Loading...
SDR1998-00026 SDR98 - 00026 PITTMAN & BROOKS OFFICES & DAYCARE ADDITION ..40y447-=== =.-4,==p I I i I ' I ofri;;)4 v .. 'r 120 DAYS = 5/20/99 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE: PITTMAN & BROOKS OFFICES & DAYCARE ADDITION Site Development Review SDR 98-0026 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested approval of a Major Modification for the construction of a 3,327 square foot addition to an existing professional office building. The expansion proposal includes a day-care facility and additional office space. An additional access, more off-street parking and a public sidewalk along SW 72'd Avenue are also proposed. APPLICANT: Brooks & Pittman Rentals OWNER: Same Contact: Randall Brooks 15255 SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Light Industrial; I-L. ZONING DESIGNATION: I-P; Industrial Park. The I-P zoning district allows for combining of light manufacturing, office and complementary commercial uses. LOCATION: 12555 SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 2S112DB, Tax Lot 00200. APPLICABLE Community Development Code Chapters 18.360 (Site Development REVIEW Review); 18.390 (Decision Making Procedures); 18.530 (Industrial Zoning CRITERIA: Districts); 18.705 (Access, Egress and Circulation); 18.730 (Exceptions to Development Standards) 18.745 (Landscaping and Screening); 18.760 (Nonconforming Situations); 18.765 (Off-Street Parking); 18.780 (Signs); 18.790 (Tree Removal); 18.795 (Visual Clearance Areas); and 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards). SECTION II. DECISION 'P Pf s Sr ,viB��i .sr f �18 .� ' ®f1Cl � P�a. dted PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 1 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS. (Unless otherwise specified,the Staff contact is Brian Rager with the Engineering Department at 503-639-4171.) 1. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan for review and approval. The revised landscaping plan shall include additional shrub plantings along the north perimeter of the north parking lot and provide a more even distribution of parking lot trees around the south parking lot. Staff Contact: Mark J. Roberts. 2. The applicant shall submit a site plan and detailed trash enclosure design drawings to the Franchise Hauler for review and approval. The plans shall be of sufficient detail for the Franchise Hauler to determine that the applicable design and access standards are met. Staff Contact: Mark J. Roberts. 3. The applicant shall submit a revised vehicle and bicycle parking plan for review and approval. The plan shall show that vehicle parking spaces are sized according to City standards and that 7 bicycle parking spaces are provided. Bicycle parking must be provided within 50 feet of the primary entrance, although it may be appropriate to provide some at each entrance given the "mixed-use" nature of the project. A detailed bicycle parking design shall be provided, which demonstrates compliance with the requirements of TMC Chapter 18.765.050.C. Staff Contact: Mark J. Roberts. 4. The applicant shall submit a tree protection plan, prepared by a certified arborist, for review and approval. The plan shall describe a protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction in compliance with TMC 18.790.030.B.4. Draft deed-restriction language, in compliance with 18.790.030.0 shall also be submitted for review and approval. Staff Contact: Mark J. Roberts. 5. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that clearly indicates the location of the SW 72nd Avenue right-of-way (ROW) and the clear vision areas associated with each access drive. The site plan shall indicate that no temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height will be located within a clear vision area. Accurate location of the right-of-way/property line is necessary as a condition of variance/adjustment approval. Staff Contact: Mark J. Roberts. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new sidewalk and street trees on 72' Avenue. 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. 7. 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. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 2 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 8. The applicant shall construct the following frontage improvements as a part of this project: A. 6-foot concrete sidewalk; B. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per Tigard Development Code (TDC) requirements. 9. Prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Engineer as to the location of the right-of-way centerline, roadway centerline (if it varies from the right-of-way centerline) and the western right-of-way line (site east property line). If the 6-foot sidewalk and 4-foot street tree area will not fit within existing right-of-way, the applicant shall dedicate additional right-of-way as needed to accommodate those items. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION BEING PERFORMED: 10.Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements. 11.The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW 72nd Avenue underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $ 11,550 and it shall be paid prior to final inspection of the building. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: A zone change from Light Industrial (I-L) to Industrial Park (I-P) was approved in 1991 (ZON 91- 0009). Vicinity Information: The site is located at 15255 SW 72nd Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road and opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. The site abuts SW 72nd Avenue, a Major Collector, to the east and the Southern Pacific railroad to the west. Southwest 72"d Avenue is improved, with the exception of sidewalk and street trees and is located within a 60-foot right-of-way. The site is located within a large area designated Light Industrial in the Comprehensive Plan. This area extends south from SW Bonita Road to the SW 72"d/I-5 intersection near the southern extent of the City limits. Property to the east, across SW 72' Avenue is zoned Industrial Park (I-P). Property to the west of SW 72' and adjacent to the subject property is zoned Light Industrial (I-L). Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is 0.65 acres in size and is currently developed with a 2-story office building of approximately 4,072 square feet. The site has two access points to SW 72"d Avenue, one to the north and one to the south of the building. Each access point leads to an on-site parking PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 3 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 area. The proposed modification to the site includes two building additions: a 2-story office addition on the north side of the building and a 1-story daycare addition on the south side of the building. The north side addition would remove some of the existing north parking area, which will be reconfigured. A fenced play yard is proposed in conjunction with the daycare addition. The applicant also proposes to construct a sidewalk and provide street trees to bring SW 72nd up to current City standards. The applicant also requests a variance to the front yard setback standard of the I-P zone. The variance is requested because the existing building does not conform to the setback and the applicant proposed to match the existing building line with the addition. The degree of non-conformity (and, therefore, the extent of the variance requested) is unknown because the exact location of the right-of-way line has not been identified. The reason for the confusion is that a 10-foot "easement for road purposes" and a later 5-foot road "dedication" appear on the property deed; it is, therefore, unclear where the ROW line is located. As noted later in this decision, the applicant will need to locate the right-of-way centerline and ascertain the actual existing dimension of the ROW. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Site Development Review - Chapter 18.360: Section 18.360.030.A provides that Site Development Review for a new development or major modification of an approved plan or existing development shall be processed by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.360.090. In compliance with Section 18.390.040, a pre-application conference was held on August 27, 1998. An application for Site Development Review was submitted and subsequently deemed complete on January 20, 1999. Notice of pending Type II Administrative Decision was given as required by Section 18.390.040.C. The relevant approval criteria are addressed below with respect to the factual information provided by the applicant and are the basis for this Director's decision. Section 18.360.090 states that the Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions, or denying an application: Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this Title including Chapter 18.800, Street and Utility Standards; The applicable review criteria in this case include the following chapters of the Community Development Code: 18.360, Site Development Review; 18.390, Decision Making Procedures; 18.530, Industrial Zoning Districts; 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; 18.730, Exceptions to Development Standards; 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage; 18.760, Nonconforming Situations; 18.765, Off-Street Parking; 18.780, Signs; 18.790, Tree Removal; 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas; and 18.810, Street and Utility Improvement Standards. The development standards and requirements of these chapters are addressed below, followed by the specific Site Development Review Criteria. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 4 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following chapters: 18.400, Land Division; 18.600, Community Plan Area Standards; 18.710, Accessory Residential Units; 18.715, Density Computations; 18.720, Design Compatibility Standards; 18.725, Environmental Performance Standards; 18.740, Historic Overlay; 18.742, Home Occupations; 18.750, Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations; 18.760, Nonconforming Situations; 18.775, Sensitive Lands; 18.785, Temporary Uses; 18.797, Water Resources Overlay District; and 18.798, Wireless Communications Facilities. These chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Impact Study: Section 18.390.040.B.2.e. 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 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 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. The applicant has not submitted an Impact Study. However, the site is already developed and has access to all city services and to an improved street. The applicant is proposing to construct sidewalk and install street trees in conjunction with the office/daycare expansion. Completion of the improvements as proposed will satisfy the City's adopted street standards. Industrial Park Zoning District: Section 18.530.020. states that the I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. Permitted Uses: Table 18.530.1. lists permitted, restricted, conditional and not-permitted uses in the industrial zoning districts. The applicant is proposing to expand an office building and add a day care facility. An office use is permitted in the I-P zone. A daycare facility is a restricted use in the I-P zone and must not exceed 20% of the square footage within a development. The applicant proposes a daycare facility of 1 ,070 square feet within a total building area of 7,399 square feet (14.5%). The proposed daycare facility is within the prescribed size range and is, therefore, permitted in the underlying zone. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 5 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Dimensional Requirements: The I-P Zoning District standards are contained in Table 18.530.2. STANDARD I-P PROPOSED Minimum Lot Size None N/A Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. Approx. 420 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 35 ft. >_ 25 ft. - Side facing street on corner & 20 ft. N/A through lots [1] 0/50 ft. [3] N/A - Side yard 0/50 ft. [3][4] N/A - Rear yard - Distance between front of - Garage & property line -- -- abutting a public or private street Maximum Height 45 ft. 23 ft. Maximum Site Coverage [2] 75% [5] 48% Maximum Landscape 25% [6] 52% Requirement [1] The provisions of Chapter 18.795 (Vision Clearance) must be satisfied. [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3] No setback shall be required except 50 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4] Development in industrial zones abutting the Rolling Hills neighborhood shall comply with Policy 11.5.1. [5] Maximum site coverage may be increased to 80% if the provisions of Section 18.530.050.B are satisfied. [6] Except that a reduction to 20% of the site may be approved through the site development review process. The table above compares the applicant's proposal with the minimum dimensional standards of the I-P zone. The side and rear yard setbacks do not apply because the site does not abut residential zoning. The proposed front yard setback is noted as greater than or equal to 25 feet because (as discussed earlier) the exact location of the front property line has not been determined. The applicant has applied for a variance to the front yard setback standard. The variance is addressed later in this decision. FINDING: Based on the above information, the applicant's proposal meets or exceeds the dimensional standards of the I-P zoning district with the exception of the front yard setback which is addressed later through the variance/adjustment approval process. Variances and Adjustments — Chapter 18.370: Section 18.370.020.B.1.a. states that up to a 25% reduction of the dimensional standards for the front yard setback required in the base zone. Setback of garages may not be reduced by this provision. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 6 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Section 18.370.020.B.2. states that a development adjustment shall be granted if there is a demonstration of compliance with all of the applicable standards; and A demonstration that the adjustment requested is the least required to achieve the desired affect; As noted earlier, there is uncertainty regarding the exact location of the property line/right-of- way. The existing building is set back only about 38 feet from the existing curb. Therefore, even if the existing right-of-way line is at or near this point, after provision of sidewalk and a street tree planter strip the property will have less then the required setback. A condition of approval requires that the applicant locate the right-of-way; this will determine the amount of adjustment necessary to bring the site into compliance. The applicant has specifically requested the least adjustment necessary. The adjustment will result in the preservation of trees, if trees are present in the development area; Trees are present in the development area. As discussed later under Tree Removal, all but one are to be preserved. Regardless of whether the front yard setback adjustment is approved or denied, there will be no effect on tree preservation. The adjustment is requested simply to legalize an existing nonconforming situation and to allow the proposed addition to match the existing building façade. The adjustment will not impede adequate emergency access to the site; Access to the site will be achieved to the north and south of the building. Therefore, adjustment of the front yard setback (east façade) will not affect emergency access. There is not a reasonable alternative to the adjustment which achieves the desired affect. The only way to meet the setback for the existing building would be to move the building. This is not a reasonable alternative. The proposed addition could meet the setback if it were made smaller, because of the triangular shape of the lot, the addition could not simply be set back further. However, in Staffs opinion, it is reasonable to allow the applicant the opportunity to match the existing setback, given the site constraints and the fact that an adjustment is necessary anyway to legalize the existing building. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the approval criteria for a 25% reduction of the front yard setback are met. The front yard setback may therefore be reduced from 35 feet to as little as 26.5 feet. The exact amount of the adjustment will depend on the location of the right-of-way as determined by the applicant in compliance with Condition of Approval # 5. Section 18.370.C.2. states that the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a variance based on finding that the following criteria are satisfied: PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 7 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; The requested variance is to the front yard setback. A variance will only be required in the event that the applicant's information regarding the location of the right-of-way indicates that the front yard setback is less than 26.5 feet. An adjustment to a 26.5—foot front yard setback is approved as part of this decision. Given that the variance is to legalize an existing nonconforming situation and to account for provision of necessary public street improvements, Staff believes that the variance is consistent with the purpose of the Community Development Code. There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; The extent of the variance is determined by the location of an existing structure. To the extent that re-location of the building would be an unreasonable burden to bring the site into compliance, this is a circumstance over which the applicant has no control. The subject property is a triangular lot which narrows towards the south, the proposed south addition is, therefore, increasingly constrained in terms of the lot's building envelope. The shape of the property is unusual and does not apply to other parcels in the vicinity. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land; As discussed elsewhere in this decision, the proposed office and daycare uses are permitted in the underlying I-P zone. To the extent that the requested variance is the least necessary to legalize the existing structure and allow the addition to match it, City standards will be maintained to the greatest degree possible. Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title; and Reduction of the front yard setback will not adversely affect physical or natural systems. The site is developed and is in an industrial area. Approval of the variance will not increase the proximity of on-site structures to the property line. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The hardship is related to the location of an existing structure, placed on the site over 15 years ago. It would be a hardship to re-locate the building to conform to the front yard setback standards and to expand the use of this odd-shaped parcel within the standard setbacks. As discussed above, the variance is the minimum variance that would alleviate the hardship. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 8 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the approval criteria for a variance to the front yard setback are satisfied. This approval modifies the front yard setback to a distance equal to but no greater than the distance between the nearest wall of the existing building and the right-of-way/property line as located by the applicant. The applicant is required to accurately locate the right-of-way as a condition of this land use decision. Access Egress and Circulation — Chapter 18.705: 18.705.020.A. states that the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures (see Section 18.360.050), and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. Section 18.705.030.F. states that pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments; The applicant's site plan indicates that walkways will be provided between the two building entrances and the proposed public sidewalk. Within all attached housing (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling shall be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities; The proposal is a commercial development, therefore this standard does not apply. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum 6- inch vertical separation (curbed) or a minimum 3-foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; The site plan demonstrates that the proposed walkways do not cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots. Both proposed walkways are four feet in width or greater. Walkway design will be evaluated for compliance with ADA standards at the time of site and building permits. 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 site plan indicates that both walkways will be surfaced in concrete. Safety issues, including lighting and signage, are addressed later in this decision. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 9 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Section 18.705.030.1.1 states that vehicle access, egress and circulation for commercial and industrial use shall not be less than as provided in Table 18.705.3; TABLE 18.705.3 VEHICULAR ACCESS/EGRESS REQUIREMENTS: COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES REQUIRED PARKING MINIMUM NUMBER OF MINIMUM ACCESS MINIMUM PAVEMENT SPACES DRIVEWAYS WIDTH REQUIRED 0-99 1 30' 24' curbs required 100+ 2 30' 24' curbs required or 1 50' 40' curbs required The applicant's site plan indicates that a total of 23 parking spaces will be provided. According to the table above; one, 30-foot access with 24-foot pavement width is required for a parking lot this size. The existing conditions plan indicates that two accesses are currently provided, although the north access does not currently meet access width standards. The site plan indicates that both access points will remain and that the north access will be improved so that both meet the above access standards. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; The north entrance which gives access to the primary office use is the primary entrance in this case. The site plan indicates that the nearest regular parking space is located within approximately 25 feet of the primary entrance. Additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. No truck traffic requirements are appropriate since the proposed uses are a professional office and daycare. Section 18.705.030.K.2. states that to eliminate the need to use public streets for movements between commercial or industrial properties, parking areas shall be designed to connect with parking areas on adjacent properties unless not feasible. The Director shall require access easements between properties where necessary to provide parking area connections. Because the subject property is triangular in shape and surrounded on two sides by street and railroad right-of-way there is only one neighboring property, which is located to the north. Aerial photograph information from the City's Geographic Information System indicates that the building on the neighboring parcel is located at the south end of the property with parking to the north. No paved connection to the south has been provided and the orientation of the building does not appear to allow sufficient space for a connection to be made. FINDING: Based on the above analysis, Staff finds that the proposed development satisfies all of the applicable development standards of Chapter 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 10 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Exceptions to Development Standards — Chapter 18.730: Section 18.730.040.A. provides for additional setback from specified roadways. To ensure improved light, air, and sight distance and to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, structures in any zoning district which abut certain arterial and collector streets shall be set back a minimum distance from the centerline of the street. Where the street is not improved, the measurement shall be made at right angles from the centerline or general extension of the street right-of-way as follows: Arterial Streets: The required setback distance for buildings on arterial streets is the setback distance required by the zoning district plus the following distances measured from the centerline of the street as contained in Table 18.730.1. Collector Streets: The required setback distance for buildings on the following collector streets is the setback distance required by the zoning district plus 30 feet measured from the centerline of the street as contained in Table 18.730.1. Southwest 72' Avenue is a Major Collector which requires a total building setback of 65 feet from the street centerline (30 feet plus the 35-foot front yard setback of the I-P zone). As noted above, there is some confusion over the exact location of the ROW. Also, the applicant's plans do not indicate the location of the SW 72nd Avenue centerline. Therefore, staff is unable to make a determination that the standard is met. However, since the applicant has applied for a variance/adjustment to the front yard setback, this standard will be satisfied through that process. Landscaping and Screening — Chapter 18.745: Section 18.745.020.A. states that the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, remodeling of existing structures where the landscaping is nonconforming (Section 18.760.040.C.), and to a change of use which results in the need for increased on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. The following are the development standards that are applicable to this proposal: Street Trees: Section 18.745.040.A.1. states that all development projects fronting on a public street, private street or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length approved after the adoption of this title shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section 18.745.040.C. The subject property has frontage on SW 72' Avenue. The applicant's landscape plan indicates that seven existing street trees will be preserved along the property frontage. The trees are maples, six at 4-inch caliper and one at 5-inch caliper. The applicant proposes to provide seven additional 3-inch caliper maples in conjunction with the site modification. Section 18.745.040.C.2. states that the specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shall be as follows: • Small or narrow-stature trees under 25 feet tall and less than 16 feet wide branching at maturity shall be spaced no greater than 20 feet apart; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 11 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • Medium-sized trees 25 feet to 40 feet tall, 16 feet to 35 feet wide branching at maturity shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart; • Large trees over 40 feet tall and more than 35 feet wide branching at maturity shall be spaced no greater than 40 feet apart; The applicant's landscape plan does not indicate what type of maple tree is proposed, however, the spacing is shown at approximately 20-23 feet. The proposed spacing is appropriate for a medium size tree according to the above standards. In order to fully satisfy this standard, the applicant must demonstrate that the specific tree proposed meets the medium tree size classification or adjust the spacing accordingly. Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.050.A.2. states that buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter (Tables 18.745.1. and 18.745.2.). The owner of each proposed development is responsible for the installation and effective maintenance of buffering and screening. When different uses would be abutting one another except for separation by a right-of- way, buffering, but not screening, shall be required as specified in the matrix; The subject property is zoned I-P and surrounding property is zoned I-L and I-P. Both zoning districts implement the Light Industrial land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan. According to the above-referenced matrices, development in Light Industrial zoning districts does not require buffering and screening from Light Industrial property. Section 18.745.050.E.1.a. states that screening of parking and loading areas is required. The specifications for this screening are as follows: • 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; • Landscape planters may be used to define or screen the appearance of off-street parking areas from the public right-of-way; • Materials to be installed should achieve a 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 and on the basis of one tree for each seven parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect; and • The minimum dimension of the landscape islands shall be three feet and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The applicant's landscape plan indicates that shrubs will be provided around the perimeter of the south parking lot and that trees will be provided along the south boundary. Shrubs are provided along the east perimeter of the north parking lot where the right-of-way abuts, and existing 5-inch caliper maple trees are located along the north and west perimeter at approximately 25 to 30-foot spacing. Additional shrub plantings along the north perimeter are necessary to achieve the required balance between low-lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 12 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Staff believes that the intent of the requirement to provide parking lot trees within landscape islands can be met in certain small parking lots where each parking space directly abuts the perimeter landscaping, and where trees are provided to achieve the required canopy effect. The north parking lot contains 14 parking spaces which would require two trees spaced evenly. The landscape plan indicates that the north parking lot is provided with six perimeter trees and, in addition, two street trees are located within seven feet of the east perimeter. The spacing of the trees is consistent with the "equal distribution" standard necessary to provide the required "canopy effect". The south parking lot contains nine parking spaces which would require one tree. The landscape plan indicates that four perimeter trees are proposed. Although more trees are proposed than is required, the distribution is uneven and should be re-designed or augmented to provide a better "canopy effect." Section 18.745.050.E.4. states that any refuse container or refuse collection area which would be visible from a public street, parking lot, residential or commercial area, or any public facility such as a school or park shall be screened or enclosed from view by placement of a solid wood fence, masonry wall or evergreen hedge. All refuse shall be contained within the screened area. The applicant's site plan indicates that a refuse collection area will be provided within the north parking lot. The plan indicates that the storage area will be screened with a 5-foot high wood fence. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the standards of Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening are satisfied outright or will be met through compliance with the condition of approval. CONDITION:Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan for review and approval. The revised landscape shall include additional shrub plantings along the north perimeter of the north parking lot and provide a more even distribution of parking lot trees around the south parking lot. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage — Chapter 18.755: Section 18.755.010.B. states that the mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable storage standards shall apply to new multi-unit residential buildings containing five or more units and non-residential construction that are subject to full site plan or design review; and are located within urban zones that allow, outright or by condition, for such uses. Section 18.755.010.C.5.b. states that non-residential buildings shall provide a minimum storage area of 10 square feet, plus 4 square feet/1,000 square feet gross floor area (GFA) for "office" and "other" uses. The total square footage of the proposed modified building is 7,399 square feet. A building this size is required to provide storage of 39.6 square feet (10 + (4 x 7.399) = 39.6). The applicant's site plan indicates that a storage area of approximately 165 square feet will be provided. Section 18.755.050.B. provides the following location standards: To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclable shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 13 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 The site plan indicates that proposed storage area is for both waste and recyclable materials. Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building Code (UBC) and Uniform Fire Code (UFC) requirements; Compliance with UBC and UFC requirements will be addressed at the time of building permit. Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations; The site plan indicates that a single outdoor location is proposed. Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; The site plan indicates that the proposed storage area is not located within a required front yard and is not adjacent to a street. Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; The site plan indicates that the proposed storage area is located in the north parking lot area. The location is central and is visible from the buildings and from SW 72nd Avenue. Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C., Design Standards; Both the parking and screening requirements are met, as addressed elsewhere in this decision. The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. The storage area is located at the edge of the north parking lot, out of the way of on-site vehicular and pedestrian movement. The storage area is no deeper than the adjacent parking spaces and does not interfere with the 24-foot-wide parking lot aisle. The franchise hauler must approve accessibility of the storage enclosure for collection vehicles. Section 18.755.O50.C. provides the following design standards: The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection as follows: Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 14 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; • Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. Section 18.755.050.D. provides the following access standards: • Access to storage areas can be limited for security reasons. However, the storage area shall be accessible to users at convenient times of the day, and to collection service personnel on the day and approximate time they are scheduled to provide collection service; • Storage areas shall be designed to be easily accessible to collection trucks and equipment, considering paving, grade and vehicle access. A minimum of 10 feet horizontal clearance and eight feet of vertical clearance is required if the storage area is covered; • Storage areas shall be accessible to collection vehicles without requiring backing out of a driveway onto a public street. If only a single access point is available to the storage area, adequate turning radius shall be provided to allow collection vehicles to safety exit the site in a forward motion. Compliance with the above design and location standards will be assured through the Franchise Hauler's review and the Building Permit process. FINDING: Based on the above analysis, Staff finds that the standards of Chapter 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage are met outright or will be satisfied through compliance with the conditions of approval. