker Street 2-Lane Major Collector 36 35 Yes No No (at Site's Access) w/CLT&Bike Lanes SW 72nd Avenue 2-Lane Major Arterial NB 60 25 Yes No No (at SW Hunziker Street) w/CLT&Bike Lanes SB 53 SW Hall Boulevard 2-Lane Minor Arterial NB 39 (at SW Hunziker Street 30 Yes Yes No /SW Scoffins Road w/CLT&Bike Lanes SB 45 Pedestrian and Bicycling Considerations Few pedestrians or bicyclists were observed during our intersection volume counts. In the immediate vicinity of the site, most street sections have sidewalks on both sides of the street. The site already has sidewalks along the north side SW Hunziker Street, and curbs and gutters on both sides of the street. Foundry Industrial Park Page 3 January 28, 2000 Transit Considerations Tri-Met operates bus routes 38 and 78 in the vicinity of the site. The nearest bus stops for routes 38 and 78 are at SW 72nd Avenue approximately 93 feet south of SW Hunziker Street, along SW Hunziker Street approximately 206 feet west of the site's access, and 172 feet west of SW 72nd Avenue. The number 38 route runs north and south along SW 72nd Avenue to/from the Mohawk and Martinazzi Transit Center and to/from Boones Ferry and Kruse Way. The number 78 route runs along SW Hall Boulevard and SW Hunziker Street to/from the Beaverton Transit Center and the Lake Oswego Transit Center. Existing Traffic Volumes and Peak Hour Operations Traffic Volumes A reconnaissance of the site and its vicinity was conducted. Traffic volumes within the study area were obtained from actual weekday peak hour traffic counts conducted earlier this month. To adjust for the winter time period,these counts were increased by 10 percent to reflect better average yearly peak hour volumes. Figure 3 shows these adjusted recent AM and PM peak hour volumes obtained at the key intersections. Traffic volumes greater than 25 were rounded upward to the nearest five vehicles. These data reveal that the morning peak hour typically occurs between 7:30-8:30 AM and the afternoon peak hour occurs between 4:45-5:45 PM. This study considered traffic conditions during weekday AM and PM peak hours, which represent reasonable"worst case" traffic conditions within the study area that also correspond with the time periods that the proposed development will generate most of its traffic. Overall, less than 5 percent of vehicles observed were large trucks. Peak Hour Traffic Operations Traffic conditions at key intersections in the study area were analyzed during both AM and PM peak hours. Intersection operational analyses were conducted using the procedures in the Highway Capacity Manual (1994) for evaluating signalized and unsignalized intersections, which describe the traffic operations of an intersection in terms of its Level of Service (LOS). For unsignalized intersections, the intersection's LOS is stated relative to the most critical intersection approach or maneuver, typically the left turn from the minor street approach. For signalized intersections, the LOS is a function of the average vehicle delay that vehicles on all approaches experience. The LOS criteria range from"A," indicating little or no delay, to "F," indicating that drivers experience long delays. The LOS worksheets for the results presented in this study are attached as an Appendix to this report. City of Tigard and Washington County standards require that all signalized intersections operate at LOS D or better and unsignalized intersections operate at LOS E/F or better(if a signal is not warranted). Table 2 (on the following page) shows the calculated existing LOS for the key major study intersections based on the peak hour traffic volumes shown in Figure 3. These key intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS D or better). Foundry Industrial Park Page 4 January 28, 2000 Table 2: 2000 Current Levels of Service • Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Signalized Intersection Avg Vehicle V/C Avg Vehicle V/C Delay(SecNeh) Ratio LOS Delay(SecNeh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd/SW Scoffins Road 8.6 0.51 B 10.1 0.76 B SW Hall Blvd/SW Hunziker Street 19.3 0.74 C 11.4 0.70 B SW Hunziker Street/SW 72nd Avenue 21.7 0.66 C 11.1 _ 0.55 B Minor Street Stop Control Avg Vehicle Avg Vehicle Delay(SecNeh) LOS Delay(SecNeh) LOS SW Hunziker St/Site's Access Driveway 7.9 B 7.3 B Critical Leg:NB Traffic Safety Accident records for the most recent three years of available data(1997-1999)were obtained from the City of Tigard Police Department files. They were examined for existing traffic safety problems at all the major intersections in the vicinity of the site. Figure 4 shows a summary of these data and the location of reported traffic accidents. All the intersections in the study area had accident rates that were acceptable (i.e., less than 1.0 accidents per million entering vehicles). These data revealed that the roadway section in the immediate vicinity of the site access had three reported accidents with an average annual accident rate of 0.18. A preliminary assessment of driver sight distance along SW Hunziker Street found that more than 400 feet is available in either direction, which exceeds the 350 feet required by City/County Code along streets with a 35-mph posted speed limit. SW Hunziker Street at the site's access is straight and relatively flat to the west and east. Two other intersections were analyzed and had an average annual accident rate of less than 0.70 accidents per million entering vehicles. These numbers and rate of accidents are typical for roadways throughout the City of Tigard. Photos in the Appendix show the section of SW Hunziker Street adjacent to the proposed site access and other nearby intersections. Based on this information and the area reconnaissance, it does not appear that the applicant needs to address any traffic safety problems in the inunediate vicinity of the site. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS The impact of traffic generated by the full buildout of the Foundry Industrial Park on the surrounding street system during the critical weekday peak hours was analyzed as follows: • Based on the projected year of full buildout of the Foundry Industrial Park (the year 2002), the existing traffic volumes were adjusted to reflect estimated background traffic conditions including other nearby developments that will be completed/approved before the end of 2002. • Total AM and PM peak hour trips both into and out of the Foundry Industrial Park site were estimated for complete buildout conditions. • Existing traffic volumes on the roadways surrounding the site and the site's proximity to major roadways were evaluated to estimate the trip distribution patterns in the study area for vehicle trips generated by the site. Foundry Industrial Park Page 5 January 28, 2000 • Estimated site-generated traffic volumes for the AM and PM peak hours were assigned to the roadway network and added to the estimated background traffic volumes to represent future traffic conditions with full buildout of the site. • Future Levels of Service (LOS) at key intersections in the study area were examined under both background and full buildout traffic conditions. Future Background Traffic Volumes Full buildout of the proposed Foundry Industrial Park is expected to occur by the end of the year 2002. To assess the likely future traffic conditions regardless of the proposed development, we estimated increases in traffic due to general growth and other proposed developments in the vicinity of the site. Discussions/meetings were held with City of Tigard and Washington County planning staff to review the area. This research identified three in-process developments that must be considered for this traffic study. These include the Eagle Hardware and Garden Store, Superior Sign, and the potential uses of the existing buildings on the Foundry Industrial Park site. Traffic generated by these later two developments were calculated based on standard trip rates in the ITE Trip Generation Report and trips generated by the Eagle traffic report from Lancaster Engineering. The results of these calculations are presented in Table 3 below. Traffic that would be associated with these developments were assigned to the roadway network based on existing traffic patterns along SW Hunziker Street. Figures 5, 5A, and 5B show the vehicle trips generated by each of these approved developments and the assignment of these trips through the entire study area. Table 3: Trip Generation for In-Process Developments Land Use Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Total In Out Total In Out Eagle Hardware&Garden Store 4199 96 82 177 162 182 344 ITE Code 862(147,812 GSF) Superior Sign 59 8 7 1 8 1 7 ITE Code 710(5,325 GSF) Existing Buildings on Foundry Industrial Park Site 466 62 55 7 66 8 58 ITE Code 110(66,920 GSF) In addition, existing volumes (in Figure 3) were increased by 4 percent per year to account for other increases in traffic from sources outside the study area during the next two years. Thus, total future 2002 background traffic volumes were estimated by multiplying existing peak hour traffic volumes by 1.08 and adding in the in-process traffic volumes shown in Figures 5, 5A, and 5B. The resulting peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 6. Capacity analyses of background volumes at the study area intersections were performed for the future background traffic volumes in Figure 6. Results of these analyses are shown in Table 4 on the following page. Comparing these results with the LOS results for existing conditions indicates that with these conservative assumptions, traffic conditions will degrade slightly but continue to operate at LOS D or better at most intersections. Foundry Industrial Park Page 6 January 28, 2000 Table 4: Future Background 2002 Levels of Service Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Signalized Intersection Avg Vehicle V/C Avg Vehicle V/C Delay(SecNeh) Ratio LOS Delay(Sec/Veh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd/SW Scoffins Road 8.8 0.53 B 11.7 078 B SW Hall Blvd/SW Hunziker Street 25.1 0.78 D 12.3 0.73 B SW Hunziker Street/SW 72nd Avenue 22.1 0.69 C - 11.5 0.62 B Minor Street Stop Control Avg Vehicle Avg Vehicle Delay(SecNeh) LOS Delay(SecNeh) LOS SW Hunziker St/Site's Access Driveway 8.0 B 11.3 C Critical Leg:NB Site-Generated Traffic Volumes Figure 1 A shows the proposed site plan for the Foundry Industrial Park. The applicant is proposing to redevelop the existing uses on the site(approximately 66,920 GSF of the LaSalle building) with a new 120,000 GSF industrial park. The site contains approximately 9.07 acres and is located at 8200 SW Hunziker Street. The site is currently zoned I-L (Light Industrial), which would permit the proposed development. An existing driveway along the south side of SW Hunziker Street will provide access to this redevelopment. Vehicle trips that would be generated by the existing uses and the new Foundry Industrial Park were estimated using standard trip generation rates from the ITE Trip Generation Report (6th Edition) for industrial park and light industrial uses(11E Codes 130 and 110). Based on these rates, it is estimated that the proposed development will generate approximately 1,010 vehicle trips throughout a typical weekday, including 143 vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and 136 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour. This is shown in Table 5 below. Trips generated by potential existing uses on the site were already included in the background traffic scenario. Thus, redevelopment of the site with the proposed Foundary Industrial Park will result in 369 additional new trips during a typical weekday peak hour, including 45 trips during the AM peak hour and 44 trips during the PM peak hour. Table 5:Trip Generation for the Foundry Industrial Park Land Use Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Total In Out Total In Out New Foundry Industrial Park 835 107 88 19 110 23 87 ITE Code 130(120,000 GSF) Existing Uses on the Site 466 62 55 7 66 8 58 ITE Code 110(66,920 GSF) Additional New Trips from Redevelopment of 369 45 33 12 44 15 29 the Site with Foundry Industrial Park Distribution and Assignment of Site-Generated Traffic Traffic generated by the Foundry Industrial Park was assigned to the roadway network by considering existing travel patterns to/from homes and businesses along SW Hunziker Street. The resulting assignment of site-generated traffic during both peaks is presented in Figure 7. Foundry Industrial Park Page 7 January 28, 2000 Total Future Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service Total future 2002 peak hour traffic volumes were estimated by adding the background future traffic volumes displayed in Figure 6 to the volumes that would be generated by buildout of the Foundry Industrial Park, which is shown in Figure 7. Figure 8 displays the total future peak hour traffic volumes for 2002 with buildout of the Foundry Industrial Park. Table 6 summarizes the results of the intersection LOS analyses for the total future buildout scenario. The LOS results in these tables are very similar to the results for the future background traffic conditions. Again all intersections will operate at acceptable LOS D or better. Table 6: Total Future 2002 Traffic Conditions with Buildout of the Foundry Industrial Park Intersection AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour Signalized Intersection Avg Vehicle V/C Avg Vehicle V/C Delay(SecNeh) Ratio LOS Delay(SecNeh) Ratio LOS SW Hall Blvd/SW Scoffins Road 8.8 0.54 B 12.3 0.79 B SW Hall Blvd/SW Hunziker Street 27.9 0.80 D 12.6 0.75 B SW Hunziker Street/SW 72nd Avenue 22.4 0.69 C 11.7 0.62 B Minor Street Stop Control Avg Vehicle Avg Vehicle Delay(SecNeh) LOS Delay(SecNeh) LOS SW Hunziker St/Site's Access Driveway 8.7 B 11.3 C Critical Leg:NB _ Finally, future traffic volumes at the site's access driveway were evaluated during the critical peak hours to determine if a separate westbound left turn lane or eastbound right turn lane are needed. These analyses were based on future 2002 peak hour traffic volumes shown in Figure 8. The right turn lane analysis is based on the criteria in the ODOT/AASHSTO Design Manual, which considers the number of vehicles turning right and continuing through eastbound along SW Hunziker Street. As shown in Table 7 below, at full buildout future 2002 peak hour volumes do not meet the right turn lane warrant. However, when we increase existing traffic volumes by 10% to accommodate for winter traffic movements, the right turn lane warrant is marginally met. Given the fact that the existing volumes were increased and that this would occur only