The URL can be used to link to this page

SDR1999-00016 SDR1999 - 00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER NE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR)I999-00016 " CITY OF TIGARD REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER Community Development Shaping Better Community 120 DAYS = 1/19/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER CASES: Site Development Review SDR1999-00016 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with 3 buildings totaling 37,000 square feet of retail space. Parcel "C" was approved as part of the previous conceptual plan approval on the site and is, therefore, now being reviewed as a Detailed Plan/Site Development Review. APPLICANT: Rembold Properties OWNER: Waremart Foods, Inc. 1022 SW Salmon, Suite 450 400 S. Woodland Avenue Portland, OR 97205 Woodburn, OR 97071 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial; C-G. ZONING DESIGNATION: General Commercial; C-G. The General Commercial Zoning District provides sites for the provision of a wide range of major retail goods and services. The property is also designated with the following overlay districts: 1) Planned Development Overlay; and 2) Tigard Triangle Design Standards Overlay. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue at the northwest corner of the SW Dartmouth Street/72nd Avenue intersection; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 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. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 1 OF 19 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (503) 639-4171.) 1 . Submit are revised plan that shows a stairway connection from the access drive to the walkway in front of Building "A" or that shows a clearly marked pedestrian connection through the parking area to the front of the building will be provided. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 2. Submit a revised elevations plan for Building "B" showing that corrugated metal or other materials that are not permitted will not be used as exterior finishes. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 3. Submit a revised plan that provides an additional landscape island in the eastern bank of parking spaces. The revised plan must provide landscape islands that equally distribute trees on the basis of 1 tree per every 7 parking spaces. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 4. Submit a revised plan that provides an ADA Van Accessible parking space that will be located in front of Building "A" and at least one in front of Buildings `B" and "C". Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 5. Submit a revised plan that clearly shows the parking space and aisle dimensions for staff to confirm that the required dimensions are provided. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 6. Submit a revised plan that shows the location of existing or proposed bicycle racks within 50 feet of the main entrance to the buildings. The bicycle parking shall be proportionally distributed among the 3 new buildings and shall provide no less than 12 spaces total. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 7. Provide a detail of the bicycle rack to be used for staff's approval. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 8. Submit a written sign-off from the franchise waste hauler that the proposed facility meets the waste hauler standards. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 9. Submit a revised lighting plan for review and approval by the Police Department. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 10. Prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit, a Stjeet Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the cut and patchwork in SW 72" Avenue associated with the proposed water line connection. 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. 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. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of $90. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 2 OF 19 13. . Prior to a final building ;pection, the applicant shall court : any work within the public right-of-way and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 14. The site shall be constructed as per the approved plans. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS FINAL DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: This site is currently developed with several large retail stores including Winco Foods, Petsmart and OfficeMax. The site received conceptual plan approval in 1993 (SDR 93-0002/PDR93-0001) for the construction of the Winco (formerly Waremart and Cub Foods) and the Petsmart. The adjacent building site was approved for the OfficeMax development in 1994 (SDR 94-0024/PDR 94-0003). The Tigard Triangle Design Standards (TTDS) were adopted for this area in 1997. While these standards apply to this development, many can not be applied due to the previous conceptual plan approval of the building and parking locations. There are several changes in the buildings from the conceptual approval that brings the proposal more into compliance with the TTDS. Vicinity Information: The subject property is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue, north of SW Dartmouth Street in the existing Winco Foods shopping center site. The property to the north is developed with Regal Cinemas (formally Act III Theaters). The Winco Foods site is bordered on the west by Red Rock Creek. The property is surrounded on all sides by property zoned and developed General Commercial. Site Information and Proposal Description: The proposal is to construct a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. The improvements are generally consistent with the approved conceptual plan for Parcel "C" of the Winco Foods site. The Code allows projects that are approved as a phased development to be built over a 7-year period without having to receive a new conceptual plan approval. The Winco Foods was approved as part of a planned development in 1993. Since that time, the Community Development Code has changed in a way that changes how Planned Developments are reviewed. Because of that, this development can not be reviewed as a detailed plan because the concept plan approved under the old Code did not provide the same level of detail as required under the new Code. Because the Site Development Review essentially addresses the same issues as a detailed plan is supposed to and both are staff level decisions; this development is being reviewed as a Site Development Review (SDR). The proposed changes that are different from the previous approval bring the project more closely into compliance with the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Impact Study: Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.040 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 3 OF 19 The conceptual plan appro addressed impact to the transpo. on system at the time it was approved. This impact was based on a 41,105 square foot retail building being built on Parcel "C". The applicant was required to sign a non-remonstrance agreement based on the impacts of the entire development and to make significant improvements to mitigate traffic at the time of application. Because the applicant has already contributed to improvements based on the impact of the site as a whole, the applicant should not be required to contribute at this stage as they are just constructing the final piece of an already approved plan. TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS: Design standards for public street improvements and for new development and renovation projects have been prepared for the Tigard Triangle. These design standards address several important guiding principals adopted for the Tigard Triangle, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. All new developments are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described below and other development standards required by the Development and Building Codes, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle. The following design standards apply to all development located within the Tigard Triangle. If a standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code, standards in this section shall govern. The criteria may be adjusted if the adjustment approval criteria, which are found in Section 18.620.090.C.1-4, have been met. The criteria provides that an adjustment may be granted if granting the adjustment will continue to meet the purpose of the standard(s) to be modified in an acceptable alternative manner; and the proposal will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of an area and the proposal will be consistent with the desired character of the area; and if more than one adjustment is being requested, the cumulative effect of the adjustments as well as each individual adjustment results in a project which is still consistent with the overall purpose, goals and standards of the zone; and granting the adjustment is the minimum necessary to allow the proposed use of the site; and any impacts resulting from the adjustment are mitigated to the extent practicable. Street Connectivity: All development must demonstrate how one (1) of the following standard options will be met. Variance of these standards may be approved per the requirements of Chapter 18.134 where topography, barriers such as railroads or freeways, or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street extensions and connections. Design Option: a. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet; b. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way shall be provided at intervals of no more that 330 feet. Performance Option: a. Local street spacing shall occur at intervals of no less than eight (8) street intersections per mile; b. The shortest vehicle trip over public streets from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than twice the straight-line distance; c. The shortest pedestrian trip on public right-of-way from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than one and one-half the straight-line distance. The development is proposed on the existing Winco Shopping Center site. Because of the location of the existing structures, a street meeting the street connectivity standards is not possible. There is, however, an access drive at the northern and southern portion of the development site (Parcel "C" on the concept plan) which effectively provides access through the site at intervals of 600 feet. In addition, there is a pedestrian connection to SW 72n Avenue via a stairway, which is proposed to be located 310 feet from the southern access drive and approximately 300 feet from the northern access drive. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 4 OF 19 FINDING: Because the ex. j development and topography p bits full compliance with the design option anu oecause the spirit of the standard is i net by existing access drives • and the proposed pedestrian connection, staff has determined that the street connectivity standard is satisfied. Site Design Standards: All development must meet the following site design standards. If a parcel is one (1) acre or larger a phased development plan must be approved demonstrating how these standards for the overall parcel can be met. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.134.050 (Criteria for Granting a Variance) is satisfied. Building placement on Major and Minor Arterials and the street: Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50 percent of all street frontages along Major and Minor Arterial Streets. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on Major and Minor Arterial Streets. The Conceptual Plan had Retail "C" at the northern end of the site, adjacent to the existing Petsmart which occupied less than 50% of the frontage. The change from the conceptual plan provides 2 building areas along the frontage, which is more building frontage along SW 72n Avenue than previously approved. Due to the location of the existing buildings on the existing development site, this standard can not be applied along the Dartmouth Street frontage. Building setback: The minimum building setback from public street rights-of-way or dedicated wetlands/buffers and other environmental features, shall be 0 feet; the maximum building setback shall be 10 feet. The conceptually approved building setback was 35 feet from the property line. The proposed buildings come closer to conforming with the Tigard Triangle design standards. The sales area of building "B" will be within 10 feet of the property line although not all of the wall area will be within this setback area. Due to the topography, the building wall will not be visible from the street. Building "A", because it is in a location different from the conceptual plan, is required to fully comply with the setback standards. The applicant has asked for an adjustment to increase the setback due to the topography and geotechnical issues with the existing retaining wall. The setback would be increased to 11 feet, 6 inches. As discussed elsewhere in more detail, staff has evaluated the adjustment standards and has approved the Adjustment request. Front yard setback design: Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one (1) street, the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to an L-1 standard on public streets. Hard-surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.620.070. There is existing landscaping which will be retained along the SW 72nd Avenue frontage between the property line and Building "A" and Building "B". The applicant has not submitted a plan that shows the detail of the existing landscaping for staff to confirm that it meets the L-1 standard, however, this will be discussed in more detail further in this decision. Walkway connection to building entrances: A walkway connection is required between the building's entrance and the public street or accessway providing access to the property. This walkway must be at least six (6) feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner near a public street intersection are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.620.070. The applicant has proposed a 6-foot wide stairway and pedestrian connection from SW 72nd Avenue to the entrance of Building "B" and "C". A walkway to Building "A" is not clearly shown. There is an existing sidewalk from SW 72nd Avenue along the entry drive adjacent to Building "A", however, the grade differential along this driveway will not allow pedestrian access to the building without crossing a portion of the parking lot or constructing a stairway. The applicant either needs to construct a stairway directly from the access driveway to the walkway in front of the building, or provide a clearly marked pedestrian connection through the parking area to the front of the building. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 5 OF 19 Parking location and land; de design: Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. The parking is located to the side and rear of the buildings based on the SW 72nd Avenue frontage. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, all of the site design standards have not been met, however, if the applicant submits are revised plan that shows a stairway connection from the access drive to the walkway in front of Building "A", or provides a clearly marked pedestrian connection through the parking area to the front of the building, this standard will be met. CONDITION:Submit are revised plan that shows a stairway connection from the access drive to the walkway in front of Building "A" or that shows a clearly marked pedestrian connection through the parking area to the front of the building will be provided. Building Design Standards: All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 (Criteria for Granting a Variance) are satisfied. Ground floor windows: All street-facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50 percent of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three (3) feet above grade to nine (9) feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50 percent of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located at a building corner. Building "B" is greater than 10 feet from the property line and, therefore, does not require compliance with this standard. While Building "A" is greater than 10 feet from the property line; it is due to an adjustment. Part of the approval of the adjustment is based on the applicant continuing to comply with the design standards as much as possible. As part of the adjustment application, the applicant submitted elevations showing glass display areas along the roofline, the top of which is 6 feet from the street grade due to the topography and retaining wall. By providing glass display areas at the level of the street, this satisfies the standard for Building "A". Building facades: Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one (1) of the following features: (a) a variation in building materials; (b) a building off- set of at least 1-foot; (c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or (d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. The east building elevation of Building "A" consists of brick and stucco with scored reveals and glass display areas. The building does riot extend more than 300 feet. Building "B" will vary greatly in building materials along the 72r' Avenue frontage as there will be indoor and outdoor display areas, greenhouses, etc, which will break up the wall line. Weather protection: Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. The elevation plans provided indicate that a canopy will be provided at the entrance to each of the stores. Building materials: Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet pressboard or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 6 OF 19 The applicant's revised narra provided with the adjustment app tion indicates stucco divided into a series of panels by metal pilasters will be the building material along the roofline and 4-inch and 8-inch CMU blocks in a brick type fashion will be used along the remaining building frontages. Building "B" will be a composition of different materials, which the applicant states will be "suggestive of a village that has evolved over time to its present state." The materials indicated include horizontal wood siding, vertical corrugated metal, stucco and pre-fabricated greenhouse sections. Clearly, the corrugated metal proposed is not a permitted exterior finish material and the plan must be modified to exclude this material. Building "C" will be constructed of painted tilt-up concrete panels and integrally colored ground face concrete block. Because the concrete is to be painted, this meets the standards. Roofs and roof lines: Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. The applicant has proposed a flat roof, which is designed as an extension of the materials used for the buildings. Roof-mounted equipment: All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. The applicant's plans indicate that the roof-mounted equipment will be screened. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the applicant has not met all of the Building Design Standards. If the conditions specified below are met, Staff can find that the Building Design Standards will be satisfied. CONDITION:Submit a revised elevations plan for Building "B" showing that corrugated metal or other materials that are not permitted will not be used as exterior finishes. Signs: In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development Code, the following standards shall be met: Zoning District Regulations: Non-residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone (18.780.130.D). Sign Area Limits: The maximum sign area limits found in Section 18.780.130 shall not be exceeded. No area limit increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Height Limits: The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs shall be 10 feet. Wall signs shall not extend above the roof line of the wall on which the sign is located. No height increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Sign Location: Freestanding signs within the Tigard Triangle shall not be permitted within required L-1 landscape areas. The applicant has not formally applied for sign permits. Signs must be approved through the sign permit process as administered by the City of Tigard Development Services Technicians. Compliance with sign standards will be reviewed at that time. A sign permit must be obtained for ANY sign located on the property. FINDING: Because compliance with sign codes will be required when a sign permit is applied for, these standards are not relevant at this time. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 7 OF 19 Landscaping and Screenii Two (2) levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other sub-sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. L-1 (Low Screen): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial, trees shall be planted at 31/2cinch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a 3-foot high screen and a 90 percent opacity within one (1) year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two (2) years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2-inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. There is an existing landscape area between the street and the proposed structures that will remain. The applicant has not submitted a landscape plan to show whether this existing landscaping plan meets the standards, however, because the landscaping is existing and was installed as required as part of the original Planned Development approval, staff has determined that the existing landscaping is adequate. L-2 (General Landscaping): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18/45 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. Trees shall be provided at a minimum 21/2-inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two (2) years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2-inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. The site does not abut a local street; therefore, the L-2 standards do not apply. FINDING: Because the landscaping is existing and installed as required as part of the original Planned Development approval, the L-1 and L-2 landscape standards do not apply. GENERAL APPROVAL CRITERIA FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW: The Site Development Review approval standards require that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of other Community Development Code Sections. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.350, 18.380, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797, 18.810 and the Metro Functional Plan Standards. The proposal's consistency with these sections has been reviewed within this decision. Variances and Adjustments (18.390) The Director is authorized to approve up to a 20% adjustment to the sideyard setback by means of a Type I procedure based on compliance with the following criteria: A demonstration that the adjustment requested is the least required to achieve the desired affect; The applicant is asking for an increase in the maximum setback from 10 feet to 11 feet, 6 inches. Based on a letter submitted from the geotechnical engineers, this reduction is the absolute minimum necessary to insure that the existing retaining wall maintains its integrity. Even at this distance, additional actions will be necessary during construction to insure that the existing wall is not compromised. The adjustment is also necessary for the applicant to comply with requirements from Winco for the development which requires the building to be designed in such a way as to not block the existing Winco sign. The proposed location allows the applicant to meet the landowner requirements and the geotechnical concerns. In addition, the applicant's revised elevation plans, while further away from the property line, shows more compliance with the overall design standards by providing reveals and glass display areas along the roof line which will create an interesting visual for pedestrians and vehicles traveling along SW 72nd Avenue. The adjustment will result in the preservation of trees, if trees are present in the development area; SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 8 OF 19 There are no trees in the area ie developed, therefore, this stanc I does not apply. The adjustment will not impede adequate emergency access to the site; All site access points and internal circulation within the site will not be affected by the proposed adjustment. There is not a reasonable alternative to the adjustment, which achieves the desired affect. The only alternative is to remove the existing retaining wall and replace it with a new engineered wall, however, this could still result in compromising the soil stability during construction and the improved SW 72nd Avenue roadway. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the adjustment criteria have been satisfied and the adjustment is approved. Planned Development (18.350): Chapter 18.350 allows the option for an applicant to create a more efficient, economically viable development that preserves natural land features while implementing the land use designation set forth for the property though the Comprehensive Plan. Section 18.350.020.B states that the Planned Development Review is a three (3)-step process, as follows: 1. The approval of the planned development overlay zone; 2. The approval of the planned development concept plan; and 3. The approval of the Detailed Development Plan. The property has a Planned Development (PD) overlay and has received conceptual plan approval. While this project can not fully comply with the detail plan criteria because of the change in the code standards after the concept plan was approved, this SDR approval in essence is reviewing and approving the detailed plan and satisfying that step as well. FINDING: Because the site has a Planned Development Overlay and conceptual plan approval and this Site Development Review is essentially approving the detailed plan, the Planned Development process is satisfied. Landscaping and Screening (18.745 and 18.360): 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.C. Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). This standard is modified by the Tigard Triangle Design standards. The property has approximately 590 feet of frontage on SW 72nd Avenue. The project site is separated from Dartmouth by the existing OfficeMax; therefore, it floes not effectively have frontage on Dartmouth Street. There are existing street trees along SW 72nd Avenue that satisfy the street tree requirements of Section 18.745. While the TTDS modifies the spacing requirement, staff has determined that the existing trees have more value than if the applicant were to be required to remove the existing trees and re-plant new trees at the spacing required by the TTDS. Land Use Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.080 requires that at a minimum the buffer between a proposed commercial use and detached single-family residences must contain the following: 1) a 20-foot width for parking lots of more than 25 spaces, 2) a row of trees at a certain spacing based on their height at maturity and shrubs of varying numbers based on their size at planting, 3) the buffer must also contain either a row of evergreen shrubs, a five-foot minimum height fence, or an earthen berm with evergreen shrubs which will provide a continuous six-foot screen within two (2) years. The property does not abut a use other than commercial, therefore, buffering and screening between differing uses is not required. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 9 OF 19 Screening: Special Provisi, : Section 18.745.050.E requires the screening of parking and loading areas. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features, which effectively screen the parking lot " areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three (3) feet wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The parking lot is effectively screened from SW 72nd Avenue because of the grade differential, in addition, the applicant is proposing to retain the existing landscape area adjacent to the retaining wall. The applicant has shown landscape islands will be provided, however, there are several areas in which there is not a tree for every 7 spaces. It appears one more island, containing 2 trees is needed in the bank of spaces along the eastern property line. FINDING: Because the plan does not provide parking lot trees spaced equally on the basis of 1 tree for every 7 parking spaces, the Landscaping and Screening standards have not been met. If the applicant submits a revised plan that shows one more landscape island with 2 trees in the eastern bank of parking spaces will be provided, the criteria will be satisfied. CONDITION: Submit a revised plan that provides an additional landscape island in the eastern bank of parking spaces. The revised plan must provide landscape islands that equally distribute trees on the basis of 1 tree per every 7 parking spaces. 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. Upon review of the Tigard Triangle Design Standards, the Clear Vision standards have been found to be superseded by newer Tigard Triangle Design Standards such as Building Placement, however, these buildings would meet the standards in any event. FINDING: Because the TTDS supercede the other standards of the Code, this criterion is found to be inapplicable. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): Preferential long-term carpool/vanpool parking: Parking lots providing in excess of 20 long- term parking spaces shall provide preferential long-term carpool and vanpool parking for employees, students and other regular visitors to the site. At least 5 percent of total long- term parking spaces shall be reserved for carpool/vanpool use. Preferential parking for carpools/vanpools shall be closer to the main entrances of the building than any other employee or student parking except parking spaces designated for use by the disabled. Preferential carpool/vanpool spaces shall be full-sized per requirements in Section 18.765.040.N and shall be clearly designated for use only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. Due to the nature of the use (retail sales), long-term carpool parking is not anticipated, therefore, this criterion is found to be inapplicable. 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 ut,r1 parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 10 OF 19 The applicant has proposed • parking spaces; therefore, five (; .DA spaces are required for this use. The applicant has proposed five (5) handicap spaces; however, none appear to be van • accessible. In addition, because the proposal involves 2 different building locations, the van accessible requirement must be met for both building "A" and buildings "B" and "C". DEQ indirect source construction permit: All parking lots containing 250 spaces or parking structures containing two or more levels shall require review by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to: 1. Acquire an Indirect Source Construction permit; 2. Investigate the feasibility of installing oil and grease separators. The parking is existing and was approved as part of the original Planned Development approval; therefore, this standard can not be applied. Access drives: With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; the number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030.P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. The access drives into the development site are existing and comply with this standard. Pedestrian access: Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow- moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. Pedestrian access through the parking lot is not necessary for Buildings "B" and "C" due to the location of the buildings on the site and the proposed stairway from SW 72nd Avenue. A condition has been proposed reviously in this decision addressing pedestrian connections to Building "A". The site has no grade drop-offs, therefore, the other standards of this section do not apply. Parking lot striping: Except for single-family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off-street parking requirements as contained in this Chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and all interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. The plans submitted show parking spaces clearly marked. Directional markings are not proposed, however, because all access drives are two-way, directional markings are not required. 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 show that wheel stops will be installed in the parking spaces adjacent to the walkway at Building "A". No other wheel stops are required or proposed. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 11 OF 19 Space and aisle dimensio■ Except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2, the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5' x 18.5' for a standard space; 7.5' x 16.5' for a compact space; and as required by applicable State of Oregon and federal standards for designated disabled person parking spaces; the width of each parking space includes a stripe which separates each space. Aisles accommodating two-direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width; The applicant did not specifically indicate what the space and aisle dimensions were. Staff scaled the plans provided and it appears that the,parking spaces meet the requirement. However, a condition of approval will be attached requiring the applicant to submit a revised plan that clearly shows the parking space and aisle dimensions meeting the standards. Bicycle parking location and access: Section 18.765.050 states bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; and bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. The applicant's plans do not show the location of existing or proposed bicycle racks. Existing bicycle racks may be used if they are located within 50 feet of the main entrance of the new buildings. A condition of approval is necessary requiring the applicant to submit information on the number and location of existing or proposed bicycle racks. 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 detail of the bike rack. Minimum bicycle parking requirements: The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.768.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. Table 18.768.2 states that for general retail sales, .3 bicycle parking spaces are required for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Because the total retail sales area is 37,000 square feet, 12 bicycle parking spaces are required. The applicant has not shown bike parking. 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 sales oriented retail is 3.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet and the maximum parking in Zone B (as defined by Metro) is 6.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet. In this case, the minimum parking is 137 and the maximum parking is 229. The applicant has proposed 137 parking spaces. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER . PAGE 12 OF 19 Off-street loading spaces: Commercial, industrial and 111stitutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off- street loading and maneuvering space as follows: a minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more; minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. The building area is less than 40,000 square feet, therefore, only one (1) loading space is required. Because Building "A" is less than 10,000 square feet, no loading space is required adjacent to this building (although it is recommended). The applicant has shown loading for Buildings "B" and "C" will be located in the rear, in the same general location as the existing stores on the development site. Off-street loading dimensions: Each loading berth shall be approved by the City Engineer as to design and location; each loading space shall have sufficient area for turning and maneuvering of vehicles on the site. At a minimum, the maneuvering length shall not be less than twice the overall length of the longest vehicle using the facility site; entrances and exits for the loading areas shall be provided at locations approved by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 18.710; screening for off-street loading facilities is required and shall be the same as screening for parking lots in accordance with Chapter 18.745. g The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and indicated that the location of the loading area is acceptable. The loading area is screened from view by the building. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the off-street parking and loading standards have not been met. Staff finds it is reasonably possible for the applicant to comply with all of the standards. If the conditions listed below are satisfied,the standards will be fully met. CONDITIONS: • Submit a revised plan that provides an ADA Van Accessible parking space that will be located in front of Building "A" and at least one in front of Building "B" and Building "C". • Submit a revised plan that clearly shows the parking space and aisle dimensions for staff to confirm that the required dimensions are provided. • Submit a revised plan that shows the location of existing or proposed bicycle racks within 50 feet of the main entrance to the buildings. The bicycle parking shall be proportionally distributed among the 3 new buildings and shall provide no less than 12 spaces total. • Provide a detail of the bicycle rack to be used for staff's approval. Access, Egress and Circulation: 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; This standard has been addressed previously in this decision as part of the TTDS compliance review. 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; SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 13 OF 19 The walkways do not cross ,cle access driveways or parking I therefore, this standard does not apply. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The plans indicate the walkways will be paved. 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 100 or more parking spaces is 30 feet with 24 feet of pavement if 2 accesses are provided and 50 feet with 40 feet of pavement if one access is provided. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. The development area is currently served with access drives that meet the above standards. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the access standards have either been addressed previously in this decision or do not apply, or are satisfied. Tree Removal: Section 18.790.030 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. The area being developed does not have any trees, therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Because there are no trees within the area to be developed, this standard does not apply. Signs: Chapter 18.780.130.D lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C-G Zoning District. Signs have been discussed earlier in this decision under Tigard Triangle Design Standards discussion, therefore, this standard has been satisfied. FINDING: Because signs have been addressed previously in this decision, this standard has been satisfied. Public Facility Concerns: Streets: TDC 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the Tigard Development Code standards (TDC). TDC 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. This site lies adjacent to SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street. SW 72nd Avenue SW 72"d Avenue is classified as a major arterial'according to the Tigard Triangle Design Standards (TTDS). This roadway classification requires a right-of-way (ROW) width of 92 feet. At present, there is adequate ROW along this street to meet the TTDS. SW 72nd Avenue is presently improved adjacent to this site and was constructed by the applicant as a part of the original SDR (SDR 93-00002). The present improvements meet the TTDS and, therefore, there is no need for additional street widening. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 14 OF 19 SW Dartmouth Street This roadway is also classified as a major arterial per the TTDS. There is adequate ROW along this roadway at this time to meet the TTDS. This street was improved as a part of a Local Improvement District (LID), of which the applicant was a part. The roadway is fully improved to meet the TTDS. Other Transportation Issues A letter was submitted to the City from Ed Christensen, dated September 23, 1999, indicating that the applicant should contribute to additional infrastructure in the site vicinity because conditions are different than what was encountered in 1993 when the development was initially constructed. Christensen believes that the applicant should contribute funds toward the signalization of nearby intersections to help mitigate their share of the impact on the system. When the applicant filed the SDR application in 1993, they provided a master plan of the entire site, including eventual development of the subject site. They also provided a traffic impact study that was prepared by Kittelson and Associates. At that time, the local intersections were operating acceptable levels of service and when Kittelson considered the impact from the development of the entire site, they found that none of the local intersections warranted §ignalization. The applicant was required to construct frontage improvements on both SW 72" Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street, as was mentioned above, to mitigate the impact of the development. The current application does not result in a net increase in trip generation from this site over what Kittelson had calculated in 1993. In fact, the proposed expansion will result in fewer trips for the entire site than what was assumed in 1993. Because the applicant was required to mitigate the impact of this development in 1993, and because the addition does not result in more trips than what was assumed in 1993, it is Staff's opinion that the applicant can not be required to make additional public transportation improvements in the area. Water: This site lies within the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. According to the proposed plan, the applicant will need to make a connection to the existing public water line in SW 72 Avenue to serve Building A. The other proposed buildings can be served from existing onsite private water lines. A permit will be required from TVWD for the proposed water connection. In addition, the roadway cut and patchwork must be covered in a Street Opening Permit from the City. Sanitary Sewer: The existing onsite sanitary sewer lines will adequately serve this site. No additional public sanitary sewer line work is necessary. Storm Drainage: The existing onsite storm drainage conveyance and detention systems were initially designed and constructed to accommodate full build-out of this site. The proposed addition will actually result in approximately 8,427 square feet less hard surface than what was initially assumed in the master plan design for the systems. Therefore, no additional storm drainage work is necessary. Storm Water Quality: Since the development of this site will result in less impervious surface than what was originally anticipated when the applicant designed and constructed the existing onsite water quality facility, there will be no further requirements. Grading and Erosion Control: USA Design and Construction Standards also regulates 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 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 $90 (3 buildings X $30/address = $90). SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 15 OF 19 FINDING: Based on the ,Iysis above, Staff finds that all tl treet and Utility Improvement standards have not been fully met. If Conditions 10 tnrough 13, summarized at the front of this decision are satisfied , the standards will be met. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage: Chapter 18.755 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign-Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan, which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The applicant has not indicated which method they will use to meet this standard. The applicant has not provided a written sign-off from the franchise hauler stating that the proposed facility location is acceptable. FINDING: Because the applicant has not provided evidence of compliance with the mixed solid waste and recyclables standards, Staff cannot determine if this standard has been met. If the applicant provides a written sign-off from the franchise waste hauler that the location and size of the facility is adequate, this criterion will be met. CONDITION: Submit a written sign-off from the franchise waste hauler that the proposed facility meets the waste hauler standards. ADDITIONAL SDR REVIEW CRITERIA Section 18.360.090.A.2 through A.15 provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed section. These other standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the following because the proposal does not involve a residential development and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval criteria: Sections: 18.360.;090.3 (Exterior Elevations); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 18.360.090.6 (Private Outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces). The following Sections were discussed previously in this decision and will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses); 18.360.090.A.8. (100-year Floodplain); 18.360.090.12 (Landscaping); 18.360.090.13 (Drainage); and 18.360.090.14 (Provision for the Disabled). Relationship to the natural and physical environment: Buildings shall be: located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting; and oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. There are no trees in the area proposed to be developed. The site is part of an already developed shopping center complex. There are no other places the buildings could be located that would be any less or more suitable than the locations proposed. FINDING: Because the building has been located with consideration to the natural environment and trees have been discussed and addressed previously in this decision, Staff finds that relationship to the natural and physical environment standard has been satisfied. Development within or adjacent to floodplain: Where landfill and/or development is allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 16 OF 19 The property does not abut a dplain, therefore, this criterion doE at apply. FINDING: Because the site does not abut a floodplain, Staff finds that this standard does not apply to this application. 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. Criterion "A" has been addressed previously in this decision. Criteria "B" and "C" do not apply, as this is not a residential development. The Police Department has reviewed this proposal and requested that a lighting plan be submitted specific to the entire "north" parking area including the new asphalt area and receiving and pick-up area in order to satisfy Criteria "D" and "E". FINDING: Because information from the Police Department indicates that a lighting plan is needed and that has not been provided, Criteria "D" and "E" have not been satisfied. If the applicant submits a revised lighting plan that shows lighting will be provided at the "north" parking area, including the new asphalt area and receiving and pick-up area, the criteria will be met. CONDITION:Submit a revised lighting plan for review and approval by the Police Department. 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. Tri-Met has not provided comments, however, based on comments received for projects in the vicinity, no bus line runs along the site frontage, therefore, bus stops, turnouts, etc., are not required. FINDING: Because no bus lines run along the site frontage, this standard does not apply. Provisions of the underlying zone: All of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. Use Classification: The applicant is proposing to build a retail store to serve a single tenant use. This use is classified in Code Chapter 18.130 (Use Classifications) as General Retail — Sales Oriented. The proposed general retail use of the property is listed as a permitted use within the General Commercial Zoning District. Dimensional Requirements: The General Commercial Zoning District standards contained in Chapter 18.520 states that there is no minimum lot area and the average minimum lot width is 50 feet . Developments are required to provide a minimum of 15 percent landscaping or areas not developed with impervious surfaces. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 17 OF 19 The parcel width is greater tt 50 feet. The applicant has provide alculations which indicate that approximately 20 percent landscaping will be provided. The landscaping has been discussed previously in this decision. Setbacks: Chapter 18.520 states that no front, side, or rear yard setback is required except 20 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. This standard is superceded by the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. Building Height: Chapter 18.520 states that a maximum height of 45 feet is permitted in General Commercial Zoning District. The applicant's elevation plans and narrative show that the building will be no greater than 29 feet. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and has offered the following comments: (1) Provide fire truck access to rear of Buildings C and B, (2) Provide fire flow work sheet and additional fire hydrant; (3) Provide fire department connection within 70 feet of fire hydrant for each new building protected by fire sprinkler; (4) storm drain under building shall be type approved for such location; (5) Provide 5 accessible parking spaces, (6) Provide accessible route, connecting all buildings on same property to the public way; (7) Traffic pattern to rear of building? Cross over easements at property line; (8) Existing requirements from courtyards; (9) Engineering for retaining walls greater than 4 feet; (10) Covered outdoor sales area to be sprinklered; (11) Fire rated walls at property line; (12) Elevations, sheet A401 need correcting; (13) Fire hydrant flow test. The Property Manger/Operations Department has reviewed the proposal and offered no comments or objections. The Police Department reviewed this application and has requested a lighting plan specific to the entire "north" parking area including the new asphalt area and receiving and pick-up. The Long Range Planning Division has reviewed the proposal and requested that a handicap and pedestrian access be provided to the Regal Cinemas site to the north. SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS GTE has reviewed the proposal and provided the following comments: Developer to provide conduits per GTE specs. Developer to pay for any relocation of existing facilities. Tualatin Valley Water District has reviewed the application and provided no comments or objections. Unified Sewerage Agency has reviewed the application and provided comments which have been incorporated into the body of this decision. TCI Cable Vision, Tri-Met, NW Natural Gas, TVWD, US West and Portland General Electric (PGE) have reviewed this application and offered no comments or objections. SECTION VII. 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 SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 18 OF 19 • Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON NOVEMBER 15, 1999 AND EFFECTIVE ON DECEMBER 2, 1999 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The Director's Decision is final 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 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 o 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 DECEMBER 1, 1999. 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 . November 15, 1999 PREP ED BY. Julia Hajduk DATE Associate Planner November 15, 1999 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdorff DATE Planning Manager I:\curpin\,Julia\sdr\Rembold.dot SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 19 OF 19 • I I. ' ... , . .. .. . • .. . •,A meow • • *.--- 7 . r"-----am irreserrms- ',.. "..... E•110/11•111.4111■01.7 v i. .. r // / •. ,----- 1 i. [. - -., / MHXIME1/10.411, / 1.I'''' ■, . _____ . - --• ; .. .. .„. - ,MEW/.91,04.I - coArsocsAcress :::: 0 c„ ''''....; ,/. , A i /I t LOA..4 T 7 7 ---• 1 II Cr) 1 1 1 _ ila .11:1901...REA sr -.7.....)tso - -% I I I _ ...,.... / 111.0411rwaS I=1 MMINI10. C9IP KM PETSMART / 41 Ni P.4 / IS OOD OM ,•—ar --/ ; I Z / I : Z PIM [I 1 1 : i . lk . <IC LLI 11.11 I-,.. , I ' ■Il 1..71, 0.0 ■13 900 77. I . rift . ' : 11. - 1 LLI eXIST 1/00110MIPLIIMD ir, V ' ' >. CI / . '.I.Z 04 Ce ( ) ( ) , r-.4..7) '',,; elial. !.i s v.•LASS 'I r, /2 I.: i f . -- -- -- - __ -----t--- 1 - Z C* 4 "Ct 12 / ----- 4 I.A. ..^.-• t t — — ... X OW MO WWII / .......... i-- : a larned...2 .,-1_-_ I."-• I 1"-_,,i -•., WI .i. _- - ,_ - IRV. FJ , u_ _..._ . c...._ ,.., ,■ r. / .....1.. 1 lave 1..ocecPrriumes 17 it, 0 / -•-•- T I - RAW WM..•MIS -..... -.....1.... . .—.. I.---, ' / ■ .., 7 j = 1 11114,P410' .1 I. k-4. ,Pcw 1 I I' I ) - i I- I • 'i-z,..L.-- ------______ ....-•-•- 4 .- 0 7 1 - / _ ,...... I li . W..%, ))1 I . : ....._ 1 (6 _ s ---- / 1 (ICA 2 _ I i 1 / ----- .'-.--.""--- jr- 7 000 GsF i A . - [I..— , . . ---- _ ------ I NM KUNO.MU. .E....'.... f ( — I 2:-.--WfflirThri .-71 EMT LA407.14 11..0 EMT RETAINIMO VP. ....,),, -- ., — • IN I , (i. 'A _6 - -0FFcr..,.., 1 SITE PLAN t SDR I 999-00016 EXHIBIT MAP N REMBOLD PROPERTIES (map is not to scale) RETAIL OFFICES VICINITY AP ~Y SDR 1999-00016 REMROL[ PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES SU13JEC v SITE A ST L ~'C- ~I YL ST F~T 1 ST DAR I ,1C?L TH ST 0 200 600 Feei ~ ~ ! 1_'Itz U~rI~[~~~Cd rL 1rJ I~ ST { ~ -,i rc l_ r-,aa r -bnl ao I I Community Development Plot date: Sep 3, 199q; ~ magic,d1r1G(C0 P.FR N \;. L.XJ CITY OF TIGARD Washington, County NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY PLANNING COMMISSION 1. Concerning Case Number(s) :SDR 93-0002/PDR 93-0001/SLR 93-0002/ SCE 93-0001 2. Name of Owner: SuperValu Holdings, Inc. Name of Applicant: SuperValu Stores 3. Address PO Box 12902 City Salem State OR , Zip 97309 4. Address of Property: Northwest corner of proposed SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue (address not yet assigned) Tax Map and Lot No(s) . : 1S1 36DC, tax lots 600, 2500, and 2501; portion of 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; portion of 2s1 1BA, tax lots 100 and 100 5. Request: 1) Site Development Review/Planned Development Review conceptual plan approval is requested to develop an approximately 20 acre site with an approximately 150,000 square foot, multi-tenant retail center with two out lots for future development. A grocery store has been identified as the future occupant of 79,000 square feet of the center. 2) Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow filling of an approximately 6,900 square foot jurisdictional wetland and an approximately seven foot intrusion into the normally required 25 foot development setback from a wetland. A separate application for wetland modifications is being requested from the Division of State Lands. 3) Sign Code Exception approval is requested to allow 28 foot high signs on SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue whereas the Code would normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed between the two signs. In addition, Sign Code Exception approval is requested to allow a combined sign area of 280 square feet for the two, two-sided signs whereas a combined sign area of 210 square feet would normally be permitted. APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA: Site Development Review: Community Development Code Section 18.120.180; Planned Development Review: Code Section 18.80.120; Sensitive Lands Review: Code Section 18.84.040.D; Sign Code Exception: Code Section 18.114.145; Other related Code Chapters 18.62, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, and 18.114. 6. Action: Approval as requested X Approval with conditions Denial 7. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall, and mailed to: X The applicant and owner(s) X Owners of record within the required distance X The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization X Affected governmental agencies 8. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON April 7, 1993 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision, and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall, P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 9. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290(B) and Section 18.32.370 which provides that a written appeal may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee ($315.00) and transcript costs, (varies up to a maximum of $500.00) . The deadline for filing of an appeal is 3:30 p.m. April 7, 1993 10. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, 639-4171. CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 93-05 PC A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A SHOPPING PLAZA PROPOSED BY SUPERVALU STORES. The Tigard Planning Commission has reviewed the applicant's plans and narrative materials, comments of reviewing agencies, and the Planning Division's staff report and recommendations for the application described below. The Commission held a public hearing for the purpose of receiving testimony on this application on March 22, 1993. The Commission has based its decision on the facts, findings, and conclusions noted below. I. PROPOSAL SUMMARY CASE: CUB FOODS/ SUPERVALU HOLDINGS INC. Site Development Review SDR 93-0002 Planned Development Review PDR 93-0001 Sensitive Lands Review SLR 93-0002 Sign Code Exception SCE 93-0001 REQUEST: A request for Planned Development Review/Site Development Review approval of plans for development of a 150,000 sq. ft., single-story shopping plaza on a 19.9 acre site. Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow development (a retaining wall and site grading) to intrude 7 feet into the required 25 foot buffer area adjacent to the wetlands adjacent to Red Rock Creek. Community Development Code Section 18.84.028.A states that land within 25 feet of an identified wetlands is considered as wetlands. All development is normally prohibited within wetland areas unless a Sensitive Lands Review permit is granted. Although not a part of this application, it is noted that the applicants have separately applied to the Oregon Division of State Lands to fill an approximately 6900 square foot wetland. Sion Code Exception approval is requested to allow 28 foot high freestanding signs on both SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street whereas Community Development Code Chapter 18.114 would normally allow a total combined height of 42 feet to be distributed between the two signs. In addition, Sign Code Exception approval is requested to allow these two signs to have a combined sign area of 280 square feet whereas a combined sign area of 210 feet is normally permitted. APPLICANT: Gordon E. Davis for SuperValu Stores P.O. Box 8774 Portland OR 97207 OWNER: SuperValu Holdings, Inc. 11840 Valley View Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 OWNER: (Tax Lots 100 and 101) Gordon R. Martin PO Box 740 Gleneden Beach, OR 97308 FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 1 LOCATION: Northwest corner of SW 72nd Avenue and proposed Dartmouth Street (WCTM 1S1 36DC, tax lots 600, 2500, 2501; WCTM 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; WCTM 2S1 1BA, tax lots 100 and 101. These parcels are listed as shown on the Washington County Assessor's maps currently on file at the Tigard Community Development Department. The Community Development Department has previously approved several lot line adjustment applications for these parcels so that the actual proposed development site after recording the surveys of these approved lot line adjustments will be bounded by SW 72nd Avenue on the east, SW Dartmouth Street on the south, and Red Rock Creek on the west) . PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial ZONING DESIGNATION: C-G (General Commercial) and C-G (PD) (General Commercial with the Planned Development overlay zone) See attached zoning map. APPLICABLE LAW: Community Development Code Chapters 18.62, 18.80, 18.84, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.120, 18.150, and 18.164. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: General approval of all applications listed above subject to several modifications and conditions of approval. SITE MAP/ZONING MAP: H i 1s. A r-----\ . . VAQPG�F ` / ,,n•NTw sc sa MOM r , . /1 ,- ----. El ELM. OS I 1 1 . I l I . s. DUV•LL I37NEEr I III 1 r HI — t \ 1 1 1-:, IK TE T 1 ` / L VW CLIWO ./ ' IS .■ ;I, EO I 1 I 1 _ 5• - � -�1 I r0{ITN E7R C7ISION. Or 1 II SITE ti �© - \I: C/ A i1E ....so 1 O N` ,,,,1111, yr, FRANKLIN \c-N,.> i st Iiim 1 1 Aft VI T-[ FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 2 II. DETAILED APPLICATION DESCRIPTION Planning Commission final orders typically include a fairly detailed description of the existing site configuration, zoning, surrounding uses, and a detailed description of the proposal culled from staff's review of the development plans. With this application, however, the applicants have provided a very thorough narrative describing the site and surrounding properties, as well as a very detailed description of the proposed development and the necessary applications. Therefore, this order will not repeat this information already supplied by the applicants but will list the following as the exhibits to be considered as the applicants' statement: 1. March 1, 1993 letter from Gordon Davis to Randy Wooley; 2. January 28, 1993 letter from Gordon Davis to the Planning Division along with attached Narrative Description; 3. Site Plan (sheet 1 of 4) and Grading Plan (sheet 2 of 4) dated March 1, 1993 by Alpha_Engineering; 4. Utility Plan (sheet 3 of 4) by Alpha Engineering and Priest Engineering; 5. Elevation (sheet 4 of 4) by Planmark; 6. Landscaping Plan (sheet 1 of 1 by Alpha Engineering and Priest Engineering) . 