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a site plan and detailed trash enclosure design drawings to the Franchise Hauler for review and approval. The plans shall be of sufficient detail for the Franchise Hauler to determine that the applicable design and access standards are met. Nonconforming Situations — Chapter 18.760: Section 18.760.040.C. provides for Nonconforming Development as follows: Where a lawful structure exists at the effective date of adoption or amendment of this title that could not be built under the terms of this title by reason of restrictions on lot area, lot coverage, height, yard, equipment, its location on the lot or other requirements concerning the structure, such structure may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, subject to the following provisions: • No such nonconforming structure may be enlarged or altered in a way which increases its nonconformity but any structure or portion thereof may be enlarged or altered in a way that satisfies the requirements of this title or will decrease its nonconformity; or PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 15 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • Should such nonconforming structure or nonconforming portion of structure be destroyed by any means to an extent of more than 60% of its current value as assessed by the Washington County assessor, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this title; and • Should such structure be moved for any reason for any distance whatever, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations for the zoning district in which it is located after it is moved. As noted earlier, the existing structure does not comply with the 35-foot front yard setback requirement of the I-P zoning district. However, the applicant has applied for a development adjustment to reduce the front yard setback requirement for the subject property. Staff finds that approval of the adjustment will legalize the existing nonconforming situation and this section will no longer apply. If the adjustment is not approved, the development cannot be built as proposed and this section would continue to apply to a revised or future development proposal. Off-Street Parking — Chapter 18.765: Section 18.765.020. states that at the time of an enlargement of a structure which increases the on-site vehicle parking requirements, off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070. subject to the following: • On the date of adoption of this title, the number of vehicle parking and loading spaces required shall be based only on floor area or capacity of such enlargement; • If the minimum vehicle parking spaces required for the enlargement added to the existing on-site space exceed the maximum number of vehicle parking spaces allowed for the whole project per the maximum parking ratios established in 18.765.070., the applicant may reduce the additional number of spaces provided so that the total spaces on the site do not exceed the maximum spaces allowed. The site plan indicates that the proposed addition will total 3,327 square feet of floor area. Table 18.765.2 states that there are no maximum parking requirements for industrial uses. Section 18.765.030.B. states that the location of off-street parking will be as follows: • Off-street parking spaces for single-family and duplex dwellings and single-family attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwelling(s); • Off-street parking lots for uses not listed above shall be located not further than 200 feet from the building or use that they are required to serve, measured in a straight line from the building: The site plan indicates that the furthest point in either parking lot is within 80 feet of the building. Section 18.765.030.D. states that in mixed-use projects, the required minimum vehicle parking shall be determined using the following formula: • Primary use, i.e., that with the largest proportion of total floor area within the development, at 100% of the minimum vehicle parking required for that use in Section 18.765.060.; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 16 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • Secondary use, i.e., that with the second largest percentage of total floor area within the development, at 90% of the vehicle parking required for that use in Section 18.765.060.; • Subsequent use or uses, at 80% of the vehicle parking required for that use(s) in Section 18.765.060.; and • The maximum parking allowance shall be 150% of the total minimum parking as calculated in D.1.-3. The primary use in this proposal is "office" and the secondary use is "daycare". According to Table 18.765.2 which summarizes required off-street parking, an office use requires a minimum of 2.7 spaces per 1 ,000 square feet of floor area and a commercial (not home-based) daycare use requires 2 spaces per classroom. The site plan indicates that the office portion of the building accounts for 6,329 square feet and that the daycare portion contains two classrooms. Therefore, the parking requirement is 17 spaces for the office portion (2.7 x 6,329 = 17) and 4 spaces for the daycare portion for a total of 21 required parking spaces. The site plan indicates that 21 parking spaces will be provided. Section 18.765.030.G. states that 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. State standards require one accessible space for parking lots providing up to 25 parking spaces. The project proposes 21 parking spaces. State standards also require that at least one required accessible space must be sized and designated "van accessible". The site plan and narrative statement indicate that one ADA van-accessible parking space will be provided. Section 18.765.040.J. states that 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 site plan indicates that all of the proposed parking stalls are located adjacent to landscaped areas. The site plan appears to indicate perimeter curbs are proposed. Provision of appropriate wheel stops will be verified at the time of building permit. Section 18.765.040.N.1. states that except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2, the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are as follows: • 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. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 17 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • The applicant's narrative indicates that parking spaces are sized at 9 feet x 18 feet for standard spaces and 8 feet x 15 feet for compact spaces. The site plan indicates that the van-accessible space is 9 feet wide with an 8-foot-wide access aisle as required by ADA regulations. All parking spaces need to be re-sized to meet the 18.5-feet and 16.5-feet length requirements. Section 18.765.040.2. provides that aisles accommodating two-direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. The site plan indicates that both parking lot access aisles are 24-feet wide. Section 18.765.050.A. states, with regard to the location and access to bicycle parking: Bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; The site plan indicates that a bicycle parking area will be provided adjacent to the day care entrance. As noted earlier, the north entrance is considered the primary entrance. The north entrance is further than 50 feet from the proposed bicycle parking area. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; The site plan indicates that the proposed bicycle parking facility is located on the concrete surface outside the entrance but is not located within the 4-foot-wide walkway. 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 locate the parking area; The site plan indicates that the proposed bicycle parking area is visible both from the building and from the street. 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 proposed bicycle parking area is located outside. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Section 18.765.050.B. states, with regard to covered parking spaces, when possible, bicycle parking facilities should be provided under cover. The applicant's narrative indicates that the proposed bicycle parking facility will be located under the porch at the south building entrance. Section 18.765.050.C. states that 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; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 18 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • Bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; • Bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 2-1/2 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; • Areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. The applicant has not provided sufficient detail on the design of the proposed bicycle parking facility for Staff to make a determination that these standards are met. Section 18.765.050.D.states that 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. As noted above, the site plan indicates that the bicycle parking facility will be located on a concrete surface. Section 18.765.050.E. states that 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. Single-family residences and duplexes are excluded from the bicycle parking requirements. The Director may reduce the number of required bicycle parking spaces by means of an adjustment to be reviewed through a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040., using approval criteria contained in Section 18.370.020.C.5.e. Table 18.765.2 states that an office use must provide 0.5 bicycle parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area and that a commercial daycare use must provide 1.5 spaces per classroom. The site plan indicates that the total office floor area will be 6,329 square feet and that the daycare area will include two classrooms. The bicycle-parking requirement is, therefore, four spaces for the office portion (6.329 x 0.5 = 3.2) and three spaces for the daycare portion (1.5 x 2 = 3), for a total of seven required bicycle parking spaces. The site plan and narrative indicate that two bicycle parking spaces are proposed. Section 18.765.070.H. states that the minimum and maximum off-street parking requirements are contained in Table 18.765.2. Minimum and Maximum off-street parking is addressed earlier in this section. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the applicable standards of Chapter 18.765, Off-Street Parking and Loading are either met outright or will be satisfied through compliance with the conditions of approval. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 19 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised vehicle and bicycle parking plan for review and approval. The plan shall show that vehicle parking spaces are sized according to City standards and that 7 bicycle parking spaces are provided. Bicycle parking must be provided within 50 feet of the primary entrance, although it may be appropriate to provide some at each entrance given the "mixed-use" nature of the project. A detailed bicycle parking design shall be provided, which demonstrates compliance with the requirements of 18.765.050.C. Signs — Chapter 18.780: 18.780.130.F. states that no signs shall be permitted in an I-P, I-L or I-H zone except for the following: Freestanding signs shall have certain limitations and conditions when permitted on properties in industrial zones; The site plan indicates that one existing freestanding sign is located on the property. No additional sign area and no additional freestanding signs are proposed. Wall Signs shall have certain limitations and conditions when permitted on properties in industrial zones: • Wall signs, including illuminated reader-boards, may be erected or maintained but shall not exceed in gross area 15 percent of any building face on which the sign is to be mounted; • Wall signs may not project more than 18 inches from the wall or extend above the wall to which they are attached; and • If it is determined under the development review process that the wall sign's visual appeal and overall design quality would be served, an additional 50 percent of the allowable sign area may be permitted. No copy will be permitted, however, in the additional area permitted. For purposes of this subsection, "copy" includes symbols, logos and letters. The elevation drawings indicate that dimensional lettering is proposed on the east facade of the north building addition, facing SW 72nd Avenue. A sign permit will be required at the time of development. Therefore, these standards will be satisfied at the time of sign permit. Tree Removal — Chapter 18.790: Section 18.790.030.A. states that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal wherever possible. Section 18.790.030.B. states that 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; The landscape plan indicates the location, size and species of all existing trees. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 20 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 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. in accordance with the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: • Retention of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D. of no net loss of trees; • Retention 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 in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D.; • Retention of from 50% to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D.; • Retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation. No trees over 12 inches are identified for removal. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; The landscape plan indicates that one, four-inch caliper maple tree will be removed. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. No tree protection plan is required. Subsequent removal of a tree: Section 18.790.040.B. states that any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section may thereafter be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance with Section 18.790.030. or as a condition of approval for a conditional use, and shall not be subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property owner shall record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit affected by this section to the effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. The form of this deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director. A condition of approval requires that a deed restriction be recorded in compliance with this standard. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the standards of Chapter 18.790., Tree Removal are met outright or will be satisfied through compliance with the conditions of approval. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a tree protection plan, prepared by a certified arborist, for review and approval. The plan shall describe a protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction in compliance with TMC 18.790.030.B.4. Draft deed- restriction language, in compliance with 18.790.030.0 shall also be submitted for review and approval. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 21 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Visual Clearance Areas — Chapter 18.795: Section 18.795.020.A. states that the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. Section 18.795.030.B. states that a clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. The applicant's site plan does not identify clear vision areas. Based on a preliminary review of the site plan, it appears that the clear vision areas associated with the two driveway entrances may conflict with the location of certain parking spaces. Parking spaces are not permitted within clear vision areas. As noted earlier, there is uncertainty regarding the exact location of the right-of-way. The right-of-way must be clearly identified in order to determine the location of clear vision areas. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that insufficient information has been provided to accurately determine whether the standards of Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas have been met. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that clearly indicates the location of the SW 72nd Avenue right-of-way and the clear vision areas associated with each access drive. The site plan shall indicate that no temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height will be located within a clear vision area. Street and Utility Improvement Standards — Chapter 18.810: Section 18.810.030.A.1. states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 8.810.030.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. Streets: This site lies adjacent to SW 72' Avenue, which is classified as a major collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. This roadway classification requires a right-of-way (ROW) width of 60 feet minimum. At present, there is approximately 60 feet of ROW overall, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. However, there may be a discrepancy between the tax assessor's map and the real property line/right-of-way line. The applicant's materials indicate that they are not sure where the western ROW is located. The preliminary plan does not indicate the centerline of the ROW or roadway and does not indicate the western ROW line. Therefore, it is difficult for Staff to determine if there is a need for additional ROW dedication. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 22 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Southwest 72nd Avenue is currently improved, with the exception of a concrete sidewalk and street trees along this frontage. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct a concrete sidewalk and plant street trees along the frontage. The applicant's plan shows that they will provide these improvements. Because there is a question regarding the western ROW line, Staff recommends the applicant provide evidence of the location of the ROW centerline, roadway centerline and western ROW line prior to issuance of any permits on this site. If the proposed sidewalk and street trees will not fit within existing ROW, then the applicant will need to dedicate additional ROW. The amount of dedication would need to account for the 6-foot sidewalk and a 4-foot area behind the sidewalk for the street trees. Water: This site is presently served from the City's water system. The building addition will be served from the existing on-site water system. Sanitary Sewer: The existing building is presently served from the public sewer system in SW 72nd Avenue. The building addition will also be served from the existing on-site system. Storm Drainage: The existing on-site storm drainage system can easily be modified to accommodate the building addition. There will not be an increase in impervious surfaces on this site, so detention is not required. Storm Water Quality: The development will result in a net decrease in impervious surfaces, from 12,677 square feet down to 12, 082 square feet. Therefore, this section will not apply. 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. Existing Overhead Utility Lines: There are existing overhead utility lines along SW 72nd Avenue. Section 18.810.120 of the 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. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 420 lineal feet; therefore, the fee would be $11,550. ADDITIONAL SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CRITERIA Relationship to the natural and physical environment: Section 18.360.090.A.2.a states that buildings shall be: Located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 23 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • 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. The proposed development is an expansion of an existing building. The site is already developed and there are no natural features present. The building addition will be constructed on existing hard surface and, according to the applicant's information, the project as a whole will result in a net loss of impervious surface area. Section 18.360.090.A.2.b. states that trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790., Tree Removal. The site plan indicates that one, four-inch caliper tree will be removed. Fifteen trees, ranging in size from four-five caliper inches will be preserved. Mitigation is not required for removal of trees under 12 caliper inches. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the proposal satisfies the Site Development Review criteria relating to preservation of the natural and physical environment. Exterior elevations: Section 18.360.090.A.3.a. states that along the vertical face of single-family attached and multiple-family structures, offsets shall occur at a minimum of every 30 feet. The proposal is for an office expansion. This section relates to residential development only and, therefore, is not applicable. Buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.360.090.A.4.a. states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, for example, between single-family and multiple-family residential, and residential and commercial uses, and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the buffer: The proposal is an office expansion. Abutting properties are developed with similar Light Industrial and Industrial Park uses. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Section 18.360.090.A.4.b. states that on site screening from view from adjoining properties of such things as service areas, storage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops, i.e., air cooling and heating systems, shall be provided and the following factors will be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: • What needs to be screened; • The direction from which it is needed; • How dense the screen needs to be; • Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile; and • Whether the screening needs to be year around. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 24 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • Screening of parking areas and the proposed trash/recycling enclosure is addressed earlier in this decision under the specific provisions of Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening. Privacy and noise: multi-family or group living uses: Section 18.36O.09O.A.5.a. states that structures which include residential dwelling units shall provide private outdoor areas for each ground floor unit which is screened from view by adjoining units as provided in Subsection 6.a. below; The proposal is for an office expansion. This section relates to residential development only and, therefore, is not applicable. Private outdoor area: multi-family use: Section 18.36O.O9O.A.6.a. states that private open space such as a patio or balcony shall be provided and shall be designed for the exclusive use of individual units and shall be at least 48 square feet in size with a minimum width dimension of four feet; and The proposal is for an office expansion. This section relates to residential development only and, therefore, is not applicable. Shared outdoor recreation areas - multi-family use: Section 18.36O.O9O.A.7.a. states that in addition to the requirements of Subsections 5 and 6 above, usable outdoor recreation space shall be provided in residential developments for the shared or common use of all the residents. The proposal is for an office expansion. This section related to residential development only and therefore is not applicable. Section 18.36O.O9O.A.8. states that 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. According to FEMA floodplain information, the site is not located within the 100-year floodplain. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Demarcation of public, semi-public and private spaces for crime prevention: Section 18.36O.O9O.A.9.a. states that the structures and site improvements shall be designed so that public areas such as streets or public gathering places, semi-public areas and private outdoor areas are clearly defined to establish persons having a right to be in the space, to provide for crime prevention and to establish maintenance responsibility; and Section 18.36O.O9O.A.9.b. states that areas may be defined by, but not limited to the following: • A deck, patio, low wall, hedge, or draping vine; • A trellis or arbor; • A change in elevation or grade; • A change in the texture of the path material; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 25 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • • Sign; or • Landscaping. The site plan indicates that the site is differentiated from the street by landscaping and street trees. The walkway approaches to the building entrances provide a clear corridor for visitors and clients who need to gain access to the building. A freestanding sign in the front yard reinforces the transition from public to private property. Therefore, this standard is met. Crime prevention and safety: Section 18.360.090.A.10.a. states that windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; The elevation drawings indicate that all four elevations are provided with a number of windows. Section 18.360.090.A.10.d. states that the exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and Section 18.360.090.A.10.e. states that 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. The applicant has not submitted information regarding lighting levels. The Tigard Police Department commented on this proposal and requested a lighting plan for their review and approval. A condition of approval requires that the applicant submit a lighting plan that complies with this section. Therefore, this standard will be satisfied through compliance with the condition of approval. Public transit: Section 18.360.090.A.11.a. states that provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route; Section 18.360.090.A.11.b.(1) & (2) state that the requirements for transit facilities shall be based on the following: • The location of other transit facilities in the area; and • The size and type of the proposal. There are existing bus stops on SW 72nd Avenue, approximately 400 feet south and approximately 500 feet north of the subject property. According to In-Met, an additional bus stop between the existing facilities is not required at this time. Landscaping: Section 18.360.090.A.12.a. states that all landscapin shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.100. as follows: • In addition to the open space and recreation area requirements of subsections 5 and 6 above, a minimum of 20 percent of the gross area including parking, loading and service areas shall be landscaped; and • A minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped. As noted earlier in this decision, the project will provide 52% of the site in landscaping. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 26 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Therefore, this standard is met. Section 18.360.090.A.13. states that all drainage plans shall be designed in accordance with the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan; Storm drainage is addressed earlier in this decision under Street and Utility Improvement Standards. Section 18.360.090.A.14. states that provision for the disabled: All facilities for the disabled shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in ORS Chapter 447; and Accessibility of parking stalls is addressed earlier in this report. Accessibility of walkways and structures will be addressed through the building permit process. Therefore, this standard is met. Section 18.360.090.A.15. states that all of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title, e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. The provisions of the underlying zone are addressed earlier in this decision. All of these standards are met except the front yard setback. An adjustment to the front yard setback standard was requested by the applicant and is addressed earlier in this decision. Therefore, this standard is met. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and has offered no comments or objections. City of Tigard Property Manager/Operations Department has reviewed this application and has offered no comments or objections. City of Tigard Water Department has reviewed this application and has offered the following comments: • All portions of the building shall be within 250 feet of a fire hydrant. City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this application and has offered the following comments: • No reference to any additional lighting. Request lighting plan, which accommodates the increase in parking areas at the north an south perimeters of the proposed expansion. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 27 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS Southern Pacific Railroad has reviewed this application and has offered the following comments: • We do not allow drainage water onto our property. GTE has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: • Developer to pay any relocation costs. GTE only supplies one demarc point per address. The Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: Sanitary Sewer Each lot shall be provided with a means of disposal for sanitary sewer in accordance with R&O 96-44 (USA'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. If the units are to be sold individually, then a separate lateral is required for each unit. Storm Sewer Each lot should have access to public storm sewer. Engineer should verify that public storm sewer is available to uphill adjacent properties, or extend service as required by R&O 96-44. Hydraulic and hydrological analysis of stormwater conveyance system is necessary. If downstream storm conveyance does not have the capacity to convey the volume during a 25- year, 24-hour event, the applicant is responsible for mitigating the flow. Water Quality Developer should provide a water quality facility to treat the stormwater runoff generated by new impervious surface. Sensitive Area A "sensitive area" exists (may exist). Developer must preserve a 25-foot corridor as described in R&O 96-44 separating the sensitive area from the impact of development. The sensitive area shall be identified on plans. STAFF RESPONSE: Comments submitted by USA were considered in the Engineering Departments review of this proposal. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, NW Natural Gas and TCI Cable were given the opportunity to review the proposal and submit comments and offered no comments or objections. No other comments were received. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 28 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 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 Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON MARCH 12, 1999 AND EFFECTIVE ON MARCH 26, 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. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 3:30 PM ON MARCH 26, 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. A March 12. 1999 PREPARED BY: Mark J. Roberts DATE Associate Planner 1 _ 41110 ((.,t M()/ March 12. 1999 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewdorff DATE Planning M.■• .ger i:\curpin\mark\sd r\sd r98-26.d oc PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 29 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 T SITE DATA pi1p Po 4:1177 ��^-� -- - r%- - .y LANG USE ZONE: I-P INDUSTRIAL PARK , Cr ir STREET SETBACK: 30•PROPOSED.EXISTING (35'REQUIRED) \ _ n^ 11 SITE COVERAGE: 46R PROPOSED(75R ALLOWED) 1. I I k ` ' :••:I!, I LANDSCAPE AREA 52X PROPOSED(25%REQUIRED) �p %�"'�^� CAR PARKING: 23 SPACES PROPOSED(21 SPACES REQUIRED) \ N' .I I - BICYCLE PARKING: 2 SPACES PROPOSED (2 SPACES REQUIRED) g_ a Ng BUILDING DATA I �t� . F ;. \\°: ; EXIS 1st FLOOR 2.036' w \\ i o< + 1: �' I I VII 2nd FLOOR 2.036' --Zt:...'.ti dV' R PROPOSED OFFICE T. '. �3`I lit FLOOR 1.336' X f`�` �^ -,__ __ 2nd BOOR 919' Z �^"� 4•''¢• F ..�..t= PROPOSED DAYCARE O 3%--• tat FLOOR 1,070'• \ --' ; 6 r ot,-.` I 1 � i1 TOTAL 1st FLOOR 4.444• \ \ I I _ TOTAL 2nd FLOOR 2.955' CO \ \ VB �.6 W \ ; Rp Fiti I ) 1, Q \ W" W 1 \ \ • ) � C4, III 0 \ I ,.; _;. .... > Z \ \ }'�' • • •'tp Y Q Z i. ,� %Y' c>s ... •� -0 Z. or,.♦ =04 •1•I . c Q ♦ , I•ii CL ♦.• \ I I 0 s, .♦ \ o • o ' , •\ S INI Q. . ♦ \ o \ JZ 7 0 Vat 0 • \ I a V ♦♦♦ 1 \\ d ' ♦♦♦ \ \ I . v \ I ♦♦♦ 1 \ LEGEND c'; . ' ♦♦ \ \\ I ♦♦ \ \I • • • • ASPHALT PAVING ♦ \ L ♦ ••eI CONCRETE SLAB ♦ ,•,, \I • r••• •PLAYGROUND SAFETY SURFACE SITE PLAN . PITTMAN &BROOKS EXPANSION EXHIBIT MAP N SDR 98-0026 (map is not to scale) I ``1 r--1 r--1 \_.\ 1 CITY of TIGARD GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM if BONITA RD JP VICINITY MAP PITTMAN r & l m BROOKS o EXPANSION c o D LI -0 50898-0026 m 0 Q CARDINAL LN cc n //) SUBJECT "8 � PARCEL REDWOOD LN to N 0 100 200 300 400 500 Feet 64r \ i".383 feat A, . 41111110 a p 1 City of Tigard cC Information on this map is for general location only and QABLE LN should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 1 .N.\ l (503)639-4171 hdp://www.citigard.or.us Community Development Plot date:Jan 25,1999;C:lmagic\MAGICO2.APR NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHG .R,VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. �•A NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Community D TIGARD ShapingA Better Community 500-FOOT PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE: January 29, 1999 PROPOSAL: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 98-0026 PITTMAN &BROOKS EXPANSION This is a request for Major Modification approval to construct an addition of approximately 3,327 square feet to the existing professional office building. The proposal includes a daycare facility and would involve reconfiguration of off-street parking and vehicular access to the site. The applicant is also requesting an administrative adjustment to the front yard setback standards to allow the addition to match the existing, non-conforming front facade. ZONE: Industrial Park; I-P. The Industrial Park Zoning District allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, manufacturing of finished products, packaging and processing, wholesale, storage, and distribution, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.760, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: 15255 SW 72"d Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road, opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. WCTM 2S1 12DB, Tax Lot 00200. 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 FEBRUARY 12, 1999. All comments should be directed to Mark J. Roberts, 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. SDR 98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION Failure of any party to addres.. .lie relevant approval criteria with -Ifficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14 DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: ♦ The application is accepted by the City ♦ Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. ♦ The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. ♦ City Staff issues a written decision. ♦ Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written Comments." CITY of TIGARD r— BONITA RD VICINITY MAP PITTMAN r � m BROOKS EXPANSION • I SOR 98-0026 CARDINAL LN SUBJECT PARCEL] • • \ tl ` REDWOOD LN N �, M1sfwn Obi :of Togud Cow l o.a. .. r_ +n sw wr s.a REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY TIGARD Community(Development ShapingA(Better Community DATE: January 25,1999 TO: David Scott,Building Official FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark J.Roberts,Associate Planner Phone: (5031639-4111/Fax: (503)684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 98-0026 PITTMAN a BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST: The applicant has requested a Site Development Review for Major Modification approval to construct an addition of approximately 26,300 square feet to the existing professional office building. The proposal includes a daycare facility and would involve reconfiguration of off-street parking and vehicular access to the site. The applicant is requesting an administrative adjustment to the front yard setback standards to allow the addition to match the existing, non-conforming front facade. LOCATION: 15255 SW 72nd Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road, opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. WCTM 2S1 12DB, Tax Lot 00200. ZONE: Industrial Park; I-P. The Industrial Park Zoning District allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, manufacturing of finished products, packaging and processing, wholesale, storage, and distribution, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.760, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: MONDAY,FEBRUARY 8,1999. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. L / / rd. Rod r , S muf ! he A4i el ro/ PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: lo aM dreg rove'/ e/►-.,'icR f e trs . We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. II- fY°"t d 9 5eii1 repay,- w„a( !rp, Please contact of our office. `� Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: ,p A'/�r; *wv crtii Are co '-,r-•�` �/) "��^ st Ae IMmea,/ode 17 /1 7`J� 4vt1 eOti /, (/�'•0,le O"t C o/' / h pt v�r e Cr',"s s r- L. 1'40/ I'O e. i. +Z 11,-v (( ell) )r r•uKT c fo 11- 14 AV. (fro✓i c C / i\ 01-, 2-5-01 a G// I-,o r l.r w )1 S `I 0'0'11 a h• e e fJ/ 0'04,-1'15f a((e f/ .41-1 le' 4-; Ali /4�'cecrJ 04-t)le 11.A// 6� o� �.1 � eitxt,c.f ■.- S'rbr et_ /0(4€ v:4Vk rtA0( k Ali �t 2 / Nft. Pet&If,r•r, . ttdr, r4 *t•,. e �� r it tA. Awl> r3 el r c , 1 . rox. c,J tb q 1)o M, 7(4 P ti, lra *,/ r tfA C �,•� f - /e (0?-1/1,68+-e, rr . A , AroL ?7v rt' rt in file a xrti•�,,.-- w "Iii f. (P1 ase ptbvicfe the following information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: a �, 1-toci-rel p,,,, c 1-ctilrogri e v7e0,1,d. - rc rt.w a k I Phone Number(s): p,S A u- w w y c' A r e m c.� L, 3t,+/- 1.1 ,1 e fke4t SDR 98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION IS / REQUEST FOR COMMENTS �I /`vvrr1e A7 cCA rart P/04 ret'- r Qetffrr 4 o/ 7104-0 A /sL MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: February 24, 1999 TO: Mark J. Roberts, Associate Planner FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer RE: SDR 98-0026, Pittman & Brooks Expansion Description: This application is for a 26,300 square foot addition to the existing professional office building located at 15255 SW 72nd Avenue (WCTM 2S1 12 DB, Tax Lot 200). 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, which is classified as a major collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. This roadway classification requires a right-of-way (ROW) width of 60 feet minimum. At present, there is approximately 60 feet of ROW overall, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. However, there may be a discrepancy between the tax assessor's map and the real property line/right-of-way line. The applicant's materials indicate that they are not sure where the western ROW is located. The preliminary plan does not indicate the centerline of the ROW or roadway and does not indicate the western ROW line. Therefore, it is difficult for Staff to determine if there is a need for additional ROW dedication. SW 72nd Avenue is currently improved, with the exception of a concrete sidewalk and street trees along this frontage. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct a concrete sidewalk and plant street trees along the frontage. The applicant's plan ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0026 Pittman & Brooks Expansion PAGE 1 shows that they will provide these improvements. Because there is a question regarding the western ROW line, Staff recommends the applicant provide evidence of the location of the ROW centerline, roadway centerline and western ROW line prior to issuance of any permits on this site. If the proposed sidewalk and street trees will not fit within existing ROW, then the applicant will need to dedicate additional ROW. The amount of dedication would need to account for the 6-foot sidewalk and a 4-foot area behind the sidewalk for the street trees. 2. Water: This site is presently served from the City's water system. The building addition will be served from the existing onsite water system. 3, Sanitary Sewer: The existing building is presently served from the public sewer system in SW 72nd Avenue. The building addition will also be served from the existing onsite system. 4. Storm Drainage: The existing onsite storm drainage system can easily be modified to accommodate the building addition. There will not be an increase in impervious surfaces on this site, so detention is not required. 5 Storm Water Quality: The development will result in a net decrease in impervious surfaces, from 12,677 square feet down to 12, 082 square feet. Therefore, this section will not apply. 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. Existing Overhead Utility Lines: There are existing overhead utility lines along SW 72nd Avenue. Section 18.810.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0026 Pittman & Brooks Expansion PAGE 2 development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 420 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $ 11,550.00. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMIT: Note: Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact for the following conditions will be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (639-4171). 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new sidewalk and street trees on 72nd Avenue. 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. The applicant shall construct the following frontage improvements as a part of this project: A. 6-foot concrete sidewalk; B. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements. 4. Prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Engineer as to the location of the right-of-way centerline, roadway centerline (if it varies from the right-of-way centerline) and the western right-of-way line (site east property line). If the 6-foot sidewalk and 4-foot street tree area will not fit within existing right-of-way, ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0026 Pittman & Brooks Expansion PAGE 3 the applicant shall dedicate additional right-of-way as needed to accommodate those items. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: 5. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements. 6. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW 72nd Avenue underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $ 27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $ 11,550.00 and it shall be paid prior to final inspection of the building. r,eng\brianrlcommen ts\sdr98-0026.bdr.doc ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0026 Pittman & Brooks Expansion PAGE 4 • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS , CITY OF TIGARD Community(Uevedopment Shaping Better Community DATE: January 25,1999 TO: Julia Huffman,Unified Sewerage Agency U � FE 5y , RECEfVED P FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division LANNING II STAFF CONTACT: Mark J.Roberts,Associate Planner JAN 2 6 1999 FEB 1 5 1999 Phone: (5031639-41M/Fax: 15031684-1291 By CITY OF Tea Ap SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR)98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST: The applicant has requested a Site Development Review for Major Modification approval to construct an addition of approximately 26,300 square feet to the existing professional office building. The proposal includes a daycare facility and would involve reconfiguration of off-street parking and vehicular access to the site. The applicant is requesting an administrative adjustment to the front yard setback standards to allow the addition to match the existing, non-conforming front facade. LOCATION: 15255 SW 72nd Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road, opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. WCTM 2S1 12DB, Tax Lot 00200. ZONE: Industrial Park; I-P. The Industrial Park Zoning District allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, manufacturing of finished products, packaging and processing, wholesale, storage, and distribution, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.760, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: MONDAY,FEBRUARY 8,1999. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. f), Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: rLs v (Pt ase provide thefoctowing information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: J d )� Phone Numher(sl: = 1- -Z 4 SDR 98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS (4 ,, UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY RECEIVED PLANNING FEB 1 5 1999 MEMORANDUM cuv OF TIGARD DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Mark J. Roberts, City of Tigard FROM: Julia Huffman, USA J;, .; SUBJECT: Pittman &Brooks Expansion, SDR 98-0026 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. SENSITIVE AREA A "Sensitive Area" exists (may exist). Developer must preserve a 25-foot corridor as described in R&O 96-44 separating the sensitive area from the impact of development. The creek, wetland/sensitive area shall be identified on plans. DIVISION OF STATE LANDS/CORPS OF ENGINEERS A DSL/Corps of Engineers permit is required for any work in a creek or wetlands. 155 North First Avenue, Suite 270, MS 10 Phone: 503/648-8621 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124-3072 FAX:503/640-3525 FEB 8 ' 99 6: 37 FRO PSU SUPT PAGE . U01 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS , CITY FTIIGARD Community Deveropment Shaping A Better Community DATE: January 253999 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer FEB 1 5 1999 FROM: City et Tigard Planning Division CITY OF tiGARQ STAFF CONTACT: Mark L Roberts.Associate Planner Phone: [503)639-4171/Fax [503)684-7291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SOR}08-0026 > PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION < REQUEST: The applicant has requested a Site Development Review for Major Modification approval to construct an addition of approximately 26,300 square feet to the existing professional office building. The proposal includes a daycare facility and would involve reconfiguration of off-street parking and vehicular access to the site. The applicant is requesting an administrative adjustment to the front yard setback standards to allow the addition to match the existing, non-conforming front facade. LOCATION: 15255 SW 72`d Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road, opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. WCTM 2S1 12DB, Tax Lot 00200. ZONE: Industrial Park; I-P. The Industrial Park Zoning District allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, manufacturing of finished products, packaging and processing, wholesale, storage, and distribution, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705. 18.730, 18.745, 18.760, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan. Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS SACK BY: MONDAY,FEBRUART 81999. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments, dime are unable to respond Iby 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 MONDE FOLLOWING ITEMS 111AT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. y Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: W6 Dc p.10s- A�c.avw D rz-i . /..4.,, e k(n-rw aszo ot.4,12- �✓z-o,F --C . fF OVase provide t fie f�tfauling informabon)Maine of Perseids]Commenting: _-So�t t.-.t 1 10-urn c�u t__L. 7 I Phone Nnmberisl: 6 "7 Z - t E, 9 SD 98-0026 DITTMAk,P.OD"(16-0 cynn.IOtnu REQUEST FOR COMMENTS cir o TIjGARD Community Development RECEIVENtAfiguttter Community DATE: January 25,1999 TO: Brian Moore,PGE Service Design Consultant FEB 1 5 1999 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD STAFF CONTACT: Mark J.Roberts,Associate Planner Phone: [503)639-4111/Fax: (5031 684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SORT 98-0026 ➢ PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST: The applicant has requested a Site Development Review for Major Modification approval to construct an addition of approximately 26,300 square feet to the existing professional office building. The proposal includes a daycare facility and 'would involve reconfiguration of off-street parking and vehicular access to the site. The applicant is requesting an administrative adjustment to the front yard setback standards to allow the addition to match the existing, non-conforming front facade. LOCATION: 15255 SW 72nd Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road, opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. WCTM 2S1 12DB, Tax Lot 00200. ZONE: Industrial Park; I-P. The Industrial Park Zoning District allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, manufacturing of finished products, packaging and processing, wholesale, storage, and distribution, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.760, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: MONDAY,FEBRUARY 8,1999. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: K 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 helow: (Please provide thefoaowing information)Name of Person[s)Commenting:` k M Phone Number(s): 4_31L1 - cVA.oc,o SDR 98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development RECEIVED PLANNING Shaping Better Community DATE: January 25,1999 TO: Elaine Self,GTE FEB 0 41999 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division cry OF TIGARD STAFF CONTACT: Mark 1.Roberts,Associate Planner Phone: [50316394111/Fax: (5031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 98-0026 A PITTMAN &BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST: The applicant has requested a Site Development Review for Major Modification approval to construct an addition of approximately 26,300 square feet to the existing professional office building. The proposal includes a daycare facility and would involve reconfiguration of off-street parking and vehicular access to the site. The applicant is requesting an administrative adjustment to the front yard setback standards to allow the addition to match the existing, non-conforming front facade. LOCATION: 15255 SW 72n`' Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road, opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. WCTM 2S1 12DB, Tax Lot 00200. ZONE: Industrial Park; I-P. The Industrial Park Zoning District allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, manufacturing of finished products, packaging and processing, wholesale, storage, and distribution, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.760, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: MONDAY,FEBRUARY 8,1999. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. if you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Piease contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: I , 0 AJLeierpai-J ' A e /- r („20„) �� .1 . . - (cPlease provide the following information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: � I Phone Number[sl: SDR 98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIIGARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community DATE: January 25,1999 TO: Jim Wolf,Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer RECENED PLANNING FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division FEB 1 5 1999 STAFF CONTACT: Mark).Roberts,Associate Planner CITY OF TICARI Phone: 15031639-4111/Fax: 15031 684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 98-0026 - PITTMAN &BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST: The applicant has requested a Site Development Review for Major Modification approval to construct an addition of approximately 26,300 square feet to the existing professional office building. The proposal includes a daycare facility and would involve reconfiguration of off-street parking and vehicular access to the site. The applicant is requesting an administrative adjustment to the front yard setback standards to allow the addition to match the existing, non-conforming front facade. LOCATION: 15255 SW 72nd Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road, opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. WCTM 2S1 12DB, Tax Lot 00200. ZONE: Industrial Park; I-P. The Industrial Park Zoning District allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, manufacturing of finished products, packaging and processing, wholesale, storage, and distribution, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.760, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: MONDAY,FEBRUARY 8,1999. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: (ND `.tke1e ro, >iA Grt gda■A-10na\ \,�.�, RQp��tsC f d \%ecJ OQ \ v kdn ucunwda \rG,c,c4A ,Qork 5 iAk-- 4n - N a � and c. \v4\CAM QXDor\ * (ccPlease provide the following information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: 6,µ V\)o■c I Phone Numberlsl: 1,\■ 2) ".a.0 SDR 98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CATTY O TIIGARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community DATE: January 25,1999 TO: John Roy,Property Manager/Operations Department FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark 1.Roberts,Associate Planner Phone: 15031639-4111/Fax: 15031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 98-0026 PITTMAN 8 BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST: The applicant has requested a Site Development Review for Major Modification approval to construct an addition of approximately 26,300 square feet to the existing professional office building. The proposal includes a daycare facility and would involve reconfiguration of off-street parking and vehicular access to the site. The applicant is requesting an administrative adjustment to the front yard setback standards to allow the addition to match the existing, non-conforming front facade. LOCATION: 15255 SW 72nd Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road, opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. WCTM 2S1 12DB, Tax Lot 00200. ZONE: Industrial Park; I-P. The Industrial Park Zoning District allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, manufacturing of finished products, packaging and processing, wholesale, storage, and distribution, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.760, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: MONDAY,FEBRUARY 8,1999. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: f V (ease pnrvide the following information)Name of Person's)Commenting: si e I Phone Number(s): I SDR 98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPAr1SION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY TIGARD Community VeveCopment Shaping Better Community DATE: January 25,1999 TO: Michael Miller,Operations Utility Manager RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division FEB 1 5 1999 STAFF CONTACT: Mark J.Roberts,Associate Planner Phone: [5031 639-4171/Fax: (503)684-7291 CITY OF TIGARD SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDR]98-0026 ➢ PITTMAN 8 BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST: The applicant has requested a Site Development Review for Major Modification approval to construct an addition of approximately 26,300 square feet to the existing professional office building. The proposal includes a daycare facility and would involve reconfiguration of off-street parking and vehicular access to the site. The applicant is requesting an administrative adjustment to the front yard setback standards to allow the addition to match the existing, non-conforming front facade. LOCATION: 15255 SW 72nd Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road, opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. WCTM 2S1 12DB, Tax Lot 00200. ZONE: Industrial Park; I-P. The Industrial Park Zoning District allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, manufacturing of finished products, packaging and processing, wholesale, storage, and distribution, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.760, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: MONDAY,FEBRUARY 8,1999. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: A-(,>; (POL—TIo,,jc Oi" /RE- 3ui ,f)I4 Gdi7N//t_/ 14-&r" aF .R— / & 4-Y4 . N7 . v ti (Please provide thefolfowing information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: "thi< I Phone Number[sl: x 39S SDR 98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development ShapingA Better Community DATE: January 25,1999 TO: Per Attached FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark J.Roberts,Associate Planner Phone: (503)639-4111/Fax: (503)604-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST: The applicant has requested a Site Development Review for Major Modification approval to construct an addition of approximately 26,300 square feet to the existing professional office building. The proposal includes a daycare facility and would involve reconfiguration of off-street parking and vehicular access to the site. The applicant is requesting an administrative adjustment to the front yard setback standards to allow the addition to match the existing, non-conforming front facade. LOCATION: 15255 SW 72nd Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road, opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. WCTM 2S1 12DB, Tax Lot 00200. ZONE: Industrial Park; I-P. The Industrial Park Zoning District allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, manufacturing of finished products, packaging and processing, wholesale, storage, and distribution, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.760, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: MONDAY,FEBRUARY 8,1999. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: tr Please provide the following information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: I Phone Number[sl: I SDR 98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS . NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE&COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CITArea:ICI(El IS] IWI CITIIEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS LA Place for review In Literary CIT Book[s] FILE NOM: �a- FILE NAMEISI: {-MC'"— &t S CITY OFFICES ADVANCED PLANNING/Nadine Smith,planningsepereenr _COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./Deigmni sue.rearnx,ans _POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Cmne Prevention Officer /BUILDING DIV./David Scott,& ding«no • ...--ENGINEERING DEPT./Brian Rager,Dvtprnm Rom«Engineer 'WATER DEPT./Michael Miller,used pager CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Whetley,cayRecorder /6PERATIONS 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 * _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE _OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS _Planning Manager Planning Manager 2501 SW First Avenue 775 Summer Street,NE _Mike Matteucci,Neghbmd.Gerard PO Box 369 PO Box 59 Salem,OR 97310-1337 PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 Portland,OR 97207 Beaverton,OR 97076 _OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. _METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING * _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street,NE _CITY OF DURHAM * 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland,OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 PO Box 23483 _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's/ZOA's) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 200 PO Box 2946 _CITY OF KING CITY* Salem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 97208-2946 City Manager _METRO AREA BOUNDARY COMMISSION 15300 SW 116th Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street OREGON DEPT.OF TRANS.(ODOT) WASHINGTON COUNTY King City,OR 97224 Building#16,Suite 540 Aeronautics Division Dept.of Land Use&Trans. Portland,OR 97232-2109 Tom Highland,Planning 155 N.First Avenue _CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO * 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13 Planning Director _OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro,OR 97124 PO Box 369 Bonneville Power Administration _Brent Curtis(CPAs) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 Routing TTRC-Attn: Renae Ferrera ODOT,REGION 1 * Scott King(CPAs) PO Box 3621 Sonya Kazen,Dvlpmt Rev cooed _Mike Borreson(Engineer) _CITY OF PORTLAND Portland,OR 97208-3621 123 NW Flanders _Jim Tice(IGA's) David Knowles,Planning Bureau Dr Portland,OR 97209-4037 Tom Harry(Current PI Apps) Portland Building 106,Rm. 1002 _OREGON,DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY _Phil Healy(Current P.Apps) 1120 SW Fifth Avenue 811 SW Sixth Avenue ODOT,REGION 1-DISTRICT 2A* _Sr.Cartographer,c.n,au.,PAS r. Portland,OR 97204 Portland,OR 97204 Jane Estes,Perms Specialist 5440 SW Westgate Drive,Suite 350 _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A Portland,OR 97221-2414 Right-of-Way Section(vacations) Rick Reeves 123 NW Flanders Portland,OR 97209-4037 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES , YORTLAND WESTERN RJR,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE R/R,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Burlington Northern/Santa Fe R/R Predecessor) Robert I.Melbo,President&General Manager 110 W.10th Avenue Albany,OR 97321 ZSOUTHERN 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 yeaverton,OR 97006-4886 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC /NW NATURAL GAS COMPANYENERAL TELEPHONE /US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Brian Moore,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer Elaine Self,Engineering Lon Dorney,Engineering Dept.. 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue MC: ORO30546 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 110 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Tigard,OR 97281-3416 Portland,OR 97219 _TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J_BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 Marsha Butler,Administrative Offices Joy-Gay Pahl,Demographs&Planning Dept. 13137 SW Pacific Highway 16550 SW Merto Road Tigard,OR 97223 Beaverton,OR 97006 * - INDlcarTS AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IF WIUIIM aso' of MILE Svarrcf PROPERTY FOR ANY/AU CITY PROJECTS. (PRo;Ler PLAN/SCR IS RESPOMSI$&E iOa INDICATING PAatIt5 TO MOUFYJ h:\patty\masters\rfcnotice.mst 2-Dec-98 MAILING RECORDS .. ..,411k AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING �mno.Ro . Community Development Shaping Better Community STA'I1. OE OREGON- ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) , cPatricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for the City of zgard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check Appropriate Box(s)Below) E NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR:. ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (F■e No.Name Reference) City of Tigard Planning Director © NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR 98-0026/PITTMAN &BROOKS OFFICES & DAYCARE ADDITION E AMENDED NOTICE (F le No Name Reference) J ELI City of Tigard Planning Director 7 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: . AMENDED NOTICE (Fie No Name Reference) (Gated Public blearing) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council CC NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (Fie No Name Reference) ■Date of Public Heanng) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council L i NOTICE OF: (Type/Kind of Notice) FOR: I ,f Ir_Na.Na re Rere•erce) ,Date of Public Heanng,if applicable A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICEESI of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit "R", on the 12th day of March, 1999, and deposited in the United States Mail on the 12th day of March, 1999, posta prepaid. 400,- 644 / 1 i (Pers`on—fhat Prep- -d No Ice) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the O (44(.r I/ day of , 1 • �. )I�/�,�.� OFFICIAL SEAL � ' � i` / s. � DIANE M JELDERKS IiO A' ' '-I I I ;) I�' NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON N.,;,o COMMISSION NO.046142 My Commission Ex l- ;S: 7/7 °' MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07,1999 EXHIBIT A NOTICE QF TYPE II IIFCISI O N A S BeifigptENT REmaitseil 98-0026 c„,► 'onunwitje0everop tent s , oet ter co.nity 120 DAYS = 5/20/99 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE: PITTMAN & BROOKS OFFICES & DAYCARE ADDITION Site Development Review SDR 98-0026 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested approval of a Major Modification for the construction of a 3,327 square foot addition to an existing professional office building. The expansion proposal includes a day-care facility and additional office space. An additional access, more off-street parking and a public sidewalk along SW 72nd Avenue are also proposed. APPLICANT: Brooks & Pittman Rentals OWNER: Same Contact: Randall Brooks 15255 SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Light Industrial; I-L. ZONING DESIGNATION: I-P; Industrial Park. The I-P zoning district allows for combining of light manufacturing, office and complementary commercial uses. LOCATION: 12555 SW 72nd Avenue; WCTM 2S112DB, Tax Lot 00200. APPLICABLE Community Development Code Chapters 18.360 (Site Development REVIEW Review); 18.390 (Decision Making Procedures); 18.530 (Industrial Zoning CRITERIA: Districts); 18.705 (Access, Egress and Circulation); 18.730 (Exceptions to Development Standards) 18.745 (Landscaping and Screening); 18.760 (Nonconforming Situations); 18.765 (Off-Street Parking); 18.780 (Signs); 18.790 (Tree Removal); 18.795 (Visual Clearance Areas); and 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards). SECTION II. DECISION Notice Is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 1 OF 29 SDR 98-0028 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS. (Unless otherwise specified, the Staff contact is Brian Rager with the Engineering Department at 503-639-4171.) 1 . The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan for review and approval. The revised landscaping plan shall include additional shrub plantings along the north perimeter of the north parking lot and provide a more even distribution of parking lot trees around the south parking lot. Staff Contact: Mark J. Roberts. 2. The applicant shall submit a site plan and detailed trash enclosure design drawings to the Franchise Hauler for review and approval. The plans shall be of sufficient detail for the Franchise Hauler to determine that the applicable design and access standards are met. Staff Contact: Mark J. Roberts. 3. The applicant shall submit a revised vehicle and bicycle parking plan for review and approval. The plan shall show that vehicle parking spaces are sized according to City standards and that 7 bicycle parking spaces are provided. Bicycle parking must be provided within 50 feet of the primary entrance, although it may be appropriate to provide some at each entrance given the "mixed-use" nature of the project. A detailed bicycle parking design shall be provided, which demonstrates compliance with the requirements of TMC Chapter 18.765.050.C. Staff Contact: Mark J. Roberts. 4. The applicant shall submit a tree protection plan, prepared by a certified arborist, for review and approval. The plan shall describe a protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction in compliance with TMC 18.790.030.B.4. Draft deed-restriction language, in compliance with 18.790.030.0 shall also be submitted for review and approval. Staff Contact: Mark J. Roberts. 5. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that clearly indicates the location of the SW 72nd Avenue right-of-way (ROW) and the clear vision areas associated with each access drive. The site plan shall indicate that no temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height will be located within a clear vision area. Accurate location of the right-of-way/property line is necessary as a condition of variance/adjustment approval. Staff Contact: Mark J. Roberts. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the new sidewalk and street trees on 72nd Avenue. 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. 7. 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. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 2 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 8. The applicant shall construct the following frontage improvements as a part of this project: A. 6-foot concrete sidewalk; B. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per Tigard Development Code (TDC) requirements. 9. Prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Engineer as to the location of the right-of-way centerline, roadway centerline (if it varies from the right-of-way centerline) and the western right-of-way line (site east property line). If the 6-foot sidewalk and 4-foot street tree area will not fit within existing right-of-way, the applicant shall dedicate additional right-of-way as needed to accommodate those items. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION BEING PERFORMED: 10.Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements. 11.The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW 721 Avenue underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $ 11 ,550 and it shall be paid prior to final inspection of the building. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: A zone change from Light Industrial (I-L) to Industrial Park (I-P) was approved in 1991 (ZON 91- 0009). Vicinity Information: The site is located at 15255 SW 72"d Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road and opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. The site abuts SW 72nd Avenue, a Major Collector, to the east and the Southern Pacific railroad to the west. Southwest 72nd Avenue is improved, with the exception of sidewalk and street trees and is located within a 60-foot right-of-way. The site is located within a large area designated Light Industrial in the Comprehensive Plan. This area extends south from SW Bonita Road to the SW 72"d/1-5 intersection near the southern extent of the City limits. Property to the east, across SW 72"d Avenue is zoned Industrial Park (I-P). Property to the west of SW 72"d and adjacent to the subject property is zoned Light Industrial (I-L). Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is 0.65 acres in size and is currently developed with a 2-story office building of approximately 4,072 square feet. The site has two access points to SW 72"d Avenue, one to the north and one to the south of the building. Each access point leads to an on-site parking PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 3 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 area. The proposed modification to the site includes two building additions: a 2-story office addition on the north side of the building and a 1-story daycare addition on the south side of the building. The north side addition would remove some of the existing north parking area, which will be reconfigured. A fenced play yard is proposed in conjunction with the daycare addition. The applicant also proposes to construct a sidewalk and provide street trees to bring SW 72nd up to current City standards. The applicant also requests a variance to the front yard setback standard of the I-P zone. The variance is requested because the existing building does not conform to the setback and the applicant proposed to match the existing building line with the addition. The degree of non-conformity (and, therefore, the extent of the variance requested) is unknown because the exact location of the right-of-way line has not been identified. The reason for the confusion is that a 10-foot "easement for road purposes" and a later 5-foot road "dedication" appear on the property deed; it is, therefore, unclear where the ROW line is located. As noted later in this decision, the applicant will need to locate the right-of-way centerline and ascertain the actual existing dimension of the ROW. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Site Development Review - Chapter 18.360: Section 18.360.030.A provides that Site Development Review for a new development or major modification of an approved plan or existing development shall be processed by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.360.090. In compliance with Section 18.390.040, a pre-application conference was held on August 27, 1998. An application for Site Development Review was submitted and subsequently deemed complete on January 20, 1999. Notice of pending Type II Administrative Decision was given as required by Section 18.390.040.C. The relevant approval criteria are addressed below with respect to the factual information provided by the applicant and are the basis for this Director's decision. Section 18.360.090 states that the Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions, or denying an application: Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this Title including Chapter 18.800, Street and Utility Standards; The applicable review criteria in this case include the following chapters of the Community Development Code: 18.360, Site Development Review; 18.390, Decision Making Procedures; 18.530, Industrial Zoning Districts; 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; 18.730, Exceptions to Development Standards; 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage; 18.760, Nonconforming Situations; 18.765, Off-Street Parking; 18.780, Signs; 18.790, Tree Removal; 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas; and 18.810, Street and Utility Improvement Standards. The development standards and requirements of these chapters are addressed below, followed by the specific Site Development Review Criteria. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 4 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following chapters: 18.400, Land Division; 18.600, Community Plan Area Standards; 18.710, Accessory Residential Units; 18.715, Density Computations; 18.720, Design Compatibility Standards; 18.725, Environmental Performance Standards; 18.740, Historic Overlay; 18.742, Home Occupations; 18.750, Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations; 18.760, Nonconforming Situations; 18.775, Sensitive Lands; 18.785, Temporary Uses; 18.797, Water Resources Overlay District; and 18.798, Wireless Communications Facilities. These chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Impact Study: Section 18.390.040.B.2.e. 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 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 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. The applicant has not submitted an Impact Study. However, the site is already developed and has access to all city services and to an improved street. The applicant is proposing to construct sidewalk and install street trees in conjunction with the office/daycare expansion. Completion of the improvements as proposed will satisfy the City's adopted street standards. Industrial Park Zoning District: Section 18.530.020. states that the I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. Permitted Uses: Table 18.530.1. lists permitted, restricted, conditional and not-permitted uses in the industrial zoning districts. The applicant is proposing to expand an office building and add a day care facility. An office use is permitted in the I-P zone. A daycare facility is a restricted use in the I-P zone and must not exceed 20% of the square footage within a development. The applicant proposes a daycare facility of 1 ,070 square feet within a total building area of 7,399 square feet (14.5%). The proposed daycare facility is within the prescribed size range and is, therefore, permitted in the underlying zone. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 5 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Dimensional Requirements: The I-P Zoning District standards are contained in Table 18.530.2. STANDARD I-P PROPOSED Minimum Lot Size None N/A Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. Approx. 420 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 35 ft. >_ 25 ft. - Side facing street on corner & 20 ft. N/A through lots [1] 0/50 ft. [3] N/A - Side yard 0/50 ft. [3][4] N/A - Rear yard - Distance between front of - Garage & property line -- -- abutting a public or private street Maximum Height 45 ft. 23 ft. Maximum Site Coverage [2] 75% [5] 48% Maximum Landscape 25% [6] 52% Requirement [1] The provisions of Chapter 18.795 (Vision Clearance) must be satisfied. [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3] No setback shall be required except 50 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4] Development in industrial zones abutting the Rolling Hills neighborhood shall comply with Policy 11 .5.1. [5] Maximum site coverage may be increased to 80% if the provisions of Section 18.530.050.B are satisfied. [6] Except that a reduction to 20% of the site may be approved through the site development review process. The table above compares the applicant's proposal with the minimum dimensional standards of the I-P zone. The side and rear yard setbacks do not apply because the site does not abut residential zoning. The proposed front yard setback is noted as greater than or equal to 25 feet because (as discussed earlier) the exact location of the front property line has not been determined. The applicant has applied for a variance to the front yard setback standard. The variance is addressed later in this decision. FINDING: Based on the above information, the applicant's proposal meets or exceeds the dimensional standards of the I-P zoning district with the exception of the front yard setback which is addressed later through the variance/adjustment approval process. Variances and Adjustments — Chapter 18.370: Section 18.370.020.B.1.a. states that up to a 25% reduction of the dimensional standards for the front yard setback required in the base zone. Setback of garages may not be reduced by this provision. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 6 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Section 18.370.020.B.2. states that a development adjustment shall be granted if there is a demonstration of compliance with all of the applicable standards; and A demonstration that the adjustment requested is the least required to achieve the desired affect; As noted earlier, there is uncertainty regarding the exact location of the property line/right-of- way. The existing building is set back only about 38 feet from the existing curb. Therefore, even if the existing right-of-way line is at or near this point, after provision of sidewalk and a street tree planter strip the property will have less then the required setback. A condition of approval requires that the applicant locate the right-of-way; this will determine the amount of adjustment necessary to bring the site into compliance. The applicant has specifically requested the least adjustment necessary. The adjustment will result in the preservation of trees, if trees are present in the development area; Trees are present in the development area. As discussed later under Tree Removal, all but one are to be preserved. Regardless of whether the front yard setback adjustment is approved or denied, there will be no effect on tree preservation. The adjustment is requested simply to legalize an existing nonconforming situation and to allow the proposed addition to match the existing building facade. The adjustment will not impede adequate emergency access to the site; Access to the site will be achieved to the north and south of the building. Therefore, adjustment of the front yard setback (east facade) will not affect emergency access. There is not a reasonable alternative to the adjustment which achieves the desired affect. The only way to meet the setback for the existing building would be to move the building. This is not a reasonable alternative. The proposed addition could meet the setback if it were made smaller, because of the triangular shape of the lot, the addition could not simply be set back further. However, in Staff's opinion, it is reasonable to allow the applicant the opportunity to match the existing setback, given the site constraints and the fact that an adjustment is necessary anyway to legalize the existing building. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the approval criteria for a 25% reduction of the front yard setback are met. The front yard setback may therefore be reduced from 35 feet to as little as 26.5 feet. The exact amount of the adjustment will depend on the location of the right-of-way as determined by the applicant in compliance with Condition of Approval # 5. Section 18.37O.C.2. states that the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a variance based on finding that the following criteria are satisfied: PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 7 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; The requested variance is to the front yard setback. A variance will only be required in the event that the applicant's information regarding the location of the right-of-way indicates that the front yard setback is less than 26.5 feet. An adjustment to a 26.5—foot front yard setback is approved as part of this decision. Given that the variance is to legalize an existing nonconforming situation and to account for provision of necessary public street improvements, Staff believes that the variance is consistent with the purpose of the Community Development Code. There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; The extent of the variance is determined by the location of an existing structure. To the extent that re-location of the building would be an unreasonable burden to bring the site into compliance, this is a circumstance over which the applicant has no control. The subject property is a triangular lot which narrows towards the south, the proposed south addition is, therefore, increasingly constrained in terms of the lot's building envelope. The shape of the property is unusual and does not apply to other parcels in the vicinity. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land; As discussed elsewhere in this decision, the proposed office and daycare uses are permitted in the underlying I-P zone. To the extent that the requested variance is the least necessary to legalize the existing structure and allow the addition to match it, City standards will be maintained to the greatest degree possible. Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title; and Reduction of the front yard setback will not adversely affect physical or natural systems. The site is developed and is in an industrial area. Approval of the variance will not increase the proximity of on-site structures to the property line. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The hardship is related to the location of an existing structure, placed on the site over 15 years ago. It would be a hardship to re-locate the building to conform to the front yard setback standards and to expand the use of this odd-shaped parcel within the standard setbacks. As discussed above, the variance is the minimum variance that would alleviate the hardship. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 8 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the approval criteria for a variance to the front yard setback are satisfied. This approval modifies the front yard setback to a distance equal to but no greater than the distance between the nearest wall of the existing building and the right-of-way/property line as located by the applicant. The applicant is required to accurately locate the right-of-way as a condition of this land use decision. Access Egress and Circulation — Chapter 18.705: 18.705.020.A. states that the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures (see Section 18.360.050), and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. Section 18.705.030.F. states that pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments; The applicant's site plan indicates that walkways will be provided between the two building entrances and the proposed public sidewalk. Within all attached housing (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling shall be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities; The proposal is a commercial development, therefore this standard does not apply. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum 6- inch vertical separation (curbed) or a minimum 3-foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; The site plan demonstrates that the proposed walkways do not cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots. Both proposed walkways are four feet in width or greater. Walkway design will be evaluated for compliance with ADA standards at the time of site and building permits. 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 site plan indicates that both walkways will be surfaced in concrete. Safety issues, including lighting and signage, are addressed later in this decision. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 9 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Section 18.705.030.1.1 states that vehicle access, egress and circulation for commercial and industrial use shall not be less than as provided in Table 18.705.3; TABLE 18.705.3 VEHICULAR ACCESS/EGRESS REQUIREMENTS: COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES REQUIRED PARKING MINIMUM NUMBER OF MINIMUM ACCESS MINIMUM PAVEMENT SPACES DRIVEWAYS WIDTH REQUIRED 0-99 1 30' 24' curbs required 100+ 2 30' 24' curbs required or 1 50' 40' curbs required The applicant's site plan indicates that a total of 23 parking spaces will be provided. According to the table above; one, 30-foot access with 24-foot pavement width is required for a parking lot this size. The existing conditions plan indicates that two accesses are currently provided, although the north access does not currently meet access width standards. The site plan indicates that both access points will remain and that the north access will be improved so that both meet the above access standards. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; The north entrance which gives access to the primary office use is the primary entrance in this case. The site plan indicates that the nearest regular parking space is located within approximately 25 feet of the primary entrance. Additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. No truck traffic requirements are appropriate since the proposed uses are a professional office and daycare. Section 18.705.030.K.2. states that to eliminate the need to use public streets for movements between commercial or industrial properties, parking areas shall be designed to connect with parking areas on adjacent properties unless not feasible. The Director shall require access easements between properties where necessary to provide parking area connections. Because the subject property is triangular in shape and surrounded on two sides by street and railroad right-of-way there is only one neighboring property, which is located to the north. Aerial photograph information from the City's Geographic Information System indicates that the building on the neighboring parcel is located at the south end of the property with parking to the north. No paved connection to the south has been provided and the orientation of the building does not appear to allow sufficient space for a connection to be made. FINDING: Based on the above analysis, Staff finds that the proposed development satisfies all of the applicable development standards of Chapter 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 10 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Exceptions to Development Standards — Chapter 18.730: Section 18.730.040.A. provides for additional setback from specified roadways. To ensure improved light, air, and sight distance and to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, structures in any zoning district which abut certain arterial and collector streets shall be set back a minimum distance from the centerline of the street. Where the street is not improved, the measurement shall be made at right angles from the centerline or general extension of the street right-of-way as follows: Arterial Streets: The required setback distance for buildings on arterial streets is the setback distance required by the zoning district plus the following distances measured from the centerline of the street as contained in Table 18.730.1. Collector Streets: The required setback distance for buildings on the following collector streets is the setback distance required by the zoning district plus 30 feet measured from the centerline of the street as contained in Table 18.730.1. Southwest 72nd Avenue is a Major Collector which requires a total building setback of 65 feet from the street centerline (30 feet plus the 35-foot front yard setback of the I-P zone). As noted above, there is some confusion over the exact location of the ROW. Also, the applicant's plans do not indicate the location of the SW 72nd Avenue centerline. Therefore, staff is unable to make a determination that the standard is met. However, since the applicant has applied for a variance/adjustment to the front yard setback, this standard will be satisfied through that process. Landscaping and Screening — Chapter 18.745: Section 18.745.020.A. states that the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, remodeling of existing structures where the landscaping is nonconforming (Section 18.760.040.C.), and to a change of use which results in the need for increased on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. The following are the development standards that are applicable to this proposal: Street Trees: Section 18.745.040.A.1. states that all development projects fronting on a public street, private street or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length approved after the adoption of this title shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section 18.745.040.C. The subject property has frontage on SW 72nd Avenue. The applicant's landscape plan indicates that seven existing street trees will be preserved along the property frontage. The trees are maples, six at 4-inch caliper and one at 5-inch caliper. The applicant proposes to provide seven additional 3-inch caliper maples in conjunction with the site modification. Section 18.745.040.C.2. states that the specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shall be as follows: Small or narrow-stature trees under 25 feet tall and less than 16 feet wide branching at maturity shall be spaced no greater than 20 feet apart; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 11 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 . Medium-sized trees 25 feet to 40 feet tall, 16 feet to 35 feet wide branching at maturity shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart; . Large trees over 40 feet tall and more than 35 feet wide branching at maturity shall be spaced no greater than 40 feet apart; The applicant's landscape plan does not indicate what type of maple tree is proposed, however, the spacing is shown at approximately 20-23 feet. The proposed spacing is appropriate for a medium size tree according to the above standards. In order to fully satisfy this standard, the applicant must demonstrate that the specific tree proposed meets the medium tree size classification or adjust the spacing accordingly. Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.O5O.A.2. states that buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter (Tables 18.745.1. and 18.745.2.). The owner of each proposed development is responsible for the installation and effective maintenance of buffering and screening. When different uses would be abutting one another except for separation by a right-of- way, buffering, but not screening, shall be required as specified in the matrix; The subject property is zoned I-P and surrounding property is zoned I-L and I-P. Both zoning districts implement the Light Industrial land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan. According to the above-referenced matrices, development in Light Industrial zoning districts does not require buffering and screening from Light Industrial property. Section 18.745.05O.E.1.a. states that screening of parking and loading areas is required. The specifications for this screening are as follows: . 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; . Landscape planters may be used to define or screen the appearance of off-street parking areas from the public right-of-way; . Materials to be installed should achieve a 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 and on the basis of one tree for each seven parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect; and . The minimum dimension of the landscape islands shall be three feet and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The applicant's landscape plan indicates that shrubs will be provided around the perimeter of the south parking lot and that trees will be provided along the south boundary. Shrubs are provided along the east perimeter of the north parking lot where the right-of-way abuts, and existing 5-inch caliper maple trees are located along the north and west perimeter at approximately 25 to 30-foot spacing. Additional shrub plantings along the north perimeter are necessary to achieve the required balance between low-lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 12 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Staff believes that the intent of the requirement to provide parking lot trees within landscape islands can be met in certain small parking lots where each parking space directly abuts the perimeter landscaping, and where trees are provided to achieve the required canopy effect. The north parking lot contains 14 parking spaces which would require two trees spaced evenly. The landscape plan indicates that the north parking lot is provided with six perimeter trees and, in addition, two street trees are located within seven feet of the east perimeter. The spacing of the trees is consistent with the "equal distribution" standard necessary to provide the required "canopy effect". The south parking lot contains nine parking spaces which would require one tree. The landscape plan indicates that four perimeter trees are proposed. Although more trees are proposed than is required, the distribution is uneven and should be re-designed or augmented to provide a better "canopy effect." Section 18.745.050.E.4. states that any refuse container or refuse collection area which would be visible from a public street, parking lot, residential or commercial area, or any public facility such as a school or park shall be screened or enclosed from view by placement of a solid wood fence, masonry wall or evergreen hedge. All refuse shall be contained within the screened area. The applicant's site plan indicates that a refuse collection area will be provided within the north parking lot. The plan indicates that the storage area will be screened with a 5-foot high wood fence. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the standards of Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening are satisfied outright or will be met through compliance with the condition of approval. CONDITION: Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan for review and approval. The revised landscape shall include additional shrub plantings along the north perimeter of the north parking lot and provide a more even distribution of parking lot trees around the south parking lot. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage — Chapter 18.755: Section 18.755.010.B. states that the mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable storage standards shall apply to new multi-unit residential buildings containing five or more units and non-residential construction that are subject to full site plan or design review; and are located within urban zones that allow, outright or by condition, for such uses. Section 18.755.010.C.5.b. states that non-residential buildings shall provide a minimum storage area of 10 square feet, plus 4 square feet/1,000 square feet gross floor area (GFA) for "office" and "other" uses. The total square footage of the proposed modified building is 7,399 square feet. A building this size is required to provide storage of 39.6 square feet (10 + (4 x 7.399) = 39.6). The applicant's site plan indicates that a storage area of approximately 165 square feet will be provided. Section 18.755.050.B. provides the following location standards: To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclable shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 13 OF 29 SCR 98-0026 The site plan indicates that proposed storage area is for both waste and recyclable materials. Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building Code (UBC) and Uniform Fire Code (UFC) requirements; Compliance with UBC and UFC requirements will be addressed at the time of building permit. Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations; The site plan indicates that a single outdoor location is proposed. Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; The site plan indicates that the proposed storage area is not located within a required front yard and is not adjacent to a street. Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; The site plan indicates that the proposed storage area is located in the north parking lot area. The location is central and is visible from the buildings and from SW 72nd Avenue. Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C., Design Standards; Both the parking and screening requirements are met, as addressed elsewhere in this decision. The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. The storage area is located at the edge of the north parking lot, out of the way of on-site vehicular and pedestrian movement. The storage area is no deeper than the adjacent parking spaces and does not interfere with the 24-foot-wide parking lot aisle. The franchise hauler must approve accessibility of the storage enclosure for collection vehicles. Section 18.755.O5O.C. provides the following design standards: The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection as follows: Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 14 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; • Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. Section 18.755.050.D. provides the following access standards: • Access to storage areas can be limited for security reasons. However, the storage area shall be accessible to users at convenient times of the day, and to collection service personnel on the day and approximate time they are scheduled to provide collection service; • Storage areas shall be designed to be easily accessible to collection trucks and equipment, considering paving, grade and vehicle access. A minimum of 10 feet horizontal clearance and eight feet of vertical clearance is required if the storage area is covered; • Storage areas shall be accessible to collection vehicles without requiring backing out of a driveway onto a public street. If only a single access point is available to the storage area, adequate turning radius shall be provided to allow collection vehicles to safety exit the site in a forward motion. Compliance with the above design and location standards will be assured through the Franchise Hauler's review and the Building Permit process. FINDING: Based on the above analysis, Staff finds that the standards of Chapter 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage are met outright or will be satisfied through compliance with the conditions of approval. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a site plan and detailed trash enclosure design drawings to the Franchise Hauler for review and approval. The plans shall be of sufficient detail for the Franchise Hauler to determine that the applicable design and access standards are met. Nonconforming Situations — Chapter 18.760: Section 18.760.040.C. provides for Nonconforming Development as follows: Where a lawful structure exists at the effective date of adoption or amendment of this title that could not be built under the terms of this title by reason of restrictions on lot area, lot coverage, height, yard, equipment, its location on the lot or other requirements concerning the structure, such structure may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, subject to the following provisions: • No such nonconforming structure may be enlarged or altered in a way which increases its nonconformity but any structure or portion thereof may be enlarged or altered in a way that satisfies the requirements of this title or will decrease its nonconformity; or PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 15 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • Should such nonconforming structure or nonconforming portion of structure be destroyed by any means to an extent of more than 60% of its current value as assessed by the Washington County assessor, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this title; and • Should such structure be moved for any reason for any distance whatever, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations for the zoning district in which it is located after it is moved. As noted earlier, the existing structure does not comply with the 35-foot front yard setback requirement of the I-P zoning district. However, the applicant has applied for a development adjustment to reduce the front yard setback requirement for the subject property. Staff finds that approval of the adjustment will legalize the existing nonconforming situation and this section will no longer apply. If the adjustment is not approved, the development cannot be built as proposed and this section would continue to apply to a revised or future development proposal. Off-Street Parking — Chapter 18.765: Section 18.765.020. states that at the time of an enlargement of a structure which increases the on-site vehicle parking requirements, off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070. subject to the following: • On the date of adoption of this title, the number of vehicle parking and loading spaces required shall be based only on floor area or capacity of such enlargement; • If the minimum vehicle parking spaces required for the enlargement added to the existing on-site space exceed the maximum number of vehicle parking spaces allowed for the whole project per the maximum parking ratios established in 18.765.070., the applicant may reduce the additional number of spaces provided so that the total spaces on the site do not exceed the maximum spaces allowed. The site plan indicates that the proposed addition will total 3,327 square feet of floor area. Table 18.765.2 states that there are no maximum parking requirements for industrial uses. Section 18.765.030.B. states that the location of off-street parking will be as follows: • Off-street parking spaces for single-family and duplex dwellings and single-family attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwelling(s); • Off-street parking lots for uses not listed above shall be located not further than 200 feet from the building or use that they are required to serve, measured in a straight line from the building: The site plan indicates that the furthest point in either parking lot is within 80 feet of the building. Section 18.765.030.D. states that in mixed-use projects, the required minimum vehicle parking shall be determined using the following formula: • Primary use, i.e., that with the largest proportion of total floor area within the development, at 100% of the minimum vehicle parking required for that use in Section 18.765.060.; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 16 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • Secondary use, i.e., that with the second largest percentage of total floor area within the development, at 90% of the vehicle parking required for that use in Section 18.765.060.; • Subsequent use or uses, at 80% of the vehicle parking required for that use(s) in Section 18.765.060.; and • The maximum parking allowance shall be 150% of the total minimum parking as calculated in D.1.-3. The primary use in this proposal is "office" and the secondary use is "daycare". According to Table 18.765.2 which summarizes required off-street parking, an office use requires a minimum of 2.7 spaces per 1 ,000 square feet of floor area and a commercial (not home-based) daycare use requires 2 spaces per classroom. The site plan indicates that the office portion of the building accounts for 6,329 square feet and that the daycare portion contains two classrooms. Therefore, the parking requirement is 17 spaces for the office portion (2.7 x 6,329 = 17) and 4 spaces for the daycare portion for a total of 21 required parking spaces. The site plan indicates that 21 parking spaces will be provided. Section 18.765.030.G. states that 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. State standards require one accessible space for parking lots providing up to 25 parking spaces. The project proposes 21 parking spaces. State standards also require that at least one required accessible space must be sized and designated "van accessible". The site plan and narrative statement indicate that one ADA van-accessible parking space will be provided. Section 18.765.040.J. states that 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 site plan indicates that all of the proposed parking stalls are located adjacent to landscaped areas. The site plan appears to indicate perimeter curbs are proposed. Provision of appropriate wheel stops will be verified at the time of building permit. Section 18.765.040.N.1. states that except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2, the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are as follows: • 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. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 17 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 The applicant's narrative indicates that parking spaces are sized at 9 feet x 18 feet for standard spaces and 8 feet x 15 feet for compact spaces. The site plan indicates that the van-accessible space is 9 feet wide with an 8-foot-wide access aisle as required by ADA regulations. All parking spaces need to be re-sized to meet the 18.5-feet and 16.5-feet length requirements. Section 18.765.040.2. provides that aisles accommodating two-direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. The site plan indicates that both parking lot access aisles are 24-feet wide. Section 18.765.050.A. states, with regard to the location and access to bicycle parking: Bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; The site plan indicates that a bicycle parking area will be provided adjacent to the day care entrance. As noted earlier, the north entrance is considered the primary entrance. The north entrance is further than 50 feet from the proposed bicycle parking area. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; The site plan indicates that the proposed bicycle parking facility is located on the concrete surface outside the entrance but is not located within the 4-foot-wide walkway. 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 locate the parking area; The site plan indicates that the proposed bicycle parking area is visible both from the building and from the street. 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 proposed bicycle parking area is located outside. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Section 18.765.050.B. states, with regard to covered parking spaces, when possible, bicycle parking facilities should be provided under cover. The applicant's narrative indicates that the proposed bicycle parking facility will be located under the porch at the south building entrance. Section 18.765.050.C. states that 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; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 18 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • Bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; • Bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 2-1/2 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; • Areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. The applicant has not provided sufficient detail on the design of the proposed bicycle parking facility for Staff to make a determination that these standards are met. Section 18.765.050.D.states that 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. As noted above, the site plan indicates that the bicycle parking facility will be located on a concrete surface. Section 18.765.050.E. states that 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. Single-family residences and duplexes are excluded from the bicycle parking requirements. The Director may reduce the number of required bicycle parking spaces by means of an adjustment to be reviewed through a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040., using approval criteria contained in Section 18.370.020.C.5.e. Table 18.765.2 states that an office use must provide 0.5 bicycle parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area and that a commercial daycare use must provide 1 .5 spaces per classroom. The site plan indicates that the total office floor area will be 6,329 square feet and that the daycare area will include two classrooms. The bicycle-parking requirement is, therefore, four spaces for the office portion (6.329 x 0.5 = 3.2) and three spaces for the daycare portion (1.5 x 2 = 3), for a total of seven required bicycle parking spaces. The site plan and narrative indicate that two bicycle parking spaces are proposed. Section 18.765.070.H. states that the minimum and maximum off-street parking requirements are contained in Table 18.765.2. Minimum and Maximum off-street parking is addressed earlier in this section. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the applicable standards of Chapter 18.765, Off-Street Parking and Loading are either met outright or will be satisfied through compliance with the conditions of approval. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 19 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised vehicle and bicycle parking plan for review and approval. The plan shall show that vehicle parking spaces are sized according to City standards and that 7 bicycle parking spaces are provided. Bicycle parking must be provided within 50 feet of the primary entrance, although it may be appropriate to provide some at each entrance given the "mixed-use" nature of the project. A detailed bicycle parking design shall be provided, which demonstrates compliance with the requirements of 18.765.050.C. Signs — Chapter 18.780: 18.780.130.F. states that no signs shall be permitted in an I-P, I-L or I-H zone except for the following: Freestanding signs shall have certain limitations and conditions when permitted on properties in industrial zones; The site plan indicates that one existing freestanding sign is located on the property. No additional sign area and no additional freestanding signs are proposed. Wall Signs shall have certain limitations and conditions when permitted on properties in industrial zones: • Wall signs, including illuminated reader-boards, may be erected or maintained but shall not exceed in gross area 15 percent of any building face on which the sign is to be mounted; • Wall signs may not project more than 18 inches from the wall or extend above the wall to which they are attached; and • If it is determined under the development review process that the wall sign's visual appeal and overall design quality would be served, an additional 50 percent of the allowable sign area may be permitted. No copy will be permitted, however, in the additional area permitted. For purposes of this subsection, "copy" includes symbols, logos and letters. The elevation drawings indicate that dimensional lettering is proposed on the east façade of the north building addition, facing SW 72nd Avenue. A sign permit will be required at the time of development. Therefore, these standards will be satisfied at the time of sign permit. Tree Removal — Chapter 18.790: Section 18.790.030.A. states that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal wherever possible. Section 18.790.030.B. states that 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; The landscape plan indicates the location, size and species of all existing trees. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 20 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 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. in accordance with the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: • Retention of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D. of no net loss of trees; • Retention 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 in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D.; • Retention of from 50% to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated in accordance with Section 18.790.060.D.; • Retention of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation. No trees over 12 inches are identified for removal. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; The landscape plan indicates that one, four-inch caliper maple tree will be removed. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. No tree protection plan is required. Subsequent removal of a tree: Section 18.790.040.B. states that any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section may thereafter be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan, in accordance with Section 18.790.030. or as a condition of approval for a conditional use, and shall not be subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property owner shall record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit affected by this section to the effect that such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. The deed restriction may be removed or will be considered invalid if a tree preserved in accordance with this section should either die or be removed as a hazardous tree. The form of this deed restriction shall be subject to approval by the Director. A condition of approval requires that a deed restriction be recorded in compliance with this standard. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the standards of Chapter 18.790., Tree Removal are met outright or will be satisfied through compliance with the conditions of approval. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a tree protection plan, prepared by a certified arborist, for review and approval. The plan shall describe a protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction in compliance with TMC 18.790.030.B.4. Draft deed- restriction language, in compliance with 18.790.030.0 shall also be submitted for review and approval. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 21 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Visual Clearance Areas — Chapter 18.795: Section 18.795.020.A. states that the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. Section 18.795.030.B. states that a clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. The applicant's site plan does not identify clear vision areas. Based on a preliminary review of the site plan, it appears that the clear vision areas associated with the two driveway entrances may conflict with the location of certain parking spaces. Parking spaces are not permitted within clear vision areas. As noted earlier, there is uncertainty regarding the exact location of the right-of-way. The right-of-way must be clearly identified in order to determine the location of clear vision areas. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that insufficient information has been provided to accurately determine whether the standards of Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas have been met. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that clearly indicates the location of the SW 72nd Avenue right-of-way and the clear vision areas associated with each access drive. The site plan shall indicate that no temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height will be located within a clear vision area. Street and Utility Improvement Standards — Chapter 18.810: Section 18.810.030.A.1. states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 8.810.030.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. Streets: This site lies adjacent to SW 72nd Avenue, which is classified as a major collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. This roadway classification requires a right-of-way (ROW) width of 60 feet minimum. At present, there is approximately 60 feet of ROW overall, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. However, there may be a discrepancy between the tax assessor's map and the real property line/right-of-way line. The applicant's materials indicate that they are not sure where the western ROW is located. The preliminary plan does not indicate the centerline of the ROW or roadway and does not indicate the western ROW line. Therefore, it is difficult for Staff to determine if there is a need for additional ROW dedication. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 22 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Southwest 72nd Avenue is currently improved, with the exception of a concrete sidewalk and street trees along this frontage. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct a concrete sidewalk and plant street trees along the frontage. The applicant's plan shows that they will provide these improvements. Because there is a question regarding the western ROW line, Staff recommends the applicant provide evidence of the location of the ROW centerline, roadway centerline and western ROW line prior to issuance of any permits on this site. If the proposed sidewalk and street trees will not fit within existing ROW, then the applicant will need to dedicate additional ROW. The amount of dedication would need to account for the 6-foot sidewalk and a 4-foot area behind the sidewalk for the street trees. Water: This site is presently served from the City's water system. The building addition will be served from the existing on-site water system. Sanitary Sewer: The existing building is presently served from the public sewer system in SW 72' Avenue. The building addition will also be served from the existing on-site system. Storm Drainage: The existing on-site storm drainage system can easily be modified to accommodate the building addition. There will not be an increase in impervious surfaces on this site, so detention is not required. Storm Water Quality: The development will result in a net decrease in impervious surfaces, from 12,677 square feet down to 12, 082 square feet. Therefore, this section will not apply. 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. Existing Overhead Utility Lines: There are existing overhead utility lines along SW 72' Avenue. Section 18.810.120 of the 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. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 420 lineal feet; therefore, the fee would be $11 ,550. ADDITIONAL SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CRITERIA Relationship to the natural and physical environment: Section 18.360.090.A.2.a states that buildings shall be: Located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 23 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • 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. The proposed development is an expansion of an existing building. The site is already developed and there are no natural features present. The building addition will be constructed on existing hard surface and, according to the applicant's information, the project as a whole will result in a net loss of impervious surface area. Section 18.360.090.A.2.b. states that trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790., Tree Removal. The site plan indicates that one, four-inch caliper tree will be removed. Fifteen trees, ranging in size from four-five caliper inches will be preserved. Mitigation is not required for removal of trees under 12 caliper inches. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the proposal satisfies the Site Development Review criteria relating to preservation of the natural and physical environment. Exterior elevations: Section 18.360.090.A.3.a. states that along the vertical face of single-family attached and multiple-family structures, offsets shall occur at a minimum of every 30 feet. The proposal is for an office expansion. This section relates to residential development only and, therefore, is not applicable. Buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.360.090.A.4.a. states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses, for example, between single-family and multiple-family residential, and residential and commercial uses, and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the buffer: The proposal is an office expansion. Abutting properties are developed with similar Light Industrial and Industrial Park uses. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Section 18.360.090.A.4.b. states that on site screening from view from adjoining properties of such things as service areas, storage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops, i.e., air cooling and heating systems, shall be provided and the following factors will be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: • What needs to be screened; • The direction from which it is needed; • How dense the screen needs to be; • Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile; and • Whether the screening needs to be year around. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 24 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Screening of parking areas and the proposed trash/recycling enclosure is addressed earlier in this decision under the specific provisions of Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening. Privacy and noise: multi-family or group living uses: Section 18.36O.O9O.A.5.a. states that structures which include residential dwelling units shall provide private outdoor areas for each ground floor unit which is screened from view by adjoining units as provided in Subsection 6.a. below; The proposal is for an office expansion. This section relates to residential development only and, therefore, is not applicable. Private outdoor area: multi-family use: Section 18.36O.O9O.A.6.a. states that private open space such as a patio or balcony shall be provided and shall be designed for the exclusive use of individual units and shall be at least 48 square feet in size with a minimum width dimension of four feet; and The proposal is for an office expansion. This section relates to residential development only and, therefore, is not applicable. Shared outdoor recreation areas - multi-family use: Section 18.36O.O9O.A.7.a. states that in addition to the requirements of Subsections 5 and 6 above, usable outdoor recreation space shall be provided in residential developments for the shared or common use of all the residents. The proposal is for an office expansion. This section related to residential development only and therefore is not applicable. Section 18.36O.09O.A.8. states that 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. According to FEMA floodplain information, the site is not located within the 100-year floodplain. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Demarcation of public, semi-public and private spaces for crime prevention: Section 18.360.O90.A.9.a. states that the structures and site improvements shall be designed so that public areas such as streets or public gathering places, semi-public areas and private outdoor areas are clearly defined to establish persons having a right to be in the space, to provide for crime prevention and to establish maintenance responsibility; and Section 18.360.O9O.A.9.b. states that areas may be defined by, but not limited to the following: • A deck, patio, low wall, hedge, or draping vine; • A trellis or arbor; • A change in elevation or grade; • A change in the texture of the path material; PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 25 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 • Sign; or • Landscaping. The site plan indicates that the site is differentiated from the street by landscaping and street trees. The walkway approaches to the building entrances provide a clear corridor for visitors and clients who need to gain access to the building. A freestanding sign in the front yard reinforces the transition from public to private property. Therefore, this standard is met. Crime prevention and safety: Section 18.36O.O9O.A.1O.a. states that windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; The elevation drawings indicate that all four elevations are provided with a number of windows. Section 18.36O.O9O.A.1O.d. states that the exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and Section 18.36O.O9O.A.10.e. states that 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. The applicant has not submitted information regarding lighting levels. The Tigard Police Department commented on this proposal and requested a lighting plan for their review and approval. A condition of approval requires that the applicant submit a lighting plan that complies with this section. Therefore, this standard will be satisfied through compliance with the condition of approval. Public transit: Section 18.36O.09O.A.11.a. states that provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route; Section 18.36O.O9O.A.11.b.(1) & (2) state that the requirements for transit facilities shall be based on the following: • The location of other transit facilities in the area; and • The size and type of the proposal. There are existing bus stops on SW 72nd Avenue, approximately 400 feet south and approximately 500 feet north of the subject property. According to Tri-Met, an additional bus stop between the existing facilities is not required at this time. Landscaping: Section 18.36O.O9O.A.12.a. states that all landscaping shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.100. as follows: • In addition to the open space and recreation area requirements of subsections 5 and 6 above, a minimum of 20 percent of the gross area including parking, loading and service areas shall be landscaped; and • A minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped. As noted earlier in this decision, the project will provide 52% of the site in landscaping. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 26 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 Therefore, this standard is met. Section 18.360.090.A.13. states that all drainage plans shall be designed in accordance with the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan; Storm drainage is addressed earlier in this decision under Street and Utility Improvement Standards. Section 18.360.090.A.14. states that provision for the disabled: All facilities for the disabled shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in ORS Chapter 447; and Accessibility of parking stalls is addressed earlier in this report. Accessibility of walkways and structures will be addressed through the building permit process. Therefore, this standard is met. Section 18.360.090.A.15. states that all of the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall apply unless modified by other sections or this title, e.g., Planned Developments, Chapter 18.350; or a variance or adjustment granted under Chapter 18.370. The provisions of the underlying zone are addressed earlier in this decision. All of these standards are met except the front yard setback. An adjustment to the front yard setback standard was requested by the applicant and is addressed earlier in this decision. Therefore, this standard is met. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and has offered no comments or objections. City of Tigard Property Manager/Operations Department has reviewed this application and has offered no comments or objections. City of Tigard Water Department has reviewed this application and has offered the following comments: • All portions of the building shall be within 250 feet of a fire hydrant. City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this application and has offered the following comments: • No reference to any additional lighting. Request lighting plan, which accommodates the increase in parking areas at the north an south perimeters of the proposed expansion. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 27 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS Southern Pacific Railroad has reviewed this application and has offered the following comments: • We do not allow drainage water onto our property. GTE has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: • Developer to pay any relocation costs. GTE only supplies one demarc point per address. The Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: Sanitary Sewer Each lot shall be provided with a means of disposal for sanitary sewer in accordance with R&O 96-44 (USA'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. If the units are to be sold individually, then a separate lateral is required for each unit. Storm Sewer Each lot should have access to public storm sewer. Engineer should verify that public storm sewer is available to uphill adjacent properties, or extend service as required by R&O 96-44. Hydraulic and hydrological analysis of stormwater conveyance system is necessary. If downstream storm conveyance does not have the capacity to convey the volume during a 25- year, 24-hour event, the applicant is responsible for mitigating the flow. Water Quality Developer should provide a water quality facility to treat the stormwater runoff generated by new impervious surface. Sensitive Area A "sensitive area" exists (may exist). Developer must preserve a 25-foot corridor as described in R&O 96-44 separating the sensitive area from the impact of development. The sensitive area shall be identified on plans. STAFF RESPONSE: Comments submitted by USA were considered in the Engineering Departments review of this proposal. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, NW Natural Gas and ICI Cable were given the opportunity to review the proposal and submit comments and offered no comments or objections. No other comments were received. PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 28 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 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 Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON MARCH 12, 1999 AND EFFECTIVE ON MARCH 26, 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. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 3:30 PM ON MARCH 26, 1999. I 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 . March 12, 1999 PREPARED BY: Mark J. Roberts DATE Associate Planner / &-"e March 12. 1999 APPROVED BY: Richard Bew ,dorff DATE Planning M.M.ger i:\curpin\mark\sdr\sdr98-26.doc PITTMAN&BROOKS OFFICES&DAYCARE ADDITION PAGE 29 OF 29 SDR 98-0026 hiiiik CRY OF TIOAFO Y SITE DATA �•"']� —— -- — ,a.�Tr') LAND USE ZONE: I-P INDUSTRIAL PARK _A,t il_",f7 STREET SETBACK: 30'PROPOSED,EXISTING (35'REQUIRED) \ 1 .I 1I: . 1. I i : I0 . I : 1 • ,I"\� I Il7� LANDSCAPE COVERAGE:EA:48% 52%PROPOSED REWIRED)• \ ��-�"1`4', CAR PARKING: 23 SPACES PROPOSED(21 SPACES REQUIRED) -•« cr . 1 \ _ • _ • BICYCLE PARKING: 2 SPACES PROPOSED (2 SPACES REQUIRED) j it:1. .ii-,tir b-,8z. :1: I ; o' •: N, BUILDING DATA • .I'••;: \W• ' �, s EXISTING OFFICE ;,...,E„ o ' oW 1st FLOOR 2.036' •\�• wo I I R 2nd FLOOR 2,036' 2 < ■ i• i1J/�1 O PROPOSED OFFICE \i �zr: j�.1j 1st FLOOR 1,338' y ( _ Q- \ 2nd FLOOR 919' Z "/ �--:.-'J... I.I,.i PROPOSED DAYCARE O• 1\ __.-- .--4--y' i F----' • I A I, 1st FLOOR 1.070' ' I VOA • TOTAL 1st FLOOR 4,444' 1 \ I TOTAL 2nd FLOOR 2.955' ` ` Ut3 stn), I W , \ Pt, F:t1 `^^ 1 ) I•; Q 1W WNb. Y_ ©I . •.st 7 0 \ I it::: "{ '''....' > Z \ s' G0 .. I Z•` `lNya 3Y0 •• I I . Z•• W< r • N ••• ._i,3 ``'. N J .�.> ••. \ I I 1 0�/•• \ L\,- ck • \• : . • . *•. .-3:1. : ' : : : .ICI '.. Q •• \ I�► • ` •o \ . 52 O: — lin � I• z� •• , \ CD• \ L •• \ I ,. •i \ 0 •• \ \\ ••vs, \ \ II •• \\ 0 LEGEND •• \ \ I •• t \I , ASPHALT PAVING •• \ _ I':_ ;?11 CONCRETE sLAB I. 'CtFrZ Fh r • 1 ,i h..... PLAYGROUND SAFETY SURFACE SITE PLAN T PITTMAN & BROOKS EXPANSION EXHIBIT MAP N SDR 98-0026 (map is not to scale) I \ 111___ \ CITY of TIGARD J \ .----------- GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 5 _ EM j l BONITA RD ,, [-----\\ ) JP TI VICINITY MAP PITTMAN TI ' & N m BROOKS 0 , ri C o EXPANSION LI 1 „ SDR 98-0026 m JCARDINAL LN co N [1 /) S 1 UBJECT '8,, � PARCEL - A 2 ..,\\,: • REDWOOD LN 1r' N 7 — 0 100 200 300 400 500 Feet 1"=383(eat* 14 p o oli.a CC City of Tigard Information on this map is for general location only and GABLE LN should be ve fied th the Development Sernces Division.— \, 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 (503)639-4171 http://www.ci.ligard.or.us Convnunity Development T Plot date:Jan 25, 1999;C:\magic\MAGICO2.APR p17T4 /V f,t3 ,c!S S/J/e 9 -ODD C EXHIBIT B 2S112AC-01500 2S112AC-01800 PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES TRUAX HARRIS ENERGY COMPANY 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PO BOX 607 PORTLAND, OR 97224 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 2S112AC-01801 2S112AC-02500 TIEDEMANN BEVERLY J/RON JR SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION PO BOX 23175 1700 FARNAM ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH TIGARD, OR 97281 OMAHA,NE 68102 2S e_-00600 2S112DA-00700 PACIFIC 'y' Y ASSOCIATES PA 1W C LTY ASSOCIATES 15350 • SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI 15350 QUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PORTLAND,OR 97224 TLAND,0 97224 2S1 DA-00800 2S112DB-00100 PACIFI - Y ASSOCIATES RALLIS JOHN 15350 SEQ S 001A PKWY#300-WMI 1000 COLUMBIA AVE Pe LAND, OR 97224 LINWOOD, PA 19061 2S112DB-00200 2 112DB-00300 BROOKS&PITTMAN RENTALS PAC REALTY ASSOCIATES 15255 SW 72ND AVE 1535 EQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PORTLAND,OR 97224 PO TLAND, 97224 2S112DB-00400 2S112DB-00401 OR-WASH ENTERPRISES UNLIMITED CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 111 SW 5TH AVE#3400 201 MISSION ST PORTLAND,OR 97204 SAN FRANCISCO,CA 94105 2S 12DB-00900 2S112DC-0. 00 SOU E PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION SO E' PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 1700 F M ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH 1700 F• SAM ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH O HA, NE 68102 0 • A,NE ::102 2- 12DD-01600 2S1 '11D-0 00 PACT' R • TY ASSOCIATES SOUTH ' PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 15350 - QUOIA PKWY#300-WMI 1700 F 'N•, ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH PORTLAND,O" 97224 0 ` A,NE 68 02 2S112DD-01800 PAGI IC LTY ASSOCIATES 15350 EQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI P TLAND, 97224 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CIT TI.ARD Community Deve pment S(zapingA 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 Appropriate Box(s)Below) © NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR: SDR 98-0026/PITTMAN & BROOKS EXPANSION AMENDED NOTICE (F de No'Name Reference) 0 City of Tigard Planning Director C NOTICE OF DECISION FOR:, AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) I City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: / L] AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Heanng) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council LI NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) ,Date of Public Heanngl ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council L i NOTICE OF: (TypeflGnd of Notice) FOR: L , I iF e N� Na^e f/ aso, ,Date of Public Heanng if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICEESI of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B}', on the 29111 day of January,1999, and deposited in the United States Mail on the 29111 day of January,1999, postage%prepaid. i . o,�/ _4 • ii, i7 (Person that Prepared .tire) :je Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the , U day of 4/C 19/7. OFFICIAL SEAL (-( '' //kit ,-) ` DIANE M JELDERKS NO ARY PUBLIC F 0 E,0 ` NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON g `", ,® COMMISSION NO.046142 My Commission Expires: ,7� ,(/ v1Y COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07,1999 .XHIBIT A NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOL _R,VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. •■■■• NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Commum'ty�De TIGARD ent Shaping Better Community 500-FOOT PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE: January 29, 1999 PROPOSAL: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 98-0026 PITTMAN &BROOKS EXPANSION This is a request for Major Modification approval to construct an addition of approximately 3,327 square feet to the existing professional office building. The proposal includes a daycare facility and would involve reconfiguration of off-street parking and vehicular access to the site. The applicant is also requesting an administrative adjustment to the front yard setback standards to allow the addition to match the existing, non-conforming front facade. ZONE: Industrial Park; I-P. The Industrial Park Zoning District allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, manufacturing of finished products, packaging and processing, wholesale, storage, and distribution, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.760, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: 15255 SW 72nd Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road, opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane. WCTM 2S1 12DB, Tax Lot 00200. 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 FEBRUARY 12. 1999. All comments should be directed to Mark J. Roberts, 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. SDR 98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION Failure of any party to address relevant approval criteria with ficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14 DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: • The application is accepted by the City ♦ Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. ♦ The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. • City Staff issues a written decision. ♦ Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written Comments." - I l I I J ( CITY of TIGARD f-- / NONITA • ■I �`_ - VICINITY MAP PITTMAN BROOKS EXPANSION SOR 98-0026 • 111•111 CARDINAL LN SUBJECT PARCEL f \ • I \ REDWOOD LN n N 0 zoo wo •1e xo 0.51 hi ob. wtleM City of Tigard •LE LN •� '� p.re,art nsv A Imo„a..ft . 11z e- (}G',)-C EMU LT B 2S112AC-01500 25112AC-01800 PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES TRUAX HARRIS ENERGY COMPANY 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PO BOX 607 PORTLAND,OR 97224 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 2S112AC-01801 2S112AC-02500 TIEDEMANN BEVERLY J/RON JR SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION PO BOX 23175 1700 FARNAM ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH TIGARD,OR 97281 OMAHA, NE 68102 2S112DA-00600 2S112DA-00700 PACIFIC REAL ASSOCIATES PACIFIC REAL OCIATES 1535 SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI 15350 EQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PORTLAND,OR 97224 RTLAND,OR 97224 2S112DA-00800 2S112DB-00100 PACIFIC R • ASSOCIATES RALLIS JOHN 15 .: W SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI 1000 COLUMBIA AVE -ORTLAND,OR 97224 LINWOOD, PA 19061 2S112DB-00200 2S112DB-00300 BROOKS&PITTMAN RENTALS PACIFIC RAL'r ASSOCIATES 15255 SW 72ND AVE 153D-S 'SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PORTLAND,OR 97224 RTLAND,OR 97224 2S1 12D B-00400 2S 112DB-00401 OR-WASH ENTERPRISES UNLIMITED CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 111 SW 5TH AVE#3400 201 MISSION ST PORTLAND,OR 97204 SAN FRANCISCO,CA 94105 2S 112DB-00900 2S 112DC-00100 SOUTHE ACIFIC TRANSPORTATION SOUTHERN PACI - -•NSPORTATION 1700 RNAM ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH 1700 F•e • ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH AHA, NE 68102 S1NT•HA, NE 68102 2S112DD-01600 2S112DD-01700 PACIFIC REALT OCIATES SOUTHERN PACIFIC T laP6R-TAT1ON- 1535 QUOIA 97224 PKWY#300-WMI 1700 NE 68102 000 FAR0TH FLOOR SOUTH TLAND,OR 9 2S112DD-01800 PACIFIC REALT CSO IATES 15350 QUOIA PKWY#300-WMI P TLAND,OR 97224 • -,) 1_ .',1 C (. ) L • 2S112AC-01500 2S112AC-01800 PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES TRUAX HARRIS ENERGY COMPANY 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PO BOX 607 PORTLAND, OR 97224 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 2S112AC-01801 2S112AC-02500 TIEDEMANN BEVERLY J/RON JR SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION PO BOX 23175 1700 FARNAM ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH TIGARD, OR 97281 OMAHA, NE 68102 2S112DA-00600 2S112DA-00700 PACIFIC RE ASSOCIATES PACIFIC REALTY-ASSOCIATES 15350 SW/SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI 15350 SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PORTLAND,OR 97224 RPO TLAND,OR 97224 2S112DA-00800 2S112DB-00100 PACIFIC R ASSOCIATES RALLIS JOHN 15,350 W SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI 1000 COLUMBIA AVE PORTLAND,OR 97224 LINWOOD, PA 19061 2S112DB-00200 2S112DB-00300 BROOKS& PITTMAN RENTALS PACIFIC R A T ASSOCIATES 15255 SW 72ND AVE 15350S SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PORTLAND,OR 97224 PORTLAND,OR 97224 2S112DB-00400 2S112DB-00401 OR-WASH ENTERPRISES UNLIMITED CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 111 SW 5TH AVE#3400 201 MISSION ST PORTLAND, OR 97204 SAN FRANCISCO,CA 94105 2S112DB-00900 2S112DC-00100 SOUTHE ACIFIC TRANSPORTATION SOUTHERN PACI NSPORTATION 1700 RNAM ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH 1700 FARNA ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH OMAHA, NE 68102 OMAHA,NE 68102 2S112DD-01600 2S112DD-01700 PACIFIC REALTY-ASSOCIATES SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI 1700 FARNAM ST 10TH FLOOR SOUTH PORTLAND,OR 97224 OMAHA",NE 68102 2S112DD-01800 PACIFIC REALT S CIATES 15350 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#300-WMI PORTLAND,OR 97224 r • CITY of TIGARD Cl) GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM M D C I ..; 5; ° NOTIFICATION AREA [500') n 2S112A 02 00 m PITTMAN 2S112AC01500 2S112AC018 I CARDINAL LN 2SU2ACO1800 BROOKS I S1120B00401 0 2S112DBOO100 EXPANSION s y 2S112DA00800 Ns f,1 r SOH 98-0028 IIII 2511 !;��02002Eow000 LN �' ?ill"'lirS112DB00400 2S112DB00300 2S112DA00700 fliiiill 0 ....1 2S' 12DA0060 CC KABLE LN `�,7.. • Q ,� 2S1120001600; N il Will c- az a -n 0 100 200 300 400 0 Fast LU 2S112DC00100 c III 1'.383 feet 2S11211;01800 Alk, U �� �I�� \\\w —_ GG City of Tigard wy Information on this map is for general location only and I I should be verified with the Development Z G 13125 SW Hall Blvd Services Division Q■ JQ�v�` Tigard,(503)639-41713 http:AMnw.ci.tigard.or.us Community Development Plot date:Jan 25,1999;C:lmagicMAGICO2.APR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223(503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 GENERAL INFORMATION PRE-APP. HELD WITH: M.J. Roberts DATE OF PRE-APP.: 8/27/98 Property Address/Location(s): 15255 S. w. 7 2 n a Ave Tigard , Or 97224 FOR'STAFF USE ONLY Tax Map&Tax Lot#(s): 25112 DB TL #200 r. _s Case No.