Loading...
SDR1999-00002 SDR99 -00002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION f - z NoTIC OF 1fP I DECISIO ',,;sr �, , NS H 4 a 'F:'SfriternopmENT REVIEW ESDRI 1999=00002 OF Camnuutj+�rzlelcr�er�t " PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION ShapingA(Better community 120 DAYS = 8/10/99 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE: PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION Site Development Review SDR 1999-00002 PROPOSAL: Major Modification approval to expand an existing motel site onto three adjacent parcels and provide an additional 3-story, 45-unit motel building and associated parking and site improvements. APPLICANT: VIP's Industries, Inc. OWNER: VIP's Motor Inns, Inc. Attn: Steven Johnson 29757 SW Boones Ferry Rd. 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville, OR 97070 Wilsonville, OR 97070 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Professional Commercial; C-P. ZONING DESIGNATION: Professional Commercial: C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more intensive commercial and industrial areas. LOCATION: The Phoenix Inn Motel is located on the east side of SW Greenburg Road, north of Highway 217 and east of the Washington Square Mall. The existing Phoenix Inn Motel is located at 9575 SW Locust Street (1S126DC, Tax Lots 04700 and 04701), the expansion will occur on the following neighboring parcels: 1S126DC, Tax Lots 4500, 4600 and 4602. APPLICABLE Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, REVIEW 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. CRITERIA: SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has , APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval tr The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV :; PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 1 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 • 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 landscape plan shall include a total of seven parking lot trees. The applicant may choose to relocate existing landscape trees directly abutting the parking lot where they may be counted as parking lot trees. The plan shall also finalize the selection of street tree species and demonstrate compliance with the street tree spacing standards of Chapter 18.745. 2. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan indicating the proposed location of a new or expanded trash enclosure with detailed sizing and design information for review and approval. The plan shall demonstrate compliance with all the applicable standards of Chapter 18.755. For the enclosure sizing assessment, the applicant may demonstrate compliance with any one of the four methods under Section 18.755.040.A. The applicant shall also submit plans for any new or expanded enclosure to the Franchise Hauler for review and submit a copy of the Hauler's approval letter to the City. 3. The applicant shall submit a revised vehicle and bicycle-parking plan for review and approval. The plan shall indicate that all vehicle parking spaces are sized in conformance with City standards and the bicycle parking spaces will be provided on a hard surface, covered and with location signage visible from the right-of-way (ROW). 4. As provided in the Tigard Development Code (TDC) 18.790.040.B., draft deed-restriction language for trees to be preserved shall also be submitted for review and approval. An approved deed restriction shall be recorded prior to occupancy. Any tree removal involving trees proposed for preservation shall be considered illegal unless documentation prepared by a certified arborist confirms that an immediate hazard to life and/or property exists and the documentation is field-verified and accepted by the City arborist prior to removal of the tree. 5. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that clearly indicates the location of clear vision areas as defined under TDC 18.795.040.B.1. The site plan shall indicate that no temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height will be located within a clear vision area. 6. Prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit, a public improvement permit and compliance agreement is required for this project. Five (5) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public improvement plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall. 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. 8. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Greenburg Road to increase the right-of-way to 49 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on Washington County forms and the final document shall be reviewed and approved by the County. (County contact: Jamil Kamawal, 693-4543). PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 2 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 9. The applicant's construction plans shall indicate that they will construct a half-street improvement along the frontage of SW Coral Street as proposed. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section from curb to centerline equal to 17 feet; B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage; C. concrete curb, or curb and gutter as needed; D. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey surface and/or subsurface runoff; E. 5-foot concrete sidewalk; F. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements; G. street striping; H. streetlights as determined by the City Engineer; underground utilities; J. street signs (if applicable); K. driveway apron (if applicable); and L. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Coral Street in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 10. A profile of SW Coral Street shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 11. The applicant shall provide a non-access reservation along the frontage of SW Greenburg Road. This shall be coordinated through Washington County. (County Contact: Jamil Kamawal, 693-4543). 12. The applicant shall remove the existing driveways along SW Greenburg Road and replace these sections with curb and sidewalk per Washington County standards. The applicant shall submit a copy of the County permit for this work to the City prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. 13. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 14. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency Design and Construction Standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. 15. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of$30. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION BEING PERFORMED: 16. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one-year maintenance assurance for said improvements. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 3 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 17. Prior to a final building inspection the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) mylars, and 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" format, if available; otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable. Note: if the public improvement drawings were hand-drawn, then a diskette is not required. 18. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along either SW Greenburg Road or SW Coral Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. This condition shall only apply to the roadway from where electrical, telephone and cable service is taken. 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. The applicant's construction plans will need to show where the power, telephone and cable service will come from. The frontages and potential fees associated with this site are as follows: Roadway Frontage (If) Fee SW Greenburg Road 100 ft. $2,750 SW Coral Street 95 ft. $2,613 The fee 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: The existing Phoenix Inn Motel is located at 9575 SW Locust Street (Tax Lots 04700 and 04701), and the expansion will occur on three adjacent parcels (Tax Lots 4500, 4600 and 4602). The existing Phoenix Inn Motel was approved in 1994 (SDR 94-0008). The parcels proposed for development are currently developed with commercial and non-conforming residential uses. Vicinity Information: The existing Phoenix Inn Motel is located at the northeast corner of SW Greenburg Road and SW Locust Street, with access off SW Locust Street. The site of the proposed expansion is north of the existing motel and is comprised of three parcels, two of which have frontage on SW Greenburg Road. The third parcel has frontage on SW Coral Street. The project vicinity is zoned commercial professional and includes Lincoln Center to the south. Washington Square (zoned General Commercial) and the Crescent Grove Cemetery are located to the west of SW Greenburg Road. Site Information and Proposal Description: As noted above, the site has frontage on SW Greenburg Road and SW Coral Street. The applicant proposes to construct a 3-story motel building on the expansion site with associated site improvements including parking and landscaping. The existing Phoenix Inn Motel includes 56 guestrooms and the expansion would add another 45 rooms. The expansion project would add 47 parking spaces and an access onto SW Coral Street, which is not fully improved to City standards. No access is proposed off SW Greenburg Road, a Washington County Road. The applicant's proposal includes a 1/2 street improvement to SW Coral Street along the project frontage to bring it up to City standards. 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 October 29; 1998. An application for Site Development Review was submitted and subsequently deemed complete on April 12, 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. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 4 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 Section 18.360.090 states mat 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 18.810, 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; 18.520, Commercial 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; 18.765, 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. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following Chapters: 18.370, Variances and Adjustments; 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 expansion site is already developed and has access to all city services and to improved public streets. The applicant s narrative states that sewer, water and storm water facilities are adequate to meet the needs of the proposed expansion. Completion of improvements to SW Coral Street, as proposed by the applicant, will satisfy the City s adopted public improvement standards. Because SW Greenburg Road is a Washington County facility, County Staff has reviewed the applicant's proposal and commented as discussed later in this decision. The County will require dedication of additional right-of-way along the project's SW Greenburg Road frontage to jorovide a total of 49 feet from centerline. No additional right-of-way is required on SW Coral Street. As noted under this Section, any required dedication of an interest in real property must be roughly proportional to the impacts of the proposed development. Any required street improvements to certain collector or higher volume streets and the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) are mitigation measures that are required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II (Resolution 95-61), TIFs are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. The trip $generation rate for motel units is 10.19 trips per unit. The rate per trip for a commercial use is 48. Therefore, the TIF for each trip that is generated by a motel use is $489.12 per unit ($48 x 10.19). Based on these figures, the current TIF for a 45-unit motel may be $22,010.40 ($489.12 x 45). Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32% of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100% of the project traffic impact on major streets is $68,782.50 ($22,010.40 - 32%). By subtracting the Traffic Impact Fee to be paid from the total traffic impact, a total unmitigated project impact of $46,772.10 remains ($68,782.50 total impact - $22,010.40 estimated_TIF). Based on previous right-of-way acquisitions (approximately $3 per square foot), the City estimates that the value of the required right-of-way dedication (approximately 5,060 square feet) may be approximately $15,180. Therefore, the requirement for dedication of street right-of-way associated with this proposal is easily proportional to the unmitigated traffic impact of the proposed development. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 5 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 Professional Commercial Zoning District: Section 18.520.020.D states that the C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services, e.g., convenience retail and personal services, restaurants, in close proximity to residential areas and major transportation facilities. Within the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Road District, residential uses at a minimum density of 32 units/net acre, i.e., equivalent to the R-40 zoning district, are permitted in conjunction with a commercial development. Heliports, medical centers, religious institutions and utilities are permitted conditionally. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more-intensive commercial and industrial areas. Permitted Uses: Table 18.520.1. lists permitted, restricted, conditional and not-permitted uses in the industrial zoning districts. The applicant is proposing to expand an existing commercial lodging by adding one additional building and associated on-site improvements. A commercial lodging use is permitted in the C-P zone. Dimensional Requirements: The C-P Zoning District standards are contained in Table 18.530.2. STANDARD C-P PROPOSED Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sq. ft. 71,438 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. 220 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 0 ft. [6] N/A - Side facing street on corner & -- through lots [1] N/A - Side yard 0/20 ft. [3] N/A - Side of rear yard abutting more -- restrictive zoning district - Rear yard 0/20 ft. [3] N/A - Distance between front of -- -- Garage & property line abutting a public or private street Maximum Height 45 ft. 35 ft. Maximum Site Coverage [2] 85% 73% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% 27% [1] The provisions of Chapter 18.795 (Vision Clearance) must be satisfied. [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3] No setback shall be required except 20 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4] See Section 18.520.050B for site and building design standards. [5] No front yard setback shall be required, except a 20-foot front yard setback shall apply within 50 feet of a residential district. [6] There shall be no minimum front yard setback requirement; however, conditions in Chapters 18.745 and 18.795 must be met. [7] There are no setback requirements, except 30 feet where a commercial use within a district abuts a residential zoning district. [8] The maximum height of any building in the CBD zone within 100 feet of any residential zoning district shall not exceed 40 feet. [9] Where the side or rear yard of attached or multiple-family dwellings abut a more restrictive zoning district, such setbacks shall not be less than 35 feet. [10]Landscaped areas on existing developed property in the CBD shall be retained. Buffering and screening requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745 shall be met for existing and new development. [11]Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. The table above compares the applicant's proposal with the minimum dimensional standards of the C-P zone. The side and rear yard setbacks do not apply because the site does not abut residential zoning. FINDING: Based on the above information, the applicant's proposal meets or exceeds the dimensional standards of the C-P zoning district. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 6 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 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 a walkway will be provided to connect the ground floor entrance of proposed motel building to the SW Greenburg Road 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 indicates that the required walkway to the public sidewalk does not cross any access driveway or parking area. The proposed walkway is approximately 5 feet in width. 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 all walkways will be surfaced in a hard surface material. Safety issues, including lighting and signage, are addressed later in this decision. 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 REQUIRED WIDTH 0-99 1 30' 24' curbs required 100+ 2 30' 24' curbs required or 1 50' 40' curbs required The applicant's materials indicate that a total of 104 parking spaces will be provided at project completion. According to the table above, two 30-foot accesses or one 50-foot access is required for a development of this size. The site plan indicates that two accesses will be PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 7 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 provided — one existing access onto SW Locust Street plus one proposed access onto SW Coral Street. The site plan indicates that both accesses meet or exceed the above access width 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 primary entrance of the proposed building is on the east elevation, oriented toward the parking area. The site plan indicates that vehicle access is provided to within approximately 10 feet of the primary ground floor entrance. Additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. No additional truck traffic requirements are appropriate since the proposed land use is commercial lodging. Section 18.7O5.O3O.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. A connection from the new parking area to adjacent property the south and west is precluded by the location of existing commercial structures on these properties and by natural topography. A future connection to the east is not precluded by topography or by existing development (the adjacent parcel is developed with a nonconforming, and apparently uninhabited single-family residence). However, a future vehicular connection would remove parking spaces and create a nonconforming situation per the minimum required parking standards of Chapter 18.765. Therefore, staff believes that a connection is not feasible in this instance and easements will not be required as provided in this section. 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. Exceptions to Development Standards — Chapter 18.730: Section 18.73O.04O.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: 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. According to the City's Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map, SW Greenburg Road and SW Locust Street are Major Collectors and SW Coral Street is a Local Commercial Industrial street. Since, as noted earlier, the C-P zone does not require any setbacks for this project's street frontages, the additional right-of-way setback is the total building setback required. The site plan indicates that all proposed structures will exceed the required 30-foot setback. Therefore, the applicable approval standards of Chapter 18.730 are satisfied. Landscaping and Screening — Chapter 18.745: Section 18.745.O2O.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 18.76O.04O.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: PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 8 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 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 expansion project has frontage on SW Greenburg Road (approximately 100 linear feet) and SW Coral Street (approximately 95 linear feet). Existing trees are located along SW Greenburg Road. The landscape plan indicates that the applicant proposes to install street trees along the SW Coral Street frontage and retain existing trees along SW Greenburg Road to fulfil this requirement. Staff agrees that the applicant's proposal for the SW Greenburg Road frontage meets the intent of the street tree standards. These trees shall be protected as conditioned in the tree removal and mitigation section of this decision. 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; • 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 indicates that street tree species selection will be based on the City arborist's recommendation. These recommendations are included later in this decision. The final landscape design must meet the above spacing standards. 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 C-P and surrounding property is zoned C-P and C-G. No buffering or screening is required between adjacent commercial developments. 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 and trees will be placed around the south and east perimeter of the proposed new parking area, where parking abuts neighboring properties. The landscape plan indicates that this perimeter area is to be planted with Portugal Laurel (Prunus lustinacia) and Dwarf Purple Osier Willow (Salix purpurea `Nana'). Parking lot trees are to be provided on the basis of one for every seven parking spaces. The applicant proposes to add 47 new parking spaces with this development. This translates to 7 required parking lot trees (47 _ 7 = 6.7). The landscape plan shows 5 arking lot trees in landscape islands. The landscape islands are approximately 5 feet wide. Two additional PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 9 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 parking lot trees will be required to fully comply with this standard. The spacing of the proposed parking lot trees is consistent with the `canopy effect" required by this section. 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 an existing waste enclosure is located adjacent to the existing building. Whether the existing enclosure is adequate to meet the additional needs of the new building is addressed later in this decision. Any new required enclosure must comply with the screening requirements of this section. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the standards of Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening are not fully satisfied. However, based on the concept landscape plan, Staff believes these standards can be met through compliance with the following condition of approval. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan for review and approval. The revised landscape plan shall include a total of seven parking lot trees. The applicant may choose to relocate existing landscape trees directly abutting the parking lot where they may be counted as parking lot trees. The plan shall also finalize the selection of street tree species and demonstrate compliance with the street tree spacing standards of Chapter 18.745. 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 applicant's site plan indicates that an existing waste enclosure is located adjacent to the existing motel building. The enclosure is approximately 30 square feet in size. Data provided on the site plan indicates that the combined gross floor area of the two motel buildings is approximately 60,400 square feet. This translates to a 252 square foot enclosure (60.4 x 4 plus 10 = 251.6). Based on this calculation, the existing enclosure is undersized for the two buildings and additional trash enclosure space must be provided to comply with this standard. Section 18.755.050.B. provides the following location standards: FINDING: Based on the above analysis, Staff finds that the standards of Chapter 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage are not met. However, based on the preliminary information provided Staff believes that the standards can be satisfied through compliance with the conditions of approval. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised site lan indicating the proposed location of a new or expanded trash enclosure with detailed sizing and design information for review and approval. The plan shall demonstrate compliance with all the applicable standards of Chapter 18.755. For the enclosure sizing assessment, the applicant may demonstrate compliance with any one of the four methods under 18.755.040.A. The applicant shall also submit plans for any new or expanded enclosure to the Franchise Hauler for review and submit a copy of the Hauler's approval letter to the City. Off-Street Parking — Chapter 18.765: Section 18.765.030.B. states that the location of off-street parking will be as follows: PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 10 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 • Off-street parking spaces for single-family and duplex awellings 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 proposed parking area is located within approximately 10 feet of the principal entrance of the proposed building. 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. According to the applicant's materials, upon completion of the expansion project, a total of 104 parking spaces will be provided. State standards for parking lots with 101-150 spaces require five accessible spaces. At least one of every 8 required accessible spaces must be sized and designated "van accessible". The site plan indicates that a total of 5 accessible spaces are proposed, four of which are appropriately sized for van-accessible parking. Of these four, at least one must be designated "van accessible" in conformance with this standard. Final compliance with ADA regulations regarding parking will be reviewed through the Building Permit process. 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 perimeter curbs are proposed where parking spaces are adjacent to landscape areas or walkways. 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. The applicant's site plan indicates that standard parking spaces are generally sized 16 x 9 feet and compact spaces are generally 16 x 8 feet. As indicated above, standard space must be at least 18.5 feet deep and a compact space must be at least 16.5 feet deep. Accessible and van- accessible spaces are discussed elsewhere in this decision and will be further reviewed for compliance at the time of Building Permit. All parking spaces need to be re-sized to meet the 18.5-foot and 16.5-foot length requirements. Overhangs into landscape areas are permitted but the area must contain only ground cover landscaping and the area may not count toward the landscaping requirement for the site. Section 18.765.040.N.2 states that aisles accommodating two-direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. The site plan indicates that the parking lot aisle is at least 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. The bicycle rack is provided within approximately 35 feet from the primary entrance to the new building. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 11 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; According to the site plan, the proposed bicycle parking area is located adjacent to a pedestrian 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 areas is visible from the proposed building. 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 site plan indicates outdoor bicycle parking areas only. 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 site plan does not indicate whether the proposed bicycle parking facilities will be covered. 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; • 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 provided a design detail for the proposed bicycle parking facility that satisfies these standards. 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. The applicant has not provided information on the proposed surface material. 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 a commercial lodging use must provide 1 bicycle parking space for every 10 rooms. The site plan indicates that 45 new rooms will be provided, which translates to a total bicycle-parking requirement of five spaces. The applicant's site plan indicates that parking for up to 10 bicycles will be provided. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 12 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 Section 18.765.070.H. states that the minimum and maximum off-street parking requirements are contained in Table 18.765.2. The proposed expansion of the Phoenix Inn Motel will add 45 new units for a total of 101 units. Table 18.765.2 requires one parking space per room for a "Commercial Lodging" use. Based on this requirement, the expanded Phoenix Inn Motel would be required to provide a total of 101 parking spaces. After completion of the proposed expansion, the applicant's materials indicate that a total of 104 parking spaces would be provided. Table 18.765.2 also includes maximum parking requirements based on Metro's Zone `A" and Zone "B" parking standards. The most restrictive maximum (1.2 spaces/room) would allow up to 122 parking spaces, significantly more than the applicant's proposal. The proposal is, therefore, within the maximum allowed. 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. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised vehicle and bicycle-parking plan for review and approval. The plan shall indicate that all vehicle parking spaces are sized in conformance with City standards and the bicycle parking spaces will be provided on a hard surface, covered and with location signage visible from the ROW. 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 applicant has submitted a tree condition and mitigation report as required by this section. The report identifies all existing trees including those designated "significant" (i.e ., over 12- inches in diameter). 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. The tree report identifies 232 caliper inches of "significant" trees and proposes to remove 56 caliper inches (24.13%). As indicated above, retention of 75% of existing trees requires no mitigation. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; The tree plan identifies all trees that are proposed for removal. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 13 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 The arborist's report specifies protection measures to be installed prior to commencement of any on-site development activities and required practices to be implemented during construction. A condition of approval will require that the arborist's recommendations are adhered to during construction. 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:As provided under 18.790.040.B., draft deed-restriction language for trees to be preserved shall also be submitted for review and approval. An approved deed restriction shall be recorded prior to occupancy. Any tree removal involving trees proposed for preservation shall be considered illegal unless documentation prepared by a certified arborist confirms that an immediate hazard to life and/or property exists and the documentation is field-verified and accepted by the City arborist prior to removal of the tree. 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 indicates that the clear vision area associated with the SW Coral Street access may not comply with this standard. A preliminary review by Staff indicates that the two closest parking spaces to SW Coral Street may be located within the clear Vision Triangle. No permanent structure or parking space may be located within a clear vision area. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the standards of Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas have not been met but that, through compliance with the conditions of approval, these standards can be satisfied. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that clearly indicates the location of clear vision areas as defined under TDC 18.795.040.B.1. 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: TDC 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 14 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 • 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 development site lies adjacent to SW Coral Street and SW Greenburg Road. SW Coral Street: Southwest Coral Street is classified as a local commercial industrial on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. This roadway classification requires a right-of-way (ROW) width of 50 feet. At present, there is approximately 30 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. Therefore, no additional ROW dedications are necessary. Southwest Coral Street is currently paved, but is not constructed to meet City standards. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct a half-street improvement adjacent to this site. The applicant's plans indicate that they will construct these improvements as a part of their development. SW Greenburg Road: Southwest Greenburg Road is classified as a major collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. The roadway is also classified as a minor arterial on the Washington County Transportation Plan map. At present, there is between 30 to 40 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. Washington County submitted comments and recommended conditions of approval to Staff related to this application. The County indicates that this roadway requires a ROW of 49 feet from the centerline. The County also requires the provision of a non-access reservation along the frontage. In order to help mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should dedicate additional ROW to provide the 49 feet from centerline to meet County standards. The applicant's materials indicate that they would dedicate ROW to provide 45 feet from the centerline. This dimension was discussed in the applicant's pre-application meeting with the City, wherein Staff estimated the ROW requirement would be 45 feet from the centerline. That estimate was based upon existing ROW north and south of this site. However, Staff pointed out to the applicant that Washington County would make the ultimate decision on this issue. Therefore, the applicant will need to dedicate the additional ROW per County standards. Since this roadway is under Washington County jurisdiction, the ROW dedication will need to be made using County forms and the applicant will need to obtain County approval for the dedication. Southwest Greenburg Road is currently improved with curb and sidewalk. There are two existing driveways adjacent to the frontage of the new building addition. Washington County indicates that the applicant will need to remove the existing driveways and replace them with curb and sidewalk to County standard. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall submit evidence to the City that they have obtained the necessary permit from the County to perform the work in the ROW of SW Greenburg Road. Water: This site lies within the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. Any new service proposed to the new building will need to be permitted by TVWD. Sanitary Sewer: There is an existing 8-inch public sanitary sewer line located in SW Locust Street that has capacity to serve this project. The applicant's plans indicate that they will extend a new sewer lateral from the main line in SW Locust Street to the new building. Storm Drainage: On-site detention will be provided via an underground, oversize pipe to be located in the parking area. The preliminary sizing calculations indicate that a 48-inch pipe will be required. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping-the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of the site and/or PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 15 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 building permit, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant's materials indicate that they plan to expand the volume of the existing pond that is located at the southwest corner of the existing motel site. The applicant's preliminary sizing calculations indicate the pond will need to increase in size by a minimum of approximately 792 cubic feet. The plans do not show how this would be accomplished, but Staff talked to the design engineer who indicated that the applicant can enlarge the pond by removing one of the existing parking stalls next to the pond and creating two vertical side walls with keystone block or similar product. There would still be two "banks" where maintenance personnel could access the pond for maintenance. This scenario would be acceptable to Staff. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Grading and Erosion Control: USA Design and Construction Standards also 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 both SW Greenburg Road and SW Coral Street. 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. This code provision only applies to the frontage from which utility service is taken. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines serving the site. The applicant's construction plans will need to show where the power, telephone and cable service will come from. The frontages and potential fees associated with this site are as follows: Roadway Frontage (If) Fee SW Greenburg Road 100 ft. $2,750 SW Coral Street 95 ft. $2,613 Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). For parcels within the USB, an addressing fee in the amount of $30 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to approval of the final plat. For this project, the addressing fee will be $30. 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; • 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 a developed site which has no remaining natural features except trees (see previous description of Tree Removal and Mitigation requirements). Therefore, this standard does not apply. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 16 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 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 tree plan indicates that more than 75% of trees over 12 caliper inches in size will be retained. 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 an expansion of a commercial lodging use. 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 p rovided 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 expansion of a commercial lodging use. Abutting properties are developed with commercial and abandoned residential 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. 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 18.360.090.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 a commercial lodging expansion. This section relates to residential development only and, therefore, is not applicable. Private outdoor area: multi-family use: Section 18.360.090.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 a commercial lodging expansion. This section relates to residential development only and, therefore, is not applicable. Shared outdoor recreation areas - multi-family use: Section 18.360.090.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 a commercial lodging expansion. This section related to residential development only and, therefore, is not applicable. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 17 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 Section 18.36O.O90.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 18.360.090.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; • Sign; or • Landscaping. The site plan indicates that the site is differentiated from the street by landscaping and street trees. The internal driveway and walkway give access to the building entrances and provide clear corridors for visitors and clients who need to gain access to the buildings. Therefore, this standard is met. Crime prevention and safety: Section 18.36O.O9O.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 of the two proposed buildings are provided with a number of windows. Therefore, this standard is met. Section 18.36O.O90.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 including lighting details on the site plan. The Tigard Police Department has reviewed this proposal and offered no additional comments or recommendations regarding exterior lighting. Therefore, this standard is met. Public transit: Section 18.36O.O9O.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. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 18 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 There is existing bus service provided by Tri-Met route #76 and #77 on SW Greenburg Road. As noted later in this decision, Tri Met has been given the opportunity to comment on this development proposal but has not recommended that any additional transit facilities be provided in conjunction with the development. Therefore, this standard is met. Landscaping: Section 18.360.090.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 27% of the overall Phoenix Inn Motel site in landscaping. 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 decision. Accessibility of walkways and structures will be addressed through the building permit process. Therefore, conformance with this standard is assured. 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. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City Operations Department has had the opportunity to review the proposal and has offered the following comments: • Is the existing water quality retention pond of adequate capacity to handle the expansion? I see no indication of this on the plan or in the written comments. Was the original design such that it allowed for expansion? Staff Response: This comment is addressed within this decision under Street and Utility Improvement Standards. The City Arborist has had the opportunity to review the proposal and has offered the following comments: • Suggested Street Trees for SW Coral Street: Corpus Kousa Chinesis, Ginko Biloba - Farimont, Shangri-La, Acer Ginnala — Flame, Prunus Cerasfera — Thundercloud, Newport, Fraxinus Pxycarpa — Raywood, Golden Desert. The Tigard Building Division, Police Department and Long Range Planning Division have all had the opportunity to review the proposal and have offered no comments or objections. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 19 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 SECTION VI. AGENCY & PROPERTY OWNER COMMENTS TCI Cable and PGE have had the opportunity to review the proposal and have offered no comments or objections. Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) had the opportunity to review the proposal and has offered the following comments: 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 to provide a water quality facility to treat the new impervious surface being constructed as part of this development. • Either provide a new water quality facility to treat the new impervious surface area or connect into and verify the existing facility has the capacity for the added area or upsize to accommodate the new impervious area. • The addition is too large for fee in-lieu. Washington County Department of Land Use & Transportation had the opportunity to review the proposal and offered the following comments: The following comments are in regard to access to SW Greenburg Road, a County-maintained Minor Arterial: NOTE: A pre-existing driveway which is part of a redeveloping site is subject to County review and conditions for access approval. COMMENTS 1. The applicant is not proposing access at this time. The County reserves the right to require additional conditions if access to SW Greenburg Road is proposed in the future. REQUIRED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT BY THE CITY OF TIGARD: A. Obtain a Right-of-way permit from the County Inspections Services Office (Contact James Johnson, 681-7181) for construction of the following required improvements: 1 . Remove existing driveways along SW Greenburg Road and replace driveway sections with curb and sidewalk to County standard. NOTE: At minimum Right-of-way permit costs include a $150 fee as well as a refundable $250 bond. This minimum estimate may not cover additional fees particular to this project. B. The following shall be recorded with Washington County (Contact the County Survey Division, Jamil Kamawal, for information, 693-4543): 1 . Dedication of additional right-of-way to provide 49 feet from centerline of SW Greenburg Road. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 20 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 2. Provision of a non-access reservation along bvJ Greenburg Road frontage. 2. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY: A. The road improvements required in Condition 1.A.1, above, shall be completed and accepted by Washington County. B. Before the City issues its Final Notice of Decision, please allow the County to review and acknowledge a draft of the City's conditions regarding access to SW Greenburg Road. Additionally, please send a copy of the subsequent Final City Notice of Decision and any appeal information to the County. Staff Comment: The required Washington County conditions have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this decision. 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 JUNE 3, 1999 AND EFFECTIVE ON JUNE 18, 1999 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 3:30 PM ON JUNE 17, 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. i17. ` /�" 1✓ z, /2 ,4,,0 �-. � June 3. 1999 PRE PAREDJBY;/. Mark J. Roberts r ' DATE -- AT$Qciate Plannc �- r/�t ( � � `- - ` June 3, 1999 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersd rff DATE Planning Manager is\curpin\mark\sdr\sdr99-01.DEC.doc PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 21 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 Lit SW CORAL STREET si opt ' e 1 r G WI,.Rfit l"!•RP/El}iC to/w; 1 . of Rt( r SIX'wµx �1►i. ii . V 0," °! c ■ 81 EXISTING 4 ai s.. .rY X "� _ •1 o BUILDING '.1' I ••` �� 1 w 0 – II 1 V) In / �LZ,11 \ NEW 45-UNIT MOTEL\ ,jjlluiii 1 0• /r Z. f Z ','Ill 't -' 115111E1 ANS .'.. .----. - __ CI / �: \ I IF maa R001 1 1 ` ^" i I LL I1 / 20.68 I\ . -219 i'1 / L \ ! �MNfO OOM.220.06 ` _ 1 1 t" l 1 +' EXISTING 56-UNIT 1 o ' I: - / o it MOTEL BUILDING $ 1 I. , — 1 I ^I -1.101�S, r/ , ! \ f I I i ' \ / .. __� w \ I I• f�e OY B E,2c I S 1 tJ 'ref=.�� ,.. I --1 ' 109 �I r N N Plve=D A2 s 1 1 • 'le I I / / \< .'' j I ' 1 4 / U [ c: EN sLK / R7 isTtq fAFf4hCt7 I 1 6 I 6 1 see SW LOCUST STREET 1-IaG•au • SITE PLAN 1 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION EXHIBIT MAP N SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 99-0002 (map is not to scale) W • CITY of TIGARD Q D GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM rr r--- . • BORDERS l I VICINITY MAP f ► ►► SDR 99-0002 7(3) SUBJEC LEHMANN PARCELS - --, I PHOENIX INN �l 8 MOTEL EXPANSION z NJ CORAL • S �' � IIII LOCUST ST i 1 ► ■ •PLELEAF T ip • A • \ . • III . 1111160 100 200 300 400 500 Feet 1111 re 378 feet .4 AII J ,- .4 ol \ City of Tigard Information on this map is for general locabon only and should be verined with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 Ahi (503)639-4171/ I Mtp�pwww.ci.li ga rd.or.u s Community Development Plot date:Apr 21, 1999;C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR iOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 1999-00002 ..yr CITY OF TIGARD Community Development PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION SlzapinflA Better Community 120 DAYS = 8/10/99 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE: PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION Site Development Review SDR 1999-00002 PROPOSAL: Major Modification approval to expand an existing motel site onto three adjacent parcels and provide an additional 3-story, 45-unit motel building and associated parking and site improvements. APPLICANT: VIP's Industries, Inc. OWNER: VIP's Motor Inns, Inc. Attn: Steven Johnson 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville, OR 97070 Wilsonville, OR 97070 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Professional Commercial; C-P. ZONING DESIGNATION: Professional Commercial: C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more intensive commercial and industrial areas. LOCATION: The Phoenix Inn Motel is located on the east side of SW Greenburg Road, north of Highway 217 and east of the Washington Square Mall. The existing Phoenix Inn Motel is located at 9575 SW Locust Street (1S126DC, Tax Lots 04700 and 04701), the expansion will occur on the following neighboring parcels: 1S126DC, Tax Lots 4500, 4600 and 4602. APPLICABLE Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, REVIEW 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. CRITERIA: SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (25 ) per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JUNE 3, 1999 AND EFFECTIVE ON JUNE 18, 1999 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal • The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 . may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. ITHE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 3:30 PM ON JUNE 17, 1999. I Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Mark J. Roberts at (503) 639-4171, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. SW CORAL STREET f T' Y41C1ilIRYonia: BUILDING `k r A �..,,, V,. . 'v - j , _ ST c -- cpa �\+".4\ . NEW 45-UNIT MOTEL -\1N\ i'"j n i;';•,` . BUILDING ADDITION `S ®1 1��0' a 0 1, / • \\ /t • wxs .rd J i /f / I ., w -1 , I f I , •--r)__- , e t�..o,VI 0 W J EXISTING 56-UNIT P( f / a MOTEL BUILDING U. % i (r/ I1---n I 7 _-- Ei Na7,S t O•r 1' w:_- � l �..J /• t' � 9 I. le rrav:a"isT,-, rear. >.' t ! 1 l i . I .% / ,,C J i. {.� I . .. w^ 7/:‘7117- U : w .a.a j+r.1Ti1 rnRwwq 4 / MG�O I I a SW LOCUST STREET " SITE PLAN T PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION EXHIBIT MAP N SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SOR)99-0002 (map is nol to scale) :< `I I I I VICINITY MAP MI i 4,1111111_ It1 I — SGk 94-OUu2 (3)SUBJEC � "" .�.�..■ PARCELS —,1I —1 PHOENIX INN - ■■um.■ T MOTEL EXPANSION 8 - 1 111 L r IIIIIII!1 — �s, ST / ------ . i rj Ill $ N \ b ..w� \ I • City of Tigard \ \ 1 ri 7/ — 1 ,,,__ NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENH( =R,VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES I t-,f IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROIvi, LY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION .•��� SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CITY OF TIGARD Community Deveropment Shaping A Better Community 500-FOOT PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE: April 22, 1999 FILE NAME/NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 99-0002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PROPOSAL: Site Development Review approval to construct a 45-unit, 3-story addition to an existing 56-unit Phoenix Inn Motel. Other proposed site improvements include additional off-street parking and landscaping. ZONE: Professional Commercial; C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more-intensive commercial and industrial areas. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: The project site is located at 9575 SW Locust Street, east of SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S126DC, Tax Lots 04500, 04600 and 04602. 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 MAY 6, 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 99-0002 PHOENIX INN EXPANSION 14-DAY PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION Failure of any party to address relevant approval criteria with ficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land .,se Board of Appeals or Circuit COUI L 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." sceouts VICINITY MAP 1 I I_ /iHuuu: — SDR 99-0002 (3)SUBJEC = PHOENIX INN PARCELS 111,, i ii H II MOTEL EXPANSION N 111■ ■■111 ■ • T $ I■1■!: I i ''-'1- /II11111!: --r- e • W All lalls SDR 99-0002 PHOENIX INN EXPANSION 14-DAY PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: May 25, 1999 TO: Mark Roberts, Associate Planner FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer f✓1�--� RE: SDR 99-00002, Phoenix Inn Motel Expansion Description: This application is for a 45-unit, 3-story addition to an existing 56-unit Phoenix Inn Motel. The site is located at 9575 SW Locust Street (WCTM 1S1 26DC, Tax Lots 4500, 4600 and 4602. 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 Locust Street and SW Greenburg Road. SW Coral Street SW Coral Street is classified as a local commercial industrial on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. This roadway classification requires a right-of-way (ROW) width of 50 feet. At present, there is approximately 30 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. Therefore, no additional ROW dedications are necessary. SW Coral Street is currently paved, but is not constructed to meet City standards. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct a half-street improvement adjacent to this site. The applicant's plans indicate that they will construct these improvements as a part of their development. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 99-00002 Phoenix Inn Motel Expansion PAGE 1 SW Greenburg Road SW Greenburg Road is classified as a major collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. The roadway is also classified as a minor arterial on the Washington County Transportation Plan map. At present, there is between 30 to 40 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. Washington County submitted comments and recommended conditions of approval to Staff related to this application. The County indicates that this roadway requires a ROW of 49 feet from the centerline. The County also requires the provision of a non- access reservation along the frontage. In order to help mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should dedicate additional ROW to provide the 49 feet from centerline to meet County standards. The applicant's materials indicate that they would dedicate ROW to provide 45 feet from the centerline. This dimension was discussed in the applicant's preapplication meeting with the City, wherein Staff estimated the ROW requirement would be 45 feet from the centerline. That estimate was based upon existing ROW north and south of this site. However, Staff pointed out to the applicant that Washington County would make the ultimate decision on this issue. Therefore, the applicant will need to dedicate the additional ROW per County standards. Since this roadway is under Washington County jurisdiction, the ROW dedication will need to be made using County forms and the applicant will need to obtain County approval for the dedication. SW Greenburg Road is currently improved with curb and sidewalk. There are two existing driveways adjacent to the frontage of the new building addition. Washington County indicates that the applicant will need to remove the existing driveways and replace them with curb and sidewalk to County standard. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall submit evidence to the City that they have obtained the necessary permit from the County to perform the work in the ROW of Greenburg Road. 2. Water: This site lies within the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. Any new service proposed to the new building will need to be permitted by TVWD. 3. Sanitary Sewer: There is an existing 8-inch public sanitary sewer line located in SW Locust Street that has capacity to serve this project. The applicant's plans indicate that they will extend a new sewer lateral from the main line in Locust Street to the new building. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 99-00002 Phoenix Inn Motel Expansion PAGE 2 4. Storm Drainage: Onsite detention will be provided via an underground, oversize pipe to be located in the parking area. The preliminary sizing calculations indicate that a 48-inch pipe will be required. 5. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant's materials indicate that they plan to expand the volume of the existing pond that is located at the southwest corner of the existing motel site. The applicant's preliminary sizing calculations indicate the pond will need to increase in size by a minimum of approximately 792 cubic feet. The plans do not show how this would be accomplished, but Staff talked to the design engineer who indicated that the applicant can enlarge the pond by removing one of the existing parking stalls next to the pond and creating two vertical side walls with keystone block or similar product. There would still be two "banks" where maintenance personnel could access the pond for maintenance. This scenario would be acceptable to Staff. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 99-00002 Phoenix Inn Motel Expansion PAGE 3 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 both SW Greenburg Road and SW Coral Street. 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. This code provision only applies to the frontage from which utility service is taken. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines serving the site. The applicant's construction plans will need to show where the power, telephone and cable service will come from. The frontages and potential fees associated with this site are as follows: Roadway Frontage (If) Fee SW Greenburg Road 100 ft. $2,750.00 SW Coral Street 95 ft. $2,613.00. 8. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). For parcels within the USB, an addressing fee in the amount of $ 30.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to approval of the final plat. For this project, the addressing fee will be $30.00. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 99-00002 Phoenix Inn Motel Expansion PAGE 4 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 site and/or building permit, a public improvement permit and compliance agreement is required for this project. Five (5) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public improvement plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall. 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. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Greenburg Road to increase the right-of-way to 49 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on Washington County forms and the final document shall be reviewed and approved by the County. (County contact: Jamil Kamawal, 693-4543). 4. The applicant shall construct a half-street improvement along the frontage of SW Coral Street. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section from curb to centerline equal to 17 feet; B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage; C. concrete curb, or curb and gutter as needed; D. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey surface and/or subsurface runoff; E. 5 foot concrete sidewalk; ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 99-00002 Phoenix Inn Motel Expansion PAGE 5 F. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements; G. street striping; H. streetlights as determined by the City Engineer; underground utilities; J. street signs (if applicable); K. driveway apron (if applicable); and L. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Coral Street in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 5. A profile of SW Coral Street shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 6. The applicant shall provide a non-access reservation along the frontage of SW Greenburg Road. This shall be coordinated through Washington County. (County contact: Jamil Kamawal, 693-4543). 7. The applicant shall remove the existing driveways along SW Greenburg Road and replace these sections with curb and sidewalk per Washington County standards. The applicant shall submit a copy of the County permit for this work to the City prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. 8. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 9. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. 10. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of$30.00. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 99-00002 Phoenix Inn Motel Expansion PAGE 6 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: 11 . Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one-year maintenance assurance for said improvements. 12. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) mylars, and 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" format, if available; otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable. Note: if the public improvement drawings were hand-drawn, then a diskette is not required. 13. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along either SW Greenburg Road or SW Coral Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. This condition shall only apply to the roadway from where electrical, telephone and cable service is taken. 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. The applicant's construction plans will need to show where the power, telephone and cable service will come from. The frontages and potential fees associated with this site are as follows: Roadway Frontage (If) Fee SW Greenburg Road 100 ft. $2,750.00 SW Coral Street 95 ft. $2,613.00. The fee shall be paid prior to final inspection of the building. is\e n g\b r i a n r\c om m e n t s\s d r99-0002.b d r.d oc ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 99-00002 Phoenix Inn Motel Expansion PAGE 7 -APR-23 99Jb9:48t FROM:WASHCO LAND DEU SERU 503-691-2908 TO:503 684 7297 PAGE:01/02 WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON UtiDepartment of Land Use and Transportation,Land Development Services 155 North First avenue.Suite 350-13,HiIlsDoro,Oregon 97124 (503)648-8761 • FAX:(503)681-2908 April 28, 1999 Mark Roberts, Associate Planner City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Fax: 684-7297 (2 Pages) RE: Phoenix Inn Expansion City File Number: SDR 99-0002 Tax Map and Lot Number: 1S1 26DC 1 4500, 4600 8 4602 Location: SW Greenburg Road between Locust and Coral Streets Applicant: VIP's Industries, Inc. r-- 11 „I ill...r' �1 , _____....11 at - , 11111" i ,---. iir /7_ i--. rs .. Iti. 1 -- __ G - o )sr -6D�^0, ) Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation has reviewed this development application and submits the following comments and required conditions for development adjacent to SW Greenburg Road, a County-maintained A-4 Minor Arterial. NOTE: A pre-existing driveway which is part of a redeveloping site is subject to County review and conditions for access approval. COMMENTS 1, The applicant is not proposing access at this time The County reserves the right to require additional conditions if access to SW Greenburg Road is proposed in future. REQUIRED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT BY THE CITY OF TIGARD: APR-2D 994b9:49. FROM:WASHCO LAND nEU SERU 503-681-2906 TO:583 684 7297 PAGE:02'02 County Transportation Review April 28, 1999 Page 2 A. Obtain a Right-of-Way Permit from the County Inspections Services Office (Contact James Johnson, 681-7181) for construction of the following improvements: 1. Remove existing driveways along SW Greenburg Road and replace driveway sections with curb and sidewalk to County standard. NOTE: At minimum, Right-of-Way Permit costs include a $150.00 fee as well as a refundable $250.00 bond. This minimum estimate may not cover additional fees particular to this project. B. The following shall be recorded with Washington County (Contact the County Survey Division, Jamil Kamawal, for information, 693-4543): 1. Dedication of additional right-of-way to provide 49 feet from centerline of SW Greenburg Road. 2. Provision of a non-access reservation along SW Greenburg Road frontage. II. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY: A The road improvements required in condition I.A.1,, above, shall be completed and accepted by Washington County. Please note; Requirements identified within this letter are considered by the County to be mandatory minimum safety improvements. The City may require improvements and submittal information in addition to minimum County requirements. Before the City issues its Final Notice of Decision, please allow the County to review and acknowledge a draft of the City's conditions regarding access to SW Greenburg Road. Additionally, please send a copy of the subsequent Final City Notice of Decision and any appeal information to the County. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions, please contact me at 844-8131.(7 4...,„_.e /a.) ‘e.1.--.-- (' :—--..--'Anne LaMountain Associate Planner c: Phil Healy, Senior Planner,Land Development Services Carolyn Cook,Associate Planner,Assurances Jamil Kamawal,Survey Division Transportation File Desk File VIP Industries,Inc., Steve V Johnson,29757 SW Boones Ferry Road,Wilsonville,OR 97070 • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS Can of OF Community DeveCopment Shaping g3etter Community RATE: April 22,1999 TO: Julia Huffman,USA/SWM Program U L (i � f] [Y1 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division APR Z 3 ;yy� STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner 1x3151 Phone: [5031639-4171/Fax: [5031684-1291 ------ 7777777,7/1/AVAINVAIVIV • SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDR] 99-0002 • PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION • A request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 45-unit, 3-story addition to an existing 56-unit Phoenix Inn Motel. Other proposed site improvements include additional off-street parking and landscaping. LOCATION: The project site is located at 9575 SW Locust Street, east of SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S126DC, Tax Lots 04500, 04600 and 04602. ZONE: Professional Commercial; C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more- intensive commercial and industrial areas. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: THURSDAY - MAY 6,1999. 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: 4 (ease provide the following information)Name of Persontsl Commenting:---- s") S J e Phone Number[sl: — G 4 SDR 99-0002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS Urr14 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY RECEIVED PLANNING MEMORANDUM MAY 1 0 1999 CITY Uf I i�f1FiQ DATE: May 5, 1999 TO: Mark Roberts, City of Tigard FROM: Julia Huffman, USA J J.,.c SUBJECT: Phoenix Inn Motel Expansion, SDR 99-0002 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. • Either provide a new water quality facility to treat the new impervious area or connect into and verify the existing facility has the capacity for the added area or upsize to accommodate the new impervious area. • The addition is too large for fee in lieu. 155 North First Avenue,Suite 270, MS 10 Phone: 503/648-8621 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124-3072 FAX:503/640-3525 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CfroF ARD Co mmunity Deve(opment Shaping (Better Community DATE: April 22,1999 TO: Patty Stambaugh,US West Communications Engineering FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner 1x315) Phone: [503)639-41/1/Fax: [5031684-1291 i.i,—,.i i i yyri�iii�eriiiI.►i0iiiiwvi:., ruv..i,.i.•v,►i�iiriii�iiiriiiiiiiiiiiiir i i i i i i i i i,►� SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRI 99-0002 ➢ PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION < A request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 45-unit, 3-story addition to an existing 56-unit Phoenix Inn Motel. Other proposed site improvements include additional off-street parking and landscaping. LOCATION: The project site is located at 9575 SW Locust Street, east of SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S126DC, Tax Lots 04500, 04600 and 04602. ZONE: Professional Commercial; C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more- intensive commercial and industrial areas. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: THURSDAY - MAY 6,1999. 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: • 4 No v■s s-� : ��•E (Please provide the following it formation)Name of Person(s)Commenting: �� � �'o f44,44, I ~ Phone Number(s): 1.1r • SDR 99-0002 PHOENIX INN MOTE EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY TIOARD Community Development ShapingA Better Community DATE: April 22,1999 TO: Brian Moore,PGE Service Design Consultant RECEIVED PLANNING FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division APR 2 8 1999 STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner(x3151 CITY OF TIGARD Phone: (5031 639-4111/Fax: (5031 684-1291 0 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 99-0002 ➢ PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION Q A request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 45-unit, 3-story addition to an existing 56-unit Phoenix Inn Motel. Other proposed site improvements include additional off-street parking and landscaping. LOCATION: The project site is located at 9575 SW Locust Street, east of SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S126DC, Tax Lots 04500, 04600 and 04602. ZONE: Professional Commercial; C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more- intensive commercial and industrial areas. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: THURSDAY - MAY 6,1999. 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 comfinents prow dcd V (c&ease provide the following it formation)Name of Person(s)Commenting: Phone Number(sl: E570-44.00a, SDR 99-0002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS Apr-26-99 10 : 15A TCI 5"i -Helens 503 "197 5686 P.02 ///\\ /Y 4 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY Of TIGARD Abigi Cola mu rri t),'l>eVelujtnneWt t RECEIVED PLANNING ,sliivprrw,?X,;`.letter Community DATE: ATiril22..1999 TO: Pat McGann,Tel Cablevision of Oregon APR 2 7 1999 CITY OF TIGARD FROM: City of,Tigard PlannintQivislnn STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner[x3151 Phone: [5031639-4111/Fax: 15031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR)99-0002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION .. .. .. : _ I .,. . . . , .�...:, . , . .I.,..., ' '''.. . .,, .. :,:: A request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 45-unit, 3-story addition to an existing 56-unit Phoenix Inn Motel, Other proposed site improvements include additional off-street parking and landscaping. LOCATION: The project site is located at 9575 SW Locust Street, east of SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 'I 1 S126DC, Tax Lots 04500, 04600 and 04602. ZONE: Professional Commercial; C-P. The C-P Zoning District d is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more- intensive commercial and industrial areas. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790. 18.795 and 1 8.810. Attached are the Site Pian,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, y ,. )roEQ,y.,Q,IU,B.. QMMENI, ,f .t Y: THUASphy - MAY 6,,1999. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you.are.nahIO..to respond by the above dale, 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. Pleasecontact ___...._.---_-....._.....-._...._..........._......__......_..-_...--....._..._.__....._...__.._..._.._.-_._.--.............-...._..._.........-._... ._...........__.... .......-- of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. --..., Written comments provided below: rst'trase pros.i;le t.f� ��grwintfg in formateOri i Name of Perseids]Commenting: I Phalle Numbertsi: (-45-0,3) 6 a a 3z. SOR59-0002 PHOF:NX"!FAN AAnTPi CXPArJ Ici\t orts,f,cc'rcr r r" •K.•.,-mm,` Apr -26-99 10 : 14A TCI 5He1enz 503 "497 5686 P.01 ji JO FAX COVER SHEET DATE : 21/12 /99 T I ME : /11 TO: J I 7 I 45.. 411' - ,(77 h6Ale0 24.4a2V/Al Div,slow FROM - Al --- I roodziyAfigwE., TCI OF TUALATIN VALLEY 14200 S.W. BRIGADOON CT. BEAVERTON , OREGON 97005 PHONE: (503) 605-4895 FAX : (503) 60.5"-q$66 NUMBER OF PACES IN THIS TRANSMISSION INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET: NOTES : . . ICI or Tualaort Valt6Y.!r1c. 14200 SM,SiVadoon Court Boaverton,Of11 9700S (503)6054895 FAX;503)448-13004 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS o�Ai OF IGARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community DATE: April 22,1999 TO: John Roy,Property Manager/Operations Department FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner[x315] Phone: [503]639-4171/Fax: [503]684-7291 0 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDR] 99-0002 ➢ PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION 4 ..,rrr,S rvrrr A request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 45-unit, 3-story addition to an existing 56-unit Phoenix Inn Motel. Other proposed site improvements include additional off-street parking and landscaping. LOCATION: The project site is located at 9575 SW Locust Street, east of SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S126DC, Tax Lots 04500, 04600 and 04602. ZONE: Professional Commercial; C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential,areas and more- intensive commercial and industrial areas. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicants Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: THURSDAY - MAY 6,1999. 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. 1/ Written comments provided below: 4 1 iirz• fe 444 OferAxS/E,-") Ak2 AND 046 v r `5 0,44. �; 4A) ctheit blj1 66-14/"I-�-s . 1,(,�4S gee iq A)1t1-rt S1 ,6 •4t' t. 4411`T A/ 1? I 1 1,I,) • • it (4'lease provide the following information)Name of Person's)Commenting: ;'% I Phone Number[sl: 3 3 ,� SDR 99-0002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS S v& - BEGS e�(LN�7`� �CC�JSA Critt.lc,uslc, irh■L.�D 6,LOi r — FA, NI'AnX .% -�...p� - pizoivUSeE c .fAsam- - NE pc% ,, FEPt4 r OKtiC AC2 pA- 4�o3� Gc .DEM DES z� REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF IOARD Community cDeveCopment Shaping Better Community DATE: April 22,1999 TO: Jim Wolf,Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner 1x315) Phone: [503)639-4171/Fax: [5031684-7297 • SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 99-0002 • • • PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION < A request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 45-unit, 3-story addition to an existing 56-unit Phoenix Inn Motel. Other proposed site improvements include additional off-street parking and landscaping. LOCATION: The project site is located at 9575 SW Locust Street, east of SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S126DC, Tax Lots 04500, 04600 and 04602. ZONE: Professional Commercial; C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more- intensive commercial and industrial areas. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: THURSDAY - MAY 6,1999. 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. PL,E7CHECK 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: (ease provide the farming information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: C\vM vX 0\c I Phone Number[sl: ' O SDR 99-0002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIIOARD Community(Development SnapingA Better Community DATE: April 22,1999 TO: Nadine Smith,Long Range Planning Supervisor FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner[x3151 Phone: [5031639-4171/Fax: 15031684-1291 47..r1,..I/�i�1rrrAIINIMr/l4.ns iAMOW AY1 1.4.0%rl/wvwswN1W4WAAIMONOW IF:WN.�s,I,I4..n..as,,...r.. .•4,∎ ••■ i/r r r�r IFWi W/�y/IrAI/Irrr%r/r/~,I/IV..rrr.P, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SDR) 99-0002 • • ➢ PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION A request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 45-unit, 3-story addition to an existing 56-unit Phoenix Inn Motel. Other proposed site improvements include additional off-street parking and landscaping. LOCATION: The project site is located at 9575 SW Locust Street, east of SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S126DC, Tax Lots 04500, 04600 and 04602. ZONE: Professional Commercial; C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more- intensive commercial and industrial areas. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18/80, 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: THURSDAY - MAY 6,1999. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: ✓ We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: v (Please provide the following information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: Phone Number(s): SDR 99-0002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS C‘,. .1--0<-14, 6 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY FTI(3ARD Community Devefopment Shaping,4 Better Community DATE: April 22,1999 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts,Associate Planner(x315) Phone: (503)639-4171/Fax: (503)684-7291 �►iwiwrirrrwm►r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r rwiwir, .rrwiwrw wiwrwiiiiiwiwiowiiaawiwiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirwiiiiri SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDR]99-0002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION < 0 A request for Site Development Review approval to construct a 45-unit, 3-story addition to an existing 56-unit Phoenix Inn Motel. Other proposed site improvements include additional off-street parking and landscaping. LOCATION: The project site is located at 9575 SW Locust Street, east of SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S126DC, Tax Lots 04500, 04600 and 04602. ZONE: Professional Commercial; C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more- intensive commercial and industrial areas. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan,Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: THURSDAY - MAY 6,1999. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: v os (Please provide the foffotying information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: Phone Number(sl: SDR 99-0002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION REQUEST FOR COMMENTS RE IUEST FOR 1 1 IMMENTS (--; NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE a COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS ` iiIT Area: (CI (El (SI (WI CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS [Tl Place for review in library MT Boaktsl FILE NMI: , '''r-l-O Z , � � 't . L• CITY OFFICES ADVANCED PLANNING/Nadine Smith,Fanneq supervu« COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./cMpmnl secs Technclans /POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Gm.Prevention Officer BUILDING DIV./David Scott,a,ka.n9°e..' .,,/ENGINEERING DEPT./Brian Rager,o,pmnl Revow Engineer _WATER DEPT./Michael Miller,uw.manage, CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,GayRecoroer OPERATIONS DEPT./John Roy,Properly Manager _OTHER // SPECIAL DISTRICTS TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.* ,/TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE 111 ,/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,Neehbma coon. 