7. Topographic Map of Site by Alpha Engineering; 8. Transportation Impact Study for Cub Foods Commercial Center by Kittelson & Associates February, 1993; IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE SITE AND GRADING PLANS THAT ARE UNDER REVIEW WERE SUBMITTED AS REPLACEMENT SHEETS SUBSEQUENT TO THE ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL. AS SUCH, THESE PLANS CONTAIN INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE LANDSCAPING PLAN. THE COMMISSION HAS CONSIDERRED THE SITE AND GRADING PLANS LISTED ABOVE TO SUPERSEDE THE EARLIER SUBMITTAL. IT IS ADDITIONALLY NOTED THAT THE SITE PLAN REFERS TO FIVE SEPARATE LOTS WHEREAS THE APPLICATION DOES NOT REFER TO ANY MINOR LAND PARTITION OR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION TO BE MADE AT THIS TIME SO AS TO RESULT IN SUCH A LOT CONFIGURATION. THE APPLICANTS' AGENT, GORDON DAVIS, HAS TOLD STAFF THAT THE APPLICANTS MAY APPLY FOR APPROVAL TO RECONFIGURE THE SITE INTO THE FIVE LOTS IN THE FUTURE. THIS ANALYSIS CONSIDERS THE SITE AS ONE DEVELOPMENT SITE. In addition, the following documents relating to the site were reviewed by staff prior to reviewing this application but were not included in the Planning Commission's packets due to their length and technical nature. These documents are available for review at the Planning Division office. 1. Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed Tigard Center by Applied Geotechnology Inc. 2. Joint DSL/Corps of Engineers fill permit application FP #7216 and supporting documents. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 3 III. AGENCY AND NPO COMMENTS The City of Tigard Engineering Department, Tri-Met, and the Unified Sewerage Agency have submitted multiple pages of comments on this proposal. Their comments are attached as an appendix to this report. The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed the proposal and provides the following comments: a. Finished cut or fill slopes shall have a maximum 2 to 1 slope; b. Erosion control measures shall be maintained throughout construction activities; c. Disabled person parking spaces will need to comply with Oregon State Statutes with regard to size, number of spaces, and signage. The State of Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL) has been notified of this proposal due to the portion of the site which is shown to include possible wetlands area by the National Wetlands Inventory map. The applicants wetland delineation prepared by IES Associates confirms the existence of wetlands on the site. Application has been made for on-site mitigation for the proposed disturbance of a portion of the wetlands. The Division of State Lands has commented that a removal/fill permit is required for this project (comment of February 5, 1993) . The applicants have submitted a copy of their application for a Joint DSL/Corps of Engineers Fill Permit dated February 9, 1993 (DSL Permit #FP 7216) . The Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District has commented that all fire hydrant locations are subject to the final approval of the Fire District. The Oregon Department of Transportation has reviewed this proposal and has commented that the traffic study should have included analysis of the proposed development's impacts on the Hwy. 217/SW 72nd Avenue interchange for both existing conditions and with improvements. ODOT has further commented that they cannot comment on impacts to the interchange until the analysis is completed. PLANNING DIVISION COMMENT: STAFF CONTACTED ODOT AND TOLD ODOT THAT THE CITY WAS NOT GOING TO REQUIRE THIS ADDITIONAL REVIEW FOR THIS PROJECT AT THIS TIME FOR THE ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS ODOT IS NOW REQUESTING. ODOT HAD BEEN APPRISED OF THIS POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR SOME TIME AND HAD NOT PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED THIS ANALYSIS. Northwest Natural Gas has commented that a 2 inch diameter gas line exists on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue. This line has not been shown on the preliminary improvement plans. The applicants' engineer should contact Scott Palmer at 721-2449 for information on the location of this line and responsibilities for relocation of the gas line. Portland General Electric and General Telephone have reviewed the proposal and have issued no comments or objections. The Tualatin Valley Water District and NPO #4 were provided with copies of the proposed development plans. As of this date, no comments have been received from those agencies. Staff forwarded a written comment from Iry Larson of 11720 SW 68th Avenue to the Commission for consideration. No other oral or written comments were received at the public hearing. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 4 IV. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Chapter 18.120 - Site Development Review Code Section 18. 120.180.A.1 (Site Development Review - Approval Standards) requires that a commercial development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of other Community Development Code chapters. The applicable criteria in this case are City of Tigard Community Development Code Chapters 18.62, 18.84, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.120, 18.150, and 18.164. These Chapters are also listed as approval standards for a planned development review application under Code Section 18.80.120.2. The proposal's consistency with these various Code chapters is reviewed in the following sections of this final order. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapter 18.92 (Residential Density Calculations) , Chapter 18.94 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations), Chapter 18.98 (Building Height Limitations: Exceptions) , and Chapter 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) which are also listed under Code Section 18.120.180.A.1 and Section 18.80.120.A.2. These chapters are therefore found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Code Section 18.120.180.A.2 (Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment) provides other Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of those previously listed Code chapters. These other standards are addressed immediately below. The proposal is found to comply with the applicable portions of Code Section 18.120.180.A.2 relating to Site Development Review approval standards for provision of buffering and screening of the proposed development through compliance with the buffering and screening requirements of Code Chapter 18.100 as described under the review of that Chapter. Code Section 18.120.180.A.8 as well as Code Section 18.80.120.A.3 1 states that where development is allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining the floodplain. This area shall include appropriate portions suitable for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. The Flood Insurance Rate Map for the City of Tigard prepared by FEMA does not map any 100-year floodplain area for Red Rock Creek on this site (FIRM Community Panel No 410276 0003B, dated March 1, 1982, although floodplain area is mapped to the south of this site) . Therefore, no dedication of floodplain area is required. Code Sections 18.120.180.9 and .10 require consideration of crime prevention and safety in the design of a proposed development. The relatively open development and landscaping pattern proposed along with the parking lot and building lighting should provide a reasonably safe site design for future customers and employees of the development. Chapter 18.80 - Planned Development Review Chapter 18.80 provides a process for creating planned environments through the application of flexible development standards. The purpose statement notes that it is the intent of this section to preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities through the use of site planning procedures that relate the type and design of a development to the site. Since this development site carries a Planned Development designation, a general review of these standards is necessary. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 5 Code Section 18.80.120 identifies approval criteria for a planned development site plan. Of particular note with regard to the current request is Section 18.80.120.A.3.a which states: .. . streets, buildings, and other site elements shall be designed and located to preserve the existing trees, topography, and natural drainage to the greatest extent possible." With the underlying zoning district allowing large scale commercial developments, such as has been proposed, and the substantial slope of the site that needs to be graded to allow such a development, it would be very difficult if not impossible to allow this type of development without substantially altering the tree cover and existing topography. The application proposes a very substantial amount of site grading and removal of almost all existing trees in order to accomplish this development. However, the application provides for preservation and substantial enhancement of the wetlands associated with Red Rock Creek. In addition the landscaping plan provides for a significant amount of replacement landscaping and trees to provide a relatively attractive development around a large commercial box development. Therefore, the Commission finds that the development plan makes a reasonable attempt at satisfying this criterion. Section 18.80.120.A.3.b provides standards relative to buffering and screening a proposed development site from surrounding uses and streets. This criterion is addressed under the discussion of Code Chapter 18.100 below. Sections 18.80.120.A.3.c, .d, and .e refer to residential developments that are developed as planned developments. These approval standards are therefore inapplicable. Sections 18.80.120.A.3.f, .q, .i .i, and .k are essentially references to the requirements of other Code Chapters dealing with access, landscaping, signs, parking, and sensitive lands. Findings relative to these Code Chapters should be considered tantamount to consistency to these planned development approval standards. Section 18.80.120.A.3.h allows the approval authority to require the developer to provide facilities relative to public transit needs such as bus turn-outs or shelters, if the proposed development abuts a public transit route. SW 72nd Avenue abutting the site is not currently served by Tri-Met bus service, although Tri-Met's comments raise the possibility that current service routes might someday be shifted to directly serve this area. Tri-Met has provided comments on the proposed development plan but has not requested the provision of any transit related facilities. Therefore, no transit related facilities will be required as conditions of development approval. Chapter 18.62 - C-G Zoning District The proposed uses of the site, food and beverage retail sales and general retail sales, are permitted uses in the C-G zoning district (Code Section 18.62.030) . Staff is charged with reviewing future usage of the site through the review of business tax applications and building permit applications. Proposed site improvements comply with the C-G zoning district dimensional standards (Code Section 18.62.030) for building height (45 foot maximum height allowed; 26 foot maximum height proposed) ; lot coverage (85 percent maximum allowed site coverage in the C-G zone; proposed site coverage of less than 75 percent) ; and landscaped area (minimum landscape coverage of 15 percent; proposed landscape coverage in excess of 25 percent) . There are no applicable building setback requirements since none of the site directly abuts a residential zoning district, except across SW 72nd Avenue from the site. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 6 Chapter 18.84 - Sensitive Lands Review The applicants retained IES Associates to conduct a wetland delineation on the site. IES identified two jurisdictional wetlands on the site as indicated on the site plan. The wetlands area that is located within the proposed parking lot area has been proposed to be filled. Under the requirements of Chapter 18.84, the City of Tigard defers to the Oregon Division of State Lands and US Army Corps of Engineers permitting processes for wetland modifications. The applicants have filed a separate joint permit application with the DSL/Corps for filling of this wetland area. This area is therefore not subject to City review. The joint DSL/Corps permit application and wetland fill mitigation plan is available for review through the Planning Division although it is not technically part of this development application. Page 8 of the applicants' narrative describes how the proposed wetlands mitigation plan will work in consort with the stormwater quality treatment and detention plan required by the USA requirements for the Tualatin River Basin. The Planning Commission approves the preliminary plans for this facility subject to the conditions of approval recommended by the Engineering Department. The Engineering Department will consider the comments provided by USA in the review of the final facility and storm drainage plans. Contrary to USA's recommendation, however, the City of Tigard typically does not desire dedication of such facilities to the City with the added maintenance responsibilities. Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested, however, to allow modification of the 25 foot buffer area adjacent to the wetlands adjacent to Red Rock Creek. This area adjacent to the wetlands is not subject to DSL/Corps review, but is subject to City of Tigard regulations. Community Development Code Section 18.84.028.A requires that land within 25 feet of an identified wetlands be considered as wetlands. Modifications to any area considered wetlands, not including areas under the DSL/Corps permit requirements, may be permitted subject to the review and approval of the modification plans consistent with Code Section 18.84.040.D. The applicant has addressed these standards on page 8 through 10 of the applicants' narrative. The Commission concurs with the applicants' analysis for this request. The Commission approves the Sensitive Lands Review Permit for the proposed wetland buffer modification. The following is adopted from the applicants' narrative as proposed findings in support of this request: Section 18.84.040.D outlines the following numbered approval criteria necessary to obtain a Sensitive Lands Permit for a wetland area alteration (in this case a buffer alteration) that does not meet the jurisdictional definition of other state and federal regulatory agencies. The applicant has proposed findings to this criteria. The City adopts those findings. 1. The proposed landform alteration or development is neither on wetland in an area designated as significant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map nor is within 25 feet of such a wetland. Finding: The Red Rock Creek wetland in this area is not identified as a significant wetland or otherwise identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland map. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 7 2. The extent and nature of the proposed landform alteration or development will not create site disturbances to an extent greater than the minimum required for the use. Finding: Because of the meandering nature of the wetland line, the wetland and its buffer extend eastward toward the development area in only one spot. While the parking lot itself will be 30 feet away from the actual wetland line, the severe grading requirements of the site force the parking lot to be elevated at the western edge almost 10 feet. In order to minimize intrusion into the wetland and/or buffer areas, retaining walls will be used. However, construction of that wall will intrude an average of approximately 7 feet into the buffer area for this approximately 110 foot area. Of the approximately 800 lineal feet of wetland edge, only approximately 110 feet will be impacted by the retaining wall within the buffer area. The intrusion area is approximately 770 square feet. However, in an approximately 200 lineal foot area immediately north of the intrusion area, the wetland boundary and parking diverge so that the average buffer is approximately 40 feet, equalling approximately 3,000 square feet more buffer than is required. 3. Any encroachment or change in on-site or off-site drainage which would adversely impact wetland characteristics have been mitigated. Finding: The proposed stormwater quality treatment and detention basin and the proposed wetland enhancement/mitigation plan are designed to manage on and off site drainage. 4. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to landform alteration or development, erosion control provisions of the Surface Water Management program of Washington County must be met and areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted in like or similar species in accordance with Chapter 18.100. Finding: The proposed stormwater quality treatment and detention basin and the proposed wetland mitigation/enhancement program will replace and substantially enhance the level of both upland, transitional and wetland vegetation within the Red Rock Creek corridor. 5. All other sensitive lands requirements have been met. Finding: No other substantive requirements are applicable to this proposal. 6. The provisions of Chapter 18.150, Tree Removal shall be met. Finding: No trees are to be removed within this area. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 8 7. Other Comprehensive Plan policies are met. Finding: The proposal is consistent with Physical Limitations and Natural Hazards (the area is not within a 100 year floodplain nor contains other physical hazards) , Parks, Recreation and Open Space policies of the Comprehensive Plan (the area is not a designated park or recreation area and the proposed mitigation plan meets the general open space policies of the plan) . Chapter 18.96 - Additional Yard Area Requirements Code Section 18.96.020.B.2 requires a minimum 30 foot setback from the centerline of SW 72nd Avenue, beyond any setback required by the underlying zoning district. As previously mentioned, there is no applicable setback imposed by the C-G zoning district. The proposed building would be set back 80 feet from the centerline of SW 72nd Avenue. Therefore, Code Section 18.96.020.B.2 has been satisfied. Chapter 18.100 - Landscaping Code Section 18.100.030 requires street trees to be planted in accordance with certain detailed standards for all developments fronting on a public or private street. Code Section 18.100.035.A specifies a minimum caliper size of 2 inches at planting and 20 to 40 foot spacing. The landscaping plan proposes minimum planting sizes for Chancellor Linden street trees of 3.5 to 4 inch caliper on 40 foot centers along SW Dartmouth Street thereby satisfying this standard as well as with the Dartmouth Street landscaping guidelines approved by the City Council on October 27, 1992. The applicants' landscaping plan also proposes minimum planting sizes for Sweetgum street trees of 2.5 inch caliper on 40 foot centers along SW 72nd Avenue consistent with the Code's street tree standard. The landscaping plan provides for appropriate low height plantings along the site's frontages on both sides of the sidewalks to reduce the impacts of on-site lights on adjacent uses and upon traffic on the abutting streets to satisfy the standards of Code Section 18.100.110.A.1 as well as the Dartmouth Street landscaping guidelines. It is noted here that these comments are based upon the review of the submitted landscaping plan which calls for a landscaped strip between the curbs and sidewalks. The revised site plan which is part of the review package does not provide for sidewalks to be set back from the curbs. The landscaping plan is consistent with both the City Council's adopted landscaping guidelines for Dartmouth Street and also with Code Section 18.164.070.B, whereas the site plan is not. This Code section requires that a planter strip separation of at least five feet in width be provided on any collector street, except in certain conditions - none of which apply to the current situation. The Dartmouth Street landscaping guidelines call for a minimum seven foot wide planter strip. Therefore, the site plan will need to be revised to provide for a seven foot wide planter strip consistent with the Dartmouth guidelines and the applicants' landscaping plan. The landscaping plan also provides more than 120 trees relatively evenly distributed within and adjacent to the parking lot at a ratio in excess of the Code's standard of at least one tree per seven parking spaces (Code Section 18.100.110.A.1.d) . Refuse and recycling facilities are required to be screened from views from other properties and from streets by Code Section 18.100.110.8 and .D. The plans do not indicate areas for ref' ie FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 9 and recycling facilities (although it is likely that these will be provided on or adjacent to the loading docks on the north edge of the buildings) . The applicants will be required to provide details on the screening of these facilities. Code Sections 18.100.80 and .130 provide for vegetative buffering and screening between a proposed development and abutting land uses. The Code's buffer matrix does not provide for any specific buffering or screening standards for a commercial use such as is proposed and abutting commercial properties. The buffer matrix requires a minimum 20 foot buffer yard between commercial development and single-family residential areas such as is found to the east of this site. However, this buffer standard does not apply when there is an intervening street. Nevertheless, Code Sections 18.80.120.A.3.b (Planned Development approval standards) and 18.120.A.4 (Site Development Review approval standards) provide more subjective approval standards for the buffering of a new use from surrounding uses. The landscaping plan provides for well landscaped perimeters of the site with a minimum dimension of fifteen feet. The Commission finds that these landscaped perimeter areas will provide for sufficient landscaped buffering and screening to satisfy the intent of these more subjective Code buffer sections. Chapter 18.102 - Visual Clearance Areas Chapter 18.102 specifies vision clearance triangles adjacent to intersections in which the height of plantings, signs, etc. are limited in height to assure safe and adequate sight distance at intersections to reduce potential hazards from vehicular turning movements. The landscaping plan appears to be consistent with the standards of this Chapter, as long as lower shrubs are kept trimmed below three feet in height and deciduous trees are trimmed so that no branches are lower than eight feet in height. Signs are also subject to this Code section. Chapter 18.106 - Parking The site plan provides for substantially more than the Code's required minimum number of parking spaces for a combined grocery store and general retail sales plaza of this size (Code Section 18.106.030.C) . 398 parking spaces would be required by the Code standard of 1 space per 200 square feet of gross floor area for the 79,455 square foot food and beverage retail sales. 166 spaces would be required for the proposed 66,295 square foot total retail store area by the Code standard of 1 space per 400 square feet for general retail sales uses. The total required parking would therefore be 564 spaces. The site plan provides for 790 total parking spaces. The parking proposed would exceed Code minimum standards by 226 parking spaces. This may be important with regard to the need to revise plans to provide for the planter strip between the curb and sidewalk along SW Dartmouth. If the grading plan needs to be revised to accommodate the planter strip, it would be preferable to reduce the size of the parking area rather than create a taller retaining wall. Future development lots 4 and 5 will need to be reviewed for parking adequacy at the time of development review. If the property owner does re- partition this property in the future to provide the five individual lots shown on the site plan, joint use access and parking agreements should be provided amongst all of the parcels involved in this development. Code Section 18.106.040.A.1 allows up to 25 percent of parking stalls to be compact stalls. Less than 5 percent of the parking spaces to be provided would be compact spaces. This standard is therefore satisfied. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 10 Code Section 18.106.020.A.c requires developments to provide disabled person parking facilities as required by State of Oregon and federal law. According to ADA requirements (Americans with Disabilities Act), a minimum of 16 designated disabled person accessible spaces are required for parking areas which provide between 750 and 800 parking spaces. The site plan provides for 18 disabled person car and van parking spaces in locations convenient to the primary building entrances, thereby satisfying this standard. Code Section 18.106.020.P requires developments to provide secured bicycle parking facilities at a minimum ratio of at least 1 bicycle parking space per 15 auto parking spaces. The site plan does not provide for any bicycle parking spaces. The site plan should be required to be revised to provide for at least 53 bicycle parking spaces within conveniently located racks in order to satisfy this standard. The proposed automobile parking spaces and parking lot aisleways are appropriately configured to satisfy all applicable Code Section 18.10. 6.050 parking area dimensional standards. Proposed loading spaces on the north side of the buildings satisfy Code Sections 18.106.080 and .090 standards for off-street loading spaces. Chapter 18.108 - Access and Circulation The proposed internal driveway and sidewalk system satisfies the requirement of Code Section 18.108.080(A) which requires that a commercial development of this size provide at least two access driveways and sidewalk(s) to provide access from adjoining streets. The plan provides for two-way driveways and sidewalks leading from both streets abutting the site as well as a one-way service driveway from SW 72nd Avenue to the loading areas on the northern side of the proposed buildings. Section 18.108.050.A requires sidewalk connections between the public sidewalks adjacent the site and the primary entrances to the commercial uses. This is provided by the on-site sidewalks along the driveways from SW 72nd and SW Dartmouth connecting to a sidewalk within a landscaped island leading to the sidewalks in front of the buildings. A fifteen-foot wide sidewalk covered by a ten-foot wide canopy extends across the fronts of the buildings. The site plan is therefore consistent with all applicable Code Chapter 18.108 access standards. The proposed internal roadway system provides good access for emergency vehicles access as well as all other users throughout the site. Chapter 18.114 - Signs The applicants' narrative states that wall signs will be installed for each of the three major tenants on the building front and that these signs will not be larger than 15 percent of the building face for any of these three buildings. These signs would therefore be consistent with Code Section 18.114.C.1.b.i.1 standards for wall signage in the C-G zoning district. The narrative states that an additional "wall" sign will located on one of the retaining walls in the southwest corner of the site, facing Dartmouth. This "wall" sign is identified on the site plan. The Commission disagrees with the applicants that this sign on the proposed retaining wall would be a wall sign permitted by Section 18.114.C.1.b.i.l. That Section specifically mentions that permitted wall sign area is determined by the gross area of the building face (emphasis added) on which the sign is to be mounted. The retaining wall is clearly not a building; therefore, the FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 1; Commission finds that this sign should be considered a freestanding sign and will therefore only be permitted if other proposed signage is omitted. The applicants' narrative notes that two (other) freestanding signs are proposed; one on the east side of the Dartmouth Street entrance to the development and one on the north side of the main 72nd Avenue entrance. The maximum available increase in sign copy area and sign height have been requested for these freestanding signs through sign exemptions provided in Section 18.114.130.G.1.c.ii. and Section 18.114.145.A.3. Section 114.130.G.l.c.ii provides for a 50 percent increase in sign copy area when a site contains more than a single tenant and the additional sign area is needed to adequately identify the separate tenants. Section 114.145.A.C. provides for a 25 percent increase in sign area and height if the increase will not deter from the purpose of the sign code. Attached with the narrative are drawings of the two (other) proposed freestanding signs. The dimensions on these drawings are accurate (dimensions indicated on the site plan - Sheet 1 - are incorrect) . The applicant has provided proposed findings addressing the approval criteria for the sign code exceptions. Due to the size of the site, topographic differences between the building locations and the two abutting streets, and large amount of frontage on these streets, the Commission concurs with the applicants that special circumstances exist which justify the additional sign area and height requested without compromising Code purposes of limiting sign clutter. The Commission approves of the requested Sign Code Exceptions and adopts the following findings provided by the applicants. The applicants state that the two sign code exceptions are requested to more adequately identify the multiple tenants in the proposed development. Unlike many comparable retail centers with many tenants, this center is designed to accommodate three major tenants. While there will be additional retail users in Retail Space A and on Lots 4 and 5, those uses will be identified with wall signs only. Since the retail complex is designed to focus on the three major tenants, each needs sufficient identification from the adjacent roads to ensure customer recognition. In addition, since the elevation of Dartmouth at the entry drive is 12 to 14 feet below the parking lot surface, little if any of the major retail buildings will be able to be seen from Dartmouth. Given this difference in elevation, it is essential that each of the three major retail users be identified at the street. The proposed freestanding sign on 72nd Avenue is necessary since there will be no other building identification visible from that street. The proposed freestanding signs are consistent with a development of this size. The combined sign area for the two proposed freestanding signs is less than the combined sign area that would be allowed if this development had eight businesses and was classified as a shopping center. In addition, even with the requested sign exceptions, the proposed signs will be smaller than the standard CUB food signs used throughout the northwest. Even though found to be consistent with sign standards through this review, a separate sign permit must be obtained from the Planning Division prior to erecting any sign. Sign size, height, and location must be shown to conform with Code standards (including vision clearance) in order for sign permits to be issued. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 12 Chapter 18.150 - Tree Removal Chapter 18.150 will be satisfied in that the applicant will be required to obtain a tree removal permit prior to removing trees over 6 inches in caliper size in preparation for development. Permits will be granted only if it is found necessary to remove the trees to accommodate structures, sidewalks, driveways, utilities, or other necessary site improvements. It should be clear from the review of the site plan and grading plan that this will require the removal of most of the trees on the site due to the significant amount of grading which must occur. Nevertheless, trees such as are located on future lots 4 and 5 should not be removed until such time as is necessary to allow for development. Chapter 18.164 - Public Improvement Requirements STREETS The site is located immediately to the north of the future Dartmouth Street Extension and immediately west of SW 72nd Avenue. Both streets are classified as major collector streets by the Comprehensive Plan's Transportation Plan Map. Major collector streets have the following minimum improvement standards imposed by Code Section 18.164.030.E.1.a: 60-80 feet of right-of-way, 44 feet of pavement, and 2-4 moving lanes. SW 72nd Avenue adjacent to the site currently has the following improvements: 40 feet of right-of-way, 11 - 13 feet of pavement west of centerline, and no curbs or sidewalks. Typically half-street improvements are required to be a condition of development approval to bring abutting roads up to the minimum standards. The applicants apparently have no problem with such requirements and have proposed improvements beyond the minimum improvement standards based upon their traffic report's analysis J of needed road improvements.1 \Based on the applicants' traffic report, at such time as the entire Tigard e� Triangle is fully developed, the projected volume on S.W. 72nd Avenue adjacent to the site will exceed the level requiring a five lane facility. The applicants state that the traffic report used conservative assumptions on future development of the Triangle. The basis of those assumptions is the existing land use plan for the area which was utilized even though that plan is being reconsidered by the City. While the plan revisions have not yet been adopted, recent decisions by the Planning Commission with regard to the Triangle will likely lead to many areas that are now zoned for primarily office development to be redesignated for medium density residential use. These changes would tend to reduce future peak-hour traffic volumes from the levels considered in the traffic report. Therefore, based on the traffic analysis provided by the applicants and the proposed changes to the land use plan, the applicants are proposing the following: (refer to Gordon Davis' March 1, 1993 letter to Randy Wooley and the March 1, 1993 revised site plan) : A. Between the Dartmouth/S.W. 72nd Avenue intersection, and to a point approximately 200 feet north of the 72nd Avenue driveway, an additional 31 feet of right-of-way, which will create a total of 51 feet of right-of-way on the west side of the centerline. B. The remaining frontage along S.W. 72nd Ave would have increased right-of-way to a total of 45 feet on the west side of the centerline. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 13 C. A total street section between the Dartmouth/72nd intersection and the site driveway on 72nd Avenue will have 51 feet of paving and will include: - a bike lane on the west side - a southbound through travel lane - a southbound left turn lane - a northbound left turn lane - a northbound through travel lane D. A total street section between the 72nd Avenue driveway to a point approximately 200 feet north will include: - a bike lane on the west side - a southbound through travel/right turn (into the site) - a center merge/left turn lane - a northbound travel lane E. From the north property line to a point approximately 200 feet north of the 72nd Avenue driveway: - a bike lane on the west side - a north and southbound travel lane - a continuous left turn lane F. Curbs and sidewalks will be constructed along the entire west frontage of 72nd Avenue. The Planning Commission concur with these proposed improvements along the site's SW 72nd Avenue frontage, except that the Commission points out that the sidewalk will need to be removed from the curb by at least five feet consistent with Code Section 18.164.070.B. Conditions of approval are specified at the end of this final order to specify these street improvements along SW 72nd Avenue. The proposed Dartmouth Street extension will be built under the Dartmouth local improvement district. The local improvement district will construct a three-lane roadway with curbs, and gutter within a 70 foot right-of-way between Pacific Highway and SW 72nd Avenue. Construction is scheduled to occur in summer, 1993. Approval of this development plan will therefore be conditioned upon Dartmouth Street be open for traffic between SW Pacific Highway and SW 68th Avenue prior to occupancy of any of the proposed retail spaces. Access from SW 72nd Avenue alone would not provide sufficient access for this size and type of development. The applicants' traffic report indicates that a three-lane Dartmouth Street should function adequately for approximately 20 years, under present growth assumptions, but that sometime later a five lane facility may be needed. The analysis also shows that the demand for a five lane facility does not necessarily come from the development, but from the build-out of the entire Tigard Triangle, again, under present growth assumptions. Again, the assumptions that were used in the traffic analysis are more than likely going to change as the Triangle land-use plan is revised such that lesser traffic peaks would be anticipated. As stated by Gordon Davis in his March 1, 1993 letter: In a future of uncertainty, it is nonetheless clear that under present growth assumptions, the three lane facility .. . will function very adequately for the development of those properties and for development within the Triangle for the next 20 years. However as future decisions are made on other transportation issues, the impacts to Dartmouth will become clear and decisions can then be made on the appropriate additional improvements to Dartmouth. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 14 In response to the traffic report's findings, the applicant is proposing the following improvements to Dartmouth Street: A. In anticipation that a five lane facility may be needed at some time in the future, dedication of an additional amount of right-of-way to bring the total right-of-way to 45 feet from the centerline. B. In addition to the improvements provided by the Dartmouth local improvement district, the following would be provided by the applicants: A second westbound through lane on Dartmouth Street between the 72nd Avenue intersection and the Dartmouth entrance driveway to the development. From the Dartmouth driveway west, an acceleration lane on Dartmouth Street which would transition back to the three-lane roadway. A deceleration right turn lane for vehicles turning right into the site from Dartmouth Street. C. A 6-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to the curb. The Planning Commission generally concurs with the need for these proposed improvements along the site's SW Dartmouth Street frontage, with the following exceptions. Again, the Commission points out that the sidewalk will need to be removed from the curb by at least seven feet to be consistent with the Dartmouth Street landscaping guidelines adopted by the City Council last October as well as with the minimum five foot separation required by Code Section 18.164.070.B. Mr. Davis' letter argues that separation of the sidewalk from the curb along Dartmouth would require that a seven-foot tall retaining wall be built to accommodate the separated sidewalk without affecting the parking lot design. While we agree with Mr. Davis that a seven-foot retaining wall is not in scale with the pedestrian environment which is desired, staff has pointed out that the need for the taller retaining wall could be diminished (or extinguished) by reducing the size of the extremely large parking lot some. The proposed parking lot would provide 236 parking spaces in excess of Code standards. By reducing the parking lot by eleven parking spaces along its southern edge, the sidewalk separation should be able to be provided without an increase in the presently proposed retaining wall height of four feet. The Planning Commission will require that the sidewalk be separated from the curb by a planter strip of at least seven feet in width and that and that the grading and site plans be revised accordingly to accommodate the sidewalk without increasing the height of the retaining wall to more than four feet in height. The Planning Commission differs with the applicants traffic study with regard to the need for the proposed second westbound lane between SW 72nd Avenue and the site entrance. The Commission does not find that the traffic report justifies the need for this additional lane and we find that the additional roadway width may be detrimental to the scale of development and attractive streetscape which the City has been attempting to create along Dartmouth Street. It is understood that the applicants may desire to construct this additional lane at this time to avoid future disruption of access to the development when and if additional road width is found to be desirable. However, absent a clear prediction of future traffic and absent a final land use plan for the Triangle, the Planning Commission finds that this additional lane shall be omitted. The Commission concurs, however, with the proposed right-of-way dedication in this area so that FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 1� buildings or other substantial improvements are not constructed upon area that may be needed for future road widening. This decision regarding improvements on Dartmouth Street will require roadway improvements sized to handle normal traffic levels for the foreseeable future rather than sized for peak traffic levels or possible future increased traffic levels. This should result in a more pleasing ( streetscape at all times in exchange for possible additional congestion at ) peak traffic periods or the possibility of future construction to add an l additional lane. It is important that the City also consider the quality /of the trip in transportation decisions rather than lacing primary emphasis 1 on providing for maximum quantities of trips. The Planning Commission is ■ therefore hesitant to recommend the scale of improvements proposed by the applicants. Recommended conditions of approval are provided at the end of this report to specify the required improvements to Dartmouth Street. SANITARY SEWER Code Section 18.164.090 requires that new developments be adequately served by sanitary sewerage collection facilities developed consistent with City of Tigard design standards. Currently there is no sanitary sewer serving the site. As part of the Dartmouth Street local improvement district, an eight-inch diameter sanitary sewer line is being installed within the street. This line should provide adequate service to the proposed development. The Dartmouth Street LID is providing sanitary sewer stubs to SW 72nd Avenue for future extension of sewer to the north. Typically, the City would require each development to extend sanitary sewer main lines to the farthest uphill property line. However, in this case there are two additional elements that must be considered: A. Cub Foods/Supervalu will not have any need for the sanitary sewer line in SW 72nd Avenue; and B. The Dartmouth Street LID shows the sanitary sewer line in SW 72nd Avenue to be located on the west side of the road's centerline. The applicants will presumably be required to provide improvements to the west side of SW 72nd Avenue as a condition of development approval. If the sanitary sewer is placed on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue and then redevelopment occurs on the east side, then it would be necessary to tear up the street improvements to get access to the sewer on the west side. It is staff's recommendation, that the developer be required to determine where this proposed sanitary sewer line in SW 72nd Avenue can be shifted to the east side of the street so as not to later interfere with the improved street. For any portion of the line that must remain on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue, the applicant should be required to provide for its installation. STORM SEWER Code Section 18.164.100.A states that development permits shall only be issued where adequate provisions for storm drainage have been made. The applicant is proposing a private on-site storm sewer system to serve this development. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 16 Part of the proposed wetland enhancement and mitigation program for this development works in combination with the proposed stormwater quality treatment and detention plan. In the large triangular upland area between Dartmouth Street, the parking lot, and the wetland boundary, this area will be shaped into a basin and developed as a wetland marsh. All stormwater from the project will be discharged into this basin which is designed to meet the standards for stormwater quality treatment, prior to entering Red Rock Creek. The Unified Sewerage Agency has established and the City has agreed to enforce (Resolution and Order No. 91-47) Surface Water Management Regulations requiring the construction of on-site water quality facilities or fees in-lieu of their construction. The applicant is proposing to construct on-site water quality facilities. Based on the preliminary plans, the storm water from the site will be piped into a private system. It will then be transported to one of several water quality facilities prior to being discharged into Red Rock Creek. Red Rock Creek, the identified wetlands, and the mitigated wetlands are classified as a sensitive areas under Resolution and Order No. 91-47. Classification as a sensitive area requires that an undisturbed corridor be provided adjacent to the water body. The required corridor must be a minimum of 25 feet wide, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries of the sensitive area. The applicant has defined the sensitive area and provided for the 25 foot buffer. Where the applicant has encroached within the minimum 25 foot buffer, an adequate area of compensation has been provided. OTHER UTILITIES Code Section 18.164.120.A requires new developments to provide for the underground placement of utility services such as electric, telephone, and natural gas service. The City Council has established a fee-in-lieu-of underground placement of utilities to be assessed where it is found to be impractical to place these facilities underground due to utility provider concerns, limited frontage affected, or other reasons. The developer of this site will be responsible for underground placement of utilities on the site; however review of the final public improvement plans with affected agencies may result in a situation where these agencies would resist underground installation. Therefore, the conditions of approval provide for the Engineering Department to review the final public improvement plans with input from other utility providers and to then determine whether the utilities will need to be placed underground or if a fee should be collected. The Planning Couunis ,zon APPROVES' Site Development Rovac:w SDR 93-000l and Planned Deveiopment Review PDR 92-0005 for the proposed tub Foods :hopping plaza artd Seit :4 y Wills R*?view SLR 93»0002 for l.andform moth.fication and a€ volopment' itbii. tae 25 foot area adjacent to wetlands on the i to. Appzoval zs grans st4b ect_, to the following c< ndit44.n`.- THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET OR FINANCIALLY SECURED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS. UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE, THE STAFF CONTACT IS CHRIS DAVIES OF THE ENGINEERING DIVISION: 1. Previously approved lot line adjustments for the involved parcels shall be completed prior to the issuance of building permits. Evidence of the recording of the lot line adjustments shall be FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 17 provided to the Planning Division. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division. 2. The site and grading plans shall be revised to accommodate the following: a. Sidewalks shall be separated from the curb by a planter strip no less than five feet in width along SW 72nd Avenue, and no less than seven feet in width along SW Dartmouth Street; b. The revised plans should not necessitate increasing the retaining wall directly north of Dartmouth Street to a height of greater than four feet; c. The proposed Cub Foods sign on the retaining wall shall be omitted, or alternatively, the other freestanding sign along SW dartmouth Street shall be omitted; d. Additional details shall be provided regarding the required screening of trash and recycling facilities, as well as the screening of roof-top mechanical equipment. e. The site plan shall be revised to provide for at least 53 bicycle parking spaces within conveniently located bicycle racks. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division. 3. The applicant shall be responsible for the underground installation of utilities along the frontages of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd Avenue, unless the Engineering Department in consultation with other utility providing agencies determines that a fee in-lieu of underground installation is justified. 4. The applicant shall investigate the feasibility of relocating the proposed sanitary sewer line in SW 72nd Avenue to the east side of the road's centerline. The applicant shall be responsible for the installation of any portion of the line that must be installed on the west side of the centerline. The City Engineer shall have the final determination as to the location. 5. An agreement shall be executed by the applicant, on forms provided by the City, which waives the property owner's right to oppose or remonstrate against a future local improvement district formed to further improve SW Dartmouth Street. 6. An agreement shall be executed by the applicant, on forms provided by the City, which waives the property owner's right to oppose or remonstrate against a future local improvement district formed to improve SW 72nd Avenue. 7. Two (2) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. Seven (7) sets of approved drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, all prepared by a Professional Engineer, shall be submitted for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. 8. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public along the SW Dartmouth Street frontage to increase the right-of-way to 45 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 18 right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 9. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public along the SW 72nd Avenue frontage to increase the right-of-way to 51 feet from centerline (from the intersection of SW 72 Avenue/Dartmouth Street north to a point that is, at a minimum, 200 feet north of the applicants' access on SW 72nd Avenue) . The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. 10. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public alt..,g the SW 72nd Avenue frontage to increase the right-of-way to 45 feet from the centerline, (from the north property line south to where tn.., right-of-way increases to 51 feet as detailed in #9 above) . The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. 11. Standard street improvements, including concrete sidewalk separated from the curb, driveway aprons, curbs, asphaltic concrete pavement, storm drainage, streetlights, and underground utilities shall be installed along the SW 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street frontages. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to major collector street standards and shall conform to the alignment of existing adjacent improvements or to an alignment approved by the Engineering Department. NOTE: The street improvements shall be as described in the applicants' preliminary plan submittal dated March 1, 1993 except that sidewalks shall be separated from curbs and the additional Dartmouth Street westbound lane from SW 72nd Avenue to the site entrance shall be omitted. 12. Building permits will not be issued and construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Department has reviewed and approved the public improvement plans and a street opening permit or construction compliance agreement has been executed. A 100 percent performance assurance or letter of commitment, a developer-engineer agreement, the payment of a permit fee and a sign installation/streetlight fee are required. 13. The proposed privately operated and maintained sanitary sewer and storm drainage system plan-profile details shall be provided as part of the public improvement plans. 14. The applicant shall demonstrate that storm drainage runoff can be discharged into the existing drainageways without significantly impacting properties downstream. 15. Sanitary sewer and storm drainage details shall be provided as part of the public improvement plans. Calculations and a topographic map of the storm drainage basin and sanitary sewer service area shall be provided as a supplement to the public improvement plans. Calculations shall be based on full development of the serviceable area. The location and capacity of existing, proposed, and future lines shall be addressed. 16. The applicant shall provide connection of proposed buildings to the public sanitary sewerage system. A connection permit is required to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer system. 17. The applicant shall be required to provide an on-site water quality facility as established under the guidelines of Unified Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-47. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 19 18. The applicant shall provide, as a minimum, a 25 foot buffer (except as approved for modification by the Planning Commission's order) which meets the requirements of Section 6.08.3, of USA Resolution and Order No. 91-47. 19. The applicant shall obtain a "Joint Permit" from the City of Tigard. This permit shall meet the requirements of the NPDES and Tualatin Basin Erosion Control Program. 20. The applicant should be aware that the City of Tigard has adopted Chapter 70 of the State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code and that the grading plan shall comply with this chapter. 21. The developer shall submit an erosion control plan ensuring compliance with erosion control standards for the Tualatin River Basin. STAFF CONTACT: George Steele, Building Division. 22. A Joint DSL/Corps of Engineers wetlands fill permit shall be obtained by the applicants, (Authority: Section 404, Clean Water Act, and ORS 541.605 to 641.695) . A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department by the applicant. 23. No construction vehicles shall access or depart the site via Baylor Street and Clinton Street except with prior approval of the City Engineer. Approval for exceptions will be given only if the applicant can show that there is no practical alternative for access. No construction vehicles or equipment may be stored or parked on Baylor Street and Clinton Street. Parking of construction vehicles on SW 72nd Avenue shall be limited to the site frontage and shall comply with all existing regulations as to location and duration of parking. No construction materials shall be stored within the rights of way of SW 72nd Avenue or Dartmouth Street at any time. Construction vehicles means the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of the site improvements or buildings proposed under this application and shall include the vehicles of their suppliers and employees. STAFF CONTACT: Ken Schreindl, Code Enforcement Officer, 639-4171. 24. A tree removal permit must be obtained from the Planning Division before removal of any trees in excess of 6 inches in diameter. The Planning Division may prescribe protective measures for the trees to be retained. These measures must be remain in place throughout construction activities on the site. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division. UNLESS A SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE ASSURANCE IS POSTED, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT: 25. Sign permits shall be obtained from the Planning Division prior to the installation of any signs on the site which are intended to be seen from the public right-of-way or other parcels. STAFF CONTACT: The Planning Division. 26. The proposed landscaping materials and other proposed site improvements shall be installed in substantial conformance with the approved site and landscaping plans. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division. 27. An occupancy permit shall not be granted until SW Dartmouth Street is open for traffic between SW Pacific Highway and SW 68th Avenue. Staff Contact: City of Tigard Building Official. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 20 APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN MONTHS OF THE FINAL DECISION DATE. It is further ordered that the applicant be notified of the entry of this order. PASSED: This day of March, 1993, by the Planning Commission of the City of Tigard. Z r . re 1.T.-•'l' Tigard Pla I g C.mmission FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 21 • • ice; ■ f.few; �'y TS. `,Hr.,:,:-.„ : .,,„;.i,_:. C. C: ;' � �2Ler 18 1S0 True s i. Chapter I.lso will be satisfied in that the applicant will be required to r '.r obtain a tree removal permit prior to removing . caliper elms in preparation for development. Permits trees over b inches in ,`t if it is found necessary to remove the trees to ac will be granted only a _•�, sidewalks, driveways, utilities, or other necessary structures, ; ::'s .' should be clear from the rev nary site ',:!;.V.1-: will require retrieval the site plan and moan that It squire the removal of most of the trees on the site due to the -_ 1 _ significant amount of grading which must occur. Nevertheless, trues such L ..1..) as are located on future lots 4 and S should not be 4 • . as is necessary to alloy for development• removed until such time Chant B 64 - • M r�nts STREETS { The site is located immediately to the north of the future Dartmouth extension and immediately west of SW 72nd Avenue. tre Street classified as major collector streets Both streets are v f E Transportation Plan Map. Major collector the Comprehensive Planes !} minimum improvement standards streets have the following 60-80 feet of right-of-way, 44 feet Code Section 18.ving lane,. a: j i anent, and 2-4 moving lanes. • 1 SW 72nd Avenue adjacent to the site currently has the following LaProvementee 40 feet of right-of-way, 11 - 13 feet of pavement west of centerline, and no curbs or sidewalks• are required to be a condition of development Typically half-at Beet ing a abutting roads up to the minima's standards. The a approval p bring abutting problem with such requirements and have pr�sleidcants apparently have no e minimum improvement standards based upon their traffic analysis of needed road Based on the applicants' traffic ' Triangle is fully developed, the projected at such flee as the entire Tigard • adjacent to the site will �ojerted °firing on S.M. 72nd Averse k exceed the level requiring a five lane facility. f; The applicants state that the traffic repc:t used C on future development of the Triangle. The conservatiae assumptions ( the existing land use plan for the arse which was utilised even thought -j plan is being reconsidered by the City. While the plan revisions have not i yet been adopted, recent decisions the Planning Commission with regard e to the Triangle will likely lead to many areas that are now Boned for , I primarily office development to be redesignated for medium ■ residential use. These changes would tend to peak-hour t traffic volumes from the levels considered in the future traffic report. Therefore, based on the traffic analysis provided by the applicants and the proposed changes to the land use plan, the applicants 1. following= (refer to Cordon Davis' March 1, 1993 Kterto proposing � 1 ar 1 the March 1, 1993 revised site plan). Randy ltooley l''' --' I d' approximately A. B wee he Dartmont M. 72nd Avenue iotersertion. and to a point } 6• aiditional 31 feet of right-of-way, t� 72nd Avenue driveway, an feet of right-feet ri which will create a total of 51 1 y on the west side of the waterline. B. The remaining frontage along S.M. 72nd Ave would have increased , right-of-way to a total of 45 feet on the v centerline, west side of the -v,,.•,.. Pflvi. ORDeR - SDR 93-0002 COs FOODS/spP�yup ;r,' Page 13 f l" # , i Hit • 1 R C. A total street section between the Dartmouth/72nd intersection and the sits driveway on 72nd Avenue will have 51 feet of paving and will • include: - a bike lane on the west side • - a southbound through travel lane - a southbound left turn lane - a northbound left turn lane - a northbound through travel lane D. A total street section between the 72nd Avenue driveway to a point approximately 200 feet north will include: - a bike lane on the west side - a southbound through travel/right turn (into the site) - a center merge/left turn lane - a northbound travel lane E. From the north property line to a point approximately 200 feet north of the 72nd Avenue driveway: - a bike lane on the west side - a north and southbound travel lane - a continuous left turn lane • P. Curbs and sidewalks will be constructed along the entire west frontage of 72nd Avenue. The Planning Commission concur with these proposed improvements along the site's SW 72nd Avenue frontage, except that the Commission points out that } the sidewalk will need to be removed from the curb by at lerst five feet • consistent with Code Section 18.164.070.8. Conditions of approval are specified at the and of this final order to specify these street improvements along SW 72nd Avenue. i • The proposed Dartmouth Street extension will be built under the Dartmouth V local improvement district. The local improvement district will construct a three-lane roadway with curbs, and gutter within a 70 fc.ot right-of-way between Pacific Highway and SW 72nd Avenue. Construction is scheduled to occur in summer, 1993. Approval of this development plan will therefore be conditioned upon Dartmouth Street be open for traffic between SW Pacific Highway and SW 68th Avenue prior to occupancy of any of the proposed retail spaces. Access from SW 72nd Avenue alone would not provide sufficient ' access for this size and type of development. The applicants' traffic report indicates that a three-lane Dartmouth Street should function adequately for approximately 20 years, under present growth assumptions, but that sometime later a five lane facility may be needed. ►. The analysis also shows that the demand for a five lane facility does not F necessarily come from the development, but from the build-out of the entire Tigard Triangle, again, under present growth assumptions. Again, the assumptions that were used in the traffic analysis are more than likely going to change as the Triangle land-use plan is revised such that lesser traffic peaks would be anticipated. As stated by Gordon Davis in his March 1, 1993 letters In a future of uncertainty, it is nonetheless clear that under present growth assumptions, the three lane facility ... will function very adequately for the development of those properties and for development within the Triangle for the next 20 years. However as future decisions are made on other transportation issues, the impacts to Dartmouth will become clear and decisions can then be made on the appropriate additional improvement■ to Dartmouth. FINAL ORDER - SDR 93-0002 CUB FOODS/SUPERVALU Page 14 • .w Y NOACWOIL- CITY OF TIGARD Washington, County NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY PLANNING COMMISSION 1. Concerning Case Number(s) : SDR 93-002/PDR 93-0001 2. Name of Owner: SuperValu Holdings, Inc. Name of Applicant: City of Tigard 3. Address 13125 SW Hall Blvd. City Tigard State OR Zip 97223 4. Address of Property: 7500 SW Dartmouth Blvd. Tax Map and Lot No(s) . : 1S1 36DC, tax lot 600, 2500, and 2501; a portion of 1S1 36CD, tax lot 2000; and a portion of 2S1 1BA, tax lots 100 and 100 5. Request: To amend condition of approval #11 in the March 25, 1993 Planning Commission Final Order, thereby allowing the westbound lane of SW Dartmouth Street from 72nd to the site entrance to be constructed by the developer. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.62, 18.80, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, and 18.120. ZONE: C-G and C-G (PD) (General Commercial, Planned Development) The C-G zoning designation allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, eating and drinking establishments, general retail sales, and single-family residential units among other uses. 6. Action: Approval as requested X Approval with conditions Denial 7. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall, and mailed to: X The applicant and owner(s) X Owners of record within the required distance X The affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator X Affected governmental agencies 8. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON December 6, 1993 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision, and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall, P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 9. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290(B) and Section 18.32.370 which provides that a written appeal may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee ($315.00) and transcript costs, (varies up to a maximum of $500.00) . The deadline for filing of an appeal is 3:30 p.m. December 6, 1993 10. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, 639-4171. CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 9316 PC A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS WHICH APPROVES AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IMPOSED UPON THE CUB FOODS SHOPPING PLAZA. (SDR93-0002) The Tigard Planning Commission has reviewed the above application at a public hearing on November 15, 1993. The Commission has based its decision on the facts, findings, and conclusions noted below. DETAILED APPLICATION DESCRIPTION On March 22nd, 1993 the Planning Commission approved the Final Order for the proposed Costco site development plan.Condition#11 of that approval stated contained the following note: 'The street improvements shall be as described in the applicants' preliminary plan submittal dated March 1, 1993 except that sidewalks shall be separated from the curbs and the additional Dartmouth Street westbound lane from SW 72nd Avenue to the site entrance shall be omitted". Page 19 of the Final Order on which condition #11 is found, along with the section of the final order dealing with the street width of Dartmouth, is attached as exhibit A. At that time, the City was in the process of conducting a transportation and land use analysis of the Triangle, working with OTAK and DKS consultants. It was thought, at that time, that a full five lanes may not be needed for several years, or not at all, and particularly if the land uses were to be changed. In addition, since the Planning Commission and City Council had indicated support for introducing a significant number of residential units into the Triangle, it seemed appropriate to try to keep the street width to the minimum necessary in order to foster a more pedestrian oriented environment. So at the least, it seemed premature to allow the street to be built with another westbound lane from 72nd to the site entrance. Since that decision in March, additional analysis has been completed, and it is now apparent that with the build out of the Triangle, Dartmouth will need to be widened to five lanes between 72nd and 99W to be able to handle the traffic. Further, the five lane width was shown to be necessary even if the land uses were changed to be more in accordance with the land use "Concept Plan" or the "Specific Plan" ideas. The key factors were not so much the volume of traffic, but the weaving and turning traffic movements between different properties in this area, and the cuvilinear nature of Dartmouth Street. (See Exhibit "B"). FINAL ORDER 93- PC - CUB FOODS SHOPPING PLAZA PAGE "1 Meanwhile,construction of a three lane Dartmouth commenced under a Local Improvement District.The LID was building a street three lanes wide,with curbs and street lights, but not sidewalks. Further, the Dartmouth landscaping plan called for the sidewalks to be set back seven feet from the curb, with street trees planted between the curb and the sidewalk. It became apparent that what was being built by the LID would not only be inadequate, but that the curbs, street lighting, sidewalks, storm drainage system and landscaping would have be rebuilt or relocated or otherwise disrupted in order to widen the street. An obvious better choice would be to allow the street to be widened now, and the curbs, sidewalks, street trees etc. be placed where they ultimately would be when the entire road section was widened. A plan was devised,therefore,to widen Dartmouth between 72nd and the site entrance with an additional westbound lane, doing so through a change to the contract. The extra cost would be charged directly to SuperValue, outside of the LID project. (At the same time, Costco asked, and the City agreed, to allow an additional lane along much of the frontage of their property through the same mechanism). For the rest of the frontage of Cub Foods, the sidewalk and landscaping will be located to accommodate a future widening,which will most likely be constructed under a separate LID. (Cub Foods has already signed a non-remonstrance agreement guaranteeing their participation in a future LID). The landscaping strip will still be seven (7') feet wide, thanks to an additional two (2') foot easement granted to the City by SuperValu. The only problem with that approach was the condition of approval noted above. Condition #11 specifically omitted the westbound lane. The timing was such that the City staff could not schedule a public hearing or otherwise involve the Planning Commission. Therefore, the staff decided to allow the widening, and then request that the Planning Commission amend the condition to reflect what has actually been built. PROCEDURE: In order to amend the final order, the Planning Commission needs to open the hearing, hear testimony, if any, and make a decision on whether or not to amend the condition in the final order. Then the Chairperson will sign an amended final order. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the condition be amended to read: "11. Standard street improvements, including concrete sidewalk separated from the curb, driveway aprons,curbs,asphaltic concrete pavement,storm drainage,streetlights,and FINAL ORDER 93-J PC - CUB FOODS SHOPPING PLAZA PAGE 2 underground utilities shall be installed along the SW 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth Street frontages. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to major collector street standards and shall conform to the alignment of existing adjacent improvements or to an alignment approved by the Engineering Department. NOTE: The street improvements shall be as described in the applicants' preliminary plan submittal dated March 1, 1993 except that sidewalks shall be separated from curbs and the additional Dartmouth Street westbound lane west of the site entrance shall be omitted at this time. In the future, additional widening of or other improvements to Dartmouth may be required. It is further ordered that the applicant be notified of the entry of this order. PASSED: This 74 r day of November, 1993, by the Planning Commission of the City of Tigard. 1 Harry Saporta, Actirig President Tigard Planning Commission A H II ST.X14 t 1 J z• c, --c. , . . . 1 .W‘*... . Mill __� E - ‘ - .., .---- .. T AAAAA ST — 1 i I 11 t W l v� l Rd 1 .■i'_ , , _ r Sr. [lIMT011`....i_r=1 i - It-417,-. K j�� I [ II .■ / ,h -, SITE i -G_ — i / N X11 1 . �© C it IIMI r,. I i I ` 11111,, -,--FRANKLIN , _W /N/ I ► - �1I. ' II T,�—r—n I n. ■® _■ riT FINAL ORDER 93-1¢ PC - CUB FOODS SHOPPING PLAZA PAGE 3 NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 1 999-000 1 6 ''!'' CITY OF TIOARD REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER CommunityDeve(opment Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 1/19/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER CASES: Site Development Review SDR1999-00016 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with 3 buildings totaling 37,000 square feet of retail space. Parcel "C" was approved as part of the previous conceptual plan approval on the site and is, therefore, now being reviewed as a Detailed Plan/Site Development Review. APPLICANT: Rembold Properties OWNER: Waremart Foods, Inc. 1022 SW Salmon, Suite 450 400 S. Woodland Avenue Portland, OR 97205 Woodburn, OR 97071 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial; C-G. ZONING DESIGNATION: General Commercial; C-G. The General Commercial Zoning District provides sites for the provision of a wide range of major retail goods and services. The property is also designated with the following overlay districts: 1) Planned Development Overlay; and 2) Tigard Triangle Design Standards Overlay. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue at the northwest corner of the SW Dartmouth Street/72nd Avenue intersection; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 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 IV 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 NOVEMBER 15, 1999 AND EFFECTIVE ON DECEMBER 2, 1999 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The Director's Decision is final 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 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. lTHE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 3:30 PM ON DECEMBER 1, 1999. I Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Julia Powell Hajduk at (503) 639-4171 , Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. ' . ,: .. p l o �_ a 0 1=3 J z E W Q - - • ..-I �-. W � r 6 �� t -`if ..1 2•.x ❑ rrrr _ N j _ EL �� G _ r I I , -_ -__,1 (A++�) i 1 U SITE PLAN T 01199-0001f EXHIBIT MAP N ABA= PAOPEATIES (...is.0 m$.41 AETAR OEHCES �: - + VICINITY MAP I IF / - I / / _. ------- SDR1999-00016 1-- ..= REMBOLD ��01 PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES v,, ,, \les imek .....rin A _4((Ili:ER , ! iiiii MIMI III @ �r. i iii�:: -I" is = �I �� !�"a.,.,._. ii 11 , I. --- IC ■•■■ .s ,__, \■� �„�, , , �"' Ciry of Tigard . \_____ . ...w.. ,- 1fi !�1 II . �.. NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIEN, _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 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW T CITY OF TI TIGARD Community(Development Shaping)Better Community 500-FOOT PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE: September 9, 1999 FILE NO(S): SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 1999-00016 FILE NAME: REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL BUILDINGS PROPOSAL: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72' Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. 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 SEPTEMBER 23, 1999. All comments should be directed to Julia Powell Hajduk. Associate Planner in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at (503) 639-4171. ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: • Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; • Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; • Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Planning Commission must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity on that issue. Failure of any party to addre, ne relevant approval criteria with r(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 ,ommPnfs." - H \_] VICINITY MAP - MIMI 114 p■ _U�; SDR1999-00016• ft IP REMBOLD Il ? R10ES ttBEC E A (III MIMI g j] U _a Ilr . I . - • , =Mb ma c \ UM* , .. - V.■ '� N MI DARTMOUTH ST milli • xoo c« \ , _ .. I IJ i • -4,Lba )\ t 1■_ ' 1 l. �� — I ____ W w...I�Oy1 n1 S.mu.P..un ''16„ p REQUEST FOR COMMENTS RECEIVED HRISTENSEN NGINEERING, INC. SEP 2 31999 PLANNERS, CIVIL ENGINEERS, AND SURVEYORS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TRANSMITTAL n�rr r('RNO TO: 09/23/99 95-1 02.01 City of Tigard ATTENTION Julia Powell Hajduk 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Ri Tri-County Center Tigard OR 97223 WE ARE TRANSMITTING THE FOLLOWING BY: Mail x Messenger Other . r Date . � ., ,. �� s,npttt 09/23/99 1 letter regarding notice of land use application SDR 99-0016 • AS INDICATED BELOW: For approval x For your use _ As requested x For review and comment REMARKS: CC: FILE SIGNED: //� BY: Mar . ead 7150 SW Hampton Street,Suite 226 Portland,Oregon 97223 Phone(503)598-1866 Fax(503)598-1868 HRISTENSEN NGINEERING, INC. PLANNERS, CIVIL ENGINEERS, AND SURVEYORS 09/23/99 CEI Job# 95-102.01 Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Julia: RE: NOTICE OF LAND USE APPLICATION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 99-00016 We have been requested to respond to the Notice of Land Use inquiry for written comments. This letter is intended to identify the rapid developmental increase in the Tigard Triangle since the 1993 Kittelson & Associates Traffic Impact Analysis for the Cub Foods Commercial Center, and how these changes affect the need for traffic flow improvements to be installed or payment in lieu of, as part of the proposed 37,000 square feet of retail space which is SDR 99-00016. The City of Tigard requires a Traffic Impact Analysis (hereafter, TIA) to be conducted for new developments in five (5) year increments. The Kittelson & Associates Transportation Impact Study for the Cub Foods Commercial Center was performed in February of 1993, nearly 7 years ago & exceeds this time limit. It is our intention to request an additional TIA be performed with references to the additional and originally unanticipated growth in the Triangle, and with another five-year forecast. At the time of the 1993 Kittelson TIA, "All of the study area intersections currently operate[ed] at acceptable levels of service during the critical weekday p.m. peak hour time period" (page 2). Per table 1, the signalized intersection of SW 78th Ave. and Highway 99W was operating at a `B' Level of Service, and the intersection of SW 72nd Ave., and SW Hampton Street was operating at a `C' Level of Service. The intersection of SW 72nd and SW Dartmouth was, according to Table 3, operating at a Level of Service `A', prior to the completion of the Cub Foods Commercial Center, and an anticipated Level of Service `B' upon completion. The TIA identified that: "In many instances, unsignalized intersections meeting one or more of these Warrants continue to operate very satisfactorily and with even less total delay than would occur if a traffic signal were installed" (page 25). 7150 SW Hampton Street,Suite 226 • Portland,OR 97223 •Phone:(503)598-1866 •Fax:(503)598-1868 •e-mail:cei@cybernw.com Additionally, the area surrounding the site was very different from its present configuration: "The project site is vacant. Therefore, it does not generate significant volumes of traffic. The land area to the west of the site between SW 72nd Avenue and Highway 217 is vacant. The Tigard Cinemas is located immediately to the north of the site. Further to the north, land along Highway 99W, where direct access to 99W exists, development consists primarily of retail commercial land uses. Where no direct access is available, such as in the vicinity of SW 72"d Avenue, the commercial uses are less intense (e.g. rental agencies, mini-warehousing). Immediately east of the site, between SW 72nd Avenue and Interstate 5 (I-5), land uses are primarily low density residential. In the vicinity of SW 72"d Avenue and SW Hampton Street there is a concentration of office buildings and institutional uses"(page 8). Today, the new development in the Triangle has exceeded the capacity of the existing transportation infrastructure. The Kittelson 1993 TIA states that the Cub Foods Commercial Center was the first major development in the interior of the Triangle. Since then, there has been either built-out, or approved; Costco, Tri-County Center, Magnolia HiFi, Car Toys, Eagle Hardware, Spect Develpoment on SW Dartmouth, McDonalds, Farmer's Insurance Business Park near I-5, the three-story office on SW Hampton and the PERS building, totaling over 1 million square feet of office and retail space. In addition, the Tigard Triangle Plan and the rezoning of Hermosa Park have all been included in the immediate area since the 1993 TIA was conducted. The impact area for the Cub Foods Commercial Center included the intersections of SW 72"d at SW Hampton, SW 68th and SW 72"d at SW Dartmouth, SW Dartmouth at Hwy 99W and SW 72"d at Hwy 99W. Each of these intersections is either directly or indirectly affected by the new developments listed above. The 1993 TIA indicates that: "...based on a straight-line projection of background traffic growth at this intersection [SW72nd Avenue SW Dartmouth Street], Warrant #11 is estimated to be met in 1995. Continuing the same growth trend, Warrants #1 & 11 would be met in 2000. Warrants 1, 2 and 11 are projected to be met in 2003. These estimates only provide an indication of when operational problems at the intersection may begin to appear, and should not be used to determine when a signal will be required. Field observations of the intersection's operational characteristics and actual volume measurements should be conducted at this location before any decision to install a signal is made" (page 25-26). Therefore, based on the 1993 TIA, there could be an underestimated need for a traffic signal at this intersection, should the growth of the surrounding area exceed the current growth trend. This also indicates that an allowance for a signal may be warranted due to the open-ended conclusions stated here. The approved Tri-County Center was required to provide a `Constrained Analysis' which demanded that the major portion of traffic generated by this development would be diverted to the intersections of 68th, 72"d at Highway 99W. This analysis concluded that 7150 SW Hampton Street,Suite 226 • Portland,OR 97223 •Phone:(503)598-1866 •Fax:(503)598-1868 •e-mail:cei @cybernw.com there is no more capacity on SW Dartmouth and SW 72" at Hwy 99W, and that the only available capacity in the area is on SW Dartmouth at SW 68th. However, this was concluded prior to the Spect Development approved at 68th and SW Dartmouth. Tri- County Center traffic generation peaked the capacity of SW Dartmouth and SW 72nd at Hwy 99W. The development was not permitted to route or direct traffic to flow south along SW 72nd. The building sizes at Tri-County Center were reduced to fit into the allowable traffic capacity of the surrounding area. The rapid development of the area since the construction of the Cub Foods Commercial Center has affected the TIA of Tri- County Center. Because of the increased traffic flow in the area, Tri-County Center has been required to improve SW Dartmouth and SW 72nd and to install numerous traffic signals. The increased traffic flow generated by the Cub Foods Commercial Center assisted to mandate this traffic system requirement. Tri-County Center has been required to make improvements to the traffic system, which benefit all nearby residents and businesses without them funding their fair share of the costs. However, because the proposed 37,000 square foot retail space will fall under the 1993 TIA, it will not have to provide any mitigation or improvements for the streets, which their customers will be utilizing. The proposed 37,000 square feet of retail space will benefit from the improvements paid for and constructed by Tri-County Center. The costs of the improvements to the transportation system should be spread among those businesses who will be benefiting from the increased availability of patronage by the promotion of traffic flow and the attraction of traffic by the increase in available retail options. The cumulative effects of the new and rapid development in the Tigard Triangle have placed unanticipated demands onto the existing transportation system. Page two of the Cub Foods Commercial Center TIA claims that there is no traffic signal needed at the intersection of SW 72" and Dartmouth. It also states that this estimate was made "...based on a straight-line projection of background traffic growth at this intersection". The Tigard Triangle has grown much more dense, and in a much shorter period of time than had been anticipated by this traffic study. This TIA made the assumption of a traffic system which has been exceeded and its conclusions can no longer apply. Therefore, it is expected that a new TIA be conducted taking into account the new existing conditions which have been proven to have changed more than anticipated, and will affect the conclusions of the TIA. Waremart, Petsmart, Office Max and GNC signed a Non-Remonstrance agreement to improve Dartmouth to improve traffic flow. Per City of Tigard Final Order SDR 93- 00002, "An agreement shall be executed by the applicant, on forms provided by the City, which waives the property owner's right to oppose or remonstrate against a future local improvement district formed to further improve SW Dartmouth Street." Therefore, the businesses adjacent to SW Dartmouth would be obligated to participate in the costs of transportation system improvements. The proposed development is part of this LID. 7150 SW Hampton Street,Suite 226 • Portland,OR 97223 •Phone:(503)598-1866 •Fax (503)598-1868 •e-mail:cei @cybemw.com It is not the conclusion of this letter that the proposed development be denied on the basis of transportation system improvements. However, it is the conclusion of this letter to require the proposed development to fulfill its five-year requirement to provide a TIA which reflects the rapid developmental increases and the demands on the Tigard Triangle transportation system. It is also the conclusion that the proposed development, while benefiting from the street improvement installed as part of the Tri-County Center, assume some of the costs of the improvements. Sincerely, CHRISTENSEN ENGINE ' 1 G,INC. Edward K. Christensen,P.E. 1 �' 7150 SW Hampton Street,Suite 226 • Portland,OR 97223 •Phone:(503)598-1866 •Fax:(503)598-1868 •e-mail:cei@cybernw.com MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: October 21, 1999 TO: Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer RE: SDR 1999-00016, Rembold Properties Retail Offices Description: Development of Parcel C of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. The site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue and on the north side of SW Dartmouth Street (WCTM 1S1 36DC, Tax Lot 2504). Findings: 1 . Streets: TDC 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. TDC 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. This site lies adjacent to SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street. SW 72nd Avenue SW 72nd Avenue is classified as a major arterial according to the Tigard Triangle Design Standards (TTDS). This roadway classification requires a right-of-way (ROW) width of 92 feet. At present, there is adequate ROW along this street to meet the TTDS. SW 72nd Avenue is presently improved adjacent to this site and was constructed by the applicant as a part of the original SDR (SDR 93- 00002). The present improvements meet the TTDS and therefore there is no need for additional street widening. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00016 Rembold Properties PAGE 1 SW Dartmouth Street This roadway is also classified as a major arterial per the TTDS. There is adequate ROW along this roadway at this time to meet the TTDS. This street was improved as a part of a local improvement district (LID), of which the applicant was a part. The roadway is fully improved to meet the TTDS. Other Transportation Issues A letter was submitted to the City from Ed Christensen, dated September 23, 1999, indicating that the applicant should contribute to additional infrastructure in the site vicinity because conditions are different than what was encountered in 1993 when the development was initially constructed. Christensen believes that the applicant should contribute funds toward the signalization of nearby intersections to help mitigate their share of the impact on the system. When the applicant filed the SDR application in 1993, they provided a master plan of the entire site, including eventual development of the subject site. They also provided a traffic impact study that was prepared by Kittelson and Associates. At that time, the local intersections were operating at acceptable levels of service and when Kittelson considered the impact from the development of the entire site, they found that none of the local intersections warranted signalization. The applicant was required to construct frontage improvements on both SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street, as was mentioned above, to mitigate the impact of the development. The current application does not result in a net increase in trip generation from this site over what Kittelson had calculated in 1993. In fact, the proposed expansion will result in fewer trips for the entire site than what was assumed in 1993. Because the applicant was required to mitigate the impact of this development in 1993, and because the addition does not result in more trips than what was assumed in 1993, it is Staffs opinion that the applicant can not be required to make additional public transportation improvements in the area. 2. Water: This site lies within the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. According to the proposed plan, the applicant will need to make a connection to the existing public water line in SW 72nd Avenue to serve Building A. The other proposed buildings can be served from existing onsite private water lines. A permit will be required from TVWD for the proposed water connection. In addition, the roadway cut and patch work must be covered in a Street Opening Permit from the City. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00016 Rembold Properties PAGE 2 3. Sanitary Sewer: The existing onsite sanitary sewer lines will adequately serve this site. No additional public sanitary sewer line work is necessary. 4. Storm Drainage: The existing onsite storm drainage conveyance and detention systems were initially designed and constructed to accommodate full build-out of this site. The proposed addition will actually result in approximately 8,427 square feet less hard surface than what was initially assumed in the master plan design for the systems. Therefore, no additional storm drainage work is necessary. 5. Storm Water Quality: Since the development of this site will result in less impervious surface than what was originally anticipated when the applicant designed and constructed the existing onsite water quality facility, there will be no further requirements. 6. Grading and Erosion Control: USA Design and Construction Standards also regulates 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. 7. 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 $90.00 (3 buildings X $30/address = $90.00). ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00016 Rembold Properties PAGE 3 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 . Prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the cut and patch work in SW 72nd Avenue associated with the proposed water line connection. 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. 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, 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. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of$90.00. 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: 4. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work within the public right-of-way and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. \\tig333\usr\depts\eng\bdanr\comments\sdr\sdr 1999-00016.bdr.doc ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 1999-00016 Rembold Properties PAGE 4 REQUEST FOR COMMENT CITY OF TIGARD 1' ��t R ommunity DATE: September 9,1999 SEP ''�� SEP 2 9 1999 TO: Julia Huffman,USA/SWM Program CITY OF TIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division ---m NTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: (503)639-4111/Fax: (503)684-1297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SDR)1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity May 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: SEPTEMBER 23, 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: (P1 ase pravide the foaming information)Name of Person(sl Commenting: I Phone Number(s): -f3o?s I� — SDR1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST FOR COMMENTS u A f ,xi J� UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY MEMORANDUM RECEIVED PLANNING DATE: September 21, 1999 SEP 2 9 1999 TO: Julia Hajduk, City of Tigard CITY OF TIGARD FROM: Julia Huffman, USA ,,/t_ SUBJECT: Rembold Properties Retail Offices, SDR 1999-00016 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. • If the existing water quality facility is adequate to treat the new impervious area, then a new facility would not be required. 155 North First Avenue,Suite 270, MS 10 Phone: 503/648-8621 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124-3072 FAX:503/640-3525 f REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIIGARD Community(Deveropment RECEIVED PC�� Better Community DATE: September 9,1999 TO: Nadine Smith,Advanced Planning Supervisor SEP 2 9 1999 CITY OF TIGAR FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: 15031639-4171 I Fax: (503]684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISORI 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: SEPTEMBER 23, 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 (cPrease provide the fotrowing information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: I Phone Number(sl: SDR1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST FOR COMMENTS `lanes e� S i 0 ,(0541) /Y441/1-44-: A t---t227. °Ant 60710.1".nite 2 1 09/28/99 TUE 10:06 FAX 503 591 0986 7 TVWD ENGINEERING X002 II REQUEST FO R COMMEI�T� �+- ... VFQ PCA CITY OF TtGARD DATE: NN/N( Community rDevilo ment September 91999 Shaping p SEP 2 p gABetterCommunit TO: /L�•• Tualatin Valle Water District Administrative OW s •0FT�CAR ) D FROM: Ci of Ti and Plannin Division STAFF CO ACT: Julia Powell Nadu : ,ociate Planner Phone: 03)639-4111/Fax: i ;4-7297 , SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SD' 1999-00 I i REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is Winco Foods site with a 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within th q re feet of the total area � 7ont Avenue;e;W Foods and C,Petsmart. ZONE: The sit Commercial;Parcel C located eon the west side nt SW commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted e existing development site n commercial agency ado provide f services,retail tail goods dstand and s. C-G The purpose C- of the g iserat sales and ser agency _ ti c�,,.. ice , to rani Jfnmern fraternal repairs, among a other uses in the C- s zoning district civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.36u, 16.390, Io.ocv, ,,;..22_ 1P 9 uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. �� 745, 18.755, Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicants Statement for your review. departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near From information supplied by various WE NE YOUR C(�Mw�niTe �., ar future. If you wih to comment recommendation on this application. COMMENT B CK BY: SEPTEIVIg�R 23_„ 1999• You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. It ou are unable to res and b the above contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon a s possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, date, please phone the staff Tigard, OR 97223. PL 'SE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: of our office. (`Pl`'°se pr°"`�e tfrc foQovnng information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: ��• - Phone Numberis): �� / ,N .1 SDR1999-0005 � � REMBOLD PROPERTIFC p=-,-,,,, —�_ REQUEST FOR COMMEt 'QED PLANNING CITY OF BOARD SEP 1 4 1999 Community(Development Shaping Better Community DATE: September 9,1999 CITY OF TIGARD TO: Brian Moore,PGE Service Design Consultant FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: (503)639-4111/Fax: (5031 684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES I REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a 1 total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: SEPTEMBER 23, 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: ti (Please provide the following information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: I Phone Number(s): S1 c-44,O(0 5DR1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST FOR COMMENTS Sep-13-99 07 : 47A TCI + . Helens 503 397 5686 P .02 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD ('ornmumv,De(L'lopncrut DATE: September 9,1999 RECEIVED PLANNING Shaping)4 cj3cvtrr('nncmuuiry TO: Pat McGann Tel Cablevision SEP 151999 CITY OF TIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: M0316394171/Fax: [5031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 1999-00016 •- REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish•to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: SEPTEMBER 23, 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: (Asc pruc,c the f)rro«r,i,,iryiirr,,ltr,..;:Name of Persontsl Commenting:- L T -31 • Phone Number's): ( (L.5--T- 4' I SDR1999-00016 RFRARnl ri DDnoccence DcTwu REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD RECEIVED PLANNING Community(Development Shaping Better Community DATE: September 9,1999 SEP 17 1999 TO: Lori Dorney,US West Communications art OF TIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: [503)639-4171/Fax: [5031684-7291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR)1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: SEPTEMBER 23, 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 C� R (Please provide the following information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: I Phone Number(s): SDR1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS 44, CITY OF TIGARD RECEIVED PLANNING Community(Development Shaping Better Community DATE: September 9,1999 S E P 1 7 1999 TO: Michael Miller,Operations Utility Manager CITY OF TIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: [5031639-4111/Fax: [503)684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR]1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: SEPTEMBER 23. 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: IS rim-m N Dl S i 0..lciT" 4 A (Please provide the following information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: Phone Number[sl: SDR1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TI TIGARD RECEIVEf L} ,Development SfiapingA Better Community DATE: September 9,1999 S E P 1 7 1999 TO: Acting Building Official CITY OF TIGARD FROM: City 01 Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: [5031 639-4111/Fax: (5031 684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR]1999-00016 r REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL BUILDINGS < REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: SEPTEMBER 23. 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: (1)eretr► r Fir.1 *rkck ! (r1J rear mF e)/) fee a f3 (�) erav,de t. vr)C l� a >� et), 4dcJ,,�//it, o-1t/ , / J-- (3) yf evl i rr1).C. /L..r't'1�/ti/, ?D ' e ' / r i. F,rY ewc 7tlu L1c1 rroft./`�e G7 fI)Y f�Ykl"1 , (L) $70 c., nU/Y .4/06 l , er )) G- AM" ✓< ' evr ,r�•c1 Lvc �1� 1eh .�5) frrc/v, di S ac ejj, �r)t FGrkh-.> f67.4( e1 C6)0Y'vvlr/c. e$ 1L J/, G l{ no LA , �a 71 r){ � Iki oN f t* ) ) ll/6/, a rr J R +''1-! cy7 t r/` , v `—& t �.� i 1 i c A/7 0) trk� L ydIth• n fJ I"twy b fQlr� ) CR041 open r�e.1y�,,,.�, ty a �L (p) ex,4,� .Z Y I �I OsN1r/art�n�'� �✓v►� �OV./. �y.[rKS(D411E)11;11 n.l rr �� l✓ ``t (�Gr� r. �r, / S 44' / Cl2) J=1r€ 14y. f=Cey/ r-, ((lease prc ufe the following information)Name of Person's)Commenting: n1`F U)(aye r1/ r4/rf I Phone Number[sl: �v I SDR1999-00016 �.f � �sw f o BOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST FOR COMMENTS 0) 4111" �,a hi �1�. �' A-'t e 1 7144.1 !O I-v ec i-,,;f REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY O TI'GARD Community cDeve(opment DATE: September 9,1999 READ PLANNING Shaping Better Community TO: Elaine Self,GTE SEP 2 3 'ggg CITY OF I IGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: [5031639-4171/Fax: [5031684-7291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDR1 1999-00016 ➢ REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: SEPTEMBER 23. 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. I PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: 1 We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact Please refer to the enclosed letter. of our office. 4 Written comments provided below: t• • 4 I / ffea .:I_.,.�, c� • I „W-4SNAIP • 4 i ; _ _/� ICI, O 44 (Please provide the foaming information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: / � / -- 0_,,, .. Phone Number[sl: . .DR1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF T r OF IGARD RECEIVED PLANNIN`,'ommunity cDevetopment Shaping Better Community DATE: September 9,1999 SEP 1 0 1999 TO: John Roy,Property Manager/Operations Department CITY OF TIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: (5031 639-4111/Fax: (5031684-7297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR]1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES <4 REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: SEPTEMBER 23, 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: f 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 ti (Please provide thefo(fawing information)Name of Personlsl Commenting: ./f, Phone Numberlsl: SDR1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY TY OF TIGARD OF Community Development R i!f IANNINGvmmunity DATE: September 9,1999 S E P 1 0 1999 TO: Jim Wolf,Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer CITY OF TIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: (503)639-4111 I Fax: (503)684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR)1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: SEPTEMBER 23, 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: RcgOI \\o r k).\A,0 '9VC -co v" ' '(\o(('' park c o .fto \�dm3 V O'SS \°' U1 eq tec;ent04 pick uQ v Please provide the follounng information)Name of Person(sl Commenting: j of c I Phone Number(s): til/ I SDR1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST FOR COMMENTS o-1/4 1 ..00 -%O ept \L as sib rNWal Wo1 c- REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community DATE: September 9,1999 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone: 15031639-4111/Fax: (5031 684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR]1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL BUILDINGS REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: SEPTEMBER 23, 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 fottawing information)Name of Personfsl Commenting: I Phone Number(s): I SDR1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REI I ES FOR COMMEN-S NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE&COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CIT Area: (C) (El [SI tWI CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS E]Place for review In library CIT Book[sl FILE NO[SM.: I/.\ . � ; -,- _ FILE NAME[S]: , ,, , , .e_, k , / ,-,, CITY OFFICES LONG RANGE PLANNING/Nadine Smith,s„perv,.a _COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./00p.m SvcS T vhnioans }POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,a,,,,ePr...b„orcr.r BUILDING DIV./David Scott,B,+a,n,Off r,a ENGINEERING DEPT./Brian Rager,Ds4prnnt ReviewEngRM. 6-'`WATER DEPT./Michael Miller,uanieseanager CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,ceyRecorder _OPERATIONS DEPT./John Roy,Property 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 117 _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS _Planning Manager Planning Manager 2501 SW First Avenue 775 Summer Street,NE Irish Bunnell,Development Services PO Box 369 PO Box 59 Salem,OR 97310-1337 PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 Portland,OR 97207 Beaverton,OR 97076 OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. _METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING 117 _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(CPA's2oA's) Larry French PO Box 2946 _CITY OF KING CITY* 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 Portland,OR 97208-2946 City Manager OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY Salem,OR 97301-2540 15300 SW 116th Avenue Bonneville Power Administration WASHINGTON COUNTY * King City,OR 97224 Routing TTRC—Attn: Renae Ferrera _OREGON DEPT.OF TRANS.(ODOT) Dept.of Land Use&Trans. PO Box 3621 Aeronautics Division 155 N. First Avenue _CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 11r Portland,OR 97208-3621 Tom Highland,Planning Suite 350,MS 13 Planning Director _ 3040 25th Street,SE Hillsboro,OR 97124 PO Box 369 OR,DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY Salem,OR 97310 Brent Curtis(cPA's) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 811 SW Sixth Avenue _Scott King(CPA's) Portland,OR 97204 ODOT,REGION 1 11r Mike Borreson(Engineer) CITY OF PORTLAND Sonya Kazen,ovlpea Rev.Coord _Jim Tice(IGA's) David Knowles,Planning Bureau Or 123 NW Flanders Tom Harry(Current Pl.Apps.) Portland Building 106,Rm. 1002 Portland,OR 97209-4037 Phil Healy(Current Pl.Apps.) 1120 SW Fifth Avenue _Sr.Cartographer(CPNZCA)MS 14 Portland,OR 97204 _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A 117 Jim Nims(ZCA)MS 15 Jane Estes,Permit Specialist _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A 5440 SW Westgate Drive,Suite 350 Right-of-Way Section(vacations) Portland,OR 97221-2414 Rick Reeves 123 NW Flanders Portland,OR 97209-4037 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES PORTLAND WESTERN R/R,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE R/R,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.RJR _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS _TCI CABLEVISION OF OREGON _TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer(Annexations only) Pat McGann Michael Kiser,Project Planner 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court 710 NE Holladay Street Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 Portland,OR 97232 Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 _PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC _NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY GENERAL TELEPHONE _ US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Brian Moore,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer Elaine Self,Engineering Lori Dorney,Engineering 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue MC: ORO30546 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 11( Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Tigard,OR 97281-3416 Portland,OR 97219 TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J_BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 TCI CABLE(Apps EofHaiVNof99W) 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 1k - INO4CATCS AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IF mows tOO' OF me sua,acr PROPERLY-FOR AMY°/ALL CI11/PitO/CC>TU. (PAO/LCT PLANNLA IS ALSPONSI#LL FOR INDICATING PARTIES TO NOTIFY! h:\pattylmasters\rfcnotice.mst 22-Apr-99 PT .ANNING SECRETARY MATERIALS . • 411‘ AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING C Al- IL Community Development Shaping A Better Community STAVE OF OREGON ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Patricia L.Lansford being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for the City ofTtgard, 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 © NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR1999-00016/REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER - AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) 0 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: _ l - 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 l ype tuna CT Notice) FOR: :"' I (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing,if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICE[Sl of which is attached, marke. Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B", .n the 15th day of November 999, anv deposited in the United States Mail on the 15th day of November,1999, postage p epaid. ' — (P: •• r at Prepar-• Notice, Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the /U day of _h._-„— _ ...i , "il l OFFICIAL SEAL f / �/ •...'�' DIANE M JELDERKS r' - -"=- NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON t I I I 1 ' I ' COMMISSION N0.328578 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT.07,2003 My Commission Expires: V7/0 5 EXHIBIT A NO. iCE OF TYPE II DECISION it„, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR)1999-00016 CITY OF TIOARD REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER Community Development Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 1/19/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER CASES: Site Development Review SDR1999-00016 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with 3 buildings totaling 37,000 square feet of retail space. Parcel "C" was approved as part of the previous conceptual plan approval on the site and is, therefore, now being reviewed as a Detailed Plan/Site Development Review. APPLICANT: Rembold Properties OWNER: Waremart Foods, Inc. 1022 SW Salmon, Suite 450 400 S. Woodland Avenue Portland, OR 97205 Woodburn, OR 97071 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial; C-G. ZONING DESIGNATION: General Commercial; C-G. The General Commercial Zoning District provides sites for the provision of a wide range of major retail goods and services. The property is also designated with the following overlay districts: 1) Planned Development Overlay; and 2) Tigard Triangle Design Standards Overlay. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue at the northwest corner of the SW Dartmouth Street/72nd Avenue intersection; WCTM 15136DC, Tax Lot 02504. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 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. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 1 OF 19 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (503) 639-4171.) 1 . Submit are revised plan that shows a stairway connection from the access drive to the walkway in front of Building "A" or that shows a clearly marked pedestrian connection through the parking area to the front of the building will be provided. Staff Contact: Julia Hajdu-k, Planning Division. 2. Submit a revised elevations plan for Building "B" showing that corrugated metal or other materials that are not permitted will not be used as exterior finishes. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 3. Submit a revised plan that rovides an additional landscape island in the eastern bank of parking spaces. The revised plan must provide landscape islands that equally distribute trees on the basis of 1 tree per every 7 parking spaces. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 4. Submit a revised plan that provides an ADA Van Accessible parking space that will be located in front of Building "A" and at least one in front of Buildings `B" and "C". Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 5. Submit a revised plan that clearly shows the parking space and aisle dimensions for staff to confirm that the required dimensions are provided. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 6. Submit a revised plan that shows the location of existing or proposed bicycle racks within 50 feet of the main entrance to the buildings. The bicycle parking shall be proportionally distributed among the 3 new buildings and shall provide no less than 12 spaces total. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 7. Provide a detail of the bicycle rack to be used for staff's approval. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 8. Submit a written sign-off from the franchise waste hauler that the proposed facility meets the waste hauler standards. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 9. Submit a revised lighting plan for review and approval by the Police Department. Staff Contact: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division. 10. Prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit, a Stcceet Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the cut and patchwork in SW 72" Avenue associated with the proposed water line connection. 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. 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. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of $90. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 2 OF 19 13. Prior to a final buildint ;pection, the applicant shall coml. 3 any work within the public right-of-way and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 14. The site shall be constructed as per the approved plans. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS FINAL DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: This site is currently developed with several large retail stores including Winco Foods, Petsmart and OfficeMax. The site received conceptual plan approval in 1993 (SDR 93-0002/PDR93-0001) for the construction of the Winco (formerly Waremart and Cub Foods) and the Petsmart. The adjacent building site was approved for the OfficeMax development in 1994 (SDR 94-0024/PDR 94-0003). The Tigard Triangle Design Standards (TTDS) were adopted for this area in 1997. While these standards apply to this development, many can not be applied due to the previous conceptual plan approval of the building and parking locations. There are several changes in the buildings from the conceptual approval that brings the proposal more into compliance with the TTDS. Vicinity Information: The subject property is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue, north of SW Dartmouth Street in the existing Winco Foods shopping center site. The property to the north is developed with Regal Cinemas (formally Act III Theaters). The Winco Foods site is bordered on the west by Red Rock Creek. The property is surrounded on all sides by property zoned and developed General Commercial. Site Information and Proposal Description: The proposal is to construct a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. The improvements are generally consistent with the approved conceptual plan for Parcel "C" of the Winco Foods site. The Code allows projects that are approved as a phased development to be built over a 7-year period without having to receive a new conceptual plan approval. The Winco Foods was approved as part of a planned development in 1993. Since that time, the Community Development Code has changed in a way that changes how Planned Developments are reviewed. Because of that, this development can not be reviewed as a detailed plan because the concept plan approved under the old Code did not provide the same level of detail as required under the new Code. Because the Site Development Review essentially addresses the same issues as a detailed plan is supposed to and both are staff level decisions; this development is being reviewed as a Site Development Review (SDR). The proposed changes that are different from the previous approval bring the project more closely into compliance with the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Impact Study: Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.040 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 3 OF 19 The conceptual plan approve ddressed impact to the transport i system at the time it was approved. This impact was based on a 41 ,105 square foot retail bumoing being built on Parcel "C". The applicant was required to sign a non-remonstrance agreement based on the impacts of the entire development and to make significant improvements to mitigate traffic at the time of application. Because the applicant has already contributed to improvements based on the impact of the site as a whole, the applicant should not be required to contribute at this stage as they are just constructing the final piece of an already approved plan. TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS: Design standards for public street improvements and for new development and renovation projects have been prepared for the Tigard Triangle. These design standards address several important guiding principals adopted for the Tigard Triangle, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. All new developments are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described below and other development standards required by the Development and Building Codes, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle. The following design standards apply to all development located within the Tigard Triangle. If a standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code, standards in this section shall govern. The criteria may be adjusted if the adjustment approval criteria, which are found in Section 18.620.090.C.1-4, have been met. The criteria provides that an adjustment may be granted if granting the adjustment will continue to meet the purpose of the standard(s) to be modified in an acceptable alternative manner; and the proposal will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of an area and the proposal will be consistent with the desired character of the area; and if more than one adjustment is being requested, the cumulative effect of the adjustments as well as each individual adjustment results in a project which is still consistent with the overall purpose, goals and standards of the zone; and granting the adjustment is the minimum necessary to allow the proposed use of the site; and any impacts resulting from the adjustment are mitigated to the extent practicable. Street Connectivity: All development must demonstrate how one (1) of the following standard options will be met. Variance of these standards may be approved per the requirements of Chapter 18.134 where topography, barriers such as railroads or freeways, or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street extensions and connections. Design Option: a. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet; b. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way shall be provided at intervals of no more that 330 feet. Performance Option: a. Local street spacing shall occur at intervals of no less than eight (8) street intersections per mile; b. The shortest vehicle trip over public streets from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than twice the straight-line distance; c. The shortest pedestrian trip on public right-of-way from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than one and one-half the straight-line distance. The development is proposed on the existing Winco Shopping Center site. Because of the location of the existing structures, a street meeting the street connectivity standards is not possible. There is, however, an access drive at the northern and southern portion of the development site (Parcel "C" on the concept plan) which effectively provides access through the site at intervals of 600 feet. In addition, there is a pedestrian connection to SW 72n Avenue via a stairway, which is proposed to be located 310 feet from the southern access drive and approximately 300 feet from the northern access drive. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 4 OF 19 FINDING: Because the ex ,g development and topography p ibits full compliance with the • design option anu because the spirit of the standard Is met by existing access drives and the proposed pedestrian connection, staff has determined that the street connectivity standard is satisfied. Site Design Standards: All development must meet the following site design standards. If a parcel is one (1) acre or larger a phased development plan must be approved demonstrating how these standards for the overall parcel can be met. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.134.050 (Criteria for Granting a Variance) is satisfied. Building placement on Major and Minor Arterials and the street: Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50 percent of all street frontages along Major and Minor Arterial Streets. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on Major and Minor Arterial Streets. The Conceptual Plan had Retail "C" at the northern end of the site, adjacent to the existing Petsmart which occupied less than 50% of the frontage. The change from the conceptual plar� provides 2 building areas along the frontage, which is more building frontage along SW 72n Avenue than previously approved. Due to the location of the existing buildings on the existing development site, this standard can not be applied along the Dartmouth Street frontage. Building setback: The minimum building setback from public street rights-of-way or dedicated wetlands/buffers and other environmental features, shall be 0 feet; the maximum building setback shall be 10 feet. The conceptually approved building setback was 35 feet from the property line. The proposed buildings come closer to conforming with the Tigard Triangle design standards. The sales area of building "B" will be within 10 feet of the property line although not all of the wall area will be within this setback area. Due to the topography, the building wall will not be visible from the street. Building "A", because it is in a location different from the conceptual lan, is required to fully comply with the setback standards. The applicant has asked for an adjustment to increase the setback due to the topography and geotechnical issues with the existing retaining wall. The setback would be increased to 11 feet, 6 inches. As discussed elsewhere in more detail, staff has evaluated the adjustment standards and has approved the Adjustment request. Front yard setback design: Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one (1) street, the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to an L-1 standard on public streets. Hard-surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.620.070. There is existing landscaping which will be retained along the SW 72nd Avenue frontage between the property line and Building "A" and Building "B". The applicant has not submitted a plan that shows the detail of the existing landscaping for staff to confirm that it meets the L-1 standard, however, this will be discussed in more detail further in this decision. Walkway connection to building entrances: A walkway connection is required between the building's entrance and the public street or accessway providing access to the property. This walkway must be at least six (6) feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner near a ublic street intersection are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.620.070. The applicant has proposed a 6-foot wide stairway and pedestrian connection from SW 72nd Avenue to the entrance of Building "B" and "C". A walkway to Building "A" is not clearly shown. There is an existing sidewalk from SW 72nd Avenue along the entry drive adjacent to Building "A", however, the grade differential along this driveway will not allow pedestrian access to the building without crossing a portion of the parking lot or constructing a stairway. The applicant either needs to construct a stairway directly from the access driveway to the walkway in front of the building, or provide a clearly marked pedestrian connection through the parking area to the front of the building. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 5 OF 19 Parking location and landst 3 design: Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. The parking is located to the side and rear of the buildings based on the SW 72nd Avenue frontage. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, all of the site design standards have not been met, however, if the applicant submits are revised plan that shows a stairway connection from the access drive to the walkway in front of Building "A", or provides a clearly marked pedestrian connection through the parking area to the front of the building, this standard will be met. CONDITION:Submit are revised plan that shows a stairway connection from the access drive to the walkway in front of Building "A" or that shows a clearly marked pedestrian connection through the parking area to the front of the building will be provided. Building Design Standards: All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 (Criteria for Granting a Variance) are satisfied. Ground floor windows: All street-facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50 percent of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three (3) feet above grade to nine (9) feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50 percent of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located at a building corner. Building "B" is greater than 10 feet from the property line and, therefore, does not require compliance with this standard. While Building "A" is greater than 10 feet from the property line; it is due to an adjustment. Part of the approval of the adjustment is based on the applicant continuing to comply with the design standards as much as possible. As part of the adjustment application, the applicant submitted elevations showing glass display areas along the roofline, the top of which is 6 feet from the street grade due to the topography and retaining wall. By providing glass display areas at the level of the street, this satisfies the standard for Building "A". Building facades: Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one (1) of the following features: (a) a variation in building materials; (b) a uildin off- set ( g set of at least 1-foot; (c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or (d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. The east building elevation of Building "A" consists of brick and stucco with scored reveals and glass display areas. The building does riot extend more than 300 feet. Building "B" will vary greatly in building materials along the 72n Avenue frontage as there will be indoor and outdoor display areas, greenhouses, etc, which will break up the wall line. Weather protection: Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. The elevation plans provided indicate that a canopy will be provided at the entrance to each of the stores. Building materials: Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet pressboard or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 6 OF 19 The applicant's revised narra provided with the adjustment api. tion indicates stucco divided into a series of panels by metal pilasters will be the building material along the roofline and 4-inch and 8-inch CMU blocks in a brick type fashion will be used along the remaining building frontages. Building "B" will be a composition of different materials, which the applicant states will be "suggestive of a village that has evolved over time to its present state." The materials indicated include horizontal wood siding, vertical corrugated metal, stucco and pre-fabricated greenhouse sections. Clearly, the corrugated metal proposed is not a permitted exterior finish material and the plan must be modified to exclude this material. Building "C" will be constructed of painted tilt-up concrete panels and integrally colored ground face concrete block. Because the concrete is to be painted, this meets the standards. Roofs and roof lines: Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. The applicant has proposed a flat roof, which is designed as an extension of the materials used for the buildings. Roof-mounted equipment: All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. The applicant's plans indicate that the roof-mounted equipment will be screened. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the applicant has not met all of the Building Design Standards. If the conditions specified below are met, Staff can find that the Building Design Standards will be satisfied. CONDITION:Submit a revised elevations plan for Building "B" showing that corrugated metal or other materials that are not permitted will not be used as exterior finishes. Signs: In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development Code, the following standards shall be met: Zoning District Regulations: Non-residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone (18.780.130.D). Sign Area Limits: The maximum sign area limits found in Section 18.780.130 shall not be exceeded. No area limit increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Height Limits: The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs shall be 10 feet. Wall signs shall not extend above the roof line of the wall on which the sign is located. No height increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Sign Location: Freestanding signs within the Tigard Triangle shall not be permitted within required L-1 landscape areas. The applicant has not formally applied for sign permits. Signs must be approved through the sign permit process as administered by the City of Tigard Development Services Technicians. Compliance with sign standards will be reviewed at that time. A sign permit must be obtained for ANY sign located on the property. FINDING: Because compliance with sign codes will be required when a sign permit is applied for, these standards are not relevant at this time. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 7 OF 19 Landscaping and Screenin■ Two (2) levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other sub-sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. L-1 (Low Screen): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial, trees shall be planted at 31/2-inch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a 3-foot high screen and a 90 percent opacity within one (1) year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two (2) years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2-inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. There is an existing landscape area between the street and the proposed structures that will remain. The applicant has not submitted a landscape plan to show whether this existing landscaping plan meets the standards, however, because the landscaping is existing and was installed as required as part of the original Planned Development approval, staff has determined that the existing landscaping is adequate. L-2 (General Landscaping): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. Trees shall be provided at a minimum 21/2-inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two (2) years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2-inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. The site does not abut a local street; therefore, the L-2 standards do not apply. FINDING: Because the landscaping is existing and installed as required as part of the original Planned Development approval, the L-1 and L-2 landscape standards do not apply. GENERAL APPROVAL CRITERIA FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW: The Site Development Review approval standards require that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of other Community Development Code Sections. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.350, 18.380, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.790, 18.795, 18.797, 18.810 and the Metro Functional Plan Standards. The proposal's consistency with these sections has been reviewed within this decision. Variances and Adjustments (18.390) The Director is authorized to approve up to a 20% adjustment to the sideyard setback by means of a Type I procedure based on compliance with the following criteria: A demonstration that the adjustment requested is the least required to achieve the desired affect; The applicant is asking for an increase in the maximum setback from 10 feet to 11 feet, 6 inches. Based on a letter submitted from the geotechnical engineers, this reduction is the absolute minimum necessary to insure that the existing retaining wall maintains its integrity. Even at this distance, additional actions will be necessary during construction to insure that the existing wall is not compromised. The adjustment is also necessary for the applicant to comply with requirements from Winco for the development which requires the building to be designed in such a way as to not block the existing Winco sign. The proposed location allows the applicant to meet the landowner requirements and the geotechnical concerns. In addition, the applicant's revised elevation plans, while further away from the property line, shows more compliance with the overall design standards by providing reveals and glass display areas along the roof line which will create an interesting visual for pedestrians and vehicles traveling along SW 72nd Avenue. The adjustment will result in the preservation of trees, if trees are present in the development area; SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 8 OF 19 There are no trees in the area be developed, therefore, this stan 1 does not apply. The adjustment will not impede adequate emergency access to the site; All site access points and internal circulation within the site will not be affected by the proposed adjustment. There is not a reasonable alternative to the adjustment, which achieves the desired affect. The only alternative is to remove the existing retaining wall and replace it with a new engineered wall, however, this could still result in compromising the soil stability during construction and the improved SW 72nd Avenue roadway. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the adjustment criteria have been satisfied and the adjustment is approved. Planned Development (18.350): Chapter 18.350 allows the option for an applicant to create a more efficient, economically viable development that preserves natural land features while implementing the land use designation set forth for the property though the Comprehensive Plan. Section 18.350.020.B states that the Planned Development Review is a three (3)-step process, as follows: 1. The approval of the planned development overlay zone; 2. The approval of the planned development concept plan; and 3. The approval of the Detailed Development Plan. The property has a Planned Development (PD) overlay and has received conceptual plan approval. While this project can not fully comply with the detail plan criteria because of the change in the code standards after the concept plan was approved, this SDR approval in essence is reviewing and approving the detailed plan and satisfying that step as well. FINDING: Because the site has a Planned Development Overlay and conceptual plan approval and this Site Development Review is essentially approving the detailed plan, the Planned Development process is satisfied. Landscaping and Screening (18.745 and 18.360): Street Trees: Section 18. 4 .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.C. Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). This standard is modified by the Tigard Triangle Design standards. The property has approximately 590 feet of frontage on SW 72nd Avenue. The project site is separated from Dartmouth by the existing OfficeMax; therefore, it does not effectively have frontage on Dartmouth Street. There are existing street trees along SW 72nd Avenue that satisfy the street tree requirements of Section 18.745. While the TTDS modifies the spacing requirement, staff has determined that the existing trees have more value than if the applicant were to be required to remove the existing trees and re-plant new trees at the spacing required by the TTDS. Land Use Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.080 requires that at a minimum the buffer between a proposed commercial use and detached single-family residences must contain the following: 1) a 20-foot width for parking lots of more than 25 spaces, 2) a row of trees at a certain spacing based on their height at maturity and shrubs of varying numbers based on their size at planting, 3) the buffer must also contain either a row of evergreen shrubs, a five-foot minimum height fence, or an earthen berm with evergreen shrubs which will provide a continuous six-foot screen within two (2) years. The property does not abut a use other than commercial, therefore, buffering and screening between differing uses is not required. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 9 OF 19 Screening: Special Provisio, Section 18.745.050.E requires the screening of parking and goading areas. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features, which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three (3) feet wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The parking lot is effectively screened from SW 72nd Avenue because of the grade differential, in addition, the applicant is proposing to retain the existing landscape area adjacent to the retaining wall. The applicant has shown landscape islands will be provided, however, there are several areas in which there is not a tree for every 7 spaces. It appears one more island, containing 2 trees is needed in the bank of spaces along the eastern property line. FINDING: Because the plan does not provide parking lot trees spaced equally on the basis of 1 tree for every 7 parking spaces, the Landscaping and Screening standards have not been met. If the applicant submits a revised plan that shows one more landscape island with 2 trees in the eastern bank of parking spaces will be provided, the criteria will be satisfied. CONDITION: Submit a revised plan that provides an additional landscape island in the eastern bank of parking spaces. The revised plan must provide landscape islands that equally distribute trees on the basis of 1 tree per every 7 parking spaces. 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. Upon review of the Tigard Triangle Design Standards, the Clear Vision standards have been found to be superseded by newer Tigard Triangle Design Standards such as Building Placement, however, these buildings would meet the standards in any event. FINDING: Because the TTDS supercede the other standards of the Code, this criterion is found to be inapplicable. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): Preferential long-term carpool/vanpoo parking: Parking lots providing in excess of 20 long- term parking spaces shall provide preferential long-term carpool and vanpool parking for employees, students and other regular visitors to the site. At least 5 percent of total long- term parking spaces shall be reserved for carpool/vanpool use. Preferential parking for carpools/vanpools shall be closer to the main entrances of the building than any other employee or student parking except parking spaces designated for use by the disabled. Preferential carpool/vanpool spaces shall be full-sized per requirements in Section 18.765.040.N and shall be clearly designated for use only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. Due to the nature of the use (retail sales), long-term carpool parking is not anticipated, therefore, this criterion is found to be inapplicable. 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. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 10 OF 19 The applicant has proposed ' parking spaces; therefore, five ( \DA spaces are required for this use.• The applicant has proposed five (5) handicap spaces; however, none appear to be van accessible. In addition, because the proposal involves 2 different building locations, the van accessible requirement must be met for both building "A" and buildings "B" and "C". DEQ indirect source construction permit: All parking lots containing 250 spaces or parking structures containing two or more levels shall require review by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to: 1. Acquire an Indirect Source Construction permit; 2. Investigate the feasibility of installing oil and grease separators. The parking is existing and was approved as part of the original Planned Development approval; therefore, this standard can not be applied. Access drives: With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; the number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030.P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. The access drives into the development site are existing and comply with this standard. Pedestrian access: Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow- moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. Pedestrian access through the parking lot is not necessary for Buildings "B" and "C" due to the location of the buildings on the site and the proposed stairway from SW 72nd Avenue. A condition has been proposed reviously in this decision addressing pedestrian connections to Building "A". The site has no grade drop-offs, therefore, the other standards of this section do not apply. Parking lot striping: Except for single-family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off-street parking requirements as contained in this Chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and all interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. The plans submitted show parking spaces clearly marked. Directional markings are not proposed, however, because all access drives are two-way, directional markings are not required. 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 show that wheel stops will be installed in the parking spaces adjacent to the walkway at Building "A". No other wheel stops are required or proposed. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 11 OF 19 Space and aisle dimension. Except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2, the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5' x 18.5' for a standard space; 7.5' x 16.5' for a compact space; and as required by applicable State of Oregon and federal standards for designated disabled person parking spaces; the width of each parking space includes a stripe which separates each space. Aisles accommodating two-direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width; The applicant did not specifically indicate what the space and aisle dimensions were. Staff scaled the plans provided and it appears that the parking spaces meet the requirement. However, a condition of approval will be attached requiring the applicant to submit a revised plan that clearly shows the parking space and aisle dimensions meeting the standards. Bicycle parking location and access: Section 18.765.050 states bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; and bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. The applicant's plans do not show the location of existing or proposed bicycle racks. Existing bicycle racks may be used if they are located within 50 -feet of the main entrance of the new buildings. A condition of approval is necessary requiring the applicant to submit information on the number and location of existing or proposed bicycle racks. 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 detail of the bike rack. Minimum bicycle parking requirements: The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.768.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. Table 18.768.2 states that for general retail sales, .3 bicycle parking spaces are required for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Because the total retail sales area is 37,000 square feet, 12 bicycle parking spaces are required. The applicant has not shown bike parking. 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 sales oriented retail is 3.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet and the maximum parking in Zone B (as defined by Metro) is 6.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet. In this case, the minimum parking is 137 and the maximum parking is 229. The applicant has proposed 137 parking spaces. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 12 OF 19 Off-street loading spaces: Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off- street loading and maneuvering space as follows: a minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more; minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. The building area is less than 40,000 square feet, therefore, only one (1) loading space is required. Because Building "A" is less than 10,000 square feet, no loading space is required adjacent to this building (although it is recommended). The applicant has shown loading for Buildings "B" and "C" will be located in the rear, in the same general location as the existing stores on the development site. Off-street loading dimensions: Each loading berth shall be approved by the City Engineer as to design and location; each loading space shall have sufficient area for turning and maneuvering of vehicles on the site. At a minimum, the maneuvering length shall not be less than twice the overall length of the longest vehicle using the facility site; entrances and exits for the loading areas shall be provided at locations approved by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 18.710; screening for off-street loading facilities is required and shall be the same as screening for parking lots in accordance with Chapter 18.745. The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and indicated that the location of the loading area is acceptable. The loading area is screened from view by the building. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the off-street parking and loading standards have not been met. Staff finds it is reasonably possible for the applicant to comply with all of the standards. If the conditions listed below are satisfied,the standards will be fully met. CONDITIONS: • Submit a revised plan that provides an ADA Van Accessible parking space that will be located in front of Building "A" and at least one in front of Building "B" and Building "C". • Submit a revised plan that clearly shows the parking space and aisle dimensions for staff to confirm that the required dimensions are provided. • Submit a revised plan that shows the location of existing or proposed bicycle racks within 50 feet of the main entrance to the buildings. The bicycle parking shall be proportionally distributed among the 3 new buildings and shall provide no less than 12 spaces total. • Provide a detail of the bicycle rack to be used for staff's approval. Access, Egress and Circulation: 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; This standard has been addressed previously in this decision as part of the TTDS compliance review. 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; SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 13 OF 19 The walkways do not cross v ,le access driveways or parking lc herefore, this standard does not apply. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The plans indicate the walkways will be paved. 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 100 or more parking spaces is 30 feet with 24 feet of pavement if 2 accesses are provided and 50 feet with 40 feet of pavement if one access is provided. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. The development area is currently served with access drives that meet the above standards. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the access standards have either been addressed previously in this decision or do not apply, or are satisfied. Tree Removal: Section 18.790.030 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. The area being developed does not have any trees, therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Because there are no trees within the area to be developed, this standard does not apply. Signs: Chapter 18.780.130.D lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C-G Zoning District. Signs have been discussed earlier in this decision under Tigard Triangle Design Standards discussion, therefore, this standard has been satisfied. FINDING: Because signs have been addressed previously in this decision, this standard has been satisfied. Public Facility Concerns: Streets: TDC 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the Tigard Development Code standards (TDC). TDC 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. This site lies adjacent to SW 72nd Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street. SW 72nd Avenue SW 72"d Avenue is classified as a major arterial according to the Tigard Triangle Design Standards (TTDS). This roadway classification requires a right-of-way (ROW) width of 92 feet. At present, there is adequate ROW along this street to meet the TTDS. SW 72nd Avenue is presently improved adjacent to this site and was constructed by the applicant as a part of the original SDR (SDR 93-00002). The present improvements meet the TTDS and, therefore, there is no need for additional street widening. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 14 OF 19 SW Dartmouth Street This roadway is also classified as a major arterial per the TTDS. There is adequate ROW along this roadway at this time to meet the TTDS. This street was improved as a part of a Local Improvement District (LID), of which the applicant was a part. The roadway is fully improved to meet the TTDS. Other Transportation Issues A letter was submitted to the City from Ed Christensen, dated September 23, 1999, indicating that the applicant should contribute to additional infrastructure in the site vicinity because conditions are different than what was encountered in 1993 when the development was initially constructed. Christensen believes that the applicant should contribute funds toward the signalization of nearby intersections to help mitigate their share of the impact on the system. When the applicant filed the SDR application in 1993, they provided a master plan of the entire site, including eventual development of the subject site. They also provided a traffic impact study that was prepared by Kittelson and Associates. At that time, the local intersections were operating acceptable levels of service and when Kittelson considered the impact from the development of the entire site, they found that none of the local intersections warranted §ignalization. The applicant was required to construct frontage improvements on both SW 72" Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street, as was mentioned above, to mitigate the impact of the development. The current application does not result in a net increase in trip generation from this site over what Kittelson had calculated in 1993. In fact, the proposed expansion will result in fewer trips for the entire site than what was assumed in 1993. Because the applicant was required to mitigate the impact of this development in 1993, and because the addition does not result in more trips than what was assumed in 1993, it is Staff's opinion that the applicant can not be required to make additional public transportation improvements in the area. Water: This site lies within the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. According to the proposed plan, the applicant will need to make a connection to the existing public water line in SW 72" Avenue to serve Building A. The other proposed buildings can be served from existing onsite private water lines. A permit will be required from TVWD for the proposed water connection. In addition, the roadway cut and patchwork must be covered in a Street Opening Permit from the City. Sanitary Sewer: The existing onsite sanitary sewer lines will adequately serve this site. No additional public sanitary sewer line work is necessary. Storm Drainage: The existing onsite storm drainage conveyance and detention systems were initially designed and constructed to accommodate full build-out of this site. The proposed addition will actually result in approximately 8,427 square feet less hard surface than what was initially assumed in the master plan design for the systems. Therefore, no additional storm drainage work is necessary. Storm Water Quality: Since the development of this site will result in less impervious surface than what was originally anticipated when the applicant designed and constructed the existing onsite water quality facility, there will be no further requirements. Grading and Erosion Control: USA Design and Construction Standards also regulates 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 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 $90 (3 buildings X $30/address = $90). SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 15 OF 19 FINDING: Based on the e 'sis above, Staff finds that all the eet and Utility Improvement • standards have hut been fully met. If Conditions 10 „rough 13, summarized at the front of this decision are satisfied, the standards will be met. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage: Chapter 18.755 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign-off . The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan, which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The applicant has not indicated which method they will use to meet this standard. The applicant has not provided a written sign-off from the franchise hauler stating that the proposed facility location is acceptable. FINDING: Because the applicant has not provided evidence of compliance with the mixed solid waste and recyclables standards, Staff cannot determine if this standard has been met. If the applicant provides a written sign-off from the franchise waste hauler that the location and size of the facility is adequate, this criterion will be met. CONDITION: Submit a written sign-off from the franchise waste hauler that the proposed facility meets the waste hauler standards. ADDITIONAL SDR REVIEW CRITERIA Section 18.360.090.A.2 through A.15 provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed section. These other standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the following because the proposal does not involve a residential development and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval criteria: Sections: 18.360.;090.3 (Exterior Elevations); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 18.360.090.6 (Private Outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces). The following Sections were discussed previously in this decision and will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses); 18.360.090.A.8. (100-year Floodplain); 18.360.090.12 (Landscaping); 18.360.090.13 (Drainage); and 18.360.090.14 (Provision for the Disabled). Relationship to the natural and physical environment: Buildings shall be: located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting; and oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. There are no trees in the area proposed to be developed. The site is part of an already developed shopping center complex. There are no other places the buildings could be located that would be any less or more suitable than the locations proposed. FINDING: Because the building has been located with consideration to the natural environment and trees have been discussed and addressed previously in this decision, Staff finds that relationship to the natural and physical environment standard has been satisfied. Development within or adjacent to floodplain: Where landfill and/or development is allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 16 OF 19 The property does not abut a )dplain, therefore, this criterion do( of apply. FINDING: Because the site does not abut a floodplain, Staff finds that this standard does not apply to this application. 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. Criterion "A" has been addressed previously in this decision. Criteria "B" and "C" do not apply, as this is not a residential development. The Police Department has reviewed this proposal and requested that a lighting plan be submitted specific to the entire "north" parking area including the new asphalt area and receiving and pick-up area in order to satisfy Criteria "D" and "E". FINDING: Because information from the Police Department indicates that a lighting plan is needed and that has not been provided, Criteria "D" and "E" have not been satisfied. If the applicant submits a revised lighting plan that shows lighting will be provided at the "north" parking area, including the new asphalt area and receiving and pick-up area, the criteria will be met. CONDITION:Submit a revised lighting plan for review and approval by the Police Department. Public transit: Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development fproposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route; the requirements for transit acilities 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. Tri-Met has not provided comments, however, based on comments received for projects in the vicinity, no bus line runs along the site frontage, therefore, bus stops, turnouts, etc., are not required. FINDING: Because no bus lines run along the site frontage, this standard does not apply. Provisions of the underlying zone: All of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. Use Classification: The applicant is proposing to build a retail store to serve a single tenant use. This use is classified in Code Chapter 18.130 (Use Classifications) as General Retail — Sales Oriented. The proposed general retail use of the property is listed as a permitted use within the General Commercial Zoning District. Dimensional Requirements: The General Commercial Zoning District standards contained in Chapter 18.520 states that there is no minimum lot area and the average minimum lot width is 50 feet . Developments are required to provide a minimum of 15 percent landscaping or areas not developed with impervious surfaces. SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 17 OF 19 The parcel width is greater tlx 0 feet. The applicant has provide .Iculations which indicate that approximately 20 percent lanuscaping will be provided. The IahUscaping has been discussed previously in this decision. Setbacks: Chapter 18.520 states that no front, side, or rear yard setback is required except 20 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. This standard is superceded by the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. Building Height: Chapter 18.520 states that a maximum height of 45 feet is permitted in General Commercial Zoning District. The applicant's elevation plans and narrative show that the building will be no greater than 29 feet. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Ti and Building Division has reviewed this application and has offered the following comments: (1 Provide fire truck access to rear of Buildings C and B, (2) Provide fire flow work sheet and ad itional fire hydrant; (3) Provide fire department connection within 70 feet of fire hydrant for each new building protected by fire sprinkler; (4) storm drain under building shall be type approved for such location; (5) Provide 5 accessible parking spaces, (6) Provide accessible route, connecting all buildings on same property to the public way; (7) Traffic pattern to rear of building? Cross over easements at property line; (8) Existing requirements from courtyards; (9) Engineering for retaining walls greater than 4 feet; (10) Covered outdoor sales area to be sprinklered; (11) Fire rated walls at property line; (12) Elevations, sheet A401 need correcting; (13) Fire hydrant flow test. The Property Manger/Operations Department has reviewed the proposal and offered no comments or objections. The Police Department reviewed this application and has requested a lighting plan specific to the entire "north" parking area including the new asphalt area and receiving and pick-up. The Long Range Planning Division has reviewed the proposal and requested that a handicap and pedestrian access be provided to the Regal Cinemas site to the north. SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS GTE has reviewed the proposal and provided the following comments: Developer to provide conduits per GTE specs. Developer to pay for any relocation of existing facilities. Tualatin Valley Water District has reviewed the application and provided no comments or objections. Unified Sewerage Agency has reviewed the application and provided comments which have been incorporated into the body of this decision. TCI Cable Vision, Tri-Met, NW Natural Gas, TVWD, US West and Portland General Electric (PGE) have reviewed this application and offered no comments or objections. SECTION VII. 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 SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 18 OF 19 Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON NOVEMBER 15, 1999 AND EFFECTIVE ON DECEMBER 2, 1999 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The Director's Decision is final 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 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 DECEMBER 1, 1999. 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 . /1 a November 15, 1999 PREP ED BY/Julia Hajduk DATE Associate Planner November 15, 1999 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdorff DATE Planning Manager I:\curpin\Julia\sdr\Rembold.dot SDR 1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER PAGE 19 OF 19 A CRT Of 110/1240 COST waarv.n / rartw•aarwa ' `, y sra•- e sor —ii au L _ -�rrra,rrowua / i_ _ WMGO / R I 1 — ❑ ._.. ... i. EAST W.111 L/ sm aaa j , / f,� T Z e; (? / .s�o� »��. c/ -I, 1 Z gI T z an r - / r a 1 r- --_- -) ,- ) , ) ) , :4—) ,.., �a.. CV I, ,. V F 6W91MM9 r~ --- , sworrw.ttS-- I... (n / — ME UNDSCAPE ' — _ — �� / ... ._ -- ------ I ' wan.rre i q�aW II I p ,ile. _ (fW.)- - EM l I XI I1 { I II a i ) EAST 9. --) i-----) ■ vaar�,..oac.aeeua FAST rrE,».n 4.1,1 r,-aaw.nvrEanw: CA 1 1) ( l OFFCE MAX SITE PLAN I SDR1999-00016 EXHIBIT MAP N REMBOLD PROPERTIES (map is not to scale) RETAIL OFFICES �\\ CITY of TIGARD .7"7. , GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM 1 Q VICINITY MAP _ If SDR 1999-00016 ------ RE M BOLD PROPERTIES IIIII %#SUBJEC Ailik, SITE __ : A J ST y P. 16111L ,... p, . II !Hi) H 111111 a l r,- ST / . r \ .,�. „ .< j ' 14Ij 1 INT , AIL ----- z. iii... iT. LI .._____ 1 s IL, ___ NA _ .... DARTMOUTH ST 111 0 200 400 600 Feet ,, �� 1"=473 feet Y. 111111111. ■ ilk NI _/l++ / City of Tigard 1.,,,,i,:,v ST - B I Information on this map is for general location only and ■, I should be verified with the Development Services Division,, g3g ar,O Hall Blvd Ti125 W 97223 If a,� HERIMOSp , (503)639-4171.d t ___` . t - W ftftp:/Mww.oi.figard.Gr.us Community Development Plot date: Sep 8, 1999; C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR EXHI Rembold Properties Waremart Foods, Inc. 1022 SW Salmon, Ste. 450 400 S. Woodland Ave. Portland, OR 97205 Woodburn, OR 97071 Edward K. Christensen Christensen Engineering Inc. 7150 SW Hampton Street, Ste. #226 Portland, OR 97223 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CIf 1oARo 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: AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) City of Tigard Planning Director E3 NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR1999-00016/REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) El 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: - I 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;sina of Notice) FOR: I (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing,if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICEISI of which is attached, marker!- . 111111 "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit'B", • the 15th day of November,l'99, and seposited in the United States Mail on the 15'"day of November,1999, postage • epaid. op- �(Pe on that " red Notic:: Subscribed and sworn/affirmed befor`�me on the /0 day of ,.,p1,C.lGf r--2- )o• , I " { OFFICIAL SEAL r ' i/ki-C_J :'''—jig DIANE M JELDERKS A�Y� RZ(GrE�!' `.i.:.�/ NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION No.326578 My Commission E�tires: il--7 3 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT.07,2003 A �.XI4I: NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 1 999-000 1 6 CITY OF TIOARD REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER Community Development Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 1/19/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL CENTER CASES: Site Development Review SDR1999-00016 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with 3 buildings totaling 37,000 square feet of retail space. Parcel "C" was approved as part of the previous conceptual plan approval on the site and is, therefore, now being reviewed as a Detailed Plan/Site Development Review. APPLICANT: Rembold Properties OWNER: Waremart Foods, Inc. 1022 SW Salmon, Suite 450 400 S. Woodland Avenue Portland, OR 97205 Woodburn, OR 97071 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial; C-G. ZONING DESIGNATION: General Commercial; C-G. The General Commercial Zoning District provides sites for the provision of a wide range of major retail goods and services. The property is also designated with the following overlay districts: 1) Planned Development Overlay; and 2) Tigard Triangle Design Standards Overlay. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue at the northwest corner of the SW Dartmouth Street/72nd Avenue intersection; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 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 IV 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 (250 per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: 7. THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON NOVEMBER 15, 1999 AND EFFECTIVE ON DECEMBER 2, 1999 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Areal_: The Director's Decision is final 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 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 DECEMBER 1, 1999. Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Julia Powell Hajduk at (503) 639-4171 , Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. , ..,..•.` i I z 1,/ 1 . -•,. 1 'i'I 1�1c,PRIM I n > 0 / _y / 'e,'„w" - d f I z / z / T z ii_ a / _7_ ` / _r- O Q s 7 e. / - _ - - F, _ - P. - - I- r v� "h / E __ I- c } 1 ■ -Ill 1 1 (I ==-,1 (. ""''� 1111 SITE PLAN t 0199943016 EXHIBIT MAP N UNSOLD PtOPEATIES _.,, IIETAIL OFFIQS � v.y \ I VICINITY MAP 1 1 I - . i . : -€- I III � _■ , �� , 1 SDR1999-00016 ■� i � L \ � REMBOLD _— . _ 1 f PROPERTIES -' ,, � �' L� 1 RETAIL OFFICES SUBJEC r- Ai SITE ,i7.-- a ii!� u � II _ 4 I'IIIII N I7 -- - I n ; � J L 1 \ 1 -; IT ---------r---- L ~ Ciry efTlpnA - _ ■ 5k, f Q9--Cetjko EXHIBIT B 1S136CD-02000 1S136CD-04301 WAREMART INC WA- A' C 3336E 32ND ST#217 3336 S ST#217 TULSA,OK 74135 T. SA,OK 74135 1S136DA-00902 1S136DA-02100 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN BEACH DAYLE D EVELYN 0 6900 SW HAINES 11530 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-00101 1S136DC-00200 COHN ALLWIN V TRUSTEE THOMAS ALFRED E AND JUNE R 7105 SW BAYLOR 7135 SW BAYLOR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-00300 1S136DC-00301 WOZNIAK JOHN G AND DARLENE M BUEHLER JAMES D&MELISSA S 14200 SW FERN ST 7175 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-00400 1S136DC-00500 CHASE WILLIAM L VIOLET TOM MOYER THEATRES 11580 SW 72ND AVE 7132 COMMERCIAL PARK DR TIGARD,OR 97223 KNOXVILLE,TN 37918 1S136DC-02503 1S136DC-02504 LURIA MARK T AND SUPERVALU HOLDINGS INC 19601 N 27TH AVE 4TH FLOOR 3336 E 32ND ST#217 PHOENIX,AZ 85027 TULSA,OK 74135 1S136DC-02700 1S136DC-02701 HAAG NANCY P LEFEBVRE MICHAEL PAUL SR& 7070 SW BAYLOR 7040 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-02800 1S136DC-02900 SALIMENA JOHN A ET AL KOCH ROBERT J 7100 SW BAYLOR 7130 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03000 1S136DC-03100 HORNE ROBBIE L AMACHER JUANITA AND 7160 SW BAYLOR ST 12060 SW ROSE VISTA DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03200 1S136DC-03300 FEGLES MARY A NOBLE THOMAS L LARRIE P 11205 SW SUMMERFIELD DR 11750 SW 72ND TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03400 1S136DC-03500 MAHON HUGH S ANNA BELLE WINKLER ROBERT G 12095 SW 118TH AVE 11745 SW 70TH TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03501 1S136DC-03507 CONNET JANE AND JOHN R P .:S ARP• I LYNN& 8416 SW 57TH AVE 7105 S► • ON ST PORTLAND,OR 97219 :•RD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03508 1S136DC-03509 PETERS ARDEN LYNN& DORTON CHARLIE R AND 7105 SW CLINTON ST 7075 SW CLINTON STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03510 1S136DC-03700 JACKSON GENE E&CAROLYN MAE POTTMEYER SHARON BEATRICE 7045 SW CLINTON ST 7050 SW CLINTON TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03800 1S136DC-03900 WAHL ROBERT LEO&ROSE MARIE JACOBER LESTER L JOAN M 7080 SW CLINTON 7110 SW CLINTON TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-04000 1 136DC-04100 ALFIERI PHILLIP J LEW - YN • MARY C 14690 NW HEATHMAN LN 11860 -' D AVE PORTLAND,OR 97229 ARD,OR 9 3 1S136DC-04200 1S136DC-04300 LEWIS LYNN C MARY C KROO STEVEN 11860 SW 72ND AVE 11930 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S136DC-04400 1S136DC-04402 POLLOCK DONALD E HEDGEPETH LOUISE AGNES 1834 SW 58TH#202 11990 SW 72ND AVENUE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-04501 1S136DC-04600 WA' •e INC COMMERCIAL NET LEASE REALTY INC 3336 •• ST#217 455 S ORANGE AVE STE 700 iLSA,OK 74 ORLANDO,FL 32802 2S101AB-00100 2S101BA-00100 POLLOCK DONALD E/JULIA GAIL MARTIN GORDON R 1834 SW 58TH#202 12265 SW 72ND AVE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101BA-00101 2S101BA-00300 MARTIN GORDON S ET AL MARTIN GORDON RICHARD 12265 SW 72ND AVE PO BOX 740 TIGARD,OR 97223 GLENEDEN BEACH,OR 97388 REMBOLD PROPERTIES 1022 SW SALMON, SUITE 450 PORTLAND OR 97205 WAREMART FOODS, INC. 400 S. WOODLAND AVENUE WOODBURN OR 97071 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OFTIOARD Community rDevefopment Shaping y1 Better Community STATE, OF OREGON ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check Apploprute Bou(s)Below) El NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR: SDRI999-00016/REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL BUILDINGS AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) IZI 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) LI City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Council NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: , I AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearings) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council NOTICE OF: (Type/Kind of Notice) FOR: . I (File No/Name Reference) (Dale of Public Hearing,If applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICE'S] of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit "B", on the 9t° day of September, 1999, and deposited in the United States Mail on the 9th day of Se I to 'ber 1999, postage,prepai•. , (Person that Prepar-e ot. ) o z,: Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the ? day of /' / , 19 /: • "z. OFFICIAL SEAL ' / '';` DIANE M JELDERKS ROTA LIC OF ` NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION No.32e678 My Commission Expires: 997 ,c&3 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT.07,2003 NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIEN1_ _DER,VENDOR OR SELLER: EMU BIT A THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION 0 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CITY OF TIGARD Community cDeve1opment ShapingA Better Community 500-FOOT PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE: September 9, 1999 FILE NO(S): SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 1999-00016 FILE NAME: REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL BUILDINGS PROPOSAL: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. 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 SEPTEMBER 23, 1999. All comments should be directed to Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at (503) 639-4171. ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: ♦ Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; ♦ Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; ♦ Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Planning Commission must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity on that issue. Failure of any party to address a relevant approval criteria with s :,lent specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14 DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: ♦ The application is accepted by the City ♦ Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. ♦ The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. ♦ City Staff issues a written decision. ♦ Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Writ - I�D-• s." V of T•IGAHD VICINITY MAP P al p, j Imine on � Jp1 SDRI999-00016 I 1p J i1 REMBOLD ,� PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES :I:I6SUBJE SITE A So for i' P-1 . \ 11111 .. . 11111�• ■off • I• • MI • • N DARTMOUTH DT ',,', Mil ik_H 1W ,• \/ �`` ■i1' •■ City ill _ nihrillm City of Tigard ENIIIIII pain �� O1TSpa.OF 6)122 e! _ ('AJ16JW171 -— M Mo./Nrx a ir6.ra a u. \sf) l qqq-©C /(Q EXHIBIT B 18136CD-02000 1 S 136CD-0430 WAREMART INC WA A C 3336E 32ND ST#217 3336 ST#217 TULSA,OK 74135 T SA,OK 74135 1S136DA-00902 1S136DA-02100 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN BEACH DAYLE D EVELYN 0 6900 SW HAINES 11530 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-00101 1S136DC-00200 COHN ALLWIN V TRUSTEE THOMAS ALFRED E AND JUNE R 7105 SW BAYLOR 7135 SW BAYLOR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-00300 1S136DC-00301 WOZNIAK JOHN G AND DARLENE M BUEHLER JAMES D&MELISSA S 14200 SW FERN ST 7175 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-00400 1S1 36DC-00500 CHASE WILLIAM L VIOLET TOM MOYER THEATRES 11580 SW 72ND AVE 7132 COMMERCIAL PARK DR TIGARD,OR 97223 KNOXVILLE,TN 37918 1S1 36DC-02503 1S1 36DC-02504 LURIA MARK T AND SUPERVALU HOLDINGS INC 19601 N 27TH AVE 4TH FLOOR 3336 E 32ND ST#217 PHOENIX,AZ 85027 TULSA,OK 74135 1S136DC-02700 1S136DC-02701 HAAG NANCY P LEFEBVRE MICHAEL PAUL SR& 7070 SW BAYLOR 7040 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-02800 1S136DC-02900 SALIMENA JOHN A ET AL KOCH ROBERT J 7100 SW BAYLOR 7130 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03000 1S136DC-03100 HORNE ROBBIE L AMACHER JUANITA AND 7160 SW BAYLOR ST 12060 SW ROSE VISTA DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03200 1S136DC-03300 FEGLES MARY A NOBLE THOMAS L LARRIE P 11205 SW SUMMERFIELD DR 11750 SW 72ND TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 1^136DC-03400 1S136DC-03500 MAHON HUGH S ANNA BELLE WINKLER ROBERT G 12095 SW 118TH AVE 11745 SW 70TH TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-03501 1S136DC-03507 CONNET JANE AND JOHN R PE S ARD,E LYNN& 8416 SW 57TH AVE 7105 S ON ST PORTLAND,OR 97219 TJS"ARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03508 1S136DC-03509 PETERS ARDEN LYNN& DORTON CHARLIE R AND 7105 SW CLINTON ST 7075 SW CLINTON STREET TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03510 15136DC-03700 JACKSON GENE E&CAROLYN MAE POTTMEYER SHARON BEATRICE 7045 SW CLINTON ST 7050 SW CLINTON TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03800 1S136DC-03900 WAHL ROBERT LEO& ROSE MARIE JACOBER LESTER L JOAN M 7080 SW CLINTON 7110 SW CLINTON TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-04000 1, 136DC-04100 ALFIERI PHILLIP J LEW ' YN MARY C 14690 NW HEATHMAN LN 11860,-•r D AVE PORTLAND,OR 97229 ARD,OR 9 3 1S136DC-04200 1S136DC-04300 LEWIS LYNN C MARY C KROO STEVEN 11860 SW 72ND AVE 11930 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S136DC-04400 1S136DC-04402 POLLOCK DONALD E HEDGEPETH LOUISE AGNES 1834 SW 58TH#202 11990 SW 72ND AVENUE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-04501 1S136DC-04600 WA' c INC COMMERCIAL NET LEASE REALTY INC 3336 ' ST#217 455 S ORANGE AVE STE 700 iLSA, OK 74 • ORLANDO, FL 32802 25101AB-00100 2S101BA-00100 POLLOCK DONALD E/JULIA GAIL MARTIN GORDON R 1834 SW 58TH#202 12265 SW 72ND AVE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 23101BA-00101 2S101BA-00300 MARTIN GORDON S ET AL MARTIN GORDON RICHARD 12265 SW 72ND AVE PO BOX 740 TIGARD, OR 97223 GLENEDEN BEACH,OR 97388 REMBOLD PROPERTIES 1022 SW SALMON, SUITE 450 PORTLAND OR 97205 WAREMART FOODS, INC. 400 S. WOODLAND AVENUE WOODBURN OR 97071 I— — -1 -__---__-_- PROJECT AREA I i i-SEE F-5/A200 ___ _ _ 1 ,=■OtEVAAV /1) i .., / ■ i 1. ..1 I --.. .■ i 411111L :-' .••■•ii !I .i 1110J r il C l' • . 1 I /I I I 1 i IVileCO ..---1 FEN.F Cs ExiSt twnwr t I dral '1' I k ---- -.J. , .... ? , ,,,, NICaMeallenia. i .., 1,....?■:;....'....,.c'..r......,;;,',:,,e.. .76 '. 4. - I 1 ii,j ,/ .... .:, _. . . 1 ' ; • I II / , ...a.,- 1 I / ''...,, r. Lb.. a I I T II 1 fi I I '4 411'"Hr4 .(4'"Ht.. 4 •". •"1 --1- I / L ."ri eflopaanna - Al, uv .; 1r -- •• • . , , 11 di . _....r iiillitsigli 11 ,........... i , 1 , . i - 1 , z i WACO i f• II / I.: ..*::ttts.A3 Ett,e:t3 Ult,.1.:. • ...... — ./..1 ji ...... / ,,,,,...,-.._I I — I : c•a•••4 0 I !II , i ivj,I ' I", !...- •: I r I ,..12......li. .,_, p il : , ! : / PErSIANIT • I ...:.................'O.- i i " ' 1 ---..... •-•••.... " C-1 1 i)I i.. i I 11 / -- d■ e ■,_) i I. : i .----.........:.--...... ,h I p e .[ Ot--at. • ii, a / I mv.........„,/. :,*".• 1 I ,. I i I ..... p 11 .,... .. , I C-2 AREA PLAN / — - - MI • r- 15. ill C0.7.17.'"".0.7. 1 L . ---, / Re.tarblear..101 e i 1 7 I i If • —) Q '', ) .‘..•...a,'.,',,.L. '...61/4711..•.,,.!:_.--kit) ; z I INOTES ::::t:: f oeseasent mairomm • .1 _ • 1 Ae mown fa womagekft.6.demrbe... / --- i B I con...parro.lib Sr yowl 414.1444.4 A.4,4 / ;• ,--,,, , -A lo.0414.10.44..4 Imo Imor nab 47...... con...a IWO.A.1.11.11.con.a Ite / ------- _- - 4-- i ---4-- • :-: I If •-EGINI.Waeaelalt ! 1 - "Mir-- / Cera01111211/1 al 11.11000p05 Islands and mewl rob.,as rettneed Lf.0 NM pl.romen n an.areas vere rnakb. / ---- _...... SAL• rt-1 / 1 •T I anabn0 --- i 1.''.22'. ,, 1 7 Al landscape aro.SW 7.4.4 and.rem. / ---- ar-_ %law r LAND USE i I Tas wk.,mare..Harried onthe se.nom 7.down lo / ..-- I- .bah.a.Ratans pacts / ---- SUBMITTAL _t____ , ---.., I r .. 1 3 fl Cr...re I onlage ardoaled toe Bead.B (15 000 01 nclu.s an enclosed be..ol 5.0 al TM balance of Ihe area is con..n ore..Pounsaters conr. 1 ..= --- ., 1=;=I ,—;--, • -, . )i ■ ■ i . r , .outdoor sales and an ckddoor leCelying area i :---,' "'"7-1 , MCM i , 4 _ _... 1 4 trash a.re,C1,area,trn Roe..A are congas.,...Ian / ---.'--- 1 — -- r 1. ) ' [ . ARCHITECTS 1 • / ---- • _ '. I 5 NI Weigle.wenn....areas Is eust.and teas / ---- --4- IABC I..:. .............own we 4 *new stew wwwwe we 4 I aslallod as a w.ol an earner approved plan bew WM. / [. ) ...rm....wee . lqtang a Hannan to be I...on 1.Inekbers lace a.lo be 4 — 1 , '2 A ! / local...point,of eriry - 7 OPP GSF I: -4 1 - MOW 31741 •••■•• REMECID 1 44 I - _ TIGARD TRIANGLE LTh ................. i i ....--.. I ) .-.-1 ' MARI CRECOI I L 1"."1." .-"T""R Les,wrtewer von. 4--13NPRIRSemor .1301.13/331•MES i .1 --). ___._.. ...-- , -----, r ; A , n •...._ Cr OFFCE MAX —— „4,,..,- F-5 sin DEVELOPMENT PLAN SITE PLAN I SCALE 1.43(1 -..1.7 ..--- A200 L - _ _ _ ` i I ` —moo — - r I---– � i ■ CITY of TIGARD — _�_ GEOGRAPNIC INFORMATION SYSTEM- i - — — NOTIFICATION J - ,„.0.,:. AREA MAP J PG`\G CDR ! 999-000 16 ill, a► A i_ „ .. _ ._ ,�SUB�EC / REMBOLD SITE ^ � �� PROPERTIES 1' ': -I" ' p 411111k‘ : . 1 •- sT RETAIL OFFICES III ) i III ii /(/ ISta6eo026a6 ,. B � ap; ��ia �1 ' l IN r—L 1 � u 3 �q)'ul v ^' y,'� -- k�l r 51" a's:i _mini Tr k II Yb X I - ..t �'' � Qk I C�rI �� sl ¢ ;�J s w...a. 3: II di"l li I I � A1�)4,..71111:� `� "" �s Aa 11 u�1 `a +1~£... ° II 9 �m'', �@ 1 DARTMOUTH:.6-,,.„,r- r i--1 i f -H \ 1__, 1 23101BA00300 i A N 1 1 0 200 400 600 Feet ; ! - 1'�473 Net L__________j n_H—111 .aa�I: Sl h, City of Tigard a �1 I Information on this map is for general location only and I 1 �j HER should be venhed nth the Development Services Division. WAY 13125 SW Hall Blvd _—/i T N I --- Tigard OR 97223 r --- 00316 39-4171 �. �rlr 141 �.__ _. Ti httpYAMww.ci.tigard.a.us Community Development Plot date: Sep 8, 1999; C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR 1 S 136CD-02000 1 S 136CD-04301 WAREMART INC WA- A- C 3336 E 32ND ST#217 3336 • ST#217 TULSA,OK 74135 T. SA,OK 74135 1S136DA-00902 1S136DA-02100 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN BEACH DAYLE D EVELYN 0 6900 SW HAINES 11530 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-00101 1S136DC-00200 COHN ALLWIN V TRUSTEE THOMAS ALFRED E AND JUNE R 7105 SW BAYLOR 7135 SW BAYLOR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-00300 1 S 136DC-00301 WOZNIAK JOHN G AND DARLENE M BUEHLER JAMES D&MELISSA S 14200 SW FERN ST 7175 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S 1 36DC-00400 1S1 36DC-00500 CHASE WILLIAM L VIOLET TOM MOYER THEATRES 11580 SW 72ND AVE 7132 COMMERCIAL PARK DR TIGARD,OR 97223 KNOXVILLE,TN 37918 1S136DC-02503 1S136DC-02504 LURIA MARK T AND SUPERVALU HOLDINGS INC 19601 N 27TH AVE 4TH FLOOR 3336 E 32ND ST#217 PHOENIX,AZ 85027 TULSA,OK 74135 1S136DC-02700 1S136DC-02701 HAAG NANCY P LEFEBVRE MICHAEL PAUL SR& 7070 SW BAYLOR 7040 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-02800 1S136DC-02900 SALIMENA JOHN A ET AL KOCH ROBERT J 7100 SW BAYLOR 7130 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03000 1S136DC-03100 HORNE ROBBIE L AMACHER JUANITA AND 7160 SW BAYLOR ST 12060 SW ROSE VISTA DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03200 1S136DC-03300 FEGLES MARY A NOBLE THOMAS L LARRIE P 11205 SW SUMMERFIELD DR 11750 SW 72ND TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-03400 1 S 136DC-03500 MAHON HUGH S ANNA BELLE WINKLER ROBERT G 12095 SW 118TH AVE 11745 SW 70TH TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-03501 1 S 136DC-03507 CONNET JANE AND JOHN R P S ARID• • LYNN& 8416 SW 57TH AVE 7105 S s • ON ST PORTLAND,OR 97219 • •RD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-03508 1 S 136DC-03509 PETERS ARDEN LYNN& DORTON CHARLIE R AND 7105 SW CLINTON ST 7075 SW CLINTON STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03510 1S136DC-03700 JACKSON GENE E&CAROLYN MAE POTTMEYER SHARON BEATRICE 7045 SW CLINTON ST 7050 SW CLINTON TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S1 36DC-03800 1 S 136DC-03900 WAHL ROBERT LEO&ROSE MARIE JACOBER LESTER L JOAN M 7080 SW CLINTON 7110 SW CLINTON TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-04000 1 136DC-04100 ALFIERI PHILLIP J LEW ' YN - MARY C 14690 NW HEATHMAN LN 11860 _•' D AVE PORTLAND,OR 97229 ARD,OR 9 3 1S136DC-04200 1S136DC-04300 LEWIS LYNN C MARY C KROO STEVEN 11860 SW 72ND AVE 11930 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-04400 1 S136DC-04402 POLLOCK DONALD E HEDGEPETH LOUISE AGNES 1834 SW 58TH#202 11990 SW 72ND AVENUE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-0450• 1S136DC-04600 WA' % INC COMMERCIAL NET LEASE REALTY INC 3336 •I ST#217 455 S ORANGE AVE STE 700 •LSA,OK 74 • ORLANDO,FL 32802 2S101AB-00100 2S101BA-00100 POLLOCK DONALD E/JULIA GAIL MARTIN GORDON R 1834 SW 58TH#202 12265 SW 72ND AVE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101BA-00101 2S101BA-00300 MARTIN GORDON S ET AL MARTIN GORDON RICHARD 12265 SW 72ND AVE PO BOX 740 TIGARD,OR 97223 GLENEDEN BEACH,OR 97388 REMBOLD PROPERTIES 1022 SW SALMON, SUITE 450 PORTLAND OR 97205 WAREMART FOODS, INC. 400 S. WOODLAND AVENUE WOODBURN OR 97071 Rembold Properties Waremart Foods, Inc. 1022 SW Salmon, Suite 450 P.O. Box 400 Portland, OR 97205 Woodburn, OR 97071-0400 Edward K. Christensen Christensen Engineering Inc. 7150 SW Hampton Street, Ste. #226 Portland, OR 97223 TIGARDNING DW. rlrf7rl 97223 WARE400 970713025 1898 09 11/18/99 FORWARD TIME EXP RTN TO SEND :WAREMART Po BOX 400 WOODBURN OR 97071-0400 RETURN TO SENDER U(c7149-(q9 .1,4e)(4ta 6,9-/Leeeej achata, ,CITY OF TIGARD �4, �kill's: o � .13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. � r SEP-9'99 PI;( $ 0 .33Ji Tigard,Oregon 972230 ._.I Ow tj�� .i \ •n ',a , U.S. - STAG. 53, 1 I WAREMART FOODS, INC. 400 S. WOODLAND AVENUE WOODBURN. OR 97071 \ WARE400 970713097 1898 17 09/12/49 FORWARD TIME EXP RTN TO SEND : WAREMART PO BOX 400 WOODBURN OR 97071-0400 .svateialifiloi44 Ildul,h:lJ„hhALLALLI„I"hhidinfld Pox,i9-0-(A Prvpitriv.s ! 50t /999- 0 oo( RECEIVED PLANNING . - . NOV 0 8 -1999 ADJUSTMENT CITY OE TIGARD -4I TYPE I APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 PRE-APP. HELD WITH: DATE OF PRE-APP.: GENERAL INFORMATION Property Address/Location(s): FOR STAFF USE ONLY Tax Map & Tax Lot#(s):SW 1/4 SE 1/4 36TIS RIW W Portion /l-0i `VAR of Tax Lot 4500 - Parcel C . Site Size: 3. 15 acres Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)*: Waremart Foods, Inc. Case No.(s): Address: 400 S. Woodland Ave. Phone: 503-982-4995 Other Case No.(s): 5.:Dt ` 9--000 City: Woodburn, OR Zip: 97071 , Applicant*: Rembold Properties LLC Receipt No.: �jL1 - > 9SC `' Address: 1022 SW Salmon, Ste. 450 Phone: 503-222-7258 Application Accepted By: ...��?- City: Portland, OR Zip: 97205 Date: //• _%? * When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owner(s) Date Determined To Be Complete: must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. Comp Plan/Zone Designation: PROPOSAL SUMMARY CIT Area: The owners of record of the subject property request permission for an Administrative Adjustment to the following provision(s) of the Recording Date and Number: Community Development Code (please circle one only): Development Adjustment: $ 100 Rev7/28/99 i:\curpin\mastersladjustmt.mst Special Adjustments: $ 100 •Adjustment to a Subdivision $ 100 ♦ Reduction of Minimum Residential Density $ 100 ♦ Landscaping Adjustments-Existing/New Street Trees $ 100 REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS • Parking Adjustments-Reduction in Stacking Lane Length $ 100 • Wireless Communication Facility Adjustments-Distance From Another Tower $ 100 Please state the reason for the Adjustment request: See attached ✓ Application Elements Submitted: adjustment summary and supporting documentation. Application Form Please note this is a request for adjustment to a Owner's Signature/Written Authorization current pending site development review © Title Transfer Instrument or Deed Case File: SDR99-00016 x Site/Plot Plan (#of copies based on pre-app check list) ® Site/Plot Plan (reduced 8'/,'x 11") ® Applicant's Statement (Addressing Criteria Under Section 18.370.020) Filing Fee $100.00 1 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 3rd day of November , 19 99 1' ' VP?'� i Owner , .ture % Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 1 I- ' 1 - •- s� • r • r �• ,,,,,-,,,141cr:&•:•:r.,,..",r'''''-`,.1,- - ..,,v _FerjW":ft",41.-....1.4-4,0T. 133 MO : I a ii'' . 1 I :.• • , �.,.: �u I .i l •• EXT4 s_ONA #- . _r I Al efNLOlwo A - YEW fnDfaNO eotrtx EIO11 7flo ASC II; i • . .; •I I ,� o..... •__......::: -- I• "I .10.111111•N Wm* t T •• . ., . , , — -- �� ..,._, _,, I •----• I I 11 lU:101A- EAST R[YA1 I I I I r/'�'� ..�..Y. �, I --'- - I I ADJUSTMENT OUPP1211.7 TO . --Ni..7411-'471-1.274-47- i W In Co • 1 I...�w.� C� — — .o...�� _u.rn_�1:1 1�•�'S.SRwr` F':::':-. 5E5*2-F-.2.F6''''1._4.4,.:::::..,..::::::-.„,, IF 1 I .... r arc- - _ k • li \_ _,.:.�.rr-xicemencomo'cw.e,.-x--_.f € I I II Y��J_ N _'w' w•nw..0 • �.�L�w (� A 11 O X 1 ■D T• 1 . .. E ) MI I i ONO■n■OMTMe.• 1 D1 MROfiq A-SOUTH ELEYAl10N�a I -I �' I I""" _,e ' -••• I f _ OWY • - I h i �' TIGARD I E•: ) ffffffffi �.