Loading...
SDR1999-00025 SDR1999 -00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW [SDRI 1999-00025 CITY rARD Community Development ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING Shaping i Better Community 120 DAYS = 3/20/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING CASE NO.: Site Development Review SDR1999-00025 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested approval of a Type H Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. APPLICANT: David Atiyeh ARCHITECT: Fred Paintner 800 SW Washington Street Ankrom Moisan Associates Portland, OR 97205 6720 SW Macadam, Suite 100 Portland, OR 97219 OWNER: Paul Schatz OWNER: Gevurtz Family Limited Prtnrshp. 6600 SW Bonita Road 1918 Indian Trail Tigard, OR 97224 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial. ZONING DESIGNATION: Industrial Park; I-P. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a Jartition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100 (6600 SW Bonita Road). Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section V. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 1 OF 17 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 plan that clearly shows the walkway will be paved with a hard surface material. 2. Submit a revised plan that shows the proposed walkway will tie into the existing walkway that runs along the access drive. 3. Submitted verification from the franchise hauler indicating that the location of the proposed trash enclosure meets their needs. 4. Submit a revised plan that shows wheel stops will be installed for all parking stalls. 5. Submit a revised plan that shows the standard parking spaces will be at least 8.5 feet x18.5 feet and that shows no more than 50% of the parking spaces will be compact. 6. Submit a revised plan that indicates a directional sign identifying the bicycle parking will be located near the front entrance. 7. Submit details of the bicycle rack to be used. 8. Submit an outdoor lighting plan for review and approval by the Police Department. 9. Submit a copy of the recorded partition plat for MLP1999-00015. Submit for review and approval the following to the Engineering Department. Staff Contact: Brian Rager. 10. If the applicant proposes to convert the existing 8-inch private sanitary sewer line to a public line, a Street Opening Permit will be required to cover the new connection to the line. This permit will also cover the proposed connection to the public water line. 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. This permit shall be obtained by the applicant prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit. 11. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement (if one is required) and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 12. If the applicant proposes to convert the existing 8-inch private sanitary sewer line to a public line, they shall arrange to have the sewer line cleaned and TV-inspected for City review. The videotape of the inspection will be reviewed by the City and from that review, a determination will be made as to whether or not the line could be accepted as a public sewer line. If repairs or modifications to the sewer line are deemed necessary to bring it up to a public standard, the applicant must perform that work as a part of this project and as a part of the Street Opening Permit. The cleaning and TV-inspection shall be completed prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. 13. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of $30. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 2 OF 17 14. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality fa Iiity as required by Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44). 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. 15. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Bonita Road underground as a part of this project, or they shall ay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $4,400 and it shall be paid prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION BEING PERFORMED OR OCCUPANCY: Submit for review and approval the following to the Engineering Department. Staff Contact: Brian Rager. 16. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (ROW) (or public easement) and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 17. 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. 18. Install all site improvements as per the approved plans. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The site is currently on the same lot as the Paul Schatz furniture store. An application was recently approved (MLP1999-00015) to partition this portion being developed as proposed in this application, from the Paul Schatz furniture store site. No other development applications were found for the portion of the property being developed. Vicinity Information: The sub J�ect site is located west of the existing Paul Schatz development and south of SW Bonita Road. The site is surrounded on the east, west and south by property zoned I-P (Industrial Park) and to the north by property zoned I-L (Light Industrial). Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is a recently partitioned lot next to the Paul Schatz furniture store (2S112AD, tax lot 00100). The applicant is proposing to construct a 14,000 square foot building and associated parking lot on the newly created lot. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 3 OF 17 SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA A. Applicable Development Code Standards 18.705 (Access Egress and Circulation) 18.730 (Exceptions to Development Code Standards) 18.745 (Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.765 (Off-Street parking and loading requirements) 18.780 (Signs) 18.790 (Tree Removal) 18.795 (Visual Clearance) B. Specific SDR Approval Criteria 18.360 C. Street and Utility Improvement Standards 18.810 D. Impact Study 18.390 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, 18.780, 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 applicant has submitted a plan that shows there is an existing sidewalk along the access drive serving the site. The plans show a walkway will be provided at the building entrance but it does not show the proposed walkway tying into the existing walkway. 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; As proposed, the walkway (even as conditioned) will not cross the parking area or accessway. The proposed walkway is 6 feet wide. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1 999-0002 5/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 4 OF 17 Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The plans do not clearly indicate that the walkway will be paved with concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc., however, staff is comfortable that this could easily be met. A condition of approval is necessary requiring the applicant to submit a revised plan that clearly shows the walkway will be paved with a hard surface material. Minimum Access Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Use: Section 18.705.030.1 rovides the minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial uses: Table 18.705.3 indicates that the required access width for developments with less than 100 parking spaces is 30 feet 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 developments taking access off of the access drive have less than 100 parking spaces. The proposed development has access from the existing access drive that has a width of 40 feet off-site and an easement width of 30 feet directly adjacent to the parcel to be developed. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff can not confirm that the access and egress standards have been satisfied, however, if the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be met. CONDITIONS: Submit a revised plan that clearly shows the walkway will be paved with a hard surface material. Submit a revised plan that shows the proposed walkway will tie into the existing walkway that runs along the access drive. Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.0 Section 18.745.040.0 required that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). While the property does not have frontage on SW Bonita Road, after the partition is recorded, the applicant is proposing to install street trees along this frontage in an effort to upgrade the existing landscaping. The street trees are proposed to be 3-inch caliper Karpick Maple spaced 30 feet apart. Because the species proposed is considered a large stature tree, the spacing at 30 feet apart as proposed meets the spacing standards. 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 (canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be tree (3) feet wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. There is parking proposed to be added off-site (on the Paul Schatz property) as part of this review. This parking is directly adjacent to SW Bonita Road. The applicant has submitted a landscape plan that shows the parking will be setback 10 feet from the property line. In the 10 foot setback area, groundcover and shrubs will be planted that will screen the parking from view. This landscaping is not included in the development site's landscaping NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 5 OF 17 calculations, however, because the area is off-site. Additional on-site landscaping is also provided between the building and the parking spaces. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the landscaping and screening standards have been fully met. 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 plans indicate a trash enclosure will be provided at the southern portion of the site. The applicant has proposed a 10-foot x 20-foot screened enclosure. The applicant has not submitted a letter from the franchise hauler, however, indicating the location meets their needs. 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 condition listed below, the standards will be met. CONDITION: Submitted verification from the franchise hauler indicating that the location of the proposed trash enclosure meets their needs. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): Disabled-accessible parking: All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. The applicant is providing 23 parking spaces on-site and has shared access to an additional 13 spaces. Based on 36 spaces, the applicant must provide 2 ADA handicap spaces, one of which is van accessible. The applicant's site plan shows the parking lot will have 2 ADA accessible spaces, both of which are 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 actually 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 SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 6 OF 17 • 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. As conditioned, there is a walkway from the street to the building which does not require crossing the parking lot. 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 being constructed for this addition clearly marked. Wheel Stops: Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. The applicant's plans do not show wheel stops will be provided where the parking lot abuts the walkway along the building or the landscape areas. The applicant's plans must be revised to show wheel stops will be provided for all of the proposed parking stalls. 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 18 feet and the compact spaces will be 8 feet by 18 feet. The dimensions for the compact spaces are satisfied, however, the length of the standard spaces must be increased to 18.5 feet. Staff is comfortable that this can be met simply by reducing the 6-foot-wide walkway since the required dimension is only 4 feet. The applicant's plans only show 1 compact space, whereas, up to 50% of the spaces may be compact. Staff recommends making the spaces adjacent to the northern portion of the building compact so that the access aisle remains as large as possible. As shown on the plans, all access aisles are no less than 24 feet wide. 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 7 OF 17 The proposed bicycle rack is located on the south side of the proposed building. The bicycle location is within 50 feet of an entrance to the building but not the main entrance. It is staff's decision that because the public portion of the building is limited to 20%, the majority of bicycle traffic that is likely to occur based on the use, is employees. Therefore, the location near the southern most entrance (close to the storage area and offices) is acceptable, provided signs are posted near the main entrance identifying the bicycle parking location. The bicycle parking location is not located in parking aisles, landscape areas, or pedestrian ways in compliance with the Code. Bicycle Parking Design Requirements: Section 18.765.050.C. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. The applicant has not provided a detail of the bike rack to be used, therefore, 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 General Retail Sales, .3 bicycle parking spaces are required for every 1 ,000 square feet of gross floor area and for Wholesale Sales, .1 bicycle parking spaces are required for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Based on the General Retail Sales portion being limited to 2,800 square feet, and the remaining 11,144 square feet being Wholesale Sales, the required number of bicycle parking spaces is 2. The applicant's plan shows 2 spaces will be provided, however, the narrative indicates that 4 spaces will be provided. Because the spaces shown on the plans meet the standards, no revisions are needed, even if they decide to provide 4 spaces instead of 2. 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 Retail Sales is 3.7 spaces per 1000 square feet and the maximum (zone B) is 6.2 spaces per 1000 square feet. The minimum parking for Wholesale Sales is .08 spaces per 1000 square feet and the maximum is 1.8 spaces per 1000 square feet. The Retail Sales portion of the building is 2,800 square feet and the Wholesale Sales (with associated office and storage) is 11,144 square feet. The minimum parking, therefore, is 19 spaces and the maximum is 37 spaces. The plans provided show 23 spaces will be provided on-site and an additional 13 shared spaces are provided off-site on the Paul Schatz furniture store site. The total parking available is 36, which meets the standards. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the off-street parking and loading standards ha'', not been fully met, however, if the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be fully met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 8 OF 17 CONDITIONS: • Submit a revised plan that shows wheel stops will be installed for all parking stalls. • Submit a revised plan that shows the standard parking spaces will be at least 8.5 feet x18.5 feet and that shows no more than 50% of the parking spaces will be compact. • Submit a revised plan that indicates a directional sign identifying the bicycle parking will be located near the front entrance. • Submit details of the bicycle rack to be used. Signs (18.780): Chapter 18.780.130.D lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C-G Zoning District. No additional signs have been formally proposed. Signs are reviewed through a separate permit process administered by the Development Services Technicians. FINDING: Because signs will be reviewed and approved as part of a separate permit process, this standard has been satisfied. Tree Removal (18.790): Section 18.790.030 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. 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 within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30-foot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway, and then connecting these two (2), 30-foot distance points with a straight line. The access drive intersects with SW Sequoia Parkway off-site, therefore, the development has no vision clearance areas. FINDING: Because the development has no vision clearance areas, this standard can not be applied to this development proposal. 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: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 9 OF 17 18.360.090.3 (Exterior Elevations); 18.360.090.4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 18.360.090.6 (Private Outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.8 (Floodplain) and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces). The following sections were discussed previously in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.13 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 building is on a vacant lot (after the partition is recorded). There are no areas subject to sliding, natural drainage areas or trees on the site that require mitigation. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, this standard has been satisfied. Crime Prevention and Safety: A. Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; B. Interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; C. Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; D. The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and E. Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet, which is sufficient to illuminate a person. Windows are oriented towards the parking lot and street. 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 needs, 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 Sequoia Parkway which is not a Tri-met transit route, therefore, this standard does not apply. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 10 OF 17 • FINDING: Based on ti ie analysis above, this standard is satisfied. 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 a building for the purpose of wholesale sales (with associated office and storage) and 20% retail sales. The proposed uses are permitted uses within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district (18.530). 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-P ZONE PROPOSED Minimum Lot Size None 36,163 sf Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. 135 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 35 ft. 39 ft. - Side facing street on corner & through lots [1] 20 ft. N/A - Side yard 0/50 ft. [3] 55 ft. - Rear yard 0/50 ft. [3][4] 48 ft. Maximum Height 45 ft. 26 ft. Maximum Site Coverage [2] 75% [5] 79.8%**see discussion Maximum Landscape Requirement 25% [6] 20.2%"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. [4] Development in industrial zones abutting the Rolling Hills neighborhood shall comply with Comprehensive Plan Policy 11.5.1. [5] Maximum site coverage may be increased to 80%if the provisions of Section 18.530.050.B are satisfied. [6] Except that a reduction to 20%of the site may be approved through the site development review process. The applicant has proposed to take advantage of footnote 5 and 6 which allows the landscaping requirement to be reduced to 20% and the maximum site coverage requirement to be increased to 85% by providing a landscaping upgrade off-site along the SW Bonita Road frontage. This, in essence, is upgrading the landscaping along the perimeter of the property. The applicant will install 3-inch caliper trees, and shrubs within a 10-foot landscape strip between the parking lot and the property line. This meets the intent of the exceptions and the flexibility in the site coverage and landscaping requirement is approved. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the provisions of the underlying zone are met. C. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS (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: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 11 OF 17 Streets: mprovements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the Tigard Development Code (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 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 a large ROW for SW Bonita Road, which is classified as a major collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. The site is actually physically separated from the roadway by the slope created for the 1-5 overpass. Access to this site is via a shared access from SW Sequoia Parkway. SW Bonita Road is already fully improved adjacent to this site. No further ROW dedications or street improvements are necessary. Traffic Study Findings: A traffic impact report was submitted by Lancaster Engineering for this project. The report analyzed local intersections, including SW Bonita Road/SW Bangy Road, SW Bonita Road/SW Sequoia Parkway and SW Bonita Road/SW 72nd Avenue. The report indicates that this project will generate approximately 70 daily weekday trips, with approximately 7 trips occurring during the PM Peak Hour. SW Bonita Road/SW 72nd Avenue: The signalized intersection at SW Bonita Road/SW 72nd Avenue is currently operating at a level of service (LOS) C during the PM peak hour, and will not change as a result of the additional traffic from this project. SW Bonita Road/SW Bangy Road: The all-way stop-controlled intersection at SW Bonita Road/SW Bangy Road is currently operating at a LOS F during the PM peak hour. The Peak Hour Warrant for a traffic signal is satisfied for existing PM peak hour volumes. However, Lancaster performed field measurements of vehicle delay and found that the measured delay is significantly less than what is calculated using a traffic model. For instance, the average calculated vehicle delay for the intersection was 72.5 seconds per vehicle. The delay for the eastbound left- turning movement was calculated at 97.9 seconds per vehicle. The delay for the southbound through/right movement was 130.2 seconds. When Lancaster measured the delays, they found that the eastbound left-turning movement ranged from 8.2 seconds to a maximum of 24.0 seconds per vehicle. For the southbound through/right movement, the delays ranged from 12.9 seconds to a maximum of 25.0 seconds per vehicle. Lancaster states that the discrepancies can be attributed to the complexity and unreliability of the methodology of all-way stop-controlled intersection analysis. It is Staff's opinion that the applicant should not be required to provide any improvement to this intersection. The City of Lake Oswego provided comments to the City regarding this application. They have a concern with regard to this intersection and have placed it on a priority list for their Capital Improvement Program. They concur with the Lancaster traffic report and agree that this project will have an insignificant impact on the intersection. Their staff also measured delays at this intersection and found similar results shown in the Lancaster report. SW Bonita Road/SW Sequoia Parkway: The unsignalized intersection at this location is currently operating at LOS F I'M peak hour. This LOS describes the delay for left-turning movements of Sequoia Parkway onto Bonita Road. The calculated delays are approximately 47 seconds per vehicle for the southbound left-turning movement and 57 seconds for the northbound left-turning movement. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 12 OF 17 Again, Lancaster made a site visit during the PM peak hour anu measured the actual delay of vehicles. They analyzed the northbound left-turning movement during the peak 15 minutes during the PM peak hour and found that the average delay was 15 seconds or less per vehicle. Lancaster suggests that the discrepancy between the calculated delay and the observed delay may be because of the close proximity of the signalized intersection at SW 72 Avenue. In summary, Staff concurs with the traffic engineer's findings and does not recommend the applicant be required to provide any further transportation improvements. 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 is a public sidewalk along the south side of SW Bonita Road. No further improvements are required. Sanitar 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. The applicant's plans show an existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line located between this building site and the existing building to the east. City records do not show this as a public line, so Staff must assume the line is a private line. It appears the sewer line serves the building to the east and possibly others to the west. The line eventually ties to a public sewer line located in SW Bonita Road. USA Design and Construction Standards, as well as the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC), state that each property shall have its own direct connection to a public sanitary sewer line, without crossing an adjacent property. The existing private sewer line situation would not meet that standard. However, it may be possible for the 8-inch sewer line to be converted to a public line. For this to occur, the property owner(s) would need to have the sewer line TV-inspected to show whether or not the sewer line is in good condition with sufficient slope to meet a public standard. In addition, the City would need to make a visual inspection of the manholes and be comfortable with their condition and location for maintenance access. Finally if the City determined the sewer could meet a public standard, the property owner) would need to grant a public sanitary sewer easement to the City. The minimum easement width is 15 feet. 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 U stream 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 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments). The surrounding parcels are developed, and the runoff from those areas are presently conveyed to the existing public storm drainage system in SW Sequoia Parkway. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 13 OF 17 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 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant's plan indicates that a detention/water quality pond will be provided near the southwest corner of the site. Staff has reviewed the preliminary sizing calculations for this pond and it appears to be adequately sized for this development. 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 SW Bonita Road. These lines are located at the bottom of the slope that supports the roadway and provides service to the existing buildings in this area. The fee is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 160 lineal feet; therefore, the fee would be $4,400. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS REGARDING STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 14 OF 17 Public Water System: I here is an existing public water line located within the shared access drive. The plan indicates the new building will be served by that line. No additional public water line work is necessary. 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. 96-44) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. As was stated above, the applicant plans to install a water quality/detention pond near the southwest corner of the site. Staff reviewed the preliminary calculations for the pond and is comfortable that the pond is sufficiently sized to handle the additional runoff. 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. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assi nin addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). An addressing fee in the amount of $30 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. For this project, the addressing fee will be $30. 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. 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 NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 15 OF 17 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 $12,280 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 $38,375 ($12,280 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 $26,095. No street improvements or dedication is required or proposed for this project. SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: 1 . Correct sheet T1 .1 , "construction" type V-N is not non-combustible, also maximum allowable area is 35,400 square feet, not 42,000. 2. Submit a fire flow analysis to determine number of fire hydrants. 3. Provide a fire department connection within 70 feet of a fire hydrant. 4. Contact the water district for location of fire water vault and domestic water protection. 5. A geo-technical report on potential liquefaction is required. 6. Down spouts and overflow roof scuppers can not penetrate the property line wall. 7. Rain water can not sheet to public street by way of the private street. The City of Tigard Operations Utility Manager has reviewed the proposal and offered the following comments: The fire hydrant identified at the south end of the project, along with the existing water meter will need to be relocated at the developers expense. Additional public water easements shall be granted to the City for the relocation of the fire hydrant and meter. The water meter location for the proposed building shown on the plans needs to be revised so that it is in the planter area. We will require the backflow prevention devise for the fire system to be placed in a vault (property line protection). 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 Property Manager has reviewed the application and has not provided comments or objections. 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. The City of Lake Oswego has reviewed the proposal and provided comments which have been discussed in the body of this decision. A complete copy of the comments are a part of the file and available for review. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 16 OF 17 AT&T, TCI, PGE, GTE, uS West and NW Natural Gas have all reviewed the proposal and offered no comments or objections. SECTION VIII. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON DECEMBER 29, 1999, AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY 14, 2000, UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Aeaal: 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 JANUARY 13, 2000. j Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. i/./ ��, � `,,�( December 29, 1999 PREP D BY: Julia Powell Hai-auk DATE Associate Planner L._ - .. c-e- s, December 29, 1999 APPROVED BY: Richard H. Bewersyg f DATE Planning Manager I:\curpin\julia\sdr\Atiyeh Brothers.doc.dot NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION 5DR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 17 OF 17 4' CITV 01,1104•140 1,/ e6 � \e ��yp «� FSW BONITA ROAD 77--- z'" IV B 9�ED I \ / / A�LL[� .■•l. -- NM'Y • _____4_____ t c� __ w19 MSQ'! -- -- _TF[714 MOO HUe il] 9.011 7a 30' EASEM b 85100 O i..4 - in 4 ...ISV sVE � I� rr� O fre cn / ino■ tt ` i • Agri .� \\ ■. CI , ' GS METE n Z IP or I ii ��% i Z ■■ L .. ZN u ft. Q CI t ill. I° ■.. m W I. z :. t s a Q ■ ..• ..p ■■ l • vntm..' Z Cum TO! m 1 1 • I 43 / �. .. iw....o.'• / ' L.L. n .. O V( .XMTM.PAL SC ATZ fUMIT1.!WLD* ir e. ,; n l a /iiiii,1 •••• —i L I_ ro /9 ...... T / % ' I / T • 270 MN \ __ � _ /L R -- A SITE PLAN 1 SDR 1 999-00025 EXHIBIT MAP N ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING '(map is not to scale) ..,,mi !n ' CITY of TIGARD MGEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM •�, 101111 SANOa/R 1 VICINITY MAP 0 1 SDR 1 999-00025 � ■ ��- ATIYEH •``"' c O''.. y BROTHERS , � .... ^ SUBJECT -�.�� .� r N SITE RETAIL• 1 Vila :�1 _ G ■ : BUILDING 1,I•, NEJ/ER ,9 c u 2 • al ii,„. n .� -, 1 bin reiI ' 1 _ v W ig I.:'_ __ Ini f■ &■ Q Ct IN 11111111.111 rim NE I-la MEM z INALw A I. 111111 101 I \ N ■ .:.:. II • Ellir. 0 400 1' 600 Feet if ., ••, =741 feet IN INWEIVIIII Cv.... ill Lieu u�j I I' 111 tauuu, „A A ..: in li��,����r $ City of Tigard ```„ ��: ��� Information on this map is for general location only and - E1N• —_ should be verified with the Development Services Division, 13125 SW Hall Blvd r!itIa Tard,OR 97223(503)639-4171 11101111 ,° .�-- httpl/www.ci tigard.or.us Community Development Plot date: Nov 24, 1999; C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR 1 OTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 1999-00025 '':I'�!` CITY OF TIGARD ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING Community Development Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 3/20/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING CASE NO.: Site Development Review SDR1999-00025 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. APPLICANT: David Atiyeh ARCHITECT: Fred Paintner 800 SW Washington St. Ankrom Moisan Associates Portland, OR 97205 6720 SW Macadam, S-100 Portland, OR 97219 OWNER: Paul Schatz OWNER: Gevurtz Family Limited Prtnrshp. 6600 SW Bonita Rd. 1918 Indian Trail Tigard, OR 97224 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial. ZONING DESIGNATION: Industrial Park; I-P. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100 (6600 SW Bonita Road). Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section V of the full decision. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (25*) per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON DECEMBER 29, 1999 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY 14, 2000, UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal; The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 3:30 PM ON JANUARY 13, 2000. Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Julia Powell Haiduk at (503) 639-4171 , Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Jo I 1r �, \ �e Ip (-SW BONITA ROAD =.yam 1e 'C Z� e �..� Z ; lily - iiiir 0 Z (i Z_ Z . Z 1 Pil. .! . : : IEi� i- F- li.. - 'I U , IF._,. . ,, , 4,=\;,.,,,,Auz.,—..-:—...414____.4 A . SITE PLAN I SDR1999-00025 EXHIBIT MAP N ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING t�rnaawl.l lain ME. v I ..-� W' • lai,11111Mill VICINITY MAP 1111111111121 SDRI 999-00025 :IT 11111115rMa ATIYEH I BROTHERS ,.� sue�ECT -, \∎ SITE RETAIL I , BUILDING V111.1.11 7 M(. : 1 Fr -� I 1111■___ N nik . —1c1\ ltallZ II;ji o - r.. W Yee-- � ■ _ Z A NO.. I. ,...•DIM E. ■s , �A:M =`== im uu•P °Du: uMA l U.u■IHIw Ciry of Tipd 1:11!1111 • - M*AIIM� ..t „^b• ° � .Le NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENI DER, VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRE i HAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PhLIVIPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CITY CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A'Better Community 500-FOOT PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE: November 24, 1999 FILE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 1999-00025 FILE NAME: ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. ZONE: I-P; Industrial Park. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100/6600 SW Bonita Road. Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. 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 DECEMBER 8, 1999. All comments should be directed to Julia Powell Haiduk, 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 addre le relevant approval criteria with . icient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14 DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: ♦ The application is accepted by the City ♦ Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. ♦ The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. ♦ City Staff issues a written decision. ♦ Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written Comments." / CITY OITIGARG riISII EMI 111111111k I ll1111.1.id awe VICINITY MAP - SDRI999-00025 1�_`h1 ATIYEH v + BROTHERS /' .SUBECT! :: � N SITE RETAIL i Stgli ' :. BUILDING ;AIM, I"\ . d 1r2: .. -1 1 1111 1111 IA cX )11upp F- . y Y ein- r 1 W F ii la L i11� I '� - Z • II I mir N wX& . , �i , ■ ■ �n uvi�rm �=� ■ K ..:111•R��Il�j I. O.. 2� la to ,innu► � cryorrEva �_.i 111 UB�II1lIr: 11111. ■■m�) *sum per*'- I I I , .......�:.. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: December 20, 1999 TO: Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer RE: SDR 1999-00025, Atiyeh Brothers Retail Building 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 a large ROW for SW Bonita Road, which is classified as a major collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. The site is actually physically separated from the roadway by the slope created for the 1-5 overpass. Access to this site is via a shared access from SW Sequoia Parkway. SW Bonita Road is already fully improved adjacent to this site. No further ROW dedications or street improvements are necessary. Traffic Study Findings: A traffic impact report was submitted by Lancaster Engineering for this project. The report analyzed local intersections, including SW Bonita Road/SW Bang Road, SW Bonita Road/SW Sequoia Parkway and SW Bonita Road/SW 72" ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00025 Atiyeh Brothers Retail PAGE 1 Avenue. The report indicates that this project will generate approximately 70 daily weekday trips, with approximately 7 trips occurring during the PM Peak Hour. SW Bonita Road/SW 72nd Avenue: The signalized intersection at SW Bonita Road/SW 72nd Avenue is currently operating at a level of service (LOS) C during the PM peak hour, and will not change as a result of the additional traffic from this project. SW Bonita Road/SW Bangy Road: The all-way stop-controlled intersection at SW Bonita Road/SW Bangy Road is currently operating at a LOS F during the PM peak hour. The Peak Hour Warrant for a traffic signal is satisfied for existing PM peak hour volumes. However, Lancaster performed field measurements of vehicle delay and found that the measured delay is significantly less than what is calculated using a traffic model. For instance, the average calculated vehicle delay for the intersection was 72.5 seconds per vehicle. The delay for the eastbound left-turning movement was calculated at 97.9 seconds per vehicle. The delay for the southbound through/right movement was 130.2 seconds. When Lancaster measured the delays, they found that the eastbound left-turning movement ranged from 8.2 seconds to a maximum of 24.0 seconds per vehicle. For the southbound through/right movement, the delays ranged from 12.9 seconds to a maximum of 25.0 seconds per vehicle. Lancaster states that the discrepancies can be attributed to the complexity and unreliability of the methodology of all-way stop-controlled intersection analysis. It is Staffs opinion that the applicant should not be required to provide any improvement to this intersection. The City of Lake Oswego provided comments to the City regarding this application. They have a concern with regard to this intersection and have placed it on a priority list for their Capital Improvement Program. They concur with the Lancaster traffic report and agree that this project will have an insignificant impact on the intersection. Their staff also measured delays at this intersection and found similar results shown in the Lancaster report. SW Bonita Road/SW Sequoia Parkway: The unsignalized intersection at this location is currently operating at LOS F during the PM peak hour. This LOS describes the delay for left-turning movements of Sequoia Parkway onto Bonita Road. The calculated delays are approximately 47 seconds per vehicle for the southbound left-turning movement and 57 seconds for the northbound left-turning movement. Again, Lancaster made a site visit during the PM peak hour and measured the actual delay of vehicles. They analyzed the northbound left-turning movement during the peak 15 minutes during the PM peak hour and found that the average delay was 15 seconds or less per vehicle. Lancaster suggests that the ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00025 Atiyeh Brothers Retail PAGE 2 discrepancy between the calculated delay and the observed delay may be because of the close proximity of the signalized intersection at SW 72nd Avenue. In summary, Staff concurs with the traffic engineer's findings and does not recommend the applicant be required to provide any further transportation improvements. 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 is a public sidewalk along the south side of SW Bonita Street. No further improvements are required. 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. The applicant's plans show an existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line located between this building site and the existing building to the east. City records do not show this as a public line, so Staff must assume the line is a private line. It appears the sewer line serves the building to the east and possibly others to the west. The line eventually ties to a public sewer line located in SW Bonita Road. USA Design and Construction Standards, as well as the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC), state that each property shall have its own direct connection to a public sanitary sewer line, without crossing an adjacent property. The existing private sewer line situation would not meet that standard. However, it may be possible for the 8-inch sewer line to be converted to a public line. For this to occur, the property owner(s) would need to have the sewer line TV-inspected to show whether or not the sewer line is in good condition with sufficient slope to meet a public standard. In addition, the City would need to make a visual inspection of the manholes and be comfortable with their condition and location for maintenance access. Finally, if the City determined the sewer could meet a ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00025 Atiyeh Brothers Retail PAGE 3 public standard, the property owner(s) would need to grant a public sanitary sewer easement to the City. The minimum easement width is 15 feet. 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 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments). The surrounding parcels are developed, and the runoff from those areas are presently conveyed to the existing public storm drainage system in SW Sequoia Parkway. 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 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant's plan indicates that a detention/water quality pond will be provided near the southwest corner of the site. Staff has reviewed the preliminary sizing ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00025 Atiyeh Brothers Retail PAGE 4 calculations for this pond and it appears to be adequately sized for this development. 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 SW Bonita Road. These lines are located at the bottom of the slope that supports the roadway and provides service to the existing buildings in this area. The fee is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 160 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $ 4,400.00. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00025 Atiyeh Brothers Retail PAGE 5 ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS: Public Water System: There is an existing public water line located within the shared access drive. The plan indicates the new building will be served by that line. No additional public water line work is necessary. 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. 96-44) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. As was stated above, the applicant plans to install a water quality/detention pond near the southwest corner of the site. Staff reviewed the preliminary calculations for the pond and is comfortable that the pond is sufficiently sized to handle the additional runoff. 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. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00025 Atiyeh Brothers Retail PAGE 6 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. 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 the site and/or building permit. For this project, the addressing fee will be $30.00. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4171, ext. 318) for review and approval: 1. If the applicant proposes to convert the existing 8-inch private sanitary sewer line to a public line, a Street Opening Permit will be required to cover the new connection to the line. This permit will also cover the proposed connection to the public water line. 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. This permit shall be obtained by the applicant prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement (if one is required) and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00025 Atiyeh Brothers Retail PAGE 7 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. 3. If the applicant proposes to convert the existing 8-inch private sanitary sewer line to a public line, they shall arrange to have the sewer line cleaned and TV-inspected for City review. The video tape of the inspection will be reviewed by the City and from that review a determination will be made as to whether or not the line could be accepted as a public sewer line. If repairs or modifications to the sewer line are deemed necessary to bring it up to a public standard, the applicant must perform that work as a part of this project and as a part of the Street Opening Permit. The cleaning and TV-inspection shall be completed prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. 4. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of$30.00. 5. 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. 96-44). 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. 6. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Bonita Road underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $ 27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $ 4,400.00 and it shall be paid prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. 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: 7. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00025 Atiyeh Brothers Retail PAGE 8 8. 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. i.\eng\brianr\comments\sdr\sdr1999-00025.bdr.doe ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00025 Atiyeh Brothers Retail PAGE 9 DEC-08-99 WED 02:20 PM CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO FAX NO. 503 635 0269 P. 01 `,�0 .ti:t�xto=y,`co City of Lake Oswego 380 A Avenue ' P. O.Box 369 Lake Oswego,Oregon 97034 Facsimile Building Department (503) 635-0390 Plannin g Department (503) 635-0290 0390 FAX P artmen (503) 635-0269 Engis:deering Department (503) 635-0270 To:N. me _) '1.r. lo`- 4Aad r - FAX# aLf• 471 "1' C;::mpany Name Gt 1 From: 1%;%me 411-V`..... .I FstAv.,....... Phone# G 3 5. .-O 7i is l''( I+epartinent E .Mail subect Mi y/1" Ormemes Dat,a 1 L U 7 ek 1 t Me ..;age: / JI1. I _ _, AIrP4:25"--i+r-- . Total Number of Pages (including cover):. DEC-08-99 WED 02:21 PM CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO FAX NO. 503 635 0269 P. 02 • \`4eEfioM COMMUNITY UE:VELOPMFNT DEPARTMENT.— -- -- December 8, 1999 Ms. Julia Powell Hajduk Associate Planner City of Tigard Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd.Tigard,97223 RE: Atiyeh Brother Retail Building Dear Julia: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed retail building development application. As we discussed on the phone the other day,staff does not have any design related issues because the proposed development will not be visible from the city limits or 1-5,as it will most likely be screened by the existing retail store along the highway. The engineering staff has also reviewed the traffic report submitted with the application and generally concurs with its findings. I have enclosed a memorandum prepared by the staff for your review. While the City is not recommending any street improvements at part of the proposed application, staff does have some concerns with the overall traffic conditions along the Bonita Road corridor. Therefore,we recommend that the City Engineers from both cities meet and discuss alternative courses of action that may be available to address the traffic concerns that may affect the two jurisdictions. Please do not hesitate to call me at 635-0294, if I can be of any assistance. Respectfully, Development Review Manager 1AtamidpiletteralajdukJP-Atiyeh Brother Retail Building DEC-08-99 WED 02:21 PM CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO FAX NO, 503 635 0269 P. 03 • MEMORANDUM December 6, 1999 To: Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Planner. From: Russ Chevrette,Engineering Tech. III Subject: City of Tigard request for comments Atiyeh Brothers Carpet Store on Bonita Road west of 1-5 This request for comments came to my attention on the same day that our office received the local newsletter from the Institute of Transportation Engineers. The newsletter's cover article focuses on growth management, and stresses the importance of making capacity improvements to keep up with development approvals ("concurrency"). The authors offer the following advice: "Pay attention to the growth of your neighbors. Local land use and transportation planning must extend beyond one's own jurisdictional boundaries. Joint planning with neighboring cities and counties should be carried out to ensure that cumulative growth impacts are fully addressed." The following comments have been prepared for the City of Tigard's consideration when their staff reviews and evaluates the applicant's traffic study prepared by Lancaster Engineering. Tigard's development approvals on the west side of the Bonita overpass have had a significant impact on the east side of the overpass, particularly at the congested unsignalized intersection of Bonita Road and Bangy Road. While we are happy to see that the applicant's traffic engineer has taken the initiative to cross the jurisdictional line by including the Bonita/Bangy intersection in the scope of analysis,we have difficulty reconciling his observations and conclusions with those of several other studies that we have accumulated in recent years_ This memorandum attempts to resolve those inconsistencies. Trip generation assumptions The applicant's traffic consultant, Lancaster Engineering,begins with several critical assumptions. We agree that the"best fit"1TE category is"furniture store,"that there are few, if any, pass-by trips, and that no reduction should he allowed for transit We further agree that the entire footprint area, about 14,000 square feet, should be used to calculate the number of trips— not just the 2,800 square feet purported to be limited to retail area. 1 DEC-08-99 WED 02:22 PM CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO FAX NO, 503 635 0269 P. 04 Bonita/Bangy backeround traffic The PM peak hour traffic count through the Bonita/Bangy intersection, 1667, is within the range of counts that has been reported by other studies in the last three years. The range is between 1340 and 1729 vehicles per hour. Level of Service Analysis The City of Lake Oswego has four relevant traffic studies on file. Each one ascribes LOS F to the Bonita/Bangy intersection_ These LOS classifications are based on background traffic, and do not include the impact of the recent 178 room Hilton Hotel, about 500,000 square feet of newly approved office buildings on Meadows Road, and 32 new townhouses on Bangy Road. The Lancaster report does not address`tin-process" development that will affect the studied intersections,nor their projected performance at a prescribed horizon such as year 2015. In general,it is our position that a proposal's traffic report should account for approved, in-process,and 20-year growth projections. The following table is a condensation of the mentioned traffic studies' findings for the Bonita/Bangy intersection. EProject Consultant., year Level of Average Delay Service Hilton David Evans& Assoc., F Range limit exceeded, not Hotel 1997 calculable 6000 Group Mackenzie, 1997 F Southbound 132 seconds, Meadows others out of range,not calculable Kruse Group Mackenzie, 1998 F Southbound 132 seconds, Woods V others out of range,not calculable Rangy Falcon Consulting F Range limit exceeded,not townhouses , Services, 1998 __ calculable The Lancaster report finds that the subject unsignalized intersection operates at a calculated LOS F, with an average delay of 72.5 seconds. It therefore agrees with the previous studies,but the averaging technique tends to downplay the unacceptably long delays encountered by literally hundreds of motorists who have no option but to wait for a long queue to clear. The report mentions queues in excess of 5 minutes on some occasions. The Lancaster report hastens to point out that the observed delays,however, are not consistent with the predicted delays derived from mathematical modeling. His field observations are documented in the report's appendix. Lancaster claims that the Bonita/Bangy intersection should be ascribed LOS D because the average observed delay of the two worst turning movements is 20.6 seconds. (LOS F means average delays DEC-08-99 WED 02:23 PM CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO FAX NO. 503 635 0269 P. 05 greater than 45 seconds.) He states that the huge disparity between calculated and observed delays is due to the"complexity and unreliability of the methodology of all-way stop-controlled intersection analysis". This kind of statement troubles the skeptics, including myself. So, on December 3, 1999,I observed the performance of the two worst movements at this intersection during the reported 20-minute peak of the PM peak hour. My findings are consistent with Lancaster's. I did not observe a delay of more than.20 seconds for any movement at the intersection. However,the influx of traffic is heavy and continuous. The intersection is functioning because the drivers are observing the right- of-way rules and making their turning movements quickly. The smooth operation is a fragile, at best, and should be monitored on a regular basis. The report should explain why there are occasional 5 minute queues since those are the conditions that are most remembered by the general public. Traffic signal warrants The subject intersections were analyzed against three relevant signal warrants: Minimum Vehicular Volume, Interruption of Continuous Traffic,and PM Peak Hour warrants. The PM Peak Hour Warrant is unquestionably met; traffic volumes are over twice the threshold amount for this warrant. The Minimum Vehicular Volume warrant is not met according to the Lancaster report, but this warrant deserves further comment. For this warrant to be met, the volumes of both the major and minor streets must exceed specified thresholds. Traffic on the higher volume street,Bonita Road, falls a bit short of the threshold hut traffic on the minor street. Ban,gy Road,is almost twice the threshold. During the peak hour,the volumes are almost equal. The warrant is technically not met based on average daily volumes,but we feel it is operationally met during the PM peak. The four previously cited traffic studies are unanimous in their conclusion that there is sufficient congestion to install lane improvements and a traffic signal now. The City of Lake Oswego's Transportation System Plan and Capital Improvement Plan identify this intersection as one of the highest priority transportation projects in the City. Construction will be funded by City SDC's and Clackamas County SDC's collected from County approved development in the area of influence. Development Impact The Atiyeh development will contribute one or two trips,presumably customers, to the Bonita/Bangy intersection during the PM peak hour. One could argue that one or two warehouse employees would also leave the premises during the peak hour. In any event, the site-generated traffic would represent only 0.12%of the PM peak. To put this in perspective,there can be as much as a 20%daily variation in peak hour traffic at this intersection. Obviously, the development's traffic impact is not measurable against the variable background of the existing congestion. If, for example,the Bonita/Bangy intersection was improved with a half million dollar signalization project,this development's proportionate share would be about $600 based on its PM traffic generation. DEC-08-99 WED 02:24 PM CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO FAX NO. 503 635 0269 P. 06 Conclusions and Recommendations • The City of Lake Oswego concurs with the traffic study's conclusion that the Atiyeh development will have an insignificant impact on the Bonita/Bangy intersection_ • The observations found in this report are equally applicable to the Sequoia/Bonita intersection. The City of Tigard should,if it has not done so already, assign a high priority to making lane and sign.alization improvements at this intersection in its short term Capital Improvement Plan. • 4 DATE: PLANS CHECK NO.: PROJECT TITLE: COUNTYWIDE ' ` F C TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE APPLICANT: ,6( va_.„v4ineit 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 n PAYMENT METHOD: 7-' CASH/CHECK CREDIT INSTITUTIONAL ONLY: BANCROFT(PROMISSORY USE RATE NOTE) LAND USE CATEGORY DESCRIPTION OF RATE WEEKDAY AVG.TRIP WEEKEND AVG.TRIP DEFER BASIS: C-41 Q Oy\L L 5-00 d D ) �-7_1500 rl1n i 0 5 0 C(e�4�-1 r c 2 5 0n ii ca( �e gJ.. SC d /5-DO ,f, Isr.Ho L -( . ' LIAN t c cart . UMs w(4 b• w�V + u� Cho 62 ©_,(- -two ems''i�S . CALCULATIONS: 14512° Oa AG2. °r 1SL ao-ke- `bc.t . Cad Cl.�sW4I �' t -kt(noLA SC�• L5pO - t a�S " V tite12 ` (re- ZSba ► ,,,t10 fr ..(12/re- 5e., 5 as "loleele PROJECT TRIP GENERATION: v bwtJ/MASJC.7. Gip() = 9.00P x 4.44 x A Ie 3.�' -_-_ �l t9 5 6 FEE: FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES 1 ONLY FU vV\ UNe (AAU' ' =e ZS DO Ch - 2.`7 . y•�{i s tsi•00 : 59.144 ROAD AMT.: Wrk-D6- 2,5OO2 = 2.5- . K (0.73 X 1'15 `iq•lq TRANSIT AMT.: PREPARED BY: 6/7/99 j:\scottk\tiflworksheet 99-00.doc CC: WASHINGTON COUNTY TIF NOTEBOOK j_ !T' ^n i{— 41-2. • ,,�,1 �II l: 6, REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping s'T Better Community DATE: November 24,1999 TO: Michael Miller,Operations Utility Manager RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division DEC 1 01999 STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner 1x4011 CITY OF TIGAR[` Phone: [503)639-4111/Fax: [5031684-7297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SORT 1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100/6600 SW Bonita Road. Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. ZONE: I-P; Industrial Park. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are 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: DECEMBER 8, 1999. 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: © r//_E-A/DL4,vr //U&-,vr/F/go Arc e,.-14.- E/.I1O or Pd�4I er- i¢1 Gn/ '-- 77/ £k/S?insLt LIR 7E2 /WE7 1L- /_I/L,E- A/Ect72, A7 ��EVEGaP� _° '. ! I i • a , g _ - ' - 19 _Ay ' _ L 13� t r244-Air" 7 7E- ry R./A:LOC-4 r/o nJ v/4 • 174.6 /d/0,2,-r-,,rr Mere L o,tiJ ,44 AL- th-z) �� "R[ r 0/r.1 z, gffer 63/44)A1 a>u RAINS - _AP 4-- /Ai 'L9tnir&t- '.L. /.•/c r. I Qliir 1./C i ' w ,vr .iv It a r. �r(E �' r ' :� J 'r er • s iri s (Please provide the following information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: Phone Number[sl: SDR1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OFTIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community DATE: November 24,1999 a�cE�vE� 1:19\TO: Julia Huffman,USA/SWM Program �0FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division � NOV 2 9 1999 STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner 1x4011 Phone: (5031639-4171/Fax: 15031684-7297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SORT 1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100/6600 SW Bonita Road. Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. ZONE: I-P; Industrial Park. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: DECEMBER 8, 1999. 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 Person[sl Commenting: t ; v�\ (1 A f 2-)I z 16 c I Phone Number[sl: 4 F SDR1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS f UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY RECEIVED PLANNING MEMORANDUM DEC 0 7 1999 CITY OF TIGARD DATE: December 2, 1999 TO: Julia Hajduk, City of Tigard FROM: Julia Huffman, USA ft_j, SUBJECT: Atiyeh Brothers Retail Building, SDR 1999-00025 SANITARY SEWER The development should be provided with a means of disposal for sanitary sewer. The means of disposal should be in accordance with R&O 96-44 (Unified Sewerage Agency's Construction Design Standards, July 1996 edition). Engineer should verify that public sanitary sewer is available to uphill adjacent properties, or extend service as required by R&O 96-44. 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 R&O 96-44. 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 Now-219-99 01 : 27P TCI c" .Helens 50? -197 5686 P .02 44lik REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OFTIGARD Community'Development Shaping Better Community DATE: November 24,1999 TO: Pat McGann,AT&T Cable FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner[x4071 Phone: [5031639-4171/Fax: 15031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SOR]1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100/6600 SW Bonita Road. Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. ZONE: I-P; Industrial Park. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are 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: DECEMBER 8, 1999. 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: 44 — (77auc provide try fi,ffowing inj,'UUiit;on)Name of Person[sl Commenting: / 1 Phone Number[sl: 4 SDR1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING DFni IGCT Er'D rr mkacnITe• Nov-29-99 01 : 27P TCI St_ _ Helens 503 397 5686 P _ 01 IC ' FAX COVER SHEET // DATE: /" / /27 / 1 TIME : . 2, t%( f/ 1 • TO J( c.L I/y l'C L/t. 1_ L / 11 jC�CC1�-. I. FROM: 1-1 i 1 l ( , i— I 7 t!c,Vs7/L-,L. ! . it.` r/L— TCI OF TUALATIN VALLEY 14200 S .W . BRIGADOON CT . PFAVERTON , OREGON 97005 PHONE : ( 503) 605-4895 FAX : ( 503 ) 646-8004 NUMBER OF PAGES IN THIS TRANSMISSION INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET : t- __ NOTES : rci of rualatirr Valley.Inc. 14200 S.W.Brngadoon Co■ t Beaverton,OR 97005 (503)805.4895 FAX(503)646.8004 An Equal Qoporruniry Empiyer REQUEST FOR COMMENTS 11 CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community DATE: November 24,1999 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: Brian Moore,PGE Service Design Consultant DEC 0 7 1999 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner 1x4011 Phone: 15031 639-4171/Fax: [5031 684-1297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(MD 1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100/6600 SW Bonita Road. Until that partition is final, the property is still ppart of that tax lot. ZONE: I-P; Industrial Park. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: DECEMBER 8, 1999. 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. _ P!eese refer to the cnc!cccd letter. Written comments provided below: v ti (Please provide tie farrowing information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: Qlis.L\ Phone Number's]: G - 4/AO SDR1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS i REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITIFY OF TIGARD Community'Development Shaping A Better Community DATE: November 24,1999 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: John Roy,Property Manager/Operations Department NOV 2 9 1999 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner 1x4011 Phone: [5031 639-4171/Fax: [5031684-1297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR]1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100/6600 SW Bonita Road. Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. ZONE: I-P; Industrial Park. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: DECEMBER 8, 1999. 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: / . •• (Please provide the following information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: It I Phone Number's]: I SDR1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY O TIGARD Community'Development Shaping A Better Community DATE: November 24,1999 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: Lori Dorney,US West Communications DEC 01 1999 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner(x4071 Phone: (503)639-4171/Fax: (503)684-7297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SDR)1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100/6600 SW Bonita Road. Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. ZONE: I-P; Industrial Park. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: DECEMBER 8, 1999. 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: •\). S � C � (Please provide the foaowing information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: l 1 Phone Number(s): SDR1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST E T F 0 R COMMENTS CITTO TIIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community DATE: November 24,1999 TO: Jim Wolf,Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division NOV 2 4 1999 STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner 1x4071 CITY OF TIGARD Phone: 15031 639-4171/Fax: 15031684-1297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SDR)1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100/6600 SW Bonita Road. Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. ZONE: I-P; Industrial Park. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: DECEMBER 8, 1999. 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: RQgoeyt S0brn14-11on U " \‘'StNktn. -vk`R -Ca e.1.'tcc ar. v ti (Please provide the following information)Name of Person(sl Commenting: )9 M v\Io6 c- Phone Number(sl: ■.¢a-aga—I - �'O I SDR1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS . A REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CIT OF TIGARD Community'Development Shaping A Better Community DATE: November 24,1999 TO: Gary lamella,Building Official RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division NOV 2 9 1999 STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner(x4011 Phone: (5031639-4111/Fax: (5031 684-7291 CITY OF TIGARD SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(MID 1999-00025 > ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100/6600 SW Bonita Road. Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. ZONE: I-P; Industrial Park. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: DECEMBER 8, 1999. 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) e'Ory,0 ..t sit 17 rJ.1 .-017rj-P`ti c4-m6 rt 1-1 ko f ✓-A) 13 Aot igen- re.,—r Ut111411 Colt) M.�..A )rr ..et. 4Ilowa1, it 'irt0. it 3S, 4 ev C21 77. r yly 000 -3yif -f LteJt 3! ' (7:) ..r,,,6"...f 'A FI✓'< Ptv+V R&/.Z711 f ,-o D.r-�r.n►h.t It OF P. N. . • • (i7 • • vii? A FD - Lv11-h1h pc!' vj- 4- Fj µ. (q)C'on+*c* t4-(11 wA1-∎.-y�Jfrrtt Fv►- Lor,d-/ ( f/r9 w4-� ti- vfALA t t- An/ a/07+'�QS+,C e.... 4.+l'r ph- vtoC7t / vii , l / (5) A (Spec,- TC G.� 1^e or7 d/`1" C 1. 070 / r,. TLI A 1 L l 1 L. C f-�G Al ea, /.f I"✓; 'r/ .1 @) Dvw� fop arafj o►,,. V./I D►)ir L1o+✓ V`tad 1 .fcupplrl c4�► - v * ('•tmr7. r471'1, ) (Please provide the following information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: (7) • %./ ifri Al-e,- r',v 0 t I Phone Number(s): -acv I iA J t tv 120. 6._ C G SDR1999 00025 t,-.h 7 p+ t-„ ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS -1 n " vk1 e 19r,,fG t: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIIGARD 1t Community'Development Shaping A Better Community DATE: November 24,1999 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner(x4071 Phone: 15031639-4171/Fax: 15031684-7297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRJ 1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100/6600 SW Bonita Road. Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. ZONE: I-P; Industrial Park. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: DECEMBER 8, 1999. 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 Persons)Commenting: I Phone Number(s): I SDR1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY TIGARD REQUEST FOR COIVENTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE a COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CITArea: (Cl (El (Sl (Wl CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS Li Place for review inUbrarvCITBouts) ^` FILE NOISI: ,SDR 1 999. 00025 FILE HAMEISI: 41 yc.4 go CITY OFFICES LONG RANGE PLANNING/Nadine Smith,s pit, no, _COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./wipmnl Svcs Techncians 'POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crane Prevention Once. BUILDING DIVISION/Gary Lampella,Building OffKial _ENGINEERING DEPT./Brian Rager,oipmnl RevnewEn9neer Jj(4/ATER DEPT./Michael Miller,UHItesManaaer CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,cnyRe<o,re, OPERATIONS DEPT./John Roy,Properly Manager _OTHER SPECIAL DISTRICTS _TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.. TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE * _TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT * • UNIFIED SWRGE.AGENCY* Planning Manager Fire Marshall Administrative Office Julia Huffman/SWM Program 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 97301-1279 PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 Portland,OR 97207 Beaverton,OR 97076 _ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING * _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street,NE CITY OF DURHAM * 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland.OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 PO Box 23483 US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. Durham,OR 97281-3483 _ Paulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP. 333 SW First Avenue Mel Huie,Greenspaces Coordinator(cPA2oA) 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(Powedlnes in Area) _OREGON DEPT.OF TRANS.(ODOT) Dept.of Land Use&Transp. Bonneville Power Administration Aeronautics Division 155 N. First Avenue CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO * Routing TTRC—Attn: Renae Ferrera Tom Highland,Planning Suite 350,MS 13 Planning Director PO Box 3621 3040 25th Street,SE Hillsboro.OR 97124 PO Box 369 Portland,OR 97208-3621 Salem,OR 97310 _Brent Curtis(CPA) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 Scott King(CPA) OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY(DEQ) ODOT,REGION 1 * Mike Borreson(Engineer) _CITY OF PORTLAND (Notify for Wetlands and Potential Environmental Impacts) _Sonya Kazen,Development Review Coordinator _Jim Tice(IGA) David Knowles,Planning Bureau Dir Regional Administrator _Carl 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(General Apps) 1120 SW Fifth Avenue Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 _Sr.Cartographer(CeA2CA)as 14 Portland,OR 97204 _Jim Nims(ZCA)MS 15 ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A * _Doria Mateja(zCA)MS 14 Jane Estes,Permit Specialist 5440 SW Westgate Drive,Suite 350 Portland,OR 97221-2414 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES _PORTLAND WESTERN RJR,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE RJR,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Burlington Northern Santa Fe RJR Predecessor) Robert I. Melbo,President&General Manager 110 W. 10th Avenue Albany,OR 97321 _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS ' TCI CABLEVISION OF OREGON _TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer(Annexations only) Pat McGann (If Project is Within 7.Mile of A Transit Route) 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Michael Kiser,Project Planner Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 710 NE Holladay Street Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 Portland,OR 97232 _PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY _GENERAL TELEPHONE US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Brian Moore,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer Elaine Self,Engineering Lori Dorney,Engineering 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue MC: OR030546 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 110 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Tigard,OR 97281-3416 Portland,OR 97219 _TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J_BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 _TCI CABLE(Apps tint I-ialUN 0199W) 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 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/ALL CITY PROJECTS(Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify). h:\pattyvnasters\Request For Comments Notification List.doc (Revised: 2-Nov-99) A AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING c TIGARD t Community Development Shaping si Better Community S TAT E O F ofkEG0 ) Coun of`Washington )ss. City of' ward I, Patricia L.Lunsford being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Speciafist//for the City ofTgarr4 Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check Appropnate Box(s)Below) NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) City of Tigard Planning Director © NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: . / AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing) City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Council NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearings) City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Council NOTICE OF: (Type/Kind of Notice) FOR: t: I (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing,if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICES] of which is attached, marked Whit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B", i n the 29" day of December1999, and deposited in the United States Mail on the 29th day of December, 1999, post-ge prepai.. all■ A_.�, (Person that Pred NotaY4 C- Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the /0 day of ,. •��.