for one peak hour, we recommend a right turn lane not be installed for the Foundry Industrial Park. Hunziker Street is already 36 feet wide, which allows for vehicles to move to the right when they slow to enter the site. Finally, as this is a private driveway, future traffic volumes will not increase in the future significantly beyond our estimates in Table 8. Table 7: Result of Right Turn Warrant Analysis for Eastbound Traffic Along SW Hunziker Street and Access Driveway to the Foundry Industrial Park Projected 20.02 Peak Hour ODOT/AASHSTO Design Manual Total Approach Right Turns Right Turn Scenario Volume Volume Criteria Warrant Met? AM 525 AM 61 55 Marginal SW Hunziker Street(Site Access) PM 324 PM 17 40 No Foundry Industrial Park Page 8 January 28, 2000 To assess the need for a separate westbound left turn lane along SW Hunziker Street, the warrants consider the percent of vehicles turning, the opposing volume, and the total advancing volume. Using future 2002 peak hour volumes shown in Figure 8, our analysis shown in Table 8 found that vehicles traveling westbound along SW Hunziker Street at the site's access driveway turning left do not meet warrants for a separate left turn lane (see worksheets in Appendix). Table 8: Result of Left Turn Warrant Analysis for Westbound Traffic Along SW Hunziker Street and Access Driveway to the Foundry Industrial Park Projected 2002 Peak Hour ODOT/AASHSTO Design Manual Total Approach Opposing Approach Volume Warrant Scenario Volume Left Turns Volume Criteria Met? AM Hunziker Street(Site Access) M 265 43(16%) AM 525 AM 278 No PM 534 14(3%) PM 324 PM 559 No SITE ACCESS As shown in Figure 1A, the applicant is proposing to construct the Foundry Industrial Park, which will have approximately 120,000 GSF. The site contains approximately 9.07 acres and is located at 8200 SW Hunziker Street. The access driveway along SW Hunziker Street will be widened to provide three lanes, one inbound and separate left and right turn outbound lanes. The applicant will not have to address any frontage improvements along SW Hunziker Street, because both streets have already been constructed with curbs, sidewalks, and gutters. CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of the analyses described in this letter, it is concluded that the proposed Foundry Industrial Park can be constructed without adversely affecting traffic operations or safety in the vicinity of the site. Furthermore, key intersections and roadways in the study area can operate at acceptable Levels of Service when this development is built out. No specific off-site roadway improvements are recommended to accommodate this development or mitigate its impact. Finally, the proposed access street scheme for the Foundry Industrial Park will meet the City of Tigard's design criteria. Sincerely, /J S. S- Howard S. Stein, P.E. Transportation Engineer 4900 - -,e, OIN4 . 17445 OREGON 44k.te,199° ate 1'9 BCC Renew Date c9c 7 Figure 1: Site Area and Vicinity Map Foundry Industrial Park Site Area ( s 1 0 0 1 \\,41 L....1 s-J CJ U I Iio elli r. \ \,, 'N. , 411141fr.'44. \ ;..1 i __p::Pir-41 C3 414:4. ' [:) \ i-=',3 . \ '- - Tigard r ".>. fr,A; f2j0 . ..11711ii: ,.• ..i. jj.j -,\ lii\ I S_ Ties --`�. -%-• 4 ', \ ilk, Courlha . � 11_i. ›/L\ ,rQ i ,, z. .mmia". f \ FANNO PARK' I-S Exlt e_TorafareLi livaLlt, ,,, [1.93 ..... A LL N Drawing not to scale. _;stein, Foundry Industrial Park Engineering Figure 1A: Proposed Site Plan for The Foundry Industrial Park L 1 — — --— —_ r ------ . r V . -( I— •?-r-.. 1 7._.______j Li :J l , ( 11± 1 co 1 i , i. _.i...._______.______i . 1 kif 0, r 1 I cc) s- III , m 1 w a? 116 � , , I o 0 CO 11 it / , I oo 0 I o I , t I I N N �� ll I � J j I I,��. r .+ r... } I N /� o 1 __—I -1— 11 i i Drawing not to scale. _ ... .. - .. Stein Engineering Figure 2: Study Area and Intersection Lane Configurations in the Vicinity of Foundry Industrial Park..\ it 4 t Z► s --..\ \., **� i �s It ti s ( *4 N ' U Sf u) a?.,.1 4 > I co =. 1 1 AO w *4 '‘ \.... 1 1 N Traffic Signal 6 Stop Sign * Proposed Roadway - - - - * Not Striped But Wide Enough for Right Turn AM(PM) Peak Hour Volumes ** Left Turn Lane for a Single Residential Driveway Drawing not to scale. nStein.Proposed Site Engineering Foundry Industrial Park Figure 3: Recent Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes in the Vicinity of The Foundry Industrial Park N \ in 46 in in (3)7 r 7(5) N N4f •-• M N 1 Lo CD in L 90(160) 914 ill.o.r 85(325)1 r r i3 E"): Oun M0 in o cS'� NN cr s ti «)1 �ijS, Q Q (210)1101 0 tS'f c (295)605 LO Ps. N s ti --a'n in r&I (A .- 0 NN > 0,40t-.) .-- O 1 .J m :fir �. �� (70)165 -,-t — k RF m (15)15 ♦ X �m l 1 . G� N N N O v� Traffic Signal 6 ` Stop Sign : Proposed Roadway - - - - AM(PM)Peak Hour Volumes Drawing not to scale. 0 Proposed Site t gtne¢ring Foundry Industrial Park Figure 4: Traffic Accident Patterns Throughout Study Area (1997-1999) Acc. Rate=0.18 PDO= 1 9g�1 H/R - 1 I Blocking- 1 H/R-2 `s�L Other-2 sc° tit ¢ill Acc. Rate=0.58 Blocking-3 S`S' '� N PDO =5 H/R-1 y�� CV Other-6 2`�erSl c% Acc. Rate=0.70 mj �~ m / Blocking-5 INDJ=46 z -. Other-5 � H/R - 1 Cl) Acc. Rate=0.62 PDO = 10 INJ = 1 I.H/R-1 Other- 1 I H/R-1 Other- 1 Other- 1 Acc. Rate=0.12 Acc. Rate=0.35 PDO= 1 Acc. Rate=0.23 PDO=2 PDO=2 N KEY:RE= Rearend S/S= Sideswipe Traffic Signal H/R= Hit& Run Stop Sign a PDO= Property Damage Proposed Roadway - - - - INJ= Injury AM(PM)Peak Hour Volumes Acc Rate=Average Accident Rate Per Drawing not to scale. Million Entering Vehicles 0 Proposed Site Stein(neerfn9 Foundry Industrial Park Figure 5:Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Generated By Eagle Hardware and Garden Store 8(18) (8)5 �► r 4(9) iico `. a�Q> f \-\\14-i -: N co c. ,,,,s., \ S� co v .... — i lir � 4J 1 (16)1010 �7 I c t "�rn �%k in v Sr er St ti I m a -' J O% 4 as if) -■,), I t : ..., %, I N Traffic Signal 6 IN OUT Stop Sign : Proposed Roadway - - - - AM 96 82 AM(PM)Peak Hour Volumes PM 162 182 Drawing not to scale. ®Eagle Hardware and Garden Store LiProposed Site Stern, Foundry Industrial Park Engineering Figure 5A:Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Generated By Superior Sign ia N 3(0) 6 r. 0 g9NI\I I:41P'.1 0 oil, N Li', N ti� �, 4) o�� TD Q — (1)0 1 S j i S� CV, 'ski + 2e � c n (2)0 ` in S o CL)o m ` I - • g r N N � Traffic Signal IN OUT Stop Sign • Proposed Roadway - - - - AM 7 1 AM(PM)Peak Hour Volumes PSI 1 7 Drawing not to scale. En Superior Sign 0 Proposed Site Er glneeving Foundry Industrial Park Figure 5B: Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Generated by Full Use Existing Foundry Industrial Park (5)33 r 22(3) N '1f M M �L 2(15) 9-w` `. r 2(20) y,,.� 9 V° `, o E. .i22 r E.i. ..'\ o s N -Si, a 4) co Kis !_ o (9)2 1 1 sf s� C i; g (14)1 ti y4 Z o � e N-> r- �St V euly m M �m ilk... . 1 N cs) r / Traffic Signal 0 / IN OUT Stop Sign Proposed Roadway - - - - AM 55 7 AM(PM)Peak Hour Volumes PM 8 58 Drawing not to scale. El Proposed Site En nineering Foundry Industrial Park Figure 6: Future 2002 Background Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes in the Vicinity of The Foundry Industrial Park Z c0 (307)464■♦ 41'"222(520) .i 30(8)• N � 1 r 1 Zzi. .'00''. r 101(380) 9 V" v.4 t r \Aso r Fi CI,:\ O .7 2 N A — O co v"/w M N �v s ti �l c� 'j r) Q (253)131 1 6 sc�� ,� c (335)654 N s tit ti v.1 t o ''zip op co N N @r St U) N CO M M -p gabli CO (78)1781 — CO 6- _ 1 (18)17 �1 LO CD C �� N v CO —co a Traffic Signal Stop Sign ! Proposed Roadway - - - - AM(PM)Peak Hour Volumes Include Full Use of Existing Building on Site Drawing not to scale. E Proposed Site glnaering Foundry Industrial Park Figure 7: Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Generated by New Foundry Industrial Park ( Ci' 1 r (9)20 r 13(67.6\ 00 4 v CN L 3(7) J r (4(10) 0 `1.4 r \-\\14\1 N s� N i Lea J o 6100i", N y > it ')ss tS �- D ∎ (5)31 'J (7)2 ti4n ti r V so i- N y �e/, to 7:-.2j m o ,!� /, s ., 400 '+• ♦ I `� 1 w c o 4 (.1 1 N r' N Ira f 0 J Traffic Signal IN OUT r Stop Sign : Proposed Roadway - - - - AM 33 12 AM(PM) Peak Hour Volumes PM 15 29 Drawing not to scale. u Proposed Site Stein, Foundry Industrial Park Engineering Figure 8: Total Future 2002 Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes with Buildout of The Foundry Industrial Park 6u, ! (301)464�♦ ♦■ 222(520 co (17)61 /�►r 43(14) u�i v 1 1 N ,- 1to � o L 102(195) ` "' r 105(390) CP ,`�4 tr �� o co v �n s j oo� out Q c `N° r` �v 4)1 ti Ohs ti (258)134 ■ I a n CO �f (342)656 / M co M M er t+t C) co aj ; ; itiv- :a-:juD .J j m . .fir ,+ (78)178 •-1 — ., (18)17 _ �m `_._, vit u, v A 2 N "� u)J Traffic Signal 6 Stop Sign a Proposed Roadway - - - - AM(PM) Peak Hour Volumes cEagle Hardware and Garden Store Drawing not to scale. W Superior Sign I I Proposed Site Foundry Industrial Park Stein Stein. TECHNICAL APPENDIX Attached is the Technical Appendix for Stein Engineering's traffic impact study for Project 510, Foundry Industrial Park. It includes the following information: 1) Photos of Proposed Site Access and Other Nearby Intersections 2) Recent Traffic Counts 3) Accident Analysis Worksheets 4) Trip Generation Worksheets and Calculation 5) Right/Left Turn Lanes Analysis 6) In-Process Distribution 7) Capacity Analysis Worksheets for Existing Traffic Volumes 8) Capacity Analysis Worksheets for Future 2002 Background Traffic Volumes 9) Capacity Analysis Worksheets for Future 2002 Traffic Volumes with Proposed Development Foundry Industrial Park iak itOir Looking EB from site access along SW Hunziker Street * :is �i - ' r+srt>E's Olt =111 un� 6 Mdf VOEsn2°' Looking WB from site access along SW Hunziker Street Looking EB along SW Hunziker Street at site access Photos Taken by Stern Engrneerrng on 1/7/00 1 ,1 4. J v Looking EB along SW Hunziker Street at SW 72 Avenue • tf i 1 r . - "-ice"'. Ems. r: Looking NB along SW 72' Avenue at SW Hunziker Street Mir mit • F y I 10;' Looking SB along SW 72°a Avenue at SW Hunziker Street Photos Taken by Stein Engineering on 1/7/00 r. , -4114 tti, f i Looking WB along SW Hunziker Street at SW Hall Boulevard 17- -- ., ■Looking SB along SW Hall Boulevard at SW Hunziker Street 1 / j 1 ' .1- F 111 A 0 Looking NB along SW Hall Boulevard at SW Scoffins Road Photos Taken by Stein Engineering on 1/7/00 in m a I% $ o 5 o ' ' 1 14 0 'tZ ' NSd ^ ! R ^ 2 T079 233 f'o .-lee aS re; eoo r I �p co I H W .- . n v p— Id o 1p 0 4 p h O n O O m a •• p & ^ .- 0 0 r. W 0 0 'T. v & N N M o N "� qq (( * : �2 0 � $ ► ggN 2 e ' $ 6p tsid 26 .1 $ 2nz i O o ao r. d o00 8i E Sion M Z 1 Z O ^ li k] r Q G M • m o ,s 0 O o 0 O o 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 p O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ( 000 .010:0 00000 it_ (i0 .. N Z Oopoo 90cOpo0 p - 00 p+OOp OOo O 0 000100—' 0 p t o O 000001 T i I ' Z y� �y ` - R g °38nigacV • 8 - 21 .4V- apgvab 1811 (2 :: 07, 40 - - 16th § i '• z o 1. 0 A A 0 j:e 0 0 0 .. 0 N O N 0 0 p - 0 0 p d O N v o q C :• a o o 0 p 0 0 a m DI OJ V N 0 t V – 1 1 – � ' SI Z Ili e� NO �-OO p00000p0OpO000 0 0000000 Otis 0000100 0 00 00 Z – > d5m4I ( — f g Z Z _ N 00000000000000030000 ,00, 00 ;. 017 0 0 0 0 o o « 0 0 0 0 0 U N 1 1 :IX : co 0 o_ . .p[F- E p i R0 E A p' .;:, psi it` vi u: g m r§i v 0 0 0 N %1 D d 0 Cat h 0 0 �0 N N N 1 sz {25 ;C7 Q N {j1 L7 j Ok CY }Dl fY }. N 'G, I° ° ° ° ° at00 v. (V h; r O O di M 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 p o o o o o p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O S 0 0 0 0 `0 - M Z t o o p O O in I 3 d 00 o0o0000000 . 000000 ,:` 0000 000 00 < zzzi $ 1 - ND CC .. N � mOyw od � 2 A B a �� r $0 n1 0 — n s w O I0ao If.- .*-- ot �0r0OW � 0 0 Ir , i z W '� — > 4 ., t — OOp0000.30000000000000000 O w 0 .0001 ' 00000 Z 1 A O � r z z c i _ _00° 0000 :: •0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 p O O p 0 0 0 0 o 0 1 0 0 0 0 O O O O O a Z — ' V • V r (n if I J0000000,0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 0 0°0 O : 00001 - : 0 0 0 0 0 >- to 22' r p� O r' { T (p g Q " 00 OI.O ^00 mo0a �0 C) 0 •- O .+ d0 Cy dON TtS 00 O O 000 IO Y W a O 0 cc cc O i (C��i Q p Oi CY �- .- w O / i` r 53 O a 0 o p 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 o 0 0 o O O o 1 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 ,. a W :, Z1 it ,�� = Y � z � / IMP Qi n. � CO . 0 a = mat T ao WwQborn,o00ti0 aooap�O .. .-0 � 0000 000 >> Z mmmco mmmm ^ ' $ D o � � � � `� 0 I �= a rncn (OCO cutuwui CD hi � � o 1 , .._$*3 N V '1.4 Z d m 4 Y c. I ! te. ! 6e : 1 (l A ,, 1 s O vo-o ""�T��1 8 6 • .. _ .. � p p O O p O O �'� 1"-'0 0 COO 0 0 0 00 .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ro a TZ1 {��F1'yyyyj � Ql � � .3: 1° ° 00 ° 0 0 0 ° .:, 0 0 • O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J . • A O 1 O 33 ax W ) . i ffl �' UI P ((�� py r .a + i 0 0 0 0 o D 0 O 1 N - 00 0 0 00000 - 0 - e p'O O O o 0 0 OO O O -� O O < v W �J I� N u li 3 0 0oo p p _ [� R1 _ _ 1 O 4 R O • „ 5-1 -40 „ i Al � N 0 01 '`� m T a ! a :o. m ..m O ,0 a N O N b O o 5 1 r U. m A s IA m (n .. 2 — - 0000 0 A0100 r 1, e0100 7. O 000000000000000000000000 O ' i ' C) tilp p - z It y t w , D A J T < J z iJ l V 2 00 V a00 A ylai V Nw O 3 4. ; 24 -2 fO M51O ..r a -p QI - 7.1 Ot -j4 4a $ - N CO m i --• 1 S 11 a 0 .. 000 _ - O Qi 1 0 . 0 000000000000000 ooa V V s % ! 'o .. 1 33E3 l A 1- ' � F i p n o v o 11pp 4 iu m s ♦ 11Z1 23OOB OOmV00m !ti $ V - p a .. wO + atiOaSgY �llosl' oHaoo5 N 0 m O 0 1 W .l �q �Ny t� a a o p co — yy — N ca i ?b N !J m - Q,Q V V D w a t N 1 11 a O & - t N w Es 6 a 1 2 Q 3 E - n !1i p $ t - 0 - to t o 61 O 3 W R O cn O W O Al 1 p o 0 0 0 O d 1 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 -t 9 co 1 Q E E A a l ((t� 11,§ ,t a i!N .. _1 E i Vg. w O . 4 :.. 1g V 11R -ii -1 Q a1 C/ 0 V N ' m A NJ 9 A A AA NR 0 , -t '2 .. tr P ' o, 4. w D 8 6. 11 E718 b Tt O O O O g g 1, P `+o I mew m mmrnN � m m < m 1.+ -. 000 S o 0000 0 0 1 "' Oo o,'' o . 000Ooo0000ooOo0000l ; RI 35 N CO ,� O m i w i r' n+ !O O O + ". L O o,A O o o a O O 0 0 0 0 o o O o o 0 o o O o o O o o -` o — O p o •�„', . O It j Q x 17 O + Q �� O i(u� I 5,::::, C C UI -. + 000 + oo00o o o a Oo o -' o _ 0oo0ooOoo0oo00000 o4 N 0 � < L V I ) .4 0 �. w • //(��� Nj (p 1� m •� y V e p� 4 �? • { N W p O O A "4 o ca ♦ •O a p 8 i w p g3 p $ A + V R 0 R 8 . Q 8 • O 8 N 4 5 4 .• A a A co o ° rt� S " -• -• -• 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 ' '� 0 0 O D 0 0 0 O O '� O + O O O O a O O O 0 0 0 O �+ N N C z �� � � D8 o aN O o a 1 O Y � oy � 3 � o �8a � � Y oh Rm } z O J N +. o 00 -. 0 C. L!V lb O0 O ' O + fl0 O OOO � + O dOOOOOO OO O Y V 33 . p 1 .� S.Q) (A (Dt� N o Iy fJ N 1� (� : NI IS CL } 1 0 Q d t4 id N § �I ,..