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 11f _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street,NE _CITY OF DURHAM 11r 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 ManagementCoontnra &tor _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV. DVLP. 333 SW First Avenue Mel Huie,Greenspaces Coormnator(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 11r 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(CPA's) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 Routing TTRC-Attn: Renae Ferrera /ODOT,REGION 1 * Scott King(CPAs) PO Box 3621 Sonya Kazen,oeipmr.tie,Coon _Mike Borreson(Englneeq _CITY OF PORTLAND Portland,OR 97208-3621 123 NW Flanders Jim Tice(iGAs) David Knowles,Planning Bureau Dir. Portland,OR 97209-4037 Tom liar (Current PI.Apps) Portland Building 106,Rm. 1002 _OREGON,DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY/ ��411W ent Pl.Apps.) 1120 SW Fifth Avenue 811 SW Sixth Avenue ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A 1M Sr.Cartographer(cPazcu)as rs Portland,OR 97204 Portland,OR 97204 Jane Estes,Pem,e specialist 5440 SW Westgate Drive,Suite 350 ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A Portland,OR 97221-2414 Right-of-Way Section(Vacasonsi Rick Reeves 123 NW Flanders Portland,OR 97209-4037 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES _PORTLAND WESTERN R/R, BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE RJR,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Burlington Northern Santa Fe R/R Predecessor) Robert I. Melbo,President&General Manager 110 W. 10th Avenue Albany,OR 97321 / _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.RJR _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS ✓TCI CABLEVISION OF OREGON TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer(Annexations only) Pat McGann Michael Kiser,Project Planner 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court 710 NE Holladay Street Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 Portland,OR 97232 //Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 /'ORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC NNW NATURAL GAS COMPANY _GENERAL TELEPHONE US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Brian Moore,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer Elaine Self,Engineering Patty Stambaugh,Engineering 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue MC: ORO3O546 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 Merlo Road Tigard,OR 97223 Beaverton,OR 97006 * - IIIOICATEs AVTOMA TIC NOTIFICATION IF WITHIN 1004 OF THE 5418JCCT PROPERTY FOR A.Nr/ALL CITY PROitCIS. (PROJECT PLANNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INDICATING PARTIES TO NOTIFY/ h\patty\masters\rfcnotice.mst 15-Mar-99 MAILING RECORDS . A AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OFTIGARD Community'Development ' Shaping Better Community STATE OAF OREGON ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for the City of rTigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check Appropriate Box(s)Below} ❑ NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR: ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) I City of Tigard Planning Director © NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR 1999-00002/PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) 0 City of Tigard Planning Director 7 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 ❑ NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. FOR:. .I I— AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearings) City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Council L NOTICE OF: (Type/Kind of Notice) FOR: 1 (File No/Name Reference) (Date of Pubic Hearing,if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICE'S] of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B", on the 3td day of 1 e,1999,,.and deposited in the United States Mail on the 3" day of June,1999, postage prepaid. ' 1k &____ mot- me/. (Person that Prepared Notice) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the '�� day of _,.W�. , 19 . 0�'•�., OFFICIAL SE.-. ./,, r.-�=r�: DIANE M JELDEt•ir;v.. J� l/, . /_�■ NOTARY r'UBc(C OREGi) N II t :i ' I i I I I ® COMMISSION NO 04614 My Commission Expires: '� MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07,f99� r i_, ,■ FXTNTR1T oom NOTICE OE' PEII DECISION sni DE# IIPMEIMT IW IS1101999-00002 TIG CITY OF TIGARD Community Development I OENIII iNitm,onieusluisioN Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 8/10/99 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE: PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION Site Development Review SDR 1999-00002 PROPOSAL: Major Modification approval to expand an existing motel site onto three adjacent parcels and provide an additional 3-story, 45-unit motel building and associated parking and site improvements. APPLICANT: VIP's Industries, Inc. OWNER: VIP's Motor Inns, Inc. Attn: Steven Johnson 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville, OR 97070 Wilsonville, OR 97070 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Professional Commercial; C-P. ZONING DESIGNATION: Professional Commercial: C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more intensive commercial and industrial areas. LOCATION: The Phoenix Inn Motel is located on the east side of SW Greenburg Road, north of Highway 217 and east of the Washington Square Mall. The existing Phoenix Inn Motel is located at 9575 SW Locust Street (1S126DC, Tax Lots 04700 and 04701), the expansion will occur on the following neighboring parcels: 1 S126DC, Tax Lots 4500, 4600 and 4602. APPLICABLE Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, REVIEW 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. CRITERIA: SECTION II. DECISION Notice • hereby given thstths City+ Tigard Comm ni Development Director's designee has APPROVED the abc e request s bje+ tt r iin dii ns of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (25G) per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JUNE 3, 1999 AND EFFECTIVE ON JUNE 18, 1999 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 . may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed • with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 3:30 PM ON JUNE 17, 1999. Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Mark J. Roberts at (503) 639-4171 , Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. SW CORAL STREET •r:rt• a .s'Im 1 EXISTING s - -a BUILDING _ • f.) Z I- .. -„,„.` - 'ETC... --... EI•,� _.' •.. 5_ ��,I. 4t!At\ NEW N3-UNIT MOTEL . \� i esign !_ 'i i i 1 *\ euILaNGAOarroN �1 ��� C7 Y .' \ \�� \\ ate Z CL gp ' a� j mul�L�R I 0 . 11 ':a_ L__71 1 (-1 r . z 1 - 4%7t`, b.VII 0 W I EXISTING 36-UNIT `' fiLt ? „,...._ / o MOTELBUI.DING B / -n � -W M Notes t. „ I' 'l'.' I+'I i `� —..� /C I, i.�yy 1. RGMOVC CxI1TiNC.�SF� >- ! I -_ I / / t�R.4 IN N6N/I.YIC�I.CC.,6 I l U I R I � W LRR I: I7�i��MRKIwr;, - f V ��� -SW LOCUST STREET ;ma* SITE PLAN T PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION EXHIBIT MAP N SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDR199-0002 (map is not to scale) _ / III BORDERS f ` I VICINITY MAP apI� • SDR 99_0002 MTh (3)SUB,EC _ . �l�■■ PHOENIX INN F�-La ;=I♦I= MOTEL EXPANSION ..uuI.■ - s M:11111111.1 i 'I ” ' 11—Ir- mo 1111111111111 - •%MI 1 .. . AI .1 N NW IN ' m_- —• \ `-• I 11 Ciry.. , of+sw.n EXHIBIT B 1 S 126C0-01107 1 S 126C0-01900 WASHINGTON SQUARE INC CRESCENT GROVE CEMETERY ASS P O BOX 21545 9925 SW GREENBURG ROAD SEATTLE,WA 98111 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 126DC-01004 1 S 126DC-01006 ROTH JEFFREY A&BETTY A JOYCE DON H 9445 SW LEHMANN 226 NW HERMOSA BLVD TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97210 1 S 126DC-03100 1 S 126DC-03200 TYROFF JACK R ELLEN D ERICKSON 0 K&ARDIS R TRUSTEES 9330 SW LEHMAN 9350 SW LEHMAN ST PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 126DC-03300 1 S 126DC-03301 ATHERTON REALTY PARTNERSHIP CROFT Z RUTH 2100 S WOLF 6060 SW 68TH CT DES PLAINES, IL 60018 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 S 126DC-03302 1S1 26DC-03500 MURRAY DOUGLAS J MORROW KENNETH C AUDREY 9450 SW LEHMAN 9411 SW CORAL PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S1 26DC-03600 1S1 26DC-03700 HANSEN MELVIN L JUNE A NEWBREY M E&RUTH L 9395 SW CORAL 603 SW LARKSPUR CT PORTLAND,OR 97223 SUBLIMITY,OR 97385 1S1 26DC-03701 1 S 126DC-03800 ZIMMERMAN LARRY D&DONNA J FISHER MICHAEL Q 9335 SW CORAL ST 9255 SW CORAL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S1 26DC-04000 1 S 126DC-04100 HEFFLER ROBERT ARNOLD CORYELL JACK M ALICE 0 9260 SW CORAL 9900 SW 92ND PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 S 126DC-04200 1 S 126DC-04400 CHAVEZ ALFRED& MARTIN ROBERT CLARE 9900 SW 92ND ST 585 MADRONA LN PORTLAND,OR 97223 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 1 S 126DC-04500 1S1 26DC-04600 DRI •RD IAN VIP'S MOTOR INNS INC 9520 - ' ORAL 29757 SW BOONES FERRY RD •+RTLAND,O' •7223 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 1 S 126DC-04601 1 6DC-04602 O'DAY F BRIAN&SUSAN A BOIVI • • SUE& 9970 SW GREEENBURG RD 9990 S • G'- NBURG RD TIGARD,OR 97223 DRTLAND,OR 23 1 S 126OC-04700 1 6DC-04701 PHOENIX INNS LLC PHO I LLC 29757 SW BOONES FERRY RD 29757 ONES FERRY RD WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 pL-S`ONVILLER-7070 1 S 1260C-04800 1S• '••DC-04801 BAKER JAMES& BAKER : & 9495 SW LOCUST#A 9495 ' LS• ST#A PORTLAND,OR 97223 RTLAND,OR • 223 1 S 126DC-04900 1 S126DC-05000 BBH INVESTMENTS MAURER GRANT D 9445 SW LOCUST 9385 SW LOCUST ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 126DC-05100 1 S 126DC-05101 LOOS HARRY AND BEVERLY A HARRIS GREGORY E 9365 SW LOCUST ST 9036 NW BENSON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97229 1 S 126DC-06500 1 S 12:l C-06600 LUNDMARK HOMES LLC LUNDMA' ! 1 ES LLC 3381 COEUR D'ALENE DR 3381 C• 0R •'•LENE DR WEST LINN,OR 97038 • LINN,OR 9 ` 8 1S126'.-06700 1512.0--07500 LUNDMAR •• S LLC WINDWOOP •S■BTRUCTION INC 3381 CO-•' D NE DR 12655 S* ••RT `•KOTA ST LINN,OR 97: T .•'D,OR 97223 1S126DC-07600 1S1 .0C-07700 WINDWOOD CONSTRUCTION INC WINDWOS•' ONSTRUCTION INC 12655 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 1265 NOR •AKOTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 ARD,OR 97223 1S126DC-07800 1S1 •:-00700 LEHMANN SQUARE HOMEOWNERS KNICKERB' K •ROP INC XXIV 19305 ROBIN CIR#55 10300 SW - RG RD STE 200 WEST LINN,OR 97068 P•• •ND,OR 97223 1S135AB-00900 1S135AB-01002 KNICKERBOCKER PROP INC XXIV KNIC • •:•-'ER PROP INC XXIV 10300 SW GREENBURG RD STE 200 1030' : G-- NBURG RD STE 200 PORTLAND,OR 97223 •+RTLAND,OR 9 23 1 S 13 AB-04400 1S • •2-04500 KNICK •:•' ER PROP INC XXIV KNICKE'?: KER PROP INC XXIV 10311 • - ENBURG RD STE 200 10,0 W GR NBURG RD STE 200 -PORTLAND,OR • 223 - ORTLAND,OR • 223 1S - •B-04600 1S135BA-00102 KNICKER: %4 ER PROP INC XXIV WINMAR OREGON INC 10300 :I GREENB I :'D STE 200 PO BOX 21545 P6•TLAND,OR 97223 SEATTLE,WA 98111 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OFTIGARD Community(Development Shaping 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 Dex(s)Below} E NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR:, • c AMENDED NOTICE (Rle No/Name Reference) City of Tigard Planning Director © NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR 1999-00002/PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) E City of Tigard Planning Director NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: G`'i AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) 'Date of Public Heannq) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. FOR:. • AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Pubic Hearings) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission • Tigard City Council b NOTICE OF: (Type,K,nd of Nccice) FOR: (File No Name Reference) ;Date of Pubic Hearing,If applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICE'S] of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B", on the 3r" day of lune,1999, and deposited in the United States Mail on the 3t° day of lune,1999, postage prepaid. / - . . yitn i/..4ii -.7_,?07el____ (Person that Prepared Notice) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the C day of • L.. _ 1 ��'�'� Eè0K0sM r 5: MO;� COMMISSIONNO.MBER P7 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07,1999 My Commission Expires: l 1 I CEOY'TYPEIIREC IDN SITE REVEL REVENOPMENT SINEW Men)1999-00002 CITY OF TIOARD Community DevekTment 11111111014111111KOTEI EXPANSION S � 9 Bet � (n 'n A tern 120 DAYS = 8110199 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE: PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION Site Development Review SDR 1999-00002 PROPOSAL: Major Modification approval to expand an existing motel site onto three adjacent parcels and provide an additional 3-story, 45-unit motel building and associated parking and site improvements. APPLICANT: VIP's Industries, Inc. OWNER: VIP's Motor Inns, Inc. Attn: Steven Johnson 29757 SW Boones Ferry Rd. 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville, OR 97070 Wilsonville, OR 97070 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Professional Commercial; C-P. ZONING DESIGNATION: Professional Commercial: C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more intensive commercial and industrial areas. LOCATION: The Phoenix Inn Motel is located on the east side of SW Greenburg Road, north of Highway 217 and east of the Washington Square Mall. The existing Phoenix Inn Motel is located at 9575 SW Locust Street (1S126DC, Tax Lots 04700 and 04701), the expansion will occur on the following neighboring parcels: 1S126DC, Tax Lots 4500, 4600 and 4602. APPLICABLE Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, REVIEW 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. CRITERIA: SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has ;.r' 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. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 1 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 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 landscape plan shall include a total of seven parking lot trees. The applicant may choose to relocate existing landscape trees directly abutting the parking lot where they may be counted as parking lot trees. The plan shall also finalize the selection of street tree species and demonstrate compliance with the street tree spacing standards of Chapter 18.745. 2. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan indicating the proposed location of a new or expanded trash enclosure with detailed sizing and design information for review and approval. The plan shall demonstrate compliance with all the applicable standards of Chapter 18.755. For the enclosure sizing assessment, the applicant may demonstrate compliance with any one of the four methods under Section 18.755.040.A. The applicant shall also submit plans for any new or expanded enclosure to the Franchise Hauler for review and submit a copy of the Hauler's approval letter to the City. 3. The applicant shall submit a revised vehicle and bicycle-parking plan for review and approval. The plan shall indicate that all vehicle parking spaces are sized in conformance with City standards and the bicycle parking spaces will be provided on a hard surface, covered and with location signage visible from the right-of-way (ROW). 4. As provided in the Tigard Development Code (TDC) 18.790.040.B., draft deed-restriction language for trees to be preserved shall also be submitted for review and approval. An approved deed restriction shall be recorded prior to occupancy. Any tree removal involving trees proposed for preservation shall be considered illegal unless documentation prepared by a certified arborist confirms that an immediate hazard to life and/or property exists and the documentation is field-verified and accepted by the City arborist prior to removal of the tree. 5. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that clearly indicates the location of clear vision areas as defined under TDC 18.795.040.B.1. The site plan shall indicate that no temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height will be located within a clear vision area. 6. Prior to issuance of a site and/or building permit, a public improvement permit and compliance agreement is required for this project. Five (5) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public improvement plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall. 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. 8. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW Greenburg Road to increase the right-of-way to 49 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on Washington County forms and the final document shall be reviewed and approved by the County. (County contact: Jamil Kamawal, 693-4543). PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 2 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 9. The applicant's construction plans shall indicate that they will construct a half-street improvement along the frontage of SW Coral Street as proposed. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section from curb to centerline equal to 17 feet; B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage; C. concrete curb, or curb and gutter as needed; D. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey surface and/or subsurface runoff; E. 5-foot concrete sidewalk; F. street trees behind the sidewalk spaced per TDC requirements; G. street striping; H. streetlights as determined by the City Engineer; underground utilities; J. street signs (if applicable); K. driveway apron (if applicable); and L. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Coral Street in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 10. A profile of SW Coral Street shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 11 . The applicant shall provide a non-access reservation along the frontage of SW Greenburg Road. This shall be coordinated through Washington County. (County Contact: Jamil Kamawal, 693-4543). 12. The applicant shall remove the existing driveways along SW Greenburg Road and replace these sections with curb and sidewalk per Washington County standards. The applicant shall submit a copy of the County permit for this work to the City prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. 13. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 14. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency Design and Construction Standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. 15. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of$30. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION BEING PERFORMED: 16. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one-year maintenance assurance for said improvements. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 3 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 17. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) mylars, and 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" format, if available; otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable. Note: if the public improvement drawings were hand-drawn, then a diskette is not required. 18. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along either SW Greenburg Road or SW Coral Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. This condition shall only apply to the roadway from where electrical, telephone and cable service is taken. 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. The applicant's construction plans will need to show where the power, telephone and cable service will come from. The frontages and potential fees associated with this site are as follows: Roadway Frontage (If) Fee SW Greenburg Road 100 ft. $2,750 SW Coral Street 95 ft. $2,613 The fee 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: The existing Phoenix Inn Motel is located at 9575 SW Locust Street (Tax Lots 04700 and 04701), and the expansion will occur on three adjacent parcels (Tax Lots 4500, 4600 and 4602). The existing Phoenix Inn Motel was approved in 1994 (SDR 94-0008). The parcels proposed for development are currently developed with commercial and non-conforming residential uses. Vicinity Information: The existing Phoenix Inn Motel is located at the northeast corner of SW Greenburg Road and SW Locust Street, with access off SW Locust Street. The site of the proposed expansion is north of the existing motel and is comprised of three parcels, two of which have frontage on SW Greenburg Road. The third parcel has frontage on SW Coral Street. The project vicinity is zoned commercial professional and includes Lincoln Center to the south. Washington Square (zoned General Commercial) and the Crescent Grove Cemetery are located to the west of SW Greenburg Road. Site Information and Proposal Description: As noted above, the site has frontage on SW Greenburg Road and SW Coral Street. The applicant proposes to construct a 3-story motel building on the expansion site with associated site improvements including parking and landscaping. The existing Phoenix Inn Motel includes 56 guestrooms and the expansion would add another 45 rooms. The expansion project would add 47 parking spaces and an access onto SW Coral Street, which is not fully improved to City standards. No access is proposed off SW Greenburg Road, a Washington County Road. The applicant's proposal includes a 1/2 street improvement to SW Coral Street along the project frontage to bring it up to City standards. 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 October 29, 1998. An application for Site Development Review was submitted and subsequently deemed complete on April 12, 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. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 4 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 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 18.810, 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; 18.520, Commercial 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; 18.765, 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. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following Chapters: 18.370, Variances and Adjustments; 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 expansion site is already developed and has access to all city services and to improved public streets. The applicant s narrative states that sewer, water and storm water facilities are adequate to meet the needs of the proposed expansion. Completion of improvements to SW Coral Street, as proposed by the applicant, will satisfy the City s adopted public improvement standards. Because SW Greenburg Road is a Washington County facility, County Staff has reviewed the applicant's proposal and commented as discussed later in this decision. The County will require dedication of additional right-of-way along the project's SW Greenburg Road frontage to iDrovide a total of 49 feet from centerline. No additional right-of-way is required on SW Coral Street. As noted under this Section, any required dedication of an interest in real property must be roughly proportional to the impacts of the proposed development. Any required street improvements to certain collector or higher volume streets and the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) are mitigation measures that are required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II (Resolution 95-61), TIFs are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. The trip generation rate for motel units is 10.19 trips per unit. The rate per trip for a commercial use is $48. Therefore, the TIF for each trip that is generated by a motel use is $489.12 per unit ($48 x 10.19). Based on these figures, the current TIF for a 45-unit motel may be $22,010.40 ($489.12 x 45). Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32% of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100% of the project traffic impact on major streets is $68,782.50 ($22,010.40 - 32%). By subtracting the Traffic Impact Fee to be paid from the total traffic impact, a total unmitigated project impact of $46,772.10 remains ($68,782.50 total impact - $22,010.40 estimated TIF). Based on previous right-of-way acquisitions (approximately $3 per square foot), the City estimates that the value of the required right-of-way dedication (approximately 5,060 square feet) may be approximately $15,180. Therefore, the requirement for dedication of street right-of-way associated with this proposal is easily proportional to the unmitigated traffic impact of the proposed development. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 5 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 Professional Commercial Zoning District: Section 18.520.020.D states that the C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services, e.g., convenience retail and personal services, restaurants, in close proximity to residential areas and major transportation facilities. Within the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Road District, residential uses at a minimum density of 32 units/net acre, i.e., equivalent to the R-40 zoning district, are permitted in conjunction with a commercial development. Heliports, medical centers, religious institutions and utilities are permitted conditionally. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more-intensive commercial and industrial areas. Permitted Uses: Table 18.520.1. lists permitted, restricted, conditional and not-permitted uses in the industrial zoning districts. The applicant is proposing to expand an existing commercial lodging by adding one additional building and associated on-site improvements. A commercial lodging use is permitted in the C-P zone. Dimensional Requirements: The C-P Zoning District standards are contained in Table 18.530.2. STANDARD C-P PROPOSED Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sq. ft. 71,438 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. 220 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 0 ft. [6] N/A - Side facing street on corner & -- through lots [1] N/A - Side yard 0/20 ft. [3] N/A - Side of rear yard abutting more -- restrictive zoning district - Rear yard 0/20 ft. [3] N/A - Distance between front of -- -- Garage & property line abutting a public or private street Maximum Height 45 ft. 35 ft. Maximum Site Coverage [21 85% 73% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% 27% [1] The provisions of Chapter 18.795 (Vision Clearance) must be satisfied. [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3] No setback shall be required except 20 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4] See Section 18.520.050B for site and building design standards. [5] No front yard setback shall be required, except a 20-foot front yard setback shall apply within 50 feet of a residential district. [6] There shall be no minimum front yard setback requirement; however, conditions in Chapters 18.745 and 18.795 must be met. [7] There are no setback requirements, except 30 feet where a commercial use within a district abuts a residential zoning district. [8] The maximum height of any building in the CBD zone within 100 feet of any residential zoning district shall not exceed 40 feet. [9] Where the side or rear yard of attached or multiple-family dwellings abut a more restrictive zoning district, such setbacks shall not be less than 35 feet. [10]Landscaped areas on existing developed property in the CBD shall be retained. Buffering and screening requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745 shall be met for existing and new development. [11]Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. The table above compares the applicant's proposal with the minimum dimensional standards of the C-P zone. The side and rear yard setbacks do not apply because the site does not abut residential zoning. FINDING: Based on the above information, the applicant's proposal meets or exceeds the dimensional standards of the C-P zoning district. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 6 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 • 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 a walkway will be provided to connect the ground floor entrance of proposed motel building to the SW Greenburg Road 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 indicates that the required walkway to the public sidewalk does not cross any access driveway or parking area. The proposed walkway is approximately 5 feet in width. 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 all walkways will be surfaced in a hard surface material. Safety issues, including lighting and signage, are addressed later in this decision. 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 REQUIRED WIDTH 0-99 1 30' 24' curbs required 100+ 2 30' 24' curbs required or 1 50' 40' curbs required The applicant's materials indicate that a total of 104 parking spaces will be provided at project completion. According to the table above, two 30-foot accesses or one 50-foot access is required for a development of this size. The site plan indicates that two accesses will be PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 7 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 provided — one existing access onto SW Locust Street plus one proposed access onto SW Coral Street. The site plan indicates that both accesses meet or exceed the above access width 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 primary entrance of the proposed building is on the east elevation, oriented toward the parking area. The site plan indicates that vehicle access is provided to within approximately 10 feet of the primary ground floor entrance. Additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. No additional truck traffic requirements are appropriate since the proposed land use is commercial lodging. Section 18.705.03O.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. A connection from the new parking area to adjacent property the south and west is precluded by the location of existing commercial structures on these properties and by natural topography. A future connection to the east is not precluded by topography or by existing development (the adjacent parcel is developed with a nonconforming, and apparently uninhabited single-family residence). However, a future vehicular connection would remove parking spaces and create a nonconforming situation per the minimum required parking standards of Chapter 18.765. Therefore, staff believes that a connection is not feasible in this instance and easements will not be required as provided in this section. 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. Exceptions to Development Standards — Chapter 18.730: Section 18.73O.O4O.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: 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. According to the City's Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map, SW Greenburg Road and SW Locust Street are Major Collectors and SW Coral Street is a Local Commercial Industrial street. Since, as noted earlier, the C-P zone does not require any setbacks for this project's street frontages, the additional right-of-way setback is the total building setback required. The site plan indicates that all proposed structures will exceed the required 30-foot setback. Therefore, the applicable approval standards of Chapter 18.730 are satisfied. 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 18.76O.O4O.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: PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 8 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 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 expansion project has frontage on SW Greenburg Road (approximately 100 linear feet) and SW Coral Street (approximately 95 linear feet). Existing trees are located along SW Greenburg Road. The landscape plan indicates that the applicant proposes to install street trees along the SW Coral Street frontage and retain existing trees along SW Greenburg Road to fulfil this requirement. Staff agrees that the applicant's proposal for the SW Greenburg Road frontage meets the intent of the street tree standards. These trees shall be protected as conditioned in the tree removal and mitigation section of this decision. 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; • 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 indicates that street tree species selection will be based on the City arborist's recommendation. These recommendations are included later in this decision. The final landscape design must meet the above spacing standards. 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 C-P and surrounding property is zoned C-P and C-G. No buffering or screening is required between adjacent commercial developments. 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 and trees will be placed around the south and east perimeter of the proposed new parking area, where parking abuts neighboring properties. The landscape plan indicates that this 'perimeter area is to be planted with Portugal Laurel (Prunus lustinacia) and Dwarf Purple Osier Willow (Salix purpurea `Nana'). Parking lot trees are to be provided on the basis of one for every seven parking spaces. The applicant proposes to add 47 new parking spaces with this development. This translates to 7 required parking lot trees (47 ± 7 = 6.7). The landscape plan shows 5 parking lot trees in landscape islands. The landscape islands are approximately 5 feet wide. Two additional PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 9 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 parking lot trees will be required to fully comply with this standard. The spacing of the proposed parking lot trees is consistent with the fully effect" required by this section. 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 an existing waste enclosure is located adjacent to the existing building. Whether the existing enclosure is adequate to meet the additional needs of the new building is addressed later in this decision. Any new required enclosure must comply with the screening requirements of this section. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the standards of Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening are not fully satisfied. However, based on the concept landscape plan, Staff believes these standards can be met through compliance with the following condition of approval. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan for review and approval. The revised landscape plan shall include a total of seven parking lot trees. The applicant may choose to relocate existing landscape trees directly abutting the parking lot where they may be counted as parking lot trees. The plan shall also finalize the selection of street tree species and demonstrate compliance with the street tree spacing standards of Chapter 18.745. 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 applicant's site plan indicates that an existing waste enclosure is located adjacent to the existing motel building. The enclosure is approximately 30 square feet in size. Data provided on the site plan indicates that the combined gross floor area of the two motel buildings is approximately 60,400 square feet. This translates to a 252 square foot enclosure (60.4 x 4 plus 10 = 251.6). Based on this calculation, the existing enclosure is undersized for the two buildings and additional trash enclosure space must be provided to comply with this standard. Section 18.755.050.B. provides the following location standards: FINDING: Based on the above analysis, Staff finds that the standards of Chapter 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage are not met. However, based on the preliminary information provided Staff believes that the standards can be satisfied through compliance with the conditions of approval. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised site plan indicating the proposed location of a new or expanded trash enclosure with detailed sizing and design information for review and approval. The plan shall demonstrate compliance with all the applicable standards of Chapter 18.755. For the enclosure sizing assessment, the applicant may demonstrate compliance with any one of the four methods under 18.755.040.A. The applicant shall also submit plans for any new or expanded enclosure to the Franchise Hauler for review and submit a copy of the Hauler's approval letter to the City. Off-Street Parking — Chapter 18.765: Section 18.765.030.B. states that the location of off-street parking will be as follows: PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 10 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 • 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 proposed parking area is located within approximately 10 feet of the principal entrance of the proposed building. 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. According to the applicant's materials, upon completion of the expansion project, a total of 104 parking spaces will be provided. State standards for parking lots with 101-150 spaces require five accessible spaces. At least one of every 8 required accessible spaces must be sized and designated "van accessible". The site plan indicates that a total of 5 accessible spaces are proposed, four of which are appropriately sized for van-accessible parking. Of these four, at least one must be designated "van accessible" in conformance with this standard. Final compliance with ADA regulations regarding parking will be reviewed through the Building Permit process. 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 perimeter curbs are proposed where parking spaces are adjacent to landscape areas or walkways. 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. The applicant's site plan indicates that standard parking spaces are generally sized 16 x 9 feet and compact spaces are generally 16 x 8 feet. As indicated above, standard space must be at least 18.5 feet deep and a compact space must be at least 16.5 feet deep. Accessible and van- accessible spaces are discussed elsewhere in this decision and will be further reviewed for compliance at the time of Building.Permit. All parking spaces need to be re-sized to meet the 18.5-foot and 16.5-foot length requirements. Overhangs into landscape areas are permitted but the area must contain only ground cover landscaping and the area may not count toward the landscaping requirement for the site. Section 18.765.040.N.2 states that aisles accommodating two-direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. The site plan indicates that the parking lot aisle is at least 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. The bicycle rack is provided within approximately 35 feet from the primary entrance to the new building. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 11 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; According to the site plan, the proposed bicycle parking area is located adjacent to a pedestrian 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 areas is visible from the proposed building. 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 site plan indicates outdoor bicycle parking areas only. 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 site plan does not indicate whether the proposed bicycle parking facilities will be covered. 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; • 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 provided a design detail for the proposed bicycle parking facility that satisfies these standards. 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. The applicant has not provided information on the proposed surface material. 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 a commercial lodging use must provide 1 bicycle parking space for every 10 rooms. The site plan indicates that 45 new rooms will be provided, which translates to a total bicycle-parking requirement of five spaces. The applicant's site plan indicates that parking for up to 10 bicycles will be provided. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 12 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 Section 18.765.070.H. states that the minimum and maximum off-street parking requirements are contained in Table 18.765.2. The proposed expansion of the Phoenix Inn Motel will add 45 new units for a total of 101 units. Table 18.765.2 requires one parking space per room for a "Commercial Lodging" use. Based on this requirement, the expanded Phoenix Inn Motel would be required to provide a total of 101 parking spaces. After completion of the proposed expansion, the applicant's materials indicate that a total of 104 parking spaces would be provided. Table 18.765.2 also includes maximum parking requirements based on Metro's Zone "A" and Zone "B" parking standards. The most restrictive maximum (1.2 spaces/room) would allow up to 122 parking spaces, significantly more than the applicant's proposal. The proposal is, therefore, within the maximum allowed. 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. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised vehicle and bicycle-parking plan for review and approval. The plan shall indicate that all vehicle parking spaces are sized in conformance with City standards and the bicycle parking spaces will be provided on a hard surface, covered and with location signage visible from the ROW. 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 applicant has submitted a tree condition and mitigation report as required by this section. The report identifies all existing trees including those designated "significant" (i.e ., over 12- inches in diameter). 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. The tree report identifies 232 caliper inches of "significant" trees and proposes to remove 56 caliper inches (24.13%). As indicated above, retention of 75% of existing trees requires no mitigation. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; The tree plan identifies all trees that are proposed for removal. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 13 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 The arborist's report specifies protection measures to be installed prior to commencement of any on-site development activities and required practices to be implemented during construction. A condition of approval will require that the arborist's recommendations are adhered to during construction. 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:As provided under 18.790.040.B., draft deed-restriction language for trees to be preserved shall also be submitted for review and approval. An approved deed restriction shall be recorded prior to occupancy. Any tree removal involving trees proposed for preservation shall be considered illegal unless documentation prepared by a certified arborist confirms that an immediate hazard to life and/or property exists and the documentation is field-verified and accepted by the City arborist prior to removal of the tree. 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 indicates that the clear vision area associated with the SW Coral Street access may not comply with this standard. A preliminary review by Staff indicates that the two closest parking spaces to SW Coral Street may be located within the clear Vision Triangle. No permanent structure or parking space may be located within a clear vision area. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, Staff finds that the standards of Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas have not been met but that, through compliance with the conditions of approval, these standards can be satisfied. CONDITION:The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that clearly indicates the location of clear vision areas as defined under TDC 18.795.040.B.1 . 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: TDC 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 14 OF 21 SCR 1999-00002 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 development site lies adjacent to SW Coral Street and SW Greenburg Road. SW Coral Street: Southwest Coral Street is classified as a local commercial industrial on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. This roadway classification requires a right-of-way (ROW) width of 50 feet. At present, there is approximately 30 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. Therefore, no additional ROW dedications are necessary. Southwest Coral Street is currently paved, but is not constructed to meet City standards. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct a half-street improvement adjacent to this site. The applicant's plans indicate that they will construct these improvements as a part of their development. SW Greenburg Road: Southwest Greenburg Road is classified as a major collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. The roadway is also classified as a minor arterial on the Washington County Transportation Plan map. At present, there is between 30 to 40 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. Washington County submitted comments and recommended conditions of approval to Staff related to this application. The County indicates that this roadway requires a ROW of 49 feet from the centerline. The County also requires the provision of a non-access reservation along the frontage. In order to help mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should dedicate additional ROW to provide the 49 feet from centerline to meet County standards. The applicant's materials indicate that they would dedicate ROW to provide 45 feet from the centerline. This dimension was discussed in the applicant's pre-application meeting with the City, wherein Staff estimated the ROW requirement would be 45 feet from the centerline. That estimate was based upon existing ROW north and south of this site. However, Staff pointed out to the applicant that Washington County would make the ultimate decision on this issue. Therefore, the applicant will need to dedicate the additional ROW per County standards. Since this roadway is under Washington County jurisdiction, the ROW dedication will need to be made using County forms and the applicant will need to obtain County approval for the dedication. Southwest Greenburg Road is currently improved with curb and sidewalk. There are two existing driveways adjacent to the frontage of the new building addition. Washington County indicates that the applicant will need to remove the existing driveways and replace them with curb and sidewalk to County standard. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall submit evidence to the City that they have obtained the necessary permit from the County to perform the work in the ROW of SW Greenburg Road. Water: This site lies within the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. Any new service proposed to the new building will need to be permitted by TVWD. Sanitary Sewer: There is an existing 8-inch public sanitary sewer line located in SW Locust Street that has capacity to serve this project. The applicant's plans indicate that they will extend a new sewer lateral from the main line in SW Locust Street to the new building. Storm Drainage: On-site detention will be provided via an underground, oversize pipe to be located in the parking area. The preliminary sizing calculations indicate that a 48-inch pipe will be required. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of the site and/or PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 15 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 building permit, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant's materials indicate that they plan to expand the volume of the existing pond that is located at the southwest corner of the existing motel site. The applicant's preliminary sizing calculations indicate the pond will need to increase in size by a minimum of approximately 792 cubic feet. The plans do not show how this would be accomplished, but Staff talked to the design engineer who indicated that the applicant can enlarge the pond by removing one of the existing parking stalls next to the pond and creating two vertical side walls with keystone block or similar product. There would still be two "banks" where maintenance personnel could access the pond for maintenance. This scenario would be acceptable to Staff. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Grading and Erosion Control: USA Design and Construction Standards also 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 both SW Greenburg Road and SW Coral Street. 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. This code provision only applies to the frontage from which utility service is taken. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines serving the site. The applicant's construction plans will need to show where the power, telephone and cable service will come from. The frontages and potential fees associated with this site are as follows: Roadway Frontage (If) Fee SW Greenburg Road 100 ft. $2,750 SW Coral Street 95 ft. $2,613 Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). For parcels within the USB, an addressing fee in the amount of $30 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to approval of the final plat. For this project, the addressing fee will be $30. 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; • 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 a developed site which has no remaining natural features except trees (see previous description of Tree Removal and Mitigation requirements). Therefore, this standard does not apply. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 16 OF 21 SOR 1999-00002 Section 18.36O.O9O.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 tree plan indicates that more than 75% of trees over 12 caliper inches in size will be retained. Exterior elevations: Section 18.36O.O9O.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 an expansion of a commercial lodging use. This section relates to residential development only and, therefore, is not applicable. Buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.36O.O9O.A.4.a. states that buffering shall be rovided 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 expansion of a commercial lodging use. Abutting properties are developed with commercial and abandoned residential uses. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Section 18.360.09O.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. 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 a commercial lodging 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 a commercial lodging expansion. This section relates to residential development only and, therefore, is not applicable. Shared outdoor recreation areas - multi-family use: Section 18.36O.O90.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 a commercial lodging expansion. This section related to residential development only and, therefore, is not applicable. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 17 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 Section 18.36O.O90.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.09O.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; • Sign; or • Landscaping. The site plan indicates that the site is differentiated from the street by landscaping and street trees. The internal driveway and walkway give access to the building entrances and provide clear corridors for visitors and clients who need to gain access to the buildings. Therefore, this standard is met. Crime prevention and safety: Section 18.36O.O90.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 of the two proposed buildings are provided with a number of windows. Therefore, this standard is met. Section 18.36O.O9O.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 18.36O.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 including lighting details on the site plan. The Tigard Police Department has reviewed this proposal and offered no additional comments or recommendations regarding exterior lighting. Therefore, this standard is met. Public transit: Section 18.360.O90.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.O90.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. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 18 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 There is existing bus service provided by Tri-Met route #76 and #77 on SW Greenburg Road. As noted later in this decision, Tri Met has been given the opportunity to comment on this development proposal but has not recommended that any additional transit facilities be provided in conjunction with the development. Therefore, this standard is met. Landscaping: Section 18.360.090.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 27% of the overall Phoenix Inn Motel site in landscaping. 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 decision. Accessibility of walkways and structures will be addressed through the building permit process. Therefore, conformance with this standard is assured. 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. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City Operations Department has had the opportunity to review the proposal and has offered the following comments: • Is the existing water quality retention pond of adequate capacity to handle the expansion? I see no indication of this on the plan or in the written comments. Was the original design such that it allowed for expansion? Staff Response: This comment is addressed within this decision under Street and Utility Improvement Standards. The City Arborist has had the opportunity to review the proposal and has offered the following comments: • Suggested Street Trees for SW Coral Street: Corpus Kousa Chinesis, Ginko Biloba - Farimont, Shangri-La, Acer Ginnala — Flame, Prunus Cerasfera — Thundercloud, Newport, Fraxinus Pxycarpa — Raywood, Golden Desert. The Tigard Building Division, Police Department and Long Range Planning Division have all had the opportunity to review the proposal and have offered no comments or objections. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 19 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 SECTION VI. AGENCY & PROPERTY OWNER COMMENTS TCI Cable and PGE have had the opportunity to review the proposal and have offered no comments or objections. Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) had the opportunity to review the proposal and has offered the following comments: 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 to provide a water quality facility to treat the new impervious surface being constructed as part of this development. • Either provide a new water quality facility to treat the new impervious surface area or connect into and verify the existing facility has the capacity for the added area or upsize to accommodate the new impervious area. • The addition is too large for fee in-lieu. Washington County Department of Land Use & Transportation had the opportunity to review the proposal and offered the following comments: The following comments are in regard to access to SW Greenburg Road, a County-maintained Minor Arterial: NOTE: A pre-existing driveway which is part of a redeveloping site is subject to County review and conditions for access approval. COMMENTS 1 . The applicant is not proposing access at this time. The County reserves the right to require additional conditions if access to SW Greenburg Road is proposed in the future. REQUIRED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 . PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT BY THE CITY OF TIGARD: A. Obtain a Right-of-way permit from the County Inspections Services Office (Contact James Johnson, 681-7181) for construction of the following required improvements: 1 . Remove existing driveways along SW Greenburg Road and replace driveway sections with curb and sidewalk to County standard. NOTE: At minimum Right-of-way permit costs include a $150 fee as well as a refundable $250 bond. This minimum estimate may not cover additional fees particular to this project. B. The following shall be recorded with Washington County (Contact the County Survey Division, Jamil Kamawal, for information, 693-4543): 1 . Dedication of additional right-of-way to provide 49 feet from centerline of SW Greenburg Road. PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 20 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 2. Provision of a non-access reservation along SW Greenburg Road frontage. 2. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY: A. The road improvements required in Condition 1.A.1 , above, shall be completed and accepted by Washington County. B. Before the City issues its Final Notice of Decision, please allow the County to review and acknowledge a draft of the City's conditions regarding access to SW Greenburg Road. Additionally, please send a copy of the subsequent Final City Notice of Decision and any appeal information to the County. Staff Comment: The required Washington County conditions have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this decision. 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 JUNE 3, 1999 AND EFFECTIVE ON JUNE 18, 1999 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Aeaal: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1 . may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 3:30 PM ON JUNE 17, 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 . r -� June 3. 1999 PI4E ARE r BY Mark J. Roberts / DATE Associate Planner )Q,u; �-�-� June 3, 1999 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewers rff DATE Planning Manager i:\curpin\mark\sdr\sdr99-01.DEC.doc PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PAGE 21 OF 21 SDR 1999-00002 • 1 A A2filt SW CORAL STREET , / fo-,,,f . I ,..-.-... .f------,::'''.---.----.- ., -.t..- ..... . ---- _ -A" il, " 1 \ .., EXISTING , F_44 1 lb , A g --,,i,111 ' i_. ; BUILDING I , Z i - -- I Ir....,' , 4.,..,, , .--- I . 0 -la.„..- Cn iimnirilf2r•-,';i"..""•`.‘-:',Z., ,,,.. > - - , *....... .. -\\remeoeeewtr■ -,..,..,s.s..s.,- „gt w_,-4- v - il7C,* \ \ \ \ ce.,■gi • 1, 1---- , i -' .„. i ' I ter aPre' /• 4 ..4=12\\:\:\ NEW 45-UNIT MOTEL WRNS I a /. 1 : rill -- i_,.....,°. (.9 41.1 gi6 .. 1., .5 w .1-1.... ••\;‘,....,NN .. ,, .,... . /.- / -\,, \\ -\\ \ ' ‘1. .." -1-'7' \ /''' .tire / . \ ' • \\ -116 , Z rill,111,1UPTI;11111,4 - 4 165; III . /11111111N - _ - Pr ...J ' - . — ---■t`"7-----;•,r_'',-„,- CL 13 10 s., co r I Ce I li< a - -"" - - ' - 7,,i •■ I ' IIIMI I 1 --...L... , r • MIMS / 1 1 .1/46 . \,,,,, . 111 , I "----L i EXISTING 56-UNIT CC i'Ll . a i MOTEL BUILDING i Umr ./ ., CO t ,,-----1,1 --7II 0 Olc i,■, \ ... . / / 4• 6..,l..I.!i t AZ/ke i■m7 -7 r1.. ua,l■1 _,..._._..,.ts-o x—A r,4 Rr')T/1 /A /Te1.:1 i‘g f1Y4N7IRj1R4ar1Gn/t cl 1 l" . (1) I '' , 1 . . SW LOCUST STREET e c.thrtes* --r I SITE PLAN t PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION EXHIBIT MAP N SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SOH] 99-0002 (map is not to scale) LLI CITY of TIGARD J Q GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM 1 S .1 I' BORDERS VICINITY MAP 1 cl I I SDR 99-0002 - (3) SUBJEC Cc LEHMANN PARCELS 111111111 -0___. , I= ! PHOENIX INN inisl i a MOTEL EXPANSION CORAL S II I� 1 1IIIIIIT!Ii _ LOCUST ST .1111111 11111Mapwllill1 ( — N ..- MAPLELEAF ST w v Al Afil N \\\\\ • '- 0 10000 :feet 400 500 Feet 1 1A 2 A City of Tigard Q • Information on this map is for general location only and should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 e. h (503)639-4171 ` - http:/www.ci.tigard.or.us Community Development Plot date:Apr 21, 1999;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR SDR 1999-©0002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION (Page 1 of 1) EXHIBIT "B" 1 VIP'S INDUSTRIES, INC. ATTN: STEVEN JOHNSON 29757 SW BOONES FERRY ROAD WILSONVILLE OR 97070 VIP'S MOTOR INNS, INC. 29757 SW BOONES FERRY ROAD WILSONVILLE OR 97070 PHIL HEALY, SENIOR PLANNER WA. CO. DEPT. OF LAND USE & TRANSPORTATION LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 155 N. FIRST AVENUE, SUITE 350-13 HILLSBORO OR 97124 A ,. ,..,, AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OFTIOARD Community cDevefopment ' Shaping Better Community STAA O"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 eon(s)Below) © NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR:l SDR 99-0002/PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) 0 City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) • City of Tigard Planning Director n NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: . - / ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Healing) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. FOR:j C AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council NOTICE OF: FOR: 1 IF'e Ne Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing,if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICEIS) of which is attached, mar Exhibit "A", was mailed-to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit' ", on the 22nd day.of April,1999, and deposited in the United States Mail on the 22"d day of ANIl,1999, postage prepai . _}.-X , (Person at Prepared Notice /e?—'7 ubscribed and sworn/affirmed befor ne on the g ay of f__. A . , 1 ' `�,�� OFFICIAL SEAL tysimPrort DIANE M JELDERKE . - - - +rrrt' ' i` I I I �" h NOTARY PUBLIC•OREQON r COMMISSION NO.0.461 42 7 7 �'� �`�:� My Commission Expire MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 09,1909 NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOL _R,VENDOR OR SELLER: EXHIBIT A THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION 1 �lIs,.# SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CITY OF TIGARD Community Deveropmen t Shaping Better Community 500-FOOT PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE DATE OF NOTICE: April 22, 1999 FILE NAME/NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 99-0002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION PROPOSAL: Site Development Review approval to construct a 45-unit, 3-story addition to an existing 56-unit Phoenix Inn Motel. Other proposed site improvements include additional off-street parking and landscaping. ZONE: Professional Commercial; C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more-intensive commercial and industrial areas. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: The project site is located at 9575 SW Locust Street, east of SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1 S126DC, Tax Lots 04500, 04600 and 04602. 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 MAY 6, 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 99-0002 PHOENIX INN EXPANSION 14-DAY PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION Failure of any party to address a 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 u j I VICINITY MAP In 1 N1iI SDR 99-0002 LEHMANN (3PARCELS _ PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION CORAL \ I :s 1111E1 IIII S MEM - - / UST ST 17�/ • 270. • 6.41 SDR 99-0002 PHOENIX INN EXPANSION 14-DAY PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION EXHIBIT B 1S126C0-01107 1S126C0-01900 WASHINGTON SQUARE INC CRESCENT GROVE CEMETERY ASS P 0 BOX 21545 9925 SW GREENBURG ROAD SEATTLE,WA 98111 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S126DC-01004 1S126DC-01006 ROTH JEFFREY A&BETTY A JOYCE DON H 9445 SW LEHMANN 226 NW HERMOSA BLVD TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97210 1S126DC-03100 1S126DC-03200 TYROFF JACK R ELLEN D ERICKSON 0 K&ARDIS R TRUSTEES 9330 SW LEHMAN 9350 SW LEHMAN ST PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S126DC-03300 1S126DC-03301 ATHERTON REALTY PARTNERSHIP CROFT Z RUTH 2100 S WOLF 6060 SW 68TH CT DES PLAINES, IL 60018 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S126DC-03302 1S126DC-03500 MURRAY DOUGLAS J MORROW KENNETH C AUDREY 9450 SW LEHMAN 9411 SW CORAL PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S126DC-03600 1S126DC-03700 HANSEN MELVIN L JUNE A NEWBREY M E&RUTH L 9395 SW CORAL 603 SW LARKSPUR CT PORTLAND,OR 97223 SUBLIMITY,OR 97385 1S126DC-03701 1S126DC-03800 ZIMMERMAN LARRY D&DONNA J FISHER MICHAEL Q 9335 SW CORAL ST 9255 SW CORAL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S126DC-04000 1S126DC-04100 HEFFLER ROBERT ARNOLD CORYELL JACK M ALICE 0 9260 SW CORAL 9900 SW 92ND PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S126DC-04200 1S126DC-04400 CHAVEZ ALFRED& MARTIN ROBERT CLARE 9900 SW 92ND ST 585 MADRONA LN PORTLAND,OR 97223 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 1 S 1-266DDC-04500 1 S 126DC-04600 DRINKAR-ILLIAN VIP'S MOTOR INNS INC 9520 17V CORAL 29757 SW BOONES FERRY RD PO-RTLAND,O97223 WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 is 126DC-04601 1 S4.2`DC-04602 O'DAY F BRIAN&SUSAN A BOIVIN A SUE& 9970 SW GREEENBURG RD 9990§.W REENBURG RD TIGARD,OR 97223 yO TLAND, R 97223 1 S 126DC-04700 1 6DC-04701 PHOENIX INNS LLC PHO �(It�NJ LLC 29757 SW BOONES FERRY RD 29757 OQ NES FERRY RD WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 Vy„1L ONVILLE, 7070 is 126DC-04800 1 S 1'F6DC-04801 BAKER JAMES& BAKER •0' & 9495 SW LOCUST#A 9495 L•. ST#A PORTLAND,OR 97223 PeRTLAND,OR ! 223 1S126DC-04900 1S126DC-05000 BBH INVESTMENTS MAURER GRANT D 9445 SW LOCUST 9385 SW LOCUST ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 126DC-05100 1 S 126DC-05101 LOOS HARRY AND BEVERLY A HARRIS GREGORY E 9365 SW LOCUST ST 9036 NW BENSON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97229 1S1 26DC-06500 1 S 12 C-06600 LUNDMARK HOMES LLC LUNDMA ES LLC 3381 COEUR D'ALENE DR 3381 CI R b'•LENE DR WEST LINN,OR 97038 %NES LINN,OR 9 8 1S1261 -06700 1S12.•.-07500 LUNDMAR • S LLC WINDWOO• ••►BTRUCTION INC 3381 CO-•- D • ENE DR 12655 S+ •RT ■•KOTA ST LINN,OR 971" T .•'D,OR 97223 1S126DC-07600 1S1 .IC-07700 WINDWOOD CONSTRUCTION INC WINDWO•.! ONSTRUCTION INC 12655 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 1265 W NOR •AKOTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 ARD,OR 97223 1 S 126DC-07800 1S1 •:-00700 LEHMANN SQUARE HOMEOWNERS KNICKERB• K ' 'ROP INC XXIV 19305 ROBIN CIR#55 10300 SW - ? RG RD STE 200 WEST LINN,OR 97068 P•' •ND,OR 97223 1S135AB-00900 1S135AB-01002 KNICKERBOCKER PROP INC XXIV KNIC • ':•''ER PROP INC XXIV 10300 SW GREENBURG RD STE 200 1030 :' G'. NBURG RD STE 200 PORTLAND,OR 97223 RTLAND,OR 9 23 1S 13 AB-04400 1S vas•:-04500 KNICK •- ER PROP INC XXIV KNICKE•': KER PROP INC XXIV 10390 ' ENBURG RD STE 200 100 W GR NBURG RD STE 200 -PORTLAND,OR • 223 ORTLAND,OR ' 223 1S . •B-04600 1S135BA-00102 KNICKER:C M ER PROP INC XXIV WINMAR OREGON INC 10300 :1 GREENB I •'D STE 200 PO BOX 21545 PS'TLAND,OR 97223 SEATTLE,WA 98111 1S126C0-01107 1S126C0-01900 WASHINGTON SQUARE INC CRESCENT GROVE CEMETERY ASS P 0 BOX 21545 9925 SW GREENBURG ROAD SEATTLE,WA 98111 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S126DC-01004 1S126DC-01006 ROTH JEFFREY A&BETTY A JOYCE DON H 9445 SW LEHMANN 226 NW HERMOSA BLVD TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97210 1S126DC-03100 1S126DC-03200 TYROFF JACK R ELLEN D ERICKSON 0 K&ARDIS R TRUSTEES 9330 SW LEHMAN 9350 SW LEHMAN ST PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S126DC-03300 1S126DC-03301 ATHERTON REALTY PARTNERSHIP CROFT Z RUTH 2100 S WOLF 6060 SW 68TH CT DES PLAINES, IL 60018 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S126DC-03302 1S126DC-03500 MURRAY DOUGLAS J MORROW KENNETH C AUDREY 9450 SW LEHMAN 9411 SW CORAL PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S126DC-03600 1S126DC-03700 HANSEN MELVIN L JUNE A NEWBREY M E&RUTH L 9395 SW CORAL 603 SW LARKSPUR CT PORTLAND,OR 97223 SUBLIMITY,OR 97385 1 S 126DC-03701 1 S 126DC-03800 ZIMMERMAN LARRY D&DONNA J FISHER MICHAEL Q 9335 SW CORAL ST 9255 SW CORAL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S126DC-04000 1S126DC-04100 HEFFLER ROBERT ARNOLD CORYELL JACK M ALICE 0 9260 SW CORAL 9900 SW 92ND PORTLAND, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S126DC-04200 15126DC-04400 CHAVEZ ALFRED& MARTIN ROBERT CLARE 9900 SW 92ND ST 585 MADRONA LN PORTLAND,OR 97223 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 1 DC-04500 1S126DC-04600 DRINK D LI • VIP'S MOTOR INNS INC 9520 S 0- • 29757 SW BOONES FERRY RD P!"TLAND,OR 9 ' WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 1 S 126DC-04601 1 6DC-04602 O'DAY F BRIAN&SUSAN A BOIVI A' -- SUE& 9970 SW GREEENBURG RD 9990 SW-G-- NBURG RD � TIGARD,OR 97223 AT//LAND,OR 223 1 S 126DC-04700 11126DC-04701/ PHOENIX INNS LLC PHO N1X INNS LLC 29757 SW BOONES FERRY RD 29757$W B©OONES FERRY RD WILSONVILLE, OR 97070 y,v1LSONVILLE,QR-...W070 1 S126DC-04800 1 S1S46DC-04801 BAKER JAMES& BAKER J i & 9495 SW LOCUST#A 9495 - L•. ST#A PORTLAND, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 223 15126DC-04900 1S126DC-05000 BBH INVESTMENTS MAURER GRANT D 9445 SW LOCUST 9385 SW LOCUST ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 126DC-05100 1 S 126DC-05101 LOOS HARRY AND BEVERLY A HARRIS GREGORY E 9365 SW LOCUST ST 9036 NW BENSON ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97229 1 S 126DC-06500 1 S 12bQ -06600 - LUNDMARK HOMES LLC LUNDMAR ES LLC 3381 COEUR D'ALENE DR 3381 COE R LENE DR WEST LINN, OR 97038 VEST LINN,OR 9 8 1S126 ID -06700 1S126DG-07500 � LUNDMAR .• S LLC WINDWOOD .I■81 UCTION INC 3381 CO-.' D • ENE DR 12655 S► •••RT 5•KOTA ST E f LINN,OR 97i ? Tj,-••D,OR 97223 1S126DC-07600 1S1 C-07700 WINDWOOD CONSTRUCTION INC WINDWO ONSTRUCTION INC 12655 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 12655- W NOR AKOTA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 .,,TIGARD,OR 97223 1S126DC-07800 1S1 • :-00700 LEHMANN SQUARE HOMEOWNERS KNICKERS► K ' •ROP INC XXIV 19305 ROBIN CIR#55 10300 SW ' RG RD STE 200 WEST LINN,OR 97068 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135AB-00900 1S135AB-01002 KNICKERBOCKER PROP INC XXIV KNIC ":• •ER PROP INC XXIV 10300 SW GREENBURG RD STE 200 10309.8 G'- NBURG RD STE 200 PORTLAND, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 9 23 1S AB-04400 1S :-04500 KNICK ':• ER PROP INC XXIV KNICKE-':• KER PROP INC XXIV 103.0 " ' ENBURG RD STE 200 1031: W GR' NBURG RD STE 200 ••RTLAND,OR • 223 'ORTLAND,OR ' 223 1S _ B-04600 1S135BA-00102 KNICKER:c«.ER PROP INC XXIV WINMAR OREGON INC 10301 :0 GREENB•- 'D STE 200 PO BOX 21545 P-4 TLAND,OR 97223 SEATTLE,WA 98111 1 4 CITY of TIGARD GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM w NOTIFICATION AREA MAP IFBORDER (S 00') SDR 99-0002 00 ROTH,JEFFREY A 4N1!'TII . .-- - - - /IEI OONH RDoCONSTBUCTIONING • LEHMANN PHOENIX INN " CRESCENT GROVE CEMETERY ASS (.. ' MOTEL EXPANSION MURRAY.BO UGIAS 1 CROFT,/RUTH TYROFF.14CARFIEND ERI CKSON.O K a ARDIS R TRUSTEES I ATHERTON REALTY PARTNERSHIP 0 / NEW BREY.ME a RUTH Z / HANSEN.MELVIN IIUKE A RSHEY.MICHAEL O CV / MORROW.KENNETH MILKY EIMMERMVN,IARRY 0 t GONNA I 0111 j / CORAL _ / O'OAT,P BRUIN o SUSAN A 1 ____ J / ____ DRINKARD.LILLIAN HEFREB,ROBERT ARMOR r WASBINGTONSQUARE INC 4 "- / r`- MARTIN.ROBERT CLARE CORYELL,LICK MALICEO BIrSMOTORTINSINC CHAVEI.ALFREDa J I ROIMIR.NREA SUE a PHOENIX INNS EEC BRIE INVESTMENTS LANDMARK HO $ I RAXER,IAMESa MAORER.GIFHARABTD AND NARRIS,GREBEVERLYA CORYE — WINMAR OREGON INC L _ i i i LOOS, RY LOCUST A ' - KNICKERBOCKER PROP,INC XXIV t 7 0 100 200 300 400 500 MAPLELEA 1"=378 teat ' Cr CitjY o Tigard - Information on this map is for general location only and *wild be verified with the Development Services Division. - �, 13125 Tigard..SW O Hall Blvd A\ Tigard,OR 97223 — \ ( w 839.4177 http:lEw�MN.C1.Hgafd.Of.11t Community Development . Plot date:Apr 21, 1999;C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR APPLICANT MATERIALS SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION CITY OF TIOARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223(503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 GENERAL INFORMATION PRE-APP. HELD WITH: g DATE OF PRE-APP.: /Q/yQQ Property Address/Location(s): (1) 9520 SW Coral Street; (2) 9980 & 9990 SW Greenburg Road FOR STAFF USE ONLY Tax Map &Tax Lot#(s): 1S126 DC (1) TL4500; (2) TL4600 & Case No.(s): c3'1)1?-- 9 / -- 4602 Other Case No.(s): Receipt No.: • —g 3 Site Size: (1) 16,553 square feet; (2) 17,900 square feet /i Application Accepted B L) dl ii Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)':1JIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. Date: Address: 29757 SW Boones Ferry Rd. Phone: 682-9284 City: Wilsonville Zip: 97070 Date Determin To Be_Complete: A PP licani`: Same - Attention: Steven V. Johnson L� ` � Comp Plan/Zone Designation: Address: ' Phone: City: Zip: CIT Area: When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written Rev.4r11/97 i:c.,rpMVr,asterslsdra.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. REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS PROPOSAL SUMMARY ✓ Application Elements Submitted: Application Form < The owners of record of the subject property request Site Development Review approval to allow (please be specific): [Owners Signature/Written Authorization The Applicant is owner and operator of the existing 56 Q Title Transfer Instrument or Deed �—•►� p Site/Plot Plan �� u unit Phoenix Inn hotel located at 9575 SW Locust Street, (#of copies based on pre-app check list) Tigard, OR 97223. The Applicant's proposal is to expanc Site/Plot Plan (reduced 871"x 11") —k1e the existing Phoenix Inn by the addition of 45 new and -9- Applicant's Statement - 1/1 Gad (#of copies based on pre-app check list) additional units on adjacent properties recently acquired ▪ ideet Construction Cost Estimate to the north of the existing Phoenix Inn. Existing USA Sewer Use Information Card improvements on the acquisition parcels will be (Distributed/completed at application submittal) j3 Filing Fee (Under$100.000) $ 800.00 demolished to make way for the addition. The building ($100.000-5999.999)....1,600.00 improvements for the addition will be located on Parcel ($1 Million 8 Over) $1,780.00 (*$5/$10,000) 2, while all parking for the addition will be located on Parcel 1. The addition will consist of a jingle three story wood frame structure with partial basement. List any VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL. USE, SENSITIVE LANDS, OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: None applicable - the proposal is an outright permitted use. Applicant will agree to right of way dedication for SW Greenburg Road to 45 feet from centerline as required by staff in Pre-Application Conference. APPLICANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as described on the front of this application in the"Required Submittal Elements" box. (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request, for all types of Land Use Applications.) THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • fa1 • • . 1.i• -t. • •A-t-• 1 • • - • 1 • -i• Vt.- 1/ 1•1 11 11 ••. 1♦. 1 .•• • • •11 *Oz.- -t• •• 1 , - • .&I 1112212121V.. pertV. • 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 1st day of February 19 99 • VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. By: Steven V. o n, Pr sid' nt Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development 5lapingA Better Community LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION I 120 DAYS = 8/10199 FILE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 99-0002 FILE TITLE: PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION • APPLICANT: VIP's Motor Inns, Inc. OWNER: Same Attn: Steven V. Johnson 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville, OR 97070 PHONE/FAX: 503-682-9284/503-682-9257 REQUEST: Site Development Review approval to construct a 45-unit addition to an existing 56-unit Phoenix Inn Motel. Other proposed site improvements include additional off-street parking and landscaping. LOCATICN: The project site is located at 9575 SW Locust Street, east of SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S126DC, Tax Lots 04500, 04600 and 04602. ZONE: Professional Commercial; C-P. The C-P Zoning District is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more-intensive commercial and industrial areas. 4p0 APPLICABLE /1 ' REVIEW 18.360, 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.730, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, CRITERIA: 18.795 and 18.810. CIT AREA: East CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request DECISION MAKING BODY: COMMENTS SENT: APRIL 22,1999 DUE: 6,1999 © STAFF DECISION DATE OF DECISION: THURSDAY - MAY 21,1999 Li HEARINGS OFFICER (MON.] DATE OF HEARING: TIME:1:00 PM J PLANNING COMMISSION [MON] DATE OF HEARING: TIME:1:30PM ❑ CITY COUNCIL [TUESJ DATE OF HEARING: TIME:1:30 PM COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION © VICINITY MAP © LANDSCAPING PLAN © NARRATIVE © SITE PLAN © GEOTECH REPORT © TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY © ARBORIST REPORT © LIGHTING PLAN STAFF CONTACT: Mark 1.Roberts, Associate Planner (503) 639-4171 Ext. 315 SDR 99-0002 PHOENIX INN MOTEL EXPANSION LAND USE PROPOSAL March 9, 1999 CITY OF TIGARD VIP's Motor Inns, Inc. OREGON Attn: Steven Johnson 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville, OR 97070 RE: Notice of Incomplete Submittal - SDR 99-0002 (Phoenix Inn Expansion) Dear Mr. Johnson: The City has received your request for Major Modification approval for the above- referenced office expansion project on SW Greenburg Road. A request for a Major Modification to an existing site is processed as a Site Development Review application under Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 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 . Provide an application narrative addressing the Site Development Review approval criteria under TMC 18.360.090. You should address the applicable criteria in sufficient detail for Staff to make findings that the standards are satisfied. 2. Provide a Traffic Study as required in the pre-application conference notes. 3. Address Storm Water Quality for the project. 4. Confirm whether you will provide additional improvements to SW Greenburg Road if required by Washington County. If existing public facilities do not meet minimum standards, land use applications may be denied. 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 x315. „cal* Sin -ra y, i S�` l MarkJ. Robe's r Associate Planner i:1cu r pin\mjr\sdr\sdr99-02 Inc.doc c: SDR 99-0002 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 MEMORANDUM TO: MARK ROBERTS CITY OF TIGARD FROM: STEVE JOHNSON VIP'S MOTOR INNS, INC. DATE: FEBRUARY 19, 1999 RE: EXPANSION OF PHOENIX INN HOTEL 9575 SW LOCUST STREET TIGARD, OR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION FILE NO. SDR99-0002 ARBORIST REPORT Enclosed please find 20 copies of an Arborist Report prepared by William L. Owen & Associates at our direction. Please enclose these materials with the above referenced site development review application previously filed with your office. With this submittal of the Arborist Report,our Site Review Application should be complete. I hope to have confirmation from you at your earliest convenience that your own separate review confirms my opinion that the Application package is "complete". If you find anything out of order, please give me a call by phone in the interests of time at(503) 682-9284. Thank you. 4N__, -C2---- Steven V. Johnson, President (503) 682-9284 (Telephone) (503) 682-9257 (Fax) LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TRT ENGINEERING, INC 2636 SE Market St Portland, Oregon 97214 Phone (503) 235-7592 Fax (503) 235-7593 TO: VIP IS I uSTI1-IES� 'NC- DATE: 3131' ` 217 57 5 W 60o0E S FE `( RD ATTENTION: STEVEN JOHNSON W1 LS 00 VI�--LE, 0k 17010 JOB NUMBER: VPT (TQSI WE ARE SENDING YOU: COPIES I DATE I NO. I DESCRIPTION 11361 q f{EUISEID SITE CIVlL D S16N pflAwro1GS 1 3(3olerg REVISE° Q(LAI'JAkE CALc-uLATIoNS COPY TO: SIGNED: !/;■ tne, , • lows INDUSTRIES,INC. April 6, 1999 Mark J. Roberts Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Phoenix Inn Expansion SDR 99-0002 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION - RESUBMITTAL Dear Mark: On 2/12/99 I filed a Site Development Review Application, together with appropriate materials. On 3/12/99 you directed your letter to me providing notice of incomplete submittal citing four specific shortcomings in our Application. On 3/9/99 you and I talked by phone regarding those four items, and reached the following agreement 1. Approval Criteria Narrative: I was to comply with your request that I provide a narrative addressing the Site Development Review approval criteria under Tigard municipal code 18.360.090. At my request,you faxed me a five page submittal containing those approval criteria. I have prepared and now enclose herein the requested narrative. 2. Traffic Study: Per my request, and your subsequent reconsideration,we are not required to submit a Traffic Study. 3. Storm Water Quality Calculations: I have directed the Project Engineer to prepare revised civil design drawings and drainage calculations to appropriately address storm water quality issues for the project. Those materials are enclosed with this correspondence. 