��..I • i OFFICIAL SEAL //p , / / ''` DIANE M�ewERKS NOTARY PUB GREG I \� ;.':%`' NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.326578 / r/7/0 COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT.07,2003 My Commission Expires: VOL 'NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION AALSITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 1999-00025 CITY OF TIGARD ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING Community Development SFiaping A'Better Community , 120 DAYS = 3/20/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING CASE NO.: Site Development Review SDR1999-00025 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. APPLICANT: David Atiyeh ARCHITECT: Fred Paintner 800 SW Washington St. Ankrom Moisan Associates Portland, OR 97205 6720 SW Macadam, S-100 Portland, OR 97219 OWNER: Paul Schatz OWNER: Gevurtz Family Limited Prtnrshp. 6600 SW Bonita Rd. 1918 Indian Trail Tigard, OR 97224 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial. ZONING DESIGNATION: Industrial Park; I-P. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100 (6600 SW Bonita Road). Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section V of the full decision. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (25 ) per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: • THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON DECEMBER 29, 1999 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY 14, 2000, UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2 of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 3:30 PM ON JANUARY 13, 2000. Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Julia Powell Ha'lduk at (503) 639-4171, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. ;ar ; T \ . IT Eliw BONITA ROAD Ti-"" 3e rC ,� LRi . 1/ Z rr. 5 O I J a z L I f 4 I IA' I Q aia a e a I :in ), , F U p---- -' r/7. / I SITE PLAN t SDR1999-00025 EXHIBIT MAP N ATIYEN BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING OW 141 10 4ra,e) ■ 1■.E V F ;—III '' VICINITY MAP -- SDR1999-00025 .� \�— ATIYEH ���.►��• `�; ,...4�l " BROTHERS zrpriip,... .. ^ SUBJECT `"_- w SITE RETAIL nii Il-x�i1. _.•IR :, BUILDING do II!r:=•SRS 1t �I��\ a .:1-!1-NM�= MI I- n�=C rME W 1�E1�m 1+:■ = , Z A N ,. ■ N lii: ,..��Ill��r .= i LIII '• o m _,. lel I IN 1:111. IN ..... Eli, lig Orin IP_� HA ......._....0.,_.. .. pawn t, 111 EE..BRBb am orn,4ie _I_2r 1111111 mom BHA I •�� '�"" SEATO-000,0.5- • • EXlJhif3 : 2S112AA-00400 112AA-00500 SPIEKER PROPERTIES LP SRI PR•• 'TIES LP 4380 SW MACADAM AVE STE 100 43805'• • . ADAM AVE STE 100 PORTLAND,OR 97201 RTLAND,OR • .11 2S112AA-00600 2S112AD-00100 .ER PR•'' 'TIES LP OBIE MEDIA CORP 4380 S •••• ADAM AVE STE 100 4211 W 11TH P•- LAND,OR • .01 EUGENE,OR 97402 2S112AD-00200 5112AD-00300 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 5" S JO- • E&MARIETTA D TRS 1700 FARNAM ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH PO :.' OMAHA,NE 68102 • RORA,OR • 102 2S112AD-00301 2S 2AD-00400 - SMETS JOHN E&MARIETTA D TRS SMET' 0 • &MARIETTA D TRS PO BOX 560 PO Be .: AURORA,OR 97002 • .-ORA,OR 9 .:• -112AD-00401 S112AD-00500 SO - RN P' FIC TRANSPORTATION Re. RS MAC •• RY CO INC 1700 Fs' • T 10TH FLOOR SOUTH 14600 ••-4 ND AVENUE ••• •HA, NE 681b ' •RD,OR 2S112AD-00501 ' 112AD-00600 ROGERS MACHINERY COMPANY UNION . T:• LIFE 14600 SW 72ND AVE INSU'• • E :•IPANY TIGARD,OR 97223 2S112AD-00700 2S112AD-00900 UNITED PIPE&SUPPLY CO INC HOME DEPOT USA INC 7600 SE JOHNSON CREEK BLVD 1700 MARKET ST#1510 PORTLAND, OR 97206 PHILADELPHIA,PA 19103 2S112AD-01100 PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PORTLAND,OR 97224 , L AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Betur Community STATE Of OGON ) County of Washington )ss. City o Tward ) 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) NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) City of Tigard Planning Director F3 NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDRI999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: t7 AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing) City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Council NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearings) City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Council NOTICE OF: (Type/Kind of Notice) FOR: E77 I (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing,if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICE[S1 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"r, .n the 29m day of December,1999, ,nd deposited in the United States Mail on the 29m day of December, 1999,po- age prepaid. /e rr A Ai,.1. '"�- at ''.rared ► .ti , ) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the o day o i.!u,.._,.a.�l� OFFICIAL SEAL WM/ / / DIANE M JEI.DERK8 , I , , , I , s~'-,ot NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON I I ' I ' ' ' COMMISSION NO.326578 My Commission Expires. ? G.3) MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT 07,2003 EXIT! NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 1999-00025 CI GARD Community Development ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING shaping etter Community 120 DAYS = 3/20/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING CASE NO.: Site Development Review SDR1999-00025 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. APPLICANT: David Atiyeh ARCHITECT: Fred Paintner 800 SW Washington Street Ankrom Moisan Associates Portland, OR 97205 6720 SW Macadam, Suite 100 Portland, OR 97219 OWNER: Paul Schatz OWNER: Gevurtz Family Limited Prtnrshp. 6600 SW Bonita Road 1918 Indian Trail Tigard, OR 97224 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial. ZONING DESIGNATION: Industrial Park; I-P. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100 (6600 SW Bonita Road). Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section V. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 1 OF 17 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 plan that clearly shows the walkway will be paved with a hard surface material. 2. Submit a revised plan that shows the proposed walkway will tie into the existing walkway that runs along the access drive. 3. Submitted verification from the franchise hauler indicating that the location of the proposed trash enclosure meets their needs. 4. Submit a revised plan that shows wheel stops will be installed for all parking stalls. 5. Submit a revised plan that shows the standard parking spaces will be at least 8.5 feet x18.5 feet and that shows no more than 50% of the parking spaces will be compact. 6. Submit a revised plan that indicates a directional sign identifying the bicycle parking will be located near the front entrance. 7. Submit details of the bicycle rack to be used. 8. Submit an outdoor lighting plan for review and approval by the Police Department. 9. Submit a copy of the recorded partition plat for MLP1999-00015. Submit for review and approval the following to the Engineering Department. Staff Contact: Brian Rager. 10. If the applicant proposes to convert the existing 8-inch private sanitary sewer line to a public line, a Street Opening Permit will be required to cover the new connection to the line. This permit will also cover the proposed connection to the public water line. 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. This permit shall be obtained by the applicant prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit. 11 . 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 vho 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. 12. If the applicant proposes to convert the existing 8-inch private sanitary sewer line to a public line, they shall arrange to have the sewer line cleaned and TV-inspected for City review. The videotape of the inspection will be reviewed by the City and from that review, a determination will be made as to whether or not the line could be accepted as a public sewer line. If repairs or modifications to the sewer line are deemed necessary to bring it up to a public standard, the applicant must perform that work as a part of this project and as a part of the Street Opening Permit. The cleaning and TV-inspection shall be completed prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. 13. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of $30. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 2 OF 17 ' 14. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44). 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. 15. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Bonita Road underground as a part of this project, or they shall p ay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $4,400 and it shall be paid prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION BEING PERFORMED OR OCCUPANCY: Submit for review and approval the following to the Engineering Department. Staff Contact: Brian Rager. 16. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (ROW) (or public easement) and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 17. 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. 18. Install all site improvements as per the approved plans. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The site is currently on the same lot as the Paul Schatz furniture store. An application was recently approved (MLP1999-00015) to partition this portion being developed as proposed in this application, from the Paul Schatz furniture store site. No other development applications were found for the portion of the property being developed. Vicinity Information: The subject site is located west of the existing Paul Schatz development and south of SW Bonita Road. The site is surrounded on the east, west and south by property zoned I-P (Industrial Park) and to the north by property zoned I-L (Light Industrial). Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is a recently partitioned lot next to the Paul Schatz furniture store (2S112AD, tax lot 00100). The applicant is proposing to construct a 14,000 square foot building and associated parking lot on the newly created lot. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 3 OF 17 SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA A. Applicable Development Code Standards 18.705 (Access Egress and Circulation) 18.730 (Exceptions to Development Code Standards) 18.745 (Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.765 (Off-Street parking and loading requirements) 18.780 (Signs) 18.790 (Tree Removal) 18.795 (Visual Clearance) B. Specific SDR Approval Criteria 18.360 C. Street and Utility Improvement Standards 18.810 D. Impact Study 18.390 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, 18.780, 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 applicant has submitted a plan that shows there is an existing sidewalk along the access drive serving the site. The plans show a walkway will be provided at the building entrance but it does not show the proposed walkway tying into the existing walkway. 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; As proposed, the walkway (even as conditioned) will not cross the parking area or accessway. The proposed walkway is 6 feet wide. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 4 OF 17 Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The plans do not clearly indicate that the walkway will be paved with concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc., however, staff is comfortable that this could easily be met. A condition of approval is necessary requiring the applicant to submit a revised plan that clearly shows the walkway will be paved with a hard surface material. Minimum Access Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Use: Section 18.705.030.1 provides the minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial uses: Table 18.705.3 indicates that the required access width for developments with less than 100 parking spaces is 30 feet 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 developments taking access off of the access drive have less than 100 parking spaces. The proposed development has access from the existing access drive that has a width of 40 feet off-site and an easement width of 30 feet directly adjacent to the parcel to be developed. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff can not confirm that the access and egress standards have been satisfied, however, if the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be met. CONDITIONS: Submit a revised plan that clearly shows the walkway will be paved with a hard surface material. Submit a revised plan that shows the proposed walkway will tie into the existing walkway that runs along the access drive. Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.0 Section 18.745.040.0 required that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). While the property does not have frontage on SW Bonita Road, after the partition is recorded, the applicant is proposing to install street trees along this frontage in an effort to upgrade the existing landscaping. The street trees are proposed to be 3-inch caliper Karpick Maple spaced 30 feet apart. Because the species proposed is considered a large stature tree, the spacing at 30 feet apart as proposed meets the spacing standards. 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. There is parking proposed to be added off-site (on the Paul Schatz property) as part of this review. This parking is directly adjacent to SW Bonita Road. The applicant has submitted a landscape plan that shows the parking will be setback 10 feet from the property line. In the 10 foot setback area, groundcover and shrubs will be planted that will screen the parking from view. This landscaping is not included in the development site's landscaping NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 5 OF 17 calculations, however, because the area is off-site. Additional on-site landscaping is also provided between the building and the parking spaces. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the landscaping and screening standards have been fully met. 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 plans indicate a trash enclosure will be provided at the southern portion of the site. The applicant has proposed a 10-foot x 20-foot screened enclosure. The applicant has not submitted a letter from the franchise hauler, however, indicating the location meets their needs. 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 condition listed below, the standards will be met. CONDITION: Submitted verification from the franchise hauler indicating that the location of the proposed trash enclosure meets their needs. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): Disabled-accessible parking: All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. The applicant is providing 23 parking spaces on-site and has shared access to an additional 13 spaces. Based on 36 spaces, the applicant must provide 2 ADA handicap spaces, one of which is van accessible. The applicant's site plan shows the parking lot will have 2 ADA accessible spaces, both of which are 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 actually 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 SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 6 OF 17 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. As conditioned, there is a walkway from the street to the building which does not require crossing the parking lot. 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 being constructed for this addition clearly marked. Wheel Stops: Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. The applicant's plans do not show wheel stops will be provided where the parking lot abuts the walkway along the building or the landscape areas. The applicant's plans must be revised to show wheel stops will be provided for all of the proposed parking stalls. 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 18 feet and the compact spaces will be 8 feet by 18 feet. The dimensions for the compact spaces are satisfied, however, the length of the standard spaces must be increased to 18.5 feet. Staff is comfortable that this can be met simply by reducing the 6-foot-wide walkway since the required dimension is only 4 feet. The applicant's plans only show 1 compact space, whereas, up to 50% of the spaces may be compact. Staff recommends making the spaces adjacent to the northern portion of the building compact so that the access aisle remains as large as possible. As shown on the plans, all access aisles are no less than 24 feet wide. 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 7 OF 17 The proposed bicycle rack is located on the south side of the proposed building. The bicycle location is within 50 feet of an entrance to the building but not the main entrance. It is staff's decision that because the public portion of the building is limited to 20%, the majority of bicycle traffic that is likely to occur based on the use, is employees. Therefore, the location near the southern most entrance (close to the storage area and offices) is acceptable, provided signs are posted near the main entrance identifying the bicycle parking location. The bicycle parking location is not located in parking aisles, landscape areas, or pedestrian ways in compliance with the Code. Bicycle Parking Design Requirements: Section 18.765.050.C. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: The racks required for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered, with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle; required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers, asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. The applicant has not provided a detail of the bike rack to be used, therefore, 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 General Retail Sales, .3 bicycle parking spaces are required for every 1 ,000 square feet of gross floor area and for Wholesale Sales, .1 bicycle parking spaces are required for every 1 ,000 square feet of gross floor area. Based on the General Retail Sales portion being limited to 2,800 square feet, and the remaining 11,144 square feet being Wholesale Sales, the required number of bicycle parking spaces is 2. The applicant's plan shows 2 spaces will be provided, however, the narrative indicates that 4 spaces will be provided. Because the spaces shown on the plans meet the standards, no revisions are needed, even if they decide to provide 4 spaces instead of 2. 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 Retail Sales is 3.7 spaces per 1000 square feet and the maximum (zone B) is 6.2 spaces per 1000 square feet. The minimum parking for Wholesale Sales is .08 spaces per 1000 square feet and the maximum is 1.8 spaces per 1000 square feet. The Retail Sales portion of the building is 2,800 square feet and the Wholesale Sales (with associated office and storage) is 11 ,144 square feet. The minimum parking, therefore, is 19 spaces and the maximum is 37 spaces. The plans provided show 23 spaces will be provided on-site and an additional 13 shared spaces are provided off-site on the Paul Schatz furniture store site. The total parking available is 36, which meets the standards. 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. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 8 OF 17 CONDITIONS: • Submit a revised plan that shows wheel stops will be installed for all parking stalls. • Submit a revised plan that shows the standard parking spaces will be at least 8.5 feet x18.5 feet and that shows no more than 50% of the parking spaces will be compact. • Submit a revised plan that indicates a directional sign identifying the bicycle parking will be located near the front entrance. • Submit details of the bicycle rack to be used. Signs (18.780): Chapter 18.780.130.D lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C-G Zoning District. No additional signs have been formally proposed. Signs are reviewed through a separate permit process administered by the Development Services Technicians. FINDING: Because signs will be reviewed and approved as part of a separate permit process, this standard has been satisfied. Tree Removal (18.790): Section 18.790.030 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. 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 within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30-foot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway, and then connecting these two (2), 30-foot distance points with a straight line. The access drive intersects with SW Sequoia Parkway off-site, therefore, the development has no vision clearance areas. FINDING: Because the development has no vision clearance areas, this standard can not be applied to this development proposal. 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: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 9 OF 17 18.360.090.3 (Exterior Elevations); 18.360.090.4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 18.360.090.6 (Private Outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.8 (Floodplain) and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces). The following sections were discussed previously in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.13 (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 building is on a vacant lot (after the partition is recorded). There are no areas subject to sliding, natural drainage areas or trees on the site that require mitigation. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, this standard has been satisfied. Crime Prevention and Safety: A. Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; B. Interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; C. Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; D. The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and E. Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet, which is sufficient to illuminate a person. Windows are oriented towards the parking lot and street. 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 needs, 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 Sequoia Parkway which is not a Tri-met transit route, therefore, this standard does not apply. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 10 OF 17 ' FINDING: Based on the analysis above, this standard is satisfied. 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 a building for the purpose of wholesale sales (with associated office and storage) and 20% retail sales. The proposed uses are permitted uses within the Industrial Park (I-P) zoning district (18.530). 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-P ZONE PROPOSED Minimum Lot Size None 36,163 sf Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. 135 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 35 ft. 39 ft. - Side facing street on corner & through lots [1] 20 ft. N/A - Side yard 0/50 ft. [3] 55 ft. - Rear yard 0/50 ft. [3][4] 48 ft. Maximum Height 45 ft. 26 ft. Maximum Site Coverage [2] 75% [5] 79.8%**see discussion Maximum Landscape Requirement 25% [6] 20.2%••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. [4] Development in industrial zones abutting the Rolling Hills neighborhood shall comply with Comprehensive Plan Policy 11.5.1. [5] Maximum site coverage may be increased to 80%if the provisions of Section 18.530.050.8 are satisfied. [6] Except that a reduction to 20%of the site may be approved through the site development review process. The applicant has proposed to take advantage of footnote 5 and 6 which allows the landscaping requirement to be reduced to 20% and the maximum site coverage requirement to be increased to 85% by providing a landscaping upgrade off-site along the SW Bonita Road frontage. This, in essence, is upgrading the landscaping along the perimeter of the property. The applicant will install 3-inch caliper trees, and shrubs within a 10-foot landscape strip between the parking lot and the property line. This meets the intent of the exceptions and the flexibility in the site coverage and landscaping requirement is approved. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the provisions of the underlying zone are met. C. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS (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: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 11 OF 17 Streets: mprovements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the Tigard Development Code (TDC) standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a T portion 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 a large ROW for SW Bonita Road, which is classified as a major collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. The site is actually physically separated from the roadway by the slope created for the 1-5 overpass. Access to this site is via a shared access from SW Sequoia Parkway. SW Bonita Road is already fully improved adjacent to this site. No further ROW dedications or street improvements are necessary. Traffic Study Findings: A traffic impact report was submitted by Lancaster Engineering for this project. The report analyzed local intersections, including SW Bonita Road/SW Bangy Road, SW Bonita Road/SW Sequoia Parkway and SW Bonita Road/SW 72nd Avenue. The report indicates that this project will generate approximately 70 daily weekday trips, with approximately 7 trips occurring during the PM Peak Hour. SW Bonita Road/SW 72nd Avenue: The signalized intersection at SW Bonita Road/SW 72nd Avenue is currently operating at a level of service (LOS) C during the PM peak hour, and will not change as a result of the additional traffic from this project. SW Bonita Road/SW Bangy Road: The all-way stop-controlled intersection at SW Bonita Road/SW Bangy Road is currently operating at a LOS F during the PM peak hour. The Peak Hour Warrant for a traffic signal is satisfied for existing PM peak hour volumes. However, Lancaster performed field measurements of vehicle delay and found that the measured delay is significantly less than what is calculated using a traffic model. For instance, the average calculated vehicle delay for the intersection was 72.5 seconds per vehicle. The delay for the eastbound left- turning movement was calculated at 97.9 seconds per vehicle. The delay for the southbound through/right movement was 130.2 seconds. When Lancaster measured the delays, they found that the eastbound left-turning movement ranged from 8.2 seconds to a maximum of 24.0 seconds per vehicle. For the southbound through/right movement, the delays ranged from 12.9 seconds to a maximum of 25.0 seconds per vehicle. Lancaster states that the discrepancies can be attributed to the complexity and unreliability of the methodology of all-way stop-controlled intersection analysis. It is Staff's opinion that the applicant should not be required to provide any improvement to this intersection. The City of Lake Oswego provided comments to the City regarding this application. They have a concern with regard to this intersection and have placed it on a priority list for their Capital Improvement Program. They concur with the Lancaster traffic report and agree that this project will have an insignificant impact on the intersection. Their staff also measured delays at this intersection and found similar results shown in the Lancaster report. SW Bonita Road/SW Sequoia Parkway: The unsignalized intersection at this location is currently operating at LOS F during the PM peak hour. This LOS describes the delay for left-turning movements of Sequoia Parkway onto Bonita Road. The calculated delays are approximately 47 seconds per vehicle for the southbound left-turning movement and 57 seconds for the northbound left-turning movement. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 12 OF 17 Again, Lancaster made a site visit during the PM peak hour and measured the actual delay of vehicles. They analyzed the northbound left-turning movement during the peak 15 minutes during the PM peak hour and found that the average delay was 15 seconds or less per vehicle. Lancaster suggests that the discrepancy between the calculated delay and the observed delay may be because of the close proximity of the signalized intersection at SW 72nd Avenue. In summary, Staff concurs with the traffic engineer's findings and does not recommend the applicant be required to provide any further transportation improvements. 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 is a public sidewalk along the south side of SW Bonita Road. No further improvements are required. 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. The applicant's plans show an existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line located between this building site and the existing building to the east. City records do not show this as a public line, so Staff must assume the line is a private line. It appears the sewer line serves the building to the east and possibly others to the west. The line eventually ties to a public sewer line located in SW Bonita Road. USA Design and Construction Standards, as well as the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC), state that each property shall have its own direct connection to a public sanitary sewer line, without crossing an adjacent property. The existing private sewer line situation would not meet that standard. However, it may be possible for the 8-inch sewer line to be converted to a public line. For this to occur, the property owner(s) would need to have the sewer line TV-inspected to show whether or not the sewer line is in good condition with sufficient slope to meet a public standard. In addition, the City would need to make a visual inspection of the manholes and be comfortable with their condition and location for maintenance access. Finally, if the City determined the sewer could meet a public standard, the property owner(s) would need to grant a public sanitary sewer easement to the City. The minimum easement width is 15 feet. 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 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments). The surrounding parcels are developed, and the runoff from those areas are presently conveyed to the existing public storm drainage system in SW Sequoia Parkway. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 13 OF 17 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 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant's plan indicates that a detention/water quality pond will be provided near the southwest corner of the site. Staff has reviewed the preliminary sizing calculations for this pond and it appears to be adequately sized for this development. 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 SW Bonita Road. These lines are located at the bottom of the slope that supports the roadway and provides service to the existing buildings in this area. The fee is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 160 lineal feet; therefore, the fee would be $4,400. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS REGARDING STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 14 OF 17 Public Water System: I here is an existing public water line located within the shared access drive. The plan indicates the new building will be served by that line. No additional public water line work is necessary. 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. 96-44) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. As was stated above, the applicant plans to install a water quality/detention pond near the southwest corner of the site. Staff reviewed the preliminary calculations for the pond and is comfortable that the pond is sufficiently sized to handle the additional runoff. 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. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assignin addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). An addressing fee in the amount of $30 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. For this project, the addressing fee will be $30. 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. 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 NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 15 OF 17 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 $12,280 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 $38,375 ($12,280 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 $26,095. No street improvements or dedication is required or proposed for this project. SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: 1 . Correct sheet T1.1 , "construction" type V-N is not non-combustible, also maximum allowable area is 35,400 square feet, not 42,000. 2. Submit a fire flow analysis to determine number of fire hydrants. 3. Provide a fire department connection within 70 feet of a fire hydrant. 4. Contact the water district for location of fire water vault and domestic water protection. 5. A geo-technical report on potential liquefaction is required. 6. Down spouts and overflow roof scuppers can not penetrate the property line wall. 7. Rain water can not sheet to public street by way of the private street. The City of Tigard Operations Utility Manager has reviewed the proposal and offered the following comments: The fire hydrant identified at the south end of the project, along with the existing water meter will need to be relocated at the developers expense. Additional public water easements shall be granted to the City for the relocation of the fire hydrant and meter. The water meter location for the proposed building shown on the plans needs to be revised so that it is in the planter area. We will require the backflow prevention devise for the fire system to be placed in a vault (property line protection). 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 Property Manager has reviewed the application and has not provided comments or objections. 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. The City of Lake Oswego has reviewed the proposal and provided comments which have been discussed in the body of this decision. A complete copy of the comments are a part of the file and available for review. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 16 OF 17 ' AT&T, TCI, PGE, GTE, US West and NW Natural Gas have all reviewed the proposal and offered no comments or objections. SECTION VIII. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON DECEMBER 29, 1999, AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY 14, 2000, UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal The decision of the Director (Type II Procedure) or Review Authority (Type II Administrative Appeal or Type III Procedure) is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 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 JANUARY 13, 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. / / ',�,� December 29, 1999 PREP D BY: Julia ell Hajduk DATE Associate Planner -C,c.r ` December 29, 1999 APPROVED BY: Richard H. BewersM f DATE Planning Manager I:\curpin\julia\sdr\Atiyeh Brothers.doc.dot NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PAGE 17 OF 17 1 ' . L �q Cn J^ a6 i"B \4dtED RED T IDf"` —SW BONITA ROAD PM —IC?---- • I1 ..1 -- 10 H \ C1 NI19 moo' / 4 d• rx..A. 02• 30' EASE*:k SesIDD O ....•_ a•C OM uP •CAS V— M O: 4' �' i i iii:• I" ° i ii ii 1 • 1J1 9) ' 'n w I " C+15 KIT iii_ a' 1419 1--/ o V Z Z le Q 1'I�00® �LDND 111"..' T o. ii 1 c l� f0 I� r1' + row 1 \/ Q I .. 1 I O d LA ct O �I A 0 1 0. m '.Jii� a l $ Q Q iii � �. r �'/�) El. P N1 {A V i 'X . Iii CCiiI 1 I i mom /Ipy ...v.ow.,n, I z I- _ aae,o AA,. . . LI- 1,0,. \ Y A '.'=.'. I'CPC uu1 ,. .1 1Vlli,tlQ d1iLDMfI ./ n.e n,..n.:.oq �3I. �ASCA.l.Y / A ■ 9 -- P, 1 / ■ 7 1 1 T R YM --■-- A` R 9,?.... r 94, .16, •WNW/.e f 0 4C. A SITE PLAN 1 SDR 1 999-00025 EXHIBIT MAP N ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING (map is not to scale) im __M_ j CITY of TIGARD ,• I . GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM , „ • SAND&JRG $j VICINITY MAP SDR 1 999-00025 �� ATIYE H ����`'rr �,�- 0' , RPM BROTHERS - ^ SUBJECT 1.1.!' 47` n ass lk-t �� �- N SITE 111 RETAIL BUILDING .1•Pli ': wy Irtir 2. kii mu INI . N ME 1111111H3BON2ITA in 4 li Mi Liiil II i o FIN imm; _ NI MN \lea 1 w I 1 IN 1-. Z mini - CARDINAL LN , NI ' ■ 1,,,, 0 400 800 Feet I=,.=,=, :,111 ■ii ..... _ 1'°741 feet _ _ :111 .411. u. i li Ir..!: 111 _sliu w. $ City of Tigard ```1111 ,•,•••••• =� CRAKE LN Information on this map is for general location only and 1111,, � ,'.E_ should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd .allum. _I II` Tigard OR 97223 ` (503)839171 �. httplAv■w.ci.tigard.or.us Community Development Plot date: Nov 24, 1999;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR David Atiyeh 800 SW Washington Street "EXHIBIT B" Portland, OR 97205 (FULL DECISION NOTIFICATION LIST) Paul Schatz 6600 SW Bonita Road SDR t 999-00025 Tigard, OR 97224 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING Fred Paintner Ankrom Moisan Associates 6720 SW Macadam, Suite 100 Portland, OR 97219 Gevurtz Family Limited Partnership 1918 Indian Trail Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager City of Lake Oswego, Community Development Dept. 