- Lrl ..... In M 0 g 4 c $ 111F " V. tv ° 2* - 114 " liV ^ Z$ 8h � 2° S1 F. 1:-.1 V- Na < no00 1 F. EE CP O O 0 � 111 t < Z 2 0o0o00000000000000000 04 '0000100 1 0000 m tiU a Sq ❑ , 1 L9 E � de '-11 / 000000000000000000000 o � 0 0 0 0 / 00� 10000 s 3 31 i manma� z �� i___� V z Z z Z a �q g oT / 1 / AO " tgo * � ec ' a ,38 ° ToVi g �` n .- u & 000o� Ili § 1 cc 0n `� . ti s O _ A O A O 1Sy 1 A ° & I30 �n ^ °r- o ' '! 2 ° rial ° 8:°- w �.1. 3 ° o o r ; ao 1 ra 38 li 1 W — y ` _ p k C t ` 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z I.. 0 0 0 0. 100 < 0 o 0 0 g 4 i Z I O r 'at Z ZZ 22 Z E {) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000- 0 /1 0 0 0 c3 / 000 ?. / 0 0 0 0 E V Li/ • — S — � � z ;� i G yj i CC U) Q V 1- " V = II LO LU 0 t ( < / 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0it o d'uj o 000 / 00 0 0 0 0 E } Z 22 I Z•7X[ f0 V p S �p ► °p �y E Q p ( /� w O r ~ Z �j G'r 22 ° 24 ° 4 r a Tu 0 D ° 21 - 6. 0 0 gl 0 0 0 1g 8 m 2 Q co tn • .e 0 o o I . 5• 1 I2t z p $ ;2 1 40 ° 40ofl °ao0oa . . 0000000 O . OOoo / ao ► 0000 O It:T r 01 Z Z•^• co• u. el a a � � a g ma _- 11 z4it - gq " v $ °' 2S — ga° 2 �' °,& Ngl � a�,;►► vNOm ��oa 1 � � $ T a u. cc 2 anmc0co �i mmanco m wY Q t� C4t!) tr1 W ill W W 1 .. + �. 4 4 . 8 n >a $ 11k Hof- X12 $ r r $ Z � n w i; a6 o 0 0 _ 1 I ¢ Q iy'a li r+ r n o Q ti L. 191 A A A #..r 11, d O g 1 I . l N T 9! 9• + ♦ in D p p �s ,+ 8 • • 1 I m 133888 88g8 2 -33 1 m O a - t II 1100 . .. .4.1;18 N o N g 10 ? 8s o t W Oi S G� - t p 4s O e N . i E ..7{ a .y A3 w ? co �. 'T1 CA r - O 0 0 0 0 ♦ f0000 .740 O O O O a b O a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g O O p p o p o 1 E Q g 1... �' Q• • A r� i 33I� ..asooA 4 1 a ♦ i°'n t.' � �, „ N 11 1 0 •. ..v o � v o� � � � � �'ro �. N� A O < 1 V 3 O p 5 N '" Ul O '_ 1/ OD Z 3 :� a D { 3 0 0 0 0 0 a _ f004009. 0 O g p O p p 0 0 0 O g p 0 0 0 O a 0 0 p p O p 0 .j r 2 8 1 _ ■ 00000 OOOO ' Z YO OnoOo0OOOO OqO oOOOOOO bO pp $. ,. 0 C Wv t. p } i 00000 oo o o O ooe o o ° o0000000 o a 00000co � A _ D i f _ z m it mom .. ., I ? ° r z z itgLI . , 13 — e9iergbt -seTott `4 � StsivBig ,,, 5 0 Tv `v d 7SS wd •. _ _ Q A 10 O _ 2e A O O 0 i,��a O O n1 II N •• % so V p N1� p + g A 347 O +A�(I . pfi y �t8a � moas� �,y e,I z z {r t_ il 1 O fh W@ m < t ! f � � � j �z 0000 ,0 _ f 0 0 . 0 i> o 00000000000000 .0000000000 , I' 00 Y 0 ZZ 0 t Y 0 O o b 0 0 0 0 0 o O 0 b O [O oO 00000 000 -I O Q O W CrJ 0 A O .. U ; p 0 . s vE + 0+, i p Qig N , o 1 O O O — C11 o Q m v 1000 + � a. 404a0R . 4404 /8 -8 ~ - 3iO4T ,41 co gig s 1) m 1D siv / � —c4ry s.,--((.40,(4-ft I 1 `NX. 5,0 F arl(CRN /Vru1YS 114 I00 "I'CI a^1 • In and Out Turn Movements Svc,"}eA, -rm,✓`-kry DI 0.)-( ct,,ntt'Q IN v3y K..e•T. I4 5 1=ArtdYS Time oK+ i A o f i n a,n.k i n o,A..t 04 i ;h t- 1:o,, to, IS _ _ — _ – .. = _ � _ ( 1:1c —7 F to1. 110 - 3 6 6G — ■ I S" . - ,r- - ?- 3° (r2.)) to 4S _ sic 67\/ _ = _ 16 1 / 1 . '- r - 4� 4b 1, 2-1- (I tO � 60 S.� r S.°° �7 r– to y3 Ii (r 6;-) g - is , 4—,' to 32, 7 ° ( ") 4. h° — - – _ — — — — — _ _ _ — _ ZI �.3' 7 to `4c 4 3 S S' _ — to , 1 4t q ,p8 7, — _ _ Z5 — — _ — 1 7 2 u 0 0 4 S S 1 S" D 3 2 4- II 9 3 y ,3 I 3 ?a4 � Iri..w- b 3 y 2 0 0 0 3 6 i y • 0 - 2 2- 1Z S ' 3 $ X4 0 3 (5151 >,.C, 1 2 115 ) ns- Sys aJ 4 ?►e.F - ' 0,s4 N " 4 14avti� 9. – - L 6 4( 111 ) . i?S -� 4— 3% �o�dey T-14a3 ;41 �'e"1C. f ��� S.A.) µwizitcer / ixoY5 115109 1' TM In and Out Turn l iovements 1 r - D( JY3 vacs-Tun Fo ,y D✓may e�„,.y.�eoc' Ar„`�y Kn�z_ 31 AT D(--'y Tlme in OAf ;At •0Kt owl to 1 n 04 1r, O w+" N O,.t,71- : °° • -15" 4? 1' 3 4=15 _ _ • _ - - - - -, u'.IS 4 4 l c 1 to G — Z l - _ _ — — (�- ) t0 11 S v 2 11 445 —7 oV "`l (170 S d a 7 - 4- �rgtl to Iz.S I 6I✓ - I L _^ c"• (5 $' _ I...-a. - - c'�S ----) - to 1 l(I .6,c 1 J (I P1, '�� -7 - S. to - R4 51 • cl 10 - - - = t0 _ cb b o� - - P44 14 10 rM•N 3 1 Zr 7 2 ,.7 o v \k 4 S Li Z I o 3 I 1G. 3 10 4 ° 2_ 10 1c, ft-Ow i l In to 2 0 ill I v o 6 1 4 q .� 1 1 0 O 6 I 11) 0 to S ,b Z I° ?,o (1 9-5 U61 7 t- 'AM 4._■\ . 4 5 G) - P4 F �"---= 0.9 3 } cp., HNDti y L 4 �19 4� N 46S �' `- 15o Project 510 Foundry Industrial Park Accident Analysis Worksheet 1997-1999 Intersection: SW 72nd Ave/SW Hunziker St Percent Percent Property Blocking 5 45% Damage Only 10 91% H/R 1 9% Injury 1 9% Turn 0 0% Total 11 Other 5 45% Total 11 PM Peak Hour 1,793 ADT 16,300 Assumed to be PM Peak Hour/11 percent Accident Rate= (Number of Accidents)/3) / (ADTx 365)"1,000,000 Vehicles Accident Rate= 0.62 Average number of accidents per million entering vehicles Intersection: SW Hall Blvd/SW Hunziker St Percent Percent Property Blocking 3 30% Damage Only 6 60% H/R 1 10% Injury 4 40% Turn 0 0% Total 10 Other 6 60% Total 10 PM Peak Hour 1,439 ADT 13,082 Assumed to be PM Peak Hour/11 percent Accident Rate= (Number of Accidents)/3)I (ADTx 365)"1,000,000 Vehicles Accident Rate= 0.70 Average number of accidents per million entering vehicles Intersection: 8255 SW Hunziker St Percent Percent Property H/R 1 100% Damage Only 1 100% Angle 0 0% Injury 0 0% Turn 0 0% Total 1 Other 0 0% Total 1 PM Peak Hour 567 ADT 5,155 Assumed to be PM Peak Hour/11 percent Accident Rate= (Number of Accidents)/3) I (ADTx 365)"1,000,000 Vehicles Accident Rate= 0.18 Average number of accidents per million entering vehicles Intersection: 7985-8001 SW Hunziker St Percent Percent Property H/R 1 50% Damage Only 2 100% Angle 0 0% Injury 0 0% Turn 0 0% Total 2 Other 1 50% Total 2 PM Peak Hour 567 ADT 5,155 Assumed to be PM Peak Hour/11 percent Accident Rate= (Number of Accidents)/3) / (ADTx 365)*1,000,000 Vehicles Accident Rate= 0.35 Average number of accidents per million entering vehicles Intersection: 7582 SW Hunziker St Percent Percent Property H/R 1 50% Damage Only 2 100% Angle 0 0% Injury 0 0% Turn 0 0% Total 2 Other 1 50% Total 2 PM Peak Hour 867 ADT 7,882 Assumed to be PM Peak Hour/11 percent Accident Rate= (Number of Accidents)/3)/(ADTx 365)*1,000,000 Vehicles Accident Rate= 0.23 Average number of accidents per million entering vehicles Intersection: 7300-7360 SW Hunziker St Percent Percent Property H/R 2 40% Damage Only 5 100% Blocking 1 20% Injury 0 0% Turn 0 0% Total 5 Other 2 40% Total 5 PM Peak Hour 867 ADT 7,882 Assumed to be PM Peak Hour/11 percent Accident Rate= (Number of Accidents)/3) /(ADTx 365)*1,000,000 Vehicles Accident Rate= 0.58 Average number of accidents per million entering vehicles Intersection: SW Hunziker St/Wall St Percent Percent Property H/R 0 0% Damage Only 1 100% Blocking 0 0% Injury 0 0% Turn 0 0% Total 1 Other 1 100% Total 1 PM Peak Hour 867 ADT 7,882 Assumed to be PM Peak Hour/11 percent Accident Rate= (Number of Accidents)/3) / (ADTx 365)"1,000,000 Vehicles Accident Rate= 0.12 Average number of accidents per million entering vehicles TRIP GENERATION WORKSHEET RATES Development: Foundry Industrial Park Size: 120,000 GSF ITE Land Use Code: Industrial Park, Code 130 (6th Edition) Variable: Per 1 ,000 GSF (G) Total Weekday Trips T = 6.96x(G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 418 417 835 Site Distribution 50% 50% 100% Weekday AM Peak Hour Trips T = 0.89x(G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 88 19 107 Site Distribution 82% 18% 100% Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips T = 0.92x(G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 23 87 110 Site Distribution 21% 79% 100% TRIP GENERATION WORKSHEET RATES Development: Existing Occupied Foundry Industrial Park Size: 66,920 GSF ITE Land Use Code: Light Industrial, Code 110 (6th Edition) Variable: Per 1 ,000 GSF (G) Total Weekday Trips T = 6.97x(G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 233 233 466 Site Distribution 50% 50% 100% Weekday AM Peak Hour Trips T = 0.92x(G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 55 7 62 Site Distribution 88% 12% 100% Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips T = 0.98x(G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 8 58 66 Site Distribution 12% 88% 100% !ASTER ENGINEERING TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS Land Use: Home Improvement Superstore Land Use Code: 862 Variable: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Variable Value: 120 I AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Trip Rate: 1.48 Trip Rate: 2.87 Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Directional Directional 54% 46% 47% 53% Distribution Distribution :::: >. :�. ::.>.< Trip Ends Trip Ends :. €t: 'vr's:::::?.:.:::.:. :<>'I P 1 WEEKDAY SATURDAY Trip Rate: 35.05 Trip Rate: 45.67 Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Directional 50% 50% Directional 50% 50% Distribution Distribution :.xy::::::.;ix4}:•:iii:':_:^::.:::.::::::::::::--_::i:::::i":::ii:: Trip Ends :;•.:.k:. ::::' ::: Trip Ends <> ? > >< >> > < f.L�::Y.•i}4'.C}i n•:iii:?•i::?v.:.'i:.i.:::........::•.?•:�::�?• ...n:?,.::::::::.::::•:::::::::::.�::.:.:.:::v:.:::::::::� Source:TRIP GENERATION.Sixth Edition -u TRIP GENERATION WORKSHEET RATES Development: Superior Sign Size: 5,325 GSF ITE Land Use Code: General Office Building, Code 710 Variable: Per 1,000 GSF (G) Total Weekday Trips T = 11 .01 x(G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 30 29 59 Site Distribution 50% 50% 100% Weekday AM Peak Hour Trips T = 1.56x(G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 7 1 8 Site Distribution 88% 12% 100% Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips T = 1.49x(G) Enter Exit Total Vehicle Trips 1 7 8 Site Distribution 17% 83% 100% Trip Genera tion for the Foundry Industrial Park Land Use Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Total In _ Out Total In Out Foundry Industrial Park ' 1,010 143 126 17 136 23 113 ITE Code 130(120,000 GSF) Existing Foundry Industrial Park 466 62 55 7 66 8 58 ITE Code 110(66,920 GSF) Additional New Trips of the Foundry 369 45 33 12 44 15 29 Industrial Park 3Z�Gft7 T,�R�J �,,RWs:s A-1- s� yuN2-iret Sr / PRoFosGD A- crss l�rc:✓F .ay > RIGHT- TURN LANE GUIDELINES ° 0 100 1 1 1 I Right-Turn Lane 80 — ( Figure 910- 12b ) J Right-Turn Pocket or Recommended 0 Toper (Figure 910- 12a) Recommended CC 60 — A-PI Q£A- Cc 0 Alm ENOD) . 40 — mho.Hra cc 20 — Radius Only Recommended ( Figure 910 - 7 )0 re' pe" uJ I I I I I I n- 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 All $,S AWIPEAK HOUR APPROACH VOLUME ( DDHV ) * I/ Q" 32-4 PM ViGo-r ikl-rJ 1.A-,Jt MCE7s vaARIZR�r • For two lane highways, use the peak hour approach volume ( through + right turn) . For multilane, high speed (posted at 45 mph or above) highways, use the right lane peak hour approach volume ( through + right turn) . Note: When all three of the following conditions ore met, the right turn DDHV is reduced by 20 VPH. 1 . Posted speed 45 mph or under. 2. Tight-turn volume greater than 40 VPH. 3. Total approach volume less than 300 VPH. Right-Turn Lane Guidelines Figure 910-11 (Metric) Intersections At Grade Design Manual Page 910-26 August 1997 Revised Left Turn Pocket Warrant Analysis Project Number: 510 Template Prepared b)HSS Project Name: Foundry Industrial Park Analysis Description:Total Future w/Buildout AM Peak Hour Single Access Site Access/SW Hunziker St Date: January 26,2000 Data Input Range of Values Opposing Volume 525 100-800 Advancing Volume 265 Left Turns in Advancing Volume 43 Percentage Lefts 16% 5%to 30% Analysis: Required Advancing Volumes 278 Decision: NO Warrant Curve for Input Conditions Opposing Required Actual Required Advancing Advancing Advancing 100 461 Lower Opposing 500 286 200 396 Interpolated 525 278 300 356 Upper Opposing 600 255 400 315 500 286 600 255 700 230 800 203 Warrant Curve Look U-3 Tables Opposing Required Advancing at Given Percents e Lefts 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 100 720 720 575 483 390 365 340 200 640 640 470 410 350 , 328 305 300 575 575 425 369 313 294 275 400 510 510 380 328 275 260 245 500 460 460 343 297 250 237 223 600 410 410 305 265 225 213 200 700 370 370 273 238 203 192 180 800 330 330 240 210 180 170 160 Note:Shaded values are interpolated. Graph Data Area 100 461 Warrant Lookup Curve Based on 16% Lefts 150 429 200 396 1 Opposing Required Advancing at Given Percentage Lefts 250 376 Lower Interp. Upper 300 356 15% 16% 20% 350 336 100 483 461 390 400 315 200 410_ 396 350 450 301 300 369 356 313 500 286 400 328 315 275 525 278 265 500 297, 286 250 600 255 600 265, 255 225 650 243 700 238 230 203 700 230 800 210 203_ 180 750 217 L 800 1 203 , 1 Revised Left Turn Pocket Warrant Analysis Project Number: 510 Template Prepared b}HSS Project Name: Foundry Industrial Park Analysis Description:Total Future w/Buildout PM Peak Hour Single Access Site Access/SW Hunziker St Date: January 26,2000 Data Input Range of Values Opposing Volume 324 100-800 Advancing Volume 534 Left Turns in Advancing Volume 14 Percentage Lefts 3% 5%to 30% Analysis: Required Advancing Volumes 559 Decision: NO Warrant Curve for Input Conditions Opposing Required Actual Required Advancing I Advancing Advancing 100 720 Lower Opposing 300 575 200 640 Interpolated 324 559 300 575 Upper Opposing 400. 510 400 510 500 460 600 410 700 370 800 330 Warrant Curve Look Up Tables Opposing Required Advancing at Given Percents e Lefts 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25°/J 30% 100 720 720 575 483 390 365 340 200 640 640 _ 470 410 350 328 305 300 575 575 425 369 313 294 275 400 510 510 380 328 275 260 245 500 460 460 343 297 250 237 223 600 410 410 305 265 225 213 200 700 370 370 273 238 203 192 180 800 330 330 240 210 180 170, 160 Note:Shaded values are interpolated. Graph Data Area 100 720 Warrant Lookup Curve Based on 3% Lefts 150 680 _ 200 640 Opposing Required Advancing at Given Percentage Lefts 250 608 Lower Interp. Upper 300 575 0% 3% 5% 324 559 534 100 720 720 720, 400 510 200 640 640 640 450 485 300 575 575 575 500 460 400 510 510, 510 550 435 500 460 460 460 600 410 600 410 410 410 650 390 700 370 370 370 700 370 800 330 330 330_ 750 350 800 330 N. 99 1 e 02a `ORF- 0 �1 Qo OOiy moo e,o 0 o`fly� ��o 00 ODJI 0,. , (:-o E-0 0000 E- 16 I E �y \F 24 EJJ.y .v.° ') ois �T � Ki‘ �1T� 0-) o`*^ > o00 ^NN `1 vno E-0 K--1\ El T \ Dartmouth Street ) °NO • 1 � %)7 (::,4-: T o E-0 : 0 ,�,n t 32 N E y •C° i 4,1-> .`° J.y .`° ^ 42 � �T� Beve fond Street ' 34 NN Try VI\ y fyP ROJECT 11 Conzogo it �� $ — treet ,n ■ I 2 Hampton Street X 49 �<,� ,. , r3 3 Koin ornK) E-0 e•, 1st �T Q1-> ' <-1Tr� `°f Irm 0 o o 00 0 4 No Scale ¢' 1 5 CO 3 4 5 Figure 6 SITE TRIPS 1 = . PM Peak Hour } OSTER ENGINEERING s"at. ,udles • Planning • Safety eogle2_5.dwg 1 In s . MI ,, 1111 . .41. w 991 ARE Er x 4,0 l 1 `52acti\ cPC A L' \,4 A K' C7 a) . v c N N Q15% Dortmouth Street 15%D °'PC, A U, se t-, 71,11 �-1 d rK to In �o Bevelond Street a ; '"••• klea\I l PROJECT 1 Conzago Street Q T �� \ SITE ----1 i alp 1 k.... Q_ \ Hampton Street *m fox �,, till'?e rilid CV No Sao a ig' Ill 1.11 r7:' . ..1 „, *: tt SITE TRIP DISTRIBUTION Inbound & Outbound Percentages CASTER a g ENGINEERING PM Peak Hour Jle2_4.dwg , �r: `$tadles • Planning • Safety eagte2_4.dwg HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hall Boulevard (N-S) Scoffins Analyst : Thanh File Name : XHANSCFA.HC9 Area Type: Other 1-26-0 AM Peak Comment : Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volume (AM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R --- - - -- - -- -- --- - ---- --- - -- -- --- - -- -- - - - - -- - - - --- N o. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 < 0 Volumes 165 1 15 3 520 295 25 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 Lost Time 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru * Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left SB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right Green 10 . 0A Green 3 . OA 45 . OA Yellow/AR 4 . 0 Yellow/AR 4 .0 4 .0 Cycle Length: 70 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB LTR 249 1583 0 . 864 0 . 157 36 . 2 D 36 .2 D NB L 101 1770 0 . 040 0 . 057 20 . 1 C 2 . 3 A T 1410 1863 0 .439 0 . 757 2 . 1 A SB TR 1089 1657 0 . 350 0 . 657 3 . 5 A 3 . 5 A Intersection Delay = 8 . 6 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 6 .0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 . 512 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hall Boulevard (N-S) Scoffins Analyst : Thanh File Name: XHANSCFP.HC9 Area Type: Other 1-26-0 PM Peak Comment : Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volume (PM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 < 0 Volumes 70 1 15 12 470 760 95 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 .0 12 . 0 12 .0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 Lost Time 3 .00 3 . 00 3 .00 3 .00 3 .00 3 .00 3 .00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru * Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left SB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right Green 10 .OA Green 3 .OA 45 .OA Yellow/AR 4 .0 Yellow/AR 4 .0 4 .0 Cycle Length: 70 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB LTR 247 1569 0 .398 0 .157 17 .7 C 17 .7 C NB L 101 1770 0 .138 0 .057 20 .3 C 2 .4 A T 1410 1863 0 .379 0 .757 2 .0 A SB TR 1083 1649 0 .897 0 .657 13 .7 B 13 .7 B Intersection Delay = 10 .1 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9 . 0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0.757 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hunziker Street (N-S) SW Hall Blvd Analyst : Thanh File Name : XHALHUNA.HC9 Area Type : Other 1-26-0 AM Peak Comment : Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (AM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R -- -- ---- ---- --- - ---- ---- ---- ---- -- -- - - - - ---- ---- No . Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 < 0 1 1 0 Volumes 85 90 500 185 115 235 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 100 Lost Time 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left NB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds WB Left * SB Left * Thru Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right * Green 15 .OA Green 36 . OA 7 . OA Yellow/AR 4 . 0 Yellow/AR 4 .0 4 . 0 Cycle Length: 70 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS WB L 404 1770 0 .250 0 . 229 14 . 3 B 11 . 7 B R 611 1583 0 . 175 0 . 386 9 . 2 B NB TR 850 1609 0 . 959 0 . 529 25 . 9 D 25 . 9 D SB L 202 1770 0 .677 0 . 114 25 . 1 D 10 . 0 B T 1277 1863 0 .219 0 . 686 2 .6 A Intersection Delay = 19 . 3 sec/veh Intersection LOS = C Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9 . 0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 . 736 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hunziker Street (N-S) SW Hall Blvd Analyst : Thanh File Name: XHALHUNP.HC9 Area Type: Other 1-26-0 PM Peak Comment : Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (PM) = Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----No. Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 < 0 1 1 0 Volumes 325 160 435 90 55 525 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12.0 12 .0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 100 Lost Time 3 . 00 3 .00 3 .00 3 .00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left NB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds WB Left * SB Left * Thru Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right * Green 20 .OA Green 31 .OA 7 . OA Yellow/AR 4 .0 Yellow/AR 4 .0 4 . 0 Cycle Length: 70 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS WB L 531 1770 0 .695 0.300 16.7 C 13 . 7 B R 724 1583 0.251 0.457 7 .6 B NB TR 747 1633 0 . 798 0.457 14. 8 B 14 . 8 B SB L 202 1770 0 .312 0.114 18 .7 C 6 .6 B T 1144 1863 0 .522 0.614 5 .3 B Intersection Delay = 11.4 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9 .0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 .699 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hunziker Street (N-S) SW 72nd Avenue Analyst : Thanh File Name: XHUN72A.HC9 Area Type: Other 1-26-0 AM Peak Comment : Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (AM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 Volumes 110 605 110 605 210 265 Lane W (ft) 12 .0 12 .0 12 .0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 .0 RTOR Vols 0 0 50 Lost Time 3 .00 3 .00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left SB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds NB Right EB Right * SB Right WB Right Green 20 .OA Green 15 .OA 43 .OA Yellow/AR 4 .0 Yellow/AR 4 .0 4 .0 Cycle Length: 90 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB L 413 1770 0 .317 0 .233 18.6 C 43 . 7 E R 704 1583 1.023 0 .444 48 .3 E NB L 315 1770 0 .416 0 . 178 21.8 C 7 .3 B T 1304 1863 0.552 0 . 700 4 . 7 A SB T 911 1863 0 .275 0 .489 8 . 8 B 9 .0 B R 774 1583 0 .329 0 .489 9 . 1 B Intersection Delay = 21 .7 sec/veh Intersection LOS = C Lost Time/Cycle, L = 6 .0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 .660 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hunziker Street (N-S) SW 72nd Avenue Analyst : Thanh File Name: XHUN72P.HC9 Area Type: Other 1-26-0 PM Peak Comment : Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (PM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 Volumes 210 295 115 520 500 355 Lane W (ft) 12 .0 12 .0 12 .0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 50 Lost Time 3 .00 3 .00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left SB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds NB Right EB Right * SB Right WB Right Green 20 .OA Green 15 . OA 43 .OA Yellow/AR 4 .0 Yellow/AR 4 .0 4 .0 Cycle Length: 90 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB L 413 1770 0.579 0 .233 21.3 C 15 .7 C R 704 1583 0.476 0 .444 11 .8 B NB L 315 1770 0 .416 0 . 178 21 . 8 C 7 .2 B T 1304 1863 0 .453 0 . 700 4 . 0 A SB T 911 1863 0 .624 0 .489 11. 9 B 11 .2 B R 774 1583 0 .447 0 .489 10 . 0 B Intersection Delay = 11 . 1 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 6.0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 .553 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 .1f XHUNACCA.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets : (N-S) Hunziker Street (E-W) Site Access Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed15 (min) Analyst Thanh Date of Analysis 1/27/0 Other Information Existing Peak Hour traffic Volumes (AM) Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 > 0 < 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 425 7 7 195 3 2 PHF . 84 . 84 .84 . 84 .84 .84 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (t) SU/RV' s (%) CV' s (%) PCE' s 1.10 1.10 1.10 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5 .00 2 .10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 .60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1f XHUNACCA.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 510 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 764 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 764 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 514 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 975 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 975 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .99 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 750 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 390 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 .99 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 .99 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 .99 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 386 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 4 386 > 462 7 .9 0 .0 B 7 .9 NB R 2 764 > WB L 9 975 3 .7 0 .0 A 0 .1 Intersection Delay = 0 .1 sec/veh HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1f XHUNACCP.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets : (N-S) Hunziker Street (E-W) Site Access Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed15 (min) Analyst Thanh Date of Analysis 1/27/0 Other Information Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (PM) Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 > 0 < 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 275 3 5 465 6 5 PHF .93 . 93 .93 .93 . 93 . 93 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (%) SU/RV' s (%) CV' s (%) PCE' s 1. 10 1 . 10 1 .10 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 .00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1f XHUNACCP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 298 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 978 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 978 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .99 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 299 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1235 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1235 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 .00 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 802 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 363 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 .99 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 99 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 99 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 361 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 7 361 > 509 7 .3 0 .0 B 7 .3 NB R 6 978 > WB L 6 1235 2 .9 0 . 0 A 0 . 0 Intersection Delay = 0 . 1 sec/veh HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hall Boulevard (N-S) Scoffins Analyst : Thanh File Name: BHALSCFA.HC9 Area Type: Other 1-26-0 AM Peak Comment : Future Background 2002 Peak Hour Traffic Volume (AM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 < 0 Volumes 178 1 17 5 586 325 32 Lane W (ft) 12 .0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 .0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 Lost Time 3 .00 3 .00 3 .00 3 .00 3 .00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru * Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left SB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right Green 10 .OA Green 3 .OA 45 .OA Yellow/AR 4 .0 Yellow/AR 4 .0 4 .0 Cycle Length: 70 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB LTR 249 1583 0 .877 0 .157 37 .8 D 37 . 8 D NB L 101 1770 0.059 0 .057 20 .2 C 2 .4 A T 1410 1863 0 .462 0 . 757 2 .2 A SB TR 1087 1654 0 .365 0 .657 3 . 6 A 3 .6 A Intersection Delay = 8 .8 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 6 .0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 .533 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hall Boulevard (N-S) Scoffins Analyst : Thanh File Name: BHALSCFP.HC9 Area Type: Other 1-26-0 PM Peak Comment: Future Background 2002 Peak Hour Traffic Volume (PM) _ Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----No. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 < 0 Volumes 78 1 18 14 519 850 103 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 .0 12 .0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 Lost Time 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 .00 3 .00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru * Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left SB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right Green 10 .0A Green 3 .OA 45 . OA Yellow/AR 4 .0 Yellow/AR 4 .0 4 .0 Cycle Length: 70 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB LTR 246 1567 0 .414 0 .157 17 .9 C 17 .9 C NB L 101 1770 0 .148 0 . 057 20 .3 C 2 .5 A T 1410 1863 0 .387 0 .757 2 .0 A SB TR 1084 1649 0 .925 0 . 657 16 .3 C 16 .3 C Intersection Delay = 11.7 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9 . 0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 .782 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hunziker Street (N-S) SW Hall Blvd Analyst : Thanh File Name: BHALHUNA.HC9 Area Type : Other 1-26-0 AM Peak Comment : Future Backgound 2002 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (AM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- -- - - --- - - --- ---- -- - - - - - - ---- -- -- - - -- - - -- ---- No . Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 < 0 1 1 0 Volumes 101 99 540 224 140 254 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 100 Lost Time 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left NB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds WB Left * SB Left * Thru Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right * Green 15 . OA Green 36 . OA 7 . OA Yellow/AR 4 . 0 Yellow/AR 4 . 0 4 . 0 Cycle Length: 70 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS WB L 404 1770 0 . 277 0 .229 14 . 5 B 11 . 8 B R 611 1583 0 . 180 0 . 386 9 . 2 B NB TR 847 1603 1 . 002 0 . 529 34 . 9 D 34 . 9 D SB L 202 1770 0 . 771 0 . 114 30 . 6 D 12 . 6 B T 1277 1863 0 . 221 0 . 686 2 . 6 A Intersection Delay = 25 . 1 sec/veh Intersection LOS = D Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9 . 0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 . 782 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hunziker Street (N-S) SW Hall Blvd Analyst: Thanh File Name: BHALHUNP.HC9 Area Type : Other 1-26-0 PM Peak Comment : Future Backgound 2002 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (PM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 < 0 1 1 0 Volumes 380 188 470 110 61 567 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 .0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 100 Lost Time 3 .00 3 .00 3 . 00 3 . 0013 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left NB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds WB Left * SB Left * Thru Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right * Green 20 .OA Green 31.OA 7 .OA Yellow/AR 4 .0 Yellow/AR 4 . 