29757 SW Boones Ferry Rd. • Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 Telephone 503-682-9284 • FAX 503-682-9257 . , I 4. Additional Improvements to Greenburg Road: Per our telephone conversation on 3/10/99,you have agreed that it is not necessary for us to confirm,at the time of our present Application, whether Washington County will require additional improvements to SW Greenburg Road, or, whether we will agree to provide such additional improvements, if any. It is my intent and understanding that the materials enclosed herein constitute full compliance with your correspondence of 3/9/99 requesting additional materials. Please review and confirm in writing at your earliest possible convenience that you have determined our Site Development Review Application to be complete, and, that the review process has commenced. If you need anything further, please be sure to advise immediately in the interests of time. Thank you for your anticipated courtesies and cooperation. ...C-2..._______ Ve truly yours, Steven V. Johnson President SVJ/db Enc: civil design drawings storm drainage calculations site development review approval criteria narrative 2 4 z...4. e: frilk CITY OF TIGARD OREGON April 16, 1999 VIP's Motor Inns, Inc. Attn: Steven Johnson 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville, OR 97070 RE: Notice of Complete Submittal SDR 99-0002 (Phoenix Inn Expansion) Dear Mr. Johnson: This letter is to inform you that your application for Site Development Review (City file reference: SDR 99-0002) is considered complete effective April 12, 1999 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 x315. Sincerely, .27 Mark J. Roberts Zi ,,�K` ' Associate Planner i:\curpin\mjr\sdr\sdr99-02.cmp c: SDR 99-0002 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 FROM 1999.02-11 17:23 #800 P.02/06 T A M E A s r c Title Order No. 861481 " _N : z Escrow No. 98)60913 '=. / After recording return to: • VIP'S Motor Inns Inc.,an Oregon corporation 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road CERTfFiE^TO 8t:A TRUE AND CORRECT Wilsonville, OR 97070 COPY OF THE ORIGINAL RECORDED Until a change is requested all tax statements ON I 6- 9 9 shall be sent to the following address_ IN/AS q ������ VIP'S Motor Inns Inc.,an Oregon corporation FIRST G.:vl=iiwruV i ITL=iN£�i-iANCE 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road COMPANY,Escrow Department Wilsonville,OR 97070 dX DPIa.)./...) . STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED LILLLAN DRINKARD, Grantor, conveys and warrants to VIP'S MOTOR INNS, INC., an Oregon corporation, Grantee, the following described real property free of liens and encumbrances, except as specifically set forth herein: The West one-half of Lot 7, Block "C", LEH IANN ACRE TRACT, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon; This property is free of liens and encumbrances,EXCEPT: 1. Statutory Powers and Assessments of Unified Sewerage Agency. 2. These premises are within the boundaries of the Tualatin Valley Water District and are subject to the levies and assessments thereof. THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. The true consideration for this conveyance is$245,000.00 ice/" Dated this ay of January, 1999. Lillian Drinkard STATE OF OREGON County of Multnomah ) SS: This instrument was acknowledged before me on January /S , 1999,by Lillian Drinkard . Notary Public for Oregon L o�ICUL.seaL My Commission Expires io -0-_J,S •.,. .r YARILEE COHEN" \ NOTARY PUHUC-0RPGO N COMMISSION NO.o sesa MY COMMISSION E#IRES OCT.8,1929 FR.--_,M : • 19'_ 2-11 17:23 #800 P.04/06 rrcun 1999.02-11 16:03 #693 P•03/0E has This Otd&No. 053596 . a. •s +t Beoro�r No. 91160607 7�t, After ldi NP ter 1/IS Mew boas.W.Perry goad 6r5 V OR s TIME a &epee is roperried all Ina etnientants shell be rent t+the sinew*oaken. von$otvr lee,Inc 29757 SW Booms Ferry Road wwtleoav;aaOtt 97070 STATUTORY WARRANTY Y DEED - Calle 6aivia and 1m'+D. > oca Granfor, conveys eed trarre to to VIP'S Moron bee Ilse.. In Orman ootporadon, 0iico,the latlovriag 0 tool property Ram et Senn aced anauinbranues, except ar ci8°diy set lbw*here&: SEE EXHIBIT'A'ATTACHED HERETO AND?MADE A PART This property is Bee cry aid amurobrancoh$)Q$PT: - - t. Statutory Powers and Ass afUnifred Sewerage Age'. Z. Time version are within the bouadariee of tin Tuehnin Valley Waco-district and are eatbpCt tat to 1 levies and commerce thereof+ I 1 'the rigbta of the Pnb1•ic in and to date portion of the treatises inertia de6cehed hdrs8'within the ti■ts of road%etrecs3 cr high WaYL Iif us DiErnt nnwf WILL Nor ALLOW USE Of THE PROPERTY DEEMBED IN T[-RS I ! 1/4LMUMENT >N VIOLATION Of APPLICABLE LAND USE T WSSANt ACQU>W FEE 86F'06U3 SIGNING, OR. SING TICS 1NaTRIJME T , TTTtB TO nib t'RIPERTY SHOULD CIS witrt � COUNTY Y FLAN)RP4 DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND LI[�17 ON LAWSUITS AGAINST PARKING Oft FOREST PRACi1CSS AS O13PJNED IN ORS 30.930. The true mra®OVa ibr this ooarcymese is S 362,50040 Dated this 10 day of December : ,1996. - ±' �.� ��: rerac +tar MR 4 / ,: PS Ire am . •r z. • , . . ., • • .■ ; - ,:,.., .,.,„„,•, .. A-.�' j... FROM 1 02-11 17:24 #800 P.05/0E FROri : 1999.02-11 1S:04 SiE93 P 04/05 • • 'STATE OP } d//e¢Lj_Camay Cas . } Tick Winnable ma acknowledged before MO an December IX , 1991, by Caida Sue Botrla pad Tames D.9sgii. !`w • w Public Oregon Onansission> ; aaar�au. eaaaet 111BALv+ 3 FROM s 1999.02-11 17:24 #800 P.06/06 FROM : 1999,02-11 15:04 #593 P.OS/05 • • r No.tt - • . EXHIBIT'A' mamma Poet if Lot B.Mock V, ACRE TRACT,abided M we 9cuth ono fag of Mahn 21 Totwedip I South, Rout 1 Weet of the WIoatnit0 Alan n, In the OoUnly d Wooliniton nod sMrie if Oregon, dtawrtbed sm dower Rewind:1p at e reAnt an On Eft tMre of tot 8 tint to e0.00 fed twtrttt d Mee Northeast comer if Lot @ and rum ng then=Garth WWI Wad,omelet with the North Um d Lot 6.1 T160 bet lo a pt*4 nxr eta Etttlterfy Ono of&W.Oreentnay Rood;them Solth 14'09'Weet,dorlp the EesteQy the if S.W.9etlrtrag ROW. 40100 I therms halts O9'Kr Eon 301,10 teat Memo North war East 79.00 feet:three.South WOO' Wen tra60 feat to o point on the Sava One of Lot 6;thence North WPM'East MAO tot mao or is. to the BeuM+east owner if lot 9;thence f<bnh 0'fS'Mint 96.10 foot Ionia tote paPnt d knalmitttp. EAWAJL PM of Lot 8. Rock`C', LE HMAAN ACRE TRACT', b the busty at Washington end Stile of Dragon. deed oo Idioms Betilru ing at a print on the East fine if tort t;trot S 80.60 fed if the wml+aaa Dorm at Lot 0; Nero*South War W e s t p a n l t e t win the Math fete of Lat 6,173.50 End to a peke at Me Ea sN tare or S.W. fdreenburg Raab; Mama South teas'weds Wong the East(fr.of S.W.Oresnowg Rand 40.0o rwt ho the tow peke if bephartna arms t4esih g°a,a' P Bo to feet;Owen Norris E9'2s'Eno 79.60 foot theme Bevil free'Eeet tuso teat m 0 pant on tote 8etlt tine if Lett 6,throne Eolith t39'Etir West 12.6.0 ono,mem or let%to me Eeetaly I ne if e.w-orsenhrp Rand;theme Nom tree'East*trip the Easterly lets of 8a,Giscenbuig Road rail feet to are tun paint a bsgtnttrto. • • r- FkOM : • 1! 02-11 17:23 6800 P.03/06 rr..1.—.11•. : 1999.02-11 15:03 11693 P.02/06 BdITE OP OREGON Come/al Mrefusgio: as ree, Jefry 'ZIr. yJ `t+r A s Oak for I ste ikiV4. Doc : 98143009 Rest: 2726x3 409.00 11/11/1998 64131■OigA • • 1-- � ' '•fM1� • • * • ,. •• I N.• - . .. • •• •.... .s 61 • •• • I . 'Y—. .•• • • • VIPS INDUSTRIES,INC. October 20, 1998 City of Tigard Planning Division Attn: Mark Roberts 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,OR 97223 Re: Phoenix Inn Expansion 9980/9990 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, OR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING DOCUMENTATION Dear Mark: Following our preapplication conference in the above referenced matter on 9/1/98,we scheduled and held our Neighborhood Meeting on October 7, 1998. Per the directions you gave following our preapplication conference, enclosed please find the requisite Neighborhood Meeting documentation: 1. Affidavit of Posting Notice 2. Affidavit of Mailing 3. Copy of mailing list of affected property owners (2 pages) 4. Copy of letter mailed to affected property owners (2 pages) 5. Neighborhood Meeting sign-in sheet (name, address, telephone number and comment). Everything enclosed should be self-explanatory and in acceptable form. If I have not submitted something in acceptable form, or, have neglected to submit something otherwise required, please call by phone and advise immediately so that I can correct the deficiency. Absent a return phone call from you, I will assume that I have correctly submitted appropriate documentation and complied with the Neighborhood Meeting notification process. I would like to make a couple of notes regarding comments from attendees at the Neighborhood Meeting. First of all, there were only two attendees. Ruth Timmons is a real estate agent who was appearing for and on behalf of Lillian Drinkard, one of the 29757 SW Boones Ferry Rd. • Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 1blephone 503-682-9284 • FAX 503-682-9257 • affected property owners. Mrs. Timmons conveyed the full support of the Phoenix Inn expansion plan from Mrs. Drinkard. The only other attendee, Brian O'Day, is the owner of the printing/copy shop immediately north of the proposed expansion property. Mr. O'Day had two specific comments that I told him I would pass onto you. The first is that he objects to access from the subject site onto Greenburg Road. The second is that he requests a setback of the building off of Greenburg Road to the eastern portion of the expansion parcel. With those two comments having been reported, I need to also immediately report that Mr. O'Day made it very clear that the reason for those comments was that he felt very bitter about the way he had been dealt with by the City at the time of his initial development of his own property, and that the City had forced and compelled him to (1) give up his existing access to Greenburg Road, and (2) set his building back to the far eastern property line off of Greenburg Road. Accordingly, he felt very strongly that if he had been so mistreated by the City,we should be similarly mistreated. Having completed our obligations with respect to the Neighborhood Meeting, let me make a further note for your benefit. Since we had our preapplication conference on the proposed addition of 24 units to the Phoenix Inn, we have acquired an interest under a contract to purchase a second parcel adjacent to the initial expansion parcel. The newly acquired parcel is tax lot 4500. Accordingly, we are intending to modify our proposal to include tax lots 4600, 4602 and 4500. This will permit us to place building improvements totaling 48 units on tax lots 4600 and 4602, together with parking for the new 48 unit expansion on tax lot 4500. A preapplication conference for this revised proposal has already been scheduled for Thursday, October 29. I mentioned to the people at the intake counter that you had handled the first preapplication conference, and that it might make some sense for you to be advised of the second preapplication conference as well. In any event, this will advise that, although I felt it appropriate to complete the Neighborhood Meeting process with respect to the initial proposal that was the subject of our 9/1/98 preapplication conference, we will be putting that matter on hold and proceeding instead with our amended proposal for the addition of 48 units as contained in the materials submitted for the preapplication conference scheduled on October 29, 1998. Thank you. e , 4 • y yours, Steven V. Johnson President SVJ/db Enc. 2 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE WITHIN SEVEN(7) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE SIGN POSTING,RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT TO: City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223 I, Steven V. Johnson, do affirm that I am the party initiating interest in a proposed commercial development affecting the land located at 9980/9990 SW Greenburg Road, Tigard, OR - Tax Lots 4600 and 4602, and did on the 17th day of September, 1998 cause a notice to be posted 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 on a tree facing Gree rg Road. Steven V. Johnson (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the II?' day of S 1 4-". OFFICIAL SEAL DIANE BEYER ki< "°OOssoN No oa�"4 c MMl COMMISSION es53 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOV.5,1999 NOTARY PUBLIC OF O GON My Commission Expires: 8-6-91 (Applicant,please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) I NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: Phnani Y Tnn nrArIi t i nn TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Addition of 24 Quest rooms (+/-) 'Name ofApplicant/Owner. VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. dba Phoenix Inn 'Address or General Location of Subject Property: ••:• _ a. •••• --.. . I Ti•ar. , OR `Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): 4600 and 4602 • J fLuogropanyYrlaste arfmid.rtul AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, Steven V. Johnson , being duly sworn, depose and say that on September 17 , 19 98, 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) 9980 and 9990 SW Greenburg Road, Tigard, OR a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at Wilsonville, 08 with postage prepaid thereon. Signature .. (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 17th day of September , 19 98. OFFICIAL SEAL i DIANE BEYER • NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON £24Ü' • /_A__.)""� COMMISSION NO 048653 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOV.5,1999 NOTA PUBLIC OF OR ON My Commission Expires: 11/5/99 (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) !NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: PhnPni x Tnn Aririi t i nn TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Addition of 24 quest rooms (+/-) Name of Applicant/Owner.. ViP'S Motor Inns, Inc. dba Phoenix Inn I Address or General Location of Subject Property: 9980 and 9990 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, OR I Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): 4600 and 4602 h:Yognnpattp nastcnzltmatl.R1Si , --\1.--\J, L\ S i e too .\p t t..)(. 4 1\-4Q 1S126C0 01107 1S126C 07 1S126C0 01900 WASHINGTON SQUARE INC WASHIN ON SQUARE INC CRESCENT GROVE CEMETERY ASS PO Box 21545 PO Box 5 5 9925 SW Greenburg Rd Seattle,WA 98111 Seattle, A 8111 Tigard,OR 97223 1S126 900 1S126DC 03300 1S126DC 03500 CRESC GROVE CEMETERY ASS ATHERTON REALTY PARTNERSHIP Kenneth C Audrey Morrow 9925 S eenburg Rd 2100 S Wolf Rd 9411 SW Coral St Tigard OR 97223 Des Plaines,IL 60018 Portland,OR 97223 1S126DC 04400 1S126DC 04500 1S126DC 04601 Robert Clare Martin Lillian Drinkard F Brian& Susan A O'Day 585 SW Madrona Ln 9520 SW Coral St 9970 SW Greenburg Rd Sherwood,OR 97140 Portland,OR 97223 Tigard,OR 97223 15126 C 04 00 15126'C 04 01 1S126DC 04800 PHOE S LLC PHOE S LLC James Baker 29757 S oones Ferry Rd 29757 S" Boones Ferry Rd 9495 SW Locust St#A Wilsonvi e, R 97070 Wilson ' le, •R 97070 Portland,OR 97223 1S1 6D 04801 1S126DC 04900 Jame er BBH INVESTMENTS 9495 Locust St#A 9445 SW Locust St Poril OR 97223 Tigard,OR 97223 Ytl2V.0..t -- SCE\- oVN Le- 0.4\\y -. -s P p_ G�--v .r r d.\\\ 04,e\►vo cQ — cau o t..r c 20.0 `o . CITY OF TI IARD CI MMUNITY INV ILVEMER r Wcr I-ll NOTIFICATION LIST TON APPLICANTS WITH LAND OSALS WEST C1T LAND USE SIII,COMMI1TTEE f AST CIT 5OUTI1 CIT CENTRAL CIT - Abdullah Alkadi Clark G.Zeller Beverly Froude Craig I topkins Jack Biethan • 11905 SW 125th Court 13290 SW Shore Drive 12200 SW Bull Mountain Ro d 7430 SW Varna Street 15525 SW 109th Avenue Tigard,OR 97223 Tigard,OR 97223 Tigard,OR 97224 Tigard,OR 97223 Tigard,OR 97224 (503)524-1068 (503)524-0994 (503)639-2529 Bill Gross Larry Westerman Kathy Smith Mark F.Mahon John Bennet 11035 SW 135th Avenue 13665 SW Fern Street 11645 SW Cloud Court 11310 SW 91st Court 15550 SW 109th Avenue Tigard,OR 97223 Tigard,OR 97223 Tigard,OR 97224 Tigard,OR 97223 Tigard,OR 97224 (503)524-6325 (503)524-4550 (503)639-0894 Kathie Kalllo Christy I lerr Linda Masters Pat Wyden 12940 SW Glacier Llly Drive 11386 SW Ironwood Loop 15120 SW 141st Avenue 8122 SW Spruce Stre. Tigard,OR 97223 Tigard,OR 97223 Tigard,OR 97224 Tigard,OR 97223 (503)524-5200 (503)590-1970/(503)624-8009 (503)620-7662 • Ed Howden Barbara Saltier Scott Russell Sue Rorman 11829 SW Morning Hill 11245 SW Morgen Court 31291 Raymond Creek Roa 11250 SW 82nd Avant Tigard,OR 97223 Tigard,OR 97223 Scappoose,OR 97056 Tigard,OR 97223 (503)524-6040 (503)684-9303 (503)543-2434 Bonne&Jim Roach June SulIfridge Cal Woolery 14447 SW Twekesbury Drive 15949 SW 146th Avenue 12356 SW 132nd Court Tigard,OR 97224 Tigard,OR 97224 Tigard,OR 97223 (503)590-0481 (503)590-0523 (503)590-4297 • Karl Swanson 11410 SW Ironwood Loop Tigard,OR 97223 (503 • LEASE NOTE: In addition to property owners within 250 feel,notice of meetings on land use proposals shall be sent to all the names on this list. I VOpMryU111M3U not-11 not It nit 11 YX 1! • • • VIPS INDUSTRIES,INC. September 17,1998 Washington Square Inc. vo i — PO Box 21545 Cui0S-fe,v49, + Seattle, WA 98111 Re: VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. dba Phoenix Inn Dear Interested Party: VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. dba Phoenix Inn is the owner of the Phoenix Inn at 9575 SW Locust Street, Tigard, Oregon (NE corner of intersection of Locust and Greenburg - tax lots 4700 and 4701). We are proposing the addition of 24 guest rooms (+/-) to the hotel to be built on property we are acquiring immediately to the north of the hotel at 9980 and 9990 SW Greenburg Road (tax lots 4600 and 4602). Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, we would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Wednesday, October 7, 1998 7:00 p.m. Phoenix Inn Meeting Room 9575 SW Locust Street Tigard, OR Please note this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. We look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at(503) 682-9284 if you have any questions. Very truly yours, Steven V. Johnson President SVJ/db Enc. 29757 SW Boones Ferry Rd. • Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 'Telephone 503-682-9284 • FAX 503-682-9257 . : IN LOCATING PROPERTY AND THE COMPANY THIS MA=IS FURNIS,yEO AS A CONVENIENCE k ASSUMES NO LIABILITY FOR ANY VARIATIONS AS MAY BE DISCLOSED BY ACTUAL SURVEY t Tr St 3 erica . Title Insurance Company o� are�or _w_ ♦n.i NIC Ousw..0 nail C'TILE INSURANCE COMPANY 0°JREGv, M 4t rte-`' 1700 S.W• FOURTH AVENUE. PORTLAND. OR 57201-5512 11. (5031 222-3551 )IAP 1SIW26DC _ 1 i is a-.- nu e c i S. a:"53E. • TERM. 650 L� `t f ^rs�' ST. : I1 of• 1 / ; - p- iE5.2 1910.5' I 316}0 • '��j 3302 ✓✓01 • .38Ac. .38A:. •3E' / :,300 ♦ 2.20Ac. / e / 4 7•�0 / 4S 5 ♦ • ` � :':) 212.1' _ 19 13. 7�,► j— - - - 5.500 I 3600 D 3700 - .:9 At. ,.38 At 4:.;_. 3. • `�y�� _ (0.S No.I I6 B 0) e iZl 4 3 2 • fRb` 521.0' 96.15' 96.15' IlOiS' • L . ♦ IE0IN. 1850 ♦ dF-. R v.r! : SIGN IN SHEET NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING OCTOBER 7, 1998 PHOENIX INN EXPANSION PLAN Name: Address: Telephone Number: c.o4trask-S acsios4ct-k-- a-4-r-06 • 42 �.✓ a P47 'Po Sec" G, 2 6 @�\D y CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST ,Z1��I. 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. Staff: 1/14 IE Date: _ 61///q 1 & RELATED DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE .i MARKED ITEMS A) Application form (1 copy) B) Owner's signature/written authorization d� C) Title transfer instrument/or grant deed D) Applicant's statement No. of Copies E) Filing Fee $ lac-$-40,1 Li (u.e c4- Wo�4Z !SITE-SPECIFIC MAP(S)/PLAN(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE ✓MARKED ITEMS A) Site Information showing: No. of Copies —26 1. Vicinity map 2. Site size & dimensions [t/ 3. Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10%) rd� 4. Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds tam 5. Locations of natural hazard areas including: ❑ (a) Floodplain areas ❑ (b) Slopes in excess of 25% ❑ (c) Unstable ground ❑ (d) Areas with high seasonal water table ❑ (e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential ❑ (f) Areas having severely weak foundation soils ❑ 6. Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Map Inventory including: ❑ (a) Wildlife habitats ❑ (b) Wetlands ❑ 7. Other site features: (a) Rock outcroppings ❑ (b) Trees with 6" + caliper measured 4 feet from ground level ❑ 8. Location of existing structures and their uses t9/ 9. Location and type of on and off-site noise sources 10. Location of existing utilities and easements 11 . Location of existing dedicated right-of-ways f#� LAND USE APPLICATION•LIST PACE 1 OF 5 B) Site Development Plan Indicating: No. of Copies 1. The proposed site and surrounding properties m/-� 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 (b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site m� (c) Alternative routes of dead end or proposed streets that require future extension lie 01 4. The location and dimension of: (a) Entrances and exits on the site (b) Parking and circulation areas (c) Loading and services area (d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation c✓ (e) Outdoor common areas ❑ (f) Above ground utilities 5. The location, dimensions & setback distances of all: (a) Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities, and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet of the site m� (b) Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site di/// 6. Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions 7. Sanitary sewer facilities Oa 8. The location areas to be landscaped 9. The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques 10. The location of mailboxes 11 . The location of all structures and their orientation 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements �7 C) Grading Plan Indicating: No. of Copies 2- 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 (b) Slope ratios (c) Soil stabilization proposal(s) (d) Approximate time of year for the proposed site development 2. A statement from a registered engineer supported by data factual substantiating: (a) Subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering report m (b) The validity of sanitary sewer and storm drainage service proposals (c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated qr/ LANG) USE APPLICATION/LIST PAGE 2 Of 5 D) Architectural Drawings Indicating: No. of Copies 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 v 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 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 ®/ 5. Landscape narrative which also addresses: 7 (a) Soil conditions (b) Erosion control measures that will be used d� F) Si:n Dra in• • ❑ Sign drawings .hall be submitted in accordance with Chapter 18.114 of the Code a‘ : - of the Site Development Review or prior to obtaining a Building Permit to onstruct a sign. G) Traffic Generation Estimate: ❑ H) Prelimina Partitio of Line Ad'ustment Ma. Indicatin:: No. of Copies 1. The owner of the subject parcel ❑ 2. The owner's au orized agent ❑ 3. The map scale it 0,50,100 or 200 feet-1) inch north arrow and date ❑ 4. Description of . .rcel location and boundaries ❑ 5. Location, width a • names of streets, easements and other public ways within and adja•-nt to the parcel ❑ 6. Location of all perman-nt buildings on and within 25 feet of all property lines ❑ 7. Location and width o all water courses ❑ 8. Location of any tree within 6" or greater caliper at 4 feet above ground level ❑ 9. All slopes greater than % ❑ 10. Location of existing utilitie .nd utility easements ❑ 11 . For major land partition whic, creates a public street: (a) The proposed right-of-wa location and width ❑ (b) A scaled cross-section of e proposed street plus any reserve strip ❑ 12. Any applicable deed restrictions ❑ 13. Evidence that land partition will no •reclude efficient future land division where applicable ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION/LIST PAGE 3 OE 3 1) Subdivision Prelims,._, : Plat Ma. and Data Indicatin:: No. of Copies 1 . Scale equaling 30 50,100 or 200 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per sheet ❑ 2. The proposed n ,me of the subdivision ❑ 3. Vicinity map s owing property's relationship to arterial and collector street ❑ 4. Names, addres•-s and telephone numbers of the owner, developer, engineer, survey- and designer (as applicable) ❑ 5. Date of application ❑ 6. Boundary lines of trac to be subdivided ❑ 7. Names of adjacent su..ivision or names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of u -subdivided land ❑ 8. Contour lines related o a City-established benchmark at 2-foot intervals for 0-10% grades gr-:ter than 10% ❑ 9. The purpose, locati.n, type and size of all the following (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): (a) Public and pr ate right-of-ways and easements ❑ (b) Public and priv. e sanitary and storm sewer lines ❑ (c) Domestic water ma'• including fire hydrants ❑ (d) Major power telepho transmission lines (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ (e) Watercourses ❑ (f) Deed reservations f. parks, open spaces, pathways and other land encumbrance: ❑ 10. Approximate plan and .rofiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers • with grades and pipe s zes indicated on the plans ❑ 11 . Plan of the proposed w. er distribution system, showing pipe sizes and the location of valves an. 're hydrants ❑ 12. Approximate centerline pro 'les showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions '.r a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision ❑ 13. Scaled cross sections of p .posed street right-of-way(s) ❑ 14. The location of all areas s bject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ 15. Location, width & directio of flow of all water courses & drainage-ways ❑ 16. The proposed lot configurati. s, approximate lot dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are t• be used for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated pon such lots. ❑ 17. The location of all trees with a d ameter 6 inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level, and th- location of proposed tree plantings ❑ 18. The existing uses of the property, ncluding the location of all structures and the present uses of the structu -s, and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting ❑ 19. Supplemental information including: (a) Proposed deed restrictions (if an, ❑ (b) Proof of property ownership ❑ (c) A proposed plan for provision of sub.ivision improvements ❑ 20. Existing natural features including rock outcroppi ':s, wetlands & marsh areas ❑ 21 . If any of the foregoing information cannot pra.ticably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION./LIST PAGE 1 OF 3 )) Solar Access acalatio s: o • K) Other Information No. of Copies '7JJ 1 1 d fr1004-7 g..