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OFTIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community SLUE OF OREGON ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Patricia L.Lunsforrd 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: SDR1999-00025/ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) El City of Tigard Planning Director NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) • City of Tigard Planning Director NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: / AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing) City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Council NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearings) City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Council NOTICE OF: (I ype,rsina 01 Nonce) FOR: Zi I (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing,if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICELSI of which is attached, marked ibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit'B" on the 24th day of November, '99, and deposited in the United States Mail on the 24th day of November, 1999, po tage pre.;rd. l,, (P- •- t 'rears: oti • �f Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the /0 day of �ur� , .20 OFFICIAL SEAL �CA,�ZQ DIANE M JELDERKS MAR PUBLIC OF DREGUN / ^ NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON ' COMMISSION NO.326578 My Commission Expires: / `y �� MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT.07,2003 EXHIBIT A NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENI .DER,VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW T CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community 500-FOOT PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE: November 24, 1999 FILE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 1999-00025 FILE NAME: ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL BUILDING PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. ZONE: I-P; Industrial Park. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100/6600 SW Bonita Road. Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. 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 DECEMBER 8, 1999. All comments should be directed to Julia Powell Haiduk, 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 a relevant approval criteria with s zient 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." �1111iRa ........,. ....... /III111111"' m. H----, a VICINITY MAP I O -- � SDR1999-00025 �� ATIYEH ql*�a°,1 . ,.�,.-� \ BROTHERS ^ SUBJECT ,I�� ,• '► N SITE RETAIL IS ,O G BUILDING !it\ I ,,, , Li 1 , •_______ ar 12 is. 1- OE 1- i in ilIl w iI.Imo.. ■I Z •N 111 Igo o Rplaln 11 .. ` �� III, IIIIIIII♦.`��•. � , r_=e.—F." r"'A..IM n.1 _' 2—e... _\S•. it aW o r , _ __a �B�E��E�• 4 arvofTtgara Hernel.�-C 111 ������II 1111`4 IIIIII BEEEO.'iI�a■ ....b...rww.....+.......r-o... 13126111W MIMI Intill-11-1 111.0".MMIll % 'illr .p.i.cm arm poierstri ... • • • 2S112AA-00400 112AA-00500 EXHIBIT fl SPIEKER PROPERTIES LP SPI • .• PR TIES LP 4380 SW MACADAM AVE STE 100 4380,5 ADAM AVE STE 100 PORTLAND,OR 97201 RTLAND,OR • .11 2S112AA-00600 2S112AD-00100 .ER PRO'' 'TIES LP OBIE MEDIA CORP 4380 S •••• ADAM AVE STE 100 4211W 11TH PO' LAND,OR • .01 EUGENE,OR 97402 2S 112AD-00200 S 112AD-00300 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION S S JO- • E&MARIETTA D TRS 1700 FARNAM ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH " • /"' OMAHA, NE 68102 RORA,OR • 102 2S112AD-00301 2S 2AD-00400 SMETS JOHN E&MARIETTA D TRS SMET' 0 • &MARIETTA D TRS PO BOX 560 PO Be .: AURORA,OR 97002 •.•ORA,OR 9 •:• -112AD-00401 S112AD-00500 SO - RN P•' FIC TRANSPORTATION Re. RS MAC NEIRIY CO INC 1700 F:• • T 10TH FLOOR SOUTH 14600 ••. ND AVENUE •,.• •HA, NE 6816 ' •RD,OR • 2S112AD-00501 = 112AD-00600 ROGERS MACHINERY COMPANY UNION . TC' LIFE 14600 SW 72ND AVE INSU•• • E :•IPANY TIGARD,OR 97223 2S112AD-00700 2S112AD-00900 UNITED PIPE&SUPPLY CO INC HOME DEPOT USA INC 7600 SE JOHNSON CREEK BLVD 1700 MARKET ST#1510 PORTLAND,OR 97206 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 2S112AD-01100 David Atiyeh PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES 800 SW Washington 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI gton Street PORTLAND,OR 97224 Portland, OR 97205 Paul Schatz Gevurtz Family Limited Partnership 6600 SW Bonita Road 1918 Indian Trail Tigard OR 97224 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Fred Paintner Ankrom Moisan Associates 6720 SW Macadam, Suite 300 Portland, OR 97219 NOTE: PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION IS VALID FOR 3 MONTHS FROM THE DATE PRINTED ON THIS MAP. � \\ I CITY of TIGARD T. \\ GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM I NOTIFICATION �,ANDMARKLN AREA MAP (S00') — FOR: Tom Marantette , Atiyeh Bros., Inc. 2 511 2116 0 9 4 6 0 r_ \-14' u7 2S„266°95°° — RE: 2S 112AD, 00100 SUBJECT 2sn266ao590 SIT E BONITA RD Z -- 26069561 . ': , . A i 1 ,i 2012Ao00s I,''� 2s1126600560 2SmgoD0Y62sms,'-'t, ,26000600 (n 251 mi 2sn2141 0 1111211,000111111 • N A 0 200 400 600 Feel CARDINAL LN __ .__ —.......... 1"=440 feel ■ City of Tigard lsI Information on this map is for general location only and should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 - I ` / (503)639-4171 _ i I REDWOOD I N http:flwww.ci.tigard.or us Community Development Plot date:Aug 2, 1999;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR 2S112AA-00400 112AA-00500 SPIEKER PROPERTIES LP SPIER PROPERTIES LP 4380 SW MACADAM AVE STE 100 4380 SWh�ADAM AVE STE 100 PORTLAND, OR 97201 PORTLAND,OR X01 2S112AA-00600 2S112AD-00100 .ER PRR'- 'TIES LP OBIE MEDIA CORP 4380 S • ADAM AVE STE 100 4211 W 11TH POR(LAND,OR • .01 EUGENE,OR 97402 2S 112AD-00200 S 112AD-00300 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION S S JO E&MARIETTA D TRS 1700 FARNAM ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH P0,0 OMAHA, NE 68102 ,AURORA,OR 002 2S112AD-00301 2S 2AD-00400 SMETS JOHN E&MARIETTA D TRS SMET' 0 &MARIETTA D TRS PO BOX 560 PO B AURORA,OR 97002 ORA,OR 9 I:• 112AD-00401 ?S112AD-00500 J SO - RN P•" FIC TRANSPORTATION R•. RS MAC RY CO INC 1700 F;• • T 10TH FLOOR SOUTH 14600 ••4 ND AVENUE +11�HA, NE 681 b •RD,OR • - 2S112AD-00501112AD-00600 ROGERS MACHINERY COMPANY UNI� T LIFE 14600 SW 72ND AVE INSU E PANY TIGARD,OR 97223 e"' 2S112AD-00700 2S112AD-00900 UNITED PIPE&SUPPLY CO INC HOME DEPOT USA INC 7600 SE JOHNSON CREEK BLVD 1700 MARKET ST#1510 PORTLAND, OR 97206 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 2S112AD-01100 PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PORTLAND,OR 97224 4 JUJL-29-99 02 :57 PM ATIYEH BROS. INC. 503 231 3680 P. 01 FAX LEAD SHEET Al IYF..I 113I2OS., INC. I'I IONI (!,U 3) • 3/1 fi'1S)!; 1 /\X (.';():1) :3I :1(1r10 14A I I' 7/029/5' 9 n l 1 N A-77-`-I1 ( / ) / (;()MI'ANY C17 d '77<v/tr -D a &di °� Ov IAA • FROM .TO '' /J /5 (;OMF'A1jY /IT/ye.,4 &gas /xJG 1, /0ial j `7'-r ONJ lt1F S LIST a fru GL�GG4 f206 /AO/ 1()f/,I Nil IMli1•Itr7I- I',\ :I" 11\h:1 III?lld(; 1FA') !;tII'I'I If NO I1.!; (.1R ;,J I.r;1111 INIr I IttJ';1 I(BFI!; Y TE'z Pffo"E iv"' F ► x . v i C3re. g c.,73/-3C.6 r� • 0 3 J216) '--. , i IF' YOU 13O N4.)T 121_r::FIV1: PI I I'/\(;l '; /V: lN1)I■11 111), I'I 1=11';I' rr)111/fir' 1 ^I=NI.)) 12 A l (503) ?14 5495 A I IY1-1 I I it l(;>>., IN 1 716 :;I= DIVISION Pc)IZ I I AND or? ' 1702 1 SUL-29-99 02 :58 PM RTIYEH BROS. INC. 503 231 3680 P. 02 >>. Portland Cleaning(aclllty 1576 SE Division Portland,Oregon 97202 PM) Sa95 rax(503)231-36180 July 29,1999 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Attention: Patty Dear Patty: Please send to us the appropriate list of property owners within 500 feet of the property described on the attached documents, We understand that there is a fee of S11.00 for the list and$4.00 for the list printed twice on labels. Please send an invoice with the list and labels. A legal description as well as a 1967 survey map is attached. Let us know if you have any questions regarding our rcqur;st. Thanking you, we are; ATIYF.H BROS., INC. iVette:244AA Thomas J. arantette 1'0111and R+•lail Slorc Tigard Retail Store Eugene Cleaning E,acility t+lhl',1'V Washington Stmt N?75 SW Mall Blvd. 563 Cast 13th rrl I.or<t,Oregon 972(11 Portland.Oregon 97223 For 'rrc,Oregon 97401 e-41111,;)‘'1125 (51)13)(,j9-66,1 (;;if)1.17.1671; 4 JUL-29-99 02 :58 PM RTTYEH BROS. INC. 503 231 3680 P. 03 JUL-09 19 11:96 From:NStS PO,,. A0 503t2aa3zc T•I11 P 09/10 16•Of7 ' Order NO 204753 , ' ' L>gA7*L DROCUP?SOiI That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Tigard, County of washington anA State of Oregon. being all t;1at portion of I,ots 3 and 4 or BONITA GARDENS as shown on that certain map tiled for r'?Cord on November 7, 1911 in Plat Book 5, at Page 11, Records of said county, described as follows; Commencing at. the Northwest corner of said Lot 4J thence East along the North line or said Lot 4 a distance of 276 feet to the true point of beginning of the parcel of land to be described: thence East along the North line of Iota 4 and 3 a distance of 516 feet to the Northeast corner of said Lot 31 thence South along the East line of last said lee 473 teat to the Southeast corner thereof, thence West along the South lines of Said Iota 3 and 4 a dicta:ice of 516 feet; thence North parallel with said East line 473 feet to the true point o:: beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the East 75.1 feet of said Lot 3. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM the North 37 .5 feet of said Lot 3 as previously conveyed for road purposes. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of the above described parcel of land included within the land described as Parcels 1 and 3 in Final Judgment in Case No. 33547, entitled State of Oregon, by and through its State Highway Commio4ton v. Southern Pacific Transportation Company, et al, recorded April 3, 1975. in Book 1017 at Pages 124-132 Inclusive, Records oi: Washington County. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM thous portions conveyed to Smote machinery Company, by Doed 79023060, recorded June 14, :.919 and by Dead 79031010, recorded August 3. 1979. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of said property lying below a depth of 500 feet measured vertically from the contour of the surface thereof, as reserved in Deed from Southern Pacific Transportation Company to Gevurtz Furniture Company, recorded June 17, 1975. Book 1028, Page 719, Washington County Deed Records. JUL-29-99 02 :59 PM RTTYEN BROS. INC. 503 231 3680 P. 04 JUL-03-99 11:88 From:MGRS Pon._.,SID 603UI03h 1-131 P.10/10 Job-831 ' ' IINGTON COUNTY OREGON SCALE jlOO' ' 11; la . f ..L J •44.0 BONITA T ROAD 110.�M AHGFN CR CM 1 YlfTIAt. a p rCIMT ICAST 00' I.r► TO PUII.IO la1s/Pa) too f �� .E 3rs Ac. N Nti2etS� l I i 401 ¢fT Mr vi�rt I�AI ILO .61.6/AC. 200./ 1 401-M1 :sec: �C. .AIAC. \ I - d I 200-S41 �\ r I I. Z 4 x viw 12 la ! pf 1 9 w ./4.i1 I C " el,. I— r a 400-M1 5 a 11 X law S C, I I Ci7 r %....- 114‘ ariZso I 1 1 N. E I-- ' f I 3va b9f •f' �w `.• t 04 II i •;1-1 ii g 1foo J .On AC. I m o $200 S0I 900 1 s zi a /I.f44C. , ` _II 1200 Sal • m[ ,Ei C r CHICAG • 1.—t Dial*lot your aid In C O..N.on your Law with reference ;. ...,ts and crier parcels, } Ni. e tv" - :•`s ow is haliav01 to N a :nt Coma,-ny assumes �> -- • •ay tot any less occurring zY V �s . .on of reliance :hereon." "act111 tie. ' 1 .r.ip Tr1l .r mow• Q ® ` T sac,t,.t; a csar�«ICAO „....... 23 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TYPE II APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 GENERAL INFORMATION PRE-APP. HELD WITH: k /61-2-- DATE OF PRE-APP.: I ( /24/ 9e Property Address/Location(s): 66,66 I—Sr FOR STAFF USE ONLY /� 5.91 /c -v 3 AD Tax Map & Tax Lot#(s): �: 51 12- - 00 (0 Case No.(s): CDR 199q- 0007-5 Other Case No.(s): Site Size: 3 6( ) �8 5 F, , 8 3 Pst,, Receipt No.:9' — ,,,.7/9//41 C7 l {� s Application Accepted By: Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)*: l . /1,u Date: /015-- 9 Address: L 'x> S_ Vv IAS}-!IP(X•i4 Phone: 223 —4125 City: fib V'.-I-LAt0 012-- Zip: -725:)5 Date Determin To C mplete: A 1/4? "'-- 3A So Applicant*: t...)ANI IP F [-1 Comp Plan/ one Designation: Address: 5...v Vf11-K-1ze-t ST Phone: "2Z3-1H 26- City: p0 l.4," ) C&. Zip: c/77 ���� CIT Area: � GLL7``44 * When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession Rev.11/26/98 is\curpinlmasterslsdra.doc 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 EY Application Form / t Owner's Signature/Written Authorization The owners of record of the subject property request Site Title Transfer Instrument or Deed Development Review approval to allow (please be specific): �y0oo .99. / / D---Site/Plot Plan ���� /7 �Vi�c!/� (^/l 9SL, ��✓ (#of copies based on pre-app check list) S.•!"e iirl v2✓P,/: 5- ErSite/Plot Plan (reduced 8'/2"x 11") [Applicant's Statement (#of copies based on pre-app check list) Construction Cost Estimate USA Sewer Use Information Card (Distributed/completed at application submittal) �`❑ ,, Sets of Pre-Addressed/Pre-Stamped/'^`°' egal Size Envelopes Li Filing Fee (Under$100,000) $ 800.00 ($100,000-$999,999)....$1,600.00 ($1 Million&Over) $1,780.00 (+$5($10,000) 1 List any VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE, SENSITIVE LANDS, OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: APPLICANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as described on the front of this application in the"Required Submittal Elements" box. (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request,for all types of Land Use Applications.) THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject property. • If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, may be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property. DATED this 14 - day of Dcitotro , 19 -1�1 -OCtA/‘ 014A;VA Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 • V 1&4/1L –c-l LT-TCct, vim, A OCT 13 1999 LAND PARTITION I�' � TYPE !I APPLICATION mot- �... CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223(503) 639-4171 FAX:(503) 684-7297 PRE-APP.HELD WITH: Julia Hajduk GENERAL INFORMATION DATE OF PRE-APP.: July 6. 1999 Property Address/Location(s): 6600 SW Bonita Road FOR STAFF USE ONLY Tigard, OR 97224 Tax Map&Tax Lot#(s): Map 25112AD Tax Lot 100 Case No.(s): Site Size: 163,263 square feet Other Case No.(s): Gevurtz Family Limited Receipt No.: q9-3/$/70/ 14- Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)*: Partnership Application Acc pted y: Address: 1913 Indian Trail Phone: (63(/7 WOL7 Date: /0 5- gq City: Lake Oswego, Oregon Zip: 97034 Applicant`: Paca Properties, LLC c/o Paul Schatz, III Date Determ'n To B Complete: II Address: 6600 SW Bonita Road Phone: 67O-6600 �A qg Comp Plan/Z ne Designation: City: Tigard, Oregon Zip: 97224 When the owner and the applicant are different people, the CIT Area: / Act applicant must'be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession Recording Date and Number: with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner with written authorization. The owner(s) must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written Rev11rz6/98 i:lcurpinUnastersVandpart.doc authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY The owners of record of the subject property request permission to REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS allow a Land Partition to: 1 Application Elements Submitted: divide 3.7 acres into two (2) (total area) (#of parcels) ❑ Application Form containing 36,163 sq. f t. and 127.100 sq. f t. ❑ Owner's Signature/Written Authorization (sq. ft. or acres) (sq. ft. or acres) ❑ Title Transfer Instrument or Deed See attached summary. ❑ Site/Plot Plan (provide any additional information here) (if of copies based on pre-app check list) ❑ Site/Plot Plan (reduced 877"x 11-) ❑ Applicant's Statement (#of copies based on pre-app check list) ❑ 2 Sets of Pre-Addressed/Pre-Stamped Legal Size Envelopes ❑ Filing Fee $780.00 1 • List any VARIANCE OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: APPLICANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as described on the front of this application in the "Required Submittal Elements" box. (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request,for all types of Land Use Applications.) . THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject property. • If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, may be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property. DATED this day of September , 1 9 99 PACA PROPERTIES, LLC (purchaser of site) By /s/ Paul Schatz, III Owner's Signature Paul Schatz, III, Owner's Signature Manager Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 411. CITY OF TIGARD Community Deve(.npment Shaping A Better Community LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION 120 DAYS = 3/20/2000 FILE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 1999-00025 FILE TITLE: ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL OFFICE APPLICANT: David Atiyeh ARCHITECT: Fred Paintner 800 SW Washington Street Ankrom Moisan Associates Portland, OR 97205 6720 SW Macadam, Suite 100 Portland, OR 97219 PHONE/FAX: (503) 223-4125 (503) 245-7100 OWNER: Paul Schatz OWNER: Gevurtz Family Limited Partnership 6600 SW Bonita Road 1918 Indian Trail Tigard, OR 97224 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 REQUEST: The applicant has requested approval of a Type II Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building with associated site improvements. The use will be warehouse and sales. LOCATION: The proposed project site is south of SW Bonita Road and east of SW Sequoia Parkway. There is a partition application in the process to separate the subject site from WCTM 2S112AD, Tax Lot 00100/6600 SW Bonita Road. Until that partition is final, the property is still part of that tax lot. ZONE: I-P; Industrial Park. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, CRITERIA: 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. CIT AREA: South CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request DECISION MAKING BODY: COMMENTS SENT: November 241999 DUE: December 8,1999 © STAFF DECISION DATE OF DECISION: DECEMBER 30,1999 ❑ 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 © NARRATIVE p TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY p ARCHITECTURAL PLAN Q SITE PLAN p LANDSCAPE PLAN GEO-TECH REPORT ARBORIST REPORT WETLAND DETERMINATION & DELINEATION p ENGINEERING CALCULATION & PLANS STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner (503) 639-4171 Ext. 407 SDR1999-00025 ATIYEH BROTHERS RETAIL OFFICE LAND USE PROPOSAL PUBLIC FACILITY PLANCIILt,KLIST Projeu:ATh eA P.P--o5 . tu�NC-Z FOR Date: l s l�cN LAND USE APPLICATION SUBMITTALS 1 COMPLETE 1!i/ I 'L I T. G DING Existing and proposed contours shown? [a" Are adjacent parcels impacted by proposed grading? ❑ Yes allo EK Adjacent parcel grades shown? T: ET ISSUES IO .'� Right-of-way clearly shown? Centerline of street clearly shown? Name of street(s) shown? no Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown? [l].\a Profiles of proposed streets ❑,„\. Future Streets Plan provided? (subdivisions and some partitions) ❑ profiles ❑ topo shown on adjacent property? L3 ❑ Traffic study required/submitted? DV Do proposed street grades comply with City standards? ❑ Check widths proposed on public streets pp- Are private streets proposed? ❑ under 6 lot minimum? ❑ commercial driveway entrance required. ❑ width appropriate? ❑Other: SANITARY SEWER ISSUES 13-: Existing/proposed lines? [r \i r Stubs to adjacent parcels required? WATER ISSUES ❑ Existing/proposed lines? ❑ Existing/proposed fire hydrants? STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES EY Existing/proposed lines? • Preliminary sizing calculation of water quality provided? [� Water quality facility shown on plan? ❑ does area provided match calculations for size requirement? °' Stubs to adjacent properties required? ❑' Water quality and/or detention shown outside of any wetland buffer? i�\eng\bnanr\masters\public facility plan checklist doc November 10, 1999 CITY OF TIGARD David Atiyeh OREGON 800 SW Washington Street Portland, OR 97205 RE: Atiyeh Brothers Building/SDR 1999-00025 Incompleteness letter Dear Mr. Atiyeh: The City of Tigard received your application submittal for Site Development Review to construct a 14,000 square foot building on the Paul Schatz site. After a preliminary review of the submittal items, Staff has determined that the following information or items are necessary before the application can be deemed complete and scheduled for review: • Provide a list of the property owners within 500 feet that was used for the envelopes you provided. The City needs a copy of the list used to provide addresses for the envelopes you submitted in the event that additional notices are required. In addition, the list is used in our affidavit of mailing. If the City generated your list for you, please just submit a copy of that list. If the City did not generate the list for you, we will need verification that the labels for the envelopes provided were generated based on the 500-foot notice area requirement. We will also need a copy of the list in 1" x 4" (20 names/address per sheet, 2 colums/10 per column) label format so that we can send out additional notices if needed. • Provide clarification on the landscape percentages. The landscape plan shows landscaping and parking "off-site" on the area that will be part of the Paul Schatz site. While parking may be shared via a joint parking agreement, the landscaping may not. If this landscaping is included in your landscape percentages, you will need to revise the plan or modify the proposed partition application. The reason for this is that we can not review this project as a whole development site without limiting the amount of retail allowed (because Schatz is considered non-conforming already). • Please provide a more detailed explanation on how you are meeting the landscaping exception standards. • Provide a letter from Paul Schatz authorizing David Atiyeh to submit this application. • Submit a existing conditionsNicinity map that shows the existing access drive out to Sequoia Parkway. This plan must show existing structures, park.nj. landscaping, pavement width, etc. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 -.4- • • Please provide information on the number of parking spaces that are existing on the Paul Schatz site and will be constructed as part of this development. If the total number of parking spaces taking access off of the existing drive is greater than 100, a second access is needed or the width must be increased to 50 feet. Alternatively, you could reduce the parking so that there is no more than 100 parking spaces taking access off of the access drive. Once the information listed above has been submitted, Staff can deem the application complete and schedule it for review. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your project, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171 x407. Sincerely, Julia Powell Haj uk Associate Planner I:curpin\julia\sdr\sdr99-25acc.doc c: Fred Paintner, 6720 SW Macadam, Suite 100, Portland, OR 97219 SDR 1999-00025 Land use file Re: SDR1999-00025 Incompleteness Review Page 2 of 2 ANKROM MOISAN ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTS November 15, 1999 Ms. Julia Powell Hajduk City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Atiyeh Brothers Building/SDR 1999-00025 Below is a list of responses to your letter dated November 10, 1999. 1. Property owners' list and envelopes provided to the City of Tigard. 2. The landscaping provided for our site is 7,310 s.f. or 20.2%of the site. The landscaping that we are showing on the Paul Schatz site is an upgrade to non-existing landscaping. We did not figure this into our totals. 3. The zoning code addresses landscaping upgrade along the perimeter of the site. Since our property line is to the south of the north(Paul Schatz)property line,we have opted to enhance the Paul Schatz landscape along the north property to meet the reduction in our site landscaping requirements. If you're not aware,the existing landscaping at the Paul Schatz site along the north property line is non-existing and non-maintained. Since our site does not adjoin the north property line, we are adding 3"diameter street trees, landscaping and screening 10 ft. between parking lot and street property line. In addition,we will have an ongoing maintenance program to ensure appropriate irrigation and maintenance of all landscape areas. This is our best attempt to comply with the zoning requirements and enhance the overall project appearance. kr Letter from Paul Schatz provided to City of Tigard. 5. Vicinity map enclosed. 6. The balance of the Paul Schatz site is 127,100 s.f. The remaining landscape area is 56,448 s.f.,or 44%of the site. There are(50)existing parking spaces located on the site. If you have any questions about our responses, please contact me. Sincerely, ANKROM MOISAN ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTS A. Paintner FAP/tl K:\ATIYEMCITYOFTIGARD3 6720 S.W.Macadam,Suite ioo,Portland,Oregon 97219,503/245-7100,FAX 503/245-7710 Principals:Stewart Ankrom,Thomas Moisan,David Vonada,Lorraine Kellow,Jeff Hamilton,Karen Bowery,Chris Dalengas,Jeff Los,Phil Marquis AO- 44 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON November 22, 1999 David Atiyeh 800 SW Washington Street Portland, OR 97205 RE: Atiyeh Brothers Building/SDR1999-00025 Completeness Check Dear Mr. Atiyeh: The City of Tigard received the additional submittal materials requested in our 11-10-99 incompleteness letter. This letter is to inform you that your application has been deemed complete and has been scheduled for review. Staff has set a target decision date for December 30, 1999. Please note that this is a target date only and that the actual decision may be rendered before or after that date. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your project, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171, extension 407. Sincerely, Julia Powell Hajduk Associate Planner I:curpin\julia\sdr\sdr99-25acc2.doc c: Fred Paintner, 6720 SW Macadam, Suite 100, Portland, OR 97219 SDR 1999-00025 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 7-22-1999 12:27PM FROM `UL SC:HA I L F UkN i i U<< SU�t�s�ubs� Gevurtz Family Limited Partnership 1918 Indian Trail Lake Oswego,OR 97034 15 July 1999 To Whom it may Concern: Paca Properties,LLC has exercised it's option to purchase our property at 6600 SW.Bonita road and we expect the closing to take place on or before 1 November 1999. Very truly yours, Gevurtz Family Limited P. •ership 4100 (-/—X Burton Gevurtz, -neral Partner -.... ,. - . „. • -•.-, ...,::::1...*•?77;7 7, "%...,i;•_•,.•;,... - • •..• •, •• 3* '....:.,..::;*.:,,..1.:...:::';•.1. i....!:s...-- . • - . • ' %100 . , ' • • ft, . • ' i ; -. a • . • . . 1, . ':-... .... .- • . P 1 •••• . 6 . • • . . 's . • . . . .. , . . . • . PORN OW FPI-IMPIIIAITI DM-11-111Mndrel.IOW illindhAlog 64•401. summelain Imo NikArkig 444 ..- .. .•- _. _ _ ell . ,./ WALL4J(TT DIXD.. .15TATI:7TORT TORII • 5 et40,ViDUAL GRANTOR • ACIRTOX..I.4-.CZKYVET2 . 4Z4 _______,._ ••••• ........,..., - War ors and wirtanti to....-g1METLXIMIti...&PALTTZ-17141=BINTIEE--11a-PrienAlillatal-----4 . . _.___..........,_....___........_......._, Omni's,ths tallowind stescrtbad mai property troo of mousnisranose :_ .: . . •xcopit es ep•cifloaly pat forth twain iituated hi—.--.NAJILUDat.0.11---...Courlt7,079.00no 40-Wfft . . • Boa attached Exhibit A . . . . • .'-t-::::. isp orAce moon:vat?.ceettINtrt bettnePncei ON ttvrtof itbe rh.property ii Iivir from orcutribrerzte tiroopt . • TM true considaration for this conveyance la 0 -0- ,. (Nara comply with the ryquit•twita of ORS 1100) Valite...other,..than...zoney .. — — . .., ........_......... ". .,...... ........— .,.-. - - . .. - - - - — Dated!hie-lath-day of.,...aCtahar ,19 .95 TM INSTRUMENT WU MX ALLOW USE OF NE PROPERTY DESCRIBED;ThtS - . ••••••••• INSTPUNIENT s VIOLXION APPLICIZ_E LAND USE L a REOWCIONS. " • ; RECOPZ SIGNING OR PixtrinG THIS INSTRUMENT THE PERSON ACOUSKRO FEE —....-.-...-...---................................-......---..................., . PILE 1,D TI•E pcupERre S'IOLL0 CHECK tYtTH tI4 CTY OR COUPGY -:. :- . PLANNING DERIATUENT ID VERIFY APPROVED USES ANS)0 MEMO*#t( LIMITS ON LialeSUTTS MAW FO,RIC(3 OR FOREST PRACTnEs AS DEfleE0 PI ORS MUM •• STATE OP OREGON,County of--..it4att1084ah- _.)is. This instrument was ecknowledied before Me 0,7----Oetober...10.-------•1355,---, . . •.1.....GEYURTZ......... -. ,r, ... %ME ry ft • ''' 'f'17.• KuiV1A N.U.LL 1 *Ps a: 14,:v-•774)..1; HcrixRY MBLIC-041V60+4 ';'. ..."..A• '. z.,,„ / z.„ ...„..,..., ...., dr jp... . „.„., . , 1 NI..." commrsimom r4o.ours e, N• siErAr71.1 f• • • . . F MY ONOCisioN toile* AN.14,10110 .; My commi • my o . . , w A.R.p.A r c r y D D f I Burton I. GeVtirt2 STATE OP OREGON, 1 1 • 6*iviiiiiiiiiry-...-Iais7...EVi7r-Flieii i hip . 6t-6.6--t-.W.--64i.t a Road •wrrg= courrtr of - . I oartify that the vrithin loons- RCA PSTIVE APORtitl.Ur . 22)51 PPP moirod for record on eh. t mow 011.0.44/14 WWI% 0.1 day of I, .... John U. Rosenfeld at--dela:Jr.____.14,,and recsarshd 14.6.4m.... • 1600 Pioneer i'cater in book/resi/rohnno No----on . reit . i OA s.w. FREh Avenue Pah or al 4 ocestentor s int Portiarvf, tif(— 91264:409g rn on t/rrticrofilmkeeaption No---, —...__.- MSC.&POW*.IMP Record of De•dit of mid County. a. e....e.rn•moom-••*bdw................,..,..........11 Witn ha .00 rnY rxl and seal of Iholl a gNonse k rotmsANA oil Noll stesoveros 044 b.w, Is Ow NahnNue smikhemou County all irad, . NR--CilAW10--.—.-- • — — III A SW ... __. -_ --.--------,------ , *AWL A-00/1111PU.rt. r By ■ ' -- . - ---- -' ; •. .....:wt.::•.:•-e....:•;•., ;:t-e .27.....-.e'r....--,.,; ';----,,,; . , ',,,,,,:,"::.... " '. , , -.........., .-„; ,„..,• „.„. .. 4;4 .• ..-. F,:.'•: ‘:•••.4,"::.....• - ..• .. - ' , ..• 1. ..• . • .'„':%:$4.•!•:.......0.:••.:,v.ttve4,4%,: •'.........p:Ir4-.M..I'vf. '-..;44:4tw.t.ti.-01;i0; '::::..,ve..-':-....1...7•:1:::...;::.•:d..6*-7-.::'If..J.-.:;...•-!..."7-,-....,•.:::-•".• ' ......7-....:%"' ' `.:ic"• '' 4. •••,..:41:.'!;:- != r.t.. efiSikot...!.:.. ii,r' ',:*7.-:2- -.; e.Ploti,""7.1r. ;L.: ;.., 1:::le':',v:=1..-:v ... L.4 .....• ..1'.1'••••.'''' :...6; .. W . 1".• 4.. • .' ...: '"•••••,IE • I,".......:::: 4...''',*5...7,hp::.s•,:'.i.::, ';`,'1'....7.-. .:Lvefajt, limu..?-7.-• ••-._%•;:.•JI..... ',..:,:,,I ' 6. 1 .6!. f'• • .. . . •••••66-. • ,*. . •...'. '':•-•• . • ...r*- ••. • -. .•...t.16... •4•;,......1 • •.";"II.. -5,. - -;%;.:":17.' ' '. ',/ 10.7,14:, ...: -. ...... . '. -..:•:' t• • -••• '. t • •-..,. •. "' -' ' .. - . 4.• .....* ...%.4 . t.P.t#—• . •:.• .. •*I.,:. • ''.. ... . '• .• .• ••,.. ••, •. - ...• • . • .. . • • --.- - - .- -.....,- , ,-....., ,.,-.a. „--.- .. . ,. . .- -„, , - . , A lA . , EXGIEIT A . TO WALP)JCTY DEE) DATED 10/10/95 ELTKL"LN 73ZRTON I. ormtTZ, Q.AXV01. AND ORVURTZ ?AXILY LIKITED PAITSKIINtlg AN ORSOON LIXITED PAATMLR5EIP, =ANT= That certain parcel of land situate in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon, being all that portion of Lots 3 and 4 of BONITA GARDENS as shown on that certain map filed for record on November 7, 1911 in Plat Book 5, at page 11, Records of said County, described as tollowa : Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Lot 4r thence East along the North line of said Lot 4, a distance of 276 feet to the true point of beginning of the parcel of land to be described thence East along the North line of Lots 4 and 3, a distance of 516 feet to the Northeast corner of said Lot 31 thence South along the Rest line of last said lot, 473 feet to the Southeast corner thereon thence West along the South line of said Lots 3 and 4, a distance of 516 feet, thence North parallel with said East line, 473 feet to the true point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the East 71 .1 feet of said Lot 3 . ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM the North 37 .5 feet of said Lot 3 as previously conveyed for road purposes. ALSO EXCEPTING, THEREFR"M that portion o the above described parcel of land included within the land described as Parcels I and III in Final Judgment in Case No. 33547, entitled State of Oregon, by and through its State Highway Commission v. Southern Pacific Transpor- tation Company, et al, recorded April 3, 1975 in Book 1017 at pages 124-132 inclusive, Records of Washington County. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM those portions conveyed to Smets Machinery Company, by deed 79023060, recorded June 14, 1979 and by deed 79031010, recorded August 3 , 1979 . lettwiyown 10. 9ns 00:s2rIli) 3 __. , . ..... . .... ....:.. w� i ,. .•.4„.„..s,,,,,,t!„.....,:„...,..,.....,....,. :::,..„:,„.. .. ...„..„...„...„,,...„.....„.......• : ........ . •..... . . ....... .. .., ... ... .... . .. .. . . . .. • enn FM t~•N`I`)T T T, c•e G, •els• T - e•c :Rn lrT OR -TT ,f-f, Yahoo, Maps and Driving Dirt Lions Page 1 of 1 TiloO MAPS fit Yahoo! -Maps-Yellow Pages -Help Yahoo! Travel - book airline tickets, hotel rooms, cruises, rental cars Yahoo! Maps New Location 6600 SW Bonita Road,Tigard, OR 97224 _ ,- nyfsT;_ •�`-: R�e�'. _ L _ 1 — 4 I ...'L.,-.....74- t- , — '_- _of 4coom. ' -.� - -�f I ti' � _ r_'ti^I ! n -- .Y ... . �1'800ft' 't-+SFr t,.y1e .'rte ;^ -i_ fIC-'- v o 1 I 1 }-, , ' .��• f- '`♦ 'i ■.,` 'J !r f; 1 1""I-17i—W) t .I 1 ry• h"-'/ ` ` S�i `°5 .-_fit : -' , I ..I { •--, ti--., r'21::r,- ,-c\--, li`��' SW37arns ~'+ .,_ ,,^;.' rwe tIdkCi + , i 1 , -. �`� ,`;y 16a-k. E ` SWIJr,St . •�'•'yl I• .. ', 1 ...., < --_ f.3 .-- __.,,, s ,, SSslgewg II ( �Parkvie Dr `•,(� t--. .J o-- t ..r}•-. .. i is 1 �Wi f1-n, r '_•— r1 ----, t. I "1 I ; ' , II I ;Jrn,n-1 =.::;,. `:),7,--- DAU$1`II.41N -- 1_----r ",_f r ∎' 1 1l-3— ` vs. in ..,j`'�' .,y ' Oakridge Rd—, — ` :i D:1- A , 1 lfr--L-i-----r t--v , t --,/ •,k A -d 1 1 .11 .,-"Vb-- .".. "... iv''', l _;-r' .-5. > DLurbta q-Hd; Jt., i,=" _-,;oBryant ., r- I `- `:_'bri- 4'o ' ?�. i-Cti r 1 l ' �c°°k - .. ,.''a 1:--WET&yr 1 :..x'-- . ^l' 1 , _-- 11 1C.- —/'-1f,•' �1-^—T�SL e''''''-?' `"'1- I 1 --� 'n -R.wo d -14r $� it.. i �. �- r, 11O : , i 1 1)__,± j' i In- .._• ©1997GeoSyslemsGbbaICorp.;©11)97NavTech , . --1-;-e. • f - Need Help?See the FAQ Or report map problems. Copyright O 1994-1999 Yahoo!Inc.All Rights Reserved. N . RECEIVED PLANNING OCT 2 5 1999 October 22, 1999 CITY OF 7IGARD Ms. Julia Hajduk Associate Planner cm; City of Tigard a 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 cjip Dear Ms. Hajduk We understand that Atiyeh Bros., Inc. submitted to you an application for site development review on October 15, 1999. The application for site development review pertains to a proposed new building on the same property for which PACA Properties, LLC has recently submitted an application to partition certain property at 6600 SW Bonita Road. We acknowledge and give permission to Aityeh Bros., Inc. to submit the application for site development review to the City of Tigard. Thank you. Very truly yours, PACA Properties, LLC 4 )14Ce3L-- Paul Schatz III Manager DREXEL HERITAGE HOME INSPIRATIONS 6600 SW Bonita Rd.• Tigard, OR 97224 • (503) 620-6600 ANKROM MOISAN ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTS City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd Tigard,Oregon 97223 Re: Atiyeh Brothers Building 6600 S.W. Bonita Estimated construction costs for a 14,000 s.f. building and associated site work is approximately $750,000. Sincerely, ANKROM MOISAN ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTS ed A. Paintner FAP/tl K:ATIYEI-I\CITYOF IGARD2 672o s.w. Macadam,Suite ioo, Portland, Oregon 97219,503/245-710o, FAx 503/245-7710 Principals:Stewart Ankrom,Thomas Moisan,David Vonada,Lorraine Kellow,Jeff Hamilton,Karen Bowery,Chris Dalengas,Jeff Los,Phil Marquis NOV-15-99 12 :06 PM ATIYEN EROS. INC. 503 231 36130 P. 01 FAX LEAD SHEET ATIYEH BROS., INC. I IOW, (503) 234-5495 l'AX (5(Y3) 231-3060 JI 7/5. AT IN _ Og4,/ . 1-1140 CoMPANY Cilre nc--__ -r-141"(2-17 rnom COMPANY 61-P/j6/7:.. SUBJEC t 1404 One i-efai, L4.57- 1 01 Al NUMIi171 or PA(;175 IN(:1 If MAU 1 FAl) No IFS OR ;.;PECIAl_ INS T MR:11(MS teih`U P.gqv OF& _ 6_LA5 7 0,121AP 4kef.46 49e-- (.1.>1.1- --r-f .L...5 ....fro.cer)#.471D,_ 43 .IT_IS ...W0eie- ,t) ,EDS /9A2.L4-. . . . . ....__. (1 - ....----.. . . _ ....___ IF YOU 1)0 NO 1 krcElvt: ALL 1"A(;1:7, AS INI H l'ASF CON I AC1 SFNUE12 AT (503) 234-5195 ATlYlI UROS., 1510 SE DIVISION Pon I LAND QI' 97202 NOTE: PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION IS VALID FOR 3 MONTHS FROM THE DATE PRINTED ON THIS MAP. N . CITY :t T I G A R D ° _ - • - c'nc•w•wsc MIsayA''OI s-sea. a. NOTIFICATION • LANDMARK LN_ AREA MAP :. (S00') FOR: Tom Marantette ill �_ __ T _.-_—M p to � -• Atiyeh Bros., Inc. �� o ,q -. I I N '^ : I I M 1111111111111111111 - RE: ZS I I SAD 40140 n - r SUBJECT mmwns — — SITE BONITA NO ,. \``; _-4.t. - _ �-T ! I - r onluuln . •�. tai. p -- '. . . CC W - ■ • IJi • N . E O. _ - m I N — -.._ _.. ....... ....23C �..1 .■ al S:•: re o CARDINAL LN - .. - - -- -... ` .446 lew N • Alk - -- . . . . • III _ - s , - . City of Tigard ~ ' Cu - '- - - lefana•ioe en tits slap•1.w prwal nulbr:--t and 5 'howl tat wreva WW1 VW Da,roFS.rt Snug 9lt.a.'