(s): 7► • Other Case No.(s): > A / Site Size: 28 , 345 sq. ft . ( 0 . 65 ac. ) ' S — Receipt No.. 31 Property Owner/DeedHolder(s)":Brooks & Pittman Rentals Application Accepted By: 65l Address: 15255 S .W. 72nd Ave • Phone: 684-9233 Date: (2'22,-`? City: Tigard , Oregon Zip: 97224 Applicant*: Randall Brooks Date Dete ined T e Complete: Address: 15255 S .W. 72nd Ave. Phone: 684-9233 1 J-)-/47/ Tigard , O r. Zip: 97224 Comp Plan/Zone Designation: When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written CITArea: 6Q,�r 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 Rev.8/29/96 i:lcurpin\rnasterslsdra.doc form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS The owners of record of the subject property request Site ✓ plication Elements Submitted: Development Review approval to allow(please be specific): Application Form Construction of a 2-story office addition p. Owner's Signature/Written Authorization and 1-story daycare addition on the 5'" Title Transfer Instrument or Deed existing office building [r Site/Plot Plan (#of copies based on pre-app check list) Site/Plot'Plan (reduced 81/2"x 11") Applicant's Statement (#of copies based on pre-app check list) LI - iinstruction Cost Estimate ling Fee (Under$100,000) • ($100,000-$999,9• .. .1 600.60 ($1 Million&Over) $1,781..i (+$51$10,000) 1 List any VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE, SENSITIVE LANDS, OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: Variance proposed to reduce front setback from 35 ' to 30 ' to match existing building. 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. ,I (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request, for all types of Land Use Applications.) THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • Th- _••v• r- •u• n. v••1- - a • • • • r• i ••n i , a •• . .. h- • • • i •• •_ u.on 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 :2- t c°� day of SQe OA , 19 I .• On vAiner's Signature Owner's Signature a k Jive. o per's Signature Owner's Signature 2 VARIANCE APPLICATION , .'11 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APP. HELD WITH: M.J . Roberts GENERAL INFORMATION DATE OF PRE-APP.: 8/77/98 Property Address/Location(s): 15255 S . W. 72nd Ave . FOR STAFF USE ONLY Tigard, Or 97224 pp �} Case No.(s):1(//]]/1L ! '- :I1/ Tax Map & Tax Lot#(s): 25112 D B TL #200 Other Case No.(s): , - : 1 (/ Receipt No.: Site Size: 28 , 345 s . f . ( 0 . 65 ac . ) Application Accepted By: . 4 Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)*: Brooks & Pittman Rentals Date: i -. - ?. Address: 15255 S . W . 72nd Ave Phone:684-9233 City: Tigard , Oregon Zip: 97224 Date Determined o Be Cpmplete: Applicant*: Randall Brooks � l�I 15 2 5 5 S . W . 7 2nd Ave . 6 8 4-9 2 3 3 Comp Plan/Zone Designation: Address: Phone: City: Tigard , Or Zip: 97224 vvhen the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant CIT Area: 4) .,/ must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written Rev.8129196 i:lcurpin\masters\variance.doc 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 application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS The owners of record of the subject property request permission for a Variance to the following provision(s) of the Community Development ✓ Application Elements Submitted: Code (please be specific): i8 . 68 . 050 Dimensional Requirement ❑ Application Form ❑ Owner's Signature/Written Authorization 3 . a The front setback shall be 35 ft . ❑ Title Transfer Instrument or Deed ❑ Site/Plot Plan (8'h"x 11") The proposed addition has a 30 ft . front (#of copies based on pre-app check list) ❑ Applicant's Statement : setback to match the xistin� bldg . (#of copies based on pre-app chec$ i"ist))1/ ❑ Filing Fee (Administrative) $545.00 (Flexible Setback) $390.00 (Hearing's Officer) $535.00 (Sign Code) $535.00 (Subdivision) $505.00 1 • List any VARIANCE OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: Reduce the front setback from 35 ft . to 30 ft . to match the existii-g building . F PPLJCANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as ii 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 thatmay 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. Si DATED this 1 day of v i -iEvA'(75E , 19 r!E .4 ,,,C.C€ti-/ C' ;2e41rt i er's Signature Owner's Signature 1� 11 '(6' ,C i Y)(7,SJ net's Signature Owner's Signature 2 CITY OF TIGARD Community cDeveIopment ShapingA Better Community LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION 120 DAYS = 5/20/99 FILE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW [SDRI 98-0026 FILE TITLE: PITTMAN & BROOKS EXPANSION APPLICANT: Brooks & Pittman Rentals OWNER: Same 15255 SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Contact: Randall Brooks (503) 684-9233 REQUEST: The applicant has requested a Site Development Review for Major Modification approval to construct an addition of approximately 3,327 square feet to the existing professional office building. The proposal includes a daycare facility and would involve reconfiguration of off-street parking and vehicular access to the site. The applicant is also requesting an administrative adjustment to the front yard setback standards to allow the addition to match the existing, non- conforming front facade. LOCATION: 15255 SW 72" Avenue, south of SW Bonita Road, opposite the intersection of SW Redwood Lane; WCTM 2S1 12DB, Tax Lot 00200. ZONE: Industrial Park; I-P. The Industrial Park Zoning District allows public agency administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance, and real estate services, business support services, manufacturing of finished products, packaging and processing, wholesale, storage, and distribution, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.760, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. CIT AREA: East CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request DECISION MAKING BODY: DATE COMMENTS SENT: 1/25/99 DUE: 2/10/99 K STAFF DECISION DATE OF DECISION: THURSDAY FEBRUARY 25,1999 HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 1:30 PM CITY COUNCIL DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 1:30 PM COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION X VICINITY MAP K LANDSCAPING PLAN K NARRATIVE X SITE PLAN K ARCHITECTURAL PLAN TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ARBORIST REPORT OTHER STAFF CONTACT: Mark J. Roberts, Associate Planner (503) 639-4171 Ext. 315 SDR 98-0026 PITTMAN&BROOKS EXPANSION PROPOSAL January 11, 1999 rana4, Randall Brooks CITY OF TIGARD Brooks & Pittman Rentals OREGON 15255 SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 RE: Notice of Incomplete Submittal - SDR 98-0026 (Pittman & Brooks Expans • Dear Mr. Brooks: The City received your request for Major Modification approval for the above-referenced office expansion project on SW 72nd Avenue. A request for a Major Modification to an existing site is processed as a Site Development Review application under Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 18.360. Based on a preliminary review of your application materials, Staff has determined that your submittal is incomplete for the purposes of continuing with Site Development Review. The following clarifications and additional information are required before Staff can consider your application complete and begin the review: 1. Documentation of the neighborhood meeting, including: • list of neighbors (from County Assessors records or Title Company) within 500 feet of the subject property to whom notice was mailed • affidavit of mailing notice • affidavit of posting notice 2. Address Storm Drainage for the proposed site modification and provide calculations of the amount of new impervious surface area. (Contact: Brian Rager, Engineering Department). 3. Address Water Quality. (Contact: Brian Rager, Engineering Department). Once the required information has been submitted, Staff will deem the application complete and begin the review process. If you have any questions about the information contained in this letter, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171 extension 315. Sincerely, 9 YL7- Mark J. $ob rt s t Associate Planner i:\curpin\mjr\sdr\sdr98-26.inc c: Jim Andrews, Andrews Architects, 205 SE Grand Avenue, #207, Portland, OR 97214 SDR 98-0026 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 01/12/99 11:15 e503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD Ij001 *************************** *** ACTIVITY REPORT *** • *************************** TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. 1367 CONNECTION TEL 2313369 CONNECTION ID START TIME 01/12 11:14 USAGE TIME 00'46 PAGES 1 RESULT OK • Post-It'"brand fax transmittal memo 7071 J'#of pages 1., January 11, 1999 ,. . A Fa.# / % Fax N 1'.. ;a;fp rd/A Randall Brooks CITY OF TIGARD Brooks & Pittman Rentals 15255 SW 72nd Avenue OREGON Tigard, OR 97224 RE: k 'tic- •f , .m•l-t- bmitt-1 - 1- 98-0s2. Pittman Brooks Ex n • Dear Mr. Brooks: The City received your request for Major Modification approval for the above-referenced office expansion project on SW 72nd Avenue. A request for a Major Modification to an existing site is processed as a Site Development Review application under Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 18.360. Based on a preliminary review of your application materials, Staff has determined that your submittal is incomplete for the purposes of continuing with Site Development Review. The following clarifications and additional information are required before Staff can consider your application complete and begin the review: 1. Documentation of the neighborhood meeting, including: - list of neighbors (from County Assessors records or Title Company) within 500 feet of the subject property to whom notice was mailed • affidavit of mailing notice • affidavit of posting notice 2. Address Storm Drainage for the proposed site modification and provide calculations of the amount of new impervious surface area. (Contact: Brian Rager, Engineering Department). 3. Address Water Quality. (Contact: Brian Rager, Engineering Department). Once the required information has been submitted, Staff will deem the application I I • f A ndreas A7thi Inc } `—To: Brian Rager, Engineering Dept. FAX 684-7297 two pages: from:,, James E. Andrews AIA • cc: Mark Roberts, Associate Planner - Date: January 13, 1999 Subject: Incompleteness of SDR 98-0026 Application(Pittman& :gooks Expansion)' We have received the notice of incompleteness for the Pittman&Brooks Expansion. This Memo is in response to Items 2& 3 which relate to storm water engineering. ( I.have understood from the Preapplication Conference that stormwater engineer.ing;k if required when projects increase the amount of impervious surfaces to be drained. AS I'noted in my memo to Brian Rager on 9/8/98, there is no net increase in impe,-vious area in:the proposal. This is because the existing development has large paved parking areas which arc it ° i inefficiently used The proposed north office addition is entire within fat limits of the Y . e R ro P existing'north parking area Significant areas of the existing north paving will be returned to ' ' t landscaping in the proposal. The proposed south parking area is 574 s.f, smaller than:,the existing. E l Tkie`net result of the proposal is:that the area of buildings and parking is reduced from the existing 12,677 s.f. to 12,082 s.f. The existing and proposed conditions .E:xe shown on the`Site • Plan sheet.Ai, though the paving to be removed is in a faint line. The existing conditions are Shown more:clearly on the topographic survey at the back of the application package: The storm drainage will go through the same facilities that it presently goes through.., Many of the existing drainage system elements will be retained and used in the proposal. No new drainage structures will be built crossing the property lines. The north parking area will drain to the existing catch basin at the northwest corner of the parking area. This catch basin drains to the culvert inlet near the northwest corner of the site, which then crosses under the railroad tracks to the weft. The office addition roof(north)will drain to the existing catch basin presently located at the southwest corner of the,north parking area. This catch basin drains to the ditch alongside the railroad tracks, which then drains north to the culvert menti.oti d:above. �# t ! Th.c daycare addition roof(south)will drain to the existing catch basin at the southwest corner of the existing south parking area.. This catch basin will now be locatedin the northwest corner of the new south parking area. This catch basin. also drains tco'the ditch along the railroad tracks, which then drains to the culvert mentioned above. ' 205 S.E. Grand Avenue Suite 207 Portland, OR 97214 Tel(503 239-43E7 Fax(503)231-3369 • Email: andrarch@eyberhighway.net Web: www.andrews-architects.com• • j • . t M 2/T •d S1331I Hide SM321QNti PS:2T 66, ET Ntil Brian Rager, Engineerii )apartment to , . 1/13/1999 Page 2 I J inquired about water quality and water quantity standards earlier, specifically asking if a detentinnpond might be required. I was told by Brian Rager that the standard in.this area is � to not build detention because the desire is to get the storm water into Panno Creek in ' advance of the water entering Fanno Creek further upstream. So I ask again, what is the standard to which we are to design? There is an existing development which has 12,677 s.f. of impervious area. The net result o'the proposal will be ! l , to reduee this impervious area to 12,082 s.f. draining to the same system that is presently j l receiving the drainage. It seems to me that new standards for storm waT:er engineering are applicable to increases in the storm drainage, but we have a net decrcasc in drainage, so new standards don't apply. , i I 205:S.E. Grand Avenue Suite 207 Portland, OR 97214 Tel(503 239-43£7 Fax(503)2M=3369 1 E mail: andrarch @cyberhighway.net Web: www.andrews-a;-chitects.corn. t 2/2'd S1J31IHO8b SM3ZIQNti SS:Zt 66, ET Ndf • A dn?zcic A,vh ta* Inc Men To: Mark Roberts, Associate Planner, City of Tigard 'FAX b84.-7 2 7 Froth:. Tames E. Andrews AIA 2: t�A F� cc: Date: January 13, 1999 Subject Neighborhood Notification for SDR 98-0026(Pittman & Brooks Expansion) We have received your notice of incomplete submission. This memo addresses Item 1,.the Documentation of the Neighborhood Meeting. We will contact Brian Rager directly, with copies to you.. regarding Items 2 & 3 relating to storm water. IWe requested from Oregon Title Insurance Company a list of property owners within 500' of 1' the subject site. They first sent us a list of property owner within 2,500' which ran to 11 ' ± pages and included 270 names, all the properties as far west as 81st Avenue. The corrected list included just 5 properties, which is correct since this is an industrial park area and the.parcels j are quite large. They sent us a full sheet'property report for each parcel, which.I would be glad to furnish to you if you request, but I will just list the parcels and owners below: 15175 S.W. 72nd Avenu, John Rallis 1000 Columbia Avenue Linwood, Pa 19061 The railroad line Southern Pacific Transportation { 1700 Farnam St. #10th Omaha, Ne 68102 7257 S.W. Kable Ln 15115 S.W. Sequoia Prk'vy 15055 S.W. Sequoia Prky Pacific Realty Associates 15350 S.W Sequoia Parkway #300-Wm Portland, Or 97224 The affidavits of Mailing and Posting were delivered to the City by The Owner, Randy Pittman,when he mailed the notices and posted the site He turned them in at the .r'e'ception counter, so I trust you will find them ins the file somewhere. I spoke with Patty Lunsford. - yesterday and she was beginning a search. i 205 S.E. Grand Avenue Suite 207 Portland, OR 97214 Tel(503 239-4387 Fax (503) 231.3369 i E-mail: andrarch @cyberhighway.net Web: www.andrews-architects.com ' 2/T 'd Sla31IHJelti SM32IQNb tiE:t T 66, ET Ntif Mark Roberts, Associar -lanner 1/13/1999 Page 2 The neighborhood meeting was held on December 17th at the offices of'Pittman and Brooks. • The only persons in attendance were the owners and myself, as noted on the attendance sheet which was submitted. We know the notices went out because Randy Pittman received a phone call from the adjacent owner,who lives in Pennsylvania, advising that the property was • for sale. Please let me know as soon as possible if there is a problem finding the lffidavits. When I gave Randy Pittman the list of names for mailing and the affidavits to execute I did not realize lie would turn them in separate from the Design Review Application. • • 205 S.E. Grand Avenue Suite 207 Portland,OR 97214 Tel(503 239-4387 Fax(503)231-3369 • I • 1 E-mail: andrarch@cyberhighway.ner Web: www.andrews-architects_corn SI3aLIH3ad SM361INU 26:TT 66, ET NUf • irvemAti. e311422z) P.c.- . r,trZ Aker ■_ A • )-T- 1 21 1 7/ 0(3 F.v41 '4'2.25-- (A.2 '7 Z NP AVG_, Ntnew_ A 12.,. .845 _ k4 1 . • f uor 2:69 -4-3F1 2-0 5" G.42..e414 V PivE*2-07 fte,--cbA4412, (71 Rmive•A 812o0ks p,rr,JMiv 8Rooks, PC (cii:34- 9233 - /5255 sled 72ND A vE, R38-21 N DJ O2 9722.4 #2.4-w,c74-1.4. —Apacire-5 44 January 22, 1999 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Randall Brooks Brooks & Pittman Rentals 15255 SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 RE: Notice of Complete Submittal - SDR 98-0026 (Pittman & Brooks Expansion) Dear Mr. Brooks: This letter is to inform you that your application for Site Development Review (City file reference: SDR 98-0026) was deemed complete effective 1/20/99, and has been accepted by the Planning Division. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171. Sincerely, / ../2 ie,____..„7x_.1-7( Mark J. Roberts i- Associate Planner i:\curpin\mir\sdr\sdr98-26.cmp c: • Jim Andrews Andrews Architects 205 SE Grand Avenue, #207 Portland, OR 97214 • SDR 98-0026 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 . _ . AndrewsArchitect Inc December 21, 1998 NARRATIVE FOR SITE DESIGN REVIEW PITTMAN & BROOKS OFFICE BUILDING 15225 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Tigard, Oregon Note: This narrative is formatted for the earlier zoning code under which the preapplication conference was held, in order to more directly respond to the notes from the preapplication conference. 18.68 Industrial Park Zone Requirements 18.68.030 Permitted Uses The proposed uses are allowed uses: Professional Offices are allowed in paragraph 18.68.030 A.2.1 Children's Daycare is allowed (up to 20% of the square footage) in paragraph 18.68.030 A.2.o(ii). Proposed Daycare is 14% of the total. 18.68.040 Conditional Uses There are no conditional uses proposed 18.68.050 Dimensional Requirements The site meets the dimensional requirements of the zone. A Variance is requested to allow reduction of the front setback from 35' to 30'. No side yard or rear yard setbacks are required(site does not abut residential zone) The proposed building height of 26' is within the allowable 45' height. The proposed 48% site coverage is within the allowable 75% site coverage. The proposed 52% landscape area is greater than the required 25% landscape area. 18.100 Landscaping and Screening Street trees are proposed, as required The landscape plan provides required trees and screening at parking No general buffering or screening is required 18.102 Visual Clearance Areas The proposal maintains the 30' Clear Vision zone where driveways intersect the street. 18.106 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements The proposed 21 offstreet parking spaces includes 18 spaces for the office use (6,329 s.f. / 350 s.f. = 18 cars) plus 3 parking spaces for daycare staff. 205 S.E. Grand Avenue Suite 207 Portland, OR 97214 Tel (503) 239-4387 Fax(503) 231-3369 E-Mail: andrarch@cyberhighway.net Web: www.andrews-architects.com Site Design Review Narrai.. Pittman& Brooks Office Addition Page 2 The proposed 21 offstreet parking spaces include 17 standard size spaces(9' x 18') and 4 compact size spaces (8' x 15'). The 10 standard size parking spaces along the north property line include a 3' bumper overhang beyond the paving. The proposed van-accessible handicap parking space meets the requirement in State and Federal Codes to provide one accessible space for the first 25 parking spaces. The proposed two bicycle parking spaces under the porch roof at the rear office entrance meet the requirement for one bicycle parking space per 15 cars. 18.108 Access, Egress and Circulation The proposed two 24' paved accesses complies with the requirement to provide a minimum of one 24' paved access. The proposal includes walkways from all building entrances to the public sidewalk along 72nd Avenue. 18.114 Signs The proposed signage 18.116 Solid Waste and Recycling The proposed designated recycling area exceeds the 36 sq. ft. required. The collection vehicle can turn around onsite by backing into the handicap parking aisle, then leaving the site in a forward manner. The handicap parking aisle is oversized to 10' wide to accommodate this maneuver. 205 S.E. Grand Avenue Suite 207 Portland, OR 97214 Tel(503) 239-4387 Fax(503) 231-3369 E-Mail: andrarch@cyberhighway.net Web: www.andrews-architects.com A ndrews A rditects Inc December 21, 1998 NARRATIVE STATEMENT FOR ZONING VARIANCE/ADJUSTMENT PITTMAN & BROOKS OFFICE BUILDING 15255 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Tigard, Oregon Pittman & Brooks, P.C. is an accounting firm with offices located at 15255 S.W. 72nd Avenue. The existing building was originally built in 1978 as a contractor's office. This located the building on the site and established a front setback of 30 feet. An addition was constructed in 1984 at the rear of the building. Remodeling of the main stair in 1996 also included a very small addition of space toward the rear of the building. The existing building has a ground footprint of 1,987 sq. ft. and is a two story wood frame structure with brick veneer. The proposal will add a new lobby and two story office addition at the north of the existing building and will add a one story addition to provide daycare for employee's children at the south of the existing building. The proposed office addition setback will exceed the required 35' front setback and is in compliance. The proposed daycare addition will be set back 30' and will align with the existing building front. The proposed daycare addition will require the variance/adjustment. The variance/adjustment is necessary to allow the owners reasonable use of their site because the unusual shape of the site as platted is a hardship. The site is an acute triangular shaped parcel formed by the intersection of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way with the S.W. 72nd Avenue right-of-way. The acute angle shape of the site makes the site increasingly unusable toward the south as the lot depth decreases to zero. The depth of the lot from 72nd Avenue doesn't even reach the 35' required front setback for 110' of the frontage along 72nd Avenue. The 35' front setback requirement takes up 47% of the total site area because the site shape is sharply triangular. If the site were the same area but square in shape, the 35' setback would take up 22% of the site. If this were an industrial site of five acres and square shape, the 35' setback would take up just 7% of the site. In the area where the variance is requested (south of the existing building) the lot depth varies from 78' to 66', so a full 35' setback would take up nearly 50% of the lot depth. The proposed 30' setback for the one-story addition matches the existing 30' setback for the original two-story office building. 205 S.E. Grand Avenue Suite 207 Portland, OR 97214 Tel(503)239-4387 Fax(503) 231-3369 E-Mail: andrarch @cyberhighway.net Web: www.andrews-architects.com Zoning Variance/Adjust. At Narrative Pittman& Brooks, P.C., 15255 S.W. 72nd Ave., Tigard 1 12/21/98 The Pittman & Brooks site is the only nearby parcel along the west side of S.W. 72nd Avenue which is zoned I-P. The I-P zone is generally along the east side of 72nd, crossing to the west side only for the Pittman & Brooks parcel. While this zoning reflects the original and existing use of the site it has a greater front setback requirement (35 feet) than the adjacent neighboring properties which have a 30 foot front setback requirement. It is reasonable to allow the same front setback for the Pittman & Brooks site as is allowed on adjoining parcels. 205 S.E. Grand Avenue Suite 207 Portland, OR 97214 Tel(503) 239-4387 Fax(503) 231-3369 E-Mail: andrarch@cyberhighway.net Web: www.andrews-architects.com -.-t--;-„milif , ww, Nlyzio,\ Mil-, _____________.______......., . eir(----__:.-- Alis ,- 1 ,1 ...,., atlf. \\, , ani, ___ . , , 1 , let ,t •-e-.7-- .. •''''' li.' \ ■\ rill . .1 ...C., `1 I `�. 1/ .o . .p. - .. i'/ l�/i, [!j i . =,r ' j�l i-- \ I / � , Ili' 1 .../.._..s.---.1.. . .........‘.., t 1 ,,,,\ Ili 1 _ -c-i-..... I it 1 I ' '1 I i i '. i \ L 1 i I I I IT/ I ' 1 01 M.. ...... I *"'. fr ,.--7-1% e ,,,, 1 , , .1. , - L.. ) - L/ / LI .' // /i I. 1/1.r 41 1 - 1 '77-- • i i II i i 0 \ I fi 1 i�� ���/y->�,vi ,i ?�►�; :.,�J _.1 ._ • ` y'.�� /� i�. :-,/,%, _ �� '7� t, ..�3> Ise _ I `1 , :. NElq\'( j ;/f7K—ILI 11;' °k% —: " ' 1 tt A t 1.1, , , . — ,,lc-',fig;Ilk.:_i,),HI Ai.... ,- , ' - :t //,,.C.�� + it , r- \ /'��`'�•1 ,� �f, rr ! . , ....4.0mi -,, w . ..,,) %\a ( -, / —, ,..4 _ ,. 8 . , ..........:. -yr,.-r-7:Th ..,, „,.../ ,.„/ 41. .74 i' I tip )111\1; \\,s'\„ 4 ) ' 1" (.. \ •,' I . , ._, ,, ,s__,--• il:- '''''r., ..: ,MIMS '—) 3 A• °--' 7,./ .4 ,! r—t, r., ‘1 .1- .- ■ ) ` . $ % .. - k : -ti. :—C__;-:" 'f:.. ''---(:,:i ii" .-.1 ..-...j --`.?- I ..41,(0..i' ' VI- . 14..-_,,"" - \1 * . fa 7 ''4,: -----7. ,-.:-) i', ''‘ 2 I- 'V--..------=-1 .' ') ' ..... ii"..A \,,,, . ' '';-- \ \).''.77:-'756' - i (Tri � — ....J .r '.. -- 1 ^� l� .fir /ll�i3O �hi4 ,g, _yip i ..... �� ,S v'' it ' n!1- - /y PITTMAN & BROOKS, P.C. 0-. 4 —I 15255 S.W. 72nd AVENUE <ID TIGARD, OREGON 97224 I 94046617 Washington County Page 1 of` - STATE OF OREGON 1 1 SS County of Washington I, Jerry f VHan@QJT, Director of Assess- ment and-Thxatton .and;ExX)ffluo County i Clerk for'iAountvreio-Peres ty na the within instruntentpf writing was received and recorded'.i ,pool Qt•tecords:of said county:, Jerry A Hanson, Director of Assessment and Ta ation, Ex- Offfcio County Doc : 94046617 38 . 00 Rect: 122241 05/12/1994 01 : 54: 46PM 0 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Randall C. Brooks and Randa K. Pittman, Grantors, convey and warrant to Brooks & Pittman Rentals, an Oregon general partnership, Grantee, the real property and improvements commonly known as 15255 SW 72nd Avenue, Portland, Washington County, Oregon, and more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference . The property is free from liens and encumbrances except those of record on the date hereof and those specified on Exhibit A . The true consideration for this conveyance is $10 . 00 and other v,!.luable consideration . 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 RACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30 . 930 . DATED this ,:J Tyr. day of WV , 1994 . R ndall C . Brooks ‘anda K . Pittman •tar, OFFICIAL SEAL STATE OF OREGON O l NOTARY GREGO C•OREGON ) SS �� COMMISSION NO.016421 County of Washington ) MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG.25.1896 On the date above, Randall C. Brooks and Randa K. Pittman personally appeared before me and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act and deed . Subscribed and sworn to before me this ' day of �jt�l.Gi=1 , 1994 . 1CloCary/t)4b is for Oregon S�n? av ~ aterle."=s to . Brooks & P_r tmar. Rentals 15255 SW 72nd Avenue Portland, OR 97224 After recording return to : Gregory E. Harris , Esq. PO Box 2083 Portland, OR 97208-2083 PNTROFFC EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION SHEET See Page 1 for vesting and encumbrances , if any . Description of the tract of land which is the subject of this report : A tract of land situated in the Northwest one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 12 , Township 2 South , Range 1 West . of the Willamette Meridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon , being a part of Lot 45 , FANNO CREEK ACRE TRACTS , being more particularly described as follows, to-wit: • Beginning at the most Southerly corner of said Lot 45 , FANNO CREEK ACRE TRACT, which Southerly corner is the point of intersection of the Westerly right of way line of S .W. 72nd with the Easterly right of way line of the Southern Pacific Transportation Co . ' s Tillamook Branch main tract ( 10C foot right of way) ; thence along said Easterly right of way line, North 17° 21 ' West by deed description • (Plat computes North 17° 42 ' 10 " West) 442 . 87 feet; thence leaving said railroad Easterly right of way line, North 89° 57 ' 20 ' East 134 . 34 feet to said Westerly right of way line of S .W . 72nd Avenue ; thence along said Westerly right of way line South 0° 02 ' 40" East, plat bearing, (Deed description South 0° 00 ' 16" East) 422 . 00 feet to the most Southerly corner of Lot 45 and the place of beginning. EXCEPTING AND RESERVING HEREFROM a 10 . 00 foot wide easement for road .purposes being Westerly , adjacent and contiguous to the Westerly right of way line of said S .W. 72nd Avenue , said easement being a portion of that easement to Washington County dated August 6 , 1965 and recorded September 15 , 1965 in Book 569 , Pace 134 , Deed Records . FURTHER EXCEPTING AND RESERVING HEREFROM a strip taken for road purposes being Westerly , adjacent and contiguous tc the Westerly right-of-way line of S.W. 72nd Avenue, said strip described in that dedication deed to the public recorded November 10 , 1983 , fee number 83-41687, Deed Records. FURTHER EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion lying below a depth of 500 feet , measured vertically, from the contour of the surface of said property. • • 1 - EXHIBIT A • RECEIVED PLANNING AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE NOV 3 01998 CITY OF TIGARD 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, Randall C. Brooks , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed Development affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) 15255 S.W. 72nd Avenue. Tigard. Oregon_ , and did on the 25th day of November 19 98 personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a Site Development Review application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at the curbside of 72nd Avenue in front of the telephone pole next to the Pittman & Brooks, P.C. sign. (state location you posted notice on property) G Si nature (In the presence of a Notary Public) • (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETEINOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the day of Atn&Ittlz ____, 19ff OFFICIAL SEAL LEONA J HEMPEL �` •Li.4IAd� 1 `r7� NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON NOTARY PUBLI /OF OREGO COMMISSION NO.050643 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JAN.24, 2000 My Commission Expires: i.' .Ao045 (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) ■ANIE OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: Pittman $ $rooFCs, TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Office and Daycare Addition to Office Building Name of Applicant/Owner. Randall C. nooks I Address or General Location of Subject Property: 15155 5.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon LSubject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): J h:UogintpattyVnasterslatfpost mst • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING RECEIVEppAnMING • Nov 3U1998 STATE OF OREGON c�r�roFr, )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Randall C. Brooks • being duly sworn, depose and say that on November 25 , 19.21 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) 15255 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 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 Tigard, Oregon with postage prepaid thereon. e r2/Loir144---- ignature .. (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON,NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the a� day of 4/31: 31.1&_, 192 OFFICIAL SEAL LEONA J HEMPEL NOTARMISSY PUBLIC-ORN Jr-C451444— COMION NO.050643 EGO MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JAN. 24, 2000 NOTARY PUBLI OF ORE ON My Commission Expires: tfaqcv (Applicant,please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) LAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: Pittman & Brooks, P.C. TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Office and Daycare Addition to Office Building I Name of Applicant/Owner. Randall C. Brooks Address or General Location of Subject Property: 15255 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon !Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): h:IogeApattyimastarsutfmad.mSt Mr. John Rallis 15175 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97224 Pacific Realty Associates 15350 S.W. Sequoia Parkway Suite 300-Wm Portland, Oregon 97224 Southern Pacific Transportation 1700 Farnam Street, #10th Omaha,Nebraska 68102 Ms. Sue Rorman 11250 S.W. 82nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 Mr. Craig Hopkins 7430 S.W. Varns Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 Mr. Mark Mahon 11310 S.W. 91st Court Tigard, Oregon 97223 Mr. Pat Wyden 8122 S.W. Spruce Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 Pittman & Brooks, p.c. Certified Public \ccountants 15255 till 72nd 1%enuc Portland. Oregon 97224 (503)1184-9233 F-\.\ 1503)68-1-6-459 November 24, 1998 Mr. Pat Wyden 8122 S.W. Spruce Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Office and Daycare Addition to Office Building for Pittman& Brooks, P.C. 15255 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon Dear Mr. Wyden: My company, Pittman & Brooks, is the owner of the property located at 15255 S.W. 72nd Avenue in Tigard. We are proposing an addition to the building to provide six additional accountant offices and daycare facilities for children of staff at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, we would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Thursday, December 17, 1998 Pittman & Brooks, P.C. 15255 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 7:00 p.m. PST 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 contact me directly at 684-9233 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Randall Brooks Pittman & Brooks, P.C. cncply Enclosure •�•�••* _ . 