0 4 .0 Cycle Length: 70 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS WB L 531 1770 0 .753 0.300 18 .5 C 14 . 9 B R 724 1583 0 .274 0 .457 7 .7 B NB TR 745 1629 0 . 821 0 .457 15 . 8 C 15 . 8 C SB L 202 1770 0 .316 0.114 18 .7 C 6 . 6 B T 1144 1863 0 .522 0.614 5 .3 B Intersection Delay = 12 .3 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9 .0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 .731 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hunziker Street (N-S) SW 72nd Avenue Analyst : Thanh File Name: BHUN72A.HC9 Area Type : Other 1-26-0 AM Peak Comment : Future Background 2002 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (AM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- - --- - --- ---- -- -- - -- - ---- - - -- - - -- - --- --- - No. Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 Volumes 131 654 128 688 267 310 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 .0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 50 Lost Time 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left SB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds NB Right EB Right * SB Right WB Right Green 20 . OA Green 15 . OA 43 . OA Yellow/AR 4 . 0 Yellow/AR 4 . 0 4 . 0 Cycle Length: 90 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB L 413 1770 0 . 354 0 . 233 18 . 9 C 45 . 8 E R 704 1583 1 . 033 0 .444 51 .2 E NB L 315 1770 0 .451 0 . 178 22 . 1 C 7 . 6 B T 1304 1863 0 . 586 0 . 700 4 . 9 A SB T 911 1863 0 . 326 0 .489 9 . 1 B 9 . 3 B R 774 1583 0 . 372 0 .489 9 .4 B Intersection Delay = 22 . 1 sec/veh Intersection LOS = C Lost Time/Cycle, L = 6 . 0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 . 687 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hunziker Street (N-S) SW 72nd Avenue Analyst : Thanh File Name: BHUN72P.HC9 Area Type: Other 1-26-0 PM Peak Comment : Future Background 2002 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (PM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 Volumes 253 335 125 619 585 403 Lane W (ft) 12 .0 12 .0 12 .0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 50 Lost ,Time 3 .00 3 . 00 3 .00 3 .00 3 .00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left SB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds NB Right EB Right * SB Right WB Right Green 20 .OA Green 15 .OA 43 .OA Yellow/AR 4 .0 Yellow/AR 4 .0 4 .0 Cycle Length: 90 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB L 413 1770 0 .644 0 .233 22 .5 C 16 .5 C R 704 1583 0 .502 0 .444 12 .0 B NB L 315 1770 0 .420 0 .178 21. 8 C 7 .2 B T 1304 1863 0 .500 0 .700 4 .3 A SB T 911 1863 0.676 0 .489 12 .8 B 11.8 B R 774 1583 0.479 0 .489 10 .3 B Intersection Delay = 11 .5 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9 .0 sec Critical v/c(x) = 0 . 617 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1f BHUNACCA.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets : (N-S) Hunziker Street (E-W) Site Access Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed15 (min) Analyst Thanh Date of Analysis 1/27/0 Other Information Future Background 2002 Peak Hour Traffi c Volumes (AM) Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 > 0 < 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 464 41 30 222 7 5 PHF . 95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (%) SU/RV' s (%) CV' s (%) PCE' s 1.10 1.10 1.10 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2 .10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 .60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 .00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3 .40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1f BHUNACCA.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 510 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 764 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 764 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .99 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 531 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 957 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 957 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .96 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .96 Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 776 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 376 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 .96 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 96 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 .96 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 360 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 8 360 > 465 8 .0 0 .0 B 8 .0 NB R 6 764 > WB L 35 957 3 .9 0 .0 A 0 .5 Intersection Delay = 0 .3 sec/veh HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1f BHUNACCP.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets : (N-S) Hunziker Street (E-W) Site Access Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed15 (min) Analyst Thanh Date of Analysis 1/27/0 Other Information Future Background 2002 Peak Hour Traffi c Volumes (PM) Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 > 0 < 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 307 8 8 520 41 12 PHF .95 . 95 . 95 .95 . 95 .95 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (%) SU/RV' s (%) CV' s (%) PCE' s 1.10 1 . 10 1.10 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5 .00 2 .10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3 .40 HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1f BHUNACCP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 327 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 945 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 945 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .99 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 331 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1192 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1192 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .99 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 882 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 327 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 .99 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 .99 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.99 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 323 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 47 323 > 380 11 .3 0 .6 C 11 .3 NB R 14 945 > WB L 9 1192 3 .0 0 . 0 A 0 . 0 Intersection Delay = 0 .7 sec/veh HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hall Boulevard (N-S) Scoffins Analyst : Thanh File Name: DHALSCFA.HC9 Area Type: Other 1-26-0 AM Peak Comment : Total Future 2002 w/Buildout Peak Hour Traffic Volume (AM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 < 0 Volumes 178 1 17 5 598 329 32 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 .0 12 .0 12 .0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 Lost Time 3 .00 3 . 00 3 .00 3 .00 3 .00 3 . 00 3 .00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru * Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left SB Left Thru Thru * . Right Right * Peds Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right Green 10 .OA Green 3 .OA 45 .OA Yellow/AR 4 .0 Yellow/AR 4 .0 4 .0 Cycle Length: 70 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB LTR 249 1583 0.877 0 .157 37 .8 D 37 .8 D NB L 101 1770 0 .059 0 .057 20 .2 C 2 .4 A T 1410 1863 0 .471 0 . 757 2 .3 A SB TR 1087 1654 0 .370 0 .657 3 .6 A 3 . 6 A Intersection Delay = 8 .8 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 6 . 0 sec Critical v/c(x) = 0 .541 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f , 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets: (E-W) Hall Boulevard (N-S) Scoffins Analyst : Thanh File Name: DHALSCFP.HC9 Area Type : Other 1-26-0 PM Peak Comment : Total Future 2002 w/Buildout Peak Hour Traffic Volume (PM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- N o. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 < 0 Volumes 78 1 18 14 524 860 103 Lane W (ft) 12 .0 12 .0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 Lost Time 3 .00 3 .00 3 .00 3 . 00 3 .00 3 . 00 3 .00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru * Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left SB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right Green 10 .OA Green 3 .OA 45 . OA Yellow/AR 4 .0 Yellow/AR 4 .0 4 .0 Cycle Length: 70 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB LTR 246 1567 0 .414 0 .157 17 .9 C 17 . 9 C NB L 101 1770 0 .148 0 . 057 20 .3 C 2 .5 A T 1410 1863 0 .391 0 .757 2 . 0 A SB TR 1084 1650 0 .934 0 .657 17 .3 C 17 .3 C Intersection Delay = 12 .3 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9 .0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 .789 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 . 4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hunziker Street (N-S) SW Hall Blvd Analyst : Thanh File Name : DHALHUNA.HC9 Area Type : Other 1-26-0 AM Peak Comment : Total Future 2002 w/Buildout Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (AM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- - --- ---- -- - - - - -- -- - - - --- --- - ---- ---- - - - - --- - No. Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 < 0 1 1 0 Volumes 105 102 540 236 148 254 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 100 Lost Time 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left NB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds WB Left * SB Left * Thru Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right * Green 15 .OA Green 36 . OA 7 . OA Yellow/AR 4 . 0 Yellow/AR 4 . 0 4 . 0 Cycle Length: 70 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS WB L 404 1770 0 . 289 0 . 229 14 . 5 B 11 . 9 B R 611 1583 0 . 185 0 . 386 9 . 2 B NB TR 846 1600 1 . 019 0 .529 39 . 3 D 39 . 3 D SB L 202 1770 0 . 811 0 . 114 34 . 0 D 14 . 2 B T 1277 1863 0 . 221 0 . 686 2 . 6 A Intersection Delay = 27 . 9 sec/veh Intersection LOS = D Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9 . 0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 . 800 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hunziker Street (N-S) SW Hall Blvd Analyst : Thanh File Name: DHALHUNP.HC9 Area Type : Other 1-26-0 PM Peak Comment : Total Future 2002 w/Buildout Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (PM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R -- -- - - -- -- -- --- - - - -- --- - -- -- -- - - - - - - --- - - - -- ---- No. Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 < 0 1 1 0 Volumes 390 195 470 115 65 567 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 100 Lost Time 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left NB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds WB Left * SB Left * Thru Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right * Green 20 . OA Green 31 . OA 7 .OA Yellow/AR 4 . 0 Yellow/AR 4 . 0 4 .0 Cycle Length: 70 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS WB L 531 1770 0 . 774 0 . 300 19 . 3 C 15 .4 C R 724 1583 0 . 283 0 .457 7 . 7 B NB TR 744 1627 0 . 828 0 .457 16 . 2 C 16 .2 C SB L 202 1770 0 . 336 0 . 114 18 . 8 C 6 . 7 B T 1144 1863 0 . 522 0 . 614 5 . 3 B Intersection Delay = 12 . 6 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9 .0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 .745 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hunziker Street (N-S) SW 72nd Avenue Analyst : Thanh File Name: DHUN72A.HC9 Area Type : Other 1-26-0 AM Peak Comment : Total Future 2002 w/Buildout Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (AM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- - -- - ---- - - - - - --- ---- - - -- --- - ---- - --- -- -- --- - No. Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 Volumes 134 656 133 688 267 318 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 50 Lost Time 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left SB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds NB Right EB Right * SB Right WB Right Green 20 . OA Green 15 . OA 43 . OA Yellow/AR 4 . 0 Yellow/AR 4 . 0 4 . 0 Cycle Length: 90 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB L 413 1770 0 . 361 0 . 233 18 . 9 C 46 . 5 E R 704 1583 1 . 036 0 .444 52 . 1 E NB L 315 1770 0 .470 0 . 178 22 . 3 C 7 . 8 B T 1304 1863 0 . 586 0 . 700 4 . 9 A SB T 911 1863 0 . 326 0 .489 9 . 1 B 9 . 3 B R 774 1583 0 . 384 0 .489 9 . 5 B Intersection Delay = 22 .4 sec/veh Intersection LOS = C Lost Time/Cycle, L = 6 . 0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 . 694 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2 .4f 01-27-2000 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Hunziker Street (N-S) SW 72nd Avenue Analyst : Thanh File Name: DHUN72P.HC9 Area Type : Other 1-26-0 PM Peak Comment : Total Future 2002 w/Buildout Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (PM) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R - - -- - --- ---- -- -- ---- -- -- - --- --- - ---- - - -- -- -- ---- No. Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 Volumes 258 342 129 619 585 405 Lane W (ft) 12 .0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 50 Lost Time 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru Thru * * Right * Right Peds Peds WB Left SB Left Thru Thru * Right Right * Peds Peds NB Right EB Right * SB Right WB Right Green 20 . OA Green 15 .OA 43 . OA Yellow/AR 4 . 0 Yellow/AR 4 .0 4 .0 Cycle Length: 90 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB L 413 1770 0 . 659 0 .233 22 . 9 C 16 . 8 C R 704 1583 0 . 512 0 .444 12 . 1 B NB L 315 1770 0 .432 0 . 178 21 . 9 C 7 . 3 B T 1304 1863 0 .500 0 . 700 4 . 3 A SB T 911 1863 0 . 676 0 .489 12 . 8 B 11 . 8 B R 774 1583 0 .482 0 .489 10 . 3 B Intersection Delay = 11 . 7 sec/veh Intersection LOS = B Lost Time/Cycle, L = 9 . 0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 .624 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1f DHUNACCA.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Well Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets : (N-S) Hunziker Street (E-W) Site Access Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed15 (min) Analyst Thanh Date of Analysis 1/27/0 Other Information Total Future 2002 w/Buildout Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (AM) Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 > 0 < 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 464 61 43 222 14 10 PHF .95 . 95 .95 . 95 . 95 . 95 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (U) SU/RV' s (s) CV' s (o) PCE' s 1.10 1 . 10 1. 10 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 .60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 .1f DHUNACCA.