. • 13125 SW-bl Sm. iiparS OP 57273 _ - - I Community Deb,, Plot date Aug 2, 1999,&1m, GIC1 -.AFR NOV-15-99 12 :07 PM AT'YEN BROS. INC. 503 231 3680 P. 03 2S112AA-00400 •-00 -� SPIEKER PROPERTIES LP SPIEKE: ' RTIES LP 4380 SW MACADAM AVE STE 100 43:s MACADAM AVE STE 100 sm,?ORTLAND,OR 97201 •RTLAND,OR 97201 2 12AA-0060 2S112AD-00100 SHE PERTIES LP OBIE MEDIA CORP 4380 MAC VE STE 100 4211 W 11TH TLAND,OR 97201 LUGENE,OR 97402 25112A0-00200 2 12AD-00 0 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION SMET N E&MARIETTA D TRS 1700 FARNAM ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH P X 5 OMAHA,NE 68102 u ORA,OR 97002 25112AD-00301 2S112AD-0 0 SMETS JOHN E 8 MARIETTA D TRS SME N E&MARIETTA D TRS PO BOX 560 Pc X 560 AURORA,OR 97002 URORA,OR 97002 2 112A0-00401 2S112AD-00500 SO R CIFIC TRANSPORTATION R M INERY CO INC 1700 F T 10TH FLOOR SOUTH 14600 ' VENUE O HA,NE 88102 T D,OH 97223 2S112AD-00501 2S112AD-46.10 ROGERS MACHINERY COMPANY U ' NTRAL LIFE 14600 SW 72ND AVE I .• •- COMPANY TIGARD,OR 97223 2S112A13•00700 2S112AD-00900 UNITED PIPE&SUPPLY CO INC HOME DEPOT USA INC 7600 SE JOHNSON CREEK BLVD 1700 MARKET ST#1510 PORTLAND, OR 97206 PHILADELPHIA,PA 19103 2S112AD-01100 PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES 15350 SW SEOUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PO1 PLAN°,OR 91224 Precision infarct ict -- 16640 SW 72nd Avenue Portland,OR 97224-7756 USA Phone:(503) -7131 Fax:(503)620-7131 www.precisionint.com August 24, 1999 Attn: Julia Hajduk City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Neighborhood Meeting Atiyeh Bros./Schatz Property Dear Ms. Hajduk: We have noted the proposed project to partition property at 6600 SW Bonita Road for a retail/corporate office/warehouse facility. While I am not able to attend the neighborhood meeting on August 30, I have known the Atiyeh Bros. Rug and Carpet business over many years. Founded in 1900, they are a community-minded, locally owned company which would be an attractive addition to this Tigard business area. As one of the area's leading employers, we hope their development request will be favorably considered. Yours very truly, Victor G. Petroff General Manager A tqco International LTD Company • , RECEIVED PLANNING OCT 2 5 1999 CITY OF TIGARD September 27, 1999 Mrs. Marietta Smets PO Box 560 Aurora, OR 97002 Dear Mrs. Smets: It was reported to us by our architect that you had called to inquire about the neighborhood meeting that we held on August 30, 1999, regarding our proposed development. We are sorry that you could not attend the meeting, as we look forward to meeting you and Mr. Smets. We have enclosed the minutes of that meeting as you requested. We anticipate many years of working together as neighbors and we hope that you will always feel comfortable to call us if you have questions or concerns. Thanking you for your interest, we are, ATIYEH BROS., INC. Thomas J. Marantette . t MINUTES NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING CITY OF TIGARD BUILDING AUGUST 30, 1999 6:30 PM A neighborhood meeting was held at the City of Tigard Building on August 30, 1999,to discuss the proposed building development of Atiyeh Bros., Inc. on the partitioned property at 6600 SW Bonita Rd. Notices, as required by the City of Tigard, had been sent to eight neighbors whose property is located within 250 ft. of the project. In addition notices were sent to the two members of the Neighborhood Committee as required. Two signs were posted in public view adjacent to the project area. Present at the meeting were Fred Paintner of Ankrom Moisan Associated Architects and Tom Marantette of Atiyeh Bros., Inc. There were no other persons at the meeting. Fred Paintner reported that the only call he had received regarding the project was on the afternoon of August 30, 1999 from Mary Smets, representing the property adjacent to 6600 SW Bonita Rd. She asked about the project and Fred described to her what was proposed. She told Fred that they were unable to attend the meeting,but indicated a positive response to the proposal as described by Fred, and asked that minutes of the meeting be sent to her. The only other neighborhood response was in the form of a letter from Victor G. Petroff of Precision Interconnect, indicating his favorable consideration for the project. The letter is attached to these minutes. There being no additional business to be considered,the meeting was adjourned at 7:00 PM. Sincerely Submitted, ANKROM MOISAN ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTS aintner 08/24/99 13:09 $5036035019 PREC. INTERCONN. Z002/002 Precision Interconnect 6640 SW 72r.d Averpue 41111111111 • o rttano,OR 97224-7756 USA Fa Fax:(503)303)O-7131 Fax:(503)620-7131 www.procisionfni.corn August 24, 1999 Attn: Julia Hajduk City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Neighborhood Meeting Atiyeh Bros./Schatz Property Dear Ms. Hajduk: We have noted the proposed project to partition property at 6600 SW Bonita Road for a retail/corporate office/warehouse facility. While I am not able to attend the neighborhood meeting on August 30, I have known the Atiyeh Bros. Rug and Carpet business over many years. Founded in 1900, they are a community-minded, locally owned company which would be an attractive addition to this Tigard business area. As one of the area's leading employers, we hope their development request will be favorably considered. Yours very truly, ,%■/: 4.e___As Victor G. Petroff General Manager A t4CO Lttemetional LTD Company Neighborhood Meeting Sign up Sheet August 30, 1999 City of Tigard 6:30 PM Neighborhood Meeting Re: Atiyeh Bros., Inc development at 6600 SW Bonita Rd. Attendee Name Address Telephone 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, Thomas J. Marantette , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed Building Project affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) 6600 S. W. Bonita Road , and did on the 13th day of August 19 99 personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a building application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at corner of S. W. Bonita Road and S. W. Sequoia as well as a sign at northwest corner of subject property (state location you posted notice on property) S.•nature (Ii/he pr•sence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the l 3t day of au ,u,c 4. , 1999 OFFICIAL SEAL. NOTARY PUBLIC-ORLON /��('� COMMISSION NO.05175S V C3 ALYCOMMISSII N EXPiRES A 16,2000 OT• R PUBLIC OF OREG N y Commission Expires: L( I 1%42 100 (Applicant. please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) .SAME OF PROJECTOR PROPOSED NAME: ' f Kf-F-1 G ! ►.E u ;TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: 13tAtC.-E)1NCo COAK5T.loan 0 I Name of Applicant/Owner. RI/YE-0- /30-05. 106-• I !Address or General Location of Subject Property: '(&1O SW FON)TR rap. [Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot 4(s): h:Voq ntpatfsAma slersta ttpostmst • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, Thomas J. Marantette , being duly sworn, depose and say that on August 13 , 19 99, 1 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) 6600 S. W. Bonita Road 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 1020 S. E. 7th Portland, OR. 97214 with postage prepaid thereon. Ignature .. (1n 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 t-1t>, day of aut«c-� _, 19Cic) :� QUICK SEAL = AMER L*WAIN — ^��i' NOTARY PIJBUC-0OREGON • l��c 'sir 1 Co!at�csSION NU.051755 >, 1 4 CLCL 4. �+!�IrN+E�aPIRESAPRL16,2000 N 6 ARY PUBLIC OF OREG N ommission Expires: 4�1 10 o (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: ATIYF.fi 131P-OS .5 Pig- Pk -Al (TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Ru It-Di AJ1. COA 5TZUCT7OA) -- �Name of Applicant/Owner: ,417 YEN- !340._ 'Ile. - !Address or General Location of Subject Property: epepoO sc o goloI )l 12.D• - LSubject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): -_._ h:Vogm bamMna sterstattmaJrnst (SIGNS ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUS . IASE AT TI IE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES(,UUNTER AT TI IF PRICE OF$2.00 EACH.) NI ICE Developer to hold NEIGHBORHOOD concerning development of this. property . • • t , . Meeting Date Time Location AUGUST 30, 1999 6:30 PM 13125 SW HALL BLVD PROPOSED PROJECT: Partition property at 6600 SW Bonita Rd. to build a Retail / Corporate Office / Warehouse facility of approximately 13,000 square feet. For More Information Contact: . Developer Name: re. 'amtner Address: . . . , . Telephone: 245-7100 • August 13, 1999 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Building site for Atiyeh Bros., Inc. Dear Interested Party: Atiyeh Bros., Inc., the owner of the partitioned property at 6600 SW Bonita Rd. in Tigard, is proposing to build a 13,000 square foot building to serve as its Corporate office/retail/ warehouse facility. 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: August 30, 1999 at 6:30 PM City of Tigard Building 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 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 us at 245-7100 and speak to Fred Paintner. Sincerely, ANKROM MOISAN ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTS 21 E07BB00900 21 E07BB00902 Parker Furniture Inc. Columbia River Girl Scouts 10375 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy. P.O. Box 2427 Beaverton, OR 97005 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 21 E07BC01000 21E07BC05401 ERI-HC Inc. Sharff Blanche Pers. Rep. 900 N. Michigan, 18th Fl. P.O. Box 25039 Chicago, IL 60611 Portland, OR 97225 21 E07BC01100 21 E07BC05406 Kruse Villa LLC Sharff Family LLC 8235 SW Oleson Rd. #C 55 NW 95th Ave. Portland, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97229 21 E07BC01200 21 E07BC01300 Lockwood, Michael P. Gilchrist, Nona A. Trustee 2610 South Shore Blvd. 9100 SW Edgewood St. Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Tigard, OR 97223 21 E07BC01400 21 E07BC05404 Moser, Delores A. Trustee Home Bldr. Assn. Metro Portland 6424 Washington Ct. 15555 SW Bangy Rd. Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 2S 112AA-00400 2S 112AD-00100 Spieker Properties Lp. Gevurtz Family Lp. 4380 SW Macadam Ave., Ste. 100 1918 Indian Trl. Portland, Or 97201 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 2S 112AD-00200 2S 112AD-00401 Smets John E. & Marietta D. Trs. Southern Pacific Transportation P.O. Box 560 1700 Farnam St., 10th Fl. South Aurora, OR 97002 Omaha, NE 68102 2S 112AD-00501 2S 112AD-00900 Rogers Machinery Company HD Development of Maryland Inc. 14600 SW 72nd Ave. 2455 Paces Ferry Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 Atlanta, GA 30339 2S 112AD-00500 2S 112AD-00600 Union Central Life Ryder Truck Rental Inc. P.O. Box 888 P.O. Box 025719 Cincinnati, OH 45240 Miami, FL 33102 2S112AD-00700 2s112AD-01100 United Pipe & Supply Co., Inc. Pacific Realty Associates 7600 SE Johnson Creek Blvd. 15350 SW Sequoia Pkwy #300-WMI Portland, OR 97206 Portland, OR 97224 PROPOSAL SUMMARY Applicant Paca Properties, LLC (hereafter"Applicant") requests approval of a minor land partition in order to create two lots from a 163,268 square foot (3.7 acre) parcel located at 6600 SW Bonita Road (the "Subject Property"). The Subject Property is currently being leased to Paul Schatz Furniture Company, which company is owned by the same individuals that own the Applicant. The Subject Property is located in an Industrial Park zoning district. It has been improved with retail and warehouse space totaling approximately 40,000 square feet. Access to the Subject Property is from a frontage road off of Sequoia Parkway. The Applicant is purchasing the property from the owner, Gevurtz Family Limited Partnership, pursuant to an Option Agreement, which option has been irrevocably exercised and closing for the purchase must occur on or before November 1, 1999. As proposed, the Subject Property would be partitioned as follows: • Parcel 1 would comprise a 127,100 square-foot lot on the eastern half of the Subject Property, and would retain the existing buildings and improvements on Parcel 1. Access would be maintained from direct frontage onto the Sequoia Parkway frontage road, and from a portion of the northerly boundary of Parcel 2. • Parcel 2 would comprise a 36,168 square-foot lot in the westerly half of the Subject Property, with access to be provided by an easement granted by the Applicant. A separate application for site development review of the Parcel 2 site will be submitted at a later date. P://065/98193C4106 923 GILBERTSON ENGINEERING September 16, 1999 To whom it may concern: The following is intended to satisfy the "Applicant's Statement" requirement for the Type H application for land partition for the Gevurtz/Schatz property located at 6600 SW Bonita Road in Tigard. Relevant code chapters as suggested by Julia Hajduk have been addressed in this narrative. A brief Impact Study is addressed in the section of this narrative dealing with Code Chapter 18.420. 18.390: DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES The applicant has already had a pre-application conference for this Type II action. This narrative is intended to provide enough information about the relevant criteria for the proposed partition in sufficient detail for review and action by the City. Applicant will provide two sets of pre-stamped and pre-addressed envelopes for all owners of record. 18.420: LAND PARTITIONS The applicant is prepared to meet all conditions of this chapter, with no known exceptions. The public facilities(water, sewer, drain, street)which serve the existing property are sufficient to also serve the proposed parcel, assuming development of similar nature to the existing furniture store. The proposed parcel will have a 30'wide easement for access;that easement will be created with appropriate access and maintenance rights. The easement will be created either by the partition plat or by separate recorded instrument. 18.530: INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS The site is zoned I-P. We expect the proposed parcel to be developed according to one of the several allowed uses. Design review of that development will follow the partition process. There is no known difficulty in meeting the standards of Table 18.530.2 or other standards of this chapter. 18.705: ACCESS, EGRESS, AND CIRCULATION Although no particular project is being proposed, it is anticipated that future development will be of a similar nature to the existing. Since it is assumed that the current development satisfies this chapter,the future development will simply share the existing features for access, egress, and circulation. In particular, both future parcels will share a proposed 30' wide easement(minimum 24'width of paving)for access to the buildings and parking lots for the parcels. Future traffic circulation for the proposed parcel would be similar to the existing pattern, in which drivers drive to a parking space, then later leave by backing up, reversing direction, and exiting via the access route. 18.745: LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING 543 THIRD ST.,#C-3 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 (503)635-7590 FAX (503)635-3540 Calculations for the proposed Parcel 1 (corresponding to the existing building) indicate that the landscaping which will exist even after creating Parcel II (aka "Atiyeh")will occupy about 49,000 square feet of the proposed 127,100 square feet, or about 38%. In this zone, the requirement is for a minimum of 25% landscaping, so this requirement is met. Landscaping for future development of the proposed vacant parcel will be decided at Development Review. 18.765: OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS The existing building has about 23,000 sf being used for warehousing furniture and about 18,000 sf being used for retailing furniture. According to Table 18.765.2,the minimum parking requirements for the warehouse portion are 0.5 per 1,000 sf or 12 spaces. Considering the retail portion to be in the category of"bulk sales", its requirement is 1.0 space per 1,000 sf, or 18 spaces. Therefore, the total required number of spaces is 30. After creating a new parcel as shown on the accompanying map,there will still be about 60 spaces (average 8'wide)left for the existing building, so its requirement will be satisfied. Respectfully, Doug Gilbertson - SDR199! X)25 Ern ATIXEH S RETAIL BLDG. ■memm■ ANKROM MOISAN ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTS PROJECT NARRATIVE Atiyeh Brothers Building 6600 S.W. Bonita Road Chapter 18.130 Use Classifications We propose to build a 14,000 s.f. building in the I-P Zone (Industrial Park). Listed under industrial use types, we plan to use the building for wholesale, storage, and some distribution. In addition, in combination with, we will use 20%of the floor area for retail sales (see attached copy of the interpretation of Community Development Code from James Hendryx, Director of Community Development. — Chapter 18.360 Site Development Review Our proposed project has met the intent of this section. We do propose an exception to landscaping requirements. We propose that the overall landscaping plan provides for at least 20%of the gross site area. All conditions are met under Section 18.530.050 Additional Development Standards (B)Reduction of Lot Coverage Requirements. All submission requirements are provided for a type II procedure. No other exceptions to the standards are required for this project. Chapter 18.390 Design Making Procedures All application requirements for our Type II is included. Chapter 18.420 Land Partitions. A copy of the Land Partition Application is included in our application. Chapter 18.530 Industrial Zoning Districts Our site is designated I-P, Industrial Park district. Our uses outlined in Chapter 18.130 (use classification) is a permitted use and we meet all the development standards in Industrial Zones (I-P). Chapter 18.705 Access Egress and Circulation We have met all vehicle access and egress requirements for this site. 6720 s.w. Macadam, Suite ion, Portland, Oregon 97219,503/245-7100, FAX 503/245-7710 Principals:Stewart Ankrom,Thomas Moisan,David Vonada,Lorraine Kellow,Jeff Hamilton,Karen Bowery,Chris Dalengas,Jeff Los,Phil Marquis PROJECT NARRATIVE Atiyeh Brothers Building 6600 S.W. Bonita Road Page 2 Chapter 18.730 Exceptions to Development Standards We require no exceptions to development standards with the exception of 20% landscaping of proposed site. Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening All stands for landscaping, buffering and screens are provided in this project. Additional new landscaping will be added along the north property line of the Paul Schatz site. This additional landscaping will enhance the site entrance and provide screening around proposed parking spaces. Chapter 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage Our project has been reviewed for adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source—separated recyclable materials. Chapter 18.765 Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements The parking requirements for this chapter have been met. We are providing 36 spaces with a maximum allowable of 38.32. Loading areas, pedestrian access, curbing, surfacing, drainage and all space and aisle dimensions are met. Four(4) bicycle parking spaces will be provided. Chapter 790 Tree Removal There are no existing trees, with the exception of a few scrub trees. K:\ATIYE H\PROJECTNARRATI V E A n wrDr-w n . —•- July30, 1999 AUG 04 1999 e. h c �.C __ CITY OF TIGARD Mr. Fred Paintner OREGON Ankrom Moison Associated Architects 6720 SW Macadam, Suite 100 Portland, OR 97219 RE: Interpretation of Community Development Code for proposed use in Industrial Park (I-P) zone Dear Mr. Paintner: The City received your request for an interpretation of the Community Development Code to determine the use classification for the proposed Atiya Brothers project. The following is an evaluation of the zone and the use classifications most closely related to the project you have described. The purpose of the I-P zoning district is to provide appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. The following uses are permitted without size limitations in the I-P zone and are not conditional uses: Emergency Services, Postal Service, Public Support Facilities, Commercial Lodging, Outdoor Entertainment, Indoor Entertainment, Repair-Oriented General Retail, Animal-Related, Vehicle Fuel Sales, Office, Self-Service Storage, Non-Accessory Parking, Light Industrial, Research and Development, Wholesale Sales, Agriculture/Horticulture, Wireless Communication Facilities, and Rail Lines/Utility Corridors. In your request for an interpretation you have indicated that you feel the proposed use most closely fits the wholesale sales classification. In addition, you have provided a supplemental letter explaining that only 33% of your business at other locations is retail sales and the rest of the revenues comes from commercial, wholesale, builder and designer products and services. You have indicated that you will be submitting an application for site development review for a new building that will have approximately 19% of floor area designated for retail sales. The remainder of the building will be used for wholesale sales, shipping and receiving of the products used for the wholesale sales, as well as, the retail sales and office for the proposed business. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Page 1 of 2 The Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.130.020.D.6 defines Wholesale Sales as follows: "Involves sales, leasing or rental of equipment or products primarily intended for industrial, institutional or commercial businesses. Businesses may or may not be open to the general public, but sales to the general public is limited. Examples include the sale or rental of machinery, equipment, building materials, special trade tools, welding supplies, machine parts, electrical supplies, janitorial supplies, restaurant equipment, and store fixtures; mail order houses; and wholesalers of food, clothing, auto parts, and building hardware." Offices that are part of and are located within a firm in a use category other than general office are considered accessory to the firm's primary activity. Because the designated area serving the general public will meet the parameters of General Retail by encompassing less than 20% of the site and the primary anticipated clientele falls under the definition of Wholesale Sales, the Director is making the interpretation that the primary use proposed is Wholesale Sales and is permitted in the I-P zone. Please be aware that this letter is interpreting the use only and may not be construed as an approval of any proposals that have been discussed with staff. You will still need to submit necessary applications in order to construct and use any new building. This interpretation does, however, state that the use of the primary portion of the building for the wholesale sales of rugs and carpets and associated storage, shipping/receiving and office is permitted under the wholesale sales use category and is permitted in the I-P zone. Sincerely, James N.P. Hendryx Director of Community Development i:\curpin\juliaWtiya interpretation.doc c: Richard Bewersdorff, Planning Manager Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner CU 6-75 (Microfilm) 1999 Planning correspondence file Interpretations file 7/30/99 Mr. Fred Paintner, Ankrom Moison Associated Architects Ltr. Page 2 of 2 Re: Interpretation for proposed use in the I-P zone 1 A1l- .-�. I k a o s, d■ I . . saw— _I -9e iltE ; 1 / 5 — z / 36"VIr� 1! �i O6 O6 4I.IN / ...-,„ a • 4 / - -"mac v - oil i / -- Ili /ter �� f6 v r6 '.6 6 1 T7b• c S 1E g r r rn = 1 i 4 A \ 1 D e i r 8 r \•O 1 ip \-& . J \ g' o \./` o I � I ' r `t ■ O I Ia I �/......... L ) r7 �OlRC -- -- i )) _444F ' 131 b; 1-5 i Ids 15t tit;mi: Z yj 9 ' 6600 SW BONITA ROAD ANKROM MOISAN :•: ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTS III 2- TIGARD, OREGON 1 - - TE N TAT I V E P LA N SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 SHEET 1 OF 1 FOR JAMES, DENECKE, & HARRIS BONITA RD. LOCATED IN THE SE 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 I OF SECTION 12, T 2S, R 1W, WM; 6'C F IN PORTIONS OF LOTS 3 AND 4, PET) BONITA GARDENS, CITY OF TIGARD, p WVm UP UPC. WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON. ( • - -N 89.38'00" E 311.00 _ - _ _ •12:58..5_1)0,35- lANDSCAPEO - - - — --— LANDSCAPED LAND AREA = 3.7 ACRES - 163,268 SO. FT. —, PARKING AREA 1 PUBLIC WAY 0. 3T� ,• I (1013/923) '16.'1—°+Oa- -'-I3 '` � 22 PARKING SPACES 1 I L LEGEND 10 PARKING SPACES r 589'38'00'W I i FH 1 1 20.00 Ti , L ,' • FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED I I 11 �' 170.9 LANDSCAPED i I FH FIRE HYDRANT WEST FACE WALLyy---- 1 1 1 WV - WATER VALVE ON PROPERTY LINE I RD 1;i> i !R, UP UTILITY POLE � I g- I I I I UG = UNDERGROUND I I RD - RAIN DRAIN FROM THE WEST I 16 I I DID - CATCH BASIN RD ; I I -' I 1111; PARCEL 2 PARCEL 1 ! FEATURES BOLD vFIItrr RD I 36,168 SF 1.--__, I 13 12,7100 SF 1 ig g _ _ _PRCENTERLINE RnUNE a I - OVERHEAD WIRE- — — —m I I I n I z 1 W u—Y N FENCE I Y i ! I - h ' Y I bO l I - EXIST CURB 1 GEVUR7Z - PROPOSED CURB RDA I I oI I FURNITURE STORE I C 15-- RD ~�_ �% t` ' ' #6600 SW BONITA RD. I I ____ NOTES WEST FACE / r'.--- THICK WALL 0 / ( E3 o i TL FN I) EXISTING UTILITIES PASSING THROUGH PARCEL 2 WHICH n Ir - f- SERVE PARCEL I WILL BE REROUTED OR GRANTED EASEMENTS FOR. I I °I 11 j 01 / 1 N 50.7 — /i `/ 1 I I 0 uI 0 4 F s I 10 30 0 a I I LANDSCAPED I I 191.0 i I I I—CENTERLINE OF 10'WATER SIGNPOST I SCALE: 1" = 40 J EASELENT OF 10554/400 %_ S BB.38'00- W 401.00 . I GILBERTSON 543 THIRD ST., IC-3 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 i G (503) 635-7590 FAX 635-3540 ENGINEERING NOTICE THE DRAINAGE PIPES FROM THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST, DRAINING ONTO SUDJECt PROPERTY. ALSO NOTICE THE WATER UNE EASEMENT UNDERNEATH THE BUILDING. JOB 197148 AND T1-E 6' THICK WALL WHICH SLIGHTLY STRADDLES THE PROPERTY LINE. Lvipac+ Study ASTER ENGINEERING .Studies • Planning • Safety t MEMORANDUM TO: Fred Paintner FROM: Tom R. Lancaster I� DATE: October 13, 1999 SUBJECT: Atiyeh Brothers Carpet Store Enclosed is one camera-ready copy of the traffic impact study for this project. Please let me know if you need anything else. Union Station,Suite 206 • 800 N.W.6th Avenue • Portland,OR 97209 • Phone(503)248-0313 • FAX(503)248-9251 ATIYEH BROTHERS CARPET STORE Traffic Impact Study TIGARD, OREGON PREPARED BY LANCASTER ENGINEERING October, 1999 C :::::::! KO ::::: 0::::::::::::,:::::::.0::::::::: A ENGINEERING ?f 1# }:;$tudies • Planning • Safety MEN:::::::;:::;: 3 Oki}F:x:::ii } firs :. <: ATIYEH BROTHERS CARPET STORE L_'<` Traffic Impact Study Q'i5'•' ttelell Amon,v:iva;:: ` :: Tigard, Oregon atom t. `ER p F fi;s:;< ,: > NAG!N as : ; g y r h vi : P,r:?::t;: :> R. LAN I;ZO}iyy3::faii ii itkidPiii 4=< ;:>: Prepared By :,4 Fly;: ::" ..:"^ TOM R. LANCASTER, P.E. 4 ::t;,.?ril DAVID C. CRAM a October, 1999 x.;4;:0.4 : 1 Y ti.W„hS:Pl,'.:t 4,.i.:Ci:i:6!:: :. .!rio ba Ration,Suite 206 • 800 N.W.6th Avenue • Portland,OR 97209 • Phone(503)248-0313 • FAX(503)248-9251 tr LANCASTER ENGINEERING TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 3 Introduction 4 Location Description 5 Trip Generation 10 Trip Distribution 11 Operational Analysis 15 Appendix 20 -2- LANCASTER ENGINEERING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. The proposed land use is expected to generate approximately 7 trips during the eve- ning peak hour. Of these, 3 will be entering and 4 will be exiting the site. The ex- pected daily traffic volume is 70 trips, with half entering and half exiting the site. 2. The signalized intersection of Bonita Road at SW 72"d Avenue is currently operating at level of service C during the evening peak hour. The addition of site-generated traffic will not change the level of service for the evening peak hour. 3. The unsignalized intersection of Bonita Road at Sequoia Parkway is currently oper- ating at a calculated level of service F during the evening peak hour. The Peak Hour Warrant for a traffic signal is satisfied for existing evening peak hour volumes. A traf- fic signal is not recommended based on field observations, the proximity of the traffic signal on SW 72nd Avenue, and the availability of an alternate route for vehicles turning west from the south leg of Sequoia Parkway. The addition of site-generated traffic will not change the level of service for the evening peak hour. 4. The unsignalized intersection of Bonita Road at Bangy Road is currently operating at a calculated level of service F during the evening peak hour. Measured delays indicate a level of service D or better for this intersection. The Peak Hour Warrant for a traffic signal is satisfied for existing evening peak hour volumes. A traffic signal is not rec- ommended based on observed operation of the intersection. The addition of site- generated traffic will not change the level of service for the evening peak hour. 5. Accident history was not made available from the City of Tigard. -3- LANCASTER ENGINEERING INTRODUCTION A 14,000 square foot carpet store has been proposed for a site near the intersec- tion of Sequoia Parkway and Bonita Road in Tigard, Oregon. The purpose of this study is to assess the traffic impact of the proposed devel- opment on the nearby street system and to recommend any required mitigative meas- ures. The analysis will include level of service calculations and a discussion of site ac- cess. Detailed information on level of service, traffic counts, trip generation calcula- tions, and level of service calculations is included in the appendix to this report. -4- LANCASTER ENGINEERING LOCATION DESCRIPTION The site is located in Tigard, Oregon near the intersection of Sequoia Parkway and Bonita Road. The site is proposed to be developed with a 14,000 square foot retail carpet store. An area map showing the location is on page seven, and a vicinity map showing the proposed site and the existing lane configuration in the vicinity of the site is on page eight. The site is proposed to have an access via a driveway easement on the northern portion of the site. The driveway easement also provides access to the Paul Schatz fur- niture store. The driveway intersects Sequoia Parkway approximately 85 feet from Bo- nita Road (edge of pavement to edge of pavement). The study area consists of the intersections of: ➢ Bonita Road at SW 72nd Avenue ➢ Bonita Road at Sequoia Parkway ➢ Bonita Road at Bangy Road Bonita Road is under the jurisdiction of the City of Tigard and is classified as a Major Collector. Bonita Road is a two-lane facility with a through lane in each direc- tion and turn lanes at selected intersections. The posted speed is 35 mph in the vicinity of the site. SW 72nd Avenue is under the jurisdiction of the City of Tigard and is classified as a Major Collector. SE 72"d Avenue is a three-lane facility with a through lane in each direction and a center two-way turn lane. The posted speed is 35 mph. The intersection of SW 72nd Avenue at Bonita Road is controlled by an eight-phase traffic signal with protected/permissive left-turn phasing on all four approaches. Sequoia Parkway is under the jurisdiction of the City of Tigard and is classified as a Local Commercial/Industrial Street. It is a three-lane facility with a through lane in each direction and a continuous center two-way turn lane. Sequoia Parkway forms a four-legged intersection with Bonita Road, with STOP signs on Sequoia Parkway. Bangy Road is under the jurisdiction of the City of Lake Oswego. Bangy Road forms a four-legged intersection with Bonita Road, with STOP signs controlling traffic -5- L LANCASTER ENGINEERING on all four approaches. There are left-turn lanes on all four approaches of the intersec- tion, shared through/right lanes on three approaches and separate right and through lanes on the east approach. There is no transit service directly available to the site. The nearest transit service is Tri-Met Route 38 on SW 72`d Avenue. Manual turning movement counts were made at the study area intersections during September and October, 1999, from 4:00 to 6:00 PM. Only the evening peak hour was counted, as this type of land use typically does not have a significant impact on the morning peak hour. The store hours will be between 9:30 AM and 5:30 PM. The peak hour is from 4:30 to 5:30 PM. The peak hour volumes for the evening peak hour are shown in the traffic flow diagram on page nine. -6- \ cAMELA� � ERLfNC 1 r P SUNCREEK `Lirr (w4Y �� _ `� �. gy~ ,---HP — — — ` .._ rill. I� ILAKE OSIECO G( e V S�� MELROSE ST. PARKWAY it CqC' 0 ,- rC l /44%„, YARNS �it \ C Sy!'�i '� tee_ST. F.Q YARNS ST. I t fr NEWCASTLE Q:L'•• M'fsT7cM r _ \ \ JO DR, 3, f(, r• FIR I ■ c,JJJ t LOOP ®q� p > S( FM/4? COVENTRY �N �Q m iYF CT. ��� r = SANDBURG O 2 �OQ��, '� GREENSBOROUGH ,`L ^ CT. u S T. a G,➢ Op�� T Q OVA \\\PAR • # 09 1 t r/ C/ KRUSE CLANDMARK 2 `n ° °ao LN. m MEADOWS Y it \ X0 Qt0 0 Carter ° , w ¢ oQ < ° _a cr. - BONITA Zs` ROAD L' G . WINDFIELD� L00P -� I�1 �11 a LANGFORD LN, <c r- = K SAL N `7� ' PARK N`L S.I a PROJECT O'cl 10 SITE BURMA RD. \°3 0p-.. (Kt ,,IILii_ i SHAKESPEARE RD. / u1.LL.i� V 6ALEINE ST. ` �1. (1,- O� c ``//,/ cc OAK RIDGE / C I��pt' ¢ ° KA6LE ST. 1� `p > FIRWOOD RD, < < F J'! a < r u r KALE LN. 1 M J ° J MARRINGTON AVE. s%‘ li MADRONA ST.W \al f I W i >> W�Qy ! ` SEVILLE ¢ VO �a� FF w W ( W. S , T DR. �" `' Z ol1 0' aJ ? IZ R cc . it j<` WASHINGTON x _.2-_ AREA MAP R : 1 STER ENGINEERING -7- 0 a io o 0 0 a) cY JAa � TES 3 en fl \ CO.......--; 0 ,N, H. SW Bonito Rood ■ - ( Driveway r r- -1 J i I u/ i I um i i_ Project Y Site 0 a i 3 in i 1 SW Cardinal Lane ■ r D t No Sod* 3 - VICINITY MAP Existing Lane Configurations LANCASTER ENGINEERING & Traffic Control Devices otiyeh_1.dwg -8- o"L--%;cu °nN f 438 (:0:10 419 0 cr ti I I , \F46 �y \F141 3 .L `7 a) rn c tu o (., n. 90 �IT1) 33 �1 11) '1 m 3 367 —j `^°Nrn o 404 m`Ory Ln 3 cn 133 -- •7 v 3 133 cN1 ! cn 0 d SW Bonito Rood J J CDriveway I I I I um ro L J Project y Site 0 Q O o co-co t 62 tp .cro- E— 136 3 E-1 NI.y .T8 413 T (� 191—) (.4).2,, 47 SW Cordinol Lone r \ I AI No Soot. TRAFFIC VOLUMES Existing Conditions LANCASTER ENGINEERING PM Peak Hour ottyeh_2.dwg -9- LANCASTER ENGINEERING TRIP GENERATION To estimate the number of trips that will be generated by the proposed land use, trip rates from TRIP GENERATION, Sixth Edition, published by the Institute of Trans- portation Engineers (ITE), were used. The trip rates used were for land-use code 890, Furniture Store. This land use category was chosen as the most appropriate for a carpet store, as carpets are generally considered a home furnishing much like furniture. Also, the site is located adjacent to an existing furniture store. The trip generation rates are based on the square footage of the proposed building. The calculations indicate that there will be an estimated total of 7 trips generated during the evening peak hour. Of these, 3 will be entering and 4 will be exiting the site. The expected daily traffic volume is 70 trips, with half entering and half exiting the site. Since the land use is primarily a destination or origin for site trips, no reduction was made for pass-by trips. And, since the site is not directly served by transit, no re- duction in site trips was made. A summary of the trip generation calculations is shown in the following table. The trip generation calculations are included in the appendix to this report. TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY Atiyeh Brothers Carpet Store Entering Exiting Total Trips Trips Trips PM Peak Hour 3 4 7 Daily 35 35 70 -10- LE LANCASTER ENGINEERING TRIP DISTRIBUTION The directional distribution of the trips generated by the proposed land use was estimated from the nature of the land use, the nearby land uses, and the primary routes which will serve the site. Also, the adjacent furniture store was telephoned for direc- tions to the store from the Portland area. The directions given were used to determine alternative routes to and from the north. The traffic flow diagram on page 12 shows the distribution of the projected site- generated trips for the proposed carpet store for the evening peak hour. The traffic flow diagram on page 13 shows the expected site trips for the even- ing peak hour. The diagram on page 14 shows the total of existing plus site-generated traffic for the evening peak hour. -11- tv c o a o of c 0 a) ;111 i&A. CN o ; 'y Vm° 3 0 `n 3 (r) 3 — cn cu 0 45% i 4— , ` SW Bonito Rood J �� 159 \ 45%D ( 30% l5 Driveway LIF0 Project A Site N 0 V v 0 3 Y L 0 0_ 0 z p- a) 3 SW Cardinal Lone r \ r D linn No Soule A SITE TRIP DISTRIBUTION k Inbound & Outbound Percentages • f%'j LANCASTER ENGINEERING PM Peak Hour otiyeh_3.dwg -12- 4. o c 1 t-o > oo- 1 000 0 0 lo <-1 .I. 14 .V° <1 \i, 4 .c-° cN ° s' ITr) off' - T - 0 _), 000 0 —> Nom in 3 (n 0 1 ! 