1 �••� - - - .......... t5,0.0.•""'''' _ .....,. , ___ , ...._ �• I .. I _ ••, .•• . — — EXISTING •• • " NEW I • �( •••• fu* ,,,"41V,, " OFFICE • �� t<'4✓ i ADDITION I 1 S9�0 — i •✓ EXISTING . .r .1 . NEW r, I I 00 DAYCARE p ADDITION BIKE RACK — Wa I — 1. t - — — .4 - tti" PI_AYTYAR� ti :; 1 j/jib N i .: J — !" `I o 18._O.. 24'-0'1, ' 15-01 BIB PIMMI.11 CO 4'-0' -- # E SiA A -4 0`P' NEW PUBLIC bIDEWf N r b-ea $l PUBLIODEWIf4CAJ >I S . W . 72nd AVENUE (A1.01\SITE PLAN LEGEND SITE DATA 1 —20 -0 LAND USE ZONE: I-P INDUSTRIAL PARK ■.6�����••�����VI ASPHALT PAVING STREET SETBACK: 30' PROPOSED, EXISTING (35' REQUIRED) ',�� no-0' 20'-0- 4O'-0- 80'-O • . .0 SITE COVERAGE: 48%PROPOSED (75% ALLOWED) CONCRETE SLAB — `" LANDSCAPE AREA: 52X PROPOSED (25X REQUIRED) [.``•. PLAYGROUND SAFETY SURFACE CAR PARKING' 23 SPACES PROPOSED (21 SPACES REQUIRED) OFFICE & DAYCARE ADDITION for BICYCLE PARKING: 2 SPACES PROPOSED (2 SPACES REQUIRED) PITTMAN & BROOKS, P.C. 15255 S.W. 72nd AVENUE BUILDING DATA TIGARD1 OREGON 97224 EXISTING OFFICE 1st FLOOR 2.036' 2nd FLOOR 2,036' PROPOSED OFFICE 1st FLOOR 1,338' 2nd FLOOR 919' ANDREWS ARCHITECTS PROPOSED DAYCARE 1st FLOOR ,070' Suite 207 at The Osbom TOTAL 1st FLOOR 4,4414' 205 S.E. Grand Ave., Portland, Or 97214 Tel. (503) 239-4387 TOTAL 2nd FLOOR 2,955' Fox (503) 231-3369 �� a ' '••� �,. ���••• r ..'•• i. ei...' I TERRACE ..e,r ',.,--{I •.1.1 6M { ('Iu•::::::.i NEW '• I .••� °Sr *'"'.BI L ADDITION i • . .11.,1,,,,,,L)._1 a 5900 / �q �� EXISTING e �• u •� STORY e Y {� �i 1 ' OF >1 �' r T •--- NAW CARE a 1 I _., .._• • • • • HER ! ph / ADDITION BIKE RACK ' ' p1% GE ' rr.`N 0 0 . I t / I r�1 .l. ,t I Z•• . 1 .. �-----._•1 _.._�; '18::-..o-...j,. .24,_0.' 15'=d3`` i AIL — — — — — — , 1w1 24-0•—• - - '4.....0.0."Y�i�... 41: w. 1' •' �A — — ;— 1 • : • f1U4 . . .., �' -b-Ep•, N 94 PUBUO•SIDEWAIK. , • f MEW PIIBUC �IOEN •� `.. ', •. �' — S .W . 72nd AVENUE SITE PLAN \ (A1.01� 1 i•=20'-0" U LEGEND SITE DATA LAND USE ZONE: I-P INDUSTRIAL PARK •••U I I I I •UUUU•U UI ASPHALT PAVING STREET SETBACK: 30' PROPOSED, EXISTING (35' REQUIRED) -0' 20'-0' 40'-0' 801-o" . . . . ..• •. •. SITE COVERAGE: 48%PROPOSED (75% ALLOWED) :•''• .' CONCRETE SLAB LANDSCAPE AREA: 52% PROPOSED (25%REQUIRED) PLAYGROUND SAFETY SURFACE CAR PARKING: 23 SPACES PROPOSED (21 SPACES REQUIRED) OFFICE & DAYCARE ADDITION for BICYCLE PARKING: 2 SPACES PROPOSED (2 SPACES REQUIRED) PITTMAN & BROOKS, P.C. 15255 S.W. 72nd AVENUE BUILDING DATA , OREGON 97224 EXISTING OFFICE TIGARD 1st FLOOR 2.036' 2nd FLOOR 2.036' PROPOSED OFFICE 1st FLOOR 1,338' 2nd FLOOR 919' ANDREWS ARCHITECTS PROPOSED DAYCARE ^ 1st FLOOR 1,070' '-( Suite 207 at The Osborn TOTAL 1st FLOOR 4,444' 205 S.E. Grand Ave., Portland, Or 97214 Tel. (503) 239-4387 TOTAL 2nd FLOOR 2.955' Fax (503) 231-3369 PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES I "•�.J:�t-t- �'^.:_ c°A-r.#..5,:7'.^w:t yi.]:R e}.r `4'�t• ii+Pr�,L.P!.i.i"�Tka' drift_.. • R%.**D." �.M�('y c ''Her{1.i. .;i{hh'rvG .+ice h+ -•-�I- _ 71.x. . c;*Jn "_igrk 0 40 ^ vtA - Tt� ,•�'fa±V'J PPLI.CATIO CONFER NCENOTES a fir` " a`+ sal . �^ Y a y . & � tL C011illllllll DClkllftllj '= ;[Pre-Applicallon Meath' Nate. are all�� oriSix-;[6l,Months -511aPhig A Weiter Co NON-RESIDENTIAL PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: • L7 'to STAFF AT PRE-APP.: L1at, 11./ APPLICANT: rpi-Mq\P'N StP.ay."5 -�c�x�.n-�S AGENT: `L& /A2glS Phone:( l Phone: ( - 4- 7 PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GEN.LOCATION: l 9 Z_2 Su./ 72-( -Av TAX MAP(SJ/LOT#1S1: ZS l 12 ) 't"G-d NECESSARY APPLICATIONESI: - — e-' 1 V'A. cc�: if.,.111=w i es S ` S��S PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: r ;Ns — -Two s �` �� r;�1 > > t . 0`tP*\, ,,NCc, ( Die-aa COMPREHENSIVE PLAN r(vj s . MAP DESIGNATION: l(AUS C- f ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: �- r (.-1-1\AL)cr r CJ.T.AREA: FACILITATOR: ----- PHONE: [5031 ZQP ING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS �� MINIMUM LOT SIZE: /4/Pc-sq. f Average lot width: 50 ft. Maximum building height: 4 ft. Setbacks:__,_Front _ft.___ ft. Rear 1\/(A ft. Corner Zo ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: ZS %. [Refer to Code Section 18. l Tv z ��of ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL RE RE E Aix � QUI M RENTS MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as .: of a partition must ha - a •'nimum of 15 feet o r. age or have a minimum 15- oot wide acce.s ea--ment. e DEPTH (IF ALL •TS SHALL N• EXCEED • TIMES HE AVERA - • •TH, unle - the pa el is les than 1 time e mini • m lot size of the app ..le zoning district. efer t 1 Code Section 18.164.1 -Lots) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Pagel of 10 NON-l.sldoatlal SaalIcatloa/Plaaala0 OMsloa Soctlaa SPECIAL SETBACKS j STREETS: ( feet from the centerline of S� 1 Z �1 . ESTABLISHED AREAS: _.--- feet feet from - . LOWER INTENSITY ZONES:_ ._, feet, along the site's boundary. FLAG LOT: 10-FO• _JOB% AR�SETBACK. • : 1 1 leS in .m118.96] SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PRO ) BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPT1014S - Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a N height of 75 feet provide-TT-Fiat: 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 (1/1) of the building's height; and The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. (Refer to Code ection 18.98.0201 co 7 PARKING AND ACCESS " � 4t1 RU D parking for this type of use: SIAc..E * J •� \, -_ ng SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): 2 c SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: -0(As �- �- Ck.AscaavLA Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): L-t- NO MORE THAN 40% of required spaces may be designated and/or dimensioned as compact spaces. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 8 inches x 18 feet. Compact parking space dimensions: 8 feet x 15 feet. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three(3) feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. 2efer to Code Section 18.106.0201 Handicapped Parking: All parking are shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED _ DISABLE SON 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 sym 1-skull-be- •.inted on the parking space surface and an appropriate si.n shall be posted. BICYCLE : ' ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIA AND INDUSTRIAL II ELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas •rotected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Bicycle parking spaces shall be provided on the basis of one space for every fifteen (15) required vehicular parking spaces. Minimum number of accesses: l Minimum access width: . Minimum pavement width: 7.4 ' All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. . (Refer to Code Section 18.106 and 18.108] CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 10 Will-iasli••tlal Ajollcatla./Rlaa.iq Milan Section W Kul IAY REQUIREMENTS WALKWAY ALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GR• - • FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. (Refer to Code Section 18.108.050) LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS E ery COMMER - OR IND► TRIAL BUILDING IN EXCES • 10,01, SQUARE FEET shathbe p ovided wi • a loading space. he space size and I.•. ion shall be a• a•prov .y the City E •in-- . [Refer to Code Section 18.106.070-0901--J • VISION AREA The C•.. requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE AND EIGHT IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the requ1red el area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification. I[Refer to Code lion 18.1021 BUFFERING AND SCREENING In order TO INC= a SE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE • c _ . - PACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.1001 The REQUIRED BUFFER WIDTHS which are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. /je feet along west boundary. IN AD ITI N, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: (V6,4- LANDSCAPING STR TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR IVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised planters. For detailed information on design requirements for parking areas and accesses. [Refer to Code Chapters 18.100,18.106 and 18.108) CRY OF T1GARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 18 NSN-1alr.■naI4ivatl.U►iinl■r eM:lo.section air SI N PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of igard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for review before the Hearings Officer. [Refer to Code Section 18.1141 SENSITIVE LANDS the Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS f E •ND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCES • ' PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. S .ff will attempt to preliminary identif ensitive la is areas at the pre- application co' erence based on available information. HO VER, the respo sibilitv to precisely identif sen ive lands areas and their boundaries is t - res.onsibili of the a.•licant. Areas meeting t e definitions of sensitive lands must be cl:.rly indicated on plans s►.mitted with the •evelo.' ent application. NNW Chapter 18.84 also provides regulation e - - use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. ESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. [Refer to Code Section 18.841 STEEP SLOPES Wh STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be sub itted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code I Se tion 18.84.040.B. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of 18.84.040.B.2 and 1 .i 84.040.B.3. UNIFIED S RAGE AGENCY NSA] : ER STANDARDS,R a 1 96-44 •ND DEVELOPME►. ADJACENT TO SEN`ITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a egetated corrido or a buffer wide enough • protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive .:rea. ID esi.n Crite• a: he VEG ATED CORRIDOR SHALL Br A MINIMUM OF 25-FEET-WIDE, measured horizontally, rom the defined boundaries of the sensi ive area, except where approval has been granted by the .,gency'or City to reduce the width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or Oilltio reduce the width of a portion of t/e vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an area of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable encroachment shall be 15 eet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the length of the vegetate corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in width. In any case, the a erage width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. / !r____ Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, co. struction activities, gardens, I. • s, application of chemi-als, dumping of any materials of any ind, or other activities shall 0- permitted which otherwise •-tract from the water quality protection p ovided by the vegetate. -orridor, except as allowed belo A GRAVEL WALKWAY OR :IKE PATH, NOT - CEEDING 8 FEET IN WIDTH. If t•e walkway or bike path is paved, then the vegetated • ridor must be widened by the width t• the path. A paved or gravel walkway or bi'--bath 'may not be constructed closer than 1 n feet from the boundary of the sensitive area, unless approved by the Agency or City. W. kways and bike paths shall be constructed so as to minimize disturbance to existing vegetatio ; -nd CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Anollcatlon Conference Notes Page 41011 NSM1sslde Ual Appllcotlpo/Tlaaolog DMsloa S.ctlo. WATEF3 •UALI ' FAULITIES may encroach into the vegetateu corridor a maximum of 10 feet with the appro .1 of the Agency or City. Location of Ve.: ated Corridor: IN ANY RESIT NTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and all not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. (' fer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3,Design for SWMI WATER RESO CES OVERLAY DISTRICT The WATER RESOURCES (WR) OVERLAY DISTRICT implements the policies of the Tigard C prehensive Plan and is intended to resolve conflicts between development and conservation o significant wetlands, streams and riparian corridors identified in the City of Tigard Local etlands Inventory. Specifically-,-this cha• : allows reasonable economic use of property while stablishing clear Ord objective standards ta: protect significant wetlands and streams; limit evelopme designated riparian corridors; aintain and enhance water quality; maximize flood sto capacity; preserve native plant cover; inimize streambank erosion; maintain and enhance fish and wildlife habitats; and conserve s -nic, recreational and educational values of water resource areas. Safe Harbor: The WR OVERLAY DISTRICT ALSO ' ETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 (Natural Resources) and the ":afe harbor" provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660, Division 23). These provisions require that "significant" wetlands and riparian corridors be mapped and protected. The Tuala n River, which is also a "fish-bearing stream," has an average annual flow of more than 1000 cfs. Major Streams: Streams which are mapped as FISH-BEARING STREAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry and have an average annual flaw less than 1000 cubic feet per second (cfs). > Major streams in Ti2ard include FANNO CREEK, ASH CREEK (EXCEPT THE NORTH FORK AND OTHER RIBUTARY CREEKS) AND BALL CREEK. Minor Streams: Streams which are NOT ISH-BEARING STREAMS" according to Oregon Department of Forestry maps . Minor streams in Tigard include Summer Creek, Derry Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and ce ain short tributaries of the Tualati - Riparian Setback Area: This AREA IS MEASURED ORIZO Y FROM AND PARALLEL TO MAJOR STREAM OR TUALATIN RIVER TOP-OF-BANKS, OR THE EDGE OF AN ASSOCIA ED WETLAND, whichever is greater. The riparian setback is the same as the "riparian corridor boundary" in OAR 660-23- 090(1)(d). The standard TUALATIN RIVER RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 5 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. The MAJOR STREAMS RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 50 FEE ', unless modified in accordance with this chapter. ISOLATED WETLANDS AND MINOR STREAMS (inc ding adjacent wetlands) have no riparian setback; however, a 25-foot `water quality buffe is required under Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) standards adopted and administered by t e City of Tigard. (Refer to Code Section 18.85.0101 CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 11 Mop-4ulautlal4rliaa•./PIa.dog Melon Section Riparian Setback Reductions The DIRECTOR MA PROVE a SITE-SPECIFIC REDUCTION OF THE TUALATIN RIVER OR ANY MAJOR ST AM RIPARI a SETBACK BY AS MUCH AS 50% to allow the placement of structures or ' pervious surfac- otherwise prohibited by this chapter, provided that equal or better protection or identified major tream resources is ensured through streambank restoration and/or enhancement of riparian ve.-tation in preserved portions of the riparian setback area. Eligibility for Riparian Setback in Disturbed Areas. TO BE ELIGIBLE FO /A RIPARIAN SETBACK REDUCTION, the applicant must demonstrate that the riparian corridor as substantially disturbed at the time this regulation was adopted. This determination mus be based on the Vegetation Study required by Section 18.85.050.0 that demonstrates all the following: > Native plant species currently cover less than 80% of the on-site riparian corridor area; • The tree canopy currently covers less than 50% of the on-site riparian corridor and healthy trees have not been removed from the on-site riparian setback area for the last five years; > Thai vegetation was not removed contrary to the provisions of Section 18.85.050 regulating re oval of native plant species; > Tat there will be no infringement into the 100-year floodplain; and > he average slope of the riparian area is not greater than 20%. — -4Referto Code Section 18.85.100) %'TREE REMOV, PLAN REQUIREMENTS A TR:E PAN FOR - - T , ND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a _ - :h-:.1 ..rest sh- _—provided for any lot, parcel combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, major part .'on, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferreo over removal where possible. THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: > Identification of the location, size and species of all =■ isting 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 gui.-lines of Section 18.150.070.D. according to the following standards: Retainage of less than 25% of existing gees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 1 :.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; b Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing rees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be m igated according to Section 18.150.070.0; r* Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing tree over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D; b Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; > Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.150.070.D. (Refer to Code Section 18.150.025) CITY Of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 10 N011-I.shleatlal Nsfcatl.t/Mattlt/Palsies Sadie' MYTifAnON REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: • A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. • If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. • If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. J� [Refer to Code Section 18.150.070[Dl NARRATIVE Th APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable proval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. lefer to Code Section 18.321 CODE SECTIONS / ka .0 18.80 18.92 718.102 / 18.116 ✓ 18.150 18.84 ✓18.96 _Z 18.106 / 18.120 18.160 _ 18.85 7 18.98 L 18.108 18.130 18.162 / 18.100 _ 18.114 / 18.134? 18.164 PACT STUDY As a ..rt of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to 11CLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.32,Section.0501 CITY OFTIMARA Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 11 NINI.tlIe■tlaI bruculoa/na■dq fM:loo section WHEN A CONDITION OF APPROVAL REQUIRES TRANSFER TO THE PUBLIC OF AN INTEREST IN REAL PROPERTY, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.32,Section.250) NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 250 FEET AND THE APPf3OPAIATE CIT FACILITATOR AND THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE ----IACOMMITTEE(S) of their proposal. A minimum of 2 weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout] SUBDIVISIO PLAT NAME RESERVATION PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SU: • I LAND USE APPLICATION w' the City of Tigard, appli ant's are required to cop glete and file - subdivision plat naming -guest the Washington Cou ty Surveyor's Office in order to obtai approvaVreservati.- for any sub.' .sion name. Appli._tions will no .e accepted as complete - ' the Ci. eceives the faxed con irmation of approv. •.. -- ounty of the Subdivision Name Reservation. (County Surveyors Office: 503-648-88841 /BUILDING PERMITS PLANS F BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVI UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by 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 OB INED.) RECYCLING Ap (cant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SLERVICING COMPATIBILITY with Pride Disposal's vehicles. CONTACT PERSON: Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal at (503) 625-6177. (Refer to Code Section 18.1161 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-ApplIcatlon Conference Notes Page 8 of 10 NON-I.sld..tlal Oaalicatlsa/?laaalag OMsloa Section • ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: A- ('a k £ P Fi02 ¢* ne.rtj ,-1 y -.n dd ter /,/ » m_ /2- ,L f>11 17-) .K- ,4 ± ()) PROCEDURE , 1 Administrative Staff Review. ,,w Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. ,i4 (, v►i`; �w170/1 - ' 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• e City Council. (6-------------PLICAT1ON SUBMITTAL PR I ESS All APPLICAT / S MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Comm Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications ---u•mitted 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 10-20 day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard p('s ri+h/ ;cc .0 •asic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available fr•m the " anning Division upo -••>.t. "' ''°. - A' '/4 t, ' 4s4v This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES IF TH 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. CITY UMW) Pm-Application Conference Notes Page 9 dill NON-issId•oUfl AAOIIcaUon/Plaealo0 OMslo•Safi.' PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of good site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide Information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: IIS�V Pcgeks- CllY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP.MEETING PHONE 15031639-4171 FAX: [5031684-7297 E-MAIL (staff's first name)@2cl.tigard.or.us I:UouIltlattiffV>i en1.prupptast [Umlauting Sanac masnnlpnrtao-c.euol 1pdatat 26-Ya1M8 CITY OF TIGARD Pro-Appncatlon Conference Notes Page 10 of t@ NS -1ss[dutlal MpfeetleU►[spplug OMstu Sectlos • PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES Adk •- ENGINEERING SECTION Ctlyut Tigard,Oregon ;'nrnmunit Devcio;;wenr Clazpirtp Better Cornmunth' It 25\ ICP PUBLIC FACILITIES The purpose of the pre-application conference is to: 2_c (1 .) Identify applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and ordinance provisions (2.) To provide City staff an opportunity to comment on specific concerns. (3.) To review the Land Use Application review process with the applicant and to identify who the final decision making authority shall he for the application. 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: (y• (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development ;ioplication for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: ( ) -et from cente't e. ( ) - — to feet fry centerline ( ) _ _ _ to eet from centerline. Street improvements: tom{ ( r'R-t street. improvements > l be necessary aion SW 1 L • Pe ttJE S�trcw�aL At-C1> Styr TRt°,�� t tc • •Elit ►4 r.fovT. — strr e: improvements will be necessary along ( Street improvement; on shall include feet of pavement from .enterline, plus the installation of curb and gutters. storm • er underground placement of uti wires (a fee may he collected if determined appra, late by th Engineering Department). a five- . t wide sidewalk (sidewalks may be requir•s to be wider on terials or major collector streets, or .1 the Central Business District), net-ssary street signs an,. traffic control devices. streetlights, a a tvio year streetlighting fee. ( ) Street improvements - _ shall include fee f pavement from centerline, plus the tiista = io oaf curb and gutters, storm sewers, undergrou placement of CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 5 Engineering OeparUnenl Section , utility wires (a fee me e collected if determined appropriP' by the Engineering Department, a five-foot wide sidew_..rc (sidewalks may be required to be .,der on arterials or major collet;t streets. or in the Central Business District) necessary street signs and traffic: control der streetlights. and a two year streetlighting fee. ( 1,✓ Section 18. 164. 120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhear ,ill t lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or. at the election of ..,., developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid This requ,'ement is valid e‘,. if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site if the fee in-lieu r; proposed. it is equal to $ 2.7 50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines Th re are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW ? Prior to 4&- 1/,106--itc/.L , the applicant shall either place these utilities underground. or pay the fee in-lieu described above. • some cases, where street improveme or other necessary public improver . are not currently pra. ical, the improvements may be e-ferret. In such cases, a condition • deve opment approval may •e specified which requires e prope owner(s) to execute a no -remonst .nce agreement which aives the property ow r s right to re onstrate against the for :tion of a to al improvement district. The following street provements may •e eligible for such an agreement (1 .) - — — - - --- -- - - (2 ) - Pe.estrianways/bikeways: Sanitary Sewers: 6� sepdtp, ^ °r-s — sawa__ The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) inch line which is located in . The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to Water Supply: < -) The r P .!> - Water District - Phone:(503) Cv9I-411( provides public water service in the area of this site. The District should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conterence Notes Page 2 o 5 ingtneering Oenartment Section Fire Protection Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (Contact Gene Bircrll,. (503) 526-2469) provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. A downstream analysts will also likely be necessary to determine if runoff from the proposed development will cause adverse impacts to the existing storm system downstream of the site. Sze ( a. pu,_t wl sue uc?-r .. V p•—A so w� sp APPL-kc 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 STORM WATER QUALITY The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant 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 he submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this protect ,.vii, require. i✓; Construction of an on-site water quality faciht,,) fns sew t ti IN t�G—cS.1btk. :Al)t Payment of the fee in-lieu. CITY OF TIGARO Pre-Annlication Conference Notes Page 3 of 5 Engineering pepartinenl Section TRAFFIC IMPACT•FEES In 1990. Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic. Impact Fee ; rIFI ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program :;oliects fees from new development based on thEr developments projected impact upon the City s transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. P �£ 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 Imes. This work may involve open trench work within the street. The permittee must submit a plan of the proposed work for review and approval. The cost of this type of permit is calculated as 4% of the cost of the work and is payable prior to Issuance of the permit in addition, the permittee will be required to post a bond or similar financial security for the work. 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 n•ork Prior to City acceptance of any permitted work. and prior to release of work assurance bond(s). the work shall be deemed complete and satisfactc: by the City in writing. The permittee rs 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. E3ulid�ndDivision Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits Issued by the wilding Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits. please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171 . ext. 304. CITY OF TIGARI] Pre-Application Conference Notes Page4of 5 �ngltieeriny Department Section Site Improvement F ,)it (SIT). This permit is genera 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. GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: . S 21 se, E GINEERING DEPART ENT STAFF Phone: [5031639-4171 Fax: [5031684-7297 h:\patty\masters\p reapp.eng (Master section:preapp-r.mst) 18-Nov-97 CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 5 Engineering Ilepertmeet Section CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST ,�, ��� ', CITY OF TIGARD The items on the checklist below are required for the succesful completion of your application submission requirements. This checklist identifies what is required to be submitted with your application. This sheet MUST be returned and submitted with all other applicable materials at the time you submit your land use application. See your application for further explanation of these items or call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. !1PLAnION Staff: 11 S Date:& RETED DOCUMENTS) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE ✓MARKED ITEMS II A) Application form (1 copy) B) Owner's signature/written authorization C) Title transfer instrument/or grant deed D) Applicant's statement No. of Copies E) Filing Fee $ SITE-SPECIFIC MAP(S)/PLAN(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE ✓ MARKED ITEMS II A) Site Information showing: No. of Copies I 1. Vicinity map 2. Site size & dimensions Er 3. Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10%) ES 4. Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds 5. Locations of natural hazard areas including: d (a) Floodplain areas Q, (b) Slopes in excess of 25% a' (c) Unstable ground (d) Areas with high seasonal water table r2' (e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential (1) Areas having severely weak foundation soils d 6. Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Map Inventory including: of (a) Wildlife habitats d (b) Wetlands 7. Other site features: (a) Rock outcroppings 0, (b) Trees with 6" + caliper measured 4 feet from ground level o' 8. Location of existing structures and their uses d 9. Location and type of on and off-site noise sources e' 10. Location of existing utilities and easements 11 . Location of existing dedicated right-of-ways d L{ND USE APPLICATION/LIST PACE 1 OF 5 • B) Site Development Plan Indicating: No. of Copies (3 1 . The proposed site and surrounding properties V 2. Contour line intervals 3. The location, dimensions and names of all: (a) Existing & platted streets & other public ways and easements on the site and on adjoining properties 2' (b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site [2, (c) Alternative routes of dead end or proposed streets that require future extension 4. The location and dimension of: (a) Entrances and exits on the site c/ (b) Parking and circulation areas o/ (c) Loading and services area g, (d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation cv (e) Outdoor common areas ar (f) Above ground utilities 2/ 5. The location, dimensions & setback distances of all: (a) Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities, and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet of the site t2/ (b) Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site 6. Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions 0/ 7. Sanitary sewer facilities ty 8. The location areas to be landscaped o, 9. The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques Q 10. The location of mailboxes d 11 . The location of all structures and their orientation d 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements d C) Grading Plan Indicating: No. of Copies 13 The site development plan shall include a grading plan at the same scale as the site analysis drawings and shall contain the following information: 1. The location and extent to which grading will take place indicating: (a) General contour lines (2' (b) Slope ratios Ef (C) Soil stabilization proposal(s) Q/ (d) Approximate time of year for the proposed site development a 2. A statement from a registered engineer supported by data factual substantiating: (a) Subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering report tY (b) The validity of sanitary sewer and storm drainage service proposals g' (c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated ra/ LAND USE APPLICATION/LIST PAGE 2 OF 5 D) Architectural Draw, Indicating: .1o. of Copies _12__ The site development plan proposal shall include: 1 . Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures proposed for use on-site 2. Typical elevation drawings of each structure E) Landscape Plan Indicating: No. of Copies _12__ The landscape plan shall be drawn at the same scale of the site analysis plan or a larger scale if necessary and shall indicate: 1 . Description of the irrigation system where applicable d 2. Location and height of fences, buffers and screenings 3. Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces ❑' 4. Location, type, size and species of existing and proposed plant materials d 5. Landscape narrative which also addresses: (a) Soil conditions (b) Erosion control measures that will be used F) Sign Drawings: GY Sign drawings shall be submitted in accordance with Chapter 18.114 of the Code as part of the Site Development Review or prior to obtaining a Building Permit to construct a sign. G) Traffic Generation Estimate: ❑ H) Prelimina Partition/Lot Line Ad'ustment Aw• Indicatin•: No. o Copies 1 . The e • ner of the subject •. cel ❑ 2. T•e owner's authori -. agent ❑ 3. he map scale :,50,100 or 200 feet- 1) inch north .rrow and date 0 4. Description parcel location and boundaries ❑ 5. Locatio., width and names of streets, easements . d other public w. within and adjacent to the parcel ❑ 6. ocation of all permanent buildings on and within 25 feet of all property lines ❑ 7. Location and width of all water courses ❑ 8. Location of any trees within 6" or great:r caliper at 4 feet above ground level ❑ 9. All slopes greater than 25% ❑ 10. Location of existing utilities and ut. ity easements ❑ 1 1 . For major land partition which cr-ates a public street: (a) The proposed right-of-way ocation and width ❑ (b) A scaled cross-section of e proposed street plus any reserve strip ❑ 12. Any applicable deed restrictio s ❑ 13. Evidence that land partition wi I not preclude effi t uu ure land division where applicable ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION./LIST PACE 3OE3 I) Subdivision Prelimii Plat Map and Data Indicating: Jo. of Copies 1. Scale equaling 30, 8,100 or 200 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per s - -t ❑ 2. The pro.•sed name of the subdivision ❑ 3. Vic.- ity map showing property's r lationship to arterial and .Ilector streets ❑ 4 Names, addresses and telepho e numbers of the owner, developer, engineer, surveyer and desig er (as applicable) ❑ 5. Date of application ❑ 6. Boundary lines of tract to .e subdivided ❑ 7. Names of adjacent subdi ision or names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of un ubdivided land ❑ 8. Contour lines related • a City-established benchmark at 2-foot intervals for 0-10% grades gr-:ter than 10% ❑ 9. The purpose, location, type and size of all the following (within and adjacent to the pr..osed subdivision): (a) Public and private right-of-ways and easements ❑ (b) Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines ❑ (c) Domestic ater mains including fire hydrants ❑ (d) Major p• er telephone transmission lines (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ (e) Waterc•urses ❑ (f) Deed r-servations for parks, open spaces, pathways and other land : cumbrances ❑ 10. Approxim. e plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grads and pipe sizes indicated on the plans ❑ 11 . Plan of t e proposed water distribution system, showing pipe sizes and the locat on of valves and fire hydrants ❑ 12. Approxi ate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of all streets includi g street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the pr000sed subdivision ❑ 13. Scaled , ross sections of proposed street right-of-w- ❑ 14. The Ioc.tion of all areas subject to inun ti-o oTf r storm water overflow ❑ 15. Location, idth & direction 91_11 all water courses & drainage-wa ❑ 16. The propose. : :.rations, approximate lot dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such lots. ❑ 17. The location of all trees with a diameter 6 inches or greater me. ured at 4 feet above ground level, and the location of proposed tree • antings ❑ 18. The existing uses of the property, including the location of . structures and the present uses of the structures, and a statement of hich structures are to remain after platting ❑ 19. Supplemental information including: (a) Proposed deed restrictions (if any) ❑ (b) Proof of property ownership ❑ (c) A proposed plan for provision of subdivisi•n improvements ❑ 20. Existing natural features including rock outcroppi :s, wetlands & marsh areas ❑ 21 . If any of the foregoing information cannot • acticably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated . to a narrative and submitted with the application ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION I LIST PAGE 4 OF 3 J) Solar Access Calculations: ❑ K) Other Information No. of Copies ❑ h:VogIn\patty\nastersU<icIist.mst May 23, 1995 LAND USE APPLICATION./LIST PAGE 5 OF 5 • S M T W T F *.'