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 520 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 755 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 755 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .98 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 552 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 936 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 936 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .95 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .94 Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 799 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 365 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 .94 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 .94 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.94 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 342 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 17 342 > 442 8 .7 0 .1 B 8 .7 NB R 12 755 > WB L 50 936 4 .1 0 .0 A 0 . 7 Intersection Delay = 0 .5 sec/veh r HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1f DHUNACCP.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Well Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets : (N-S) Hunziker Street (E-W) Site Access Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed15 (min) Analyst Thanh Date of Analysis 1/27/0 Other Information Total Future 2002 w/Buildout Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (PM) Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 > 0 < 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 307 17 14 520 58 40 PHF . 95 .95 .95 . 95 .95 . 95 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (%) SU/RV' s (%) CV' s (t) PCE' s 1.10 1.10 1. 10 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5 .00 2 .10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2 .60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 .00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3 .40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1f DHUNACCP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 332 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 940 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 940 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .95 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 341 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1179 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1179 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .99 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .98 Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 894 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 321 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0. 98 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 .98 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 .98 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 314 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 67 314 > 431 11 .3 1. 1 C 11 .3 NB R 46 940 > WB L 17 1179 3 .1 0 .0 A 0 . 1 Intersection Delay = 1.2 sec/veh PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES '` CITT OP INARD.ORNOH Community rDeveIopment (Pre Application fleeting Notes are Valid for Six (6) Months) sfapgJ4 Better Community NON-RESIDENTIAL PRE APP.MTG.DATE: f/-/8-9 9 STAFF AT PRE-APP.: T/Bg, APPLICANT: 2.747 l t/4c/dle AGENT: • Phone: ( ) ZZ/—Zm,?j Phone: ( ) PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GEN. LOCATION: 8zirx, TAX MAP(S)/LOT #(S): ;ZS/ O/Pit o _ NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: ..Si DU2/orne iter-WeT^/ PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: 61art,cl 3 /lcl.i -Chil(AreS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: 7;i4S Mi ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: SL C.I.T. AREA: �s _ FACILITATOR: PHONE: (503) IONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT SIZE: sq. ft. Average lot width: . ft. Maximum building height: ft. Setbacks: Front ft. Side• - ft. Rear o �7 't. Corner 2 ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: S. % Minimum Ian scaped or natural vegetation area: /S %. (Refer to Code Section 18. 530 4 t, Jc/t%4 1 Z9AG 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 11/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. [Refer to Code Section 18.810.0601 CITY Of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page I of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section Ak r1)76 i,f The 4X i55-Inq s-Nrag e) 0 so, iugl1 a6Slgt1,ra QGev,Oo Op). Jo ht N2tu SI-eueittkgS 2aUJ SPECIAL SETBACKS STREETS: feet from the centerline of • • LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet, along the site's boundary. FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7301 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 to site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; > All actual building setbacks will be at least half ('A) of the building's height; and > The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. [Refer to Code Section 18.730.010.8.1 PARKING AND ACCESS REQUIRED parking for this type of use: Deriids - reC- 1r A! rt� 4-cis (provc%al) Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): S�c rs ari, SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): NO MORE THAN 40% 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 18.765.0401 Handicapped Parking: All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. • BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. - o-9y r / Minimum number of accesses: /ao ° %2 Minimum access width: a/S7 . Minimum pavement width: 02V/�/D 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 18.1051 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 NON Residential Appbaoon/Phnning Oration Section —- •_ IIIIALKWAY REQUIREMEN >— WALKW HALL 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] DADING EA 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) CLEAR VISION AREA The Ci requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND El HT (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] OFFERING AND SCREENIN rder CREASE PRIVACY AND • - THER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjace t develo• ents, especially between diff rent land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas' along cert.• site perimeters. Requir d buffer areas 'ale described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer area must be occupied by a ixture of deciduou and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achiev a balance between vertical and horizontar plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be -quired; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may my be occupied b4 vegetation, fences, utilitie , and- alkways. Additional infc�-mation on required bI fer area materials and sizes may be found in the D elopment Code. , (Refer to Co Chapter 18.745] j The F SQUIRED BUFF R WIDTHS which are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: feet alo north boundary. 'foot/along east boundary. feet alon outh boundary. feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCU ING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: . ilANDSCAPDNG -- - 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 18.7051 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9 NON-Aesdent ai Application/Planning Division 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 18.780) ENSITIVE LAND The provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive lands areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.84 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7151 EP SLOP "••■■Im'en ST - LOPES exist, prior ance of a firj order, a •-e -chnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the igard ommun Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field e . . ation and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775:Gab.C. 111E11 SEWERAGE AGENCY[USA]B UFFER STANDARDS,R& 690 -44 -. LA1/II DEVECOPIVENT AD,TATENT-T-6-SEN�ITFVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 25-FEET-WIDE, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries of the sensitive area, except where approval has been granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an area of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable encroachment shall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the length of the vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in width. In any case, the average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: A GRAVEL WALKWAY OR BIKE PATH, NOT EXCEEDING EIGHT (8) FEET IN WIDTH. If the walkway or bike path is paved, then the vegetated corridor must be widened by the width to the path. A paved or gravel walkway or bike path may not be constructed closer than ten (10) feet from the boundary of the sensitive area, unless approved by the Agency or City. Walkways and bike paths shall be constructed so as to minimize disturbance to existing vegetation; and WATER QUALITY FACILITIES may encroach into the vegetated corridor a maximum of ten (10) feet with the approval of the Agency or City. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. (Refer to R&0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3,Design for SWMI CITY Of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 9 NON-Rudennil Apphation/Phnning Diva on t&non • . ;WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY DISTRICT - The WATER ROU ES S (WR) OVERLAY DISTRICT implements the policies of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and is intended to resolve conflicts between development and conservation of significant wetlands, streams and riparian corridors identified in the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. Specifically, this chapter allows reasonable economic use of property while establishing clear and objective standards to: protect significant wetlands and streams; limit development in designated riparian corridors; maintain and enhance water quality; maximize flood storage capacity; preserve native plant cover; minimize streambank erosion; maintain and enhance fish and wildlife habitats; and conserve scenic, recreational and educational values of water resource areas. Safe Harbor: The WR OVERLAY DISTRICT ALSO MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 (Natural Resources) and the "safe harbor" provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660, Division 23). These provisions require that "significant" wetlands and riparian corridors be mapped and protected. The Tualatin River, which is also a "fish-bearing stream," has an average annual flow of more than 1000 cfs. Major Streams: Streams which are mapped as "FISH-BEARING STREAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry and have an average annual flow less than 1000 cubic feet per second (cfs). ➢ Major streams in Tigard include FANNO CREEK, ASH CREEK (EXCEPT THE NORTH FORK AND OTHER TRIBUTARY CREEKS) AND BALL CREEK. Minor Streams: Streams which are NOT "FISH-BEARING STREAMS" according to Oregon Department of Forestry maps . Minor streams in Tigard include Summer Creek, Derry Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and certain short tributaries of the Tualatin River. Riparian Setback Area: This AREA IS MEASURED HORIZONTALLY FROM AND PARALLEL TO MAJOR STREAM OR TUALATIN RIVER TOP-OF-BANKS, OR THE EDGE OF AN ASSOCIATED WETLAND, whichever is greater. The riparian setback is the same as the "riparian corridor boundary" in OAR 660-23- 090(1)(d). The standard TUALATIN RIVER RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 75 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. • The MAJOR STREAMS RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 50 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. --- ISOLATED WETLANDS AND MINOR STREAMS (including adjacent wetlands) have no riparian setback; however, a 25-foot "water quality buffer" is required under Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) standards adopted and administered by the City of Tigard. (Refer to Code Section 18.797.0301 ( R parian Setback Reductions The DIRECTOR MAY APPROVE A SITE-SPECIFIC REDUCTION OF THE TUALATIN RIVER OR ANY MAJOR STREAM RIPARIAN SETBACK BY AS MUCH AS 50% to allow the placement of structures or impervious surfaces otherwise prohibited by this chapter, provided that equal or better protection for identified major stream resources is ensured through streambank restoration and/or enhancement of riparian vegetation in preserved portions of the riparian setback area. Eligibility for Riparian Setback in Disturbed Areas. TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A RIPARIAN SETBACK REDUCTION, the applicant must demonstrate that the riparian corridor was substantially disturbed at the time this regulation was adopted. This determination must be based on the Vegetation Study required by Section 18.85.050.C. that demonstrates all of the following: ➢ Native plant species currently cover less than 80% of the on-site riparian corridor area; ➢ The tree canopy currently covers less than 50% of the on-site riparian corridor and healthy trees have not been removed from the on-site riparian setback area for the last five years; ➢ That vegetation was not removed contrary to the provisions of Section 18.85.050 regulating removal of native plant species; CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 9 NON-Residential AppI caOon/Planning Division 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%. [ ter to Code Section 18.797.1001 4REE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS 9r� 1"W A TREE--PAN--FOR T PLANT IING, 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, major 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.C.] cano PLACEMENT 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-Aeidenhol Application/Planning[Inman Seaton RATIVE�} _- +re 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(Conditional Use) 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) -- =- 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirement) _ 1 8.340(Director's Interpretation) -- 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) -t� 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) 18.350(Planned Development) 1 8.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) 18.780(Signs) 1 8.360(Site Development Review) 1 8.710(Accessory Residential Units) 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) 18.370(Vanances/Adjustment) 18.715(Density Computations) 18.790(Tree Removal) 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendment) tf 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) 1 8.385(Miscellaneous Permit) 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) 18.797(Water Resources(WR)Overlay District) 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) - 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) 1 8.410(Lot Line Adjustment) 18.740(Historic Overlay) 1 8.