0: o 0 1 SW Bonito Rood \ / - O Driveway / uI �/ I I I L i um ro L J /I ts Project Y Site 0 a 0 o I o 0 I. 0 -00 E-0 <1.1,y .C° 1-f <-1Tf4 1 0 00o f 0 -z, SW Cordinal Lone ` r \ f i dol 'N, No Sack ....r................................ TRAFFIC VOLUMES Site Trips IN' CASTER ENGINEERING PM Peak Hour otiyeh_4.dwg -13- 1 1 i o o Q °�� 4�9 c°ccvvo� 459 f 0 b Ej .j. �46 EJ�4 142 ' a.) 90-1 :! :4 4, SW Bonito Rood i ( �--- Driveway e Li1 ud /�umdturo Project Y Site 0 CL o Q N -° 'r 62 o Pow F- 136 3 (J .1.�-? .C8 H 3 cn ) 414 -T �1T1� 191 NrcoN 47 \1r SW Cardinal Lone / D ,NI No Soal. ................. ................ ............ .. TRAFFIC VOLUMES Existing + Site Trips LANCASTER ENGINEERING PM Peak Hour atiyeh_5.dwg -14- LANCASTER ENGINEERING OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS Background Traffic No other developments in the area have been identified by the City of Tigard which would contribute traffic to the study area intersections. Traffic Signal Warrants A traffic signal warrant comparison was made to determine if a traffic signal is or will be warranted at the unsignalized intersection of Bonita Road at Bangy Road or Bonita Road at Sequoia Parkway. The Minimum Vehicular Volume Warrant, the Inter- ruption of Continuous Traffic Warrant, and the Peak Hour Warrant from the MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, published by the Federal Highway Administration, were examined. When evaluating the Minimum Vehicular Volume Warrant and the Interruption of Continuous Traffic Warrant, it is assumed that the evening peak hour is 10 percent of the average daily traffic (ADT) and that the 8th highest hour is 5.3 percent of the ADT. The warrant comparison shows that the intersection of Bonita Road at Sequoia Parkway satisfies the Peak Hour Warrant for the evening peak hour. Right-turning vol- umes were reduced by 50 percent in the warrant comparison since right-turning vehi- cles receive little benefit from a traffic signal. None of the other warrants examined were satisfied for this intersection. For the intersection of Bonita Road at Bangy Road, the Peak Hour Warrant was also satisfied. Capacity Analysis To determine the level of service at the study area intersections, a capacity analysis was conducted. The level of service can range from A, which indicates very little or no delay, to level F, which indicates a high degree of congestion and delay. The analysis was made for existing conditions and existing plus site-generated traffic conditions. -15- LANCASTER ENGINEERING The study area intersections were analyzed using the signalized and unsignalized intersection methods in the 1994 HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL, Special Report 209, published by the Transportation Research Board. The results of the capacity analysis show that the signalized intersection of Bo- nita Road at SW 72nd Avenue is currently operating at level of service C during the evening peak hour. The addition of site-generated traffic will not change the level of service. The unsignalized intersection of Bonita Road at Sequoia Parkway is operating at a calculated level of service F during the evening peak hour. This level of service de- scribes the delay to the left-turning movements of Sequoia Parkway onto Bonita Road. The calculated delays are approximately 47 seconds per vehicle for the southbound left- turning movement and 57 seconds for the northbound left-turning movement. The peak hour for this intersection begins at 4:30 PM and continues to 5:30 PM. The peak hour factor for this intersection is 0.86. The peak hour factor means that the peak hour volume is 86 percent of the peak fifteen-minute volume multiplied by four. The peak fifteen-minute period for the entire intersection was between 5:00 and 5:15 PM. A site visit was made at this intersection to observe actual delays and queu- ing. Observations made between 4:30 and 4:40 showed very little delay (15 or fewer seconds per vehicle) to either the southbound or northbound left-turning movements. The discrepancy between the calculated delay and the observed delay may be explained by the proximity of the signalized intersection of Bonita Road and SW 72' Avenue. The traffic signal phasing provides gaps in the eastbound traffic that can be efficiently used by traffic on Sequoia Parkway that are not provided for in the capacity calcula- tions. While the calculated delay is shown to increase with the addition of site- generated traffic from the proposed carpet store, the actual change in delay is estimated to be insignificant. The all-way stop-controlled intersection of Bonita Road at Bangy Road is cur- rently calculated to operate at level of service F during the evening peak hour, with an average vehicle delay of 72.5 seconds. The peak hour for this intersection is between 4:35 and 5:35, with the peak fifteen-minute period occurring between 5:10 and 5:25. The peak hour factor for this intersection is also 0.86. During two site visits to this in- tersection during the peak hour, some long queues were observed for the eastbound left-turning movement and for the southbound right-turning movement. However, the queues did not last for more than five or so minutes during the periods of observation. On several occasions the intersection had almost no traffic. As stated above, the average calculated delay for the intersection was 72.5 sec- onds per vehicle. The delay for the eastbound left-turning movement was calculated at -16- LANCASTER ENGINEERING 97.9 seconds per vehicle. The calculated delay for the southbound through/right move- ment was 130.2 seconds. With such disparity between calculated values and observed operations, a delay study was conducted for these two movements for a two-hour period between 4:00 and 6:00 PM. The results of the delay study show average delays for the eastbound left-turning movement ranging from 8.2 seconds per vehicle to a maximum of 24.0 seconds, with a weighted average of 18.9 seconds for the peak hour. For the southbound through/right movement, the delays range from 12.9 seconds per vehicle to a maximum of 25.0 seconds, with a weighted average delay of 21.3 seconds for the peak hour. Clearly there is a large discrepancy between the measured values and the calculated values. These discrepancies can be attributed to the complexity and unreli- ability of the methodology of all-way stop-controlled intersection analysis. Based on the measured values of the movements with the greatest volumes and queue lengths, it can be stated that the intersection of Bonita Road at Bangy Road is op- erating at level of service D or better during the evening peak hour. The addition of site-generated traffic is not expected to change the level of service. The results of the capacity analysis, along with the Levels Of Service (LOS) and the average delay per vehicle are shown in the following table. Tables showing the re- lationships between delay and level of service are included in the appendix to this re- port. -17- ALE: LANCASTER ENGINEERING LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY Atiyeh Brothers Carpet Store PM Peak Hour LOS Delay Bonita Road at SW 72nd Avenue Existing Conditions C 24.5 Existing + Site Trips C 24.6 Bonita Road at Sequoia Parkway Existing Conditions F 47.3 Existing + Site Trips F 47.9 Bonita Road at Bangy Road Existing Conditions (Calculated) F 72.5 Existing Conditions (Measured) D 20.6* Existing + Site Trips (Estimated) D 20.6* LOS = Level of Service Delay = Average Delay per Vehicle in Seconds * Combined average delay for two movements with greatest delay -18- LANCASTER ENGINEERING Accident History The City of Tigard has requested an analysis of accident history, but no infor- mation has been provided for an analysis to be performed. Proposed Mitigations The intersection of Bonita Road at Sequoia Parkway is currently operating at level of service F during the evening peak hour. The Peak Hour Warrant for traffic sig- nals is satisfied at this intersection. However, since the proximity of the signalized in- tersection of Bonita Road at SW 7211d Avenue may provide many suitable gaps for the minor street movements, and since westbound traffic from the south leg of Sequoia Parkway has an alternative route available to reach the intersection of Bonita Road and SW 72nd Avenue via Cardinal Lane, a traffic signal is not recommended at Sequoia Parkway. The all-way stop-controlled intersection of Bonita Road at Bangy Road appears to be operating at a satisfactory level of service, with short periods of long queues. A traffic signal is not recommended at this intersection either. The proposed carpet store is not expected to have a significant impact on the study area intersections. No mitigation measures are recommended as a result of the proposed development. -19- LANCASTER ENGINEERING APPENDIX -20- L LANCASTER ENGINEERING LEVEL OF SERVICE Level of service is used to describe the quality of traffic flow. Levels of service A to C are considered good, and rural roads are usually designed for level of service C. Urban streets and signalized intersections are typically designed for level of service D. Level of service E is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. For unsignalized intersections, level of service E is generally considered acceptable. Here is a more complete description of levels of service: Level of service A: Very low delay at intersections, with all traffic signal cycles clearing and no vehicles waiting through more than one signal cycle. On highways, low volume and high speeds, with speeds not restricted by other vehicles. Level of service B: Operating speeds beginning to be affected by other traffic; short traffic delays at intersections. Higher average intersection delay than for level of service A resulting from more vehicles stopping. Level of service C: Operating speeds and maneuverability closely controlled by other traffic; higher delays at intersections than for level of service B due to a signifi- cant number of vehicles stopping. Not all signal cycles clear the waiting vehicles. This is the recommended design standard for rural highways. Level of service D: Tolerable operating speeds; long traffic delays occur at in- tersections. The influence of congestion is noticeable. At traffic signals many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. The number of signal cycle failures, for which vehicles must wait through more than one signal cycle, are notice- able. This is typically the design level for urban signalized intersections. Level of service E: Restricted speeds, very long traffic delays at traffic signals, and traffic volumes near capacity. Flow is unstable so that any interruption, no matter how minor, will cause queues to form and service to deteriorate to level of service F. Traffic signal cycle failures are frequent occurrences. For unsignalized intersections, level of service E or better is generally considered acceptable. Level of service F: Extreme delays, resulting in long queues which may interfere with other traffic movements. There may be stoppages of long duration, and speeds may drop to zero. There may be frequent signal cycle failures. Level of service F will typically result when vehicle arrival rates are greater than capacity. It is considered un- acceptable by most drivers. LANCASTER ENGINEERING LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LEVEL STOPPED DELAY OF PER VEHICLE SERVICE (Seconds) A <5 B 5-15 C 15-25 D 25-40 E 40-60 F >60 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LEVEL STOPPED DELAY OF PER VEHICLE SERVICE (Seconds) A <5 B 5-10 C 10-20 D 20-30 E 30-45 F >45 INTERSEC )N TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMP" REPORT 72ND AVENUE AT BONITA ROAD / �/i 7 a- _ . , . • T= 4.3% P=.902 N 1884 : • DATE OF COUNT: 05/19/99 O '+ 1576 DAY OF -WEEK: Wed R 300 357 227 TIME STARTED: 16:00 T TIME ENDED: 18:00 H 4-1114 43 1 1-0. 4-541 • • 90 J L57 T= 3 .3% T= 1.1% 367 —► 4-438 P=.916 P=.829 133 ; ;46 TEV=TO'T'AL ENTRY VOLUME 41 I • T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH �► P=PHF BY APPROACH 590 —► 684 —► JWEE 376 429 90 Peak Hour 1536 16:30-17:30 Traffic Smithy • 1 T= 4.4% P=.768 895 TEV=2910 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • • • FROM - TO I, —► 3 .3 1 Li, 41 r► r L ALL 16 :00-16 :05 8 13 5 22 38 16 21 34 1 4 26 11 199 16 :05-16 :10 24 39 9 17 27 17 26 34 4 10 24 6 237 16:10-16 :15 17 41 6 24 39 16 36 26 2 1 29 9 246 16 :15-16 :20 9 30 5 16 34 16 29 36 4 1 37 6 223 16 :20-16 :25 14 32 4 27 35 12 22 30 4 3 38 6 227 16 :25-16:30 13 21 3 22 36 18 21 38 5 6 13 5 201 16 :30-16:35 14 28 7 20 34 17 33 43 0 5 31 7 239 16 :35-16:40 14 26 11 24 30 20 36 36 10 1 26 6 240 16 :40-16 :45 6 26 8 24 29 19 24 33 10 4 37 11 231 16 :45-16 :50 15 34 9 31 25 25 20 37 1 5 31 5 238 16:50-16 :55 8 33 8 27 27 22 25 36 9 5 31 4 235 16 :55-17:00 12 22 5 28 34 14 20 35 12 10 30 4 226 17:00-17:05 14 46 12 13 28 14 19 32 9 3 42 5 237 17:05-17:10 16 27 7 25 29 19 46 43 10 1 32 3 258 17:10-17:15 8 17 7 35 32 24 58 47 11 4 33 2 278 17:15-17:20 7 34 2 28 27 26 41 28 7 0 44 3 247 17:20-17:25 10 49 7 18 27 8 28 31 7 3 59 4 251 17:25-17:30 9 25 7 27 35 19 26 28 4 5 42 3 230 17:30-17:35 19 30 5 22 25 9 41 25 8 7 25 5 221 17:35-17:40 14 27 5 25 28 12 24 27 4 5 41 6 218 17:40-17:45 10 27 8 22 21 11 21 29 2 2 37 6 196 17:45-17:50 12 20 1 20 17 11 23 22 8 6 35 3 178 17:50-17:55 9 30 6 20 22 8 18 13 3 2 34 3 168 17:55-18:00 12 22 4 21 20 11 26 33 9 1 33 3 195 Total Survey 294 699 151 558 699 384 684 776 144 94 810 126 5419 PHF .79 .85 .8 .85 .96 .82 .65 .88 .73 .57 .76 .59 . 929 % Trucks 5.8 1.9 5.3 2.3 7 2.1 4 .7 4.5 2.1 1.1 1 1.6 3 .5 Stopped Buses 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 154 345 80 282 388 212 313 418 62 55 353 80 2742 16 :15-17:15 143 342 86 292 373 220 353 446 85 48 381 64 2833 16 :30-17:30 133 367 90 300 357 227 376 429 90 46 438 57 2910 16:45-17:45 142 371 82 301 338 203 369 398 84 50 447 50 2835 17:00-18 :00 140 354 71 276 311 172 371 358 82 39 457 46 2677 INTERSECT-1N TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMAF" REPORT G NITA ROAD AT SEQUOIA PARKWA / 0 / • T= 1.7% P=.7 N 170 : ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 09/21/99 O . 124 DAY OF -WEEK: Tue R 18 22 30 TIME STARTED: 16:00 T TIME ENDED: 18:00 H -518 4-i 1 I-• 4-575 • • 3 - L15 T= 2% T= 1.9% 404 —► 4-419 P=.894 P=.871 133 141 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH .1-1 r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 540 —► 661 —► JWGP _ 1296 6 227 Peak Hour ♦ 16:30-17:30 Traffic Smithy T= 1.4% P=.817 1314 TEV=1499 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • ♦ L FROM - TO ; —► J •J I L .■ 41 1 r• r 4._ ALL, 16 :00-16:05 22 27 0 1 1 2 6 1 14 12 22 0 108 16:05-16:10 14 30 2 3 1 3 8 0 14 8 37 0 120 16 :10-16:15 13 23 3 1 1 0 7 1 8 10 27 0 94 16:15-16:20 14 37 0 1 1 2 9 2 11 7 33 0 117 16:20-16:25 8 26 0 1 2 0 6 1 20 6 34 0 104 16:25-16:30 9 27 0 0 0 2 4 3 15 5 25 2 92 16:30-16:35 16 34 0 2 3 7 3 0 18 6 30 1 120 16 :35-16:40 12 31 1 3 3 3 7 0 12 11 41 2 126 16 :40-16:45 13 38 0 2 2 0 8 1 23 11 27 0 125 16:45-16:50 7 32 2 1 5 4 11 0 13 9 37 0 121 16 :50-16:55 11 27 0 1 0 0 5 2 21 16 33 0 116 16 :55-17:00 8 29 0 0 1 3 7 0 13 8 29 0 98 17:00-17:05 12 44 0 3 3 4 5 1 29 16 43 1 161 17:05-17:10 9 36 0 3 2 5 6 0 24 13 40 1 139 17:10-17:15 7 43 0 1 2 1 7 1 23 8 41 2 136 17:15-17:20 12 36 0 1 0 1 7 1 19 16 40 0 133 17:20-17:25 19 29 0 1 0 1 9 0 14 14 31 3 121 17:25-17:30 7 25 0 0 1 1 6 0 18 13 27 5 103 17:30-17:35 10 25 0 0 1 0 12 3 13 9 40 0 113 17:35-17:40 10 41 0 0 4 1 9 1 13 3 36 1 119 17:40-17:45 9 30 1 0 4 0 12 0 15 10 38 1 120 17:45-17:50 11 26 0 0 3 2 9 3 11 10 24 2 101 17:50-17:55 8 21 0 0 1 4 5 0 13 8 26 1 87 17:55-18:00 7 23 0 0 3 1 12 1 12 7 25 1 92 Total Survey 268 740 9 25 44 47 180 22 386 236 786 23 2766 PHF .81 .82 .25 .64 .55 .63 .78 .5 .75 .82 .84 .47 .859 Trucks 2.6 1.8 0 4 0 2 .1 1.7 9.1 .8 .4 2.2 8 .7 1. 8 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 Hourly Totals 16 :00-17:00 147 361 8 16 20 26 81 11 182 109 375 5 1341 16 :15-17:15 126 404 3 18 24 31 78 11 222 116 413 9 1455 16:30-17:30 133 404 3 18 22 30 81 6 227 141 419 15 1499 16:45-17:45 121 397 3 11 23 21 96 9 215 135 435 14 1480 17:00-18:00 121 379 1 9 24 21 99 11 204 127 411 18 1425 IINTERSEr-TON TURN MOVEMENT COUNT SUMP RESORT BONITA ROAD AT BANGY ROAD �_ / C (.f 1' • T= 1.11 P=.839 N 1655 . ♦ DATE OF COUNT: 09/21/99 O 1563 DAY ©F-=WEEK: Tue R 416 101 138 TIME STARTED: 16:00 T TIME ENDED: 18:00 H 4-59 8 4-1 1 L, *-206 413 -1 L62 T= 1.5% T= 1.1% 191 -► 1-136 P=.805 P=.872 47 8 TEV=TOTAL ENTRY VOLUME ♦ r T=%TRUCKS BY APPROACH 41 I r► P=PHF BY APPROACH 651 -► 350 -► DJGL 46 88 21 Peak Hour 1156 ♦ 16:35-17:35 Traffic Smithy - T= 2.2% P=.824 1155 TEV=1667 (503) 641-6333 EAST BOUND SOUTH BOUND NORTH BOUND WEST BOUND TIME PERIOD • ♦ • FROM - TO -► .0 1 Lo. 4l I r• r L ALL 16:00-16:05 2 11 26 27 5 10 0 4 0 3 5 3 96 16 :05-16:10 0 7 31 30 5 6 4 6 3 2 12 4 110 16 :10-16 :15 5 13 21 27 4 5 2 9 3 0 7 7 103 16:15-16:20 3 10 34 31 7 6 1 6 2 0 11 3 114 16 :20-16:25 2 18 28 31 5 2 0 7 0 0 7 4 104 16 :25-16:30 7 12 22 21 11 11 1 8 2 1 9 2 107 16:30-16:35 4 17 41 24 6 7 3 5 2 2 10 4 125 16 :35-16:40 3 15 30 50 6 8 1 8 3 1 5 1 131 16 :40-16:45 2 15 40 28 7 12 5 6 3 1 7 8 134 16 :45-16:50 4 14 26 29 8 13 7 6 1 1 13 4 126 16:50-16:55 8 16 29 30 3 6 3 7 4 1 15 5 127 16 :55-17:00 3 12 30 23 9 9 3 8 2 0 10 3 112 17:00-17:05 7 18 42 40 8 7 6 11 3 0 15 3 160 17:05-17:10 3 26 43 42 11 12 2 7 0 0 11 4 161 17:10-17:15 7 13 43 37 12 12 3 11 0 2 16 7 163 17:15-17:20 3 15 43 36 11 22 2 8 1 1 12 6 160 17:20-17:25 2 15 44 40 5 14 4 4 2 0 8 5 143 17:25-17:30 2 16 16 29 8 9 4 4 0 0 10 11 109 17:30-17:35 3 16 27 32 13 14 6 8 2 1 14 5 141 17:35-17:40 2 18 25 24 9 15 4 11 2 1 12 4 127 17:40-17:45 5 21 26 32 5 10 7 7 2 1 10 5 131 17:45-17:50 3 12 23 25 11 6 2 3 1 3 9 4 102 17:50-17:55 3 11 22 26 10 8 2 6 0 0 7 2 97 17:55-18:00 7 11 24 22 5 19 2 5 0 0 12 6 113 Total Survey 90 352 736 736 184 243 74 165 38 21 247 110 2996 PHF .65 .84 .79 .87 .74 .72 .77 .76 .58 .67 .81 .7 .861 % Trucks 1.1 .9 1.9 1.8 0 0 1.4 2.4 2.6 0 1.6 0 1.4 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peds 0 8 0 0 2 0 0 12 0 0 2 0 Hourly Totals 16:00-17:00 43 160 358 351 76 95 30 80 25 12 111 48 1389 16:15-17:15 53 186 408 386 93 105 35 90 22 9 129 48 1564 16:30-17:30 48 192 427 408 94 131 43 85 21 9 132 61 1651 16:45-17:45 49 200 394 394 102 143 51 92 19 8 146 62 1660 17:00-18:00 47 192 378 385 108 148 44 85 13 9 136 62 1607 I Location: Bonita Rd at Bangy Rd- South Bound Right Turn Time: 1600-1800 Date: October 7, 1999 Day: Thursday Stopped Total TIME Vehicles Vehicles Delay(sec) 16:00 16:15 136 94 14.5 16:15 16:30 112 87 12.9 16:30 16:45 137 71 19.3 16:45 17:00 145 92 15.8 17.00 17:15 288 115 25.0 17:15 17:30 268 113 23.7 17.30 17:45 191 99 19.3 17:45 18:00 139 92 15 1 Sheet3 Location: Bonita Rd at Bangy Rd-East Bound Left Turn Time: 16001800 Date: October 7, 1999 Day: Thursday Stopped Total TIME Vehicles Vehicles Delay(sec) 16:00 16:15 62 76 8.2 16:15 16:30 97 81 12.0 16:30 16:45 255 108 23.6 16:45 17:00 151 101 15.0 17:00 17:15 142 91 15.6 17:15 17:30 204 99 20.6 17:30 17:45 252 105 24.0 17:45 18:00 90 76 11.8 Page I LE LANCASTER ENGINEERING TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS Land Use: Furniture Store Land Use Code: 890 • Variable: 1,000 Sq Ft Gross Floor Area Variable Value: 14 AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Trip Rate: 0.17 Trip Rate: 0.45 Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Directional Directional Distribution 0.69 0.31 Distribution 0.44 0.56 Trip Ends Trip Ends WEEKDAY SATURDAY Trip Rate: 5.06 Trip Rate: 4.94 Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Directional Directional Distribution 0.5 0.5 Distribution 0.5 0.5 Trip Ends : `` :< >' Trip Ends Source:TRIP GENERATION,Sixth Edition L LANCASTER ENGINEERING TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT CALCULATIONS Major Street: Bonita Road Minor Street: Sequoia Parkway Existing Conditions Number of Lanes for Moving ADT on Major St. ADT on Minor St. Traffic on Each Approach: (total of both approaches) (higher-volume approach) Major St. Minor St, 100% 70% 100% 70% WARRANT 1 Warrants Warrants Warrants Warrants 1 1 t 8,850 6,200 rP'-'1,-- 11 1,850 2 or more 1 10,600 7,400 2,650 1,850 2 or more 2 or more 10,600 7,400 3,550 2,500 1 2 or more 8,850 6.200 3,550 2,500 WARRANT 2 1 1 13,300 9,300 ".7,=M 950 2 or more 1 15,900 11,100 1,350 950 2 or more 2 or more 15,900 11,100 1,750 1,250 1 2 or more 13,300 9,300 1,750 1,250 Note: ADT volumes assume 8th highest hour is 5.69 of the daily volume Warrant Used X 100 percent of standard warrants used 70 percent of standard warrants used due to 85th percentile speed in excess of 40 mph or isolated community with population less than 10,000. Number of Approach Minimum Is Signal Lanes Volumes Volumes Warrant Met? Warrant 1:Minimum Vehicular Volume Major Street 1 11,150 8,850 Minor Street 1 2,010 2,650 No Warrant 2:Interruption of Continuous Traffic Major Street 1 11,150 13,300 Minor Street I 2,010 1,350 No Warrant 11: Peak Hour Warrant -AM Peak Hour Major Street 1 Minor Street 1 - No Warrant 11: Peak Hour Warrant- PM Peak Hour Major Street 1 1,115 Minor Street 1 201 175 Yes Note: Right-turning volumes reduced by 50 percent. rt"''. LANCASTER ENGINEERING TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT CALCULATIONS Major Street: Bonita Road Minor Street: Bangy Road Existing Conditions Number of Lanes for Moving ADT on Major St. ADT on Minor St. Traffic on Each Approach: (total of both approaches) (higher-volume approach) Major St, Minor St. 100% 70% 100% 70% WARRANT 1 Warrants Warrants Warrants Warrants 1 1 8,850 6,200 2,650 1,850 2 or more 1 10,600 7,400 2,650 1,850 2 or more 2 or more V 10,600 ---,- 7-777'7' 7,400 t ; '° 2,500 1 2 or more 8,850 6,200 3,550 2,500 WARRANT 2 1 1 13,300 9,300 1,350 950 2 or more 1 15,900 11,100 1,350 950 2 or more 2 or more 15,900 11,100 Wiz; ;:61.31I 1,250 1 2 or more 13,300 9300 1,750 1,250 Note: ADT volumes assume 8th highest hour is 5.6% of the daily volume Warrant Used X 100 percent of standard warrants used 70 percent of standard warrants used due to 85th percentile speed in excess of 40 mph or isolated community with population less than 10,000. Number of Approach Minimum Is Signal Lanes Volumes Volumes Warrant Met? Warrant 1:Minimum Vehicular Volume Major Street 2 8,570 10,600 Minor Street 2 6,550 3,550 No Warrant 2: Interruption of Continuous Traffic Major Street 2 8,570 15,900 Minor Street 2 6,550 1,750 No Warrant 11: Peak Hour Warrant -AM Peak Hour Major Street 2 Minor Street 2 - No Warrant 11: Peak Hour Warrant - PM Peak Hour Major Street 2 857 Minor Street 2 655 350 Yes HCM: SIGNALIZED INT: ECTION SUMMARY Version le 09-23-1999 Center ror Microcomputers In Transrdrtation Streets : (E-W) BONITA ROAD (N-S) SW 72ND AVENUE Analyst : DAVE CRAM File Name : AT1 EXPM.HC9 Area Type : Other 9-23-99 PM PEAK Comment : EXISTING CONDITIONS Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -- -- ---- -- -- No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 < 0 1 1 < 0 1 1 1 Volumes 90 367 133 46 438 57 376 429 90 227 357 300 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 0 Lost Time 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 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 5 . OA 27 . OP Green 12 . OA 5 . OA 21 . OA Yellow/AR 4 . 0 4 . 0 Yellow/AR 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 Cycle Length: 90 secs Phase combination order: #1 #2 #5 #6 #7 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB L 199 1752 0 . 487 0 .411 14 . 8 B 16 . 6 C T 574 1845 0 . 688 0 . 311 20 . 0 C R 767 1568 0 . 187 0 .489 8 .4 B WB L 206 1787 0 . 238 0 .411 11 . 7 B 32 . 5 D TR 575 1849 0 . 925 0 .311 34 . 5 D NB L 505 1736 0 . 800 0 .522 19 . 5 C 26 . 1 D TR 613 1779 0 . 910 0 . 344 30 . 9 D SB L 343 1736 0 . 711 0 .422 18 . 3 C 23 . 4 C T 447 1827 0 . 860 0 .244 31 . 8 D R 535 1553 0 . 604 0 . 344 17 . 2 C Intersection Delay = 24 . 5 sec/veh Intersection LOS = C Lost Time/Cycle, L = 15 . 0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 . 957 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTE 11CTION SUMMARY Version . e 10-12-1999 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets: (E-W) BONITA ROAD (N-S) SW 72ND AVENUE Analyst: DAVE CRAM File Name : AT1 EPPM.HC9 Area Type : Other 9-23-99 PM PEAK Comment : EXISTING + SITE TRIPS Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- --- - -- -- ---- --- - - --- -- -- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 < 0 1 1 < 0 1 1 1 Volumes 90 367 133 46 439 58 376 429 90 228 357 300 Lane W (ft) 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 0 Lost Time 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 3 . 00 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 * * g Peds * Peds * * WB Left * * SB Left * * Thru * Thru * Right * Right * g Peds * Peds * NB Right EB Right * SB Right * WB Right Green 5 . OA 27 . OP Green 12 . OA 5 . OA 21 . OA Yellow/AR 4 . 0 4 . 0 Yellow/AR 4 . 0 4 . 0 4 . 0 Cycle Length: 90 secs Phase combination order : #1 #2 #5 #6 #7 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB L 199 1752 0 .487 0 .411 14 . 8 B 16 . 6 C T 574 1845 0 . 688 0 . 311 20 . 0 C R 767 1568 0 . 187 0 .489 8 .4 B WB L 206 1787 0 . 238 0 .411 11 . 7 B 33 . 0 D TR 575 1848 0 . 929 0 . 311 35 . 0 D NB L 505 1736 0 . 800 0 . 522 19 . 5 C 26 . 1 D TR 613 1779 0 . 910 0 .344 30 . 9 D SB L 343 1736 0 . 714 0 .422 18 . 4 C 23 . 4 C T 447 1827 0 . 860 0 .244 31 . 8 D R 535 1553 0 . 604 0 .344 17 . 2 C Intersection Delay = 24 . 6 sec/veh Intersection LOS = C Lost Time/Cycle, L = 15 . 0 sec Critical v/c (x) = 0 . 959 , HCS : Unsignalized II. rsections Release 2 . 1e AT2_EXPM.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) SEQUOIA PARKWAY (E-W) BONITA ROAD Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed15 (min) Analyst DAVE CRAM Date of Analysis 9/23/99 Other Information EXISTING CONDITIONS / PM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- N o. Lanes 1 1 < 0 1 1 < 0 0 > 1 1 0 > 1 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 3 404 133 141 419 15 81 6 227 30 22 18 PHF . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 Grade 2 -2 0 0 MC' s (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV' s (%) 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 CV' s (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PCE ' s 1 . 22 0 . 91 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 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 . 1e AT2_EXPM.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 548 496 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 731 776 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 731 776 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 64 0 . 97 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 625 504 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 863 986 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 863 986 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 83 1 . 00 Step 3 : TH from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 1218 1288 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 250 230 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 82 0 . 82 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 206 190 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 97 0 . 86 Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 1234 1346 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 204 176 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 . 71 0 . 80 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 78 0 . 84 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 76 0 . 54 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 154 95 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 94 154 > 157 57 . 0 3 . 1 F NB T 7 206 > 21 . 4 NB R 265 731 7 . 7 1 . 8 B SB L 35 95 > SB T 26 190 > 154 47 . 3 2 . 4 F 47 . 3 SB R 21 776 > EB L 4 986 3 . 7 0 . 0 A 0 . 0 WB L 149 863 5 . 0 0 . 7 B 1 . 2 Intersection Delay = 7 . 2 sec/veh HCS : Unsignalized Ii .rsections Release 2 . 1e AT2_EPPM.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) SEQUOIA PARKWAY (E-W) BONITA ROAD Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed15 (min) Analyst DAVE CRAM Date of Analysis 9/23/99 Other Information EXISTING + SITE TRIPS / PM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- N o. Lanes 1 1 < 0 1 1 < 0 0 > 1 1 0 > 1 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 3 404 134 142 419 15 83 6 228 30 22 18 PHF . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 . 86 Grade 2 -2 0 0 MC' s (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV' s (%) 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 CV' s (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PCE ' s 1 . 22 0 . 91 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 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 . 1e AT2_EPPM.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 548 496 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 731 776 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 731 776 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 64 0 . 97 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 626 504 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 863 986 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 863 986 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 83 1 . 00 Step 3 : TH from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 1220 1290 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 250 230 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 82 0 . 82 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 206 190 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 97 0 . 86 Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 1235 1348 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 204 175 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 . 71 0 . 80 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 78 0 . 84 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 76 0 . 54 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 154 94 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 97 154 > 157 59 . 2 3 . 3 F NB T 7 206 > 22 . 2 NB R 266 731 7 . 7 1 . 8 B SB L 35 94 > SB T 26 190 > 153 47 . 9 2 .4 F 47 . 9 SB R 21 776 > EB L 4 986 3 . 7 0 . 0 A 0 . 0 WB L 149 863 5 . 0 0 . 7 B 1 . 2 Intersection Delay = 7 .4 sec/veh I HCS: Unsignalized T-`ersections Release 3.1b ALL-WAY STOP CON1ROL(AWSC) ANALYSIS Worksheet 1 - Basic Intersection Information 1. Analyst: DAVE CRAM 2. Intersection: BONITA ROAD AT BANGY ROAD 3. Count Date: EXISTING CONDITIONS 4. Time Period: PM PEAK HOUR Worksheet 2 - Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 Li L2 1. LT Volume: 46 0 138 0 413 0 8 0 2. TH Volume: o 88 0 101 0 191 0 136 3. RT Volume: 0 21 0 416 0 47 0 62 4. Peak Hour Factor: 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 5. Flow Rate LT: 53 . 0 160 0 480 0 9 0 6. Flow Rate TH: 0 102 0 117 0 222 0 158 7. Flow Rate RT: 0 24 0 483 0 54 0 72 8. Flow Rate Total: 53 126 160 601 480 276 9 230 9. Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 10. Subject Approach 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 11. Opposing Approach 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 12. Conflicting Approach 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 13. Geometry Group 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 14. T (Time in Hours) : 0.250 Worksheet 3 - Saturation Headway Adjustment Worksheet North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 1. Flow Rate Total: 53 126 160 601 480 276 9 230 2. Flow Rate LT: 53 0 160 0 480 0 9 0 3. Flow Rate RT: 0 24 0 483 0 54 0 72 4. Prop LT in lane: 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 5. Prop RT in lane: 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.31 6. Prop. Heavy Vehicle: 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 7. Geometry Group 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 8. hLT-adj by Table 10-18 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 9. hRT-adj by Table 10-18 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 10. hHV-adj Table 10-18 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 11. hadj 0.53 -0.10 0.52 -0.55 0.53 -0.10 0.52 -0.20 Worksheet 4 - Departure Headway and Service Time North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 1. Total lane flow rate 53 126 160 601 480 276 9 230 2. hd, initial value 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3. x, initial 0.05 0.11 0.14 0.53 0.43 0.25 0.01 0.20 4. hd, final value 9.2 8.6 8.2 7.2 8.2 7.6 9.0 8.3 5. x, final value 0.14 0.30 0.37 1.20 1.09 0.58 0.02 0.53 6. Move-up time, m 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 7. Service Time 6.9 6.3 5.9 4.9 5.9 5.3 6.7 6.0 Worksheet 5 - Capacity and Level of Service North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 L1 L2 1. Total lane flow rate 53 126 160 601 480 276 9 230 2. Service Time 6.9 6.3 5.9 4.9 5.9 5.3 6.7 6.0 3. Degree Utilization, x 0.14 0.30 0.37 1.20 1.09 0.58 0.02 0.53 4. Departure headway, hd 9.2 8.6 8.2 7.2 8.2 7.6 9.0 8.3 5. Capacity 385 413 436 504 441 475 395 430 6. Delay 13.4 15.0 15.5 130.2 97.7 20.2 11.9 20.0 7. Level Of Service B B C F F C B C 8. Delay Approach 14.5 106.0 69.4 19.7 9. LOS, approach B F F C 10. Delay, Intersection 72.5 W "°5/ /,v To'K.3 rGT7i..1 h= e-e0Teck Report Atiyeh Brothers Retail Impact Study And Storm Drainage Facilities Calculations October, 1999 P5950 PROlf o•. •N � ✓G�X12,19th �i-� 6r .A 6��� Expires: 12/31/99 -© _ Moffatt, Nichol & Bonney, Inc . Consulting Engineers 1845 NE COUCH STREET• PORTLAND, OREGON 97232-3087 • (503) 232-2117 • FAX (503) 232-B023 -0 I t Atiyeh Brothers Retail Building Impact Study And Storm Drainage Facilities Calculations TABLE OF CONTENTS Impact Study Summary 2 Pages Storm Water Facility Design Summary 2 Pages SECTION I: Detention Basin Volume and Outlet Structure Design Calculations ... 