+`::'.•,::�}: ..}}y.... •::,,........,.a}x}ns}::•iiii?:;i;: ii ::i:::C;::;::;::;::;: ss:<zz:»i>:� :iiiii»iFi:F::i»»»»iFi}' .i:.>•:y:.::}.:••r::a.v}•,•}•>•>::•:.:.. +k•::.: .�::;:..::::.:::::..:::::•::::::::::.,.•::::::::::sir. '}.. •} � 13 14 12 11 10 1 9 1 . h.. 15 ...................:.............. •:+.•:::;•::::: ..i:i?•}}•;..}:?•:r:::rrr.':;.>:::.:::... ,sw:::.av:::;ss:•a .:. ::.;. ...................:..:................v...... ............. ,:::. is .':.... , ..}.•:,: "'v:F}'na''.Q}:F.`}n}.;...v.;•.•i::F:;titi:F:ti::.:•'. ':'.:,:,�:j;,?:•ivi^:;: ...............:....................:}v::": ... .�.:...,za},.:?•}:•>:.:::::}:. •'tax.:..:... •s .:X; rr,:,•F:5,7,�'`3.:r.::::.a::•}}'.'•>:•}>?:•va+:•.•.•}}:i<.•a.;::. •}.OFF:'::;: :::::::::::::::•.�::::::.}�:::::::.}�:;.:. ::• ... 16 17 18 19 20 21 2 '� :.,•.{r:.•:: rte•:: �, :.�r.:: : i'T +'}'•a:r}. lJ{:rr r .lki,. ............................... ...........:. ?,•.v;•.•;T:.+:rri•::::•.:..•F..:••::;.r•:� r�':./,r::: ....t}:R a:•:G. ha':: ,¢,, r rf:Y ../�{a'?+.v:•!!.... }'::�....r r,. .:ifi'FY?iii: +:.:•r:•.:..,�/ r/r..../rr....:K..r.....,r..... M1f:}:�:v::?..\ ...r{..:...... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 '•. 30 31 1� �' :> �.� � ����� <�� : :. �>>; »=�:: •::�' ..?ask ,�.:.................. 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 10.00 ................................ :•.!l. ;:•isjti:F::tititi•:,•.::''a.'::i�ii:�iiiiiiiiiiiii:�i:f -"`r;,r.`:q :k:;'NG'.','•'GC�4'tM::Y::^ ."6`.u�::r�:;•::`��'.,,: r./.}...................:::.:.:::.}..::....}.}...........:::::::::::: 11:00 11:30 12:00 12:304D( 1:00 6(141 c�Il�t (`( 1:30 o r c.tSS i cx+ v 2:00 t �� 1`,,n2 _ v, • , 2:30 (\r) 5. �UGC Z 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 8:00 4:36PM Friday,August 07, 1998 Andrews Archi Inc Memo c, To: City of Tigard �. From: James E. Andrews AIA ,k cc: Randy Brooks, Pittman &Brooks Date: August 7, 1998 Subject: Preapplication Conference for 15255 S.W. 72nd Avenue This application is for a Preapplication Conference for an office addition project at 15255 S.W. 72nd Avenue, the offices of Pittman & Brooks Accountants. The proposal is to construct a two story addition on the south of the existing two story building. The office will have a daycare facility for children of staff. We expect that a zoning variance will be required to reduce the front yard setback from the 35' required in the IP zone because of the unique shape of the lot. The lot is a triangle formed by the intersection of S.W. 72nd Avenue with the railroad right-of-way and the parcel is very shallow depth along the 72nd Avenue frontage where the 35' setback is required. We feel a setback reduction is warranted because of the unusual shape of the lot and because other properties in the area appear to have about a 10' setback(7000 S.W. Redwood Lane). The Industrial Park Zone with the 35' setback is probably intended for much larger uses on much larger parcels. There are two issues we would particularly like to have addressed in the Preapplication Conference. The first issue is the location of the lot line along 72nd,which will determine how much of a variance we require. Our site plan shows the original lot line, then a line offset 10'west for an easement granted in 1965, then another 5' offset for a dedication granted in 1983. If the current lot line is 15' off the original lot line then we request a front setback reduction from 35' to 15'. If the current lot line is just 5' off the original lot line(per a literal reading of the legal description), then we only need a setback reduction from 35' to 25'. We don't really care which it is, we just want to be able to get it right and build what we think is an appropriate addition to the existing building. The second issue involves the storm drainage system. We understand the storm drainage design standards of the Unified Sewerage Agency(U.S.A.) to require a downstream analysis of drainage system capacity when a proposal adds 5,000 sq. ft. or more of impervious surface to the system. Our proposal will have no net increase in impervious area because the proposed building addition will be built on an existing parking lot. The existing impervious surface totals 12,677 sq.ft. and the proposal totals 12,654 sq.ft. We would like clarification that we will not be required to perform a downstream analysis of the drainage system capacity. Our engineer looked at what would be involved and it would be an extensive study of many acres of other people's development, totally out of scale with our very small proposal. Topographic contours of the general area are shown on the attached map obtained at the Community Development counter. We expect to drain to the culvert under the railroad. We have attached copies of the Legal Description, Plat Map and general topographic map. We request that the Preapplication Conference be held in the week of August 24th. I will be out of town between the 8th and 23rd. You could fax me a notice of the meeting time. Thanks! 205 S.E. Grand Ave. #207 Portland, Oregon 97214 Tel. 503 239-4387 Fax. 503 231-3369 E-Mail: andrarch@cyberhighway.net • Legal Description. A tract of land situated in the Northwest one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 12, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon, being a part of Lot 45, FANNO CREEK ACRE TRACTS, being more particularly described as follows, to wit: BEGINNING at the most Southerly corner of said Lot 45, FANNO CREEK ACRE TRACT, which Southerly corner is the point of intersection of the Westerly right of way line of SW 72nd with the Easterly right of way line of the Southern Pacific Transportation Co's Tillamook Branch main tract (100' r/w); thence along said Easterly right of way line, North 17°21' West by deed description (Plat computes North 17°42'10" West) 442.87 feet; thence leaving said railroad Easterly right of way line, North 89°57'20" East 134.34 feet to said Westerly right of way line of SW 72nd Avenue; thence along said Westerly right of way line South 0°02'40" East, plat bearing. (Deed description South 0°00'16" East) 422.00 feet to the most Southerly corner of Lot 45 and the place of beginning. EXCEPTING AND RESERVING HEREFROM a 10.00 foot wide easement for road purposes being Westerly, adjacent and contiguous to the Westerly right of way line of said SW 72nd Avenue; said easement being a portion of that easement to Washington County dated August 6, 1965 and recorded September 15, 1965 in Book 569, page 134, Deed Records. Further excepting and reserving herefrom a 5 foot wide strip taken for road purposes being Westerly, adjacent and contiguous to the Westerly right-of-way line of SW 72nd Avenue; said strip described in that dedication deed to the public recorded November 10, 1983; Fee No: 83-41687 Deed Records. L Vd .A L i1� -niq ■ i . i agN ....,..-,...., ,--- C `:1 — _ C�?— �� _—_ —. — 242.19 _ •. 1087 SOIe20C R ' O M PACIFIC R.R. TRACKAGE EASE-- — —I — �� P 006 A`� \.\ 11 V r e . d,� M:2•�'N 0 O�j C> 96 z,' o �, D � 1:.: IICI 116 N s8 c'c' IV , / . i ; � O� N slo 6. O ` ♦ a P .0 . , '. '8'0 Cr) le 1 0 O \ ■ T8.74 " _ �1.- ; . " - /if - - S0cr0016 E ID..1UBl.G..PiAII ,,sE ;..•• ..w..•.•. . .. :v.i/. .. � �� 72nd S.W. C.R.No.I2614o wIOE) p� • �o TO PUBLIC 569134 DC co N N cn m 1 �- Potz jot4 OF M-Pe 4102 o . I t \va-\ - ° MH x 165. 3 U OQ 16X.3 x 169. IL._ il l' -' 167.4 PAVED C8 ft• • MHa 11 r� � i /1 PARKING \! �• _ � !fi 3 1 , 1 .110 169.2 x 1 w�� i�h � 1 CB 11 /1 • 1 CB irD a}-, t11 NI _ `� OCB 4 �� x 1 so.s 41 157.2 ' x 148. 7 1 4 I' 1 1 7 ii, .".'s-----e \( / . 1p t*PARKING , ey, IsX.9 , . , x . T. i, ! , x 14 9.0 ,,1 ' i ri. . ; 1 1 CB a' 1 3 I 1 ,...., . C8 � � x 159.0 1 O T i 1 4, If' OCB I � 1 ' f z z m �a w 1 z , i x 157.9 ace / a x 159.2 I \ 59. 15 x 9.3•. ■ 1 l OCB ■ 1 Illr 3 I .-67.2 rl r 148.4 \ T• - � . . . ,. 411 ' r.:. ' AP * ‘ 411446 :...... . Raiff , . • IA' II NUIllimip V : 11 . ,....., . . i. . ., ..,. . .,.. II al u _ , $ $ ... . . ...„...., , . , - .. ,.,.,•• ,,,:. ,..,.......„. ‘,.'..,.,,..•. . . 1.. . .. . . .,...... , ..... . srcrwy' : , somi ,,,,,,...:,,,,,i..: - $•'' , ,,, ., T , . ,. ..., .-,...... ' ,.., ..ii to ' :it ‘ -,•.=, ,0•1 .40 ,,,* 40 1.::,- ,. , ."‘...\\*‘, .1 . ..,‘ ,. . ..,.: . .. . . ... . ... .. . . .. ... -... 4 : pi .. , e. N.... . - ,.. . . , . . „ . . ... . . .... , . . . , . „ . ,... ... , . .. . . . _ :„ . .. ., , ..... , opoir . • s., - .,.....,,,,-,k1 ,.. , .... - . - iiii) 1 , , ' 1114 1 f 1 0 .... . . . . ,... N ' .. .. . . , , 4 :: 4 .. . „ . . •.4.. • it Of 4414' i *.10. • : '.•• ' ' . '' ,...... ' '''..' * '.•''' ' , Rim C 4 4 I 441 lik : ttOtt r .. ..: , , .,,,. ...... ..k„.. .. 4 ,. , ii: i . . , ...........,4.1"1",:f .„ t . . - . ...., . ..„.„4 . r . . , ..... ..7,,,...i..),.,..41.,,, . „..... .. _ - * t A ws - J , . r „...,-,.,. : .. • to '',..,, • . , %:,...... : 40 • , :. 7.:::. ,,-s '' ',- - - - ... . ..... . , filit,....o *aiiik 71.si'rq Fit440 .,...iii . . ,. ... . . . .., 4. 0 A • JP -,:. ii r. •," .P. tie'' n ,,,,- 'e • • * • . .. .-- ......, - : . • • 0 4 - . . 11 '.. ... ' ill, • •• ..._. ....* % 4 • ili'' 4 „ . • . * ' * . ........ ,s. A 4:- „ — .. ....... ... ye&P 4$ illy 4..... 1 ..'7 . a , ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Date Received TO: City Of Tigard ATTN: 1)/) ,1,6_ l(i RECEIVED DEPT: JUL 0 9 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN1 From: Contact Name: r/ `� �`�-'��` C «xd -,L a Project Name: �� S u 772 �r2� Phone: Fax: Comments transmittalform l , . ,•••v \ . /---2_ ...16. , -1 1 f 0 (,.o .._. k.. .._- ..- _.... 1 . _ - - • — ..... (v -- .- . . . . 4. • • 1 . ,. . .,..,.- -,,- . - . --- :4--- • • : •i . : .. . ,...., ...) ! ; .,_.. _ .....,sNs. AsFw.ALT ..."-- F.,....,i,i, Tr.*. RE*-1.1,ti 1--,-' ----- i: -1''''''' ' ' . ?± .0. - ...,?.:_—f .... ...1.----"" -.. 7-------.--7,K--.-- -,..„.- ;. . ..- I; - i'• ::,' : ' / ', •-•. I. • (§; . • ' ' ' ' ii • i.-.) ;. • . • . . • ,) • il .,, ;1,-• 1J i ;Tr -•-••— '10.- ' ' ' ' --4. • \ • . -i .-1,:.s.:,_---' .-----. .k ..._;—. .1.... I . ' NEW 4(,--1- • • ./A ' • . • (• %.,-, - • - - ---1-. .. . ; ADDri!ON 1' ,;- ' 4.- --1:1•Cli• -.1!C.11-; • ...-•—____ __ :" 2) I - . . ,4 \';----17P-1 ;-'1:111 ---- TRA&A-EiRr_-C:1-C,L INC:- i . . ' '1 7. .4 . .1.1) NCI OSURE I111 - • - -1I.- -../, - • ' I 1 n 1 0 1-11•Ai&H -.)-1 012oK, ' . I, ,ii• r • . i p .rje_ 1 - ! 1. . .‘. - • . (( )14._,„...: 1 1 re , , _ .1. . 24 .0-..i . . -$5--.7-bs— i "1-c.:5 (-3) :Ys./.72. -' ii — ------1-- . ' 0 II • • • • . -.--4'-t i- I I O It 1 .6 : . .1 . .4,1 . . ,;! (c.5j _1 ii 1 . .p,, V - - . . . . :-...•I . - ti, il,____I• • 't, 4 V x 7 , ----' zik,• A: . . •7 I. . 777-7 . ,0(.3) -t --' n f 6.__.5 (.1 . .ip,:_6, . . .:' 24._on -1 - • ;.-.$-61' , I- I ( 1 4 -tr .: - . • . • . • .I- . *. 1 ,:, ... I. I . ., • 1 .1- - — 1 ,.. 61 ' .1 ._ ' C•9 H . . . 1; 'L.4:4=19—;" . : . . ii., : _,----"; ' -■Si -. • - - - __I -- ,,,f,. . . . . ....y„.. ,Ni • -I ' 1...... ,_ ....46-...- • t. • ' 1■ -.. . . .._._7. wig.. , . . . . If ' A ''.:.. 1 • 1. b i• • 11 ______i.frj I-, ....... r---c. -.ei,LIWI / ■ • v.J • . ...1/2-*-1-``' - I ffr.,■,- s, ,... /_ ...\))) 1,.77!-:-.:. . - 1 ; 1.. :•-.:1P — — .., ._ , _ - -it,tu ,mu€31..1.:.-. $:pt:Lup.i....../...it< ill 6 1 ; ,` • •____._ ______ - -...- \ -_ . / .--- .!-..t..-.,,,,,- =:".5TING A.PRON I INtl•T ,A1_ (...-.Ur-.0. ..11N1:17. w !..1-::. New .,v2'FIC.". PER C —I- STAN:.:AR'L,•3 ,vf. 7, i1.'' AVE.NuE '40k ,/, .,,,, ANDREWS ARCHITECTS Suite 207ot The Osborn 205 5.EGtorxi Ac. GS, rtittlond, Oregon 97214 5DR_q8 --.ZA(to LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Date Received TO: City Of Tigard ATTN: MATT • • RECEIVED DEPT: 15/f'NN'/N(. OCT 191999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT kr 6D 6 � Con>fact Name• .x; � / t —;� Project Name: PTTa-'A yS V • °(C Phone: VS" a Fax • •;+ • •• • ♦ s dt ♦ + !?a ♦ fi.}:> t 4 ! * , e +4,4,1.4 y+�S3 Comments TI c r1 1v Pc.01-7j 1/ r— transmittalform 1 OCT-15-1899 10:09 FROM:HAL S T F Ans ^"B0 CONS 503-840-7627 TO:503 P31 3369 P. 002'006 HALSTEAD'S ARBORICULTURE Specialists in rho care and preservation o(Bees" CONSULTANTS • Dav,o H/ISIead Co„svnara 8 5 PO £4o 1182 'uaiann.OP 97062 Q'one.15031 245-i 383 October 15, 1999 ATTN. : Mr. James E. Andrews AIA Andrews Architects, Inc. 2175 SE Grand Avenue •' Suite 207 Portland, OR 97214 • ift Reference: Tree Care and Protection Program Location: Pittman&Brooks • 1 14 , Subject Alf Trees / I have inspected the site, trees and the site pier"Office and Daycare Addition” A dated 9/14/99 for the purpose of proposing a tree care and protection program for the existing trees. 1. On the north side of the existing building's parking lot there are five Red 4., Maples on the north side and an additional three Red Maples along the west side. 2. There are two Green Ash trees on the east side of the existing building located in a planting bed. 3. There are two Red Maple trees on the south side of the building just west of 72nO Avenue. All of the trees are 4 to 6 inches in diameter, in very good health and are structurally stable. In addition, the trees are young and their root systems have not developed much beyond their original root ball size from the time of planting. The forthcoming construction will have little or no affect on the trees health and/or structure providing reasonable care and protection is applied. The trees, although young, have a monetary value of$2,500.00 each Therefore, it is my recommendation that all contractors working on this project be made aware of the trees and their vafues and penalty assessed for damage due to negligence The forth coming 'TREE CARE AND PRESERVATION" report discusses those items which needs to be carved out during the construction phase.The main 1 issues are protection and keeping the arbonst advised of the project. 1 LICT-15'1999 10:09 FROM:HALSTEADS ARBO CONS 503-848-7627 TO:503 231 3369 P. 003,006 Page 2 October 15, 1999 Reference. Tree Care and Protection Program Location: Pittman& Brooks Subject: Alt Trees TREE CARE AND PRESERVATION Because of the number of trees fo be preserved, the particular situation of where the trees are growing, the species of the tree(s)and the proposed construction plans,there wilt be a certified arborist on-site and/or on-calk for the entire project, especially during any excavating and/or the removal of tree (s). In this way, decisions can be made in,the field that are only speculations at this writing. MEETINGS: Before the site clearing and construction begins a pre-construction tree preservation conference will be held on site with the general contractor in charge of tree removal, and/or in charge of heavy equipment, the resident certified arborist and those official representatives who have interest in the project. PURPOSE: The purpose of the on-site meeting will be to introduce all parties to the specifications and sensitivity needed in the protection and preservation of trees, their environment and protected areas PREPARATION/FENCING: We have found through several years of tree preservation that the protected area is the first and most important procedure of tree preservation. If the fencing is placed properly and maintained the root zone of the tree(s)within this protected area will not be compacted nor damaged by needless excavation. Before any site clearing takes place tree fencing needs to be erected out to the drip line(furthest most branches)of those tree/s to be preserved Tree barrier fencing can be as simple as a seven (7)foot tall steel fence stakes driven into the ground approximately two(2)feet,6 foot apart and the tree barrier fencing attached to the stakes. • OCT-15-1999 10:10 FROM:HALSTEADc- ARBO CONS 503-848-7627 TO:507 231 3369 P. 004/006 Page 3 October 15, 1999 Reference: Tree Care and Protection Program Location: Pittman &Brooks Subject' All Trees TREE CARE AND PRESERVATION PREPARATION I FENCING: It is further recommended that two (2) heavy gauge wires be attached to each stake. One (1) at the top of each stake and interwoven through the fencing and a second (2)wire attached to the stakes approximately 2 feet above ground and interwoven through the fencing. In some cases the fencing, will need to be adjusted from the drip line to a smaller area in order to accommodate walls, building, sidewalks. excavation and other like building construction. The adjustment of the fencing and any disturbance within the protected area will be done under the supervision of the consulting arborist. If the fencing is adjusted to a smaller diameter it may be necessary to erect a chain link and/or a heavy plywood fence in order to protect the adjusted area. Regardless, any adjustment of the fencing from the dnp tine, no matter how slight, will require therapeutic care for the tree and its root zone THERAPEUTIC CARE: Therapeutic care is described as that treatment which will be needed to ensure the tree/s within the protected area receive the best chances for survival. In order to accompfish this objective,the tree/s will have to be periodically inspected during the construction process and for at least two years after construction is completed. Individual treatment is based on the tree/s needs, it's root zone, structural condition and health. Factors will be taken into consideration, such as species. soil compaction, soil annals, season in which construction is done, how much root zone will be affected by construction, losses of surrounding native plantings and loss of and/or over abundance of surface and sub-surface water. OCT-15-1999 10:1u 1-Ru 1HL51tHLA - Tfl'cn '31 3369 P. 005,006 • Page 4 October 15, 1999 Reference. Tree Care and Protection Program Location Pittman& Brooks Subject: All Trees TREE CARE AND PRESERVATION ROOT PRUNING: Excavation when using back-hoe or track-hoe, or other mechanical device,will be done towards the tree rather than along side of the tree Furthermore, before excavation begins, bridging and tunneling will be considered; especially if tree roots are found to be in excess of 4 inches in diameter. When excavation needs to be done within the drip line of the tree, it may be necessary to cut roots. The best way is to sever the roots by first digging a G��ich with a trencher just outside of the proposed excavation area. All roots 2 inches and larger need to be cut clean with the use of an ax, saw and or other like sharp instrument. in this way the mots are severed clean and wilt start to produce new root hairs. Regardless,any work done within the drip line of the tree will be done under the supervision of the consulting arborist. FERTILIZING: ff the tree/s diameter root zone is reduced, the tree/s will need to be therapeutically fertilized. How much and types of mixtures will be determined by the amount of disturbance, root loss, sot}analysis,condition of the soil, season, health and condition of the tree/s. Those tree/s which will be less than 8 feet from excavation at ground level may require not only therapeutic fertilizer, but root hormones as well. This will help the sealing process of damaged roots and the stimulation of new growth. When a tree root area is severely damaged, it may need additional fertilizing within 6 months and again within a year. IOCT-15-1939 10:10 FPOM:HALSTEACec QR60 CONS 503-848-7627 TO:503 231 3359 P. 006/006 Page 5 October 15, 1999 Reference:Tree Care and Protection Program Location: Pittman & Brooks Subject: All Trees TREE CARE AND PRESERVATION ACCIDENTS: With the amount ofectiv11y on a major development project, accidents are bound to happen. Limbs are broken, roots are dug-up or root zones are compacted In most cases, it these problems are addressed immediately by the resident arborist, they will not hamper the trees longevity. Where negligence occurs and the contractor deliberately damages a tree and/or the root zone, the contractor should be held responsible and monetary values arrived at for the repair and or replacement of the tree/s. If I can be of further assistance in this matter or if more technical information is needed please advise. Sincerely, 1c D vid Halstead BS CA ASCA TREE AGREEMENT This Tree Agreement (the"Agreement") is made this 7°�'? ' day of October, 1999, by Pittman & Brooks, P.C. RECITALS: WHEREAS: Pittman & Brooks, P.C. applied to the City of Tigard, Oregon (the "City") to develop an office and daycare addition, and associated parking on property identified as Washington County, Oregon Tax Map and Lot Numbers WCTM 25112DB 00200, and WHEREAS: The City reviewed the Application of Pittman & Brooks, P.C., and conditioned its approval, in part, upon a deed restriction, which subjects prospective removal of certain trees located on the that property identified as Washington County Tax Map and Lot Numbers WCTM 25112DB 00200, to Tigard Development Code § 18.790.040.B; and WHEREAS: Pittman & Brooks, P.C. has identified the trees subject to this Agreement by drawing attached hereto as Exhibit "A", and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein; THEREFORE: Pittman & Brooks, P.C. agrees as follows: TERMS AND CONDITIONS: 1. Pittman & Brooks, P.C. agrees and shall not remove any of the trees presently existing on the Exhibit "A" property, unless the following conditions are present: a. a certified arborist confirms in writing that the tree is diseased and cannot be cured; or b. a certified arborist confirms in writing that the tree has died; or c. a certified arborist confirms in writing that the tree presents a hazard to life or property; and d. under subparagraph a, b, or c, herein, Pittman & Brooks, P.C. first provides the written confirmation of the certified arborist to the City before taking any further action to remove the affected tree. 2. This Agreement shall apply only to the existing trees located on that property described as Washington County, Oregon Tax Map and Lot Numbers WCTM 25112DB 00200, each tree being identified by drawing in the attached Exhibit "A", and does not apply to any other trees or vegetation located on the Exhibit"A" property. AGREED TO THIS I`r DAY OF OCTOBER, 1999. CITY OF TIGARD PITTMAN & BROOKS, P.C. C Sign Name Si n Name Rt24- /3,• 47-0K s Print Name Print Name State of Oregon ) )ss: County of Washington ) Before me, a Notary Public in and for said State and County, appeared the above named Randall C. Brooks, shareholder of Pittman & Brooks, P.C., who acknowledged that he did sign the foregoing instrument and that the signing of the same was his voluntary act and deed and the voluntary act and deed of Pittman & Brooks, P.C. for the uses and purposes therein described. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal this I I+k- day of October, 1999. + q„iem-yl ,! 1' OFFICIAL SEAL Notary Public for: LEONA J HEMPEL `k::4 J NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO 643 My Commission Expires: 91.---.P1;g000 JAN. 2 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JAN. 24. 2000 • • • ; ••• r-- • 1 • • •• • • •• • I ' •• \ • • • • • ••• • \ ' = I •• '\ z , • •• �1 a I • \ o •• •• '\ N I ••• ' 0 I • \ I vi • •• \ • j I • \ 0 •••• ,\ i •• •• 5 \ 0 •• 0 • I •.•% \ �;ii • ••• I ''. 4 •. U •• • ,\ I , EXHIBIT "A" •• , j I 15255 S.W. 72ND AVENUE • TIGARD, OREGON 97223 •• TAX LOT 00200 ••• SITE DESIGN REVIEW #SDR 98-0026 •• •.. 0 DESIGNATED TREE • ••• I I I 0 I 0 50' 100' •• •• • f � 5'D kl O PERFORMANCE BOND O Bond No. rD -2 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENCE, that we Randall C. Brooks as Principal, and Contractors Bonding and Insurance Company , a corporation duly authorized to conduct a general surety business in the State of Oregon, as Surety, are jointly and severally held bound unto the City of Tigard, Oregon, a municipality of the State of Oregon, hereinafter called obligee, in the sum of $7,000, lawful money of the United States of America, for the payment of which we, as Principal, and as Surety, jointly and severally bind ourselves, our successors and assigns firmly by these present. THE CONDITIONS OF THIS BOND AND OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that the Principals are constructing a development known as Pittman & Brooks Office & Daycare Addition, located in the City of Tigard, Oregon, and have entered into a Landscaping Compliance Agreement with respect to timely completion of landscaping, a copy of said Agreement is attached, and by reference made a part hereof; and NOW, THEREFORE, if the Principal herein shall faithfully and truly observe and comply with all terms of the Agreement and shall well and truly perform all matters and things undertaken to be performed under said Agreement and under all ordinances, regulations and conditions of the Obligee applicable to said development and improvement, and shall promptly make payments to all persons supplying labor or material for any of the work provided by said agreement, and shall not permit any lien or claim to be filed or prosecuted against the Obligee, then this obligation shall be void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect. In the event of suit or action be filed by the Obligee hereunder to enforce said contract or to recover under the terms of this bond, in addition to all other rights and remedies, the City, in the event it shall prevail, shall be entitled to recover such sums as the Court may adjudge reasonable as and for attorney's fees. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this bond to be executed this 26th day of February , 20 03 . Randall C. Brooks Principal By: \ `ite-4e7'`'i U (Title) Contractors Bonding and Insurance Company k, Ala, Surety Attorney in Fact = �' , ' vI', `` PO Box 12053 Portland OFF Address n r4 �y_ ij i 'Iiic' O e a llO e f y f S i tc r ee t PO B ox 9271 ted Power of Attorney rrvsururvice (206) 628-7200 98109-0271 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that CONTRACTORS BONDING AND INSURANCE COMPANY,a corporation duty�gen.ed and existing under the laws of the State of Washington,and having its principal office in Seattle,King County,Washington,does by these presents make,constitute and appoint DEANNA DAVIS.of Portland,Oregon,its true and lawful Attorney-in-Fact,with full power and authority hereby conferred in its name,place and stead,to execute,acknowledge and deliver on behalf of the Company any and all bonds and undertakings of suretyship given for any purpose,provided,however,that no Attorney-in-Fact shall be authorized to execute and deliver any bond or undertaking that shall obligate the Company for any portion of the penal sum thereof in excess of$6,000,000,and provided,further,that no Attorney-in-Fact shall have the authority to issue a bid or proposal bond for any project where,if a contract is awarded,any bond or undertaking would be required with a penal sum in excess of$6,000,000;and to bind the Company thereby as fully and to the same extent as if such bonds were signed by the President,sealed with the corporate seal of the Company and duly attested by its Secretary;hereby ratifying and confirming all that the said Attorney-in-Fact may do in the premises.Said appointment is made under and by authority of the following resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors of the CONTRACTORS BONDING AND INSURANCE COMPANY on September 8,1998: RESOLVED that the President of the Company is authorized to appoint any person as the Company's true and lawful Attorney-in-Fact with power and authority to execute and deliver on behalf of the Company any and all bonds and undertakings of suretyship given for any purpose,subject to such limits as shall be determined by the President of the Company; provided,however,that no such person shall be authorized to execute and deliver any bond or undertaking that shall obligate the Company for any portion of the penal sum thereof in excess of$10,000,000,and provided,further,that no Attorney-in-Fact shall have the authority to issue a bid or proposal bond for any project where,if a contract is awarded,any bond or undertaking would be required with penal sum in excess of$10,000,000. RESOLVES FURTHERs that the authority of the Secretary of the Company at certify the authenticity and effectiveness of the foregoing resolution in any Limited Power of Attorney is hereby delegated to the following persons,the signature of any of the following to bind the Company with respect to the authenticity and effectiveness of the foregoing resolutions as if signed by the Secretary of the Company:Donald Sirkin,Steven A.Gaines,John Pieprzny,John D.Minto,Larry A.Byers,Debi Lewis,Kim McCauley,JoAnn Johnson,Pat Domey, and Tom Dyment RESOLVED FURTHER that the signatures(including certification that the Power of Attorney is still in force and effect)of the President. Notary Public and person certifying authenticity and effectiveness,and the corporate and Notary seals appearing on any Limited Power of Attorney containing this and the foregoing resolutions as well as the Limited Power of Attorney itself and its transmission,may be by facsimile;and such Limited Power of Attorney shall be deemed an original in all aspects. RESOLVED FURTHER that all resolutions adopted prior to today appointing the above named as Attorney-in-Fact for CONTRACTORS BONDING AND INSURANCE COMPANY are hereby superseded. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,CONTRACTORS BONDING AND INSURANCE COMPANY nas caused these presents to be signed by its President and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed this 11th day of June,2002. ,",,pau4rprrr, CONTRACTORS BONDING AND INSURANCE COMPANY 5 PPO :SEAL. 8 By: lg7g l��s Steven A.Gaines,President ., ,`, STATE OF WASHINGTON—COUNTY OF KING rrrr..................NlIu `�. On this 11th day of June,2002.personally appeared STEVEN A.GAINES,to me known to be the President of the corporation that executed the foregoing Limited Power of Attorney and acknowledged said Limited Power of Attorney to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation,for the uses and purposes therein mentioned,and on oath stated that he is authorized to execute the said Limited Power of Attorney. r IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. :0.� •\SStOIV••'•._Fjrtrr i�i tiOTARV• i J c,. `` %rc i Notary Public in and for the State of' . 'gton,residing at Seattle r1vx �yy ' The undersigned,acting under authority Board of Directors of CONTRACTORS BONDING AND INSURANCE COMPANY,hereby certifies.as or in lieu of Certificate of the Secretary of CONTRACTORS BONDING AND INSURANCE COMPANY,that the above and foregoing is a full,true and correct copy of the Original Power of Attorney issued by said Company,and does hereby further certify that the said Powe • Attorney is still in force and effect GIVEN under my hand at/ /. ,e, : ,a Pi.' ,this ti` day of ,20 J Ilk I ) /2/ . tea► PoaDD01: -11S06 102 t ■ 4:4L LANDSCAPIN V<O�) IANCE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT Nth day of March 5 , 2003 between th;` O TIGARD, a municipality of t S Oregon, hereinafter termed the "CITY", and Ra,,,F4ka . rooks hereinafter termed "Petitioner". c.:271§ lik■ WITNESSETH : WHEREAS, Petitioner has applied to the City for approval of a project known as Pittman & Brooks Office & daycare Addition, City land use case number SDR98-00026, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon;and WHEREAS, the City has adopted the Petitioner who has been conditioned to install landscaping as a part of Petitioner's development; and WHEREAS, the landscaping; as a part of Petitioner's development is incomplete, and Petitioner has nonetheless requested the City to permit occupancy and use of property in the development, and the parties desire hereby to protect the public interest generally by legally enforceable assurances that the landscaping and trash enclosure will be completed as required within the time hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and the covenants and agreements to be kept and performed by the Petitioner and its sureties, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: (1) Petitioner shall proceed with development, with the intent and purpose to complete landscaping not later than ninety(90)days from the date of this agreement. (2) To assure compliance with the City's requirements and the provisions herein, Petitioner tenders to the City a performance bond in the amount of$ 7,000. (3) In the event that Petitioner shall fail, neglect or refuse to proceed with the landscaping work in an orderly and progressive manner to assure completion within the time limits, upon ten (10) days notice by the City to Petitioner , and such default and failure to proceed continuing thereafter, the City may at its option proceed to have the work completed and charge the costs hereof against Petitioner deposit and in the event action be brought,. Petitioner promise and agree to pay, in addition to the amounts accruing and allowable, such sum as the court shall adjudge reasonable as attorney's fees and costs incurred by the City, both in the Trial Court and Appellate Court, if any, or the City may, at its option, bring proceedings to enforce against the Petitioner specific performance of the contract, and in such event, in like manner, the City shall be entitled to recover such sum as the court shall adjudge reasonable as and for the City attorney's fees and costs, both in the Trial Court and Appellate Court, if any. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Petitioner acting by and through its duly authorized undersigned officers pursuant to resolution of its Board of Directors has caused this agreement to be executed, and the City acting pursuant to resolution of its Council adopted at a regularly scheduled meeting on the 13th day of October , 19 86 , has caused this agreement to be executed by the Community Development Director PETITIONER By: Nc.:),e, ,e-f- L Owner/Contractor THE CITY OF TIGARD By: Community Development Director (Attached otary Acknowledgement hereto) S6-4)44j-tis-v ■ Return signed copy to: --14NA-44:a-1/45-42kSti A ciA4L/4"5" ,i6,,A.:(1- 4-wic-c-- OFFICIAL SEAL IV 1) LEONA J.HEMPEL () �T��' NOTARY PUBLIC OREGON 1 � COMMISSION NO.330823 ) 1 ii pw r,),,,4v.'F∎)1,1 CXPIRES JAN.24,2004 ) 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 5-07e-- 9F- DO,OZ ( J / 11:22:32AM �a �'I Tigard,Oregon 97223 __. (503) 639-4171 Receipt #: 27200300000000000850 Date: 03/05/2003 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SDR98-00026 [UNGRND] Fee Lieu Underground 230-0000-445003 11,550.00 Line Item Total: $11,550.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check PITTMAN& BROOKS,P.C. SSC 4088 In Person 11,550.00 Payment Total: $11,550.00 4088 PITTMAN & BROOKS, P.C. CENTENNIAL BANK 15255 SW 72ND AVE BEAVERTON,OR 97006 PORTLAND,OR 97224 96-605/1232 PH(503)684-9233 2/7/2003 C 0 a PAY TO THE — ORDER OF CITY OF TIGARD,OR $ **11,550.00 0 Eleven Thousand Five Hundred Fifty and 00/100*************************************************************************** DOLLARS 8 m CITY OF TIGARD,OR 0 LL MEMO ay I AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE I Page 1 of I cReceipt.rpt