�- TRIANGLE 1 •—„—••,_-- — ••••m �� —' I.cY.OID DDY.ANI[i • WII7LO ..WAJ -- -..•J_ _— -:Y Ad i 1---- ----- MAN), OIKOON .'.e..«.. -_ 3i_i,=-:U!”IBM"I•IffffB�'.�<iffi ZS ..we. .u... -...... _ - r 1 K� � 3A.I' I Ill 1 - Ft A- NOON ELEVATOR F4 level r� _ . / - \ i ADJUSTMENT• SUBMITTAL 44 1 _-. 1 of 1 Jul / J A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION MCM GRIGSBYS.CHRISTOPHER ORELAND MICHAELJ.MYLES LOY K.RUSCH November 4, 1999 REMBOLD TIGARD TRIANGLE ADJUSTMENT TYPE I APPLICATION Supporting Documentation Submitted: November 1, 1999 REQUEST: This proposal is a request for an Development Adjustment as defined in the Tigard Zoning Ordinance, Section 18.370.020, B1a, Front Yard Setback. PROPOSAL:The proposed project is the construction of a three building retail complex on property zoned C-G PD. The property is overlain by the Tigard Triangle Design Guidelines. The Guidelines call for a minimum setback of zero and a maximum setback of 10' along the SW 72"d St. frontage. This requested adjustment is for the building located at the southeast corner of the subject site indicated as Bulding A. The original submittal called for the building to be setback 8' from the easterly property line. The original submittal also proposed a building with a sloping roof where the lower edge of the slope was oriented to the street and the roof sloped up and into the site. This design was the result of the applicants efforts to meet the Tigard Triangle Design Guidelines for placement of the building as close to the street as possible. It was also an effort to meet the deed mandated CCR's that required that the building not obscure the current "Winco Foods" sign located at the southeast corner of the subject site. The proposed building is set substantially below the adjacent street level due to the grade change between the site and SW 72"d A preliminary analysis by the planning staff indicated that this design did not meet the intent of the Tigard Triangle Design Guidelines that buildings address the street through the placement of windows and that street facades utilize variation in the elevations to create visual interest. Simultaneously, while the review was underway, the applicant was studying the impacts of the grade change between 72"d and the site in terms of the geotechnical impacts of the slope and the existing site retaining wall. The subsequent recommendation from the structural engineers is that the new building not be located directly in line with the existing retaining wall. Their analysis indicates we need to maintain a minimum distance of 3' from the inside face of the retaining wall to the outside face of our exterior wall. This location results in the building being setback 11'- 6" from the property line which is 1'-6" further than allowed by the Design Guidelines. Therefore we are requesting an adjustment of 1'-6" to the setback requirements under the provisions of Section 18.370.020, B1a, Front Yard Setback. This provision allows for the granting of a setback adjustment so long as it does not exceed the required distance by more than 25%. In this case the maximum setback of 10' could be increased by up to 2'-6" under the provisions of this section. Concurrent with the requested setback adjustment we have redesigned the building to create a flat roofed building with a step 11177 Col ITHWFCT CAI AArAI CTRFFT CI IITF 7F" • P(1RTI ANTI(1RF( 1N Q77fnc7447 I I.CA • TFI FPHf1NF ROC 777 5757 • FAY S(17 741 1 514 PAGE 2 in the east elevation. The step allows us to place the building as close to the existing retaining wall as the engineers will allow and, at the same time to maintain visibility of the Winco Foods sign as required by the CCR's. Therefore the request is for the granting of an increase in the front yard setback at SW 72' to 11'-6". APPROVAL CRITERIA 18.370.020, 2 a. A Demonstration that the adjustment requested is the least required to achieve the desired affect: The proposed design places the building 3' off of the face of the existing retaining wall. This is the distance our engineers have recommended in order to maintain the integrity of the existing retaining wall and the soil behind it. Currently the retaining wall terminates at a point approximately 1' below the soil line. This means that as we excavate to the floor level of the proposed building, a potion of unexcavated soil will be left several feet below the bottom of the wall. The concern is that if the new wall is any closer to the existing wall the risk of substantial movement of the soil behind and below the wall is too great. Our engineers have recommended several actions that must take place to minimize the risks of adverse soil movement while the new wall is under construction. Their concerns about the location of the wall and the recommendations for reduction of the risks are contained in a separate memo from Greg Sherer with VLMK Engineers attached to this document. The proposed adjustment has been used as an opportunity to develop additional variation in the east wall of the building consistent with the requirements of the Tigard Triangle Design Guidelines. We have provided steps in plan and elevation of the east wall. Additionally in the high wall above the step the materials have been changed from concrete masonry to stucco divided into a series of panels by metal pilasters. Within the stucco panels a series of glass faced poster boxes have been proposed. Currently this building is planned to be occupied by Hollywood Video. They would use these poster boxes to display a changing series of movie posters. Should Hollywood not become the tenant the poster boxes will be used for graphic display either of an abstract nature or directly related to the services provided within. They will not be used for direct tenant signage. In summary we believe this adjustment is the least required to maintain the structural integrity of the existing retaining wall as well as the integrity of the soil behind the wall. The Adjustment is also the least required to maintain the required visibility of the Winco sign per the CCR's. PAGE 3 c. The adjustment will not impede adequate emergency access to the site. All site access points to and internal circulation within the site will be unaffected by the proposed adjustment. d. There is not a reasonable alternative to the adjustment which achieve the desired affect. The only alternative to the requested adjustment is to remove the existing retaining wall completely and replace it with a new engineered wall. However since the existing wall was constructed concurrent with the excavation of the site and the construction of the improved 72nd roadway there was, at that time, no risk of soil movement. If the wall were removed today there would be a substantial risk of movement of the retained soil and possible damage to the road. Therefore we believe this is the only prudent and safe option for achieving the desired affect. END OF SUBMITTED TEXT NOV 04 '99 11:39AM VLMK ENGINEERS P.1/1 Consulting Er -'ineer's - - 393:. KELLY AVENUE. PORTLAND, OREGO' _01-4393 - (503) 222-4453/FAX (503)248.9263 JOB MEMORANDUM DATE: November 4, 1999 TO: Doug Benson/MCM Architects FROM: Greg Scherer/VLMK • RE: Rernbold Tigard Triangle-Building "A" Back Wall at Existing Retaining Wall PAGES: 1 Total This memorandum is in regard to the location of the proposed building"A"back wall in relation to the existing Keystone retaining wall. We recommend that the new building wall be located as far from the existing retaining wall as possible. A separation of eight feet would have minimum affect to the retaining wall (although temporary shoring would still be required). However,we understand that this distance exceeds zoning allowances for the Tigard Triangle. Apparently, a separation of three feet can meet zoning requirements if a variance is granted_ Locating the new wall this close to the Keystone wall will be difficult and could potentially affect the stability of the existing wall. The geotechnical engineer of record,AGRA Earth and Environmental, has advised that several items be taken into account: 1. Temporary shoring will be required and will be at least eight feet high at the south end. It will need to be engineered since the stability of the Keystone wall is a concern. 2. The existing Keystone retaining wall will need to be monitored before, during, and after the installation and removal of the temporary shoring. A determination will need to be made as to how much movement the retaining wall can tolerate_ This is • dependent on the design of the wall-which as of now has not been determined. 3. The new back wall of building"A" will need to be designed as a retaining wall that can support not only the retained soil behind it,but also the surcharge of the Keystone retaining wall. In summary, Iocating the new back wall of building "A" with a three foot separation from the existing Keystone retaining wall is feasible. However, the design and construction of it will be difficult and will require careful consideration so as to avoid any consequence to the existing Keystone wall. cc_ Marcy Boyer, AGRA Earth and Environmental c:\otiocs\wri\A-Rw-merno.doc 4114 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: DATE OF PRE-APP.: Property Address/Location(s): FOR STAFF USE ONLY Tax Map&Tax Lot#(s): SW 4 SE 4 36 TIS R1W W Portion Case No.(s): /999-000/6 of Tax Lot 4500 - Parcel C — 1 S( Uo - 2--St# Other Case No.(s): Site Size: 3 1 s Ares Receipt No.: Application Accepted By: Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)": Waremart Foods, Inc. Date: Address: 400 S Woodland Ave. Phone:503-982-4995 City: Woodburn, OR Zip: 97071 Date Deter i ed o Complete: Applicant*: Pembold Properrif-s LLc Comp Plan/Zone Designation: Address: 1022 SW Salmon, Ste. 450 Phone: 503-222-7258 City: Portland, OR Zip: 97205 CIT Area: * When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession Rev.11/26/98 is\curpin\masterslsdra.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 lr Application Form Owner's Signature/Written Authorization The owners of record of the subject property request Site Er Title Transfer Instrument or Deed Development Review approval to allow (please be specific): Site/Plot Plan See attached proposal summary and supporting documenta- #of copies based on pre-app check list) tion Site/Plot Plan (reduced 81/4"x 11") .Applicant's Statement (#of copies based on pre-app check list) 0 Construction Cost Estimate 0 USA Sewer Use Information Card (Distributed/completed at application submittal) © 2 Sets of Pre-Addressed/Pre-Stamped Legal Size Envelopes ® Filing Fee (Under$100,000) $ 800.00 ($1 00,000-$999,999)....$1,600.00 ($1 Million&Over) $1,780.00 (+$5/$10,000) 1 � 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 day of , 19 9 4004 ae,e. • , 41, Arredifl- •' ner' :ignature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development Shaping ABetter Community LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION 120 DAYS = 12/29/99 FILE NO(S).: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR]1999-00016 FILE TITLE: REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES APPLICANT: Rembold Properties OWNER: Waremart Foods, Inc. 1022 SW Salmon, Suite 450 400 S. Woodland Avenue Portland, OR 97205 Woodburn, OR 97071 PHONE/FAX: 503-222-7258 503-982-4995 REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to develop Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site with a total of 37,000 square feet of retail space for several prospective tenants. 10,000 square feet of the total area will be partially covered outdoor retail sales. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the west side of SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 1S136DC, Tax Lot 02504. The site is Parcel "C" within the existing development site containing Winco Foods and Petsmart. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, REVIEW 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.795 and 18.810. CRITERIA: CIT AREA: East CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request DECISION MAKING BODY: COMMENTS SENT: 919199 DUE: 9/23/99 © STAFF DECISION TENTATIVE DATE OF DECISION: 10/21/99 ❑ 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 © VICINITY MAP © NARRATIVE p TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ARCHITECTUAL PLAN Di SITE PLAN Di LANDSCAPE PLAN GEO-TECH REPORT STAFF CONTACT: Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner (503) 639-4171 Ext. 407 SDR1999-00016 REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL OFFICES LAND USE PROPOSAL PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN CHECKLIST Project: R'E'D C? FOR Date: (?.0 1°l9 LAND USE APPLICATION SUBMITTALS Et-COMPLETE ❑INCOMPLETE GRADING Existing and proposed contours shown? KT m - f; 17`17- (owD t50.1°-tit►f' -04 la Are adjacent parcels impacted by proposed grading? ❑ Yes lEtNo Adjacent parcel grades shown? ST?EET ISSUES gz- R ight-of-way clearly shown? Centerline of street clearly shown? Name of street(s) shown? Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown? 04 Profiles of proposed streets [ h Future Streets Plan provided? (subdivisions and some partitions) ❑ profiles ❑ topo shown on adjacent property? F ❑ Traffic study required/submitted? [r' Do proposed street grades comply with City standards? Er Check widths proposed on public streets [k Ar A❑re private streets proposed? under 6 lot minimum? ❑ commercial driveway entrance required. ❑ width appropriate? ❑Other: S ITARY SEWER ISSUES Existing/proposed lines? Stubs to adjacent parcels required? WATER ISSUES I I' Existing/proposed lines? D---- Existing/proposed fire hydrants? STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES Existing/proposed lines? 1/1 A. Preliminary sizing calculation of water quality provided? A- Water quality facility shown on plan? OA ❑ does area provided match calculations for size requirement? Stubs to adjacent properties required? A Water quality and/or detention shown outside of any wetland buffer? i:\eng\bnanr\masters\public facility plan checklist.doc ■ CITY OF TIGARD September 1, 1999 OREGON Rembold Properties 1022 SW Salmon, Suite 450 Portland, OR 97205 RE: Notice of Complete Submittal - SDR 1999-00016 Dear Rembold Properties: Staff has received your application for Site Development Review for the property identified as Parcel "C" of the existing Winco Foods site (WCTM 1S136DC, tax lot 2504). After a review of the submittal items staff has determined that the application is complete and will begin reviewing the project. The processing time for this type of application is approximately 6-8 weeks. Staff has set a tentative decision date of October 21 , 1999. Please be aware that this is a target date only and that a decision could be rendered before or after that date. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171 ext. 407. Sincerely, ulia Powell Hajduk Associate Planner is\curpin\julia\sdr\SDR99-16ACC.doc c: SDR 1999-00016 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 • MCM ARCHITECTS 1022 SOUTHWEST SALMON,SUITE 350 PORTLAND,OREGON 97205 USA • TELEPHONE 503 222 5757 • FAX 503 241 1514 TRANSMITTAL DISTRIBUTION: VIA DATE: August 6, 1999 File 2.20 TO: City of Tigard Planning Department NUMBER OF PAGES TRANSMITTED: 13125 SW Hall Blvd. PROJECT NUMBER: 99015 Tigard, OR 97223 FILE NAME: Tigard=08-06-99=winco.doc Fax No. 684-7297 VIA: Fax w/ Mail to follow PROJECT: Rembold-Tigard Triangle FROM: Doug Benson COPIES DATED PAGE NO. DESCRIPTION 1 08-06-99 Waremart Letter REMARKS: The enclosed letter is part of a submittal made on August 5, 1999 for Site Development Review for the above referenced project. It is provided in support of and as authorization for the signature made on the Type II Application form. A case file assignment was not provided so the only reference besides the project name that we can provide is the receipt number for the payment. That number is 99-317424. Please let us know if there is any problem or question concerning this additional information.Thank you Aug-06-99 10:38A Retail Development P .02 ffffjareiiuirl Foods An Employee Owned Company WAREMART,INC. P.O.BOX 400 DISTRIBUTION CENTER WOODBURN,OREGON 97071-0400 (503)982-4900 August 6, 1999 City of Tigard C/O MCM Architects Doug Benson 1022 SW Salmon, Suite 360 Portland, OR 97205 RE: Ownership Authorization Letter for Property: SW I/s SE '/a 36 TIS RIW W portion of Tax Lot 4500—Parcel C Dear Sirs. Waremart, Inc. and Rembold Properties LLC have entered into a sales agreement whereby Waremart will sell the property referenced below to Rembold Corporation upon completion of a series of conditions agreed to by both parties. One of the conditions is the successful application and review of the improvements proposed for the site by the City of Tigard. For the application currently before you, we have designated Wayne Rembold to act as our agent and to make and sign the required application for review by the Planning Commission to the City of Tigard. Please consider the application before as being made by and on behalf of Waremart, Inc. as the property owner. Please let me know if you have any questions or require any additional data. Thank you for your assistance. Very truly, Paul A. Simmons V. P. Retail Development 400 S.WOODLAND AVE.,WOODBURN,OREGON 97071 . 4;• i - . . . . . . . . . . , • 1 1 . — . .,___CCI_QV...Qs:kg-4 ....._L r • 1. . . _ (Q-e- - 4,-..z1 , • i- , • ....?rct_,... , , .. ...,.....,.. e-g-e • --...-"a0876-, — /L ".e.g...,.. rf , Al A- -- ..T,L crt... — 41:Loihros..yr,•••''‘...)- pialciJ.0 p.) ..- ,' .17_ (-CA'7.c --. 1'?a•41-,24-"Laj ..staltr.‹.) — '1• Pr 1A-i• Il'ik 4941.41-10. "-> fik- If- 2S cS:k:L-...' - _ - ---1-------,---_, — 4 ,__ /27 3-6„,„...0 4,- 1'c ,... /a.., .e.4.,i.,„/,( SI-f7-1 ji—N...)■ 4 MILS1)...,j n..-...k""--.•...., .0"-'. a b". ( -7. ...,....„.„,_,....&:}1 . . .'--- u---- J--4 -----IAA-0-- . .i . • /7( - 9 , • 7 — ,____ -/- a_.... - - I ,Q..) 1 ti t.,--i--- / 6-(1z L9-• . 6 ri.Ai ..„.....:...j.„ . • : . 1 0114 II _•_. r•-_---s.." - ar;•• ..,..- •- . ' . • . 1,. ' . • .. !I • _ • ,i,. • ti I` ®R�/Jb —__-- --- ___ y I Zzl-s3o6 i .___ - m 71).' 3 J `) -3 0' • X° Q/ oo . I 37 D, ., seu) ,-- -- F p-.sue,-^.o-12a. 1/,"-- h u,,.--94-)-7 62.41.4)A-1 A,-F.. . • MISSING LABELS FOR SDR 1999-00016 l REMBOLD PROPERTIES RETAIL BLDGS (5-Ubrvii.14-ed /q1' -'i*11 REMBOLD PROPERTIES 1022 SW SALMON, SUITE 450 PORTLAND, OR 97205 WAREMART FOODS, INC 400 S. WOODLAND AVE. WOODBURN, OR 97071 SUPERVALU HOLDINGS INC 3336 E 32ND STREET #217 TULSA, OK 74135 POLLOCK DONALD E 1834 SW 58TH #202 PORTLAND, OR 97221 MARTIN GORDON S ET AL 12265 SW 72ND AVENUE TIGARD, OR 97223 MARTIN GORDON RICHARD PO BOX 740 GLENEDEN BEACH, OR 97388 PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION IS VALID FOR 3 MONTHS FROM THE DATE PRINTED ON THIS NOTIFICATION AREA MAP! CITY of TIGARD 17:-I GE OGRA PHIC INFORM ATIOH gYSTEY — I AREA NOTIFIED � 1 (800') S i 131300AM/902 Q��,F�� , I T0: Douglas A. Benson \er MCM Architects RE: ISI36DC, 02504 �` 13130402100 -• A• 181360000500 ----- - 1 • 131380300300 131960300400 1 151a69coo161 $UBJEC 1slancooY}o lalasocooa�i 1 -. ! : SITE --___-____ _i aAY�oR ST NOTE: 1, 611303000 T r�T- S798CD02000 _-1---`• �Is9611c0810 1asocono0 , 161360027011 1 ,.I EAST CIT AREA / '� � _1_ ulasoca:aoo IS CORRECT 1 15136030320 1S136000P00 I Q \ 181960 6336Q--�-'---- �1�6000a50 . 13W8000261% { i 1 1S1as000840q I ^ ■507 131a8C0o4300 131369 500 -- -- 131360301151 I '.. q)pq 15138000i1568 1 151360303519 + 1513110001501 11313@000if500 ST •• CLINTON I 181 603800 31a6oco F.. -- v "`_- ~ 18136gC04600 LS13604043001 161360304400 1� .03 ■ �. _ � lSl36OCD440L • -. 73101800101 ---- - ____.i Islolaeoa169 DARTMOUTH ST . 1 N 20014600100 r 1 III 0 200 400 800 Peet l'i• 1".418 feet . l IIIIII dI,A,I•IUI:$.-r ST Alt ALijili City of Tigard 'II. . z illi:x H E •. nfa rna0on en This map for penenl loutan only and RMO$p ., should w verified with the Development Services Division. `�� INN imIllsr 1 I 13125 W Hall BNd TipardOR 97223 ala (503839-1171 111 h0p:/Mnvw.u.tiWrd.or.us Community Development Plot date:Jun 16, 1999;C:lmagicWIAGIC03.APR 6/16/99 Parcel Summary Report For Parcel #: 1 S136DC-02504 3:32:19 PM Size: 0.00 Acres Notes: Zoning:C-G Status: Active Complan: CG Creation Date: Legal Lot? Updated:5/27/99 Parcel Use: Updated By: CMC TOPO Map:4222 COMM PNL#: Water Service TVW Ju •' is Flood Zone: Sewer Service SWR CIT: E Plat Name Subdivision:PP1995-013 Div: Block: Lot: Valuations Land Value: $679,210 Building Value: $0 Total Value: $679,210 Site Address Status Address NO ADDRESS People Role Type Last Name M.I. First Name Address 1 Address 2 City State Zip Phone 1 Ext.1 Phone 2 Ext.2 OWN SUPERVALU HOLDINGS INC BY BURKE+NICKEL 3336E 32ND ST#217 TULSA OK 74135 Notes: Page 1 of 1 • 1S136CD-02000 ,136CD-04301 WAREMART INC WA'• • A' C 3336 E 32ND ST#217 3336 2•' ST#217 TULSA,OK 74135 . SA,OK 7• 5 1S136DA-00902 1S136DA-02100 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN BEACH DAYLE D EVELYN 0 6900 SW HAINES 11530 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-00101 1 S 136DC-00200 COHN ALLWIN V TRUSTEE THOMAS ALFRED E AND JUNE R 7105 SW BAYLOR 7135 SW BAYLOR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-00300 1S136DC-00301 WOZNIAK JOHN G AND DARLENE M BUEHLER JAMES D&MELISSA S 14200 SW FERN ST 7175 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-00400 1S136DC-00500 CHASE WILLIAM L VIOLET TOM MOYER THEATRES 11580 SW 72ND AVE 7132 COMMERCIAL PARK DR TIGARD,OR 97223 KNOXVILLE,TN 37918 1S136DC-02503 1S136DC-02504 LURIA MARK T AND SUPERVALU HOLDINGS INC 19601 N 27TH AVE 4TH FLOOR 3336 E 32ND ST#217 PHOENIX,AZ 85027 TULSA,OK 74135 1 S 136DC-02700 1 S 136DC-02701 HAAG NANCY P LEFEBVRE MICHAEL PAUL SR& 7070 SW BAYLOR 7040 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-02800 1S136DC-02900 SALIMENA JOHN A ET AL KOCH ROBERT J 7100 SW BAYLOR 7130 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03000 1S136DC-03100 HORNE WILLIAM I/ROBBIE L AMACHER JUANITA AND 7160 SW BAYLOR 12060 SW ROSE VISTA DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03200 1S136DC-03300 FEGLES MARY A NOBLE THOMAS L LARRIE P 11205 SW SUMMERFIELD DR 11750 SW 72ND TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 • 1S136DC-03400 1S136DC-03500 MAHON HUGH S ANNA BELLE WINKLER ROBERT G 12095 SW 118TH AVE 11745 SW 70TH TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-03501 1 S 136DC-03507 CONNET JANE AND JOHN R PETERS ARDEN LYNN& 8416 SW 57TH AVE 7105 SW CLINTON ST PORTLAND,OR 97219 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03508 1S136DC-03509 PETERS ARDEN LYNN& DORTON CHARLIE R AND 7105 SW CLINTON ST 7075 SW CLINTON STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03510 1S136DC-03700 JACKSON GENE E&CAROLYN MAE POTTMEYER SHARON BEATRICE 7045 SW CLINTON ST 7050 SW CLINTON TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03800 1S136DC-03900 WAHL ROBERT LEO&ROSE MARIE JACOBER LESTER L JOAN M 7080 SW CLINTON 7110 SW CLINTON TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-04000 36DC-04100 ALFIERI PHILLIP J LEW YN■ ' ARY C 14690 NW HEATHMAN LN 11861 << - ND AVE PORTLAND,OR 97229 ARD,OR 9 3 1S136DC-04200 1S136DC-04300 LEWIS LYNN C MARY C KROO STEVEN 11860 SW 72ND AVE 11930 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-04400 1 S 136DC-04402 POLLOCK DONALD E HEDGEPETH LOUISE AGNES 1834 SW 58TH#202 11990 SW 72ND AVENUE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 136DC-0451! 1S136DC-04600 WA' M•' INC COMMERCIAL NET LEASE REALTY INC 3336 D ST#217 455 S ORANGE AVE STE 700 SA,OK 135 ORLANDO, FL 32802 2S101AB-00100 2S101BA-00100 POLLOCK DONALD E/JULIA GAIL MARTIN GORDON R 1834 SW 58TH#202 12265 SW 72ND AVE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 • 2S101BA-00101 2S101BA-00300 MARTIN GORDON S ET AL MARTIN GORDON RICHARD 12265 SW 72ND AVE PO BOX 740 TIGARD,OR 97223 GLENEDEN BEACH,OR 97388 • 09/15/99 15:39 FAX 2411514 MCM 001 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 411117117 MCM M 4 I - MICHAELJ.MYLES ' LOY K.RUSCH June 15,1999 Ms. Patti Lunsford City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,OR 97223 Fax No. 684-7297 RE: Neighborhood Meeting Notification Mailing List Dear Ms.Lunsford: We are presently preparing a submittal to the Planning Commission for Site Development Review of a parcel of land within the City of Tigard. As required we will be notifying the neighbors and appropriate members of the CIT regarding the timing and location of the meeting. We are hereby requesting that the City of Tigard prepare a list of the affected property owners for our use. It is also our understanding that the same mailing list and an additional two sets of mailing labels and envelopes are required to be sent out at the time we are assigned a review date in front of the Planning Commission. If it is possible to assemble all of the labels at one time it would make both of our lives that much easier. The project is the final phase of development of the site currently occupied by Winco,Petsmart and Office Max_The map and tax lot information is as follows: Map No.: 1S136DC Tax Lot: : 02504 Tax Account R2036293 We have scheduled our meeting for Wednesday, July 7, 1999 at 7:00 pm. The location will be finalized prior to mailing the notices out. In reviewing the materials provided to us regarding 1 n7,CC1111-ww .T CAI 1Jf114 IGTCICCT £I IITc?411 . Of1PT1 WW1 rarigA 1N 477I1.r-7aa7 I RA • TFI FF r Nc F(1.9 777 5747 • Fn■ P.(17 7a• 51 d 01/15/99 15:39 FAX 2411514 _ MCM Cl 002 • • PAGE 2 the notices it appears we should be mailing to the East CIT members.Please advise us if this is correct for our site. Please let me know as soon as the materials are ready for pick-up and what the charges will be. If you have any questions,please give me a call.Thank you for your attention to our request. Sincerely, kaip 111ou.` .sA. 13 .•n MCM Architects Copies: Doherty,Rembold Co. Aug-27-99 11 : 51A 503- "" 22-4053 P_ 01 REMBOLD COMPANIES 1022 SW SALMON ST . , STE . 450 PORTLAND , OR 97205 FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM: Julia Hyduke Denise Doherty (fax 222-4053) COMPANY: DATE: City of Tigard August 27, 1999 FAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO.OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: 684-7297 7 PHONE NUMBER: 639-4171x407 RE: Dartmouth Road—Tigard Triangle ❑ URGENT ❑ FOR REVIEW ❑PLEASE COMMENT ❑PLEASE REPLY ❑ PLEASE RECYCLE NOTES/COMMENTS: JULIA, ATTACHED IS A HARD COPY OF THE LIST OF RESIDENTS (WITHIN 500 FEET OF OUR PROPERTY)THAT WE PURCHASED FROM THE CITY OF TIGARD. I HAVE ALSO ATTACHED THE FRONT AND BACK OF THE CANCELLED CHECK FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE ABOVE LIST. THANK YOU, DENISE DOHERTY 503-222-7258 OR 503-121-4053(FAX) Atig-27-99 11 : 52A 503 22-4O53 P. 02 - - ,... arr. . ..arezifili-47 r•-- d.•,. .-._.,..,.a.:, .....*.uhmair........7Apr....a.....0*i4amaer=4.....rititir ...... ......--_ _....pe_02.4........2.2.1___...._....p.a....r........ .._._-..sel. ....... . i 1 0 4 2 I REMBOLD PROPERTIES LLC it 1022 SW.SALMON,STE. 450 PORTLAND.OR 97205 24-7038/3230 i 2804 7 199 'F P :.i ___ . til • ..,i..1 PAY TO THE ORDER OF_ _ (.7 --G21/7?(-4° 1-$ 11 . . l''.1 • 1 `d•:' /iy-\ I!, ........--------- DOLLARS b rt Fri; 41 W Bank of America . ) l'rirate lerTli.'ili riii) Iii 11101 Sounvovst f 0 If P no 1, I Puro end ON ST IC, 7 (Li ) :11 T^I FOR —1--37---- ------------ - i . i ...00000o & L OW :,.„.„,s.*ii..i,;:,,i:gq,1:0:::,,,,...mmi .1,:tiii.,93....,tiii:.:.„,F,;....,i;;::::,;..,:ss,:.;:..,..:„.-..••,......,;,,,:,,..,,....*:,4.;,:,-,„„......:...-.ff'1.4.:• •••••, . ..S.!.:1•1:■•azsh.!•••:•: ))1•:gb. t:', .,::::::.:.i;i•if:t;42::.?!.;:*i..!;.!??5::!..:•;•;?;.:4:!hhig•:•278iii.libbbbigl.li),;40;1••••;..: • 1/ f • • ! . i ' _ ALig-27-99 11 : 52A 50-7 ")22-4053 P.03 WROCESSEDI 01 T . • 1 P. O. • 06221999 • • Ir. 7 1K V220 e621.119 9 157 1. , er 9v F- : 14 • - •pixT •:;*;:';!%,3*11::.•!.■';:i:.;■'?f,i't3,■*■,.`3iii:i,:.,:::•!.h,:?■`iilili,i'814);1■.31.,1:ni.*■;!;11‘1440)100$§6!"■14,hbl,'‘ht,■'•"+'Z." 4 • Aug-27-99 11 : 52A 503 222-4053 P-04 1s 136CD-02000 136CD-0430 ,> WAREMART INC WA A C 3336 E 32ND ST#217 3336 ST#217 TULSA,OK 74135 SA,OK 7 5 1 S 136DA-00902 1 S 136DA-02100 4 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN at BEACH DAYLE D EVELYN 0 6900 SW HAINES 11530 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-00101 1S136DC-00200 COHN ALLWIN V TRUSTEE �,THOMAS ALFRED E AND JUNE R 7 7105 SW BAYLOR 7135 SW BAYLOR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-00300 1 S 136DC-00301 di WOZNIAK JOHN G AND DARLENE M 4. BUEHLER JAMES D&MELISSA S 14200 SW FERN ST 7175 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-00400 1S136DC-00500 CHASE WILLIAM L VIOLET 4 TOM MOYER THEATRES 11580 SW 72ND AVE 7132 COMMERCIAL PARK DR TIGARD,OR 97223 KNOXVILLE,TN 37918 1S136DC-02503 15136' : • - LURIA MARK T AND SUPERVALU -% GS INC 19601 N 27TH AVE 4TH FLOOR 3336 E D ST#217 PHOENIX,AZ 85027 T A,OK 74135 15136DC-02700 151 36DC-02701 y HAAG NANCY P ♦ LEFEBVRE MICHAEL PAUL SR& 7070 SW BAYLOR 7040 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 I S1360C-02800 1 S136DC-02900 SALIMENA JOHN A ET AL • KOCH ROBERT J 7100 SW BAYLOR 7130 5W BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-03000 1 S 136DC-03100 HORNE WILLIAM I/ROBBIE L AMACHER JUANITA AND 7160 SW BAYLOR 12060 SW ROSE VISTA DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-03200 1 1 S 136DC-03300 FEGLES MARY A ` NOBLE THOMAS L LARRIE P 11205 SW SUMMERFIELD DR 11750 SW 72ND TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 Aug-27-99 11 : 52A 503 ?22-4053 P_05 a 1 S136DC-03400 is 136DC-03500 dl+ MAHON HUGH S ANNA BELLE •4 WINKLER ROBERT G 12095 SW 118TH AVE 11745 SW 70TH TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-03501 1 S 136DC-03507 4, CONNET JANE AND JOHN R .4, PETERS ARDEN LYNN& 8416 SW 57TH AVE 7105 SW CLINTON ST PORTLAND,OR 97219 TIGARD,OR 97223 S136DC-03508 1S136DC-03509 PET A NN& 4 DORTON CHARLIE R AND 7105 C N ST 7075 SW CLINTON STREET T ARD,OR 972 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S136DC-03510 „1 S136DC-03700 1r JACKSON GENE E&CAROLYN MAE PO II MEYER SHARON BEATRICE 7045 SW CLINTON ST 7050 SW CLINTON TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03800 1S136DC-03900 ¢WAHL ROBERT LEO&ROSE MARIE - JACOBER LESTER L JOAN M 7080 SW CLINTON 7110 SW CLINTON TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-04000 36DC-04100 ♦ALFIERI PHILLIP J LE YN, ” ARY C 14690 NW HEATHMAN LN 1186' =1' D AVE PORTLAND, OR 97229 ARD,OR • 3 15136DC-04200 1S136DC-04300 r LEWIS LYNN C MARY C KROO STEVEN 11860 SW 72ND AVE 11930 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 36DC- 0 1S136DC-04402 POLL DONALD E 4 HEDGEPETH LOUISE AGNES 1 SW 58 202 11990 SW 72ND AVENUE ORTLAND,OR 221 TIGARD,OR 97223 136DC-04 1 S136DC-04600 W M INC A COMMERCIAL NET LEASE REALTY INC 3336 D ST#217 455 S ORANGE AVE STE 700 SA,OK 135 ORLANDO,FL 32802 .2S101AB-00100 ,y 2S101BA-00100 POLLOCK DONALD E/JULIA GAIL MARTIN GORDON R 1834 SW 58TH#202 12265 SW 72ND AVE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 Aug-27-99 11 : 53A 503 222-4053 P.06 2S 101 S101BA-00300 MARTIN GOR ET AL MA 1211 GORD HARD 12265 S ND AV PO BO T D,OR 97223 NEDEN BEACH, 97388 '.1 1 i vI IIVHI\V o COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT TEAM CIT SUBCOMMITTEES a:. JAW 02, ...: �. � ..,u....ti_ _ s Ed & Fran Egan Naomi Gallucci Sally Christensen 14635 SW Bull Mountain Roa• 11285 SW 78th Avenue Debra Seeman Tigard, OR 97224 15685 SW 76'h Avenue 13372 SW Clearview Way Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 N Earl & Marilyn Elias Sue Rorman Mary Ann Melvin o 13540 SW Village Glenn D ive 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Mary Skelton Tigard, OR 97223 10395 SW Bonanza Way 10355 SW Walnut I g Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 N o Craig Minor 14210 SW Windsong Court Stephen Bicker p Tigard, OR 97223 14235 SW 97"'Avenue o Tigard, OR 97224 Paul E. Owen Mark Bogert 10335 SW Highland Drive ' 14445 SW 100'" Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Beverly Froude Twyla Brady 12200 SW Bull Mountain Road . 9360 SW Edgewood Street Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Craig Smelter Debra Muir 14900 SW 103' Avenue 15065 SW 79'"Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 an Best Sue Siebold 10705 SW Murdock Ln, #F2 15374 SW Thurston Lane Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 1, Kathy Palmer Tim Esav M do John Tigard House PO Box 230695 N 14260 SW High Tor Dr. Tigard, OR 97281 LTigard, OR 97224 i _-------.-- _— _— cn cP PLEASE NOTE: — — -- N In addition to all property owners within 500 feet of the subject site, notice of meetings on land use proposals shall be sent to all names o �, P P on this list. .] I:kurotromatter5vevicernritnOtlr.m<r Q A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Mc' ` PRINCIPALS: ROBERT S.MORELAND MGRIGSBY S.CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL J.MYLES LOY K.RUSCH November 4, 1999 REMBOLD TIGARD TRIANGLE ADJUSTMENT TYPE I APPLICATION Supporting Documentation Submitted: November 1, 1999 REQUEST: This proposal is a request for an Development Adjustment as defined in the Tigard Zoning Ordinance, Section 18.370.020, Bla, Front Yard Setback. PROPOSAL:The proposed project is the construction of a three building retail complex on property zoned C-G PD. The property is overlain by the Tigard Triangle Design Guidelines. The Guidelines call for a minimum setback of zero and a maximum setback of 10' along the SW 72nd St. frontage. This requested adjustment is for the building located at the southeast corner of the subject site indicated as Bulding A. The original submittal called for the building to be setback 8' from the easterly property line. The original submittal also proposed a building with a sloping roof where the lower edge of the slope was oriented to the street and the roof sloped up and into the site. This design was the result of the applicants efforts to meet the Tigard Triangle Design Guidelines for placement of the building as close to the street as possible. It was also an effort to meet the deed mandated CCR's that required that the building not obscure the current "Winco Foods" sign located at the southeast corner of the subject site. The proposed building is set substantially below the adjacent street level due to the grade change between the site and SW 72nd A preliminary analysis by the planning staff indicated that this design did not meet the intent of the Tigard Triangle Design Guidelines that buildings address the street through the placement of windows and that street facades utilize variation in the elevations to create visual interest. Simultaneously, while the review was underway, the applicant was studying the impacts of the grade change between 72nd and the site in terms of the geotechnical impacts of the slope and the existing site retaining wall. The subsequent recommendation from the structural engineers is that the new building not be located directly in line with the existing retaining wall. Their analysis indicates we need to maintain a minimum distance of 3' from the inside face of the retaining wall to the outside face of our exterior wall. This location results in the building being setback 11'- 6" from the property line which is 1'-6" further than allowed by the Design Guidelines. Therefore we are requesting an adjustment of 1'-6" to the setback requirements under the provisions of Section 18.370.020, Bla, Front Yard Setback. This provision allows for the granting of a setback adjustment so long as it does not exceed the required distance by more than 25%. In this case the maximum setback of 10' could be increased by up to 2'-6" under the provisions of this section. Concurrent with the requested setback adjustment we have redesigned the building to create a flat roofed building with a step 1!177 Cru ITHWFCT CAI IA(1N CTPFFT CI IITF ZSf1 • Pf1PT1 ANf1 f1PFf:f1N Q77f15.9447 I MA • TFI FPN(11JF col 777 5757 • FAY 5112 741 IF 1 e 1 PAGE 2 in the east elevation. The step allows us to place the building as close to the existing retaining wall as the engineers will allow and, at the same time to maintain visibility of the Winco Foods sign as required by the CCR's. Therefore the request is for the granting of an increase in the front yard setback at SW 72' to 11'-6". APPROVAL CRITERIA 18.370.020,2 a. A Demonstration that the adjustment requested is the least required to achieve the desired affect: The proposed design places the building 3' off of the face of the existing retaining wall. This is the distance our engineers have recommended in order to maintain the integrity of the existing retaining wall and the soil behind it. Currently the retaining wall terminates at a point approximately 1' below the soil line. This means that as we excavate to the floor level of the proposed building, a potion of unexcavated soil will be left several feet below the bottom of the wall. The concern is that if the new wall is any closer to the existing wall the risk of substantial movement of the soil behind and below the wall is too great. Our engineers have recommended several actions that must take place to minimize the risks of adverse soil movement while the new wall is under construction. Their concerns about the location of the wall and the recommendations for reduction of the risks are contained in a separate memo from Greg Sherer with VLMK Engineers attached to this document. The proposed adjustment has been used as an opportunity to develop additional variation in the east wall of the building consistent with the requirements of the Tigard Triangle Design Guidelines. We have provided steps in plan and elevation of the east wall. Additionally in the high wall above the step the materials have been changed from concrete masonry to stucco divided into a series of panels by metal pilasters. Within the stucco panels a series of glass faced poster boxes have been proposed. Currently this building is planned to be occupied by Hollywood Video. They would use these poster boxes to display a changing series of movie posters. Should Hollywood not become the tenant the poster boxes will be used for graphic display either of an abstract nature or directly related to the services provided within. They will not be used for direct tenant signage. In summary we believe this adjustment is the least required to maintain the structural integrity of the existing retaining wall as well as the integrity of the soil behind the wall. The Adjustment is also the least required to maintain the required visibility of the Winco sign per the CCR's. PAGE 3 c. The adjustment will not impede adequate emergency access to the site. All site access points to and internal circulation within the site will be unaffected by the proposed adjustment. d. There is not a reasonable alternative to the adjustment which achieve the desired affect. The only alternative to the requested adjustment is to remove the existing retaining wall completely and replace it with a new engineered wall. However since the existing wall was constructed concurrent with the excavation of the site and the construction of the improved 7Td roadway there was, at that time, no risk of soil movement. If the wall were removed today there would be a substantial risk of movement of the retained soil and possible damage to the road. Therefore we believe this is the only prudent and safe option for achieving the desired affect. END OF SUBMITTED TEXT IYV V 0'4 '77 11• . 1 1•; VL Consulting Engineers - _— 3933 —.J KELLY AVENUE, PORTLAND, OREGON 201-4393 _:; •_ ____-. __._ _ (503) 222-4453/FAX (503) 248-9263 JOB MEMORANDUM DATE: November 4, 1999 TO: Doug Benson/MCM Architects FROM: Greg Scherer/VLMK RE: Rembold Tigard Triangle-Building "A" Back Wall at Existing Retaining Wall PAGES: 1 Total This memorandum is in regard to the location of the proposed building"A"back wall in relation to the existing Keystone retaining wall. We recommend that the new building wall be located as far from the existing retaining wall as possible. A separation of eight feet would have minimum affect to the retaining wall (although temporary shoring would still be required). However,we understand that this distance exceeds zoning allowances for the Tigard Triangle. Apparently, a separation of three feet can meet zoning requirements if a variance is granted. Locating the new wall this close to the Keystone wall will be difficult and could potentially affect the stability of the existing wall. The geotechnical engineer of record, AGRA Earth and Environmental, has advised that several items be taken into account: 1. Temporary shoring will be required and will be at least eight feet high at the south end. It will need to be engineered since the stability of the Keystone wall is a concern. 2. The existing Keystone retaining wall will need to be monitored before, during, and after the installation and removal of the temporary shoring. A determination will need to be made as to how much movement the retaining wall can tolerate. This is dependent on the design of the wall -which as of now has not been determined. 3. The new back wall of building"A" will need to be designed as a retaining wall that can support not only the retained soil behind it,but also the surcharge of the Keystone retaining wall. In summary, locating the new back wall of building "A" with a three foot separation from the existing Keystone retaining wall is feasible. However, the design and construction of it will be difficult and will require careful consideration so as to avoid any consequence to the existing Keystone wall. cc. Marcy Boyer, AGRA Earth and Environmental C:\ODocs\RT A-Rw-mcmo.doc S E P 1 0 1 d By Submittal For REMBOLD - TIGARD TRIANGLE PROJECT SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TYPE II APPLICATION Supplemental Application Material Prepared By MC M. I IO22 SW SALMON•SUITE!SO rnnrLA'O'OR OOO5-`aa� Sa •hA[X01��1 Submittal For SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TYPE II APPLICATION TABLE OF CONTENTS I. BASIC INFORMATION • Proposal Summary • Demonstration of Compliance with Applicable Standards II. TITLE TRANSFER III. CC & R's IV. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING EVIDENCE V. IMPACT STUDY VI. PRE-APPLICATION NOTES Submittal For SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TYPE II APPLICATION BASIC INFORMATION Rembold-Tigard Triangle LAND USE APPLICATION August 5, 1999 BASIC INFORMATION A. Application Provided as an attachment to this document. B. Title Transfer Instrument or Grant Deed Provided as an attachment to this document. C. CC & R's Provided as an attachment to this document. The attached CC & R's have been recently amended to reflect the project design presented herein and are in the process of being adopted and recorded by the underlying property owners of all affected parcels within the development. D. Proposal Summary This project proposes the construction of three new retail buildings on a 3.15 acre site referred to as Parcel C of the Winco Foods site bounded by SW 72nd and SW Dartmouth Street. Parcel's A and B were previously developed as part of a master site plan reviewed and approved by the City of Tigard for the construction of the Winco and Petsmart buildings and modified for the construction of the Office Max store. In the review and approval process for the master site plan, Parcel C was originally designated to be developed as 41,000 sf of general retail space. It should also be noted that Parcel C is zoned as C-G for the northern half and C-G PD for the southern half. The boundaries of Parcel A extend all the way to SW 72' and surround Parcel C. This approved and recorded configuration creates a condition where Parcel C does not have direct street frontage nor does it have a condition where street frontage landscaping would be required. However access is guaranteed by easements that are governed by the CC &R's that are in place and agreed to be all adjacent property owners. This submittal proposes a total of 37,000 sf of new construction (less than originally approved) of which 10,000 sf is to be a partially covered outdoor retail sales area. Building A is a single story, 7,000 sf retail building that is intended for either single or multiple tenants ( 2-3 tenants ). This building is located directly adjacent to the site entry from SW 72nd and is placed as close to the street as is possible, given the extreme slope, in accordance with the recommendations of the Tigard Triangle Design Guidelines. Building B (including the outdoor retail sales area) is intended to provide indoor and outdoor sales area for an upscale nursery and garden supply store. Building B is 5,000 sf and the outdoor sales area provides an additional 10,000 sf of partially covered area. The building is organized around a series of outdoor spaces that are part sales area and part garden courtyard. It is intended that the building, the courtyard and the covered sales area work together to create a visual point of interest when viewed from above on 72nd in accordance with the Tigard Triangle Design Guidelines. Building C is a 15,000 sf single story general retail structure. Buildings B, C and the outdoor sales area, are located on the graded pad originally intended for the retail structures proposed under the previous master site plan. The existing parking has been maintained as originally constructed except where it has been modified to create a pad for the proposed Building A and where it is being restriped to adjust the ratio of compact spaces in accordance with the zoning code allowances . All other site entries, parking lots and circulation remain as originally approved and constructed. All existing parking lot landscaping has been maintained except where modified to create the new building pad. All impacted parking landscaping has been replaced and some additional landscaping, in the form of islands at the ends of parking bays, has been added. The eastern boundary of the site was previously graded to create a landscaped slope that varies in height and reconciles the grade difference between SW 72 and the finish grade of the building pads and parking areas. This steeply graded slope prevents the construction of buildings directly adjacent to the property line. It also results in buildings that are substantially below the elevation of the adjacent street. Modifications to this slope as a part of this proposal is limited to the addition of two parallel retaining walls that allow the landscaped slope to be terraced to allow additional and varied plantings. A Pre-Application Conference for the proposed project was held on May 20, 1999. Following the Pre-App a notice of neighborhood meeting was mailed on June 21, 1999 to all property owners within 500' of the subject site as well as to the list of CIT members. The site was posted with the sign provided by the City on June 23, 1999. The meeting was held on July 7, 1999 at 7:00 pm in the Town Hall Room of the Tigard City Hall. The neighbors in attendance expressed their support for the project as presented. Copies of the City's Pre-Application Conference notes, the notarized Affidavit of Mailing (with the mailing list), the notarized Affidavit of Posting and the City of Tigard Room Application form are included in this submittal. We have also included a copy of MCM's notes from the neighborhood meeting. E. Demonstration of Compliance with the Applicable Provisions of the Tigard Community Development Code This narrative has been prepared to address all of the applicable approval criteria as established by the relevant code chapters of the Tigard Zoning Ordinance. The chapters cited in the Pre-application meeting notes are as follows: 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795& 18.800 Additional chapters have been referenced as necessary to provide a complete response to the project approval issues. COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT This project is proposed for property that is currently zoned C-G and C-G PD. The proposed uses are General Retail sales space. General Retail uses are a permitted use as defined in Table 18.520.1 At this time the specific tenants have not been determined however, it is understood that any tenants proposed for this site will need to meet the criteria for the C-G zone as set forth in Table 18.520.1. The development standards for the C-G zone and the corresponding response are as follows: STANDARD C—G ZONE PROVIDED Minimum Lot Size None N/A Minimum Lot Width 50' 200' Front Yard Setback 0' (6) 8' Side Yard Setback 0/20' (3) _20' (south side) Rear Yard Setback 0/20' (3) 0' Maximum Height 45' 31' _ Maximum Site Coverage 85% 80% (2) Minimum Landscape 15% 20% Req. (2)Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces (3) No setback shall be required except that 20 ' shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. (6) There shall be no minimum front yard setback requirement. However, conditions in Chapters 18.745 and 18.795 must be met. F. TIGARD TRIANGLE DESIGN STANDARDS F. Street Connectivity This project is on the only remaining parcel of the Winco Shopping Center site. All adjacent streets, site entries and connections were improved as a part of the earlier project. No modifications to the previously developed connections are anticipated by this proposal. 18.620.80 Site Design Standards The previously approved site plan for this project called for all buildings on this parcel of the shopping center to be located in line with the Winco and Petsmart stores that are already in place. The layout follows the traditional suburban model that places buildings towards the rear of the site with parking lots located in front for maximum visibility. Towards this goal all of the parking for the previously constructed buildings and for this parcel is already in place. The pad designed for the development of this parcel has been graded and underground drainage has been installed in anticipation of future development. In addition the site topography from SW 72nd to this parcel drops very dramatically. The elevation difference between the developable building pad and SW 72nd varies from a low of 15' vertical change to a high of 24'. Accordingly many of the standards for building placement are unachievable on this site. In an effort to respond to the spirit of the standards the project proposes two deviations form the design anticipated by the original shopping center layout. 18.620.030-Al Building Placement First, the easterly building at the rear of the project is proposed as a significantly different building type than typically seen in this type of center. It is intended to provide space for an upscale garden center that is designed to offer homeowners a combination of landscape materials together with garden accessories for year round gardening. While the building is located well below the street level due to the topography, its character, the outdoor courtyard proposed along the easterly edge and the partially covered outdoor sales contribute to the creation of a visually interesting and lively environment for passing pedestrians and motorists. Second, we are altering the plan originally intended for this site by placing a portion of our developable area outside the inline orientation of the other stores at the rear of the property. A 7,000 sf building is proposed to be located directly adjacent to the site entry off of SW 72nd. This building has been placed as close to the street as possible and is intended to work with the existing Office Max store to frame and define the entry to the site. Here again the topography does not allow for the development of any storefront conditions along SW 72nd. This placement is consistent with those shown in Diagram 1 of Section 18.620.030 - A.1 on building placement. Together this building and the garden center occupy 50% of the frontage allowing us to meet the intent the standard for building placement along Major and Minor Arterials. 18.620.030-A2 Building Setback Building setbacks vary according to the site conditions. Building A is placed 8' back from the property line along the SW 72nd frontage per the standards of 18.620.030 -A2 Building B is placed approximately 38' west of the property line because of the steep topography of that portion of the site. Building C is located west of Building B and is therefore considered to be a part of the Building B setback response. 18.620.030-A3 Front Yard Setback Design Landscaping is provided between both Buildings A & B and the SW 72nd street frontage. This landscape already exists in compliance with the previous approval given for this site. 18.620.030-A4 Walkway Connection to Building Entrances Currently an ADA compliant sidewalk extends from the Winco/Petsmart stores directly to SW Dartmouth Street. This walk will be directly connected to Buildings B & C via the 10' wide sidewalk that fronts the buildings. Additionally we propose to connect the site directly to SW 72nd by constructing a stair from the aforementioned sidewalk up to SW 72nd. Building A will connect to SW 72nd via an existing sidewalk adjacent to the entry to the site from SW 72nd 18.620.030-A5 Parking Location and Landscape Design As previously noted the parking for this parcel is already in place having been approved and constructed as a part of the development of the adjacent parcels. Based on the proposed placement of Buildings A & B the project meets the intent of this requirement and is limited to 50% of the street frontage along SW 72nd The landscaping at this point has been designed to meet the referenced Tigard Triangle Design Standards. J. Building Design Standards 18.620.040-Al Ground Floor Windows The grade difference between SW 72nd and the property preclude meeting this requirement. However, the design of Building B has, through its placement on the site and the development of an outdoor courtyard along its east elevation with corresponding windows and openings, addressed the spirit of this requirement. The extreme grade difference will result in limited visibility of these openings. 18.620.040-A2 Building Facades 18.620.040-A3 Weather Protection As noted earlier in this document, the grade difference between the site and SW 72' creates a unique circumstance that precludes meeting these requirements. However canopies have been provided at all of the proposed buildings to shelter both entries and general storefront windows. 18.620.040-A4 Building Materials A variety of compatible building materials have been utilized create a visually interesting and varied center. Building A Building A is to be constructed of Ground Faced Concrete Masonry. This material is best described as concrete blocks that have been ground smooth on their face to reveal the inner surfaces of the aggregates. Unlike most concrete block the ground faced block as a natural stone like quality due to the exposed aggregate and the way in which it catches and reflects light. The roof of this building is standing seam, integrally colored metal. Canopies are provided over all entries and storefront windows. The canopies are a combination of painted steel frames and canvas infill. Building B Building B will be the first local location of a new startup company. The forms and materials chosen are intended to suggest regional forms coupled with industrial materials arranged in a sophisticated,upscale way. References to other popular retailers that are appropriate include Smith & Hawken, Pottery Barn and the new Nature's store in Lake Oswego. Each of the elements of the composition is clad in a different material suggestive of a village that has evolved over time to its present state. The front piece is to be painted horizontal wood siding. The second pavilion is clad in vertical corrugated metal like Nature's while the pavilion at the back is painted stucco. The covered plant sales areas to the rear will be created through the use of pre-fabricated greenhouse sections. Building C Building C will be constructed of painted tilt-up concrete panels and integrally colored ground face concrete block. As with Building A, a steel canopy will be provided over all doors and windows for the protection of pedestrians. 18.620.040-A5 Roofs and Roof Lines The roofs of Building's B & C will be flat with the roof level dropped below the parapet in order to provide screening for the rooftop mounted HVAC equipment. 18.620.040-A6 Roof Mounted Equipment Rooftop equipment will be screened as shown on the drawings included with this submittal. 18.620.050 Signs At this time no specific tenants have been identified. Once the tenants have signed leases they will be required to prepare and submit sign drawings to the City of Tigard for review and approval as a part of their tenant improvement package. All signs will be required to meet the City of Tigard Sign Standards. G. Entry Portal Not applicable 18.620.070 Landscaping and Screening Landscaping of the perimeter of the site along the 72"d Ave. frontage was provided as a part of the original site development approvals and is a part of land that is under Parcel A's ownership. Parcel C does not have any direct frontage on the adjacent streets. Landscaping within the site is shown on the Site Development Plan included with this submittal. 18.620.81 Street and Accessway Standards All serving streets and accessways for this project are already in place. No modification to the existing conditions is anticipated by this project. End of Response to Zoning Requirements F. Stamped &Addressed Envelopes The required envelopes are included as a separate attachment to this document. G. Neighborhood Meeting Evidence The following documents are attached as evidence of the neighborhood meeting: • Letter to neighbors and designated members of the CIT for this project • Affidavit of Mailing(copy) • Affidavit of Posting(copy) • Neighborhood Meeting Notes prepared by MCM Architects H. Impact Study A Traffic Impact Study was prepared at the time the original site development took place. That study included this parcel within the study boundaries. In addition the study assumed a build-out on this parcel of 41,000sf. Kittleson and Associates completed the study. The current design proposes 37,000 sf, which is less that originally anticipated. At the proposer's request Kittleson has reviewed their notes from the original study and prepared a letter identifying their conclusions regarding this proposal. It is included as a part of this submittal. Subsequent to Kittleson's review the property seller's (Waremart, Inc.) planning consultant, Gordon Davis discussed this issue with the City of Tigard Planning Director, Dick Biersdorf and he agreed that the letter included in this submittal would be adequate to support the determination that no additional Impact Study is required. I. Pre-Application Notes A copy of the Pre-Application conference notes prepared by the City of Tigard has been included in this submittal. K. Filing Fee The Filing Fee is included under separate cover. It has been calculated based on the following Construction Cost Estimate: Building A: 7,000 sf @$40/sf= $280,000 Building B: 15,000 sf @$37/sf= $555,000 Building C: 15,000 sf @$38/sf= $570,000 Total Construction Cost Estimate: $1,405,000 Site development costs are minimal since all roads, drives and parking already exist. The per square foot costs include all remaining site development costs. Based on this total we have calculated the Filing Fee as follows: Base Fee: $1,780.00 Supplemental Fee : $1,405,000 / 10,000 x$5.00 $ 702.50 Total Filing Fee $2,482.50 K. Plans Required The following describes each of the required submittal drawings and notes any cases where required information has been omitted due to its inapplicability. In those case we have provided an explanation as to why we believe the information is not required. Vicinity Map This map is provided as a part of our cover sheet. Existing Conditions Map The site survey prepared by Alpha Engineering is included as the designated Existing Conditions Map. In addition the following exceptions are noted: • No site gross area indicated as this is a continued build-out of master parcel. • No natural hazard areas indicated as they are not present at site. • No resource areas, or wetlands indicated on current proposal as these features are located at the northern end of the master property. Site Development Plan The Site Development Plan is provided as drawing A200 and includes the required information with the following exceptions. All entrances, exits, parking and circulation are indicated, however dimensional information is not provided as these elements are existing and are not to be modified as a part of this project. In addition all site lighting is already in place as the result of earlier construction at the shopping center. No modifications of these lights are anticipated. Additional lights have been provided on the new buildings and are indicated on the building elevation drawings. Landscape Plan The Landscape Plan requirement has been addressed as a part of the Site Development Plan. The majority of the landscaping is already in place as a part of the earlier improvements to the site. Where new landscaping is being provided it is to supplement the existing and is intended to match the species of plants and trees that are already in place. Public Improvements/Streets Plan The location and width of existing rights-of-way are shown on the Site Development Plan. No Public Improvements / Streets Plan is provided as a part of this submittal. Grading/Erosion Control Plan The following exceptions are noted: • Limits of grading not specifically indicated as all construction is generally taking place within limits of existing hardscape. Any grading that occurs as a result of this project will be limited in scope to allow proposed grades to match existing hardsurfaces. Utilities Plan The following exceptions are noted: • No area of inundation or storm water overflow known. • No watercourses or drainageways are present within the limits of this proposal. • No proposed water quality / detention facilities as a regional facility currently exists for the global development. Utility Systems—General All new utility systems proposed for this project will connect to existing infrastructure provided within the Win Co. development,except for domestic water service to proposed Building "A". Storm System The current proposed development under this application will discharge all storm drainage into existing piped systems that ultimately outfall into the detention/water quality ponds at the north end of the project. Storm water from Building "A" will be discharged into the western storm system, while Buildings "B" and "C" will discharge into a 12-inch stub-out on the eastern side of the project. This pond system was originally developed to handle detention and treatment of all future runoff from the ultimate build-out of Retail "C",which is currently designated as proposed Buildings "B" and "C". Actual square footage of these two buildings will be 30,000 square feet, or approximately 8,427 square feet less than originally designed for. The area of Building "A" is currently being treated as this location is asphalt at this time. As the original development was initially designed to handle future development, and the proposed development is nearly 8,427 feet less than anticipated,this project has not proposed to provide separate detention and water quality treatment systems. Domestic Water System Buildings "B" and "C" will be served off of a 2-inch domestic water main running along the eastern side of the property behind the buildings. Building "A" is proposed to be have service from an existing 12-inch water main in SW 72nd Avenue. Sanitary Sewer System Buildings "B" and "C" will connect into an existing 6-inch stub-out near the southwestern corner of the Petsmart building. Building "A" will install a 4-inch service lateral towards the existing 6-inch sewer that will serve Buildings "B" and "C". Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan No Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan is provided with this submittal since the storm drainage will be connected to an existing system already in place from the earlier development. As stated elsewhere this existing system was sized to accommodate this anticipated development. The connections for the Storm Drainage are shown on the Utilities Plan described above. Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan All existing trees on the site are to remain. Existing trees consist solely of those planted at the time the center was developed. They are all to be retained. Architectural Drawings Floor plans and elevations of each building are included as a part of this submittal. Sign Drawings The proposed project is intended to provide retail lease space for as yet undefined tenants. General site signage identifying the center is already in place as a part of the Winco / Petsmart development. The only signage to be provided as a part of this development would be to identify the individual tenants and would be placed directly on the buildings. Since specific tenants have not been designated at this time no sign drawings are included in this submittal. We understand that at such time as the tenants are determined they will be required to submit detailed sign drawings, in compliance with the City of Tigard Sign Standards for review and approval prior to installing the signs. Submittal For SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TYPE II APPLICATION TITLE TRANSFER FIRST AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (the "Amendment") is made and entered into as of this JO day of July, 1999, by and between WAREMART, INC., an Idaho corporation ("Seller") and REMBOLD PROPERTIES LLC, an Oregon limited liability company and its assigns, conditioned upon compliance with Section 11.2 of the Agreement("Purchaser"). PRELIMINARY STATEMENT This Amendment is made with reference to the following facts and objectives: A. Seller and Purchaser entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement dated as of March 15, 1999 (the "Agreement"). B. Seller and Purchaser desire to modify certain terms of the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged,the parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions. Except as otherwise provided herein, all definitions and terms used in the Agreement shall have the same meaning in this Amendment. 2. Amendment of Section 4.7. Section 4.7 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: Bonds, Taxes and Assessments. Subject to the prorations set forth in Section 4.6, any and all bonds, real property taxes, special taxes, improvement taxes, and/or assessments which are a lien on the Property and which are Permitted Exceptions shall, at closing, be assumed by Buyer without reduction of or adjustment to the Purchase Price or any recourse to Seller. Notwithstanding anything else herein to the contrary, Buyer shall be exclusively responsible for, and shall pay when due, the assessments of the Dartmouth Street Local Improvement District #40 resulting from the initial construction of Dartmouth Road (the "Assessments"). Although Buyer is exclusively responsible for the Assessments, Seller may, but need not, pay the Assessments prior to Closing. If Seller elects to pay the Assessments prior to Closing then at Closing Buyer shall reimburse Seller the amount Seller remitted to pay the Assessments. The parties acknowledge and agree that a party has challenged the method of calculating the assessments for the cost of the initial construction of Dartmouth Road. Buyer may, at its election and at its own expense,participate in any such challenge. FIRST AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT- 1 C 3. Restatement of Agreement. The Agreement, as modified by this Amendment, shall remain in full force and effect, and shall be binding upon Seller and Purchaser according to its terms. The Agreement shall be construed,to the extent possible, so as to be consistent with this Amendment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to be executed as of the day and year first above written. WAREMART, INC.,an Idaho corporation ✓ . By / C 4-3 �-c-a- Its C REMBOLD PROPERTIES LLC, an Oregon limited liability company . , Its _ BOISE:0107689.01 i PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT This PURCHASE AND SALE IGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made effective as of the S day of 7J947^a4..- , 1999 by and'between WAREMART, INC., an Idaho Corporation, ("Seller"), and REMBOLD PROPERTIES LLC, an Oregon limited liability company and its assigns, conditioned upon compliance with Section 11.2 ("Buyer"). RECITALS This Agreement is made with reference to the following facts and objectives: A. S ler is the owner of approximately 3.15 acres of real property located in Tigard, Oregon (tax lot 2 4) which is more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and, by this reference, incorpora- d herein and set forth in full (the"Property"). B. Seller is willing to sell the Property to Buyer, and Buyer is willing to buy the Property from Seller under the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, and in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual promises set forth in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: 1. SALE OF PROPERTY. The Seller agrees to sell, and the Buyer agrees to purchase, pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement, the Property and all of the Seller's right, title, and interest in and to the Property. 2. PURCHASE PRICE. - 2.1 Purchase Price. The purchase price for the Property shall be calculated by multiplying $17.78 by the square footage of the Property (the "Purchase Price"). The Purchase Price is estimated to be $2,436,357.84 based on an assumed useable square footage of 137,028 square feet. The exact useable square footage of the Property shall be established by Alpha Engineering, Inc., which shall provide the parties with a certification of the number of useable square feet in the Property. If Alpha Engineering, Inc., determines that the Property consists of more or less than the assumed useable square footage, the Purchase Price shall be adjusted accordingly based on $17.78 per square foot. The term "useable square feet" shall mean the actual square footage of the Property, minus any square footage required as a street dedication or other dedication by the City of Tigard or any other governmental agency as a condition of development of the Property. 2.2 Deposit. The Buyer shall make the following deposit which shall be applicable to the Purchase Price: 2.2.1 Initial Deposit. Within five (5) business days after the date both parties execute this Agreement (the "Execution Date"), Buyer shall deposit into escrow with Chicago Title Insurance Company of Oregon, 888 S.W. Fifth Avenue, No. 930, Portland, Oregon 97204 (the "Escrow Agent") a note in the amount of Twenty-Five Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($25,000.00) (the "Initial Deposit"), which note shall-be converted to cash within-five (-5) days--after the--end of the Evaluation—Period - (defined below) if this Agreement is not terminated. The Deposit (defined below) shall be applied to the Purchase Price. PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT- 1 2.2.2 Investment of Deposits, Etc. The Initial Deposit and all interest earned thereon shall be referred to in this Agreement as the "Deposit." Buyer shall pay the Initial Deposit to the Escrow Agent by cashiers or official bank check or a wire transfer of funds for immediate credit. The Deposit shall be held by the Escrow Agent in an FDIC insured interest-bearing account at a bank, savings and loans association or other financial institution mutually acceptable to the parties. Interest shall be retained in the account and will accrue for the benefit of, and be credited to, the party entitled to receive (or have credited) the Deposit at Closing or upon termination of this Agreement pursuant to its terms. 3. TITLE TO THE PROPERTY. 3.1 Quality of Title. At closing, Seller shall convey to Buyer good and marketable title to the Property free and clear of all liens, restrictions and other encumbrances and title exceptions, except for those determined in accordance with Section 3.2. Title shall be insured by an ALTA Standard Coverage Owner's Policy of Title Insurance issued by Chicago Title Insurance Company (the "Title Company") in the full amount of the Purchase Price insuring fee simple title to the Property in Buyer, subject only to the exceptions determined in accordance with Section 3.2. Buyer shall have the right to require an ALTA Extended Coverage Owner's Policy of Title Insurance and additional endorsements to the Title Policy. If Buyer elects to require an Extended Coverage Policy and/or additional endorsements to the Title Policy, Buyer shall pay for the increased amount of the premium attributable to the Extended Coverage Policy and for the costs of any additional endorsements requested by it. Neither the close of escrow nor the period for Buyer's due diligence review of the Property shall be extended as a result of Buyer electing to receive endorsements to the Title Policy beyond the extended coverage endorsements contained in an extended coverage policy of title insurance. • 3.2 Title Report. Within ten (10) days after the Execution Date, Seller shall obtain and furnish to Buyer a preliminary title report issued by the Title Company (the "Title Report"), together with copies of the documents and instruments upon which the exceptions contained therein are based. Within fourteen (14) days after receipt by Buyer of the Title Report and the underlying documents and instruments (the "Title Contingency Date"), Buyer shall deliver written notice to Seller ("Buyer's Title Notice") of all matters of title to the Property disapproved by Buyer (the "Disapproved Items"). Buyer's failure to deliver Buyer's Title Notice by the Title Contingency Date shall be deemed to be Buyer's approval of all existing title matters except for Seller's Monetary Liens, defined below. If Buyer timely notifies Seller of Disapproved Items, Seller shall notify Buyer if Seller shall remove said Disapproved Items within fourteen (14) days after Seller receives Buyer's Title Notice, in which case, Seller shall have until the Closing Date to remove such Disapproved Items (except for Seller's Monetary Liens as defined below, which liens shall be removed by Seller on or before the Closing Date). If Seller refuses to remove any such Disapproved Item, then Buyer may either terminate this Agreement within ten (10) days thereafter by giving Seller written notice of termination, or elect, at Buyer's sole option, to purchase the Property subject to the Disapproved Items which Seller refuses to remove. In the event of termination by Buyer: (a) Buyer and Seller shall execute and deliver to the Escrow Agent escrow cancellation instructions; (b)the Deposit (less one-half of the escrow cancellation fee) and all other amounts paid by Buyer to the Escrow Agent, together with all interest thereon, shall be returned to Buyer; and (c) except as otherwise provided herein, this Agreement shall be of no further force or effect. The term "Seller's Monetary Liens" shall mean and refer to any mortgages or deeds of trust or similar instruments recorded against the Property, mechanics liens recorded against the Property (except for such liens caused or permitted by Buyer) and liens for real property taxes and assessments which would be delinquent at the Closing Date. Any items which are not Disapproved Items or Seller's Monetary Liens and any Disapproved Items which Seller has refused to remove shall be "Permitted Exceptions." Seller shall deed the Property to Buyer at closing subject only to the Permitted Exceptions. } PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT - 2 } 3.3 Survey. Seller shall within ten (10) days after the Effective Date deliver to Buyer the most current ALTA survey in Seller's possession. Buyer may, at its election and its sole cost and expense, obtain an updated or new ALTA survey of the Property. 4. CLOSING. As used in this Agreement, the term "Closing" shall mean the consummation of the conveyance of the Property to Buyer and the payment of the Purchase Price to Seller as provided in this Agreement. The "Closing Date" shall be on the date the Deed (defined in Section 4.2) is recorded in the official property records of Washington County, Oregon, and shall occur on a date selected by Buyer which is not less than thirty (30) days after each of the conditions precedent set forth in Section 5.1 have been either satisfied or waived by Buyer. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, Buyer shall provide Seller with not less than ten (10) business days written notice of the Closing Date. The sale contemplated by this Agreement shall be consummated as follows: 4.1 Title Transfer - Form of Deed. Seller shall convey to Buyer fee simple title to the Property by delivery of a statutory special warranty deed (the "Deed"), in a form reasonably acceptable to Buyer and subject only to the permitted Exceptions. 4.2 Seller's Instruments. Seller shall cause to be deposited with the Escrow Agent, prior to Closing, for recordation and delivery to Buyer upon the Closing, the following items: 4.2.1 Deed. The Deed in recordable form duly executed and acknowledged by the Seller and effective to convey to the Buyer title to the Property as provided for in this Agreement. 4.2.2 Non-Foreign Status Certificate. The Non-Foreign Status Certificate pursuant to Internal Revenue Code § 1445 duly executed by Seller in a form reasonably acceptable to Buyer. 4.2.3 Additional Documents. Such additional documents as may be reasonably required by the Escrow Agent to consummate the Closing in accordance with this Agreement. 4.3 Buyer's Payment and Documents. 4.3.1 Payment. On or prior to the Closing Date Buyer shall deposit with the Escrow Agent, for payment to the Seller upon the Closing, the balance of the Purchase Price and an amount equal to the Buyer's costs as set forth in Section 4.5. The Deposit shall be applicable to the Purchase Price. The amount to be paid by Buyer at the Closing shall be set forth in the approved Buyer's closing statement prepared by the Escrow Agent. 4.3.2 Documents. Such documents as may be reasonably required by the Escrow Agent to consummate the Closing in accordance with this Agreement. 4.4 Seller's Costs. The Seller shall, before or simultaneously with the Closing, pay the following costs: the premium expense associated with the issuance of the ALTA Standard Coverage Owner's Policy of Title as provided in Section 3.1, with a liability amount equal to the Purchase Price; all sales, excise, documentary, real estate conveyance, and transfer taxes applicable to the sale which are imposed by any governmental authority; one-half of the Escrow Agent's fees; one-half of the costs of recording all documents and instruments (other than those pertaining to financing, if any, obtained by Buyer) to be recorded at the Closing; fees and expenses of Seller's counsel, if any, and the Broker's Commission, as defined herein. 4.5 Buyer's Costs. The Buyer shall, before or simultaneously with the Closing pay the following costs: the cost of any endorsements to the Title Policy requested by it; the additional PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT- 3 premium attributable to an extended coverage title insurance policy, if requested by it; one-half of the Escrow Agent's fees; one-half of the costs of recording all documents and instruments to be recorded at the Closing; all costs of recording documents and instruments pertaining to financing, if any, obtained by Buyer; and all fees and expenses of Buyer's counsel. 4.6 Prorations, Adjustments. All real property taxes shall be prorated and adjusted between the parties as of the Closing Date. All CAM charges shall be prorated and adjusted between the parties on the Closing Date. Seller and Buyer hereby agree that any of the aforesaid prorations and adjustments which cannot be calculated accurately as of the Closing Date shall be prorated on the basis of the parties' reasonable estimates, and shall be recomputed sixty (60) days after the Closing and either party owing the other party a sum of money based upon such subsequent proration adjustment shall promptly pay such sum to the other party and, if payment is not made within ten (10) days after delivery of the bill therefor, shall pay interest thereon at the rate of eight per cent (8%) per annum from the Closing Date to the date of payment. Buyer acknowledges that the tax value of the Property may be reassessed upon the change of ownership, and that a supplemental tax bill may be issued. If a supple- mental tax bill is issued after the Closing Date, Buyer shall be solely responsible for any additional taxes due thereunder. The obligations of this subsection shall survive the Closing. 4.7 Bonds, Taxes and Assessments. Subject to the prorations set forth in Section 4.6, any and all bonds, real property taxes, special taxes, improvement taxes, and/or assessments which are a lien on the Property and which are Permitted Exceptions shall, at closing, be assumed by Buyer without reduction of or adjustment to the Purchase Price or any recourse to Seller. Notwithstanding anything else herein to the contrary, Buyer shall be exclusively responsible for, and shall pay when due, the assessments of the Dartmouth Street Local Improvement District #40 resulting from the initial construction of Dartmouth Road. The parties acknowledge and agree that a party has challenged the method of calculating the assessments for the cost of the initial construction of Dartmouth Road. Buyer may, at its election and at its own expense, participate in any such challenge. 4.8 Possession. Seller shall deliver possession of the Property to Buyer on the Closing Date. 5. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO CLOSING. 5.1 Closing Conditions. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, Buyer's obligation to complete Closing under this Agreement is contingent upon the following conditions being satisfied within the time periods specified below: 5.1.1 Evaluation Period. Buyer's obligation to purchase the Property on the Closing Date is subject to the satisfaction of the following contingencies and conditions during the first ninety (90) days after the date that Seller has delivered to Buyer the documents which Seller has agreed to provide to Buyer in Section 6.3 (the "Evaluation Period"): a. The Buyer shall have ninety (90) days after the Execution Date to, at its expense: (i) evaluate the suitability of the Property for its contemplated use and for the construction thereon of its contemplated improvements; and (ii) determine the availability of all necessary permits and governmental approvals for its contemplated use of the Property. In connection with this evaluation, Buyer, and Buyer's agents, employees and independent contractors, may enter upon the Property at reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting and testing the same; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that Buyer shall not conduct any intrusive soils or underground tests without Seller's prior written consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld; Buyer shall promptly restore the Property to substantially the condition which existed immediately prior to the commencement of any inspection and/or testing and Buyer shall indemnify Seller for all costs and damages related to such inspection and/or testing. This obligation shall survive any termination of this Agreement. At any time prior to the expiration of the Evaluation Period, Buyer may, in its sole and absolute discretion, PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT - 4 t ( terminate this Agreement by giving written notice thereof to Seller. In the event that Buyer shall fail to give Seller notice of the satisfaction or waiver of this condition on or before the end of the Evaluation Period, the condition shall be deemed to have failed, and this Agreement shall terminate. 5.1.2 Additional Conditions Precedent. Buyer's obligation to purchase the Property on the Closing Date is also contingent upon the satisfaction or waiver by Buyer of the following additional conditions precedent which must be satisfied on or before the Closing Date: a. The representations and warranties of Seller set forth in Section 8 hereof shall be true, correct and complete in all material respects on and as of the Closing Date with the same effect as though such representations and warranties had been made as of the Closing Date. b. There shall be no effective injunction or restraining order of any nature issued by a court of competent jurisdiction which shall direct that this Agreement or the transaction contemplated herein not be consummated. c. Seller shall have complied in all material respects with all of the covenants in this Agreement on its part to be performed on or prior to the Closing Date. d. Neither Buyer nor Seller have received notice that the Property contains Hazardous Substances or Environmental Contamination in excess of levels permitted by federal, State of Oregon or local governmental statues, standards, regulations, rules or ordinances. "Hazardous Substance" shall mean any substance, material or waste deemed hazardous or toxic under any of the following statutes, as amended, or any Oregon or local analog of such statutes, or under any other statute or regulation of any governmental authority having proper jurisdiction: the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. § 9601, et seq.; the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. § 6901, et seq.; the Hazardous Material Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. § 1801, et seq.; and the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2601, et seq.; the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1251, et seq.; and the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7401, et seq. Without limiting the foregoing, "Hazardous Substance" includes petroleum and petroleum products, polychlorinated biphenyls, radioactive substances, and any other substance which has in the past or could in the future constitute a health, safety of environmental hazard to any person or property. "Environmental Contamination" means the existence or release (including, without limitation, sudden or nonsudden, accidental or nonaccidental leaks, spills, disposal, deposit and migration) of, or exposure to, any Hazardous Substance in, into, onto or under the environment (including, without limitation, the air,soil, surface water and ground water). 5.2 Effect of Failure to Satisfy Conditions. If the conditions precedent set forth in Section 5.1 hereof are not satisfied within the respective time periods set forth therein, then in addition to any rights afforded by this Agreement, Buyer shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement, in which event the Deposit shall be returned to Buyer. 5.3 Termination of Agreement. 5.3.1 Termination by Buyer. If this Agreement is terminated by Buyer: (a) during the Evaluation Period; (b) as a result of the failure to satisfy or waive all conditions and contingencies set forth in Sections 5.1.1 or 5.1.2; (c) pursuant to Sections 11.14 or 11.15;or (d) as a result of Seller's - breach of this Agreement(each a"Buyer's Termination Event"), then, in any of those events: (i) Buyer and Seller shall execute and deliver to the Escrow Agent escrow cancellation instructions; (ii) except as otherwise provided herein,this Agreement shall be of no further force or effect; and (iii) the Deposit PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT- 5 (less one-half of the escrow cancellation fee) and all other amounts paid by Buyer to the Escrow Agent and all interest thereon shall be returned to Buyer. 5.3.2 Liquidated Damages. IN THE EVENT THIS AGREEMENT IS TERMINATED OR THE CLOSING AND THE CONSUMMATION OF THE TRANSACTION HEREIN CONTEMPLATED DO NOT OCCUR FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN AS A RESULT OF A BUYER'S TERMINATION EVENT, THE BUYER AND THE SELLER AGREE THAT IT WOULD BE IMPRACTICAL AND EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO ESTIMATE THE DAMAGES THE SELLER MAY SUFFER. THE BUYER AND THE SELLER THEREFORE AGREE THAT A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF THE TOTAL NET DETRIMENT THAT THE SELLER WOULD SUFFER IN THE EVENT OF A TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN AS A RESULT OF A BUYER'S TERMINATION EVENT, IS AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO THE DEPOSIT AND THAT THIS SHALL BE THE SELLER'S SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY (WHETHER AT LAW OR IN EQUITY). THIS AMOUNT SHALL BE THE FULL, AGREED AND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES FOR A TERMINATION FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN AS A RESULT OF A BUYER'S TERMINATION EVENT, ALL OTHER CLAIMS TO DAMAGE OR OTHER REMEDIES BEING HEREIN EXPRESSLY WAIVED BY THE SELLER (EXCEPT FOR SELLER'S RIGHTS UNDER SECTIONS 5.1.1, 6.1 6.2 AND 11.10). THE PAYMENT OF THIS AMOUNT AS LIQUI- DATED DAMAGES IS NOT INTENDED AS A FORFEITURE OR PENALTY, BUT IS INTENDED TO CONSTITUTE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES TO THE SELLER. UPON THE TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN AS A BUYER'S TERMINATION EVENT, NEITHER PARTY SHALL HAVE ANY FURTHER RIGHTS OR OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE AGREEMENT, EACH TO THE OTHER, EXCEPT FOR THE RIGHT OF THE SELLER TO COLLECT SUCH LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED IN THIS AGREEMENT. PRIOR TO EXERCISING ITS RIGHT TO COLLECT AND RETAIN THE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SET FORTH ABOVE AS A RESULT OF A DEFAULT OF BUYER, SELLER SHALL GIVE BUYER WRITTEN NOTICE OF ANY ALLEGED DEFAULT AND BUYER SHALL HAVE A PERIOD OF FIFTEEN (15) DAYS, BUT NOT LATER THAN THE CLOSING DATE, TO CURE SUCH DEFAULT. Seller Buyer 5.3.3 Buyer's Remedies Upon the Default of Seller. In the event Seller defaults under any of the terms of this Agreement on or prior to the Closing Date (including, without limitation, by failing or refusing to deliver any documents required to be delivered pursuant hereto), Buyer shall be entitled to (i) compel specific performance of this Agreement, in which event Buyer may also recover its damages incurred as a result of such default or incorrect warranty or representation, including, but not limited to, all of its reasonable costs and attorney fees in seeking such specific performance, or (ii) if specific performance is not possible or if Buyer elects not to pursue specific performance, receive a refund of the Deposit, and recover any actual, reasonable damages resulting from said default including all reasonable out-of-pocket costs and attorney fees. Prior to exercising its right to the remedies set forth above, Buyer shall give Seller written notice of any alleged default and Seller shall have a period of fifteen (15) days, but not later than the Closing Date, to cure such default. 6. PENDING CLOSING. 6.1 Inspection. Seller hereby grants Buyer the right to go upon the Property between the Execution Date and, prior to expiration of the Evaluation Period, at Buyer's expense, to make such surveys, tests and other site analyses as Buyer may require. Buyer shall, with the exception of the survey, provide Seller with not less than five (5) days notice prior to any such inspection or testing. Buyer shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Seller, its agents and employees from and against all losses, damages, expenses, costs, liability, claims and reasonable attorney's fees and costs (including, but not limited to, reasonable costs of experts, suits and appeals) that may arise by reason of Buyer's or PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT- 6 its agents' or employees' entry upon the Property pursuant to this Section 6.1 and shall repair any damage to the Property caused by such entry. 6.2 Environmental Inspection. Buyer may, in its discretion, retain one or more environmental consultants of its choosing to inspect the Property, including any soils, surface waters, wells, and groundwater on or under the Property and conduct such tests, samples, engineering studies, and examinations upon the Property prior to the expiration of the Evaluation Period as Buyer or any such consultants deem appropriate to determine the environmental condition of the Property and the existence or nonexistence of environmental hazards on or about the Property such as, but not limited to, any past or current generation, storage, release, threatened release, disposal, and presence and location of asbestos, PCB transformers, petroleum products, flammable explosives, underground storage tanks or other hazardous, toxic or contaminated substance or condition. Buyer shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Seller, its agents and employees against all loss, damages, expenses, liability and reasonable costs (including, but not limited, to reasonable costs of experts, suits and appeals) and claims that may arise by reason of Buyer's inspection, testing and examination of the Property pursuant to this Section 6.2 with the exception of any such loss, damages, expenses, liability and claims resulting from the discovery and/or existence of Hazardous Substances on the Property, and shall repair any damages to the Property caused by such inspection, testing or examination. Within fourteen (14) days after the Execution Date, Seller agrees to make available to Buyer any environmental studies or reports related to the Property in Seller's possession, Buyer acknowledges and agrees that Seller is not making, and will not make, any representations or warranties of any kind or nature concerning or related to the environmental studies or reports made available to it by Seller, including, without limitation, their accuracy, content, thoroughness of investigation or the competence or ability of the persons or companies preparing the same. 6.3 Delivery of Documents. Within seven (7) days after the Execution Date, Seller shall (at no cost to Buyer) deliver to Buyer copies of the following documents: (a) Survey prepared by Robert E. Meyer Consultants dated September 19, 1994; (b) Partition Plat No. 1995-013; (c) Wetlands Mitigation and Compensation Plan dated February 5, 1993; (d) Transportation Impact Study dated February 19, 1993; (e) Preliminary Site Assessment Proposed Club Foods Site, Portland, Oregon, dated January 17, 1991; (f) Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Club Foods Site, S.W. Dartmouth, Tigard, Oregon, dated February 18, 1991; (g) Braun Intertec Soil Study, dated August 26, 1992; (h) two Braun Intertec Home Heating Oil UST Study, each dated August 13, 1992; (i) eight Braun Intertec Soil Studies each dated August 13, 1992; and (j) Braun Intertec Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, dated December 18, 1992. Buyer acknowledges and agrees that Seller is not making, and will not make, any representations or warranties of any kind or nature concerning or related to the documents made available to it by Seller, including, without limitations, its accuracy, content, thoroughness of investigation or the competence or the abilities of the persons or companies preparing the same. 7. SURVIVAL OF COVENANTS AND WARRANTIES. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, all covenants contained in this Agreement and all representations and warranties contained in this Agreement shall survive Closing for a period of one (1) year after the Closing Date. Any inspection of the Property, or of Seller's records, by Buyer or its representatives shall not be construed as a waiver of any warranty contained in this Agreement. 8. SELLER'S WARRANTIES AND REPRESENTATIONS. As a material inducement to cause Buyer to enter into this Agreement, Seller represents and warrants to Buyer that: PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT - 7 8.1 Authority. Seller has the authority and power to enter into this Agreement and to consummate the transactions provided for by this Agreement. Consummation of such transactions will not breach any material agreement to which it is a party. 8.2 Title. The Seller has good and marketable title to the Property and at Closing such title shall be subject only to Permitted Exceptions. There shall be no other parties in possession of all or any portion of the Property at Closing except Buyer. 8.3 Compliance with Law. To Seller's knowledge, the Property and the existing uses of the Property, are in material compliance with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, and requirements of all governmental authorities having jurisdiction thereof, including, without limitation thereto, those pertaining to zoning, building, housing, safety, fire, health and the environment. 8.4 No Proceedings. There are, to Seller's knowledge, no actions, suits, proceedings or investigations, pending, proposed or threatened, before any agency, court, or other governmental authority which relates to the ownership, maintenance, development or operation of the Property, except for the pending action filed by a third party in which the third party is challenging the method of calculating the assessment for the cost of the initial construction of Dartmouth Road. 8.5 Condemnation. 8.5.1 Eminent Domain Proceedings. There is, to Seller's knowledge no condemnation or eminent domain proceeding affecting the Property or any portion thereof currently pending or threatened. 8.5.2 Takings by Eminent Domain. To Seller's knowledge, there have been no takings by condemnation or eminent domain of any land of which the Property was a part and for which compensation has not been paid or for which compensation has been paid within the past three years. 8.6 No Notices of Violations. Seller has not received notice of any failure of the Seller to comply with any applicable governmental requirements in respect of the development, use and occupation of the Property, including, but not limited to, environmental, zoning, platting and other land use requirements which have not been heretofore corrected to the satisfaction of the appropriate governmental authority. 8.7 No Defaults. Seller has not received notice of any default or breach by the Seller under any covenants, conditions, restrictions, rights-of-way, or easements which may affect the Seller in respect to the Property or may affect the Property or any portion thereof. 8.8 No Litigation. To Seller's knowledge, there is no litigation or proceeding pending or threatened against or relating to the Property, except for the pending action filed by a third party in which the third party is challenging the method of calculating the assessment for the cost of the initial construction of Dartmouth Road. 8.9 Zoning and Violation and Environmental Notices. To Seller's knowledge, Seller has not received a notice from any governmental authority, holder of any mortgage or any other person asserting a violation of any applicable law, regulation, or other governmental requirement applicable to the Property. To Seller's knowledge the Property is a legal lot. 8.10 Seller Not a Foreign Person. Seller is not a foreign person as defined in Section 1445(f)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Seller will deliver to Buyer at Closing a Certificate of Nonforeign Status, in a form reasonably acceptable to Buyer certifying the correctness of this Section 8.10. PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT - 8 ( 8.11 No Attachments. To Seller's knowledge, there are no attachments, executions, assignments for the benefit of creditors, or proceedings in bankruptcy or under any other debtor relief laws contemplated by or pending or, to the best of Seller's knowledge, threatened by or against Seller. 8.12 No Leases or Mechanics' Liens. To the best of Seller's knowledge, there are no pending or threatened mechanics' or materialmen's liens recorded against the Property. Seller has not entered into or assumed any leases affecting the Property. 8.13 No Service/Maintenance Contracts. There are no service or maintenance contracts affecting the Property to which Seller is a party or by which Seller is bound. 8.14 Environmental Conditions. To Seller's knowledge: (i) no Hazardous Materials are, will be, or have been, stored, treated, disposed of or incorporated into, under or on the Property in violation of any applicable statutes, ordinances or regulations; (ii)the Property is in material compliance with all applicable environmental, health and safety requirements; and (iii) any business heretofore operated on the Property has disposed of its waste in accordance with all applicable statutes, ordinances and regulations. Seller has not received actual notice of any pending or threatened action or proceeding arising out of the condition of the Property or any alleged violation of environmental, health or safety statutes, ordinances or regulations. "Hazardous Materials" shall mean all toxic or hazardous materials, chemicals, wastes, pollutants or similar substances, including, without limitation, Petroleum (as hereinafter defined), asbestos insulation and/or urea formaldehyde insulation, which are regulated, governed, restricted or prohibited by any federal, state or local law, decision, statute, rule, regulation or ordinance currently in existence or hereafter enacted or rendered (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Hazardous Materials Law") including, but not limited to, those materials or substances defined as "hazardous substances," "hazardous materials," "toxic substances" or "pollutants" in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. ' 9601, et seq., the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. ' 6901, et seq., the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. ' 1801, et seq., the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. ' 2601, et seq., the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. ' 7401, et seq., the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. ' 1251, et seq., and any applicable statutes, ordinances or regulations under the laws of the State in which the Property is located, and any rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, all as presently or hereafter amended. "Petroleum" for purposes of this Agreement shall include, without limitation, oil or petroleum of any kind and in any form including but not limited to oil, petroleum, fuel oil, oil sludge, oil refuse, oil mixed with other waste, crude oil, gasoline, diesel fuel and kerosene. 8.15 Representations To Be Correct at Closing. All of the representations and warranties of the Seller contained in this Agreement shall be true and correct as of the date of this Agreement and as of the Closing and shall survive the Closing. 8.16 No Untrue Statements. None of the foregoing representations and warranties contain any untrue statement or material fact or fails to state any material fact necessary to make such representations and warranties not misleading. 8.17 Seller's Knowledge. For purposes of this Agreement and any other documents or instruments relating to the transaction contemplated by this Agreement, the "best of Seller's knowledge" or "Seller's knowledge" shall be defined as William D. Long (Seller's President and CEO) and Paul Simmons' (Seller's Vice President of Retail Development) present, actual knowledge, without investigation or inquiry and without any duty to investigate or inquire. 8.18 No Additional Representations/"AS IS." Except for Seller's representations, warranties and covenants set forth in this Agreement, neither Seller nor any employee, agent or attorney of Seller has made any representations, guaranties, promises, statements, covenants or warranties of any kind or nature whatsoever, whether express or implied, with respect to the Property, including, without PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT - 9 limitation, the suitability for any purpose or profitability of owning or operating the Property, the physical condition of the Property, the environmental condition of the Property, including, without limitation, the existence or nonexistence of environmental hazards or substances, satisfaction of any local, state or federal permits for the development or use thereof, or any past, present or future matter whatsoever. Further, except for Seller's representations, warranties and covenants otherwise set forth in this Agreement, Seller has not made any representations, guaranties, promises, statements, assurances, covenants or warranties pertaining to the HABITABILITY, SUITABILITY FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS OF THE PROPERTY FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR ITS ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION. BUYER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT WITH THE AID OF INDEPENDENT ADVICE BUYER HAS OR WILL HAVE INSPECTED THE PROPERTY AND, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE EXPRESS REPRESENTATIONS SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT, THE PROPERTY IS BEING PURCHASED "AS IS AND WITH ALL FAULTS." BUYER FURTHER ACKNOLWEDGES THAT SELLER IS NOT MAKING, AND WILL NOT MAKE, ANY REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND OR NATURE CONCERNING OR RELATED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES AND REPORTS MADE AVAILABLE BY IT TO BUYER, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THEIR ACCURACY, CONTENT, THOROUGHNESS OF INVESTIGATION OR THE COMPETENCE OR ABILITY OF THE PERSONS OR COMPANIES PREPARING THE SAME. 9. BUYER'S WARRANTIES AND REPRESENTATIONS Buyer represents and warrants to Seller as follows: 9.1 Authority. Buyer is fully authorized to enter into and perform its obligations under this Agreement and any other agreement or instrument necessary to consummate the transaction contem- plated by this Agreement. 9.2 No Defaults. Neither Buyer's execution of this Agreement nor Buyer's performance of its obligations hereunder will violate, or constitute a default under or breach of, any agreement between Buyer and any third party or by which Buyer is bound. 9.3 No Proceedings. There is neither pending nor, to the best of Buyer's knowledge, any threatened legal action, arbitration or administrative hearing before any governmental authority to which Buyer is a party and which could enjoin or restrict Buyer's right or ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement. 9.4 No Attachments. There are no attachments, executions, assignments for the benefit of creditors, or proceedings in bankruptcy or under any other debtor relief laws contemplated by or pending or, to the best of Buyer's knowledge, threatened by or against Buyer. 9.5 No Untrue Statements. None of the foregoing representations and warranties contain any untrue statement or material fact or fails to state any material fact necessary to make such representations and warranties not misleading. 9.6 Representations. All representations and warranties contained in this Section 9 shall be deemed made as of the date of this Agreement, shall be renewed as of the Closing and shall survive the Closing. 10. BROKERS Seller and Buyer represent to each other that each has had no dealings with any broker or finder concerning Buyer's purchase or Seller's sale of the Property except for Commercial Realty Advisors Northwest LLC for Seller and Robert R. Niehaus & Company for Buyer (the "Brokers"). Seller agrees PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT- 10 ( that, conditioned upon the sale Closing, it will pay the commission due the Brokers (the "Brokers' Commission") consisting of a total fee equal to five percent (5%) of the Purchase Price and that the Brokers shall share the Brokers' Commission pursuant to a separate agreement between them. The parties hereby agrees to indemnify and hold each other harmless from all loss, costs, damage or expenses (including reasonable attorney's fees) incurred by the other party as a result of any claim arising out of the acts of it (or others on its behalf) for a commission, finder's fee or similar compensation made by any broker, finder or party who claims to have dealt with it. The parties certify that they have not received or relied upon any representation by the Brokers not contained herein or on any tax or legal advice from the Brokers. 11. MISCELLANEOUS. 1 1.1 Notices. Any notice or other communication required or permitted to be given under this Agreement ("Notices") shall be in writing and shall be (a) personally delivered, (b) delivered by a reputable overnight courier, or(c) delivered by certified mail, return receipt requested, and deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid. Telecopy notices shall be deemed valid only to the extent they are (1) actually received by the individual to whom addressed and (2) followed by delivery of actual notice in the manner described in (a), (b) or (c) above within three business days thereafter. Notices shall be deemed received at the earlier of actual receipt or (A) one business day after deposit with an overnight courier as evidenced by a receipt of deposit; or (B) three business days following deposit in the United States mail, as evidenced by a return receipt. Notices shall be directed to the parties at their respective addresses shown below, or such other address as either party may, from time to time, specify in writing to the other in the manner described above: IF TO SELLER: Waremart, Inc. 8590 Fairview P.O. Box 5756 Boise, ID 83705 Telephone: (208) 377-0110 Fax: (208) 377-0474 With a copy to: Larry E. Prince Holland& Hart LLP U. S. Bank Plaza 101 S. Capitol Blvd., #1400 P.O. Box 2527 Boise, ID 83701 Telephone: (208) 342-5000 Fax: (208)343-8869 IF TO BUYER : Rembold Properties, LLC Suite 450, 1022 S.W. Salmon Street Portland, OR 97205 Telephone: (503)222-7258 Fax: (503)222-4053 With a copy to: Lois J. Portnoy, Esq. 2427 N.W. Pinnacle Drive Portland, Oregon 97229-8022 Fax: (503) 297-0962 PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT- 11 • • 11.2 Assignment. Except as otherwise specifically provided for herein, the parties shall be entitled to assign their rights and obligations under this Agreement only upon obtaining the other party's prior written consent, which will not be unreasonably withheld. No such assignment shall release the other party from its obligations under this Agreement. Buyer may assign its rights under this Agreement to any entity which Buyer forms to purchase and develop the Property. 11.3 Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by a written instrument executed by the party or parties asserted to be bound thereby. 11.4 Interpretation. Words used in the singular number shall include the plural, and vice versa. The captions and headings of the articles and sections of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only, and shall not be deemed to define or limit the provisions thereof. 11.5 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon. 11.6 Merger of Prior Agreements. This Agreement and the exhibits hereto constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the purchase and sale of the Property and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements and understandings between the parties hereto relating to the subject matter hereof. Each party acknowledges and agrees that except for the specific representations, warranties and covenants contained in this Agreement, the other party and its agents have not made any representations, warranties or covenants to it. 11.7 Time is of the Essence. Seller and Buyer hereby acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition, obligation and provision hereof. 11.8 Joint Venture. It is not intended by this Agreement to, and nothing contained in this Agreement shall, create any partnership, joint venture or other agreement between Buyer and Seller. No term or provision of this Agreement is intended to be, or shall be, for the benefit of any person, firm, organization or corporation not a party hereto, and no such other person, firm, organization or corporation shall have any right or cause of action hereunder. 11.9 Further Acts. Each party shall, at the request of the other, execute, acknowledge (if appropriate) and deliver whatever additional documents, and do such other acts, as may be reasonably required in order to accomplish the intent and purposes of this Agreement, including, without limitation, providing instructions to the Escrow Agent consistent with the terms of this Agreement, executed by both Seller and Buyer and delivered to Escrow Agent on or before the Closing Date. 11.10 Professional Fees and Costs. If any legal or equitable action, appeal, arbitration, bankruptcy, reorganization, or other proceeding, whether on the merits, application or motion, are brought or undertaken, to enforce or interpret this Agreement (including any proceeding in bankruptcy), or because of an alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with any of the provisions of this Agreement, then the successful or prevailing party or parties in such undertaking shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney's and other professional fees, expert witness fees, court costs and other expenses incurred in such action, proceeding or discussions, in addition to any other relief to which such party may be entitled. 11.11 Dates of Performance. In the event that any date for performance by either party of any obligation hereunder required to be performed by such party falls on a Saturday, Sunday or nationally recognized holiday, the time for performance of-such—obligation shall be deemed extended until the next business day following such date. PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT- 12 ( 11.12 Counterparts and Execution by Facsimile. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery of an executed copy of this Agreement by facsimile, telecopy, telex or other means of electronic communication producing a printed copy will be deemed to be an execution and delivery of this Agreement on the date of such communication by the party so delivering such a copy; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, the party so delivering such a copy via electronic communication shall deliver an executed original of this Agreement to the other party within five (5) business days of the date of delivery of the electronic communication. 11.13 Severability. Any provision of this Agreement which is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable shall be invalid or unenforceable only to the extent of such determination, which shall not invalidate or otherwise ineffective any other provision of this Agreement. 11.14 Eminent Domain. If prior to the date of the Closing, Seller acquires knowledge of any pending or threatened action, suit or proceeding to condemn or take all or any part of the Property under the power of eminent domain, then Seller shall immediately give notice thereof to Buyer. Upon receipt of such notice, Buyer may terminate this Agreement within five (5) business days of its receipt of such notice whereupon the Deposit, minus one-half(1/2) of the escrow cancellation fee, shall be paid by the Escrow Agent to Buyer. If Buyer does not terminate this Agreement, and the Closing occurs, then Buyer shall be entitled to the proceeds of any condemnation award available for the Property. 11.15 Casualty. If prior to the Closing Date the Property, or any portion thereof, shall be damaged or destroyed by reason of an earthquake or other casualty, then Seller shall immediately give notice thereof to Buyer. Upon receipt of such notice, Buyer may terminate this Agreement within five (5) business days of its receipt of such notice whereupon the Deposit, minus one-half (1/2) of the escrow cancellation fee, shall be paid by the Escrow Agent to Buyer. If Buyer does not terminate this Agreement, and the Closing occurs, then Buyer shall be entitled to the insurance proceeds available as a result of the casualty, if any, for the Property. 11.16 Section 1031 Exchange. Seller may, prior to Closing, notify Buyer in writing of its desire to exchange the Property for other property of like kind in an effort to qualify the exchange under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code. Buyer agrees to reasonably cooperate with Seller in connection with such exchange, including, without limitation, the execution of such documents as may reasonably be necessary to effectuate the same. Buyer's obligations shall, however, be subject to the following conditions and limitations: (a)the Closing shall not be delayed by the exchange; (b) all additional costs in connection with the exchange shall be paid by Seller; (c) Buyer shall not be obligated to take title to any property in connection with the exchange(other than Buyer's acquisition of title to the Property as provided in this Agreement) or to execute any note, contract or other document providing for any personal liability whatsoever on Buyer's part; and (d) Seller shall indemnify and hold Buyer harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, liabilities, costs, expenses, damages and losses whatsoever(including, without limitation, attorney's fees and costs) in any way arising out of, connected with or resulting from Buyer's participation in the exchange. 11.17 Required Notices. 11.17.1 THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING-FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY-SHOULD CHECK WITH-THE APPROPRIATE __ -- CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT - 13 1 ( 11.17.2 THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT MAY NOT BE WITHIN A FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT PROTECTING STRUCTURES. THE PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS, WHICH, IN FARM OR FOREST ZONES, MAY NOT AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION OR SITING OF A RESIDENCE AND WHICH LIMIT LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930 IN ALL ZONES. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPRO- PRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND EXISTENCE OF FIRE PROTECTION FOR STRUCTURES. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this Agreement the day and year set forth below. SELLER: WAREMART, INC. an Idaho corporation By: �- . Its r'Co Dated , 1999 BUYER: REMBOLD PROPERTIES LLC an Oregon Limited Liability Company • p _ _ s %fTwIrGS�. Dat6 h,u,A— L( , 1999 BOISE:0101790.04 PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT- 14 MAR 04 '99 08:22AM ALPHA ENGINEERI P.2/2 • ALPHA ENGINEERING, INC. MARCH 4, 1999 LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAREMART, INC. PARCEL JOB NO. 358-006 A PARCEL OP LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT FROM WHICH THE SOUTH ONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 36 BEARS SOUTH 22°38'41" WEST, 918.70 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 56°46'00" EAST, 126.81 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01°43'56" WEST, 186.87 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 11°30'30" EAST, 32.75 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01°43'56" WEST, 280.81 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°16'04 EAST, 210.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01°43'56" EAST, 599.89 FEET; THENCE NORTH 85°51'42" WEST, 295.89 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 34°33'06" WEST, 55.33 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 137,028 SQUARE FEET OR 3.146 ACRES. THE BASIS OF BEARING FOR THIS DESCRIPTION IS PARTITION PLAT NO. 1995-013, WASHINGTON COUNTY PLAT RECORDS. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR OREGON Jut,rt.tow MICHAEL R.GATES 2449 y a 00/9, EXHIBIT A Plaza West.Suite 230.9600 SW Oak.Portland,Oregon 97223 Office 503-452-8003.Fax 503-452-8043 CURVE ^ATA TABLE -3.-1' PART11lOt1 PLAT NO. 19 9 5-0/3 NIEF,.11r+ 1 M. ,,.,.,71 .� PARTI )N PLAT RECORDED AS DOCUMENT N( s01a3o?" C'I�� '11.10 ++)y ' r -Cl�i1.00'�7i'1 I1� jail BONO LOCATED IN THE SOUTH ONE-HALF OF SECTION 38, • LEI' '# °0�0� '�= TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, LEGEND CITY OF TICARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON • stT IIAASt x0113 3.m 73101 3.4loot sm iJ7u MK 1' 1�' i SURVEYED: DECEMBER 12, 1994 ALPHA ENGINEERING, INC. MK l3.:.)(.)� 1 j rr- !... I100 L .3M,PLAZA 3K7r,i2TL 730 0 raw NOAAIw1 Al worm / inimi M •l11F: * . 1YFism .I. (5003 432-8003 UNE 1101 I • w si uueta•AninatA�wd~.r+e'�olD"i As mortar UNE DATA TABLE `T a 1 Q //ow 1A'1101 1700 04tH x7L0.11..300 w raoceo '�1low teat►1G'N 44044!3[443 K71C .ta t // AV W.°nIC?eo; 04Ivua II SCALE 1• 100' // 01 W1I f/1[IR 0( Me I w/rJ.c 04m,0400+/WINO 3.x lin // 40 CDIIT 3.1 3.(A 11/1x11 IJ. MN Mt Ia00 ritT t.0(fA71rMT 7101 74111.7/,3410,1 75.3/0 y:*'� / 7c+u[ASOIDIT ro Ott // 4014 7/0•n4H 1r'[ L001 0170110 PIONS 4JO1Cf1 LR na IW a r'CA Ito In 7 // 171•L NIID 11/7 CI aK 1)1• A0M7(. �. 10. 0DU„o ro Ira KMMO // 0a Ntx7 40 13,IW WOK Iga4O17 s � AolArm to nu // t p.1 .7 70[ 71 04'13.7+'. I=R r ulxT'a 17.47 or //u 16 4. � )(1) 623.44'(31 (701. 44 oT k (1) a x340 eAU rat 0101(r 74 04401 A 0 XID 4� r 1 44.V1w0a 13. //V + OOn f•, I 14044144043 04 1,107777,oltYJV A0.40100'1i• 1• DETAI 'C" (7) 04 030 OAIA►tN 0(00 DOOUq(1 A9 1.101717 tl■It■■1 NI DETAIL "E: J./% L ♦ 17411 1 �• f7> 110010 oArA 1071 DAM x7 a 11443 4 ! 1I not 10 0111 1101 TO suac itrI,A. }' (�) µ�� 4.Y//u�/ g l $ 3.I' 14°171''7•• 71041•(1) PLAT RESTRICTIOf15: M 1 .0•- ■!1♦22 71 i .h U 6 •• ,,i I. SLe.0 CT TO COO71R4 1%TOIAnn 40 RaTIIICrf[N7 I ,i . r /1' // . ••y j Al IOCIIC(D II DOG 001.14413037 a 041041054.A14 Kra ■'i' 13}7_ i 1� RRI* //C7 0430'(1�1.1'tiy, v 0341/11 oU.o ucam•■I))♦'Z• " € / 0 44 1'04•r()N�7' 1 IQ1t 1,L A0p 1 Mq bCiJ T101 IO IMO(3 1 AK aw.ctt 17• ..A3. ,� / �/� t TO 1104-4104 D c t>sn+nln 3.w/VAX AC(Z21 3.137 q 19 • MK DETAIL D. U �1 r�/ I 01)GIn1u14OK71 1 U[x330444[04 3.0 0(10 0001.011 N ••} 11 • I • not 10 KALI DETAIL 'Q� 5 E DET I `, , R not,o 41x1 (lo F •E 7 t NOS: 044 • j •11' 111 LI I. 1.r u'Ae0 0141X11711 C/ 10*07•A': TMC1••A•9,41 } . •2! 3 . 1• 4 417 / _I _ MO uirt±mTMi arK a 1'rr 7oA� ou MAR di 79 K 4 iiv tr. • l / a b l 1� o CMG=1114 Haut war-n-.AT 314.OSfl• • / ,$ 417 1 10 1 LT•A'IS 3.M 11 LSD[' 0 33-401 alts tw♦DOrr,0•.171 l'I •) . aR ul / EX�aPpT�lOttp(rTOa li IOif]) 2 6 't� PAACn I. )!' r 1r1� DETAIL 'A' + 1.111 cwnnulr Ioa MIX / 1 71,.S7r r► �y' 1 r//x1140�>w 101.401.40403 11,04 7770�.c�r�I.,A ■ -1 LI • µD WO OOOU 134.344 I��. 11� 41 t 44.30 l7 1 31Ke7 711-7 1.00 n(3171..0).r• ■ �l� 000 10/01104 aft 11 1 OJ00 /`I 1 El■ �■ a k x , NAATIVE ■ �' SK 1/ uo PARCEL 2 //,,f 'a 1, 11134010 a3.11043 0ul,cr a ro 37+4111101 M T.A[t or 141.117 V A. IO DOa1�M OQD DO0.14 S M 41041/77. • '7 �• r ` ul 1117 AC �7 c4 •' E 1• O. 417 ! / , I. /WUI/Q SHINTY p 11i14�7a1Jt V aK 7T0 1 •fl • 1 .3.07)hl ll a (3) .f ds 113 J� SEE DETAIL 'D' • •• A I •4S 171 / 1 ' " 1 1 1aD I[CO+L 311,1(Al 00303)3404 f1AK7 004 1.11W AM n.) 1'1-J. IcID[/. �Q® \ + C7 0. 0(09 0o06*4wr 0a i* .3737 10(1110031 n(WIOWI 01. w.'r A11.0.0111' / \ 1.77 / N IOWA,nC 0wn1 1).L CdrOlJC V RD 7.(401 w(DI ("Asti.004 70.111) I \ u( / 6 6 1� U 3.a 1101 P n(001 Ul(l 3(174 U`((Q[i►t 11077/71'3 \\L 1 u3.4174` SEE DETAIL 'C' / + 34 }a 1041041 As rortD).4140 nc t 3.w 3403 rw44 31103 7 CV CLAN Y 004 7SIw NIO o®DOp&p1 NM NW1717. r"="- \ 7CT 0100310 0000404 A7 / a w I W CO 1 Ywd+7llYIXrl 7 YWOiQ A[ [3I�/VI�n1tIK7�11a MJtI ,., W// ('\ /37-0114'1..340? , N iD� © /� �p' 1/j a 7400 O IN.-00UM 30}7104 M 1.aW(M AI IC) 10 I 1 �!`, SEE DETAIL 'B' 3AwA11I 1004 two 1<7()Alx �� 173114191 nc 307114.1043 CO47Q 1111 3011 X aT •411 ,,, (A041141 / a (ry�y< 040414 4141 003 tl3.410403(7 srnro ro13004 v Ar•o.1 ' •• 1U1 3+.. Vs C, tit 141.00(1) 110.00' 1 01 17 r7 A �A 1 0001440 1004 44103737 P.o 700310• 1704 / C7 �rI 10.00 3.¢T 3.0(01013-CI-.A3. / 1 4411'01 I I J74.•• 1 I2m a 1411(4 a..141 i4.q/T4 a�.. /R� ( 10 Yt)ONnln 43 4440.4 Al Aw 3.q•I J7 etaCA1401 3.0 Otm OOOwIxT .1/ 11,1.01• 7' till)""r x1'004 34.111, W Lad SCI.111ca1 Lawn d �ti•'" 004 33070137 ,� M Hl '01'•• 71 ?t At 1 77')0'77•C. 00'� t I• 4all• 71.44' 41.31 V^ J 1A Z w n PARCEL 1 f 4i ory 1p/0� n / N 4143401 ■ 4 # 9_sT� 110 IT 1093.3 0(00 DATA 0.41 Pt 7�A7 1 441aw 10 )5.111 Y 4., of. `� a I L t 7777/410 CALCUA30q/0!11041 At r C,...1R)� .,. }.4.7 0411 AC •17' /4 Cr Coe,3.0 / I i� 1d A/• <I �R� A0L( 0)M 14C000/WA Alfa•lOw OwIX 107x111 vt rviill 3.4.Or 4 110 014 'r t )^ 111 }I 3 I 1.1 /Jp�, 447 h I•. r LP.PLAN 1.r V4 1'"'044•a +74'40, h PARCEL 3 C r � . 3.7 g` 11rCOt37n113n4117uooaA a N 0!'31'!0' 7 3& s k I T b ;r 441At 0031 tM►4)1104 IIA,111. t 0.4073 u r 113x37104(11"i W 344.0 . 111.11 3°11. • . :cr, a �7a(7asAe w< g 101111 /7'r 170401 3.o 1 / 186 28� > y g. • y s � �P°'M a Q0f0.00/IC Nil V')t+1�H 8 '31' 'l �3Y ee. 1,'f+) 3.j ::::: 0f 7Y0M 711111 Sw 2 1f zari.1 •1 A 4 14011-p-►AT 3 OtaCAn04 MA 0(10 0(04003 (N`�.�89 6 25� +WI) H ) r toy Na.13074011 INITIAL POINT itj 11-, / �1'$i •bOS], �� s '3. +t�7�o�tlau a 8 1 ¢ i Moti 41341 3.0 301 a 1 ��'t1`. 3 / `S0) O4� a +1(,, ._ 77°ilWy.r/l"-4I.t 1 I A - 89'42'55'(4 �`-. .°Urk ' (1) b 1 .. t 1Tp1 paR R 31.50'171 14 -" >t 4111'4040'•101. 