11 Pages SECTION II: Storm Drainage Runoff and Facilities Calculations 11 Pages APPENDIX A: Rainfall Intensity Chart 1 Page APPENDIX B: Wet Pond Sediment Removal Model 1 Page APPENDIX C: Runoff Coefficients 1 Page APPENDIX D: Drainage Map: C2.0, Grading and Utility Plan 1 Page Impact Study Summary Impact Summary The proposed Atiyeh Retail Building site is located along 1-5 just south of Bonita Road in Tigard, Oregon, and encompasses 0.83 Acres. The site is currently a parking area with two access isles that run along a large landscape island. The site is to be filled on the west side to provide a flat building pad for the proposed retail building. The impact to the drainage, sewage and water systems due to this development are summarized below. Storm Drainage The site drainage plan has been developed using a detention pond for the control and treatment of surface water runoff. The new onsite drainage network will collect the surface water and convey it to the detention basin located to the south of the proposed building. The detention basin will be used to remove suspended solids from the runoff and hold the release of the water to the current pre-developed rates for storm events of 2 through 25 years. The storm drainage will then convey water from the outlet structure to the current on site 15" storm drainage line that connects to the City of Tigard storm drainage system in Southwest Sequoia Parkway. The construction of the proposed building and on site drainage facilities should result in improved storm water runoff quality due to the treatment of impervious surface runoff that was previously discharged directly to the storm drainage system. The quantity of storm water runoff will be held to pre-developed levels and discharged into the existing on-site storm drainage system. Sanitary Sewer The building's sanitary sewer needs will be served by the new 4" line from the building to the existing 8" sanitary sewer located on the east side of the site. The building will discharge an additional 30 drainage fixture units to the sanitary sewer as summarized bellow. Fixture #of Fixture Fixture Value Fixtures Value Water Closets 6 3 18 Urinals 5 1 5 Lavatories 1 2 2 Janitors Sink 3 1 3 Sink 2 1 2 Total Drainage Fixture Units= 30 Water System The proposed building will have both domestic and fire water lines to service the restrooms and fire sprinkler system. These lines would be run from the existing Tigard Water District's 8" water line that runs along the east side of the site. The building will have an additional 28.5 water supply fixture unit demand for domestic water as summarized in the table below. Fixture Value #of Fixture Fixture 35 PSI Fixtures Value Water Closets 5.5 3 16.5 Urinals 5 1 5 Lavatories 1 2 2 Janitors Sink 3 1 3 Sink 2 1 2 Water Supply Fixture Units = 28.5 Storm Water Facility Design Summary Water Quality Pond The on site storm drainage pond was designed as a combination water quality and quantity basin. All of the water quality facility calculations were done using the methods outlined in chapter 3 of The Unified Sewerage Agency Design and Construction Standards Manual. The bottom of the pond is used for the permanent pool volume required for removal of 65% of the suspended solids. To provide the area for suspended solid removal the bottom of the pond has a 400 s.f. treatment surface area at pond elevation 85.6. The pond from elevation 86.6 to elevation 87.56 supplies the extended dry pond volume of 875 cubic feet. This dry pond volume is released over a 48-hr. treatment period through a 9/16" diameter orifice at the pond outlet structure. Detention Basin Calculations Once the water quality volume requirements were met, the runoff quantities for the detention basin sizing were calculated using the Rational Method. The discharge flows from the site were held to pre-developed conditions for sizing of the detention basin. Calculations were run for a two-year storm event to determine the amount of storage required at a release rate not to exceed the two year pre-developed level. Once the two year detention level was set the calculations were repeated to establish storage volumes required to hold both 10 year and 25 year storm event at their pre-developed release rate. The detention basin has a 2 year detention storage volume of 759.80 cubic feet at elevation 88.17 with 10 year and 25 year detention storage volumes of 1104.37 cubic feet and 1 272.75 cubic feet at elevations 88.44 and 88.58 respectively. The drainage area used for the sizing of the detention pond is shown on the drainage map included in appendix D. The detention basin was sized to accommodate the flow contributed by the adjacent building and landscape area to the east of our site in addition to the onsite runoff. Due to site grading conditions, the parking stalls on the north end of the site discharge directly to the storm system without being detained on site. However, the on site detention facility is designed to treat runoff in excess of this amount generated by the adjacent site to the east. The runoff and storage volume calculations as well as outlet performance curves and stage storage volume graphs are shown in section I of the hydrology calculations. Storm Drainage System Calculations The onsite storm drainage system is connected to the existing 15" storm line on the north side of the site, which runs along the Paul Schatz Furniture access road and downstream to the City of Tigard Storm Drainage System in Southwest Sequoia Parkway. All storm drainage pipe capacities were sized using Manning's equation for a 10-year storm event to be passed in an open-channel (non-surcharged) flow. The pipe line flow values and outlet tailwater conditions from Manning's equation were used in Softdesk 8 pipe works module to calculate the hydraulic grade line of the pipeline system. The pipe capacity summary sheets, Channel flow conditions, full flow velocity conditions, and storm water run summary data is shown in section II of the hydrology calculations. Design Software Used Hydraulic Grades, Pipe Capacities, Channel Flow Conditions, Performance Curves and Detention Pond Stage Storage Curves were all computed using Softdesk 8 Hydrology and Pipeworks Modules. SECTION I Detention Basin Volume and Outlet Structure Design Calculations MOFFATT, NICHOL & BONNEY Atiyeh Retail 1845 NE Couch St. 2 Yr. storm detention Portland, OR 97232 10/05/99 PH#(503) 232-2117 FAX# (503) 232-8023 DETERMINATION OF REQUIRED DETENTION STORAGE - RATIONAL METHOD VOLUME REQUIRED = 0 2dev - Q 2undev Q 2undev = A x Cundev x i 2undev Q 2dev =A x Cdev x i 2dev A = 0.83 acres PRE-DEV, Cpredev = 0.59 Impervious surface area POST-DEW 0.672 Ac, Pervious surface area=0.158 Ac Tc undev = 5 min., i 2yr= 1.9 in/hr, Q(max) 2undev = 0.93 cfs (0.83 acre contribution area) TIME AREA Cpredev Cdev i 2yr Inflow Rate Inflow Outflow Rate Outflow Req. Storage Tc Q 2dev Volume Q 2predev Volume 2 Yr. min. acres in/hr cfs cu. ft. cfs cu. ft. cu. ft. 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 0 0.83 0.59 0.78 1.90 1.230 0.000 0 0.000 0.00 5 0.83 0.59 0.78 1.90 1.230 369.018 0.000 0.000 369.02 10 0.83 0.59 0.78 1.30 0.842 310.752 0.430 64.500 615.27 15 0.83 0.59 0.78 1.10 0.712 233.064 0.430 129.000 719.33 20 0.83 0.59 0.78 0.90 0.583 194.220 0.595 153.750 759.80 <== Peak Storage 2 yr 30 0.83 0.59 0.78 0.75 0.486 320.463 0.595 357.000 723.27 Water Surface 88.17 40 0.83 0.59 0.78 0.60 0.388 262.197 0.595 357.000 628.46 50 0.83 0.59 0.78 0.55 0.356 223.353 0.430 307.500 544.32 70 0.83 0.59 0.78 0.45 0.291 388.440 0.430 516.000 416.76 100 0.83 0.59 0.78 0.40 0.259 495.261 0.280 639.000 273.02 2 Yr . Hydrograph DRAINAGE AREA D- 1 1 .4 - 1 .2 v - — U 0. 8 , _ Inflow Rate 0 . 6 0 0 4 Outflow Rate 0 .2 0 • 0 20 40 60 80 100 TIME (MIN ) MOFFATT, NICHOL & BONNEY Atiyeh Retail 1845 NE Couch St. 10 Yr. storm detention Portland, OR 97232 10/05/99 PH# (503) 232-2117 FAX# (503) 232-8023 DETERMINATION OF REQUIRED DETENTION STORAGE - RATIONAL METHOD VOLUME REQUIRED = Q 10dev - Q 10undev Q 10undev = A x Cundev x il0undev Q 10dev = A x Cdev x i 10dev A= 0.83 acres PRE-DEV, Cpredev = 0.59 Impervious surface area POST-DEV= 0.672 Ac, Pervious surface area=0.158 Ac Tc undev = 5 min., i 10yr= 3.0 in/hr, Q(max) 10undev = 1.47 cfs (0.83 acre contribution area) -IME AREA Cpredev Cdev i 10yr Inflow Rate Inflow Outflow Rate Outflow Req. Storage Tc Q 2dev Volume Q 2predev Volume 10 Yr. min. acres in/hr cfs cu. ft. cfs cu. ft. cu. ft. 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 0 0.83 0.59 0.78 3.00 1.942 0.000 0 0.000 0.00 2.5 0.83 0.59 0.78 3.00 1.942 291.330 0.000 0.000 291.33 5 0.83 0.59 0.78 3.00 1.942 291.330 0.430 32.250 550.41 10 0.83 0.59 0.78 2.20 1.424 504.972 0.430 129.000 926.38 15 0.83 0.59 0.78 1.80 1.165 388.440 0.973 210.450 1104.37 <== Peak Storage 10 yr 20 0.83 0.59 0.78 1.50 0.971 320.463 1.210 327.450 1097.38 Water Surface 88.44 30 0.83 0.59 0.78 1.20 0.777 524.394 1.210 726.000 895.78 40 0.83 0.59 0.78 1.00 0.647 427.284 0.787 599.100 723.96 50 0.83 0.59 0.78 0.85 0.550 359.307 0.600 416.100 667.17 70 0.83 0.59 0.78 0.70 0.453 602.082 0.600 720.000 549.25 100 0.83 0.59 0.78 0.55 0.356 728.325 0.430 927.000 350.58 10 Yr . Hydrograph Atiyeh Detention Pond 2 _ 1 F) 1 . 5 U -\ Inflow Rate 1 O LL 0. 5 Outflow Rate i 4 -1 1 4 - 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 TIME (MIN ) MOFFATT, NICHOL & BONNEY Atiyeh Retail 1845 NE Couch St. 25 Yr. storm detention Portland, OR 97232 10/05/99 PH# (503) 232-2117 FAX#(503) 232-8023 DETERMINATION OF REQUIRED DETENTION STORAGE - RATIONAL METHOD VOLUME REQUIRED= 0 25dev - Q 25undev Q 25undev = A x Cundev x i25undev Q 25dev = A x Cdev x i 25dev A= 0.83 acres PRE-DEV, Cpredev = 0.59 Impervious surface area POST-DEV= 0.672 Ac, Pervious surface area=0.158 Ac Tc undev= 5 min., i 25yr= 3.4 in/hr, Q(max) 25undev = 1.66 cfs (0.83 acre contribution area) 'ME AREA Cpredev Cdev i 10yr Inflow Rate Inflow Outflow Rate Outflow Req. Storage Tc Q 2dev Volume Q 2predev Volume 25 Yr. min. acres in/hr cfs cu. ft. cfs cu. ft. cu. ft. 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 0 0.83 0.59 0.78 3.40 2.201 0.000 0 0.000 0.00 2.5 0.83 0.59 0.78 3.40 2.201 330.174 0.000 0.000 330.17 5 0.83 0.59 0.78 3.40 2.201 330.174 0.430 32.250 628.10 10 0.83 0.59 0.78 2.50 1.619 572.949 0.430 129.000 1072.05 15 0.83 0.59 0.78 2.10 1.360 446.706 1.210 246.000 1272.75 <== Peak Storage 25 yr 20 0.83 0.59 0.78 1.80 1.165 378.729 1.500 406.500 1244.98 Water Surface 88.58 30 0.83 0.59 0.78 1.40 0.906 621.504 1.500 900.000 966.49 40 0.83 0.59 0.78 1.15 0.745 495.261 0.973 741.900 719.85 50 0.83 0.59 0.78 1.00 0.647 417.573 0.600 471.900 665.52 70 0.83 0.59 0.78 0.82 0.531 706.961 0.600 720.000 652.48 100 0.83 0.59 0.78 0.67 0.434 868.163 0.600 1080.000 440.64 130 0.83 0.59 0.78 0.60 0.388 739.978 0.280 792.000 388.62 25 Yr . Hydrograph Atiyeh Detention Pond 2 . 5 , v 2 U 7 5 - - - Inflow Rate H • _J __ Outflow Rate 0. 5 - - 0 1 1- H 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 TIME (MIN ) — oroge Curve Atiyeh Detention Pond 2817.38 ; Azasaeo r A r A, / • ro • A A / A 4 _ isso.a3 /4/ ,IrerAr A• 4 ci \\ , , ,, \ , ,,. ,,,,_ ,, ,, \ , 563.48 A N Nr 0 85.60 e6.16 86.83 81.5 ee16 8883 Stage — ft PERMANENT POOL \\ WATER QUALITY CAPTURE VOLUME STORM WATER DETENTION Stage—Storage Curve Atiyeh Detention Pond 2817.38 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 f 1 1 f i I I 2253.90 2 1690.43 a) — — E D j 1126.95 563.48 0.00 ' I I I I _ I , I I 85.60 86.16 86.83 87.5 88.16 88.83 Stage — ft Performance Curve 8" Release 1 . 17 i I i I 0. 95 0. 73 0 -o 0 0. 51 C 0. 29 0. 07 ' I I II I I I 0.02 0.31 0.61 0. 90 1 . 20 1 . 50 Flowrate — cfs 10/1/99 MHO P5904 Water Quality Pond The water quality pond was designed in accordance with the Unified Sewerage Agency Design and Construction Standards Manual chapter 3. Wet Pond Using Chart No. 060-CH3 Rv=0.05 +0.009 x impervious area Rv=0.05 + (0.009) x [(0.654/0.83)(100)] =0.76 For 65% removal the catchment ratio = 1 .10 See Drawing No. 060-CH3 in appendix B Minimum surface area =catchment ration as a percent x Acreage (0.83 acre)(0.01 1 ) =0.0091 Acre —4 397 s.f. Extended Dry Pond Impervious Area =0.67 Acre —4 29,185 s.f. Dry Volume is 100% of Impervious Area runoff for 0.36" 4-hr storm event Runoff Volume =0.36 in x (1 ft/12 in)(29,185 s.f.) =875 cubic feet Dry Pond Volume=875 cubic feet Orifice Size Release rate is equal to the Dry Pond Volume Divided by the 48hr treatment period. Q= (875 ft'3)/[(48 hr)(60 min/hr)(60 sec/min)] =0.061 cfs Orifice size calculated using the following equation Q=Cd A(2gh) " 1/2 Cd is the discharge coefficient (0.61 for sharp edge) A = (0.061 cfs)/[(0.61 ) x (2(32.2 ft/sec)(0.5 ft)) - 1/21 =0.02 s.f. -0.22 in-2 Use 9/16" diameter orifice. SECTION II Storm Drainage Runoff And Facilities Calculations 10/4/99 MHO P5904 Runoff Contributions at Drainage Structures Runoff contributions to new onsite storm drainage structures are computed using the rational method for a 10 year design storm as outlined in the USA Design and Construction Standards Manual chapter 3. Catch Basin #4 Impervious Area =0.212 Acre Runoff Coefficient=0.90 Pervious Area =0.131 Acre Runoff Coefficent=0.25 Total Area =0.343 Acre Composite Coefficient 4 [(0.212)(0.90) + (0.131 )(0.25)1/(0.212 + 0. 131 ) =0.65 10yr Rainfall Intensity from chart 160-CH3 =3.00 in/hr Q= (0.343 Acre)(0.65)(3.00 in/hr) =0.67 cfs Catch Basin #5 Impervious Area =0.259 Acre Runoff Coefficient =0.90 Pervious Area =0.125 Acre Runoff Coefficent =0.25 Total Area =0.384 Acre Composite Coefficient 4 [(0.259)(0.90) + (0.125)(0.25)]/(0.259 +0.125) =0.69 10yr Rainfall Intensity from chart 160-CH3 =3.00 in/hr Q = (0.384 Acre)(0.69)(3.00 in/hr) =0.80 cfs Total Q at CB#5 =0.67 cfs + 0.80 cfs = 1 .47 cfs Clean Out #1 Impervious Area =0.07 Acre Runoff Coefficient =0.90 10yr Rainfall Intensity from chart 160-CH3 = 3.00 in/hr Q=(0.07 Acre)(0.90)(3.00 in/hr) =0.19 cfs Total Q at CO#1 =0.67 cfs + 0.80 cfs + 0.19 cfs = 1 .66 cfs Curb Cut Impervious Area =0.077 Acre Runoff Coefficient=0.90 Pervious Area =0.028 Acre Runoff Coefficent =0.25 Total Area =0.105 Acre Composite Coefficient 3 [(0.077)(0.90) + (0.028)(0.25)]/(0.077 +0.028) =0.73 10yr Rainfall Intensity from chart 160-CH3 =3.00 in/hr Q= (0.105 Acre)(0.73)(3.00 in/hr) =0.23 cfs wEST.txt WEST STORM DRAINAGE RUN Run: stsl ************************* Sheet View ************************* Pipe Node Rim Struct Struct Node Label Label North East Station Offset Elev. Type Dim. Drop [ft] [ft] [ft] [ft] [ft] [in] [ft' PIPE CB#4 1792. 1248 1094 .7708 91. 8200 cb 48 . 0000 0. 1000 PIPE CB#5 1635.0444 1095. 9731 91. 8000 cb 48 .0000 0. 1000 PIPE CO#1 1599. 0124 1096. 2489 91. 6739 CO 24 . 0000 0. 1000 FLRD. END 1579. 5559 1046. 4667 88 . 9113 end 0.0000 0. 1000 Sump Pipe Start Finish Cen-Cen Pipe Pipe Pipe Rough Pipe Elev Size Inv. Inv. 2DLength Slope Drop Descr. Coeff Flow [ft] [in] [ft] [ft] [ft] [ft/ft] [ft] [MANNG] [cf. 87 . 9900 10. 0000 89. 9900 89. 5187 157 . 0850 0. 0030 0. 4713 0. 0100 0. 6700 87 . 4187 12 . 0000 89. 4187 89. 3287 36. 0331 0. 0025 0. 0901 0. 0100 0. 8000 88 .7287 12 . 0000 89.2287 89. 0950 53. 4492 0. 0025 0. 1336 0. 0100 0. 1900 89. 0950 Page 1 whs i .txt Lateral Lateral Lateral Lateral Lateral Lateral Infilt. Design Design % Name #1 Inv. #1 Flow #1 Name #2 Inv. #2 Flow #2 Inflow Flow Vel. d/D [ft] [cfs] [ft] [cfs] [cfs] [cfs] [fps] 0. 0000 0.0000 0. 0000 0. 0000 0. 0000 0. 6700 2.7516 0. 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0. 0000 0.0000 1. 4700 3. 1223 0. 0000 0.0000 0. 0000 0. 0000 0.0000 1. 6600 3.2063 Design Wet Wet D. Point Full Full Full Full HGL Elev HGL Elev Depth Area Perim. Flow Vel Area Perim Flow In Out [in] [ft2] [in] [cfs] [fps] [ft2] [in] [cfs] [ft] [ft] 1. 5601 90.2107 89. 9342 2.3158 89.8473 89.5_ ,, 2. 3158 89.5575 89.2687 89.2000 Surface Surface Surface Cen-Cen Str-Str Thicknss Thicknss Adjusted EGL Elev Flow File On/Off 3DLength 3DLength In Out Length In [cfs] [ft] [ft] [ft] [ft] [ft] [ft] 0. 0000 0.0000 157 .0857 153. 3139 0.0000 0. 0000 153. 3139 90.2107 0. 0000 0.0000 36.0332 33.2423 0. 0000 0. 0000 33.2423 89. 9649 Page 2 wGJl .tXL 0. 0000 0. 0000 53. 4493 52. 4495 0. 0000 0.0000 52. 4495 89.7090 89.3598 EGL Elev Critical Critical Critical Froude Flow Out Depth Slope Velocity Number Regime [ft] [in] [ft/ft] [fps] 89. 9342 0. 3603 0.0037 2 . 9666 0. 8958 89.7114 0. 5137 0.0037 3. 6168 0. 7972 89. 4202 0. 5475 0.0038 3.7716 0. 7727 Page 3 sA:._ _20E_ Al.._J __INE EAJ . .tx, Run: sts2b ************************* Sheet View ************************* Pipe Node Rim Struct Struct Node Label Label North East Station Offset Elev. Type Dim. Drop [ft] [ft] [ft] [ft] [ft] [in] [ft] PIPE INLET 1568.269 1061. 631 91. 454 end 0.000 0. 100 PIPE MH#1 1588.207 1106. 332 91.798 pmh 48 .000 0. 1 MH#2 1829. 691 1104 .492 91.798 pmh 48.000 0. 100 Sump Pipe Start Finish Cen-Cen Pipe Pipe Pipe Rough Pipe Elev Size Inv. Inv. 2DLength Slope Drop Descr. Coeff Flow [ft] [in] [ft] [ft] [ft] [ft/ft] [ft] [MANNG] [cfs] 85. 650 12. 000 85. 650 85. 528 48 . 946 0.003 0. 122 0.010 1. 660 85.428 12.000 85.428 84 .824 241.490 0.003 0.604 0.013 0. 000 84 . 824 Lateral Lateral Lateral Lateral Lateral Lateral Infilt. Design Design % Name #1 Inv. #1 Flow #1 Name #2 Inv. #2 Flow #2 Inflow Flow Vel. d/D [ft] [cfs] (ft] [cfs] [cfs] [cfs] [fps] 0. 000 0.000 0. 000 0. 000 0. 000 1. 660 3.206 62. 639 0.000 0.000 0 .000 0.000 0.000 1. 660 2.577 76.441 Page 1 EAST.txt Design Wet Wet D. Point Full Full Full Full HGL Elev HGL Elev Depth Area Perim. Flow Vel Area Perim Flow In Out [in] [ft2] [in] [cfs] [fps] [ft2] [in] [cfs] [ft] [ft] 7 . 517 0. 518 21. 916 2. 316 2. 949 0. 785 37. 699 2.316 86. 406 86. 066 9. 173 0. 644 25.536 1. 781 2.268 0. 785 37. 699 1.781 86.004 85.724 85.200 Surface Surface Surface Cen-Cen Str-Str Thicknss Thicknss Adjusted EGL Elev Flow File On/Off 3DLength 3DLength In Out Length In [cfs] [ft] [ft] [ft] [ft] [ft] [ft] 0.000 0. 000 48 . 947 98. 008 0. 000 0. 000 98 . 008 86. 406 0. 000 0. 000 241. 491 237 . 492 0. 000 0.000 237 . 492 86. 163 85. 303 EGL Elev Critical Critical Critical Froude Flow Out Depth Slope Velocity Number Regime [ft] [in] [ft/ft] [fps] 86. 066 0. 548 0.004 3. 772 0.773 Subcrit. 85. 884 0. 548 0. 006 3. 772 0. 521 Subcrit. Page 2 10in-3fps.txt 10" Storm Line Full Flow Velocity Calculations Manning Pipe Calculator Given Input Data: Shape Circular Solving for Flowrate Diameter 10. 0000 in Depth 10. 0000 in Slope 0. 003 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0100 Computed Results: Flowrate 1. 6608 cfs Area 0. 5454 ft2 Wetted Area 0. 5454 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 31. 4159 in Perimeter 31. 4159 in Velocity 3. 0451 fps Hydraulic Radius 2. 5000 in Percent Full 100. 0000 % Full flow Flowrate 1. 6608 cfs Full flow velocity 3. 0451 fps Critical Information Critical depth 8. 6039 in Critical slope 0. 0051 ft/ft Critical velocity 4 . 4935 fps Critical area 0.5230 ft2 Critical perimeter 22. 9158 in Critical hydraulic radius 3.2863 in Critical top width 10. 0000 in Specific energy 1. 0567 ft Minimum energy 1. 0755 ft Froude number 0. 7748 Flow condition Subcritical Page 1 12in-3fps.txt 12" Strom Line Flowing Full Manning Pipe Calculator Given Input Data: Shape Circular Solving for Flowrate Diameter 12 .0000 in Depth 12 . 0000 in Slope 0. 0025 ft/ft Manning' s n 0. 0100 Computed Results: Flowrate 2. 3617 cfs Area 0.7854 ft2 Wetted Area 0. 7854 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 37 . 6991 in Perimeter 37 . 6991 in Velocity 3.0070 fps Hydraulic Radius 3.0000 in Percent Full 100.0000 % Full flow Flowrate 2.3617 cfs Full flow velocity 3. 0070 fps Critical Information Critical depth 9.7208 in Critical slope 0. 0047 ft/ft Critical velocity 4 .7551 fps Critical area 0.7028 ft2 Critical perimeter 26.2912 in Critical hydraulic radius 3.8491 in Critical top width 12. 0000 in Specific energy 1.2178 ft Minimum energy 1.2151 ft Froude number 0. 6985 Flow condition Subcritical Page 1 tmp#l .txt SOUTHWEST PARKING LOT CURB CUT Channel Calculator Given Input Data: Shape Trapezoidal Solving for Depth of Flow Flowrate 0.2000 cfs Slope 0. 0200 ft/ft Manning's n 0. 0200 Height 6. 0000 in Bottom width 24 .0000 in Left slope 1. 0000 ft/ft Right slope 1.0000 ft/ft Computed Results: Depth 0. 7372 in Velocity 1. 5792 fps Flow area 0. 1266 ft2 Flow perimeter 26. 0852 in Hydraulic radius 0. 6991 in Top width 25. 4745 in Area 1.2500 ft2 Perimeter 40. 9706 in Percent full 12.2874 % Critical Information Critical depth 0. 8037 in Critical slope 0. 0150 ft/ft Critical velocity 1. 4447 fps Critical area 0. 1384 ft2 Critical perimeter 26. 2732 in Critical hydraulic radius 0. 7587 in Critical top width 25. 6074 in Specific energy 0. 1002 ft Minimum energy 0. 1005 ft Froude number 1. 1398 Flow condition Supercritical Page 1 SW-SW.txt SWALE AT SOUTH WEST PARKING LOT CORNER Channel Calculator Given Input Data: Shape Trapezoidal Solving for Depth of Flow Flowrate 0.2000 cfs Slope 0. 1499 ft/ft Manning' s n 0. 0200 Height 6. 0000 in Bottom width 12. 0000 in Left slope 2. 0000 ft/ft Right slope 2. 0000 ft/ft Computed Results: Depth 0. 6000 in Velocity 3. 6366 fps Flow area 0. 0550 ft2 Flow perimeter 14 . 6831 in Hydraulic radius 0. 5394 in Top width 14 . 3999 in Area 1. 0000 ft2 Perimeter 38 . 8328 in Percent full 9. 9995 % Critical Information Critical depth 1.2027 in Critical slope 0. 0138 ft/ft Critical velocity 1. 6623 fps Critical area 0. 1203 ft2 Critical perimeter 17. 3786 in Critical hydraulic radius 0. 9969 in Critical top width 16. 8108 in Specific energy 0.2555 ft Minimum energy 0. 1503 ft Froude number 2. 9947 Flow condition Supercritical Page 1 APPENDIX A Rainfall Intensity Chart RATIONAL METHOD 1 RAINFALL INTENSITIES FOR EAST WASHINGTON COUNTY (for Ranges 1 and 2 West) Rainfall Intensity (inches per hour) I IME OF SI ORM EVENT : YRI(PROB AB 11,1'i'Y) CON CEN'I R.AT O\ MIi� : "< ` ? $#f ( � j �� ��;� �> gg1I> 5 50 lU(J SfT'•:'' ... +TLJ .,... :: .....�`4..t30.. ) (4`76.) .,. (2%) (1%).<.,... 0 1.90 2.50 3.00 3.40 4.00" 4.50 5 • 1.90 2.50 3.00 3.40 4.00 4.50 10 1.30 1.70 2.20 2.50 3.00 3.50 15 1.10 1.40 1.80 2.10 2.50 2.90 20 0.90 1.20 1.50 1.80 2.10 2.40 30 0.75 0.95 1.20 1.40 1.65 1.90 I° 40 0.60 0.75 1.00 1.15 1.30 1.60 50 0.55 0.70 0.85 1.00 1.15 1.35 70 0.45 -0.55 0.70 0.82 0.95 1.10 100 0.40 0.45 0.55 0.67 0.75 0.90 180 or more 0.35 . 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.85 160-CH3 • APPENDIX B Wet Pond Sediment Removal Model ,i, IL • Olr WET PONDS . POND - MARSH FACILITI.. F I; 111,; Wetpond Sediment Removal Model , Average Depths 1 feet ( ! [ o 100% Rv = 0.05 + 0.009: 1 impervious oreo;/ ' e 90% -• 1' o ' 1I ' . .I:' ., Box .1 J --- ■ I'i o {J1 w TO.— -.` A • O !t c 60% - 0 p a I 1 h 50%— ; v ( Rv=o. 10 -- o ' ' rte- J tll j! a Rv=0.50 : Rv=0.95 30Z I 1 1 1 11 i i I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 ii 1 i 0.01 0. 10 1.00 10.00 CICotchmenl rolio (percent) II Wet pond sediment removal model Cl ft average depth) Wetpond Sediment Removal Model I 'I Average Deaths 3 feet �; ii` 100% - I 4' o Rv = 0.05 + 0.0094 : imperviou JoX. 11 i E n KZ—. J v }; Io .0 v v ' c 60% r 4 ,, .. Rv=0. 10 i • 50%— ▪ 4077.— --- -----------* n 4 a Rv=o.so Rv=0.95 , 30% ,n I I l t 1 1 1 I I ) 1 I I )I l I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.01 0. 10 1.00 10.00 .- Colchmenl ratio (percent) o • Wet pond sediment removal model (3 ft average depth) N I . W WET POND unified f sewerac SEDIMENT REMOVAL MODEL -� agency' I = DRAWING N0. 060-CH3 I APPENDIX C Runoff Coefficients CHART 10 j;j RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS * ill r % SOIL** DRAINAGE AREA SLOPE �I IMPERVIOUS TYPE Under 5% 5%to 10% Over 10% TYPICAL LAND USE**` II m A 0.19 0.24 0.29 Zones: OS, RF ''I, a N 0 to 10 B 0.28 0.33 0.38 Other: Parks, Cemeteries & Playgrounds j' C 0.33 0.43 0.52 ! [ A 0.26 0.31 0.36 Zones: R20 "1' 10 to 20 B 0.35 0.40 0.45 C 0.39 0.48 0.57 i A 0.34 0.39 0.44 Zones: R10 ! 20 to 30 B 0.41 0.46 0.51 11 C 0.45 0.54 0.62 A 0.41 0.46 0.51 Zones: R7, R5 30 to 40 B 0.48 0.53 0.58 1'. C 0.51 0.59 0.67 A 0.49 0.54 0.59 Zones: R2.5, R3 40 to 50 B 0.54 0.59 0.64 C 0.57 0.65 0.72 i , . A 0.56 0.61 0.66 Zones: R2, CO1 ° 50 to 60 B 0.61 0.66 0.71 Streets: Neighborhood-20' in 35' ROW C 0.63 0.70 0.77 Other. Schools j' A 0.64 0.69 0.74 Zones: R1, CN2, CO2 ' 60 to 70 B 0.67 0.72 0.77 Streets: Neighborhood- 24'to 28' in 40' ROW 32'to 35' in 50' ROW .I1 C 0.69 0.76 0.82 Neighborhood Collector iit A 0.71 0.76 0.81 Streets: Neighborhood-36' in 50' ROW 70 to 80 B 0.74 0.79 0.84 28'in 40'ROW C 0.75 0.81 0.87 Other: Hospitals A 0.79 0.84 0.89 Zones: RH, CN1, CM, CS, CG, EG1, EG2, IG1, IG2 '1 80 to 90 B 0.80 0.85 0.90 ' C 0.81 0.87 0.92 A 0.86 0.91 0.96 Zones: RX, CX, EX, IH , 90 to 100 B 0.87 0.92 0.97 Streets: Community Arterial Commercial ;1 C 0.87 0.92 0.97 Paved Portion Of Any Street li;I 01 N DRAINAGE AREA SLOPE * Runoff coefficients may be adjusted w SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS ;1 -.I Under 5% 5%to 10% Over 10% to the nearest 0.05, if adjusted consistently throughout the project. , Fa- Woodlands Type A Soil 0.10 0.15 0.20 ** Soil Types: ;;�,! Type B Soil 0.20 0.25 0.30 A =Gravel & sandy Loam B = Light Clay& Silt Loam kl1 Type C Soil 0.30 0.35 0.40 C =Tight Clay I. Lawns, Pasture And Meadows I';• Type A Soil 0.15 0.20 0.25 ***The land uses are typical for a given Type B Soil 0.25 0.30 0.35 percent of impervious surface. Where L ',, Type C Soil 0.30 0.40 0.50 there is or will be any significant Cultivated Land variation from typical conditions, 11 Type A Soil 0.25 0.35 0.50 another percentage range should be11 1 ■ Type B Soil 0.40 0.55 0.70 used. Type C Soil 0.50 0.65 0.80 1;� Gravel Areas &Walks i�' Loose 0.30 0.40 0.50 j Packed 0.70 0.75 0.80 11. Pavements& Roofs 0.90 0.95 1.00 "' BES August 7, 1990 CHART j it APPENDIX D Drainage Map BONITA ROAD -- --, _6._._:..---------4_, - - -�' - -- -ar - 0/H PWR -CF- ,......L--- ` PUMP STATION \ \ \ /�� 11 -o/H PWR- - = - - - oa \ w - �""`�-_-- BOLLARD / 1 //� \ •UCHT - -- (/ e" ._'�.. ..i �� j fir. %,or j/ � - -STS _ _ _ _ p •B.L. /I - - = I. --N, STS - X16 WO. I ssMf 1 - - - - w - - - - - w � _ �'`t Ce�3: W f RE=84.A 1 � .._ .', e- - O O - LN, • I -1. NH r m / IE M=78.65 `` - - SS 1 REIN.8 I OU7_78.55 w•=.-¢-•'-�\"" ' °' .,. ,' IE'OU 83.9�� I _ ,j KEY NOTES • 1 ` ■I■�i■■■■I7■■■■r1■■c■■■A■■r�- I I 1 I rl� 1 CONSTRUCT NEW CONCRETE CATCH BASIN PER UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY ■r/■9i■■■I■■■■Np/■■H■\J■■■•■� °_ '� OSTANDARD DRAYANG NO 220-$T 01 ir , ®� �I■■C ��• I j q6 O STANDARD UTILITY TRENCH TO BE CONSTRUCTED PER DETAIL 2 ON DRAWING C4.0 :� l ��, '` } ��� ••• C„ G M I I I��%j I - s - -� �-' \ O POND OUTLET SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PER DETAIL 2 ON DRAWING C4.1 \\ I, { • ::_•_-_ i I _ � - � �� O4 ONNDRAVANG C4.ANITARY SEWER LATERAL TO EXISTING e" SEWER LINE PER DETAIL 5 l vg t I 1 .•i;::::: L II( I O CONSTRUCT NEW CLEANOUT PER DETAIL 1 ON DRAWING C4.0 RD Ip ■■ --' r i 3 �� II II O CONSTRUCT NEW CONCRETE MANHOLE PER DETAIL 1 ON DRAWING C4.1 p ■■ II1 / �� , f\---111 l l Ul 1 / I O RAISE EXISTING CATCH BASIN OR MANHOLE RIM ELEVATION TO NEW ELEVAT100N g ,°y I •• I W �- NOTED IN UTILITY SCHEDULE. .12 11 1 :: Io ll I 1i I . O PARKING LOWIDE CORNERB CUT FOR STORM WATER RUNOFF AT SOUTHWEST Si • • ,�' ll k i W , I 9 PRO ME RIP RAP PAD Al INLET TO POND. RIP RAP TO BE A MINIMUM OF T t I A o O 1 FT THICK MD 12 FT VAN FF 93.09 1 • I ii ( p ��I I I �10 I II <>PROVIDE POLY DRAIN TRENCH DRAIN WITH 6' HORIZONTAL COUTLET END PLATE. rW v� I TOP OF GRATE ELEVATION TO BE 89.03 WITH AN INVERT OUT ELEVATION OF 88.39. �� �' I OUTLET PIPE TO BE 6" PVC WITH A MINIMUM SLOPE OF 1% CONSTRUCT TRENCH DRAIN ' _ 1 .I ''W .�I// i 7l I I PER DETAIL /ON DRAWING C4.1 11 ■1®• I ' , I O PROVIDE 1" WATER METER AND SERVICE PER CITY OF TIGARD ENGINEERING p I• j: ' l o 11 DEPARTMENT DRAWING NO. 521. CONNECT TO EXISTING 8" TIGARD WATER f C :: '-.<«w..�i I I� I DISTRICT LINE ■■ ff) {� :: ;I I I h�I ; I 12 CONNECT TO MAIN PER STANDARD CONNECTION DETAIL 5 ON DRAWING C4.0 I MP it \I I1� II ► 1 q j ■■ t n m 1011 2 9 !I g •L I . I l a Pn I ,_I�. I 4• 11' l C 1 I ,� w _ I 1 ,i i�■■IN P6 I $S MH E}� E :��a� t ki RE-9 \ L*46t ■■ ? O� E (OUT)=85. 4 I ��:;� 1►. ; ; UTILITY SCHEDULE 1 ■...■■■••■ • I ~t'�i'?;eela• a` I CB 02 I r Mil F1I1t-HY RART T BE ; _. REMOVED BY OTHERS;t' TG INVRT. EL. INVRT. EL. I& I '<;r. �°' / a/ I M1 STRUCTURE CURB To BE NORTHING FASTING IN OUT I • Lam'4 'i �;.y y�y O I 8Y OTHERS I , RE ry4k /REMOVED 1 I(, L. :I .o,,t •LIT LO'DI G C7 ! �, MH/1 91.80 1586.21 1106.33 85.53 85.43 di IOa �f` FR -f" 9192 :iI` © NH/I I `,�V1� \ j , 4, MH#2 90.71 1832.09 1104.57 84.82 • `�iP CB #1\ O � �`- C8#1(E) 88.4(E 1574,70 1083.29 86.50(10") 85.98(12") I' • ?DE TEN 11ON "I II�1 O j 1 ! Sf(,x CB 2(E) 92.30(N 1617.37 1122.98 65.85(12') 85.77(12") I POND II /� L 91.60(E) 3 II I IE=85.65 I / bet ` , $ ' TUR I �/ CB#3(E) 91.5 1830.54 1122.25 84.45(12") 85.28(15") [?!1 4 6� / / i t I.'" \% a / C8#4 91.82 1740.70 1094.77 89.99 ,�„a_, f ,t e / / CBS 91.80 1635.02 1095.97 - 89.53 89.43 / CO#1 91.67 1599.01 1096.25 89.34 89.24 as // • 4 I USCHDI I 1, 1 ,' /, 11 // r + NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - - PLOTTED; 13;23 10/00/1999 - ©� MOFFATT NICHOL & BONNEY, INC. �`���°;"9 DESIGNED:MHO _ PROJECT NO. GRADING AND UTILITY PLAN P5950 CRAM: EJK DRAWING NO. �© consulting Engineers I ATIYEH RETAIL BUILDING p Po wzYwee�� G1Ep�D: MHO 6600 SW Bonita Road C2,0 1845 Northeast Couch Street, Portland Oregon 97232 Telephone (503) 232-2117, Fox (503) 232-8023 �'QT A.BON tssum 10/1/99 DAIE REVISIONS EXP. 12/31 • SC , 1•_20' TIGARD OREGON PR,E - APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES �` � � � }.r,wV lifilitar,71,--. .A437,. -'e""""'4'"' .------ . ° , 5 i :� M G�1R - P ' . : RO ISj � ; -1� �,:. EPLI I ON CONEEENC N E = .'--: ' , � C ,. :, 6 • :"- t -r. -, ,. Y 'Zifb-^ — w .. :v- --1[Pre`Appiicatioeetinw .otes are a.Id10 .1xj6Monh ,,„ ,.--NON-RESIDENTIAL PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: // ".%4 V- O/ COd4 i2e(oMG$ e rye ii. L 1� L STAFF AT PRE-APP.: �J r- B - / � �J oJI G 4 vq/14 b4 O� � s G J e rk APPLICANT: IQ v1 Sdza AGENT: 4 Phone:[ 1 Phone: [ I PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GEN.LOCATION: TAX MAP[S1/LOT#[SI: o. S/ /24D - o0/00 I NECESSARYAPPLICATION[SI: /c. �o,,</ rK4 ��i L✓ PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: j{4 0,4-)4- 2 a n�/�� 'S/ ii f- /27 ''o c S�^_ P ��cl* Ru P-471-01/ A-4:1/4' /hol�_6JlC 7l .1CS7/I/ns1 7-4171 71 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN .� MAP DESIGNATION: 2"=10 ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: •Z---P C.I.T.AREA Z,;2,5:72- FACILITATOR: PHONE [5031 l -- :TONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT SIZE: Cpl sq. ft. Average lot width: Sc' ft. Maximum building height: t;IS ft. r,ethack Front • '� ft. Side ft. Rear ci'. ft. Corner Zo' ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: 75 % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: a5 %. [Refer to Code Section 18. 53 a_ l ,..(0_ , ay���� / �� <-4-z-1� � ,75-5,. c..- 3e./\,.)e,..._/ Co I • n /47. 5-:?...9, 0....c-c., "p _- /, re" JIIDITIONA[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 2v TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. [Refer to Code Section 18.164.060-Lots) CITY OFT1CARD Pre-Appllcat1on Conference Notes Page 1 0110 MC I- ss<irrtla!MAiIIcatlr■/PIauinr Olvlslar Sactla■ • OEC:AI SETBA S �/ TREETS: 3 feet from the centerline of it/{� > ESTABLISHED AREAS: feet from • • LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet, along the site's boundary. • FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. [Refer to Code Section and 18.961 IAI BUILDING HEIGHT PROYISIO' - - - " 'T1ONS - 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 (y) of the building's height; and • The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. [Refer to Code Section 18.98.0201 AHD CES REQUIRED parking for this type of use: 4s''/e- SXa"5Z9 Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): 37 17 -9( SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: / e/-'// 3. '1' «: str,nr 2-�.9‘..., Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): oPC"ce. 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, 8 inches x 18 feet. • Compact parking space dimensions: 8 feet x 15 feet. 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 18.106.0201 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. Bicycle parking spaces shall be provided on the basis of one space for every fifteen (15) required vehicular parking spaces. Minimum number of accesses: /� Minimum access width: 3(-7) Minimum pavement width: All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: [Refer to Code Section 18106 and 18.1081 CITY OF T1GARA Pro-Anpncatlon Conference Notes Page 2 0110 NIMInlI �tl��Iflcatl�UTfuta!IMsliaS.ctla �AY 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 18.108.0501 WIG AREA EitIREMENTS Every COMME CIAL 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 18.106.070-0901 VISION AR - ity requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE AND EIGHT 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 Section 18.1021 BUFFERING AND SCREENING In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE AS : E NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between dip-rent land use , ■e City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Rewired buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied b a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance bet een vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be os3'cupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer .rea materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.1001 The REQUIRED BUF IDTHS which are a. •Iicable to our .ro•osal area are as follows: feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: - iDSCAPING_D --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 18.100,18.106 and 18.108] CM OPTICABD Pre-Anutication Conference Notes Page 3 0111 11N-#atO.tlal&ollc*Uau tlnalii;MilanSactlo■ • 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 Section 18.1141 SENSITIVE LANDS The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely 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 Section 18.841 STEEP SLOPES When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical - m be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Co Section 18.84.040.B. The report shall be based upon field exploration and • vestigation and shat( include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements .f 18.84.040.B.2 and 18.84.040.B.3. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY NSA]BUFFER STANDARDS,R&0 96-44 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall pres:rve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quay functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRID• SHALL BE A MINI •' OF 25-F' T-WIDE, measured horizontally, from the defined boundarie- of the sensitive area, except -re approval has been granted by the Agency or City to reduce th • width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of : portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an area of he vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable encroachment -hall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the length of th:• vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in width. In any c..se, the average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. Restrictions in the Ve.eta,- Corridor: NO structures, develop ent, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any material- 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 GRAV •, • KWAY OR BIKE PATH, NOT EXCEEDING 8 FEET IN WIDTH. If the walkway or b. - path is paved, then the vegetated corridor must be widened by the width to the path. A .:ved or gravel walkway or bike path may not be constructed closer than 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 CITY OFT]6AED Pre-A W Icatlon Conference Notes Page 4 of e NON Oasldsatlii bollcstleaRhaalnq NMsloa Sictlo■ WATER QUALITY FACT_ . IES may encroach into the vegetate, orridor a maximum of 10 feet • with the approval of the Agency or City. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CRE• " S MULTIPLE PARCELS or lo nded for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the ve. -tated corridor shall be contained in a separa tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used or the construction of a dwelling unit. (Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3 Design for SWMI WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY DISTRICT The WATER RESOURCES (WR) OVERLAY DIS RICT implements the policies of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and is intended to resolve con icts between development and conservation of significant wetlands, streams and riparian corridors identified in the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. Specifically, this chapter allows r-asonable economic use of property while establishing clear and objective standards to: protec significant wetlands and streams; limit development in designated riparian corridors; maintain a • enhance water quality; maximize flood storage capacity; preserve native plant cover; minimize stre:mbank erosion; maintain and enhance fish and wildlife habitats; and conserve scenic, recreatio al and educational values of water resource areas. Safe Harbor: The WR OVERLAY DISTRICT AL'.O MEETS THE REQ. 'EME TS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 (Natural Resources) and t - "safe harbor" provisions • •- Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660, Division 23). These provision- require that "significant" wetlands and riparian corridors be mapped and protected. The Tualati 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-B a.RING STREAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry and have an average annual flow less than 1000 cubic feet per second (cfs). > Major strea s in '.ard include F' NNO CREEK, ASH CREEK (EXCEPT THE NORTH FORK AND ITHER :UTARY CR EKS) AND BALL CREEK. Minor Streams: Streams which are N•T "FISH-BEARING STREAMS" according to Oregon Department of Forestry maps . Minor streams Tigard include Summer Creek, Deny Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and c- ain 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-:ANKS, OR THE EDGE OF AN ASSOCIATED WETLAND, whichever is great The riparian setback is the same as the "riparian corridor boundary" in OAR 660-23- 090(1/ d). ➢ The stan and TUALA N RIVER RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 75 FEET, unless modified in accordance v7Ith this ch.pter. > The MAJOR ST' . AM` RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 50 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. I ➢ ' 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 18.85.010) CITY OF T1GARO Pre-AupUcatlon Conteronce Notes Pogo 5 sill 3lON-Iul4.etlhI&eellc.tl.e/NI.eelH Mils'S.ctl.e • Blii;arian Setback Reductions The DIRECTOR MAY APPROVE A SITE-SPECIFIC REDUCTION OF T E TUALATIN RIVE ANY MAJOR STREAM RIPARIAN SETBACK BY AS MUCH AS 50% o allow the placement of structures or impervious surfaces otherwise prohibited by this chapter, p ovided that equal or better protection for identified major stream resources is ensured through str ambank restoration and/or enhancement of riparian vegetation in preserved portions of the riparian s•tback area. Eligibility for Riparian Setback in Disturbed Areas. TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A RIPARIAN SETBACK REDUCTION, the app icant must demonstrate that the riparian corridor was substantially •tsturbe. . a- time this regulation was adopted. This determination must be based on t e Vegetation Study -, ire. by Section 18.85.050.0 that demonstrates all of the following: Native plant species current! cover less than 80% of the on-site riparian corridor area; • The tree canopy currently lovers less than 50% of the on-site riparian corridor and healthy trees have not been remov-d from the on-site riparian setback area for the last five years; • at ve.