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) 18.420(Land Partitions) 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) 18.430(Subdivisions) T 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) • 18.510(Residential toning District) 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 18.520(Commercial coning District) ' 1 8.755 (Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) - 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) ACT STUD_-A,s 5 rt 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 HBORH00D MEETIN ANT 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, applicant's 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 CITY Of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section 1; ILDING PERMITS ' :► - R 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 183551 ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: -ri$b 2,3 100$140/y v /2-/d-99 '/ .�, /J�7 �ii r1 ��,., G✓S�/i c/win /% b S0 �e�-� C 1'f/S/ aS /e 5,.a,) OZS)- Z 4 3 /1f9 40A /li a2-V-7 9 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)e 81/2" x 11" map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 9 NON-Residential Appliation/Plannin`Division Section The Planning Division and Engineering Division 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 use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard 7-iegr,ix org4z,-. . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is a.. ailable from the Planning Division upon request. 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 of good 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: //�/f'� //-tea C OF TIGAR�LANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP.MEETING PHONE: 15031639-4171 FAX: 15031684-7297 E-MAIL: Sstatis first name)@ci.tigard.or.us H:\patty\masters\Pre-App Notes Commercial.doc (Engineering section.preapp.eng) Updated: 2-Nov-99 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 NON-Residential Appliatian/PInning Division Section CITY OF TIGARD LAND USE APPLICATION CHECKLIST Please read this form careful) in con.unction with the notes .rovided to ou at the .re- application conference. This checklist identifies what is required for submittal of a complete land use application. Once an application is deemed complete by Community Development staff, a decision may be issued within 6-8 weeks. If you have additional questions after reviewing all of the information provided to you, please contact the staff person named below at the City of Tigard Planning Division, (503) 639-4171. Staff: 3Jfk9/.Br'41 Date: //- 1. BASIC INFORMATION ALL LAND USE APPLICATIONS REQUIRE THE FOLLOWING: Completed Application Form with property owner's signature or name of agent and letter of authorization Title transfer instrument or grant deed Written summary of proposal Narrative demonstrating compliance with all applicable development standards and approval criteria (as specified in the Pre-Application Conference notes) Two (2) sets of stamped, addressed envelopes and a notarized list of all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. Mailing envelopes shall be legal-size, addressed with 1"x 4" labels Documentary evidence of neighborhood meeting (if required) Impact Study per Section 18.390.040.B.2.(e) Copy of the Pre-Application Conference notes Filing Fee 2. PLANS REQUIRED In addition to the above basic information, each type of land use application will require one or more of the following maps or plans. PLEASE SUBMIT EACH OF THE PLANS CHECKED BELOW WITH YOUR APPLICATION (Section 5 of this checklist provides details on what information to include on each plan): Vicinity Map iV Preliminary Grading/Erosion Control Plan 0� Existing Conditions Map DV Preliminary Utilities Plan ❑ Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map Q/ Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan ❑ Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan El---/Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan Er Site Development Plan [ice Architectural Drawings 19- Landscape Plan ❑ Sign Drawings • Public Improvements/Streets Plan 3. NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED The City requires multiple copies of submittal materials. The number of copies required depends on the type of review process. FOR AN APPLICATION SUCH AS YOU ARE PROPOSING THE CITY REQUIRES /h COPIES OF ALL APPLICATION MATERIALS. City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 1 of 5 . 4. SPECIAL STUDIES AND REPORTS Because of the nature of your project and/or the site you propose to develop, THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL STUDIES WILL BE REQUIRED. These studies must be prepared by certified professionals with experience in the appropriate field: l9 '''. Traffic Study-{(1,,I es$ Brian 59y.5 a i-csi e) ❑ Local Streets Traffic Study 13/ Wetlands/Stream Corridor Delineation and Report Cl Habitat Area Evaluation • ❑ Storm Drainage System Downstream Analysis ❑ Preliminary Sizing Calculations for Proposed Water Quality and/or Detention Facility ❑ Geotechnical Report ❑ Other 5. PREPARING PLANS AND MAPS Plans and maps should be prepared at an engineering scale (1" = 10/20/50/1001200') and include a north arrow, legend and date. The same scale should be used for all your plans. Where possible the City prefers the use of a scale that allows a site plan or subdivision plat to be shown on a single sheet. Architectural drawings may be prepared at an architectural scale. One copy of each plan must be submitted in photo-ready 8Y: x 11 format. THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR EACH TYPE OF PLAN (If the plans you submit do not include all of the information requested because you feel it is not applicable, please indicate this and provide a brief explanation). 'cinity MM �� �`�� rte— 4s "asrr c re"&y/e" A,J Showing the location of the site in relation to: • Adjacent properties ❑ • Surrounding street system including nearby intersections ❑ • Pedestrian ways and bikeways ❑ • Transit stops ❑ • Utility access ❑ 'sting o ditions Map Parcel boundaries,dimensions and gross area ❑ Contour lines(2'intervals for 0-10%slopes or 5'for slopes>10%) ❑ Drainage patterns and courses on the site and on adjacent lands ❑ Potential natural hazard areas including: • Floodplain areas ❑ • Areas having a high seasonal water table within 24"of the surface for three or more weeks of the year ❑ • Slopes in excess of 25% ❑ • Unstable ground ❑ • Areas with severe soil erosion potential ❑ • Areas having severely weak foundation soils ❑ Locations of resource areas including: • Wildlife habitat areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan ❑ • Wetlands ❑ Other site features: • Rock outcroppings ❑ • Trees with 6"caliper measured 4'from ground level ❑ Location and type of noise sources ❑ Locations of existing structures and their uses ❑ Locations of existing utilities and easements ❑ Locations of existing dedicated right-of-ways City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 2 of 5 • Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map The proposed name of the subdivision �` ❑ Vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial an. .Ilector streets ❑ Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the own; ,developer,engineer surveyor and designer(as applicable) ❑ Scale, north arrow and date ❑ Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided Names of adjacent subdivisions or names of recorder owners of adjoining parcels of unsubdivided land ❑ Contour lines related to a City-established benchma at 2' intervals for 0-10%grades and 5' intervals for grades greater than 10% ❑ The purpose,location,type and size of all of the folio ing (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): • Public and private right-of-ways and easements ❑ • Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines ❑ • Domestic water mains including fire hydrants ❑ • Major power teleph• e transmi - '•- 4,e 0 0 volts or greater) ❑ • Watercourses ❑ • Deed reservati• s for parks,open spaces, pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ • The location of III trees with a diameter 6 inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level ❑ • The location of:II structures and the present uses of the structures,and a statement of which structures are to remain a er platting ❑ Supplemental info ation including: • Proposed deed -strictions (if any) ❑ • A proposed plan •r provision of subdivision improvements ❑ Existing natural featur:s including rock outcroppings,wetlands and marsh areas The proposed lot confi. rations, lot sizes and dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for purposes other than res •ential, it shall be indicated upon such lots ❑ If any of the foregoing in ormation cannot practicably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submi ed with the application materials ❑ Preliminary Partition/Lot ine Adjustment Plan The owner of the subject par -I ❑ The owner's authorized ag- t ❑ The map , • -.• - - •w and date ❑ Propos:• property lines ❑ Descri ation of parcel location and boundaries ❑ Conto r lines(2'intervals for slopes 0-10%or 5'for slopes>10%) ❑ Locat •n,width and names of streets,easements and other public ways within and adjacent to the parcel ❑ Locat in of all permanent buildings on and within 25'of all property lines ❑ Locat •n and width of all water courses ❑ Locat in of any trees with 6"or greater caliper at 4'above ground level ❑ All sl.•es greater than 25% ❑ Locat•n of existing and proposed utilities and utility easements ❑ Any applicable deed restrictions ❑ Evidence that land partition will not preclude efficient future land division where applicable ❑ Future street extension plan showing existing and potential street connections ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 3 of 5 • Site Development Platt- The propose('site and surrounding properties ❑ Contour line intervals ❑ The locations, dimensions and proposed names of the following: • Existing and platted streets and other public ways ❑ • Easements on the site and on adjoining properties ❑ • Proposed streets or other public ways and easements on the site ❑ • Alternative routes of dead-end or proposed streets that require future extensions ❑ The locations and dimensions of the following: • Entrances and exits on the site - ❑ • Parking and circulation areas ❑ • Loading and service areas ❑ • Pedestrian and bicycle circulation ❑ • Outdoor common areas El • Above ground utilities ❑ • Trash and recyclable material areas El The locations, dimensions and setback distances of the following: • Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25' of the site ❑ • Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site ❑ • Sanitary sewer facilities ❑ • Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements ❑ • Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions ❑ Locations and type(s)of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques El The locations of the following: • All areas to be landscaped ❑ • Mailboxes ❑ • Structures and their orientation El rrdscape Plan • Location of trees to be removed El Location, size and species of existing plant materials ❑ General location, size and species of proposed plan materials ❑ Landscape narrative that addresses: • Soil conditions and how plant selections were derived for them El • Plans for soil treatment such as stockpiling the top soil El • Erosion control measures that will be used El Location and description of the irrigation system where applicable ❑ • Location and size of fences, buffer areas and screening ❑ Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces ❑ P moments/ reets Plan • Proposed right-of-way locations and widths ❑ • A scaled cross-section of all proposed streets plus any reserve strips El • Approximate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 4 of 5 . ' g/Erosion Control Pla - The ocations a ent to which grading will take place ❑ Existing and proposed contour lines - ❑ Slope ratios ❑ ilit PTa?t Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated on the plans ❑ Plan of the proposed water distribution system,showing pipe sizes and the locations of valves and fire hydrants ❑ preliminary Storm Drainage Pla The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ Location,width and direction of flow of all water courses and drainageways ❑ Location and estimated size of proposed storm drainage lines ❑ Where applicable, location and estimated size and dimensions of proposed water quality/detention facility ❑ e reservation/Mitigation PI Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees ❑ Program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal (Section 18.790.030) ❑ A protection program defining standards and methods to be used during and after construction ❑ t- itectural Drawings Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures and their proposed use ❑ Elevation drawings for each elevation of the structure ❑ sign Drawl = Specify proposed location, size and height ❑ • • i:\;curpin\masters\revised\chkl ist.doc 26-Nov-98 City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 5 of 5 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES �,, . ➢ ENGINEERING SECTION Q " Oregon Co Tigard, nt Shaping)1 Better Community 2st c�1 PUBLIC FACILITIES 4700 AND 2S 1 01 R� * Zc.,0v 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: ( -) street improvements will be necessary along �� �• to include: feet of pavement 0 concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities [v (,7 -foot concrete sidewalk El street trees street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. op- AcPiLt.i CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 6 Engineering Department Section ( ) strE mprovements will be necessary al( to include: ❑ feet of pavement H 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 n concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk l 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. 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 of 6 Engineering Department Section are on the opposit' le of the street from the site. If tr le 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 PP,vtm- . The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to 1 Tc LA It= IrceSSAL-4 o SGR-mac CA-nq)(�C�c S • ‘c P A t a—u--10.4 40:).14,&b--51— .-1-4N S S(.