1 �-- 4UT S L 49.32'(71 1 1 (7401.041)l3)�� .STRf �.... 1:4 �a� CO ■ S 4615'23' W, r Pw111.MD 1 § REFERENCE SURVEYS 104140 3-1!11.Amara 049( Fr k `it.'9 04a7a�1r( MSI) A6$ 44.44'(:) W1Q T��n � 10474 /150410410 0191 CO.RA3x 10*' ®4b SIDEWALK EASEMENT A11/4 MICA --__TI�JdILGll l a 2 ��- 7 0117 UNE DATA TABLE 71.310 I 1-o.//1'a./v.c 74.IU CO'��-( ■J !! G - 14'32'16' u,°w°� J n1(Alwm•101110 La ■ • ftis� I R 465.00' I \ 100117' carts 11Y. S.C.CCNKA'PA7A.uj 11•'44 ■t j R•:I Acts'4441 0)11x7 11,(41 [ .JF ...OM�■ L .. 117.99' No. 10141. Ku t/• `, rut n 7AWU Aorta• in 1 • ■■�i1 CB •• H 61 17'01' W. I .MA L.A. 130 11 ��0 ow • 'Ism 117.67' SHEET 1 CF 2 • PARTITION PLAT PARTITION PLAT 1,0, 19g5-D13 RECORDED • IN DOCUMEN. �‘, 9501,2;701 BEING LOCATED IN 4 ,c: SOUTH ONE-HALF OF SECTION 3B, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, • CITY OF 110ARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON SURVEYED: DECEMBER 12, 1991 ALPHA ENGINEERING, INC. 1100 III.OAK NSA 61 11,iU K 330 ■ 1 ullA40,4(001 17 17) • (703)121-11003 DECLARATION SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE 0404 114 C01(AV I!73(It MK 1)K O1Ml(�d TMC 7,a lm N TMt CITY OF T10MD APPROVALS 40[0111 AMTMO CN8h 101'1 CFA MOAN.AND NN CAU I.*4011(4 7.GAY!(1[A4Y 0771710 TM 1 1404 DUN(MT 0711KT(D MO MAAMO MrAOKD 1)N .«~OAI d art l/N.2 C IKC MD T(INK f0 MM 1401'11 YOM.u01 r4,7110 W40f 007(704110 04 71K ATIAO KO/4111106(WM. 0TT Cr TOMO[910440 TY Ot1QOrYL11-Oft CM I(IM71rQN0 AND AJAKTCD MIO/4(11.1 Al 01041 w DK AIM(AtD DK 17110444(1 60110 0(3[30(9 N I010`1, �7 n' K✓,A.40 00(1 MU4(ST 07(4 1(0 t0 DM!14030 Al ruSJC 1417 A 00111104 d 114 103111 LMl-HALF d N0001 74,19.(10$'1►011)4. • Ill �YJ A' [r 101(044 ALL 411I(77,/410 N(ALI T 0AA(i ALL 744(14341!M0N1 MAMA 1 IN 1T d 1)K'7.AN(710 ma'am,077 d nov10 VARIAN DDiwrf, ON 90110 Mu(0, SALOON MO k m0 NOS IAAncv-4,7 0130110 Al 001467 aro 0'7 Toll DAT d(sIt r17(�NIL n4AC AAI MI+4171 mows MrNi Muff 1 T•MI room}T, /(0N/t10 AT 1K MIIAI I01t IOW 01101 Of 00)!74 ON[-GUM WI COI 11 Cr 1.40 017 d 11040 /(0 TON 34/t A A 3 0 4 4 1 3'N.I.31411 1777, 110471 M 03 II'30'N,744.0111(7 Y - 10 TK CAN INC d 7AUK(AUK!' TUIU A1D44 01 7437 UK,.M DO'I)'tY C � .r�� WARFMART, INC. 37.17 nt7 7o m W47min or 04 7001 CAM; 11K74C('LA1a0 um!ANN 4t. In r AA OM S 13 max ON TM/44 210:I010w10 T-MN CCUAX* • N 1.0'Or*Y 1•I1.11 run 1,INCE N II'*r 41.4.33.47/r(h 111471 N 00•II 34.1. WASHINGTON COUNTY APPROVALS 34.10 Itt71 71(4(1 or 14'U't.17.34 IUD DICK(11 11'11'11'1,7.12 rah /7 IN[Mq N 0;7Y 30'C.71.07 IUD 714(471 N 1.0 7r 11•C 11.37 It(7t 11 KAM (4,I /�i l� N$1'11'11 1.64.17 7u1 1)4(4(4 N 7('41'M•f,1..17/c(1 104(1 Aa770K9 431�_OA Co'4405 1/L�7 N Jr 30'74' )7.44 rut. Mum(M 1r 1.7'.3'C I/.M rail Naar N Dl'37.04•N, rA3W0101 00411 KTM NUJ 461 O.IONI 71.71 70(7; 111471 M 0r 04'33'1,44.17 IUT1 104(M 13'14'N'C 17.3./MT; 10171 007171A M/1'34'13'w,11.4 III IS 11 414c1 4 30'31 64'1,00.10/ail 110(N 71'00'or 1. J�) 100'',V11.-1Z9';`.;1.r M'71•t.1N11 7Ct1 7111(13 11•Ar OS'C 7113 III* 1.944 , .\ ` _ M M' 4 0 *7' Mu4q M ll 4.3/'1.7).17 60'1 M('IN 11•i4.'II N, 71.4 Torn 111]1[7 N 4.r IV/3'L 1611/t(17 MG11 M 1r••4 0r w,11.10 N'O t. 01 M 71'3t'II't,77.11 41[7, 7104(1N Sr N' /'L]177 03(11 M(4q 0 11•10'OY L 11,17 1101 11014 N 1.7.1.r 04'N,4.701)(1 INC KC 4.71'or U'1,3111 60'71 mac( N 70'N'II'C.11.31 ITC* 01040C N it 47'3]'t.71.31 00(11 0104C1 31'10.47'4 ACKNOWLEDGMENT 4140 11171 404(N 11'13'22'N,11.13 Itch 1104(N Or 11'13.C.14.31 nth 11401 STATE OF OREGON M 0.'II'11'C,31.00 ft(T: 101(7 N Or 43 03'0,1,70 IN(71 •11(44(1 Lt A440 7.40 0104 SS STATE IDAHO C O I t N•41'31'C,31.03 run 1)(K(1 4't3'31'C 7Oa41 fit1 TO DK 40.37 110(7-Or-NAT LK 0'1.11.7740 1114110 DKA71 44,7340 lA3}V7 10011-d-0AT INC,D WASHINGTON COUNTY COUNTY OF ADA SS 101103.440 10,111 CONK], Or 4.7'00 V.341.44 MID 11 191(1 OS•I N'II,377.31 11(71 71101(I OI'43'4'V, 1111 tU 1Tx1 MA}o1,MI } ( 337.11 IUD 1)a(µ0M0 A 34.00 It(7 INOVI OAK 10 114(Mo11,/ONO 0040 K 00173(4(1 T. Au IAl[J,1334 A0t(3lADITL ON VINO(ONMW Nf Mt rna 121 A T d►I �11 1AIIp=mot D410001 A[(MANN.A4ol d 11'or 11'.0.71 NU(0100►(MI I 41'31'73*N.14,14 IUI Al IVAC09 24'&RA 01.001 INK KM/b AI d ►04/04 IT MI CD A MO1 I/U►UC N A+ 74404(4 4,444444 000 IN It 04011-d-+A7(440,M Or 33'II N,11.70 It(11 1404(ALINI A 4 00 MT A-AA 24 11� AAy1 iAA�O 6111144 O.00+0.N10e,,0041 NA1 7 1'O ON• MDNI 0)4 TO 771 NOW,900011 00N1AK 40111141.112.41.T.DO 0.001 A[111111 MCI'0'11'3 11', 14T nut Mt II M(0'V O. .t 411(4 d 1 100 re..me%At 117.11 70(7 D1 410 r(MI N 11'it It'N 117.17 11[71, *10171 N 74'00'13'0,371.13 IUD , 140 MIl1VM0.1 441 003110 04 104µJ d 1µO COVON IDOL OT DK THOME N N 1r N N.11133 MD Mb/C(N 13'II'34'N,14.4/It1 10 1431 141114,MO. 9'4.[104. 4 CU, d._!161 640 7wAAA04 AY MOO TT d III 00440 0'DAMCMONL AN0 0001 A0410.11D(340 NASw0101 CONN.011701 1411nw(447 TO It d IIt OM II=ACt A44 DUD. • 10471JT100 10 IM(4 74. Of 0.4140 AT A 1.044!71404 14101 1)70 0014 7441-03447(7 • y�,�/�C 0404CC Cr 1'4 054.11,34 0043 127'04 11'I 11'O Till: T4 10 M N'11.04 1,44,34 I1(h 1.1 fMhO 1J/ O itfA /4/• M[N(1 01.3.Y 7O•►,N�(4 114,77 111114(1 N•7(•Dr[,]71.00 11171 T(Aq N 01'U'4' '�+SDK' 011;^t I11.0I rut, 1104(4 I3'1I'47'r,LII1/Vh M(NC 134.3.1'01'11,33.13 NIT TO DK 0111/11 ►7117 W KPMWIO Cr 104 tl[[7 TIO74, (A .a A (�•1'444.^^-' al.lter 7o 71 r'olria(1 OwuTm 40*70074 4(NO.1307434 STATE OF OREGON +�0.` * �`�h J 06/iz(/d p CON1AW10 41.777 30144(4101,OR)AI]1104 1 SS wnsluNCTON couNTY (k° Jt 4 I D0 moil=KT NNMI(104►M 01104 1'11 T W 1.10].0 • (01 0LDS'D 01)MSp -'UAT d.51241.4.0.4.1_,115,3., 400111A00 Al,1,i,SbOQD01-A-K.ND RI0000 M n(CO-NTT CADtA Nowt /I ROIISS/01OAI I(G21 CIAIYT NA Tots 1MM0 11 A m77 yp LAND SURVEYOR AAD 1144[1 D7IT d 14111104 IIAI Nq /YdS-61.3 l TA.aW„ _ n� ��ll In own o9 A4 if-/ • t1"t. *404/4 ti CA 11S Ill.1141 NU s3.14N 1NC11A33.t,GAM STATE OF OREGON 1111 SS TALO 1.0017. I-10-11 WAS1ilNGTON COUNTY 1 DO 44470 CD 161 1NAf 1111 MACK,11 A 0361 01171ID TO MC.IT DK/)11101 d 113 IN All MN COAL TO IC A 1111.1[APO(FAC1 077 0 M 000f4A1ASO DUI 11 040 MtC3'(D 04/K a t-'-DAT d y1KyAAJ Id'- Al 1373 G 0a001_Pjl,AND/'CUOD M n/: 00.1170 a(30(41Nr'D1 In (- 7f JL el-) 0(77411 170.01 11 0311,1 SHEET 2Cf 2 Submittal For SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TYPE II APPLICATION CC & R's Sent by: LOIS PORTNOY ATTY 5032970962 08/03/99 12:20PM Job 229 Page 2 nice , P), :COMA; ?ir8 343 8859 LCIS rOnikb• 4t �k.N-F3-1939 t 9:04 H7 LFND 8 FART L l P ?fi=t 347 :989 F DR d Filed for Record at Space for Recorder's Lite the Request of: Weremurtt,Inc 650 North Armstrong Place Boise,Idaho 13704-0825 AFTER RECORDING MAIL TO: Larry Z. Prince, Esq. HOLLAND£HART LL! 101 South Capitol Boulevard, Suite 1400 Boise, Idaho 23702 SECQN(D AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS., CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS,AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT • THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT (the "Second Amendment") is made as of the day of , 1999, by and between WAREMART, INC., an Idaho corporation ("Waremart"), as the successor to SUPERVALU Holdings, Inc., an Ohio corporation ("SUPERVALU"), MARK LURIA and DOYLE WHEELES (`Luria and Wheeles"), as successors to PETsMART, Inc , a Delaware corporation, PETsMART, INC., a Delaware corporation ("PETsMART"), COMMERCIAL NET LEASE REALTY INC., a California corporation ("CNLRI"), as the successor to both CNL NET LEASE INVESTORS, LP, a California limited partnership ("CNL"), and TCC-BTS TIGARD I, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("TCC-BTS"), and GORDON R. MARTIN ("Martin"). Waremart, Luria and Wheeles, CNLRI and Martin arc referred to herein collectively as the"Owners " RECITALS A SUPERVALU and PETsMART entered into that certain Declaration of Covenants and Reciprocal Easement Agreement (the "Declaration") dated August 30, 1993. recorded as Instrument No. 93081054, records of Washington County, Oregon, for the purposes of setting forth covenants, conditions and restrictions governing, among other things, reciprocal access, sign usage, parking, pedestrian access, maintenance of parking lots, landscaping and building exteriors and types of use to enhance the value of the Shopping Center developed on the Property Defined terms not otherwise defined in this Second Amendment have the meanings set forth in the Declaration SECOND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS,CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT - Sent by: LO15 VIMINUY AlIY 5032970962 08/03/99 12:21PM Job 229 Page 3 _ 5:84A47; 2::6 J44 5h69 :ANN PORTNOv Ai Tr: M ,:,;.1.71-0 3-1999 F13:06 Hit LAND t H4RT 11ID B. Waramart purchased the Property pursuant to that certain Purchase Agreement dated January 8, 1993, by and between Waremart and SUPERVALU, and has succeeded to SUPERVALU's interest under the Declaration. C Luria and Wheeles purchased Lot 2, also known as Retail B, from PETsMART, and PETsMART is a Prime Lessee as that term is defined in Section 1.01(s) of the Declaration D. Warman and Luria and Whccics entered into that certain First Amendment to Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and Reciprocal Easement Agreement (the "First Amendment') dated March, 1995. recorded as instrument number 95024984, records of Washington County, Oregon. E. CNL purchased Lots 4 and 5, as depicted on the Site Plan attached as Exhibit B to the Declaration and as amended by the Site Plan covering Lots 4 and 5 attached to the First Amendment, and transferred said property to CNLR1 on or about November 18, 1998, via Warranty Deed. F Martin purchased from Waremart that certain parcel of property more particularly described as follows: Parcel 1 on the Partition Plat 1995-013, in the County of Washington, State of Oregon, instrument number 95012308 (the "Parcel 1 Property"). The Parcel l Property consists of approximately .59 acres, is located southwest of Southwest Dartmouth Street and is not immediately adjacent to any of the other parcels which comprise the Shopping Center H. The Owners have agreed that the Parcel 1 Property should not be part of the Shopping Center and should not be covered, affected by, or have any rights or obligations under the Declaration, as amended. I Waremart has entered into a Purchase Agreement dated March 15, 1999, with Rembold Properties, LLC ("Renabold") for the development of certain commercial facilities on Lot 3 Parcels A. Bl, B7., and C (collectively, the "Rembold Parcels") on the Site Plan which is attached hereto as Exhibit B and, by this reference, incorporated herein as if set forth in full. J. The commercial facility which Rembold intends to construct on Parcel A will be placed in an area designated as an area for vehicular or pedestrian traffic on the Site Plan attached to the Declaration as Exhibit B. K, The Owners have agreed that the value and utility of the Property will be enhanced by the commercial facilities proposed by Rembold, and wish to amend the Declaration to permit and facilitate the development of the Reinhold Parcels. SECOND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS. AND RECIPROCAL.EASEMENT AGREEMENT - 2 Sent by: LOIS PORTNOY ATTY 5032970962 08/03/99 12:22PM Job 229 Page 4 " .;4AM: 268 s+3 aery :Oi`_ "0ii7i4 A . ..; 1-1-03—i9S9 PP. HOLLAND & HART LLP )0F1 '.ii .11.4. I 4 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals above, the parties agree to amend the Declaration as follows I. Amendment of Refersaces to Lot 5. As set forth above in Recital E, CNL the lots referred to in the Declaration and the First Amendment as Lots 4 and 5, and transferred said property to CNLJIU on or about November 18, 1998. Due to the merger of Lots 4 and 5, both lots shall be referred to collectively, hereinafter and on Exhibit B attached hereto, as Lot 4 2• Exclusion of Parcel 1 Property. Notwithstanding anything in the Declaration, as amended, to the contrary, the Parcel t Property shall be, and it hereby is, completely deleted and excluded from the Declaration, as amended, and the Parcel I Property shall not be encumbered by, or have any rights arising under, the Declaration. as amended 3. Amendment of Exhibits. Exhibit B to the First Amendment, which replaced Exhibit B to the Declaration, is hereby amended and replaced with Exhibit B attached hereto. 4. Amendment of Definition of"Lot" Section 1.01(1) is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: "Lot"means any of the five lots (Lot I a.lda WinCo, Lot 2 a/1c/a PETSMART,Lot 3 a/k/a Parcels A, 131, B2, and C Or the Rembold Parcels, and Lot 4 a/k/a Office Max, which are individually referred to as a "Lot"and collectively referred to as 'Lots")shown on Exhibit B, 5. Amendment of Buildine Height. Section 3.03.4, Building Height, is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: All Buildings on Lots I, 2,3, and 4 shall be single story with mezzanine permitted and shall not exceed 31 feet in height; except that the Building on Parcel A of Lot 1 shall be single story with no mezzanine permitted and shall not exceed I (iteen rem feet in height on the eastern-most 12. feet of the Building and 24 feet in height at any one point on the remainder of the Building (including mechanical fixtures and equipment and screening for the same, if any). All other Buildings shall be single story with no mezzanine permitted and shall not exceed 22 feet in height(including mechanical fixtures and equipment and screening for the same, if any). No mezzanine or basement shall be used for the sale or display of merchandise. SECOND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS,AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT - 3 Sent by: LOIS PORTNOY ATTY 5032970962 08/03/99 12:23PM Job 229 Page 5 ,•08 .-as tfnhsl - :uiS FbATNU' 477-•: M.: • H s 5--i 3 199? 09:IE HOLLAND $ HART LLP 2R8 74- 859 r,if j4 • 6. Amendment of Pylon Situate. The first two sentences of Section 3 03 i, Pylon or Monument Signage, are hereby amended to read in their entirety as follows (all other provisions and sentences of Section 3.03.5 remain unatnended): Subject to governmental approval, two free-standing signs are erected at the locations designated "Center Pylon Sign"on the Site Plan, as amended by the Second Amendment It is agreed that there is a shared pylon sign with Lot I's Owner having the first choice of position for a single Occupant of Lot I (the "First Sign User"), Lot 2's Owner having second choice of position for a single Occupant of Lot 2 (the "Second Sign User"), and Lot 3's Owner having third choice of position for up to two Occupants of Lot 3 (collectively, the"Third Sign User") Lot l's Owner and Lot 3's Owner both acknowledge that the pylon sign used exclusively by Lot I's Owner(the "Lot 1 Pylon") is located on Lot 3 (specifically, Lot 3 Parcel A). Lot I's Owner shall maintain the Lot I Pylon, or cause the Lot 1 Pylon to be maintained, in first class condition. In the event Lot l's Owner fails to maintain. or cause to be maintained,the Lot 1 Pylon in first class condition, Lot 3's Owner may rectify said failure by using the process set forth in Section 4.03. 7. Amendment of Supermarket Use Restriction. The first sentence of Section 6 02, Supermarket Use Restriction, is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows (all other provisions and sentences of Section 6 02 remain unamended) For so long as Lot 1 is being used or has during the immediately preceding twelve (12) months been used for the operation of a supermarket, no portion of the Shopping Center, other than Lot I, shall be used as a supermarket (which is hereby defined to mean any store. bakery,or delicatessen, engaging in the sale of fresh or frozen meat. poultry, fish or produce for primarily off-premises preparation Or consumption or otherwise primarily devoted to the retail sale of food for off-premises preparation and consumption), and no portion of Lot 3 shall be used as a take-and-bake pizza restaurant/store_ 8. Addition of Provision Relating to Type V-N Rating Maintenance of Lot 3. Section 3.06., Type V-N Rating Maintenance for Lot 3, is hereby added to read as follows Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in this Declaration, all buildings constructed on Lot 3 must be constructed such that the Type V-N rating, as described by tnc Uniform Building Code("UBC"), as adopted by the State of SECOND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT-4 Sent by LOIS PORTNOY ATTY 5032970962 08/03/99 12:24PM Job 229 Page 6/14 n.nd;A.t, ..0.5 343 ends LOTS 'rOHTNOY Arty; Mb ;416-03-1999 1999 09:616 I- UaNt , HART H I ? :r1S 747: 9 r',t)i ,. Oregon for the stores on Lots 1 and 2, be itiatntathed. Maintenance of this code rating may be accomplished either through the establishment of yards setback from adjacent property lines or adjacent street centerlines as described in the LBC or through the construction of a rated area separation wall as described in the UBC 9 Amendment of Parking Easements. Section 2.01.7, Parking Easements s, hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows Nonexclusive easements in and to the parking areas for access to and use for vehicular parking purposes. Such parking easements shall consist of no less than 4 83 parking spaces fur each 1,000 square feet of Gross Floot Area of the Shopping Center. Each Owner covenants and agrees that at all times during the term of this Declaration the parking area and ratios shall be maintained in the general configuration set forth in the Site Plan, as amended by the Second Amendment. Subject to the applicable requirements of any governmental agency having jurisdiction over the Shopping Center, each Owner covenants that the widths of parking spaces, parking lanes, and parking bays shall be in accordance with the widths and dimensions shown on the Site Plan, as amended by the Second Amendment, on their respective portions of the Shopping Center, but that in any event the parking spaces in Lots 1, 2, and 3 will be no less than 9 feet wide and 18 feet deep, and the parking spaces in Lots 4 will be no less than 8.5 feet wide and 18 feed deep Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, the Owner of Lots and 4 may designate up to 10 compact parking spaces which will be no less than 7 5 feet wide and 18 feet deep. The Owners agree to designate employee parking spaces on their respective Lots with the standard letter"E"of such size and color as to be readily observable in daylight hours to users of the parking areas. The Owners shall designate adequate employee parking places on their respective Lots to serve the businesses located on their respective Lots. The Owner and/or Occupant of each Lot shall require the Owner's employees or the employees of all Occupants of each Lot to park only in the employee parking spaces marked with "E" on its Lot 10, Counterparts. This Second Amendment may be executed in any number or counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to he an original, but all such counterparts together shall constitute one and the same Agreement 11 Survival of all Other Provisions. Except as expressly set forth in this Second Amendment, all other terms and conditions of the Declaration, as amended b) the ti :COND AJIIENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT - S Sent by: LOIS PORTNOY ATTY 5032970962 08/03/99 12:25PM Job 229 Page 7/14 ..,js 343 36619 LOBS POPYNO. Ai i'i; s'i .1c1-1373..1209 09;r.i€, k ...LA ) 8 FART l.tP ?Pie 141 416,4 P.}''f'?.'1,:t First Amendment, shall remain in full force and effect. In the event of any inconsistency between this Second Amendment and the Declaration and the First Amendment, this Second Amendment shall control IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Second Amendment as of the day and year first above wntten. WAREMART, INC Ry--- Its___ _- STATE OF IDAHO, )ss. County of Ada On this day of lune, 1999 before me, Notary Public, personally appeared , known or proved to me to be the of WAREMART, INC., an Idaho corporation, the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of said corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official scat the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public Residing at Comm Expires SECOND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT- 6 rr Sent by: LOIS PORTNOY ATTY 5032970962 08/03/99 12:26PM Job 229 Page 8/14 xc.c_ar::. ... ':•r., ti:uoAq; ::(IB ads tsNfiti 016 PO14TWOY ATTv, in Rh-03-1999 09:137 HOLLAND & HART LIP 08 343 386' P.a3i I i MARK LURIA • STATE OF )ss. County of On this day of June, 1999 before me, a Notary Public,personally appeared MARK LURIA,known or proved to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the foregoing instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public Residing at Comm. Expires, SECOND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT- 7 Sent by: LUIb 1'UMIPNUY Al IY DUJ1!!/Ulit Uti/UJ/yy 1L:Ltit'M JOD LLy rage 111l14 ti VOW; i001 3.0 8+369 -• e.013 RCIFtetGV ; is iTr-f3-i9 t:f'i^ H C O L A r 1 G "a H A P T L!_P ?3P 143 RAW!' P.ft9•t DOYLE WHEELES w__STATE OF ) )ss County of On this day of June, 1999 before me, , Notary Public, personally appeared DOYLES WHEELES, known or proved to me to he the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the foregoing instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official soul the day and year m this certificate first above written Notary Public —. Residing at Comm. Expires_ SECOND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS,CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT- 8 Sent by: LOIS PORTNOY ATTY 5032970962 08/03/99 12:27PM Job 229 Page 10/14 ]� ., { n:ueA�r; r;efj i43 AEi9 4> LOTS LPOORTkin UP 410 y� I T.K.- 1� 09:V 7 HOLLAND a 1 iice 21 343 8% F.jU. 14 GORDON R. MARTIN STATE OF ) )ss. County of ) On this day of lune, 1999 before me, , a Notary Public, personally appeared GORDON R. MARTIN, known or proved to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the foregoing instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public Residing at -__---_ Comm. Expires SECOND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RF.STRICTIONS, AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT -9 Sent by: LOIS PORTNOY ATTY 5032970962 08/03/99 12:27PM Job 229 Page 11/14 .,s•r:..•,• •. .. n:;,nAirs %10# A4 i AMA i f1TR P4ATVOY MT,/: /t r aL-c33-1999 09:07 HCILAND HOLLAND & HART LLP 208 34 t869 P.I 1 14 PETsMART, INC. By - — Its STATE OF ) )ss. County of On this day of June, 1999 before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared • known or proved to me to be the of PETSMART, INC.. a Delaware corporation, the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of said corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and aced my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public Residing at Comm. Expires SECOND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS,CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT- 10 Sent by: LOIS PORTNOY ATTY 5032970962 08/03/99 12:28PM Job 229 Page 12/14 • , F,07"; 'raft 343 64559 -> toIS POiimov WY; Its 14 -03-1 09:07 HOLLAND & HcRT LLP 08 343 Mr69 r.tr-14 COMMERCIAL NET LEASE REALTY INC By Its STATE OF )ss. County of On this _ day of June. 1999 before me. , a Notary Public, personally appeared , known or proved to me to be the of COMMERCIAL NET LEASE REALTY INC. the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of said corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public Residing at Comm. Expires SECOND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT - i l Sent by: LOIS PORTNOY ATTY 5032970962 08/03/99 12:28PM Job 229 Page 13/14 .-'+y; 8:07AM; ?r 4 3::, a%v = LOIS PORTNOV TTY; 4:5 4.0703-1999 09:07 HOLLAND 3 HART LLP 2 FiEl 343 6869 F.13 -: APPROVAL PFL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY executes this Second Amendment to acknowledge its approval thereof, and agrees to recognize this Second Amendment in the event it forecloses its liens on Lot 2. PFL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY By _ - Its STATE OF ) )ss- County of On this day of June, 1999 before me, - Notary Public, personally appeared , known or proved to me to be the of PFL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of said national banking association. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official scat the day and year in this certificate first above written. Notary Public Residing at Comm. Expires BOISE:0090427.06 SECOND AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT - 12 Sent by: LOIS PORTNOY ATTY 5032970962 08/03/99 12:29PI1 Job 229 Page 14/14 265 343 5969 - LOIS ;NINON AT'.. e+a 426-03-1999 09:GB HOLLAND 8+ HART LLP :3�.7 6.8869 F. 14. 1 -- — -' `" S000.J l2:IY 13HVM 1 f ii, ad I 106.001.1•11*..19 14313NS s2j, i i JITN 3AV ONZ 'MS i- . _J _______„.c. __..„ i ____ _ _ _ _ __ • _ i i i i I a� 14 ' � s � 1 I! i 1 r U 1 i I ' -� I 1 ,ow ^` o(..) , . . 1_ , ,.., I 0 <a •.— _ / 1 N Q L !, - :II ,.. _ Ow 1 i I VI lilt I!,, ! 3 I I , � / 11 'c I +�iIIs , / i col 1 1 1 . • ri W Nttri 7 1 i \ A i ' / i i •:I lei f I I � 1 �arr6 r) i 7 X Li f' ; d w 1, z / we i z / !, l LL,o a_ f�1 i w /3:131 mz c I i W n �1// �fi i 1 ---=za.-- --(=x 2- ...- \ J cn _.--r----------.---"--- . ! [ . . r ` TOTAL P.14 Submittal For SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TYPE II APPLICATION NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING EVIDENCE A R C N I T E C T S mat 1022 SW SALMON ST,SUITE 350• PORTLAND,OREGON 97205•USA•TELEPHONE 503 222 5757•FAX 503 241 1514•WWW MCMARCHITECTS.COM COMMUNIQUE DISTRIBUTION: VIA: DATE: July 7,1999 File TO: Denise Doherty Rembold Companies NUMBER OF PAGES TRANSMITTED: VIA: Hand Delivered PROJECT NUMBER: 99015 PROJECT: Rembold Tigard Triangle FILE NAME: File=07-07-99=neighmtg.doc FROM: Doug Benson RE: Neighborhood CIT Meeting—Tigard City Hall Present: Denise Doherty,Doug Benson 1. Five neighborhood residents were in attendance at the meeting. All of them live east of the project site either along SW 72"d or on one of the side streets that feed into SW 72nd. 2. We described the project and its relationship to the previously proposed plans for this parcel. 3. All of those present said they are in favor of the project. They did offer a few comments regarding the site and current issues: a. They asked if we planned to develop a stair connecting the walkway in front of the primary buildings and SW 72"d. We indicated that the City Planning staff had requested that we provide a stair at this location. b. They advised us that plant materials on the bank along SW 72"d are frequently stolen. They also indicated that the irrigation lines currently installed on the slope frequently break and wash out part of the soil. c. They asked if the one way entry drive at the rear of the property (north) was intended to remain one way or be changed. We advised them that this drive was outside of our property and that, as far as we know, there are no plans to modify it at this time. d. They asked if we knew the status of the proposed new signal at 72"d and Dartmouth. We indicated we did not. 4. The meeting was concluded with the neighbors restating their support for the project. END COMMUNIQUE 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 1, Douglas A. Benson , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed Rer. i 1 nevP1 npment affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently • registered) SW 72nd & SW Dartmouth Road , and did on the 23 day of June 19 99 personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a Planned novelopment application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at SW 72nd, adjacent to the existing site entry to the Winco Center, approximately 200' north of the intersection of SW 72nd and Dartmouth (state location you posted notice on property) i■ - - • 11)(I the pre - - - of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the .23 day of 44111.J , 19Z !'Z., OFFICIAL SEAL o‘azt-- �-rti - °�'�l+r;< BETTE JEAN OWEN . NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON NOTARY PU LIC OF.OREGON COMMISSION NO.059428 Od d MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOV 29. 2000 My Commission Expires:..�r�aZ 4�a (Applicant,please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) --------------------------------------------- NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: !Name of Applicant/Owner: 'Address or General Location of Subject Property: [Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): J h:ll09nlpattyVnasterslaffposLmal • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) )ss. City of Tigard ) 1, Denise Doherty , being duly sworn, depose and say that on June 21st , 1999 I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the attached list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at (or near) SW 72nd and SW Dartmouth RD Tigard, OR 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 given to postal carrier at 1022 SW Salmon Ste. 450 with postage prepaid thereon. Portland, OR 97205 Signature (In the presen of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON,NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the .2.2. .day of , 1917 OFFICIAL SEAL / BETTE JEAN OWEN , st NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON 'p c f� COMMISSION NO.05942$ N•T•RY P LIC OF OREGON MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOV 29, 2000 My.Commission Expires: 1//.t9 .i OO • (Applicant,please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: RemborUCbmpanles LLC (TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Retail �Name of Applicant/Owner: Rembold Companies LLC Address or General Location of Subject Property. 1022 SW Salmon Ste. 450 i Unrt l a n r?! (lR 472055 :Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): .J kuogimpattyvnasterstemad.mst REAL ESTATE LLD DEVELOPMENT June 22, 1999 COMPANIES (INVESTMENT CONSTRUCTION «FirstName» «LastName» «Address 1» • «City» «State» «PostalCode» RE: Rembold Companies Dartmouth Street Retail Development Dear Neighbor: Rembold Properties LLC is currently working on the design of a retail development to be located on the remaining,undeveloped parcel of land within the Winco Foods development at SW 72" and Dartmouth St..The specific parcel is located directly adjacent to the east wall of the Petsmart store and extends to the west edge of SW 72°d.We are currently developing the design and plan to submit to the City for review of our Site Development proposal by the Planning Commission. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary reviews and permits,we would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents.You are invited to attend a meeting on Wednesday,July 7, 1999 Town Hall Room Tigard City Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,Oregon 7:00 pm Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans.These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. We look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you.Please call me at 222- 7258 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Denise Doherty Rembold Properties LLC 1022 SW Salmon Str•el • Sults 450 • Portland. OR 97205 USA • Telephone 1.503.222.7258 • Fax 1•503•222•1053 1 S136CD-02000 136CD-0430 WAREMART INC WA C 3336E 32ND ST#217 3336 ST#217 TULSA,OK 74135 SA,OK 7 5 1 S136DA-00902 1 S 136DA-02100 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN BEACH DAYLE D EVELYN 0 6900 SW HAINES 11530 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S136DC-00101 1S136DC-00200 COHN ALLWIN V TRUSTEE THOMAS ALFRED E AND JUNE R 7105 SW BAYLOR 7135 SW BAYLOR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S136DC-00300 1 S 136DC-00301 WOZNIAK JOHN G AND DARLENE M BUEHLER JAMES D&MELISSA S 14200 SW FERN ST 7175 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S136DC-00400 1 S136DC-00500 CHASE WILLIAM L VIOLET TOM MOYER THEATRES 11580 SW 72ND AVE 7132 COMMERCIAL PARK DR TIGARD,OR 97223 KNOXVILLE,TN 37918 1 S136DC-02503 1 S136DC-02504 LURIA MARK T AND SUPERVALU HOLDINGS INC 19601 N 27TH AVE 4TH FLOOR 3336 E 32ND ST#217 PHOENIX,AZ 85027 TULSA,OK 74135 1S136DC-02700 1S136DC-02701 HAAG NANCY P LEFEBVRE MICHAEL PAUL SR& 7070 SW BAYLOR 7040 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-02800 1S136DC-02900 SALIMENA JOHN A ET AL KOCH ROBERT J 7100 SW BAYLOR 7130 SW BAYLOR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 • 1S136DC-03000 1 S136DC-03100 HORNE WILLIAM I/ROBBIE L AMACHER JUANITA AND 7160 SW BAYLOR 12060 SW ROSE VISTA DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-03200 1S 136DC-03300 FEGLES MARY A NOBLE THOMAS L LARRIE P 11205 SW SUMMERFIELD DR 11750 SW 72ND TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03400 1S136DC-03500 MAHON HUGH S ANNA BELLE WINKLER ROBERT G 12095 SW 118TH AVE 11745 SW 70TH TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 136DC-03501 1 S 136DC-03507 CONNET JANE AND JOHN R PETERS ARDEN LYNN& 8416 SW 57TH AVE 7105 SW CLINTON ST PORTLAND,OR 97219 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03508 1S136DC-03509 PETERS ARDEN LYNN& DORTON CHARLIE R AND 7105 SW CLINTON ST 7075 SW CLINTON STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03510 1S136DC-03700 JACKSON GENE E&CAROLYN MAE POTTMEYER SHARON BEATRICE 7045 SW CLINTON ST 7050 SW CLINTON TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-03800 1S1360C-03900 WAHL ROBERT LEO&ROSE MARIE JACOBER LESTER L JOAN M 7080 SW CLINTON 7110 SW CLINTON TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DC-04000 - 3600-04100 ALFIERI PHILLIP J LEW YN ARY C 14690 NW HEATHMAN LN 1186' :" D AVE PORTLAND,OR 97229 ARD,OR 9 3 1S136DC-04200 1S136DC-04300 LEWIS LYNN C MARY C KROO STEVEN 11860 SW 72ND AVE 11930 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S136DC-04400 1S136DC-04402 POLLOCK DONALD E HEDGEPETH LOUISE AGNES 1834 SW 58TH#202 11990 SW 72ND AVENUE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 .136DC-0451 s 1S136DC-04600 WA" M•- INC COMMERCIAL NET LEASE REALTY INC 3336 D ST#217 455 S ORANGE AVE STE 700 • SA,OK 135 ORLANDO, FL 32802 2S101AB-00100 2S101BA-00100 POLLOCK DONALD EJJULIA GAIL MARTIN GORDON R 1834 SW 58TH#202 12265 SW 72ND AVE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 BA-00101 2S 101 BA-00300 MARTIN GORDON S ET AL MARTIN GORDON RICHARD 12265 SW 72ND AVE PO BOX 740 TIGARD,OR 97223 GLENEDEN BEACH,OR 97388 • U m r UI- I IWNIji _ COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT TEAM AM (CIT SUBCOMMITTEES S' :1��ui MIN�t +''' t�ic'��F�i1 f � ,�' � � y'• w, y - -- - ...r•. a t,t�`t4�.W ES T` ,, ,t.1�((►�t, 4 i , '""114:1( fp " ,' ' ,�;�/r ({ .r� ti' +` hlU3 a.� `� i,!��.I.,t!�i�t,�[ N '�t��'�� I. .'�j,� 11 ��W 1 + � ` . .,:T f.� � Y� '.'mot,., p _L.lTli_ ., a�l�llf,' ' it:3-t A. . i :J,24fl•u, 7r; ,; -'_OU ■ ',' "X, fi ... E • e4,' '.1 Ldtit ,o,f Ed & Fran Egan Naomi Gallucci 14635 SW Bull Mountain Roa. 11285 SW 78"'Avenue Sally Christenhen Debra Seeman Tigard, OR 97224 Earl Marilyn Elias Tigard, 15G85 SW 76 Avenue 13372 SW Clearview Way , OR 97223 Sue Rorman Tigard, OR 97224 I Tigard, OR 97223 13540 SW Village Glenn D - 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Mary Ann Melvin Mary Skelton Tigard, OR 97223 10395 SW Bonanza Way I 10355 SW Walnut Tigard, OR 97223 • Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Craig Minor 14210 SW Windsong Court Stephen Bicker Tigard, OR 97223 14235 SW 97th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Paul E. Owen Oh 10335 SW Highland Drive Mark Bogert Tigard, OR 97224 14445 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Beverly Froude 12200 SW Bull Mountain Road Twyla Brady Tigard, OR 97224 9360 SW Edgewood Street Tigard, OR 97223 Craig Smelter 14900 SW 103rd Avenue Debra Muir Tigard, OR 97224 15065 SW 79"'Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 • Joan Best 10705 SW Murdock Ln, #F2 Sue Siebold Tigard, OR 97224 15374 SW Thurston Lane Tigard, OR 97224 �' Kathy Palmer c/o John Tigard House Tim Esav 14260 SW High Tor Dr. PO Box 230695 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97281 --- ---------- L • PLEASE NOTE: In addition to all ro'er owners within 500 feet of the sub'ect site notice of meetin;s on land use irotosals shaII be sent __ all names_ _on this list. . I • 1:kurolnkmastersvevlsemutnoticrost Submittal For SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TYPE II APPLICATION IMPACT STUDY 7 KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 7 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING/TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 610 SW ALDER,SUITE 700 • PORTLAND,OR 97205 • (503)228-5230 • FAX(503)273-8169 June 10, 1999 Project#: 3711.00 Mr. Doug Benson MCM Architects MCM Architects RECEIVED 1022 SW Salmon Street, Suite 350 Portland, OR 97205 JUN 11 1999 RE: Rembold/Tigard Triangle Site Dear Doug: The purpose of this letter is to provide a comparative trip generation assessment of the retail development currently being proposed by Rembold Trust, Inc on the Winco site within the Tigard Triangle versus what was assumed in our February 1993 Transportation Impact Study for the retail center on the subject site. Referring to an exhibit prepared by MCM Architects dated April 28, 1999 titled the Rembold/Tigard Triangle Site,Rembold Trust is proposing three retail buildings totaling 37,000 square feet,of which 10,000 square feet will be outdoor garden sales. These buildings would take the place of what was previously designated as Retail "C" on the site plan we studied in February 1993, which included 41,105 square feet of retail floor area(see attached site plan from our February 1993 study). The 41,105 square feet included in our February 1993 study was assumed to be general retail space within a shopping center.The proposed 37,000 square feet of retail floor area is consistent with our previous assumptions and is clearly less square feet of retail floor space than assumed in our February 1993 study. I trust this information adequately addresses the transportation related issues associated with the proposed development. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. / ,/ ar . Vandehey, 'ti . Principal Attachment FILE NAME:H:IPROJFILE\371 I\TRIPGEN.WPD Submittal For SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TYPE II APPLICATION PRE-APPLICATION MEETING NOTES - s rm rk'" { rr ..--.r....-. f. .. _ ..,.,m,..s_ .. ' • R .. a a:�.3S.a Y . • I R u 1, I r. „IL t„Ilt: a 16nt71 [Pre-Appiica o • , NON-RESIDENTIAL rQr‘wl°uS Fr/L J 93-o 2-; Cc�b Foods f r50-.oO '. F off. PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: 5.12-0/ 9 //9 r S 7.'1$ STAFF AT PRE-APP 0/.71 / pQ SOQ 9 /^ Fncc-. F-c -Fry' ooSr rem APPLICANT: L Ru.s - AGENT: Phone:[ - 51-S Phone: I I PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GEN.LOCATION: c )(,3 t- s I dam- •.f s 7zr�.12-. Nor'4. s r✓ TAX MAP[S1/LOT#{Sl: / 5/ 3 lo Dc. .c t't 5 v 4' l3 ,s c c.) NECESSARY APPLICATION[S1: 5i te- D p,no t Re.0 Plc -r`e-ct. De L.1 op rnZrt/k- PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: (..1-71--"L. o-f .2 z ou o .5 F e , 3 ba.4. cii _s p t<.c,s ./0 oc D .SH •4- owl de-c s Lt s COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 's uCtil 1 +'u` G -&- - MAP DESIGNATION: e,•�2 C-omr-Ya_ft-elz-P ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: C- 6- C- G- P D CIT.AREA: C FACILITATOR: PHONE: [5031 ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT SIZE: - sq. ft. Avetpge lot width: -sG ft Maximum building height: 'S`s ft. Setbacks: Front 0 ft. Side C/3' Rear %-c ft. Corner -- ft.from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: 85 % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation.area: 15 %. c.bc..tis c.- 402-Q-� ? - `- (Refer to Code Section 18. s�o l • s ru t- Cu- d-Q- ADDITIONALLOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREME £EE 6-A-12-1) rrei 4(0 4-6 .5 7'•.-N o A-20 s u�O64_ Ec-ICON / cf .(o.-0 MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 5 feet, unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a pa ition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access ease nt. The DEPTH OF ALL L S SHALL NOT EXCEED 21/2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 11/2 mes the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. [Refer to Code Section 18.810.0601 CITY Uncut) Pre-Application Conference Motes Page 1 ef9 H114asleaatlal&Op1IcatleUnaanlag OM slam Section SPECIAL SETBACKS 7n a,•�b f` -5 / REETS: feet from the centerline of 7.2 �- > ESTABLISHED AREAS: feet from . D LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet, along the site's boundary. > FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7301 SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS BUILDING XCEPTIONS - 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(Y2) of the building's height; and ;- The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. [Refer to Code Section 18.130.010.8.1 B �-- � ot7co0 .3F 1in civc9`i" . PARKING AND ACCESS REQUIRED parking for this type of use: 3 .7 lr 0 cp c, oO) • .L/r co 0 Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): i7 - ': • parking: . 3 / / coo (ct Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): O NO MORE THAN 40% of required spaces may be designated and/or dimensioned as compact spaces. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: > Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 6 inches x 18 feet. (.0 e'N c-41 t--.) > Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 inches x 16 feet,Snches. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3)feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. [Refer to Code Section 18.765.0401 Handicapped Parking: ➢ All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. ➢ BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: 3 0 Minimum pavement width: ' All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: • [Refer to Code Chapters 18.765 and 18.705) CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 11O114esIdeptlallpplIcetlee/Meaplag OhrIsloa Settles _ WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS WALKWAYS-SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. de Section 18.105.0301 LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS very : • ' • - 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. efer to Code Section 18.765.0801 CLEAR VISION AREA e i requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7951 BUFFERING AND SCREENING In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO El ER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent dev- opments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas aloe• certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. :uffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and st also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or -nces may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The re• ired buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Addition- information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code [Refer to Code Chapter .1451 The RE* IRED B FF IDTHS which area• •Iicable o • r •ro•osal area ar- as f•Ilows: feet a •ng north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet :long south boundary. feet along west boundary. DDITION, SIG 'T OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: LANDSCAPIH STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised planters. For detailed information on design requirements for parking areas and accesses. [Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 18.7051 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9 11O114esldentlelAsollatleUMioolog Min Sectl•e SIGNS/ SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for review before the Hearings Officer. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.1801 SENSITIVE LANDS The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHIC ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN TH' 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPE: IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to prelimi ary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available informati"n. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive lands areas. and their boundarie.. is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must •- clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for t - use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.1151 STEEP SLOPES When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approv- standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall •e based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.0.2 and 18.775.080.C.3. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY(USA)BUFFER STAN-ARDS,R&0 96-44 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACE TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wise enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOr SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 25-FEET-WIDE, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries if the sensitive area, except where approval has been granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an . ea of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable enc'•achment shall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the I •ngth of the vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in •idth. In any case, the average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. Restrictions in the egetate Corridor: NO structures, d -velopment, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any v aterials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water • ality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: A GRAV WALKWAY OR BIKE PATH, NOT EXCEEDING EIGHT (8) FEET IN WIDTH. If the walkway or bike path is paved, then the vegetated corridor must be widened by the width to the path. • paved or gravel walkway or bike path may not be constructed closer than ten (10) feet from t►e 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 OF TIGARD Pre plicatlon Conference Notes Page 4 of 9 ION;o:ldaatlal 141ollcatloo/Maooloo IMiloa!Actin D. WATER QUALITY FACILITIES may encroach into the ve•-tated corridor a maximum of ten (10) feet with the approval of the Agency or City. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATE'. MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the veg-tated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be u•ed for the construction of a dwelling unit. [Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3,Desi' for SWM) WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY DISTRICT The WATER RESOURCES (WR) OVERLAY DIST"ICT implements the policies of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and is intended to resolve co licts between development and conservation of significant wetlands, streams and riparian cor idors identified in the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. Specifically, this chapter allo s reasonable economic use of property while establishing clear and objective standards to: 'protect significant wetlands and streams; limit development in designated riparian corridors; m. ntain and enhance water quality; maximize flood storage capacity; preserve native plant cover; mi imize streambank erosion; maintain and enhance fish and wildlife habitats; and conserve sce c, recreational and educational values of water resource areas. Safe Harbor: The WR OVERLAY DISTRICT ALSO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 (Natural Resources) and the "safe arbor" provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660, Division 23). These provisions req ,ire that "significant" wetlands and riparian corridors be mapped and protected. The Tualatin Ri er, which is also a "fish-bearing stream," has an average annual flow of more than 1000 cfs. Major Streams: Streams which are mapped as "FIS -BEARING STREAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry and have an average annual flow le:s than 1000 cubic feet per second (cfs). D Major streams in Tigard • dude FANNO CREEK, ASH CREEK (EXCEPT THE NORTH FORK AND OTHER TRIB TARY CREEKS) AND BALL CREEK. Minor Streams: Streams which are NOT "FIS •-BEARING STREAMS" according to Oregon Department of Forestry maps . Minor streams in Ti.:rd include Summer Creek, Deny Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and certa. short tributaries of the Tualatin River. Riparian Setback Area: This AREA IS MEASUR' D HORIZONTALLY FROM AND PARALLEL TO MAJOR STREAM OR TUALATIN RIVER TOP •F-BANKS, OR THE EDGE OF AN ASSOCIATED WETLAND, whichever is greater. The ripari. setback is the same as the "riparian corridor boundary" in OAR 660-23- 090(1)(d). D The standar. TUALATIN RIVER RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 75 FEET, unless modified in accordance ith this chapter. :- The MAJ• STREAMS RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 50 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this • apter. ISOLAT D WETLANDS AND MINOR STREAMS (including adjacent wetlands) have no riparia► setback; however, a 25-foot "water quality buffer" is required under Unified Sewerage Agent y (USA) standards adopted and administered by the City of Tigard. [Ref r to Code Section 18.797.030] CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 019 IIOM-Iesldeatlel inlIwUoaRfaonlag OMslon iectlee Riparian Setback Reductions The DIRECTOR MAY APPROVE A SITE-SPECIFI REDUCTION OF THE TUALATIN RIVER OR ANY MAJOR STREAM RIPARIAN SETBACK B AS MUCH AS 50% to allow the placement of structures or impervious surfaces otherwise pro • ited by this chapter, provided that equal or better protection for identified major stream resourc is ensured through streambank restoration and/or enhancement of riparian vegetation in presery d portions of the riparian setback area. Eligibility for Riparian Setback in Disturbed Areas. TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A RIPARIAN S BACK REDUCTION, the applicant must demonstrate that the riparian corridor was substantiall disturbed at the time this regulation was adopted. This determination must be based on e Vegetation Study required by Section 18.797.050 that demonstrates all of the following: Native plant species curre ly cover less than 80% of the on-site riparian corridor area; kr The tree canopy curren covers less than 50% of the on-site riparian corridor and healthy trees have not been re, oved from the on-site riparian setback area for the last five years; That vegetation was of removed contrary to the provisions of Section 18.797.050 regulating removal of native • ant species; ➢ That there will b- no infringement into the 100-year floodplain; and The average - ope of the riparian area is not greater than 20%. [Refer to Cote Section 18.791.1001 TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS ? - - _ - ' i- E 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 18.790.060.D. according to the following standards: /1 b Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.790.060.D. of no net loss of trees; / a Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; b Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be'removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; b Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; Y Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and V. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. [Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.CJ CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Motes Page 6 of 9 NON-*eslreetlal&polIatluUMaaoluo/1Nsleu Seetles MITIGATION REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property; and The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. [Refer to Code Section 18.790.060.EJ NARRATIVE e APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.321 CODE CHAPTERS 8.330 18.390 1718.520 18.715 ' 18.765 o' 18.795 18.350 18.420 18.530 ✓ 18.730 _ 18.775 18.797 ►7 18.360 _ 18.430 v' 18.620 18.745 V 18.780 v 18.800 18.370 _ 18.510 ✓ 18.705 '' 18.755 ✓ 18.790 IMPACT STUDY • . part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. [Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050] CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page I of 9 KON3esldeatlal Asollcatlao/rl000loo Shrills'Seetloo NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING - a" HALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET AND THE APPROPRIATE CIT FACILITATOR AND THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE(S) of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. [Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION ' 'D USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicant's are required to complete and f - a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyor's Office in order • obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be acceptee as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of •- Subdivision Name Reservation. _[County Surveyor'. l trice: 503-648-8884) BUILDING PERMITS w• ' FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE _ DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME IN WHICH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS AINED). RECYCLING !cant 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. Meter to Code Chapter 18.755) ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: a 0_,d-d a77' c_cti-cC-( ( `"�` • .-ry o ,—�> c�-c 5-0 °� '�� c� .e-r-- 7 752)°/a o 3zi� ' - -Z S.s' D a-- • T 1'• _ „/ • CAA - - r . CITY OF TICARD Pre-Appltcatlon Conference Notes Page 8 of 9 NON-Iot luUil ND011cttloUMualoo IMiln ioctlo' PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. ✓ Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other week days. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. One (1), 81/2" x 11" map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Division will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard . 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. 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 o he staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: 503 639-4171 FAX: 503 684-7191 E-MAIL staf s first name)@ci.tigard.or.us c7 R-4 5 :1a rpinl masters lrerised\prepp-crost (Engineering section.preapp.eng)1 Revised I/2B/99 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Motes Page 9 of 9 MOM-Iesidontlildppllwtloi/Niaoley Division Section CITY OF TIGARD LAND USE APPLICATION CHECKLIST Please read this form carefully in conjunction with the notes provided to you at the pre- application conference. This checklist identifies what is required for submittal of a complete land use application. Once an application is deemed complete by Community Development staff, a decision may be issued within 6-8 weeks. If you have additional questions after reviewing all of the information provided to you, please contact the staff person named below at the City of Tigard Planning Division, (503) 639-4171. Staff: A ,-u-v Date: 5-1?-0/ 9 ? 1. BASIC INFORMATIO ALL LAND USE APPLICATIONS REQUIRE THE FOLLOWING: Completed Application Form with property owner's signature or name of agent and letter of authorization Title transfer instrument or grant deed Written summary of proposal Narrative demonstrating compliance with all applicable development standards and approval criteria (as specified in the Pre-Application Conference notes) Two (2) sets of stamped, addressed envelopes and a notarized list of all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. Mailing envelopes shall be legal-size, addressed with 1"x 4" labels Documentary evidence of neighborhood meeting (if required) Impact Study per Section 18.390.040.B.2.(e) Copy of the Pre-Application Conference notes Filing ee 2. PLANS REQUIRE In addition to the above basic information, each type of land use application will require one or more of the following maps or plans. PLEASE SUBMIT EACH OF THE PLANS CHECKED BELOW WITH YOUR APPLICATION (Section 5 of this checklist provides details on what information to include on each plan): If( Vicinity Map 0 Preliminary Grading/Erosion Control Plan El' Existing Conditions Map I3' Preliminary Utilities Plan ❑ Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map 2' Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan ❑ Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan C9' Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan Er Site Development Plan Q' Architectural Drawings El' Landscape Plan t3' Sign Drawings ❑ Public Improvements/Streets Plan ( c G.r+ z 3. NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED The City requires multiple copies of submittal materials. The number of copies required depends on the type of review process. FOR AN APPLICATION SUCH AS YOU ARE PROPOSING THE CITY REQUIRES a COPIES OF ALL APPLICATION MATERIALS. City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 1 of 5 • 4. SPECIAL STUDIES AND REPORTS Because of the nature of your project and/or the site you propose to develop, THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL STUDIES WILL BE REQUIRED. These studies must be prepared by certified professionals with experience in the appropriate field: ❑ Traffic Study ❑ Local Streets Traffic Study ❑ Wetlands/Stream Corridor Delineation and Report ❑ Habitat Area Evaluation ❑ Storm Drainage System Downstream Analysis ❑ Preliminary Sizing Calculations for Proposed Water Quality and/or Detention Facility ❑ Geotechnical Report ❑ Other PREPARING PLANS AND MAPS Plans and maps should be prepared at an engineering scale (1" = 10/20/50/100/200') and include a north arrow, legend and date. The same scale should be used for all your plans. Where possible the City prefers the use of a scale that allows a site plan or subdivision plat to be shown on a single sheet. Architectural drawings may be prepared at an architectural scale. One copy of each plan must be submitted in photo-ready 8Y2 x 11 format. THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR EACH TYPE OF PLAN (If the plans you submit do not include all of the information requested because you feel it is not applicable, please indicate this and provide a brief explanation). 1 � cJ1.4.4X- inity Map „to �o u� Showing the location of the site in relation to: • Adjacent properties ❑ • Surrounding street system including nearby intersections ❑ • Pedestrian ways and bikeways ❑ • Transit stops ❑ acce ❑ Existing Conditions Map Parcel boundaries,dimensions and gross area ❑0 Contour lines(2'intervals for 0-10%slopes or 5'for slopes>10%) Drainage patterns and courses on the site and on adjacent lands ❑ Potential natural hazard areas including: • Floodplain areas ❑ • Areas having a high seasonal water table within 24"of the surface for three or more weeks of the year ❑ • Slopes in excess of 25% • ❑ • Unstable ground ❑ • Areas with severe soil erosion potential ❑ • Areas having severely weak foundation soils ❑ Locations of resource areas including: • Wildlife habitat areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan ❑ • Wetlands ❑ Other site features: • Rock outcroppings ❑ • Trees with 6"caliper measured 4'from ground level ❑ Location and type of noise sources ❑ Locations of existing structures and their uses ❑ Locations of existing utilities and easements ❑ Locations of existing dedicated right-of-ways ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 2 of 5 Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map The proposed name of the subdivision ❑ Vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial a r d collector streets ❑ Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owne , developer, engineer surveyor and designer(as applicable) ❑ Scale, north arrow and date ❑ Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided Names of adjacent subdivisions or names of recorde• owners of adjoining parcels of unsubdivided land ❑ Contour lines related to a City-established benchma at 2' intervals for 0-10% grades and 5' intervals for grades greater than 10% ❑ The purpose, location, type and size of all of the fol swing (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): • Public and private right-of-ways and easeme s ❑ • Public and private sanitary and storm sewer nes ❑ • Domestic water mains including fire hydrant. ❑ • Major power telephone transmission lines .0,000 volts or greater) ❑ • Watercourses ❑ • Deed reservations for parks, open space., pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ • The location of all trees with a diameter ; inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level ❑ • The location of all structures and the pr'sent uses of the structures, and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting • ❑ Supplemental information including: • Proposed deed restrictions (if any) ❑ • A proposed plan for provision of su••ivision improvements ❑ Existing natural features including rock outcroppings,wetlands and marsh areas The proposed lot configurations, lot si -s and dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it sha be indicated upon such lots ❑ If any of the foregoing information ca not practicably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with t - application materials ❑ Preliminary Partition/Lot Line ,, djustment Plan The owner of the subject parcel ❑ The owner's authorized agent ❑ The map scale, north arrow and date ❑ Proposed property lines ❑ Description of parcel location ..nd boundaries ❑ • Contour lines (2' intervals for-lopes 0-10%or 5'for slopes >10%) ❑ Location,width and names . streets, easements and other public ways within and adjacent to the parcel ❑ • Location of all permanent b ildings on and within 25' of all property lines ❑ Location and width of all w:ter courses ❑ Location of any trees wit 6" or greater caliper at 4' above ground level ❑ All slopes greater than 2 % ❑ Location of existing and proposed utilities and utility easements ❑ Any applicable deed re trictions ❑ Evidence that land pa ition will not preclude efficient future land division where applicable ❑ Future street extension plan showing existing and potential street connections ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 3 of 5 Site Development Plan The proposed site and surrounding properties ❑ Contour line intervals ❑ The locations, dimensions and proposed names of the following: • Existing and platted streets and other public ways ❑ • Easements on the site and on adjoining properties ❑ • Proposed streets or other public ways and easements on the site ❑ • Alternative routes of dead-end or proposed streets that require future extensions ❑ The locations and dimensions of the following: • Entrances and exits on the site ❑ • Parking and circulation areas El • Loading and service areas ❑ • Pedestrian and bicycle circulation ❑ • Outdoor common areas ❑ • Above ground utilities ❑ • Trash and recyclable material areas ❑ The locations, dimensions and setback distances of the following: • Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25'of the site ❑ • Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site ❑ • Sanitary sewer facilities ❑ • Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements ❑ • Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions ❑ Locations and type(s)of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques ❑ The locations of the following: • All areas to be landscaped ❑ • M.' •oxes ❑ • Structures - -• their orientation ❑ Landscape Plan Location of trees to be removed ❑ Location, size and species of existing plant materials ❑ General location, size and species of proposed plan materials ❑ Landscape narrative that addresses: • Soil conditions and how plant selections were derived for them ❑ • Plans for soil treatment such as stockpiling the top soil ❑ • Erosion control measures that will be used ❑ Location and description of the irrigation system where applicable ❑ Location and size of fences, buffer areas and screening ❑ Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces ❑ Public Improvements/Streets Plan or c...4.45-1-L-1.