- - ion was not r-moved contrary to the provisions of Section 18.85.050 regulating removal of nati - slant •ecies; That there will be no infringement into the 100-year floodplain; and • The average slope of the riparian area is not greater than 20%. (Refer to Code Section 18.85.100] MEE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREME A TREE PA THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, 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 18.150.070.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 18.150.070.D; g> 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 18.150.070.D. (Refer to Code Section 18.150.025] CM Of T1CARU Pro-AOppcatlon Conference Rotas Page 6 of 11 MOM-t.sltlutlal Isallatlaa/TlaaatuI aMslaa Sac 1.a GATT REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: > A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. • If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. • If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. [Refer to Code Section 18.150.070[DI �NARRATNE� he 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 Section 18.321 !8. /30� !s„ 36. 18. 390 l &Yzo (v5-30, /1?. 70S /x'. 730 /X'. ?YS /i 7SS - CODE SECTIONS /a. 745, /8. 790, /8. 800 (Ncw Gods da r1) 111 18.80 _ 18.92 _ 18.102 _ 18.116 l�` , _ 18.84 18.96 18.106 18.120 _ 18.8 _ : 98 18.10: 18.1 I :.;8 18. e s • 8. 4 18 34 •:-• ° IMPACT STUDY a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.32,Section.0501 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-AUpDcatIoa Conference Notes Page 1 of 10 Mar-aoiIi.anal AsialcstleafflusINI oM Ion Ssctiu WHEN A CONDITION OF APPROVAL REQUIRES 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. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.32,Section.2501 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING/ THE APPETCANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 250 FEET AND THE APPROPRIATE CIT FACILITATOR AND THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE(S) of their proposal. A minimum of 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 SUBDIVISION LANs USE APPLICAT •N with the City of 'lard, applicant's are required to mplete and file a subdivi- .n plat na ' g request with the Washin• on County Surveyor's Offic in order to obtain approvar - -• . ion for any subdivision name. Applicati s will not b accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval fro the Cou ty of the Subdivision Name Reservation. [County Surveyor's Office: 503-648-88841 BUILDING PERMITS P OR 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 plicant 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. i 3e?to 5...v 1-4,144711-1 c i4i (Refer to Code Section18.116) 54- % .i. "ox `0 �e / CITY OF T16A110 Pre-Appflcatlon Conference Notes Page 8.110 N9ti-Euldpptltl AApllcatlaI/Tlpapiap➢Mslap Section ADOI7iONAl CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: 1Jeed 5-7° i 1-I 0/4 1 4 1 0/S V P ? f a r c /a 75d 3 9rz� . U 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), 8W' x 11" map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering 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 10-20 day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard '. A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available 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. MY OF T1GARO Pm-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 11 K011- u1laatlsl4pllcstli■/PhootopOlvtslo■Settle■ 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 tfle 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 RY: Jr)/q y9//t cii/( CITY OFTIGARD TANNING DIVISION - STAff PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP.MEETING PHONE: [5031639-4171 FAX: [503)684-7297 E-MA1L (staff's first name)@CLtIgard.Or.uS kUe9le W ttylauterslpnappt.st ttnitaeertq SectleL masterslpresopi.eoel Opdatek 2841ay-98 • CfTY OF TIGARD Pro-Application Conference Notes Page 10 of 10 X011-1e1ldsnisl Aspticatlee/?Isenlne OMsloo Sectlo■ CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST CRY OF TIGARD The items on the checklist below are required for the succesful completion of your application submission requirements. This checklist identifies what is required to be submitted with your application. This sheet MUST be returned and submitted with all other applicable materials at the time you submit your land use application. See your application for further explanation of these items or call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. Staff: Date: I APPLICATION & RELATED DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE ./MARKED ITEMS I A) Application form (1 copy) B) Owner's signature/written authorization rg C) Title transfer instrument/or grant deed t� 0) Applicant's statement No. of Copies E) Filing Fee $ S °I I SITE-SPECIFIC MAP(S)/PLAN(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE ./MARKED ITEMS A) Site Information showing: No. of Copies /8 1. Vicinity map E' 2. Site size & dimensions ram 3. Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10%) ea, 4. Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds I!! ' 5. Locations of natural hazard areas including: (a) Floodplain areas car' (b) Slopes in excess of 25°f t� (c) Unstable ground (d) Areas with high seasonal water table s� (e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential (f) Areas having severely weak foundation soils et' 6. Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Map Inventory including: (a) Wildlife habitats gl' (b) Wetlands °, 7. Other site features: (a) Rock outcroppings I (b) Trees with 6" + caliper measured 4 feet from ground level r� 8. Location of existing structures and their uses e' 9. Location and type of on and off-site noise sources t21- 10. Location of existing utilities and easements 11 . Location of existing dedicated right-of-ways t LAND USE APPUC TtON/LiST PAGE 1 OF 5 8) Site Development Plan indicating: , No. of Copies (g 1. The proposed site and surrounding properties 2. Contour line intervals e/ 3. The location, dimensions and names of all: (a) Existing & platted streets & other public ways and easements on the site and on adjoining properties (b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site (c) Alternative routes of dead end or proposed streets that require future extension ❑ 4. The location and dimension of: (a) Entrances and exits on the site El" (b) Parking and circulation areas ta' (c) Loading and services area t ' (d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation (e) Outdoor common areas t • (f) Above ground utilities 5. The location, dimensions & setback distances of all: (a) Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities, and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet of the site e� (b) Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site t� 6. Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions e� 7. Sanitary sewer facilities 8. The location areas to be landscaped ra` 9. The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques e-/ 10. The location of mailboxes [� 11 . The location of all structures and their orientation e' 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements e� C) Grading Plan Indicating: No. of Copies / 8 The site development plan shall include a grading plan at the same scale as the site analysis drawings and shall contain the following information: 1. The location and extent to which grading will take place indicating: (a) General contour lines a� (b) Slope ratios ❑ (c) Soil stabilization proposal(s) ❑ (d) Approximate time of year for the proposed site development ❑ 2. A statement from a registered engineer supported by data factual substantiating: (a) Subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering report ❑ (b) The validity of sanitary sewer and storm drainage service proposals ❑ (c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION I LIST PACE 2 OF 5 D) Architectural Drawin, ndicating: v, of Copies !' The site development plan proposal shall include: 1. Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures i; proposed for use on-site 2. Typical elevation drawings of each structure E) Landscape Plan Indicating: No. of Copies /Y The landscape plan shall be drawn at the same scale of the site analysis plan or a larger scale if necessary and shall indicate: 1. Description of the irrigation system where applicable ttK 2. Location and height of fences, buffers and screenings (2)- 3. Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces ❑ 4. Location, type, size and species of existing and proposed plant materials e� 5. Landscape narrative which also addresses: (a) Soil conditions 1;k- (b) Erosion control measures that will be used CV F) Sign Drawings: ❑ Sign drawings shall be submitted in accordance with Chapter 18.114 of the Code as part of the Site Development Review or prior to obtaining a Building Permit to construct a sign. G) Traffic Generation Estimate: tr H) Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Map Indicating: No. of Copies /g 1. The owner of the subject parcel o� 2. The owner's authorized agent t� 3. The map scale (20,50,100 or 200 feet-1) inch north arrow and date e� 4. Description of parcel location and boundaries cY 5. Location, width and names of streets, easements and other public ways within and adjacent to the parcel e" 6. Location of all permanent buildings on and within 25 feet of all property lines 0 7. Location and width of all water courses 8. Location of any trees within 6" or greater Caliper at 4 feet above ground level a- 9. All slopes greater than 25% 0- 10. Location of existing utilities and utility easements r� 11. For major land partition which creates a public street: (a) The proposed right-of-way location and width a� (b) A scaled cross-section of the proposed street plus any reserve strip a- 12. Any applicable deed restrictions e- 13. Evidence that land partition will not preclude efficient future land division where applicable a' LANO USE APPLICATION J LIST PAGE 3 OF 3 I) Subdivision Prelimina 'lat Map and Data Indicating: . of Copies 1. Scale equaling 30,50,100 or 200 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per sheet ❑ 2. The proposed name of the subdivision ❑ 3. Vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial and collector streets ❑ 4. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner, deve •per, engineer, surveyer and designer (as applicable) ❑ 5. Date of application ❑ 6. Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided ❑ 7. Names of adjacent subdivision or names of recorded o , ners of adjoining parcels of un-subdivided land ❑ 8. Contour lines related to a City-established benchmar at 2-foot intervals for 0-10% grades greater than 10% ❑ 9. The purpose, location, type and size of all the fol owing (within and. adjacent to the proposed subdivision): (a) Public and private right-of-ways and eas- ents ❑ (b) Public and private sanitary and storm s: er lines ❑ (c) Domestic water mains including fire drants ❑ (d) Major power telephone transmission ines (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ (e) Watercourses ❑ (f) Deed reservations for parks, open spaces, pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ 10. Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers • with grades and pipe sizes indicat:• on the plans ❑ 11. Plan of the proposed water distri'ution system, showing pipe sizes and the location of valves and fire drants ❑ 12. Approximate centerline profil: showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision ❑ 13. Scaled cross sections of •roposed street right-of-way(s) ❑ 14. The location of all are. subject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ 15. Location, width & d' ection of flow of all water courses & drainage-ways ❑ 16. The proposed lot •nfigurations, approximate lot dimensions and lot numbers. W ere lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it all be indicated upon such lots. ❑ 17. The location of all trees with a diameter 6 inches or greater measured at 4 feet abo e ground level, and the location of proposed tree plantings ❑ 18. The exis 'ng uses of the property, including the location of all structures and the present uses of the structures, and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting ❑ 19. Su•plemental information including: ,) Proposed deed restrictions (if any) ❑ (b) Proof of property ownership ❑ (c) A proposed plan for provision of subdivision improvements ❑ 0. Existing natural features including rock outcroppings, wetlands & marsh areas ❑ 21 . If any of the foregoing information cannot practicably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION I LIST PAGE 4 OF 5 J) Solar Access Calculations: ❑ K) Other Information No. of Copies /8 41 M -. / i'• (G • Ni.) "Pe -4., p A.► h Nog in\patty4nas tersUtld ist.mst • May 23,1995 LAND USE APPLICATION/UST PAGE 5 OF 3 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES A� ➢ ENGINEERING SECTION Q Commuunity Development Shaping A Better Community LS \ \ZAD PUBLIC FACILITIES .. \c D 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 ❑ 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. TY OF TISARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 6 glneerteg Department Section ( ) street it -)vements will be necessary along . to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ( ) street improvements will be necessary along to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ 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. ( ) Section 18.164.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW . Prior to , the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. :try OFT1&ARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 6 ngloeeriog Department Section In some cases, where street • -ovements or other necessary pub' .mprovements are not currently practical, the improvements h. , be deferred. In such cases, a cL...Jition 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.) Sanitary Sewers: C U � r �� -s, The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) inch line which is located . The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to Water Supply: (c'/-z-,'2 The - Phone:(503) 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. A downstream analysis will also likely be necessary to determine if runoff from the proposed development will cause adverse impacts to the existing storm system downstream of the site. 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 newly created impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant 'JrY OF 11CARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 6 IV:leering 9epertment Section to- pay a fee in-lieu of construr 1 an on-site facility provided spec'" criteria are met. The City will , use discretion in determining w....cher or not the fee in-lieu will be oh. .:d. 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. S �T A APt'-.kcA—Ct qJ . 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. 'ERMITS 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. In addition, the permittee will be required to post a bond or similar financial security for the work. i1Y OF T1CARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 6 :gineering Department Section Compliance Agreemer" 'AP). This permit covers more e> sive work such as main utility line extensions, street 1,. rrovements, etc. In subdivisions, L. . 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 ohtain 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. 1T1 OF T16ARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 016 171neettog Department Section TRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR 5' lIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: l ti �g ENGINEERING DEPAR ENT STAFF Phone: (503)639-4111 Fax: 15031684-7297 h:lpatty\masters\prea pp.a ng (Master section:preapp-r.mst) D1-Sept-98 CITY Of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 (egIu,ering Department Section ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: January 11, 2000 TO: FILE: SDR 1999-00025, Atiyeh Brothers FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer RE: Condition #15: Undergrounding Requirement After the decision was issued, I determined that the subject site does not actually have frontage on SW Bonita Road. The partition that was approved prior to the SDR left the access easement area adjacent to Bonita Road a part of the Schatz Furniture parcel. Therefore, since this site does not have frontage on Bonita Road, the applicant is not subject to the overhead utility undergrounding requirement. Condition #15 will not apply. I will note such in Permit*Plan. i:\eng\brianr\comments\sdr\sdr1999-00025-undergroundi ng.doc PAGE 1 05/10/00 06:21 $503 625 6179 PRIDE DISPOSAL Z1001/004 SDI 1999-0°02_5 Pride Disposal Co. FaIDE To h k r o /-t r From: Fax �£/ — 7 7 /0 Date: S"- /0 - ° D Phone: 7-45-^ ?/00 Pages: IRe: Attn: ---- I 0 Urgent ❑ For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle TELEPHONE(503)625-6177 FAX IS (503) 625.8179 •Comments: s :� ct 4.-m wft( , - P� DI 5 POCCLAS Ar,ii/a ‘12/el f h I 05/10/00 06:21 $503 625 6179 PRIDE DISPOSAL Z003/004 mnY-05`3000 1L:42 nNKRCM MOI51*l 503 245 7710 P.02. 02 ;117: its / 3 .4 ,iiiiiiiiiiint. •.11�i .• T'al i 1 1 tin 'ell j. • • N .6 ... y ;"- ;a: -- • :moll, ■:•' ■ e . �� _ . p11144146 , .. . 8. 111 P k 1 a ',4b■ / iik . a a •I ; __`F r96 s - x~ i 1 - 1 1 t t- , . .r.. ii i .... ie. . . . 0 A .. . , _______________________ • ae. ____:- s ' " B a % 8 ) 1 . Ths... 0, iit (...7 40--..-- ----I-3 wow,.a . X I !A TOTAL P.02 ..1. 0 0 -r o o CONDITIC)N BEFORE OCCUPANCY . 70' -- ) These are all inside measurement • for wells of enclosure. NO CENTER POST S= ACCESS POINT. _) Gates hinged in front of walls - no _side. '"•r_'_s :'--- a_?ow =o: the extra `_=' an::e needed. '.71 _ ft.= 80" . ., _) Spa.-... be-wee :....-Line-- 11 a access to recycL- - :c: s. cr)ca -) Reepc_inc :a.es a e i A a'_?oM ?3" be=weer. =ecv:_i N a. 5) :,ales must be a le == be caned L in =he open and closed pcs- n =-o . e• ,1 y r c.-5 ' ' co N = CD r> �r1 :.5.4f, N -:L.- j :7 011 CO J O 0 O 0 o , N um NNE ANKROM MOISAN ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTS FAX MESSAGE laStS TO: J U I—I�s I--lM cll< �20 Oti DATE: S7 I $ /0 c°c)'"(11 00/H\� FIRM: £:rr( c ti GAlvto FAX #: FROM: RE: ikr If r( t3l.JOG JOB NO. NUMBER OF PAGES (including this cover sheet) MESSAGE: Mti Atze 1514 Pic S w 5E4413 fat BSIgl z - Please call us if you had any problems in receiving this transmission or if there are pages missing. 67.10 s.w. Macadam,Suite coo,Portland,Oregon 972.19, 503/245-7100,FAX 503/245-7710 Principals:Stewart H.Ankrom,Thomas Moisan,David N.Vonada.Lorraine C.Kellow,Jeff-Hamilton,Karen Bowery SITE PLAN REVIEW ,., ;. CITY OF TIGARD COMMENTS Shaping Development aping Better Community Date: 5-l-00 Staff Person Commenting: Department: Pmn Phone Number/Extension: 4 3'9 yi ,/ Xyo _ Project Name: /9i/ R(04-L Q_-%,)1 Site Permit No.: Land Use Case File NUM.: ;Di2 /999- 00025 The Proposed Plans Submitted For A Site Permit Have Been Reviewed By Our Department And We Have The Following Comments: ❑ PLANS ARE APPROVED. All land use conditions related to this department have been satisfactorily met. � ' PLANS ARE GENERALLY CONSISTENT with the land use approval, HOWEVER, THERE ARE STILL LAND USE CONDITIONS THAT MUST BE MET PRIOR TO RELEASE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS, OR PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION. Specifically, 3 E 9(1d 9_ S «/q5 .5-,p-7,e a,4'o„ X4c.a04c / z y- 7 ) I i PLANS ARE NOT CONSISTENT with the land use approval AND MUST BE REVISED. Specifically, NOTE: IF THE PERMIT APPLICANT HAS ANY QUESTIONS WITH REGARD TO THE COMMENTS ABOVE, THEY MUST CONTACT THE STAFF PERSON SPECIFIED AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE. h:\patty\rnasters\siteplan.mst 051800 These plans as submitted, are acceptable for lighting proposals for the project. Thanks. Jim Wolf Crime Prevention Officer oPA Tigard Police Department `-p 7 Customer Receipt CITY OF TIGARD Printed:06/23/2000 15:42 User: front Station: 02 Operator: DLH Rcpt No: 0003249 Date: 06/23/2000 Customer No:000000 Amount Due: 30.00 Name: ATIYEH BROS. Cash: 0.00 Address: 800 SW WASHINGTON ST. Check: 30.00 PORTLAND, OR 97205 N/A 0.00 Change: 0.00 Type Description Amount EADDRE Engineering Address Fee 30.00 C,z( ;,6/a2 SZ e - 000 Merl 1TE OF OREGON 1 O . County of Washington SS • After Recording Return Recorded Document to RESw GO\ 1 I, Jerry ;�:� ,•+t.. ` of Assess- City Records-City of Tigard O ment and rr r. � s"jl.'o County Clerk for . .. .�,• 7 13125 SW Hall Blvd.-Tigard,OR 97223 M�� Z the wit {4 .. °;� r elce ved ` �tOr% and re',n,°a e ,�,... ,tea n .f said �c��'f countyy CORPORATION irector of a ;Taxation, Ex- ,'1 y. • thy-Clerk �v Project/File No. 5 ia,Vk Co026 Doc : 2001007746 Rect: 271540 37. 00 01/31/2001 12:00: 25pm \' EASEMENT PERMANENT WATERLINE y 1.1+ 3/C05., I f4 c , hereinafter called the "Grantors", grant, convey, and transfer unto the City of Tigard, a municipal corporation of Washington County, Oregon hereinafter referred to as "Grantee", its successor and assigns forever, a permanent easement over and upon the following described real property, to wit: 10' wide Fire Water Easement See Exhibit "A" Property Description attached and Exhibit "B" Easement Exhibit attached. This easement shall be for the construction, maintenance, and repair of an underground pipeline and/or mains for the purpose of conveying water over, across, through, and under the hereinabove described real property and shall include the perpetual right to enter upon said real property at reasonable times, together with the right to excavate and refill ditches for the location of said pipelines and/or mains, and the further right to remove all obstructions interfering with the location, construction, and maintenance of said pipeline and/or mains. The true consideration for this conveyance is $ 0.00 . However, the actual consideration consists of or includes other property or value given or promised which is the whole consideration. It is expressly understood that this easement does not convey any right, title, or interest except those expressly stated in this easement, nor otherwise prevent Grantors from the full use and dominion thereover; provided, however, that such use shall not interfere with the uses and purposes of the intent of the easement. In consideration of the premises, Grantee agrees that if said Grantee, its successors or assigns should cause said easement to be vacated, the rights of the Grantee in the above-described easement will be forfeited and shall immediately revert to the Grantors, their successors and assigns in the case of such event. To have and to hold the above-described and granted premises unto said Grantee, its successors, and assigns forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand on this "1-s-1*- day of ,7yL1/4, , 20 o► . Atiyeh Bros. Name of Corporation Signature L v—,fru-C. I RA) 6750 SW Bonita Rd. -MARS°A Address Title Tigard, OR 97224 Signature H Title STATE OF OREGON ) )ss. County of Washington ) This inst •me was acknowledged before m- on - _ (date) by / e(s) of person(s)) as (type of authority, e.g., officer,trustee, etc) of r (name of party on behalf of whom instrument was executed). • OFFICIAL SEAL raw-a VIOLET L WOLTMON �� �` ,® NOTARY PUBLIC-0081889 COMMISSION N4. r MY COMMISSION EXPIRES FEB,18 2001 Notary's Signature My Commission Expires: 07—/ Y—o/ Accepted on behalf of the City of Tigard this 2.9 ' day of d A- JU AQ i , 200 . • tai ._ - Utility Mana:-r 1\PW\BASEMENf.DOC WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS INC. ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING Phone: 503 684-0652 Fax: 503 624-0157 Atiyeh Retail Building 10' Wide Fire Water Easement Project No.: 1015-04 (A) January 09, 2001 EXHIBIT "A" PROPERTY DESCRIPTION A 10 foot wide strip of land situate in the southeast one-quarter of the northeast one-quarter of Section 12, T. 2 S., R. 1 W., WM, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon,being a portion of Parcel 2, Partition Plat Number 2000-020, recorded as document number 2000022261, Washington County Plat Records, and lying 5 feet on each side of the following described centerline: Beginning at the northeast corner of said Parcel 2; thence along the easterly line of said Parcel 2, South 0°26'19" East, 190.01 feet; thence, South 21°01'57" West, 4.24 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence, South 89°33'41" West, 52.97 feet to the terminus of said centerline. Subject to lengthening and/or shortening of sidelines so that they terminate on the proper boundaries; REGISTERED 'S The area contained is 530 square feet, more or less. PROFESSIONAL 2 ' ND SURV • " H:\ADMIN\101504.00\SURVEY\ED 101504-FW.DOC OREGON AUG.14,1998 DOUGLAS D. LILES #2861 I efew: I Z/3I/2tvZ- III Pacific Corporate Center, 15115 S.W. Sequoia Parkway, Suite 150,Tigard, Oregon 97224 3 z o S89'26'10"W N. 1 15,3 88' o 1 0 0° o°- 20.00' 11I1I v 1111 S89'38'0d'W A ' I ii,V\) J 0 J PARCEL 2 GALE: 1 " = 40' PARTITION PLAT 2000-020 DOC. NO. (0 - PARCEL 1 2000022261 PARTITION PLAT 2000- 020 EXISTING BUILDING I DOC. NO. 2000022261 z 0 N.) 0 O� cn O O U! o S89'33'41"W _/1\/_ 4.24' 1 T TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING S89'33'41"W I 52.97' lid ft). N8929_57"E 100.00' EXHIBIT " B " EASEMENT EXHIBIT DATE 01-09-00 DRAWN BY DDL ICI WESTLAKE SE1/4, NE1/4, SEC. 12, T2S., R1 W., WM CONSULTANTS INC. CITY OF TIGARD CHECKED BY WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON BRS ENGINEERING • SURVEYING • PLANNING ED101504-FW.DOC REVISIONS PACIFIC CORPORATE CENTER JOB N0. 15115 S.W. SEQUOIA PARKWAY, SUITE 150 (503) 884-0852 1015-04-A TIGARD,OREGON 97224 FAX (503) 624-0157 LI • STATE OF OREGON SS • After Recording Return Recorded Document to: County of Washington City Records-City of Tigard -t i, Jerry J , ;,�*t ±u of Assess- 13125 SW Hall Blvd.-Tigard,OR 97223 D 0•t' ment and t w •` ��'~ o County E`v� G� Clerk for����-��, �;' as� •:rtify that G the wit n► ,n ' ;y` eceived O 2 1 and r-�-���;' °� . . �'�-` �`i��j f said \A�R county ; -, Y ' Y,t CORPORATION ► ! ; .�:�.. k a s.sss .a, *1 fr„ .hector of axation,—Project/FileNo. SIR-- 1g°1q- 0007- a.. ,r.T�J. Jerk Doc : 2001007797 Rect: 271590 37.00 01/31/2001 12:00: 26pm EASEMENT PERMANENT WATERLINE !so.)�1 t•H �2 mss. N , • , hereinafter called the "Grantors", grant, convey, and transfer unto the City of Tigard, a municipal corporation of Washington County, Oregon hereinafter referred to as "Grantee", its successor and assigns forever; a permanent easement over and upon the following described real property, to wit: "10' Wide Potable Water Easement" See Exhibit "A" Property Description attached and Exhibit "B" easement Exhibit attached. This easement shall be for the construction, maintenance, and repair of an underground pipeline and/or mains for the purpose of conveying water over, across, through, and under the hereinabove described real property and shall include the perpetual right to enter upon said real property at reasonable times, together with the right to excavate and refill ditches for the location of said pipelines and/or mains, and the further right to remove all obstructions interfering with the location, construction, and maintenance of said pipeline and/or mains. The true consideration for this conveyance is $ 0.00 . However, the actual consideration consists of or includes other property or value given or promised which is the whole consideration. It is expressly understood that this easement does not convey any right, title, or interest except those expressly stated in this easement, nor otherwise prevent Grantors from the full use and dominion thereover; provided, however, that such use shall not interfere with the uses and purposes of the intent of the easement. In consideration of the premises, Grantee agrees that if said Grantee, its successors or assigns should cause said easement to be vacated, the rights of the Grantee in the above-described easement will be forfeited and shall immediately revert to the Grantors, their successors and assigns in the case of such event. To have and to hold the above-described and granted premises unto said Grantee, its successors, and assigns forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand on this LC day of Thy"—, , 20 01 . Atiyeh Bros. Name of Corporation Signature t vVn41t V 11.,6 i;22J 6750 SW Bonita Rd. MA'S va-L_ Address Title Tigard, OR 97224 Signature Title STATE OF OREGON ) )ss. County of Washington ) This instrument was acknowledged before me, on G/� _ - .� .2.77.e:9 j (date) by `19' �. / ' name(s) of person(s)) as (type of authority, e.g., officer,trustee, etc) f 40, _ . 4► (name of art on behalf of whom instrument was executed), — ( party .ice?, OFFICIAL SEAL u,. VIOLET L WOLTMON r.� ; J`2E ).� NOTARY PUBLIC•OREGON �► -u: COMMISSION NO.061883 - — L '/ �6L< t� MY COMMISSION EXPIRES FEB.18,2001 Notary's's Si nature '�` -:sue>. r, _ g My Commission Expires-„y_/8-69 / Accepted on behalf of the City of Tigard this I-' Tfr day of ---)11.N" ' 20 o i ill Utility Manager I:'PW\EASEMENT.DOC a WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS INC. ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING Phone: 503 684-0652 Fax: 503 624-0157 Atiyeh Retail Building 10' Wide Potable Water Easement Project No.: 1015-04 (A) January 09, 2001 EXHIBIT "A" PROPERTY DESCRIPTION A 10 foot wide strip of land situate in the southeast one-quarter of the northeast one-quarter of Section 12, T. 2 S., R. 1 W., WM, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon,being a portion of Parcel 2, Partition Plat Number 2000-020, recorded as document number 2000022261, Washington County Plat Records, and lying 5 feet on each side of the following described centerline: Beginning at the northeast corner of said Parcel 2; thence along the easterly line of said Parcel 2, South 0°26'19" East, 162.97 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence, South 89°47'59" West, 54.39 feet to the terminus of said centerline. Subject to lengthening and/or shortening of sidelines so that they terminate on the proper boundaries; The area contained is 544 square feet, more or less. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL H:\ADMIN\101504.00\SURVEY\ED101504-PW.DOC ND S R 0 ND �� OREGON .14, 1998 DOUGLAS D. LILES #2861 POW 12131/24N' �I� Pacific Corporate Center, 15115 S.W. Sequoia Parkway, Suite 150,Tigard, Oregon 97224 3 v ■J z o J S89'26'10"W t. N o 15,3...k3 '1 0 \ 0 Sc0D � i 20.00' S89'38'Od'W r II 1 :11A I�I i,l PARCEL 2 ''AL 1 " = 40' PARTITION PLAT z -- o rn 2000-020 • ^'N (D 'O DOC. NO. °' ys RCEL 1 2000022261 PARTITION PLAT ) 2000-020 EXISTING BUILDING I DOC. NO. ° 1 2000022261 1 589'47'59"W °o 54.39' z I _ / N o — 01 —; Co 0 No TRUE POINT 1J- o OF BEGINNING r . I I ^v N8929_57"E 100.00' EXHIBIT " B " EASEMENT EXHIBIT DATE 01-09-00 DRAWN BY III WESTLAKE SE1/4, NE1/4, SEC. 12, T2S., R1 W., WM DDL CONSULTANTS INC. CITY OF TIGARD CHECKED BY WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON BRS ENGINEERING • SURVEYING • PLANNING REVISIONS ED101504-PW.DOC PACIFIC CORPORATE CENTER JOB N0. 15115 5.11. SEQUOIA PARK1fAY, SUITE 150 (503 884-0852 1015-04-A TIGARD,OREGON 97224 FAX (503 624-0157 Li RETURN RECORDED DOCUMEN""O: r ss CITY HALL RECORDS DEPART. ', STATE OF OREGON CITY OF TIGARD County of Washington 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,OR 97223 I, Jerry - :��E:, `u�-_. of Assess- ment and th.- \•io County CORPORATION Clerk forte. R s .�� 1 , r� -C rtify that the wit ` T.,..��.�: +°;;tn'-, ieceived and r- ••YF;Win;•-r `,;';,, ;',"'ate pf said File No *\///''',`�J.R/}� ,*hector of v�i k* c4Y'axatlon,Ex- a' .,► t. Jerk EASEMENT Doc 2001028933 Rect: 275873 32.00 PERMANENT SANITARY SEWER 04/05/2001 11: 47:O6arn WASHINGTON COUNTY 2001-028933 111111111 IIH II I IIIII 111111111 II II IIII IIIII 01111 Space above reserved for Washington County Recording inform, AT)Y U+ 13201, 1 NC , hereinafter called the Grantors, grant and convey unto the City of Tigard a perpetual easement for constructing, reconstructing, operating, maintaining, inspecting, and repairing of an underground sewer line and appurtenances, together with the right to remove, as necessary, vegetation, foliage, trees, and other obstructions on the parcel of land described in the attached Exhibit "A" situated in the City of Tigard,Washington County,State of Oregon. THE TRUE CONSIDERATION for this conveyance is $ 0.00 . However, the actual consideration consists of or includes other property or value given or promised which is the whole consideration. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD that this easement does not convey any right, title, or interest except those expressly stated in this easement, nor otherwise prevent Grantors from the full use and dominion thereover; provided, however, that such use shall not interfere with the uses and purposes of the intent of the easement. IN CONSIDERATION of the premises, Grantee agrees that if said Grantee, its successors or assigns should cause said easement to be vacated, the rights of the Grantee in the above-described easement will be forfeited and shall immediately revert to the Grantors,their successors and assigns in the case of such event. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above-described and granted premises unto said Grantee, its successors,and assigns forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I hereunto set my hand on this 31 s' day of J At„.:Anrt ,20 01 . Afl f4.1- 6«n&. t„,1 Name of Corporation Signature bi 139uL I A (L-D Address Title & I Oa-C3) (31-)7 7`1 Signature Title STATE OF OREGON ) )ss. County of Washington ) This instrument was acknowledged before me o J/' i. " ,.,po, (date)by Y G _(name(s)of person(s)) as (type of authority,e.g.,officer,trustee,etc.) of J� __— • (name of party on behalf of whom instrument was executed). r r=�+ OFFICIAL SEAL f .0 ` �,`?�; VIOLET L WOLTMON r 401 NOTARY PUBLIC•OREGON COMMISSION NO.061883 otary's Signature MY COMMISSION EXPIRES FEB.18,2001 r My Commission Expires: ' — /F–O f Accepted on behalf of the City of Tigard this a day of Fe-12 ,20 in Q. City g eer NO CHANGE IN TAX STATEMENT I:\ENG\PUB-FORM\P-SANT-P.DOT / �� • WESTLAKE CONSULTANTS IN(' ENGINEERING SURVEYING PLANNING Phone: 503 684-0652 Atiyeh Retail Building Fax: 503 624-0157 15' Wide Sanitary Sewer Easement Project No.: 1015-04 (A) January 30, 2001 EXHIBIT "A" PROPERTY DESCRIPTION A 15 foot wide strip of land situate in the southeast one-quarter of the northeast one-quarter of Section 12,T. 2 S., R. 1 W., WM, City of Tigard,Washington County,Oregon, being a portion of Parcel 1, and Parcel 2, Partition Plat Number 2000-020, recorded as document number 2000022261, Washington County Plat Records, and lying 7.5 feet on each side of the existing facility, the centerline of which is described as follows: Beginning at the northwest corner of said Parcel 2; thence along the west line of said Parcel 2, South 0°12'01" East, 0.19 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence, South 88°18'43" East, 149.26 feet; thence, South 00°34'31" East, 167.60 feet to Point "A"; thence, continuing South 00°34'31" East, 35.50 feet to the terminus of said centerline. Also included herewith a centerline beginning at aforementioned Point "A" and running thence South 89°41'50" West, 50.45 feet to the terminus of said centerline. Subject to lengthening and/or shortening of sidelines so that they terminate on the proper boundaries; The area contained in Parcel 2.is 4564 square feet,more or less. The area contained in Parcel 1 is 1366 square feet,more or less. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ND UR, Or OREGON AUG. 14,1998 DOUGLAS D. LILES #2861 H:UDMIM101504.001SURVEYIED101 SO4-SS.DOC ICI Pacific Corporate Center, 15115 S.W. Sequoia Parkway, Suite 150,Tigard, Oregon 97224 N851 2'56"E - - 110.35' — — —1 — — — - - ' S89'26'10"W S00'12'01"E o 37.34' 153.88' o N N00'12'01"W / NV SrS SS 10.80./10.80./ .■ 1 — — — � — / —— S89'38'00"W S88'18'43"E 15.00' • 20.00' 149.26' / / N /17 I I '1 SCALE: 1" = 40' (:II NR 1 1 o I 589 ' W Ln N00'26'19"W 500' 00"E 0.19' o 19001 o S$S8818'43E 149.26' CI o OF BECNNINGT 71 PARCEL 2 PARCEL 1 PARTITION PLAT I PARAT DETAIL: 2000-020 N 000-0 O NOT TOUALE DOC. NO. I II DOC. NO. i coCn 1• 2000022261 2000022261 oiL j : S89'41'50"W I POINT "A" 50.45' � 15.00' I l SS _,� I N.) ' EXISTING /I --)U! N 3 e 1- \ to' A-I cs) c,7 N 89'29'57"E 100.00' DATE 01-30-01 EASEMENT EXHIBIT il WESTLAKE DRAWN BY GCF/DDL I SE1/4, NE1/4, SEC. 12, T2S., R1 W., WM CONSULTANTS Mc. CITY OF TIGARD CHECKED B DDL /GRA WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON REVISIONS ENGINEERING • SURVEYING • PLANNING ED101504-SS.DOC PACIFIC CORPORATE CENTER JOB NO. 15115 S.W. SEQUOIA PARKWAY, SUITE 150 503 884-0852 1015-04 TIGARD,OREGON 97224 FAX 503 624-0157 2