% Water Supply: The - Phone:(503) I provides public water service in the area of this site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (Contact: Gene Birchill, (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. C OaD - - 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 OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 6 Engineering Department Section newly created impervious faces. The resolution contains a rision 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. ( ) Payment of the fee in-lieu. Other Comments: All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. 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. 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 OF TIGARD Pre-Anplicatlon Conference Notes Page 4 of 6 Engineering DepartmentSectloa • In addition, the p€ ttee will be required to post a be or similar financial security for the work. Compliance Agreement (CAP). This permit covers more extensive work such as main utility line extensions, street improvements, etc. In subdivisions, this type of permit also covers all grading and private utility work. Plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. 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 TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Engineering Department Section • GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS[ SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The • engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. • \-26vf_...._ PREPARED BY: • ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT STAFF Phone: (5031639-4171 Fax [503)684-1291 h\patty\masterslpreapp.eng (Master section preapp.r mst) 04-March-1999 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 Engineering DepartmentSeetlo■ \,/ {tai /f YA`4'A f{v f f p, } 4t , , \\8\\ / Community Development X 1 .. it \ •:/r - j P ; � 1 2 Q VGP2Gc/!�2 ‘;4ti'S. A ‘,, 1• t ';4..\\ iA... . ... ...%,. p. c� y �p6 - 8 Q� ? \ •'�: ;fey-'w,f''° e. O 3 1 V i. Gtg• s08 Q- it •V(J-r P` L J r *,L, ld � f��-9�� .c T —M41 r/ .9/'! /:"- 1\ <Y.,1 / :!:///'''. 1.-45 l •j• J ` ' '\i i ! ' i.� 1i ,4I°3•'361L 590.8T '•L-.------L.--.- ..,- •_..-- - .•A .I , �� v L.n , . / '`. ' f M- ,, I" , , ,.:._ .. . " _ i_.. _, „-,.,, p. :. r , ,,.. ,�. i 1 1!v/. ' / .., ``Ii ' 1 t-� . 'i•! --. - *. i i 1 _ i 44' ! . if i 1 'G.:•Ri/EWSY I .1 III 3.,-- -, yell_., • I 9.N:408 PAGE 131 II' ) I �;: r `; , 4' - f. '/ !' h J/ ; • 1 .,4, c. Y ,,' J \ ' _—:---7-":"*.:.''....—. •.— e.O.F lie'-'' TD F • �, ` y41°41,4_-•-'E :� .- t Pre-Application Letter City of Tigard 10/22/1999 Re: Northwest Demolition and Dismantling Office Remodel Applicant: Smith Gerig Western Properties, LLC PO Box 930 Wilsonville, OR 97070 Ph: 503-638-6900 Agent: Waddle Design Planning Architecture 1927 NW Kearney Portland, OR 97209 Ph: 503-221-2003 Project Description: g aoo t-tk,t4 The project consists of the renovation of the existing Northwest Demolition and Dismantling offices to include new toilet facilities, partitions, doors, ceilings, lighting, floor finishes. The work may include replacement of windows in some areas, exterior paint, re- striping of existing parking areas and minor landscape improvements. Questions to be Answered: 1. What fees are required and how much are they? 2. Will a submittal to The City Building Department for plan review be automatically routed to all agencies requiring review and approval of the proposed work, i.e. Fire Marshall, Sewer and Water districts, etc.? 3. How long is the complete process of submittals and approvals likely to take? aN Ai `( P��a\C' °4, NORTH `` 3,t, • W l e e 4 p reR me was PA,M.0 T `4 ....,...., 8,y,H f Z 4. SITE ,& /11/7/i' j �',. R ir7/ -. ... VICINITY MAP .••orw.er f* ,. ,a oRr w. TAX LOT 2500 k Xx TAM Lwn AREA • 058 ACRES ' r/41/JAM/.��1f A W.+..T■�■+ rg�9 V SWEET.nN fit .../,-� ' A d.�K cocain rte' GRAPHIC SCALE i,: j,df' _ w.r,.o.o,w.or• _ oan..■..oac ■ y■.Rae) �� /,I i' —P—WOE P PATEN/ •M l M OP Wow —0164—...MR�T LAM ,',^• .au.lo / • MARE■�sV.1Tp1 • �, •J' , OR OWE DAVATT01- i .-/.../2"-■,".1.) N. MR ummee WOK lob..tea.o ,,./-44. � J • N' . r v �� rid M� a•/'r� �.� TAX LOT 100 • • �.,\...,..\_:\.\• s. �!I AREA • 8.49 ACRE _ \ / e *�, > / OTAL AREA • • �M \\ I �i,� / 901 ACRES > ' k'Csr f, - I t., _ .., ) , ---,.., , t,,../ 7‘ , f. 4--= ‘s ss, \_ __ 44. \• . .‘. .. .. .' VO 0 a N ED 44 +✓4 REVISIONS ° ° REMODEL OF �,4� , ,i D °"� ""� ;,& NUJD4D OFFICE '" /:•/././ice° 1 awR w S I—r 'L_A1�1 TIGARD, OREGON DESIGN MANNING ARCHITECTURE O( a • ITm 11.N Ma Si m Peen•NAM •NMI rr Mir.RAM.kshi fi• a 04 21-710 r■pmo 7J-TR J 1 -%i• A. -.4.' ' � • ' i S; A.c ' " `; iF � Y/!, r,, , 6• r. i t 74- 1. yy' '' F Q -�y� s r f � .t o % `' F+4, 1 , tj.• ' 'i fir 0• � -� i •,∎ .436'361 015-r r`i-_•_-' --I _ _ 's�, '• 1 e . , _ ."--dir.a• ,f, ,�'. \% - •� / .,,.•r:0a_./7-7-77 I ///////,,/,' , I It . �Ili.. , Jam; ',r//,— •it / / ; '.i.'!%• ' ''i�; ' r. -1 11,�', ; ` , r •=. ink- •; r •• �rl�tuer �. v v T-- '1 r 9. 406 PeGE 131 i _ _.r hi it., 0• I Ih+ I a y% --4--' , . 442 `�- 1•„fr • ill . ,/p.,;'' s*„ , . ` -; `} _r / / . a,!, __ 1 � , I ...;,,v . \- ..s, ....‘,;.,,,,• .., ,.• . , , ,4., ,• ci , TY- `�,j_ _ __--• _— a�w+1 •-- .. . • • . .�.- .. _�� . ..._ 541-4:--,-E :g.NT Nov•.;rn;.er 7;:. Pre-Apps (CD 11�e`et n s pp � 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 Thursday, November • 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 ad �'f��i.:::. 10:00 :: :::::»::::: •::.::.::.::.::.::.::.:.:::.::.::.::.;:::>;;;:.; 10:30 11:00 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 12:00PM Tuesday,November 02, 1999 • ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS 5 b,� oc .-Gver4 / r j''F'-c ,, �4°) I1Iregori RECEIVED PLANNING Division of State Lands �,.... z 775 Summer Street NE Salem,OR 97301 1279 —g:9 John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.,Governor AUG 0 7 2000 (503)378-3805 FAX(503)378-4844 August 3, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD TTY(503)378-4615 State Land Board Claudia Steinkonig John A.Kitzhaber Schott & Associates Governor 11977 S. Toliver Rd. Bill Bradbury Molalla, OR 97038 Secretary of State Jim Hill RE: Wetland Delineation Report for Foundry Industrial Park, Tigard, Washington State Treasurer County; T2S R1W Sec.01 taxlot 100 Det. #00-0095 Dear Ms. Steinkonig: I have reviewed the wetland delineation report you prepared for Brian Smith for the project referenced above. Based on the information presented in the report and your addendum, I concur with the wetland and waterway boundaries as mapped in Figure 3 of the report. These wetlands and waterways are subject to the permit requirements of the state Removal-Fill Law. A state permit is required for fill or excavation of 50 cubic yards or more in a wetland area or below the top of bank of a waterway. This concurrence is for purposes of the state Removal-Fill Law only. Federal or local permit requirements may apply as well. The Army Corps of Engineers will review the report and make a determination of jurisdiction for purposes of the Clean Water Act at the time that a permit application is submitted. We recommend that you attach a copy of this concurrence letter to both copies of any subsequent joint permit application to speed application review. I understand the city is requiring a 25 foot riparian setback, therefore, there are no wetland or waterway impacts expected at this time. If plans should change, The permit coordinator for this site is Bill Parks. Should additional information be brought to our attention or should site conditions change, we would consider the new information and re-evaluate the site and our jurisdictional determination, as needed. Thank you for your report. In the future please enclose the cover form with each delineation report, so that our data entry is faster and more accurate. Sincerely, Dana Field Wetlands Planner cc: City of Tigard Planning Department Jim Goudzwaard, Corps of Engineers Rich Gebhart, Corps of Engineers Bill Parks, DSL I . A,A.Ic .J. VTeuana UeUUeatJOn Map & Plot t'otnts FUTIL STATEMENT TWE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SWOWN ARE PER FIELD MARKINGS AND RECORD ■ DRAWINGS PROVIDED BY THE RESPECTIVE UTILITY AGENCIES.LOCATION OF 6.1) • NON-OBSERVABLE AND/OR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ARE SIaOWN FOR 1:4 INFORMATION ONLY AND ARE NOT GUARANTEED TO DE COMPLETE OR ACCURATE. NOTE* I. TWE 15A5I5 OF BEARINGS FOR T.115 MAP 15 PER SURvEY NIMEER GRAPHIC SCALE i *Om.wAS1INGTON COUNTY SURVEY RECORDS. - 7. THE DENCWMARK(BASIS OF ELEVATIONS/FOR THIS IS IS SUVEY A BRASS ‘2.°N DISK SET IN TIE NORTNIEST CORNER OF THE SIDEWALK ON THE (1M rut 1 e• , - $F' BRIDGE OVER FAss40 CREEK.ON NALL BOULEVARD.STAMPED �y fRM 330 196T wASMING TON COSH TY BEN:I/MARK NO.43. I I/I • b R 'EL 4 "-y S ELEVATION•143.10. TAX LOT 2500 '•e 4). ,. FIELD UORK PERFORI•ED MAJ2cN II,1996 AREA = 058 ACRES Ni. '°•`+' ,' b ` S2 r 4. THE EASEMENT SNOW NEREON ARE PER ORS POLICY NPIBER y Wien UK CPPIOLnAT1Ow • O�A 2 �1 500036W.TITLE POUC7 BY OREGON TITLE COMPANY. l Y��� �A V6Li R V°APL �J1� �S Gg Z . ` �� f ,�>'s, rrm Wie17 Dbif.C� i�' '�' ,, J. .. -- IA. .. ,F►' r 1� cP`tAt' 1. \t� ---. % \ N 8� F 4,6 S/7y7�W :., 'S\ '.F7� LL �I� • %t Q• -3c�� "�-1''— --��I r��� 10 i � \7\ 4.41 . Q, Pis CL 1( f v �, i.;., ` ? if�4 J .$ /•\\\ \��s v� 9/nls°O" Sk \ g mow ion II 1,-,.. ,--..;+ :,72i-- a v ° l7 s \ oP \I 4 ` i'i N Z �'����A - av \ p 1/JJ !f Its ~O a'iP� d *4.y Jv� •°v' J Y' �p (1 i OJ i%, 5 O O Z�„... �i-r G4 I 41 \ �� •��,� stir 11\ CC .I—i_ i (.,1� •a ri�� 4,.. ' '`!p •te V Z Y '1 1V •1'J / C '> — J° X LEGEND I LO N Q ,• 1 . // EXCEPTION PER 000K �j,. i 11 `T 1 1159 PAGE 69/ DY ORIvEYM7 ill i �� TAX LOT 700 /J' 1AAFaLxwT W• °\ AREA = 8.49 ACRES ` �i I- I Da WATER VALVE ( 'I `Y a ��;� TOTAL AREA = , ,, `V•• C '' .1 i �' \*k 9.01 ACRES °a� N Tx FIRE NTDR.WT :. STREET SIGN NJ 1, '' , •sA, 1•+ * MONITORING WELL M1 \\\\\ p ' r I L_J ----- j ''S' , cc GAS VALVE L .. O■� x.11 (2 CONCRETE Z c i-\1\J.� ' . .F�i . ' vC il l CULVERT a 1L� /�• '4,,,, • • - ♦ S I — GU,ANCWOR /�/L q La"�J lt. \ • �J `�`t I 0 FOYER POLE p Wa O $r \..„., �/ - \ I I �1 —B- ` •' y / ,. RAILROAD TRACKS N �, V •• 66000 \ / e 1 J I 1` >I •Z42 �.,."�� • J �/�• /`S/ /`Si 11I0 1� 1 —Y— FENCE C 12 l'La • .y' �� '• .♦ I ° a.' I t )i — v — EDGE OF PAVEMENT •��(1 I ♦ • • • Fei.Ay'e�¢T't w0���000MMM- I I —15-SA—SANITARY SEWER LINE N_• • "•'°m fi I 1� 'a \ • • • °• • 0 11fiARD WiA OtlIRKT / • L� X - zZZ• I I \\ I (/ L,J p� >qn� • °a • - • •• .•• I •JA I II • FOUND b NOTED•— ,-. .. ' . *'o • . • ♦ X' .: ' +117.0 SPOT ELEVATION ��II •'� • Cy I Gas APPROXIMATE ON-SITE WETLAND AREA (5.631 S.F. FOUND N/•IRON PIPE y' •J -) / /,6. 4 J<� I BOUNDARY PER SIf2VEY KAISER a I I(t-'-'•' -' '° _ �' Plot 2 _Z � - 'f'., •;� I�''J IE INVERT ELEVATION �a 5/EO 1 111/0 J Q (.ELDI ,.. _—_� _ _ � ..�•. OR GRATE ELEVATION d / ` a• �•-nw... ••.. -• —.• �:-•' •.....ii-{:iO�i..•....•i ..,__ — - O p^. Of Nab�i/97E '::<. :-.: ;•", : _T ... '•�• N/NS/'O•E J........ , R: C Pe • '� � �9�— a Plot I .. RED ROCK CREEK • — g u -----' 4 \IN. , <e3C1?.5A—'--6 `•.�,• Plot 3 APPRON.ob.iei"NE 1 a i OEXISTING CONDITIONS C2 12 RUI OLIO3L1.08110 CITY of TIGARD OE OOe�n NIC IN rOR N1TION SvSTE4 000 ,s,<ti VICINITY MAP •s J FOUNDRY INDUSTRIAL PARK • .:p<< � SDR2000-00004 * W•o0P F.1 CC .. S #.# . 411.. 1, l*Zw * 1 i ' N., , ■140" , 1 401161 1 1 ■ ,% ' ,� SUBJECT SITES "9p % ST N j 000 2.00 300_!00 500 Feel/ 'Y MI II l/J 29Y 1'=378 feet *St A . City of Tigard Information on this map is for general location only and • should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd 1 Tigard,OR 97223 \\,) (503)639-4171 .- Slip ci hgard or us Community Development Plot date: Mar 1,2000;C:\rnagic\MAGIC03.APR • r4 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON September 5, 2001 Smith Gerig Western Properties, LLC P.O. Box 930 Wilsonville, OR 97070-0930 RE: SDR2000-00004 Approval Extension Dear. Mr. Smith: This letter is in response to your request for an extension to the approval period for the Foundry Industrial Park. Based on the information submitted on August 29, 2001, staff has determined that the criteria for approval of an extension have been met. The first year of the Site Development Review would have expired on November 9, 2001. The new expiration date will be November 9, 2002. Substantial construction of the site must begin within the time frame indicated above or the approval will expire. The code does not permit any further extensions. Therefore, the 3-year completion date is hereby extended to November 9, 2005. Please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171 x407 if you have any questions on this request. Sincerely, / M thew Scheidegger Assistant Planner i:curpin/mathew/SDR2000-00004.extension.doc c: SDR2000-00004 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 Smith Gerig Western Properties, LLC P.O. Box 930 Wilsonville, OR 97070-0930 August 29, 2001 Director of Planning, City of Tigard Re: Request for one year extension of sdr 2000-00004 approval effective 4/24/2000 for The Foundry Industrial Park Applicant: Smith Gerig Western Properties, LLC P.O. Box 930 Wilsonville, OR 97070-0930 Phone: 503-638-6900 Agent: Waddle Design Planning Architecture 1927 N.W. Kearney Portland, OR 97209 Phone: 503-221-2003 Dear Sir: Applicant proposes to re-develop this existing site of the former Western Foundry into an attractive and successful light industrial park with rail access. The purpose of the original application was to obtain approvals of the masterplan concept and to proceed into construction of the buildings and public service facilities on a phased basis not to exceed three years. This site was contaminated by the original foundry operation over a period of many years prior to the applicant's purchase of the property. The applicant has actively pursued the required clean-up and mitigation of the site, which has been continuously monitored and tested over the last several years. The site has recently obtained"no further action required" status from DEQ verbally. Unfortunately, the final written documentation required for financing the re-development project has been delayed until sometime in November of this year. Once this documentation is finalized, and the redevelopment of the site can be financed, the applicant intends to move ahead with the construction of the first building on the phased basis originally submitted. Therefore, under the provisions of Section 18.360.030, subsection D, we request a one year extension of sdr 2000-00004 with the understanding that all original approvals granted will remain in full force and effect, including the approved setback from wetlands. Fee for this request in the amount of$150 is attached. Respects ly submitted -e flan H. Smith Member, Smith Gerig Western Properties, LLC BHS/ms