- Proposed right-of-way locations and widths ❑ A scaled cross-section of all proposed streets plus any reserve strips ❑ Approximate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 4 of 5 Grading/Erosion Control Plan The locations and extent to which grading will take place ❑ Existing and proposed contour lines ❑ SI e ratios ❑ Utilities Plan Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated on the plans ❑ Plan oft - •ro•os-• , -ter distribution system,showing pipe sizes and the locations of valves and fire hydrants ❑ Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ Location,width and direction of flow of all water courses and drainageways ❑ Location and estimated size of proposed storm drainage lines ❑ � 11#►ere-applisabl ,fesati estimated size and dimensions of proposed water quality/detention facility ❑ Tree Preservation/Mitigation Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees ❑ Program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal (Section 18.790.030) ❑ A uon ing standards and methods to be used during and after construction ❑ Architectural Drawings Floor lans indicating the square footage of all structures and their proposed use ❑ ��- evation s for each elevation of the structure ❑ Sign Drawings Specify proposed location, size and height ❑ • • is curpinlmasters kevised\chklist.doc 26-Nov-98 City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 5 of 5 PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES �om � �Pnt (Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six(6)Months) S(iapingA Better Community NON-RESIDENTIAL ►°r'evtouS f r/eJ -s p•Q 93-e) Gib roods +rY /S0,o6 S at. PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: 40/2-a 17 I/9 Y S .3 4-4 7 a-r•a. STAFF AT PRE-APP.: b/Y) / 13 it ,gpQ 4 y-.Z'i . orirc•a-. -Fey- 5-oO5 c-c) .DQr/inau /. ._'- APPLICANT: .Lo Rus c.kt-- AGENT: Phone:[ l „IA o1 - 5 a-S 4 Phone: [ l PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GEN.LOCATION: w44 t- s s.4 6 T ,-. L AI o, 64 so/ J rtmo _ TAX MAP(Sl/LOT#[S): / 5 1 3 4. D C.. Lot �5 0 (3,/s NECESSARY APPLICATION[Sl: i .D' L • tA-)-'c.<..) 4- P a.%-r*.�t •. o• . e: F Cti• PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: ,e,„ „frt, a-71-A_, o-f a Z co o s F 4 re._f .t spa_c.c �-- 3 b p l /'- o -S D wS es-(A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN s �/D u .S -6- MAP DESIGNATION: ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: L- 6- o- 4t_ C- G- P D C.I.T.AREA: C �..�� d.� FACILITATOR: 4 PHONE: [503) ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT SIZE: — sq. ft. Ave ge lot width: - ftic. Maximum building height: "s ft. Setbacks: Front 0 ft. Side Ch-' Rear %-a ft. Corner — ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: 85- % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: IS %. a/2 ccrtr c� . t Itocc acQ_>41"-La--/ (Refer to Code Section 18. 5,1 o 1 S �u a-� ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREME SEE �-I -A-t2c n - aru 6•L.6 07-A-,J%).4-24 $ 11n306.'2_ Se-c-Ttc tJ / c':ca • .0 MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 5 feet, unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a pa ition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access ease nt. The DEPTH OF ALL L S SHALL NOT EXCEED 2'/z TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1'/z mes the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. (Refer to Code Section 18.810.0601 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section SPECIAL SETBACKS____- STREETS: 4 feet from the centerline of 7.2- 4 • ESTABLISHED AREAS: feet from • ➢ LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet, along the site's boundary. FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.730] SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS BUILDING ' XCEPTIONS - 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 (1/2) of the building's height; and The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. [Refer to Code Section 18.730.010.8.) 3 ot7,cD0 3F 11 c?ar. _PARKING AND ACCESS A X REQUIRED parking for this type of usa e 3 .7 /i o0 0 �'°off a Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): i02- Q - parking: , 3 1/ ooc (4 nc&S. &) Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): O NO MORE THAN 40% of required spaces may be designated and/or dimensioned as compact spaces. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: • Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 6 inches x 18 feet. to Lr■r-he-3 Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 inches x 16 feet,'S-inches. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3)feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. [Refer to Code Section 18.165.0401 Handicapped Parking: ` • All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Minimum number of accesses: .Z-- Minimum access width: Minimum pavement width: ' All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: [Refer to Code Chapters 18.765 and 18.705] CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 NON-I esidential Application/Planning Division Section WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS WALKWAYS—SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. Infer to Code Section 18.705.030) LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. ,----- (Refer to Code Section 18.765.080) CLEAR VISION AREA The i requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7951 BUFFERING AND SCREENING In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO El ER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent dew opments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas alo • certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. suffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and st also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or nces may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The re ired buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Addition information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code (Refer to Code Chapter 18.1451 The REQUIRED BUFFS IDTHS which are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: feet a ng north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet Tong south boundary. feet along west boundary. IN-ADDITION, SIG T OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: LANDSCAPING, STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. - -7 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 18.145,18.165 and 18.7051 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9 NON-Residential Appllcatlo.Rlannlon Melon Section S__ SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for review before the Hearings Officer. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7801 SENSITIVE LANDS The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHIG ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN TH 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPE IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to prelimi ary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available informati n. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive lands areas, and their boundarie , is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for t use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PR HIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.715) STEEP SLOPES When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to is uance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approv standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall e based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C.2 and 18.775.080.C.3. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY(USA)BUFFER STANDARDS,R&0 96-44 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACE t TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wi e enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDO SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 25-FEET-WIDE, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries f the sensitive area, except where 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 a portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an ea of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable enc achment shall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the I ngth of the vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in idth. In any case, the average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any Materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: A GRAVEL WALKWAY OR BIKE PATH, NOT EXCEEDING EIGHT (8) FEET IN WIDTH. If the walkway or bike path is paved, then the vegetated corridor must be widened by the width to the path. paved or gravel walkway or bike path may not be constructed closer than ten (10) feet from t e boundary of the sensitive area, unless approved by the Agency or City. Walkways and bike aths shall be constructed so as to minimize disturbance to existing vegetation; and CITY OF TIGARD Pre placation Conference Notes Page 4 of 9 NON-Aesldential Application/Planning GhAsloa Section Y WATER QUALITY FACILITIES may encroach into the vegetated corridor a maximum of ten (10) feet with the approval of the Agency or City. / Location of Vegetated Corridor: / IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATE MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the veg tated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be u ed for the construction of a dwelling unit. (Refer to R fig 0 06-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3,Desi for SWM) WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY DISTRICT The WATER RESOURCES (WR) OVERLAY DIST-ICT implements the policies of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and is intended to resolve con licts between development and conservation of significant wetlands, streams and riparian cor idors identified in the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. Specifically, this chapter allo i s reasonable economic use of property while establishing clear and objective standards to: v rotect significant wetlands and streams; limit development in designated riparian corridors; m. ntain and enhance water quality; maximize flood storage capacity; preserve native plant cover; mi imize streambank erosion; maintain and enhance fish and wildlife habitats; and conserve sce c, recreational and educational values of water resource areas. Safe Harbor: The WR OVERLAY DISTRICT ALSO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 (Natural Resources) and the "safe arbor" provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660, Division 23). These provisions req sire that "significant" wetlands and riparian corridors be mapped and protected. The Tualatin Ri er, which is also a "fish-bearing stream," has an average annual flow of more than 1000 cfs. Major Streams: / Streams which are mapped as "FIS -BEARING STREAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry and have an average annual flow le s than 1000 cubic feet per second (cfs). r Major streams in Tigard V elude FANNO CREEK, ASH CREEK (EXCEPT THE NORTH FORK AND OTHER TRIBUTARY CREEKS) AND BALL CREEK. Minor Streams: Streams which are NOT "FIS -BEARING STREAMS" according to Oregon Department of Forestry maps . Minor streams in Ti rd include Summer Creek, Derry Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and certa. short tributaries of the Tualatin River. / Riparian Setback Area: / This AREA IS MEASURED HORIZONTALLY FROM AND PARALLEL TO MAJOR STREAM OR TUALATIN RIVER TOP-ftF-BANKS, OR THE EDGE OF AN ASSOCIATED WETLAND, whichever is greater. The ripari setback is the same as the "riparian corridor boundary" in OAR 660-23- 090(1)(d). r The standar TUALATIN RIVER RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 75 FEET, unless modified in accordance/with this chapter. The MAJ Y STREAMS RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 50 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this apter. :- ISOLAT,7D WETLANDS AND MINOR STREAMS (including adjacent wetlands) have no riparianf 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 18.791.030) CITY of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Satin Riparian Setback Reductions The DIRECTOR MAY APPROVE A SITE-SPECIFI REDUCTION OF THE TUALATIN RIVER OR ANY MAJOR STREAM RIPARIAN SETBACK B AS MUCH AS 50% to allow the placement of structures or impervious surfaces otherwise prohibited by this chapter, provided that equal or better protection for identified major stream resources is ensured through streambank restoration and/or enhancement of riparian vegetation in preserv-d portions of the riparian setback area. Eli•ibilit for Ri•arian Setback in Disturbed Areas. TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A RIPARIAN S BACK REDUCTION, the applicant must demonstrate that the riparian corridor was substantiall disturbed at the time this regulation was adopted. This determination must be based on e Vegetation Study required by Section 18.797.050 that demonstrates all of the following: • Native plant species curren(ly cover less than 80% of the on-site riparian corridor area; • The tree canopy curren covers less than 50% of the on-site riparian corridor and healthy trees have not been re oved from the on-site riparian setback area for the last five years; That vegetation was of removed contrary to the provisions of Section 18.797.050 regulating removal of native ant species; That there will bi no infringement into the 100-year floodplain; and • The average ope of the riparian area is not greater than 20%. [Refer to C e Section 18.797.1001 TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified ar:•rist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development :•plication for a subdivision, major partition, site development review, planned development or .•nditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: • Identification oN`tre location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by t City; • Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D. according to the following standards: Retainage of less tha5% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program actor• to Section 18.790.060.D. of no net loss of trees; Retainage of from 25 to 50°0 if existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; • Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and • A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. [Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.C] CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section MITIGATION REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property; and The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. (Refer to Code Section 18.790.060.E.) /NARRATIVE The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.32) CODE CHAPTERS T8.330 18.390 !18.520 18.715 18.765 18.795 18.350 18.420 18.530 ✓ 18.730 18.775 y,. 18.797 ✓ 18.360 18.430 IE' 18.620 " 18.745 v' 18.780 ✓ 18.800 18.370 18.510 ✓ 18.705 " 18.755 ✓ 18.790 IMPACT STUDY part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. [Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.0501 CITY OF TIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING THE--APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET AND THE APPROPRIATE CIT FACILITATOR AND THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE(S) of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION . PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicant's are required to complete and f a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyor's Office in order obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepte as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of Subdivision Name Reservation. (COMM Surveyor° Hice: 503-648-88841 BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME IN WHICH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OS.TAINED). ,RECYCLING �. Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY with Pride Disposal's vehicles. CONTACT PERSON: Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal at (503) 625-6177. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7551 ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: GLe—t 4_10- • t r- _Co -pr'v,_'L 5-o 'A A c-y, A' 7 /SD°/Q a c .era D L+-,✓ c�c c a— �� -F-�- -�►��-ye� ��,-c1� CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes firs . Cv-c_-e-- 0 2 � Page 8 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Manning Division Section PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other week days. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. One (1), 81/' 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-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard Co .. - . 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. PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of ood site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: k& � CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: 503 639-4171 FAX: 503 684-7297 E-MAIL: staf s first name)@ci.tigard.or.us 5 is\co rpl n\mas ters\rev ised\preapp-c.nst (Engineering section:preapp.eng)\ Revised 1/28/99 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 NON-Residential AppllcaUon/Planning Olvlsion Section CITY OF TIGARD LAND USE APPLICATION CHECKLIST Please read this form carefully in conjunction with the notes provided to you at the pre- application conference. This checklist identifies what is required for submittal of a complete land use application. Once an application is deemed complete by Community Development staff, a decision may be issued within 6-8 weeks. If you have additional questions after reviewing all of the information provided to you, please contact the staff person named below at the City of Tigard Planning Division, (503) 639-4171. Staff: -- Date: -5-h-,)/ 9 y 1. BASIC INFORMATIO ALL LAND USE APPLICATIONS REQUIRE THE FOLLOWING: Completed Application Form with property owner's signature or name of agent and letter of authorization Title transfer instrument or grant deed Written summary of proposal Narrative demonstrating compliance with all applicable development standards and approval criteria (as specified in the Pre-Application Conference notes) Two (2) sets of stamped, addressed envelopes and a notarized list of all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. Mailing envelopes shall be legal-size, addressed with 1" x 4" labels Documentary evidence of neighborhood meeting (if required) Impact Study per Section 18.390.040.B.2.(e) Copy of the Pre-Application Conference notes Filing 2. PLANS REQUIRED addition to the above basic information, each type of land use application will require one or more of the following maps or plans. PLEASE SUBMIT EACH OF THE PLANS CHECKED BELOW WITH YOUR APPLICATION (Section 5 of this checklist provides details on what information to include on each plan): Er Vicinity Map Er Preliminary Grading/Erosion Control Plan le Existing Conditions Map Er Preliminary Utilities Plan El Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map E2' Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan ❑ Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan E3' Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan Er Site Development Plan 1T Architectural Drawings IH Landscape Plan Et/ Sign Drawings ❑ Public Improvements/Streets Plan ( car 4A..f S 3. NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED The City requires multiple copies of submittal materials. The number of copies required depends on the type of review process. FOR AN APPLICATION SUCH AS YOU ARE PROPOSING THE CITY REQUIRES a `F COPIES OF ALL APPLICATION MATERIALS. City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 1 of 5 4. SPECIAL STUDIES AND REPORTS Because of the nature of your project and/or the site you propose to develop, THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL STUDIES WILL BE REQUIRED. These studies must be prepared by certified professionals with experience in the appropriate field: ❑ Traffic Study ❑ Local Streets Traffic Study ❑ Wetlands/Stream Corridor Delineation and Report ❑ Habitat Area Evaluation ❑ Storm Drainage System Downstream Analysis ❑ Preliminary Sizing Calculations for Proposed Water Quality and/or Detention Facility ❑ Geotechnical Report ❑ Other 5. PREPARING PLANS AND MAPS — Plans and maps should be prepared at an engineering scale (1" = 10/20/50/100/200') and include a north arrow, legend and date. The same scale should be used for all your plans. Where possible the City prefers the use of a scale that allows a site plan or subdivision plat to be shown on a single sheet. Architectural drawings may be prepared at an architectural scale. One copy of each plan must be submitted in photo-ready 81/2 x 11 format. THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR EACH TYPE OF PLAN (If the plans you submit do not include all of the information requested because you feel it is not applicable, please indicate this and provide a brief explanation). Vicinity Map Showing the location of the site in relation to: • Adjacent properties ❑ • Surrounding street system including nearby intersections ❑ • Pedestrian ways and bikeways ❑ • Transit stops ❑ -Utility access ❑ Existing Conditions Map Parcel boundaries, dimensions and gross area ❑ Contour lines (2' intervals for 0-10% slopes or 5'for slopes >10%) ❑ Drainage patterns and courses on the site and on adjacent lands ❑ Potential natural hazard areas including: • Floodplain areas ❑ • Areas having a high seasonal water table within 24"of the surface for three or more weeks of the year ❑ • Slopes in excess of 25% ❑ • Unstable ground ❑ • Areas with severe soil erosion potential ❑ • Areas having severely weak foundation soils ❑ Locations of resource areas including: • Wildlife habitat areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan ❑ • Wetlands ❑ Other site features: • Rock outcroppings ❑ • Trees with ?6"caliper measured 4' from ground level ❑ Location and type of noise sources ❑ Locations of existing structures and their uses ❑ Locations of existing utilities and easements ❑ Locations of existing dedicated right-of-ways ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 2 of 5 Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map The proposed name of the subdivision ❑ Vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial a d collector streets ❑ Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owne , developer,engineer surveyor and designer(as applicable) ❑ Scale, north arrow and date ❑ Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided Names of adjacent subdivisions or names of recorde• owners of adjoining parcels of unsubdivided land ❑ Contour lines related to a City-established benchma at 2' intervals for 0-10% grades and 5' intervals for grades greater than 10% ❑ The purpose, location, type and size of all of the fol swing (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): • Public and private right-of-ways and easeme s ❑ • Public and private sanitary and storm sewer I nes ❑ • Domestic water mains including fire hydrant; ❑ • Major power telephone transmission lines (.0,000 volts or greater) ❑ • Watercourses ❑ • Deed reservations for parks, open space., pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ • The location of all trees with a diameter s, inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level ❑ • The location of all structures and the pr-sent uses of the structures, and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting ❑ Supplemental information including: • Proposed deed restrictions (if any) ❑ • A proposed plan for provision of su••ivision improvements ❑ Existing natural features including rock outcroppings,wetlands and marsh areas The proposed lot configurations, lot siz-s and dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it sha be indicated upon such lots ❑ If any of the foregoing information ca not practicably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with t - application materials ❑ Preliminary Partition/Lot Line l djustment Plan The owner of the subject parcel ❑ The owner's authorized agent ❑ The map scale, north arrow and date ❑ Proposed property lines ❑ Description of parcel location .-nd boundaries ❑ Contour lines (2' intervals for-lopes 0-10%or 5' for slopes >10%) ❑ Location, width and names • streets, easements and other public ways within and adjacent to the parcel ❑ Location of all permanent b ildings on and within 25' of all property lines ❑ Location and width of all w:ter courses ❑ Location of any trees wit 6" or greater caliper at 4' above ground level ❑ All slopes greater than 2'.% ❑ Location of existing and proposed utilities and utility easements ❑ Any applicable deed re.trictions ❑ Evidence that land pa ition will not preclude efficient future land division where applicable ❑ Future street extension plan showing existing and potential street connections ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 3 of 5 Site Development Plan The proposed site and surrounding properties ❑ Contour line intervals ❑ The locations, dimensions and proposed names of the following: • Existing and platted streets and other public ways ❑ • Easements on the site and on adjoining properties ❑ • Proposed streets or other public ways and easements on the site ❑ • Alternative routes of dead-end or proposed streets that require future extensions ❑ The locations and dimensions of the following: • Entrances and exits on the site ❑ • Parking and circulation areas ❑ • Loading and service areas ❑ • Pedestrian and bicycle circulation ❑ • Outdoor common areas ❑ • Above ground utilities ❑ • Trash and recyclable material areas ❑ The locations, dimensions and setback distances of the following: • Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25' of the site ❑ • Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site ❑ • Sanitary sewer facilities ❑ • Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements ❑ • Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions ❑ Locations and type(s)of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques ❑ The locations of the following: • All areas to be landscaped ❑ • M ' oxes ❑ • Structures their orientation ❑ Landscape Plan Location of trees to be removed ❑ Location, size and species of existing plant materials ❑ General location, size and species of proposed plan materials ❑ • Landscape narrative that addresses: • Soil conditions and how plant selections were derived for them ❑ • Plans for soil treatment such as stockpiling the top soil ❑ • Erosion control measures that will be used ❑ Location and description of the irrigation system where applicable ❑ • Location and size of fences, buffer areas and screening ❑ Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces ❑ — ) Public Improvements/Streets Plan • Proposed right-of-way locations and widths ❑ • A scaled cross-section of all proposed streets plus any reserve strips ❑ Approximate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 4 of 5 Grading/Erosion Control Plan The locations and extent to which grading will take place ❑ Existing and proposed contour lines ❑ Slo e ratios ❑ Utilities Plan Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated on the plans ❑ Plan of tr000sed water distribution system,showing pipe sizes and the locations of valves and fire hydrants ❑ Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ Location,width and direction of flow of all water courses and drainageways ❑ Location and estimated size of proposed storm drainage lines ❑ Where-applioable, • estimated size and dimensions of proposed water quality/detention facility ❑ Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees ❑ Program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal (Section 18.790.030) ❑ A . : - ion . .• : •• :: ing standards and methods to be used during and after construction ❑ ______D Architectural Drawings Fl000rr leans indicating the square footage of all structures and their proposed use ❑ = -E evat� tion • s for each elevation of the structure ❑ Sign Drawings Specify proposed location, size and height ❑ • i:l;curpinlmasterslrevisedlch klist.doc 26-Nov-98 City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 5 of 5 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ��{# ➢ ENGINEERING SECTION Q Com�m°ntya(Oregon Shaping Better Community \ ?(oD(-- PUBLIC FACILITIES Zcv 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. ( )___v__ 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 I street trees I I street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 6 Englneertng gepanmentSection ( ) stre nprovements will be necessary alc to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk I I 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 I I street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ( ) street improvements will be necessary along to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to execute a non-remonstrance agreement which waives the property owner's right to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district. The following street improvements may be eligible for such an agreement: (1.) (2.) ( ) Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 016 Engineering Department Section are on the opposite e of the street from the site. If thE in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW . Prior to , the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) inch line which is located D c -1- . .- . The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to c se-At A-s NS #o r� 1 %-) . �I�GQ� 1Aa.1 Ak•'.o Se. Pc _ '_...mac ou-IS;e T.aq-i Water Supply: The a,,*-� i kJ U&1i"-cG2_- N5- -t c- - Phone:(503) 2- -;W provides public water service in the area of this slte. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (Contact: C ill- (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 noff from upstream properties when fully developed. tls w.,_/%11.45'> �i;n�.�cS�S o� Ca.) ,cbv-d -NAT l(d4u-kA PA+i Accoo.1-w> TL -«s f&-x%-i)11.4 Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 016 Engineering Department Section newly created impervious aces. The resolution contains a F lion that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of new impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $210. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ( 'j Construction of an on-site water quality facility. c . S Tarr' ( ) Payment of the fee in-lieu. t' 'C -6,4 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. • R f-f L sue,__- tic— Cr-r 71 �P — APP c-I LA17.0-1. . C e -c. 'MAPS E wt-k e- V4tic A sSu, P F-ate AAs T — 1 LA Ac ), 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. PAI Fes. PERMITS Engineering Department Permits: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a permit from the Engineering Department. There are two types of permits issued by Engineering, as follows: Street Opening Permit (SOP). This permit covers relatively minor work in a public right-of-way or easement, such as sidewalk and driveway installation or repair, and service connections to main utility lines. This work may involve open trench work within the street. The permittee must submit a plan of the proposed work for review and approval. The cost of this type of permit is calculated as 4% of the cost of the work and is payable prior to issuance of the permit. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 6 Engineering Department Section In addition, the per ee will be required to post a bor r similar financial security for the work. Compliance Agreement (CAP). This permit covers more extensive work such as main utility line extensions, street improvements, etc. In subdivisions, this type of permit also covers all grading and private utility work. Plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The cost of this permit is also calculated as 4% of the cost of the improvements, based on the design engineer's estimate, and is payable prior to issuance of the approved plan. The permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security, and execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. Prior to City acceptance of any permitted work, and prior to release of work assurance bond(s), the work shall be deemed complete and satisfactory by the City in writing. The permittee is responsible for the work until such time written City acceptance of the work is posted. NOTE: If an Engineering Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. CITY OFTIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Engineering Department Section GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS Fl UBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: zx.I ENGINEERING DEP RTMENT STAFF Phone: [5031 639-4171 Fax: [5031 684-7297 h\patty\masters\preapp.eng (Master section:preapp-r mst) 04-March-1999 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 Engineering Department Section A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ---- PRINCIPALS: MCM ROBERT S.MORELAND GRIGSBY S.CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL J.MYLES px 5 s LOV K.RUSCH May 12, 1999 Community Development Department City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,Oregon 97223 RE: Pre-Application Conference Request Dartmouth Retail Center The following information is provided as a part of our request for a Pre-Application Conference to be scheduled for the above referenced project. This information has been developed in response to the Pre-Application Conference Checklist provided by the City of Tigard. APPLICANT: Rembold Companies 1022 SW Salmon,Suite 450 Portland,Oregon 97205 P): 222-7258 F): 222-4053 AGENT: MCM Architects 1022 SW Salmon,Suite 350 Portland,Oregon 97205 P): 222-5757 F): 241-1514 The project proposes the development of Parcel C of the Winco Shopping Center located on the northwest corner of the intersection of SW 72"d and Dartmouth. Currently Parcel's A & B have been developed as individual retail pads. We propose constructing 27,000 gross square feet of retail space in three buildings. Two of the buildings are located towards the north end of the 1022 SW SALMON ST., SUITE 350 • PORTLAND,OREGON,97205 USA • TELEPHONE 1 503 222 5757 • FAX 1 503 241 1514 • WWW.MCMARCHITECTS.COM PAGE2 parcel and are in line with the previously developed Winco and Petsmart stores. They comprise a total of20,000 gsf. They are joined by a 10,000 area that has been set aside for the development of an outside sales area for use by one of the prospective tenants. The remaining 7,000 sf is proposed as a 7,000 gsf retail pavilion located along 72nd near its' intersection with SW Dartmouth. The existing parking will remain with the exception of the elimination of approx. 28 spaces to accommodate the retail pavilion. The attached Site Plan more fully describes the specifics of the plan. PROPOSED USES: Retail Sales TAX MAP AND TAX LOT NUMBERS: SW1/4 SE1/4 36 TIS RIW WM Portion of Tax Lot 4500 Parcel C CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER: Waremart Inc.,A Idaho Corporation Topographic information on the site is on file at the City of Tigard as a part of the earlier permit applications for the Waremart, Petsmart and Office Max stores. Submitted By: Douglas A. Benson MCM Architects f- - — -- -- - --- — — .• -__________ r j,...t,j, -,--,---6-,_i___ I-----r----i ■ `' `�� c.__,,„ trY 7 S 6 c.cam_• 1 -- 1 --- 1 4 II 1 �T- J_ J 4 l J, 1 r ` 1 I f:f'11 1 r`.:;t2'.%,mil I ' rr` c ` ( I A: 7,000 Sq. Ft. Bldg. WinCo 1 Petsmart r F 81: 5,000 Sq. Ft. Bldg. j C B 1 82: 10,000 Sq. Ft. Outdoor Sales 1 11 %: C: 15,000 Sq. Ft. Bldg. i I I I_ \ r , 1 -- r r , 1 � I 7k 1 L I I J 1 i =r= 1___. / I T t ti • • 1 I� _ I 4 `tip"X11 \ `�� ('.��'. .'�s,.'1 (�,../..., . .'��.". (` .,}. "J I f L-, �— ` ∎h ir 1 " r' 't r Off 2-L ,,' 1 1 REMBOLD - TIGARD TRIANGLE SITE ; ,� . L; 11 L f 4ij �o �' 4-28-99 � S �v L� a - rti J Ut Street y'J 1 _ 7 { --i A •ROrlSS,On AL 1:34140g43,144 R-C ✓` +1 ,ev 6o.,r2l..esr sAL64ory•sulre 364 \`,�' y _ , �` �, i i 61 +'ORTLU.4 ME.i7.•67206.2477 VS• y V+1021E 602 2=4767•f A X 502 241 1614 + I . I— _ 20.)y $e-p-5 n-- , r-� Kam. , D �. ) a_.LK G``'� 4-b �C? LA-144-4 a- kit-rN- C.,1. r. r: --1\4 �.n �..?�2 �5 �c a l r Z4, cC • 0) (311`. l Cx �..tt am'°- 1"v� .,1 °� _ . Qr _ <. p et_,C-Lt. / 2 / / , Pre-Apps (CD Meetings) May 1999 S M T W T FS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Thursday, May 20, 1999 30 31 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 10:00 Loy Rusch -222-5757 (SDR on vacant pad next to Petsmart... 10:30 11:00 11:30 12:00 12:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 1:21 PM Thursday, May 13,1999 tige eff T- c • � 1 i#,, . R- 12 . -,t,-- / m r . 1 p . IP',- ..--\ * i Ili i i i Iry 1 I r _ - - _ _, _ ___ _ _ G ci ili ' ci, ill, / , E • Ili . Wiwi !Ai ATLAN A '� 1I_ I , / �� (, 3T ___ 14 N l, Mb 1710,1•,,,. f 44' 1. LIMI 1111 1 ' 4kitifi.1,.., in ME .0. ,,i- :,, 1„, ii . ,.. G Ai .► r. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - -, • I , 4 MN T I li 1 ;' • I. 1E1 /� ,R l'z rte__ �----7 hrs... .� 11 v 1 a vi {{ N'11 .-µ } • 1 .. f■ 'k t 3 E , ., F r w�,. f4 r ll° ,.LAPr, - S, m, • ! # / 4 1 +e. • • r .• � iii. 1 ' ifid# tt, �: / - r f1 �ta.t ^� r a ,-� - ••�,.�- u 1 �@ _t g �e: .y '..m.s. s E i +, • ` Ll . r ••.� . . t i.'; « • v O to i . a ar.;.. lo F�}� i af�„ti b .J,.. ,. r .. . w y .gay 1!' L i� I. i. t A icy i m 7+ }'...:`,.4t`. .W . 00,. • . s ...k. '4' 4',„-.114.4: ,R C �, . R .+t ] a �• per, .'yam j ,•!,.. a pp�"t { ,g `+,i ,•pew, ._ • " �. R F . J i ,1 8.i a p'A'1'i;:f:hi f M .,. 44 ,r .,,•y. P.'S`,.: n iiip , . ---•••.......T.-..-.1 _. __ . ___ ...... ?....i no■••••••■•■...•••■■•wo moo 7.1m,Ur Yr I n . /--- .. i., ,,..... /... .... ......., ...,, ..., I p 1- -1 I . ( : I . CUB FOODS 79,455 S.F. FF1.200.0 LO' 6 OWN SP moue WACO. 414•STANDARD SP•=HMO •.$IROCAP I•14004011.VAPI • \\\ RETAIL "B: — 24.690 S,F. 17.1sia . • FF■•204.0 • t tor I. Nam wr mambo weak RETAIL "C" 38,608 S.F. FF-208.0 tor 31. woo ao rawitibe WACO+ Mil•VARDAR° 6•RANDC.AP I•INNOICAP 6.4111 I I 1 I I I I i I 0 a 1.== I i < i L J 1 i - 0,,.supcsmo • •.ow:sem. - 1 1 0 ' I-1-1 I r. CD 1 : s__ ______________ _____-_—..---.„ — -- I I I --r.- ) ."--- C:1 7:. :-... ..) =--1 :=7: .:= .=--e i I '•—• ...---■• •7.7.. ' •:-..=I . • ...,. (..5 L. ... ... II i 1 i . I 1 . Z I 1 I I I i II I e I 1 ! N 1.-• „...„..... , ...:.:.- • :..„ • .:_:-.) t•--...... , 1 .1 g...... .:,:::7: ,............ ,..__..„. _,. i , , , 1 i , z , 1 < I . II ......, 1 , ... 1 ;II _ iis, ', ...1 1 ..• . . , . - :,--_,_ .._._ . 1 4- L..' I -"'s "1 .C ..:-. , L .---, --..:,._,:::.:„....,..-:i:_J / II v.4-.4. ''''• ''.. 4pet!,, a...18.'• ...%)....7.:1 c_-_-7. .'. ..:::-.; .-.....".:.", .:.*:=i 7:7.7) 1"■... .-•• : t:!"11111111_ C:1 -es•...v..* 1 ; 1,444.,•■ .,, -;/,./iX/.' ; ',. • ..„.• ,r. ..- CC I //..7,./2' /.//je•%Y.'.i ;.,./.,/,'.;'.! 4 V. •/4, i',.".":AX''.•I'lii•'ijj./■,V./e,f ' .....":" 4... i .. ...." :::::, , : .4.-4-/:/%-:://4/ ,.• .. ..Vz'a7//`: ;k/..; :.. .-ii.i . 4A1v/ . .1 .-..." *---...... 7::' ....(--- .--...-1 . I I . `...:'-' /.;77,•,Y-7../1.-;:, / "2/ .-./.9i .i- ....„.... '-•-•.-. , --...'/•: 0-.',/,*-.13.5pciy;7. /. I' (1.5 ...., ...„.... .. - •...., •-•.,.... i *-2 ..-', .i/..:. 1- '. -•-* /:/ / . s.w. . •''---........ - ....,_ ............. .. ...) -.----. v411 b4Ou ryi ..--...... """••.... • f ...://.':'./'*/eSliANDARCO%/4i;-• ...:. -........... st i 4 ->./.. ...V,--....- - •-••",-4/42,.;.. I"' ..... .,... ..,...„. : • - / ' 4. :?')1/11°,/'//4%;-?;.-: ' .„_., •-....„..... ------- -1 i ''''''',''. .. , i ,/ .0 ;':) • - .,.. ,, -//y/../••%, / ,.//. /./ ..-----. --- -....,7";•-"e---:- " . '' • . ..... .... .--.... .. --.. --••••....... ; \ .... i-- . . .. 0 VICINITY 11 CASE NO. - EXHIBIT MAP 10/22/99 15:29 FAX 2411514 MCM a001 MCM ARCHITECTS 1022 SOUTHWEST SALMON,SUITE 350 • PORTLAND,OREGON 97205 • USA TELEPHONE 503 222 5757 FAX 503 241 1514 TRANSMITTAL DISTRIBUTION: VIA DATE: August 6, 1999 File 2.20 TO: Julia Hajduk City of Tigard NUMBER OF PAGPS TRANSMITTED: Planning Department PROJECT NUMBER: 99015 13125 SW Hall Blvd. FILE NAME: Tigard=08-06-99=winco.doc Tigard, OR 97223 Fax No. 684-7297 VIA: Fax w/ Mail to follow PROJECT: Rembold—Tigard Triangle FROM: Doug Benson COPIES DATED PAGE NO. DESCRIPTION 1 10-22-99 Rembold Waiver Letter REMARKS: Please give me a call so we can schedule a time to meet next week (preferably early) to discuss alternative solutions to the Building A issues.Thank you for your help. • lU/LL;HH 1J:LH rAA L411014 IULM lyjuuZ REAL ESTATE REI IEB D DEVELOPMENT October 22, 1999 COMPANIES /,NVESfMENT CONSrRCCTION Community Development Department City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Julia Hajduk RE: Land Use Review Waiver Rembold— Tigard Triangle Project Dear Ms.Hajduk:: We understand that you and our Architect, Mr. Doug Benson of MCM Architects have been in touch regarding some pending issues as a part of the Land Use Review for the above referenced project. We further understand that in order to properly evaluate the issues, discuss possible solutions and arrive at a workable solution that can result in approval of our project you will require additional time beyond the mandated 120 review period. This letter shall serve as our approval of a waiver to the 120 day review period to allow up to an additional 21 days (3 weeks) for the final decision to be rendered. Further we are willing to meet with you as required to discuss and resolve the pending issues. If you have any questions or require any further information, please don't hesitate to give me or Doug Benson at MCM Architects a call. Thank you for your assistance with this matter. Sincerely, r u 3d Denise Doherty Project Manager REAL ESTATE REMBOLD DEVELOPMENT COMPANIES /INVESTMENT October 22, 1999 CONSTRUCTION Community Development Department RECEIVED PLANNING City of Tigard OCT 2 5 1999 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 =OF TIGARD Attn: Julia Hajduk RE: Land Use Review Waiver Rembold— Tigard Triangle Project Dear Ms. Hajduk:: We understand that you and our Architect, Mr. Doug Benson of MCM Architects have been in touch regarding some pending issues as a part of the Land Use Review for the above referenced project. We further understand that in order to properly evaluate the issues, discuss possible solutions and arrive at a workable solution that can result in approval of our project you will require additional time beyond the mandated 120 review period. This letter shall serve as our approval of a waiver to the 120 day review period to allow up to an additional 21 days (3 weeks)for the final decision to be rendered. Further we are willing to meet with you as required to discuss and resolve the pending issues. If you have any questions or require any further information, please don't hesitate to give me or Doug Benson at MCM Architects a call. Thank you for your assistance with this matter. Sincerely, , e/4.44.,‘" ,.. Denise Doherty 7 Project Manager 1022 SW Salmon Street • Suite 450 • Portland, OR 97205 USA • Telephone 1.503.222.7258 • Fax 1.503•222.4053 DATE: PLANS CHECK NO.: PROJECT TITLE: COUNTYWIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT WE APPLICANT: WORKSHEET MAILING ADDRESS: (FOR NON-SINGLE FAMILY USES) CITY/ZIP/PHONE: RATE PER TAX MAP NO.: LAND USE CATEGORY TRIP SITUS NO.ADDRESS: RESIDENTIAL $201.00 X BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL $51.00 G OFFICE $184.00 F- P141# INDUSTRIAL $193.00 L-9 INSTITUTIONAL $83.00 • �. PAYMENT METHOD: • CASH/CHECK CREDIT INSTITUTIONAL ONLY: DEFEROTO (PROMISSORY NOTE) LAND USE CATEGORY I USE EQ-80 � I RATE 676-69�� - I WEEKEND AVG.TRIP BASIS: /4oL CAS*" 000'0 Vt5 /9 37000 /-pp•J, )e H6 EX/9 rA (- (IP"ir''L 3 64-P9, q 0 44C. - CALCULATIONS: y-q-5 F X <r-el PS Xi P -37o , y/ cf F 9' X&G, 492 f7.06 G y-9 has h/9 PROJECTSRIQ,GpERATION: FEE:/ 7 FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES „r6,' •ulr4 / —/9 4 r ONLY ADDITIONAL NOTES: �� Sf�i �� racoss g Fr ROAD AMT 7- TRANSIT AMT.: , _• -f?• PREPARED BY: 6/1/88 t sharbo INAApshare scotticVMWroceduros mInU*? Od ost SS OO.doe WASHINGTON COUNTY TIF NOTEBOOK 02/03/00 11:06 $503 625 6179 PRIDE DISPOSAL 0002/003 ;DR 1999-0001c, Pride Disposal Co. FaX - � / i4fTo: C,-,L,/ '? wFrom: l Fax: V$ T q 7 Date: 3 C, Phone: Pages: 3 Re: Attn: Col T �-Yi 34 d Urgent Q For Review ❑Please Comment 0 Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle TELEPHONE(503)e25-6177 FAX tl (503) 625-6179 -Comments: pt, o di 5 v v., 4 s'L b 5 LJ tT 114 .LCD pr 1 s � �.-:pc9 s vl 1,o 4-1,,L)-t-4---e--c4 o (-.). t-1 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION r PRINCIPALS: MC ■ill ROBERT S.MORELAND s GRIGSBY S.CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL J.MYLES rt LOY K.RUSCH April 4,2000 Mr.Bob Poskin Plans Examiner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,OR RE: Plan Check No's. 71C,72C,73C, 74C, 75C & 76C SDR1999-00016 Dear Bob: As a part of our approved Site Development Review process for the above referenced project several conditions of approval were identified by Julia Hajduk, the project planner. In an effort to assist you in confirming that we have met all of the conditions we have prepared this summary for your use. I have repeated the condition as taken from Julia's summary document. I have followed it with an explanation of how and where the condition has been addressed. Submit a revised plan that shows a stairway connection from the access drive to the walkway in front of Building "A" or that shows a clearly marked pedestrian connection through the parking area to the front of the building will be provided. See Sheet A201—A stair has been added as requested.This stair is currently being studied to see if it can be developed as a ramp to allow the development of an accessible route from Building "A" to the Office Max store across the access drive and on to Dartmouth along the existing Office Max accessible route. 2. Submit a revised elevation for Building "B"showing that corrugated metal or other materials that are not permitted will not be used as exterior finishes. See Sheet A402 — The current siding materials are horizontal lap wood siding, plywood siding with wood battens and cement plaster. None of these materials are on the list of materials that are not permitted. t.3 Submit a revised plan that provides an additional landscape island in the eastern bank of parking spaces. The revised plan must provide landscape islands that equally distribute trees on the basis of one tree per every 7 parking spaces. See Sheet A201 — A new landscape island has been added in this location. t Submit a revised plan that provides an ADA van accessible parking space that will be located in front of Building "A"and at least one in front of Building's "B" & "C". 1022 SW SALMON ST.,SUITE 350 • PORTLAND,OREGON, 97205 USA • TELEPHONE 1 503 222 5757 • FAX 1 503 241 1514 • WWW.MCMARCHITECTS.COM PAGE2 See Sheet A201 — An additional van accessible space has been located on the north side of Building "A". An existing van accessible space in front of Buildings "B" & "C" has been retained. .ubmit a revised plan that clearly shows the parking space and aisle dimensions for staff to confirm that the required dimensions are provided. See Sheet A201 .CrSubmit a revised plan that shows the location of existing or proposed bicycle racks within 50 feet of the main entrance to the buildings. The bicycle parking shall be proportionately distributed among the three new buildings and shall provide no less than 12 spaces total. See Sheet A201—A 5 bike rack has been located in front of Building "A" and a 7 bike rack is located between Buildings "B" & "C". .. Provide detail of the bike rack to be used for staffs approval. See Sheet A201 for specification on bike rack and Sheet C500 for a detail. -8'Submit a written sign-off from the franchise waste hauler that the proposed facility meets the waste haulers standards. See the attached letter from Pride Disposal. 9. Submit a revised lighting plan for review and approval by the Police Department. See Sheet A202—Exterior Lighting Plan 10. Prior to the issuance of a site and/or building permit,a street opening permit will be required for this project to cover the cut and patchwork in SW 72' Avenue associated with the proposed waterline connection. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of the 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. See Sheet C400 for the required waterline taps and fire hydrant installation to serve this project. 11. As 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 cororate 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 contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. PAGE 3 This information will be provided within the next 10 days to the Engineering Department. 12. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of$90. The addresses have been assigned and the fee will be paid prior to or at the time permits are ready to be issued. 13. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work within the public right-of-way and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. This requirement has been noted and will be complied with at the appropriate time. 14. The site shall be constructed as per the approved plans. This requirement has been noted. Sincerely, OpAk Doug :•nson MCM Architects 11/22/99 15:10 FAX 2411514 )1CM IJ001 ,, I rMCM AR c o ! 1022 SW SALMON ST,SUITE 360 • PORTLAND,OREGON 07205 • USA•TELEPHONE 503 222 5767 FAX 603 241 1614•WWW.MCMARCHITECTS.COM COMMUNIQUE DISTRIBUTION: VIA: DATE: November 22, 1999 File TO. Julia Hajduk City of Tigard NUMBER OF PAGES TRANSMITTED: Planning Department PROJECT NUMBER: 99015 684-7297 FILE NAME: Hajduk=11-22-99=ParReq.doc VIA: Fax PROJECT Rembold Tigard Triangle FROM Doug Benson RE: Parking Lot Dimensional Requirements In the list of conditions that accompanied our Site Development Review, item 5 requires that we submit a site plan that indicates the dimensions of all of the parking and spaces. In preparing the plan we have found that the parking lot as currently constructed does not meet the dimensional requirements of the current Tigard Zoning Ordinance. Before proceeding any further I came out to City Hall and pulled the microfilm records for the construction of the Winco and Petsmart stores to determine whether the existing conditions match the approved building permit drawings. The dimensions shown on the permit drawings and the actual as-built conditions match each other exactly. While I was at the City I asked at the counter if the Zoning Ordinance that was in force in 1993 when Cub Foods and Petrsmart were built is the same one in force today. According to the individual at the counter the ordinance has not changed. When I returned tot he office I also checked our most recent project in the City of Tigard, the Cascade Boulevard Retail Center from 1996. It also does not meet the current code, although it was granted all of the necessary permits. My guess is that the dimensional requirements have changed since the Cub Foods project was initially permitted and built. I would appreciate you assistance to verify if that is the case. If in fact it is my next questions is what are we required to do for this project. Other that some additional islands and the removal of some of the parking to accommodate Building A we were not anticipating modifying the parking lot.If we are required to meet the current standards we will have to greatly reduce our parking counts which wil jeopardize our ability to meet the CC&R's. Can you help us sort this series of questions out? Please call me and let me know what 1 need to do to help resolve this question.Thank you. END COMMUNIQUE No-k -1v Pe ,e,./ zr4rer "1 51/ft'd (Ae 5 L74 - A-1_4d tk April 4, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Doug Benson MCM Architects, P.C. 1022 SW Salmon St. Ste. 350 Portland, OR 97205 RE: Plans Check Number: 3-73C & 3-74C Rembold Properties - Poppybox Gardens This letter is to confirm receipt of your building plans which have been routed to the building plans examiner. As a reminder, the associated land use case(s) is/are: SDR1999-00016 Please be aware you are responsible for satisfying the conditions of the land use case(s) and must submit plans directly to the appropriate staff person(s) indicated on your final order. Your building plans are not routed to the planning or engineering departments; you must satisfy the land use permit conditions independent of the building permit plans review process. After the building plans review process has been completed, your building permit will not be issued without approval from the engineering andplanning departments. If you have any questions regarding this notice, please feel free to telephone me and I will be happy to explain further. OP% Bonnie Mulhearn Development Services Technician cc: Building file cc: Planning Department cc: Engineering Department I:\DSTS\BUPLUC.DOT 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 .. . . . ,,,•,., ,..,. ......„,... . . :..., . . , . ,.. CITY of TIGARD ....,•:,..,::::,:.:::„...,..„...„...„.:::.:„ ..:,........:...„„„..„ .. ..,..,..,.....„.....::f,......,. 11...::::'""... 1*::::::::'i:i*:::::::'''''':::"."..FM::::::.'":1:::::::;.",::':::::::::::::::.:ii::::::;:ii;".:‘".::* si:,..:.iii: 11111...:::::::',......;:l.;::::::,1".,:.:::::....:::;::,,tti4:i:1;:'f..::::::',:::::. :::,::....:::::"':::::: ''.: '.,;:.:i.,"...".,::: '.:::::iti..:',:,!",N i,..:,,:li::::,...!':::::::iq...:-..;:.:,..,::::0::',-..i,:..,::::::,...-,:,, :-.,--: .... ..1,....•:;.,. l'ESEEk.-------1":Rii.'":".:'''' A111111Mm....ltnallMitaliilmMili::':";:::::::::-.1;:::11;:liii.:."..'....1:'''''''.:Ni;:,..:;:.:::;.:;:::::...N,...:..........i: ill ,..?..,........f.,:ii ........„,..............::::!.:::;..,.... ............. .::,,i111111414111111 .. ,.. ,,.::::,.......,...:::.......:...i....;,..........................::::.,....1:::"......i...„1.'.,-.:: .. -...'.' ...::-...::'... 1 VI MAP ..................:„.„:„.......,...............„.. ..... . . . :..•. .. . . :• .. ..............„.......:.....„:............„....,...,................ ...... . illiffm'.-mriWi'llwat '.'W ' .:.. mi • '''''''''.: "-.: - Mr': :::.:::' ' ...---....:.:: .:::----: ------:"..:! 1 S 136DC-02504 „....:..., ..... . . . .. . • . • ....................H...„:.:::•::„.:::.:.....,...:,..,.. .:.... . „. .. .. ..,.....,,..:.n.::::::::issmi:Aintwiss::::aw.i.:•:!!!:::.1:i::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::•::::::: :::::-.::i....r° - ' ':::::::: " --v.:11"...;;Am -.-: . . :..F.,:.: :: . :. ::::. • .' ' -:- ' . ..... ' . ' . ...."'''''''''''.:::::::. ::::'"':::': ::::1:-::::::::::"% ::: •::: . - :::: ....,• =„:„.„:„.....,„:,„,„:,„„„„„„„,..„,...........,...,.....„„.....„.....„....:„. ... .,:ab'llw-• RII,:i.,-::::Ciliiiiiiiiillingiii•i:':%igi':::::v': •:::::.: ............:......*:„....„_, ..:........:::::,:::::::::::::.......,....:::...:...:!::::...,......::::::::::::„.::::.:.............:::::::::::::..:::::•:.-....::.• .....-........... ... ... .•.......• .....„.......... ................- .:. ....... ..:. ..................„......:"............:......:.::::::::.•..::....•.. .. .. . .. • • .:.•_- :- : • . . .....-.::-...::::::::::-....:::::-..::-...::::-..............:::::::,.....ii.....,.....:::::::.:•:::::••••:..:::::::::::::-..!:.•-..- ...::::::::::::.:-..::::•„...,:: , - ......:::::*:........- --:::-.. •••••••••• .-•- - • ••••: ....::??......-...- .. ... ....::::::::::::.•:•:::: • •.............. ..... ..... ........... ....•.............. U ................... . . . 11.::::..:.....::::-..?:?:::,........:::::::::........: ...„........::::...:..... ........... :::„ ..,........:::: *:.......ii:1,::.: n "... .. . .. .. . ...::::::..........„:„....„:„..„:„:„.„::::::„..„......„....„.„.„..::„.„......::::.::............„....:....::::. •:: . .. . . . ... ., ........................„.„...............,,.....:„......,........ . .. ........:„.....: .:.:::::: :.•„: , ......,........:•.... :„.„.........:............:„...................................„......:........„........,.....,................ ..........::. . . . ... . ............• •. .••••• . . • •• .•... ................• ............,.....„........::,:...........,..... • •••. ...... ..........„,...: • • ..............• .• ...: ,,..,.......,...........,..„................... • :........„.......„...„:::::•::„...........: .......... .........,....... ••......••••........... .......„........... ...„ ... ... . ....:.'".il......11":::4:-,:::,::::::::„..,„:::::::::, ‘ ,. :::„.....::::._......:.::.:::::::::::::::,:::::::::::::,„...„:::::::.. ,.::::::::„.. .....:......:: :::::.:„........,.......:::„......„:„....„:::: Ma ..................„...........:::: ................:.........., ..:::...,...........::::::::::::::::::::::.,.....::::::::: :::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::Emir . . .....................- .......... „:..........:. mi - .---: .. ... .........................,.................,....................:.„....„.„:„.........,........................./............ ...... :.............,,..,,,,,,,:........... .... 0 •••• ‘44itt:, -- - , ,:-..::-...----: ::•,.. ...iii:::Ri!lii$11l: ::.:J.:Jii :::::•gi:"...::::•:"'-....":.'.".•••:::::::,'''.. .--."---:;•:•-••••'•-• - .:::-..:.::::::::!::::::::::.;.:::::::ota""0-:::::\:::::::,.::::,:,--ill ••Joil*NE 11111 ::::::.:Iii ... ,.... . ... .... ..........,.,........,„:„.:::::................:....,..............:::........,..:.. ....:.....: ...:.::: . ..., ..... n.: .411 _,_ ii ..• ..-.. - - •.. -,- ..--.•-:-...,.....• ..:...•:......::•........ .••••..,...,.........:,..,.....-::.-.... 0 ... :- . :..• - . .:.niir .: : - -.. - - - - . • .. ..........,,, ::::: p... ...-- •..,. - II . .: -.......„....•..-.......:.:•,:::,...:..:..,••••::::::-.:-:-.:::::.- - - -::-.:.:.:i::::::::::,:....-.:-.,-.:::::-... . . : ...„..........,...............,....:::: '\\ ,...:X.,..........:„.... .., ,.:„.,...::::.....:::::::••...!....a.,-,..-.,.'...•:::::,....,...-...,•••• • • .. •-• • .......... .•... .....,. .. ...-.:-..:::-.::-..,;.: -.• . :...,.............„...........:......„ ,„.,,,, \„.......:iii• , • . it .211......Aiiii..: it,„•,:...„. .. •.• . •..... . -.--- - . ..:....-.:.;::.:•:"'":.::\N, '''.''' i ".... ift- . .. . . . -I.. it•-:- „..., ••.: .•. , ....... ., ....•.. . .. .. • •.: •....„.:::::......„.....::::::...........::::::::::„......... . . • . ..... ,nagm on.. .,,,..-.... .... ... . .. .... . .. .. :: .....: . ..:.„..:.... .........„:„.............. .....: ...."..•.",...."::::::',..].":c..i...,,.:::,,.::::::::::....,..-. •-•::.............:.:.••• „i....,..../....................:...:::.:•:-.....-....:•::::: :..-•:::...:•:::....-..-:;:-.i........::::: ::::::::. •.:.... .:::::::RE 7111:•!.......: .::::•••••::..:: .: 1 2 ••:......•....::::::::::::::::::::::::...,:::::::::. ::......:„:„....:„......:.:.::.:::: ,:.. :..:.::::::::::::.... . .....-... ... .......:..:. .. .......: . . .....•...•...• . ..• • ••••. .. .... . .. .. .. •. ••• .............. .. ... ....... • .. . .......... ... ..-z.......:•:,.....:„,•:::::::::,,,........,...-. ........,.....:•,.:::-:::-. .......::::::: ....,.....:::::::::,:„.....:•••••••••••:••••••••:•••• . •... .. .:..:„.:......... •: " ..„.•:: : .:.:::„..„....: .. .milli. . . . . .. ......................:.......„....:::::::: .....,........ ......„::::......„........... ... . . . .... .: .....„.......„...•..: .•..... • • ...ill! .. .. "". ......:... . .. • • .• . - - so ...,,...- NI N .............................. . . .„.....-....:„.........•.;:.:::::,............................:.:;<::::i-, :-.. . .............,...........:::.,.....,,,,,.....-.......:::::::::,..,:.. . . .. . --.. :....:. ...... . .. .. . :. -""""..*.'.' . . . - -- ,: ..-.:..-.-..:.. .......• ... ..., , 400 ow Feet ..........;,::.:,..*:•:.,...... . . 1111111M 0 200 ....,;::::::::::::11.„3.....'il::::,......,,...„.......,,...-,....,...1.:.. ..:.:Z. .44,1_....:.:...... ...:.::'....::::i.: :::-..:::::::: :::'''...'i.]......„:::::::::.:;:i'''''''::::' '''' ' . - . ::'•• - - .:' ..MR 1'4 476 feat -ig INN Mill • . ' II , .. . . .. .• ...::......••••:::...•,:::•.::::::::::••••,••••••••::::•::•::...•••••••••••.,..•.• • ,•: NEENNis ,mil of is, :,1 ......'....:j!".'::::' :..,:ii.l.....'...':.1...:::'...-....::: .... ... .......... . "..:........• ka ,,,,.,..,..„.,.4,.. - ...........-,..,.....:::*.::::::::::::.*::::::,...,:::::::::::.,..:. . -. - .. .,.. „....:.....,..,..:.:::::„.::::,:::::•:„..,:......:,..:::::„:„:„.:.. : ........ .............. .. ....... . . ..•...................::..... . . ,,,,4 ,...:::::.::::::::.,...:::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::..::::.....x.,.....::::::•:::::: : : .. •••:.::::::.,::::*.:::::::::::::....::::....::.::::....::::::::::::....:::::..:::....::::.::::::::::....:::.•.: .. •:: •..2,11astainiv. • MI .. ........".-...--....-.....-.....••••••... . •• .„:„......„......... . . ,.„ • .. . ...... . .:.: .:::: .,..:........ ,he. .::.:::....: ...::..::......:..,....:......::::::::.::::::::. " . :: ......„.........„.............:. . : .,NK....-..".:::.:.:- ... :„,:- •:::"•:-...:. illitliti.g14111 fl..1 .,.......,....::..:::., .::.:: ..... ... ..•. Informldbeetisoenrionedm:,,s.:7CtFtahipteydsisDaveioforfRi:T 09rnee;i i g,i.ar°I:.dseamticncesonuryvianniond .11n:. (503)639-4171 "" "".".....„....."•: ,. • ....,:.:.-..-........,:::.,...............:...:.. .•.... .. . . . ........ ... . • • ..• • • ••• ....:. •..:. .......•,..:. http:/Avww.ci tipar0 or us BAYLDR A L.L. gq In IIIIII U ° m N N N REE\,ISOLE FRCPERTIES Q 1S136DC-02504 ti SDR1999-00016 Lo z a_ a1 7275, 7295, and 7301 CLINTON SW Dartmouth St. N CU N. ) s7 V) X Q L4-1 SW D-"4100TH Sr Li- CI 1