{— ', JIS-GctSj 1/1.Aiii 6140 ✓e, • VVellokl 1/v1 e a5 we.S c i Qf ct<1 Go vcs1�-� _J ',Nog inbaayVnastersV-C icl ist.mst may 23. 1995 LAND USE APPLICATION J LIST PAGE 5 OF 5 APPLICANT'S STATEMENT FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION 1. APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. Attn: Steven V. Johnson 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville, OR 97070 Telephone: 682-9284 Fax: 682-9257 2. PROPOSED USE/PROTECT PROPOSAL: The Applicant is owner and operator of the existing Phoenix Inn hotel located at 9575 SW Locust Street in Tigard, OR 97223. The existing facility consists of 56 guest units. The Applicant's proposal is to expand the existing Phoenix Inn by the addition of 45 new and additional units on adjacent properties recently acquired by the Applicant to the north of the existing Phoenix Inn. The proposed addition will require the construction of certain building improvements, and, surface parking lot. The building improvements will consist of a single, rectangular shaped,three story,wood frame structure, with partial basement, of construction method, materials and design consistent with the existing Phoenix Inn. 3. SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: The proposal involves two separate properties adjacent to the existing Phoenix Inn. The first adjacent property (Parcel 1) consists of approximately 16,553 square feet located adjacent to, and northeast of, the existing Phoenix Inn hotel. The description of Parcel 1 is "West one-half of Lot 7, Block C, Lehman Acre Tract, Tax Lot 4500 aka 1S126DC-04500. Parcel 1 is currently improved with one small, old single family residential dwelling that is vacant. This building will be demolished to make way for the addition. The surface parking lot for the addition will be physically located on Parcel 1. The second adjacent property (Parcel 2) consists of approximately 17,900 square feet of land located adjacent to, and north of,the existing Phoenix Inn. The description of Parcel 2 is "Part of Lot 6, Block C, Lehman Acre Tract, Tax Lots 4600 and 4602 aka 1S126DC-04602 and 04600. Parcel 2 is currently improved with two buildings, one is a single family residential dwelling, and the other is a former single family residential dwelling converted to office use. Both buildings are now,or will shortly be,vacant. Both buildings will be demolished to make way for the addition The building improvements for the addition will be physically located on Parcel 2. 4. ZONING/PERMIT"!'ED USE: Both properties that are the subject of the current proposal have designations as "Commercial Professional" (CP) under both the comprehensive plan map designation, and, zoning map designation. The proposal is accordingly an outright permitted use, and no variance, conditional use, sensitive lands,or other land use actions are necessary for the proposal. 5. RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATIONS: Applicant has succumbed to City of Tigard demand and will grant right of way dedication for SW Greenburg Road to a distance of 45 feet from the centerline thereof on Parcel 2. No right of dedication has been required by the City of Tigard for SW Coral Street at Parcel 1. As agreed with City staff at the Pre-Application Conference on 10/29/98 (Mark Roberts - Planning; Brian Rager -Engineering), no traffic study will be required given Applicant's acquiescence to a dedication on Greenburg Road. The two existing curb/driveway cuts on SW Greenburg Road will be eliminated, so no direct vehicular access to or from Greenburg Road will be permitted. 6. CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE: Hard costs for the cost of construction of the proposed project, excluding land costs, soft costs, and permits/fees, is$1,500,000. DATED this 1st day of February, 1999. qr.TOR I NS, IN (2_____ By: Steven V.Johnson, President 2 (4/6/99 ADDENDUM TO 2/1/99 APPLICANT'S STATEMENT) APPLICANT'S NARRATIVE FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL CRITERIA TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 18.360.090 1. Compliance With Requirements of This Title: Plans and specifications have been submitted by Charles C. Nagel, an Oregon licensed Architect, and,Timothy R. Turner,an Oregon licensed Civil Engineer. All plans and specifications submitted by Project Architect and Project Engineer are designed in full compliance with all applicable requirements of this title. 2. Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment a.(1) The project has been designed to locate building and site work improvements to preserve existing trees, topography and drainage where possible. For example, the several mature Douglas Fir trees located on Greenburg Road have been fully preserved. And, topography will remain relatively unchanged from present condition. Finally, the natural flow of drainage will be maintained (down slope from north to south),although most storm drainage will be collected and directed by newly installed storm drainage system. a.(2) There is no evidence whatsoever of slumping or sliding in any areas of the project. a.(3) The only building will be a rectangular shaped three story structure separate from, and parallel to the existing Phoenix Inn facility located on the parcel adjacent to the south. There are no buildings to the east or west of the new building, and the new building will be a minimum of 20 feet distant from the existing building on its south side, all of which will provide adequate light and air circulation. Adequate fire fighting circulation and access will be available directly from Greenburg Road on the west, and,the newly constructed parking area on the east. a.(4) Primary orientation of the new building is to the south, for full sun exposure to the east, south and west elevations. Wind is an immaterial factor in the subject area. b. Applicant has prepared and submitted an Arborist's Report dated 2/16/99 by William L. Owen,Registered Arborist. Said Report clearly identifies what is necessary and possible to do on the site regarding tree preservation. The findings and instructions noted thereon are subject to, and in full compliance with, the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. 3. Exterior Elevations: The approval criteria listed are applicable to single and multi-family residential structures only. The subject is a commercial project, so no discussion is necessary. 4. Buffering,Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses: a. Three sides of the subject(north, south and west) are bounded by similar commercial or public uses. Accordingly,there is no need for consideration of buffering in those cases because there is no conflict between different types of land uses. The west boundary borders on Greenburg Road, a public right-of-way and commercial thoroughfare. On the opposite side of Greenburg Road is a commercial/retail development, and,a cemetery. Across the south boundary lies the existing Phoenix Inn which the subject development is intended to compliment so no buffer is needed. Across the north boundary from the subject lies a commercial building and accessory parking area. A landscaping strip exists already, and will be supplemented by additional landscaping along the entirety of the common boundary with the development of this project. The only boundary with differing use is the east boundary where an older, single family residential use exists. However, it should be noted that the property across this east boundary is zoned commercial, and is presently listed for sale and being marketed for redevelopment as a commercial use. Notwithstanding, the applicant's landscaping plan previously submitted does reflect a significant effort at a screen buffer along the entirety of the east boundary of the subject development. 2 • b. The roof of the new building will be identical to that of the existing Phoenix Inn building, i.e.,a residential-style pitched roof with asphalt shingles. There is no roof-mounted equipment to be placed on this roof. Accordingly, there should be no concern for on-site screening from view from adjoining properties except for parking lots. As noted, the property to the south is the existing Phoenix Inn of which the new building is intended to be a part, so no screening is appropriate. The adjoining property to the east is a public highway,and the adjoining property to the north is an existing commercial use. Accordingly, screening from view from these adjoining properties is also of little concern,if not irrelevant at all. In any event, the landscaping plan previously filed by Applicant does reflect considerable landscaping across the entire distance of both these west and north frontages,which landscaping will not screen the view, but will aesthetically mitigate the view. As noted in the preceding section, the only view corridor of concern would be on the eastern boundary since the adjoining property on the east side is currently devoted to a residential use. However,it should be noted once again that the adjoining property is commercially zoned, and currently being marketed for redevelopment to commercial purposes. Again however,extensive landscaping is planned across the entire length of the eastern boundary to mitigate the need for any screening. 5. Privacy and Noise: Multi-Family or Group Living Uses: This section relates to multi-family or group living uses,while the Applicant's proposal is for a commercial use. Accordingly,the criteria listed are not applicable and need not be addressed. 6. Private Outdoor Use: Multi-Family Use: This section relates to multi-family uses only, and need not be addressed for the current application which is a commercial use. 7. Shared Outdoor Recreation Area: Multi-Family Use: This section relates to multi-family uses only, and need not be addressed for the current application which is a commercial use. 3 • 8. Landfill/Floodplain Development The Applicant's proposal is in an area not previously used as landfill, and not within the 100 year floodplain, so the criteria listed are irrelevant and need not be addressed. 9. Demarcation of Public,Semi-Public and Private Sp#ces for Crime Prevention: All structures and site improvements are designed so as to clearly define and establish persons having a right to be upon the subject property, to provide for crime prevention, and,to establish maintenance responsibility, principally by the clearly distinct construction design, and,landscaping. The new building will be identical in architectural design and style to the existing Phoenix Inn, so it will be clearly known to any person that the building is reserved for lodging guests of the Phoenix Inn. Additionally, significant landscaping around the entirety of the perimeter of the property upon which the buildings are to be developed will clearly separate the private property of Applicant's development from any adjacent public or private property. As to security and crime prevention, it should be noted that all guest rooms are accessed from interior corridor only, and,access to interior corridors is from three exit doors only, each of which exit doors are locked at all times from the inside. 10. Crime Prevention and Safety: 10.(a) Each guest unit shall have a 5' X 6' window centered in its exterior wall, so that there is clear line of sight for all occupants to outside areas. 10.(b) No interior laundry and service areas will be located in the new building. All such areas are located in the existing Phoenix Inn building. 10.(c) There will be no mailbox for the new building, as the existing mailbox for the existing Phoenix Inn will receive mail for the entire project. 4 10.(d) There will be no areas within the project vulnerable to crime. However, the new building will have significant accent lighting mounted on all exterior elevations which will keep the area around the new building well lighted. Additionally, there will be significant pole-mounted parking lot lights throughout the new development to illuminate the area fully. 10.(e) Light fixtures are adequately located in pedestrian, vehicular, and, other potentially dangerous areas. Fixtures will be located at such height as to cause light pattern overlap at a height of seven feet Exterior and parking lot lighting plans will be submitted with construction drawings for review and approval by the City of Tigard. 11. Public Transit This criteria is not applicable as the development proposal is not adjacent to a transit route. 12. Landscaping: 12.(a) Applicant has previously submitted a landscape plan designed and prepared by an Oregon registered Landscape Architect, which landscape plan is in complete accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.100. 12.(b) The requisite minimum percentage of gross area is landscaped,and so reflected on the landscape plan previously submitted. 12.(c) The requisite minimum percentage of gross area is landscaped, and so reflected on the landscape plan previously submitted . 13. Drainage: All drainage plans and specifications have been designed by the Project Engineer, an Oregon licensed Civil Engineer,in accordance with the criteria in the adopted 1971 Master Drainage Plan. 5 J., 14. Provisions for the Disabled: All facilities have been designed by the Project Architect, an Oregon licensed Architect, in accordance with the ADA,and the requirements of ORS Chapter 447. 15. Zonin All provisions of the underlying zone apply. The proposed development is an outright permitted use, and no variances or adjustments are requested or required. 6 • i - / S.W CORAL STREET 401-'I S,1 del (-- c : AMR UM. --Tv— d J------:- rre-r. ,c .. , , . AIOO.T"moans ' , ' .._.-...:.._.� , is • Y- 1 �✓ �f _ _-n2•E' .S^f t153r�___ _- - i.v 7 Nth Afrxu.rrsvw ) �;4 J nn '/� roraawAUt . '`. �,�r •�, �I �-- I B,°• 71` a /7 I S _ STO J arsrw., �,j, 1 jcP .l ''/ , "1 4 • 1 = 0O MAxOAUM SLa* m .`iI erc_.— 1`---- ?- r I -I"�� - I 'D ci 0 �17,-e.,,,--I ct I��� 6P n +/ VtILT I N -1 =c-_. 'n in x T p wlvrx Pus ••GP -"IfTN .1 D01W11•,1C - /.. W o sr,MIN WIDTH AT 11111��---��� i-�1* / MICAIU(NO J it 1 a / P a�� I J 30 r �:•rAmmEn more[ I / •vim'}1I Q aR`o • [ num,.TpNA1 F (f.J C__.. 1 J i / U �F 7210Q.1OR ACERSIRSILITT �f.ct�i RV,Oil , a r _ .. _– s I a o f1Al1DIGAPP1=17 PAi2Kl1.1$ ,;1� \liGi}Jlr�' MAP uT5 J/� �•— ' �.�. _ �sr_ r • ST��/S NOM: 7 / ' :�� bi _pr V .� .. TA.. d'u1r.E•I r.+e?Sal1WD -- � _ ____ — x .�m i�- e�nDe u�ci cR core VAC.lm[DTfgN - R.�, WSW AS•r.\ 3.i. I • Ml.,6 IG�jIJIf. WITH OREGON ADM[NDMLNrf Nm� 1• ��1~a� •~-�0 -� 4t In[DRIOn Or OSSC. 2 / 1 RI w1aDINC EONS cr w 1 \ -:.•,.•;' �� -�, 1 *V OOTOPANC1 R I ` t t _ -� -,d- D : CONSTRUCTION. HOUR 3 VITT MOIL.ADDITION-Y STORS ^1.. % _ ~ �_ H C EXISTING MID..RAS M MOTEL I'NEM , � M `• , ENERGY PATH 1 USED AS A GUIDE SEE[SERGI • GI1`QMI CAICCLATIONS TO S[SISMIRLD •/a \ \• i SI - - R` r•1°I L.L. RA.SIC ARIA ALIA.ED ••%5Q7 S 2-21AD I II ,. /fir' 1. A �N,S 4 r I R ' = CA �J Li SEPERATION IMOC4Aute10[A.SE-ll.HR Sp ET. 7 J . 1E1 NNE _ 1 Z XT-01.2 t]�p G (Z i� STIILNNIlaS OW.SQf ARL IOOTAG[wAM Sp rt. __ _ I - —. — ALLOWED. ♦ S MOOR ARG Of C(®TIN(:. O 54.LFR IE;I'_�Tr FIRST •AS1 SQ.rt. -.� _ ___ -� 1� COS EKED EARNING-•MR SQ.rt. �� .. POYTE_0 WHERE - ND SQ.rt. �:%/yijy-i �C11Rp f1� SECOND I2 OR -@,f1S MI,rt. n rill r,ELV :4 MD:•J/ M x -12,11 4 rt. _ -,!'fir - ,. TOTAL GROSS -21AM fprt. -' l ``\ 11 1M"t0�20I fAL I E. j?� ' / I M o_ UI NCLI DES COVERED PAWING,1YAIJO.CANOPY r I LSECpO 11.150.I-zl[!�r, _ - 1.. r\ , TTTIIIMMMIIDDD oa+■-MSS \ 1 I F- TOTAL GROSS FLOOR AREAL OrwDDEEpN `�� 1__,4 AT,�, rR 1 �i, Z< 2 a uMENT 2,w 7p.rt. III R. FIRST FLOOR [,w EP.PE. �.' /G1 i• -r-- U•(///(/•�■! \� • �Ir,ui� Z I W SWORD FLOOR VW) EIX rt. 14 1 1 I !� '�,, CJ \ �� Z TauDEIDOR - /DM IQ FT. i rr MxIL L L+M.15W1 1- • •I X, y TOTAL GROSS ' !' ❑ / % Z O 7 at FLOOR AREA - 2,AM E0.rt. ' 1 I / $I 0 N (7 MAO TOTAL GROSS■LOOK AREA SECLUDING RAIEMENT 1 __ �___ _I___.._ _L ' 4�_-_ O W aEEU7Q a M SOS COVE: 11,71 w.n. N7x � -. -.- 'C� - --'ate /COMM. --- ISMS SP El n% •��� le I f �/� I- L%ICxDISG - RAID SV.FT. 11% '�., ! `� 5 I / W. �((' ADDITION a ...TA / Ems'TINGPAYNG • 12.M w.rt 1.% ou - T% d lf EAU es - - =1�/EIaTVq PA.f76lPQGI I LI G{.�7�N K- J .NEW TAXING - o.n1 w,T. RNA Cr :4 G� 1 �� _ Eu PING WA1 rA Ewn 10 PDL- .LIaH1-5 EXCLUDES COX TIRED - 1'°0A 1Q-R. 1% _ No,is AIY7 AM>Q.T 2% 1- ; i b1 i I wl 11 I 1 I Iti ,,t4` , , ; I.IIbHT��I.1b .P o, ExcLiMS rOSTUrn • .•/ • --(I) AIN Mou r UMIr.. I/1 MALLS UMW.LANDSCAPED- SWIM.PT II% r T' JILcO. AREA e.*t ►i rj SHEET NO. NEW LANDSCAPED - IIMIEQSE M% ¢I \ AREA 5 W.LOCUST STREET Z:M 1 TARRING REQUIRED - fracas i PARKING moron, -77 EXISTING SPACES SITE PLAN SCALE 1'•20•Q' AT NEW'SPACES __ _ TOTAL •OSTOTAL SEAM 1 PROS SEWS r 4 WILLIAM L. OWEN and ASSOCIATES �1�,.s Tree and Landscape Consulting Services /1,, ■, P.O.BOX 641,PORTLAND,OREGON 97207 503/222-7007 i TREE REPORT VIP INDUSTRIES, INC. PHOENIX INN GREENBURG ROAD ADDITION PROJECT Tigard, Oregon Prepared for: Steven V. Johnson, President V1P's Industries, Inc. 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville,OR 97070 February 16, 1999 Prepared by: William L. Owen, B.S.,M.A., C.A. American Society of Consulting Arborists Registered Member #114 Diplomate, American Board of Forensic Examiners i+ 4 INSPECTION,DIAGNOSIS AND EVALUATION OF TREES,SHRUBS AND RELATED PLANTINGS. f~ CONSULTATION WITH RESPECT TO PLANTING,TRANSPLANTING,PRESERVATION,MAINTENANCE AND c= ARBOREAL PLANNING.COMPREHENSIVE LOSS OR DAMAGE REPORTS.DULY SANCTIONED APPRAISALS FOR LEGAL OR CONTRACTUAL PURPOSES.LEGALLY ACCEPTABLE TESTIMONY IN COURT CASES. WILLIAM L. OWEN and ASSOCIATES / �C A Tree and Landscape Consulting Services , , P.O.BOX 641,PORTLAND,OREGON 97207 503/222-7007 February 16, 1999 Steven V. Johnson, President VIP's Industries, Inc. 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville, OR 97070 RE: Phoenix Inn/Greenburg Road Addition Project Dear Mr. Johnson: Enclosed find the tree report on the subject project as required by the City of Tigard. Please advise me if you need additional information to this report. Thank you. Very truly yours! - " William . Owen, B.S., .A., C.A. American Society of Consulting Arborists Registered Member#114 Diplomate, American Board of Forensic Examiners . =T' INSPECTION,DIAGNOSIS AND EVALUATION OF TREES,SHRUBS AND RELATED PLANTINGS. ., t CONSULTATION WITH RESPECT TO PLANTING,TRANSPLANTING,PRESERVATION,MAINTENANCE AND •. ARBOREAL PLANNING.COMPREHENSIVE LOSS OR DAMAGE REPORTS.DULY SANCTIONED APPRAISALS FOR LEGAL OR CONTRACTUAL PURPOSES.LEGALLY ACCEPTABLE TESTIMONY IN COURT CASES. TABLE OF CONTENTS Problem and Task 1 Methodology of Analysis 1 Present Condition 1 Findings 1 - 6 Recommendations 6 - 8 Summary 9 Species Glossary 10 Mitigation Plan 11 Plot Plan Pruning Standards 12 Standard for Fertilizing C 1 - C5 VIP INDUSTRIES, INC. PHOENIX INN GREENBURG ROAD ADDITION PROJECT TREE REPORT 1) Problem and Task: The purpose of the survey of the trees on the subject site is to examine trees on the site as planned, to determine 1) the present condition, viability and prognosis for survival and 2) their suitability for preservation as landscape amenity trees. 2) Methodology of Analysis of Tree Population: A visual inspection was done looking for typically normal specimens and for abnormalities and indications of disease, (dead tissue, galls, conks etc.)to find visual symptoms of tree failure or hazard. In addition, in so far as possible visually at this point in the process, prognosis for survival considering the impact of construction is assessed. 3) Present Condition: a) See schedule ff. b) Insects and Diseases: Mites (Cedar, Pine, Fir); Aphid (Apple and Willow); Apple scab,blight (Apple and Apricot). c) Man-caused damage: Construction damage to roots of Fir;non-standard pruning in Apple, Dogwood,Willow. d) Nature caused damage: Storm breakage in Firs, Willow, Apricot, Cedar. 4) Findings/Problems/Recommended Solutions: The information following in the tree schedule is provided to inform all concerned parties regarding the impact of the subject project on the trees marked to be preserved on the plot plan enclosed, as well as prognosis. (See plot plan enclosed with trees numbered per following schedule.)*4.50 feet above ground or its equivalent. Phoenix Inn/WLO&Assoc#9905 1 J Tree Species Condition This tree Remarks. ersin slow increment of dead branches. with number tree's is subs es. substantial e s cendis tantially below e annual growth I Ipoor p decline, be Years in is the ofconstruct�age' This area but c Past nt in Fair t retained professional cable for a may me continue to proper Good° This tre e' Shown to be given formi eismpresu more vigorous.er. gnnua tantial than tree# overall Solve dead increme tan I24, With performing at d branching, is Professional low-average ng, but it Fair to perform' Shown to be reta continue rPacity.care can Good overall retained. to average,dead bran 2 in overall erage, but branches. Perform #4 20" injuries at dconsistent��growth�ceb with Same base w me evidence rs below construction.history as loch have callused of old but a hit or d Fair to can be preserved. #2 regarding l over Good erved. professional r Past od Quite similar Shown t nal cart condition ar to Fees#1 , scarring similar , 2 and o be retained. arr'ing at b to Fees 3' equipment the base from #2 and#3 though in Some sae t i Juries but has ld callused ell.me from injury. udate ev call n rdent used well, consiste th Some deadwood.typically normal preserved.quire thee#2, 3 and 4�ual growth ed Sho care, but c particularly. Note: It • wn to be e drawings is significant retained. change gn the will probably to °te that ba:d:a Phenix side of thes grade at the b the In 'LU`�Assoc#9�ps sidewalk away from trees. The asphalt asphalt level on east to lk°n the west i b` at now from 1, similarly most The arlY close This 2 con'd east area to C] eat a e e b e d. b e d of asphalt 1 0" history ve g Pl us for and made into Empress professional of construction k'e11 to da ee Firs These Good oval Care traumaig1 e9utheir A split,ste A,split wInspecimenat This is which is a bad ]4"abov no doubt ad tree for . e the #6 removed a existing building,l volunteer tree location. 8" to the site.by the c°nstru shown is within Pine it is in It is a tree ction. Not tO be Good n ant event. ee that shoul o beeat lore A somewhat 'here A sparse on o Willow tC be removed a scrub one side specimen ed Willow to t. S II Good This • Y construction, the east. Shown Is a one-sided sfrace be all scpJ esePecin,en due conifers between it and s, indiscriminate to crowding rb to (#6 ther, #8 14" Shown to be the north do not qua they, s the 0 loss since it removed by construction.as trees. Poor and in the No #9 16" This is a scrub a wrong brew tree, in Apricot neglect.pshthe CFO%froec]ine with much Poor Thconstruction.°to s removed h damage and Is a b to the site. Y declining broken u This treng old specimen'partially degraded and year j from 1 s becoming more h substantial e de site.removed by growth and no care• dohs each ay. Between tree fiction. No loss a°� to the Bet ear s#8 and#9 and south, is a row lfindiscrimi running to s north and Phoenix In specimens Filbert. All indiscriminate small o&DSO°'��os ref�o City specimens which do o not qual all as trees ow removed by construction are shown gees ceder n. be 3 , #10 g„ Dogwood This tree has largely improper non-standard badly mutilated in ne•s ad ve ous ed$ gr un�nand s Past IIbe m thciemved by c� by tree��24„ tree h Opd one for�ctiOnShown to site been badly neglected Though the Poor glected and 1Pa purposes, laterally decay ilaterary in major scaffold Lt with stress f stogy b e sided branches. assures section arrei� and neglected with Decay in up. s tree is h section io is beyond 's canard rnuc meaningful repair. Shoignificant and s in one 42" constriction and should Cedar the site be to be removed by Good o g�eat loss to major is multi-stem specimen erns splitting c with any co- o out at pp weak has four addition g. Again ancies and imately S, stems we additional and one main g into shown fal problems for main leader, which a radius i stability. ' With If shown h makes its location the parkin This tree is rained . g tat entry, within the will require untenable as p crown cabling sho maintenance wn and be over time and support lot,pedestrian tena.n and potential a time high a situation the heightened hazard in a 24„ (Aggregate 3 eotY culturally 15 feasible recommendation situation. In s parking Stems Hawthorne Poor removal for reason A mu1ti.ste uP, stogy m specimen d with the base, a age iand deca substantial break high risk arty, neglect At treeish with nigh ris of splitting and fa evidence ur Phoenix InO and failure. of Assoc#99 this construction. I w' Shown to This os location for reaso would not retain removed safety, tree in 4 #14 7" Sweetgum Fair This tree is leaning substantially to the northwest due to crowding. It has some storm damage and break up. Quite one-sided. Shown to be removed by construction. #15 14" Cedar Good This tree is a decent specimen with no apparent problems. It is shown to be removed by construction,being located in the parking lot. It is too close to tree#16 causing some disfiguring of the growth on the south and east. Shown to be removed by construction. #16 8" Apple Fair A split-stem specimen at 3' above the ground with substantial adventitious growth. Very crowded into the Cedar(tree #15). This tree is in the wrong location and its growth is increasing the problem for balance in the crown and weight on the split-stem. Shown to be removed by construction. A very poor tree. #17 19" Apple Fair A tree which has been neglected badly in the past and pruned improperly, creating extensive advanticious growth and top heavy crown which is very crowded, with die-back resulting. Die back in stubs cut away in the past. A four-stem specimen from 30"above the ground,with multi-stems erupting at 12' from a main leader which will in time threaten for failure to split away. Poorly attached advanticious sprouts from larger scaffold branches. Poor specimen. Shown to be removed by construction. #18 16" Apple Poor Quite similar to tree#17 in all respects. A multi-stem scaffold begins at 30", spreading a multi-stem with advanticious sprouts, many of which will become problems of risk as they grow. Some die-back in lower branches from improper pruning and loss of energy. A very poor specimen. Shown to be removed by construction. #19 6" Pear Good A typical neglected specimen which has a poor appearance due to non-standard pruning. Phoenix lnn/WLO&Assoc#9905 5 #19 Extremely heavy growth in upper crown. Off con'd balance. Shown to be removed by construction. (Crowded on the east by a volunteer deciduous species on the neighbor's property.) #20 24" Willow Poor This tree has fallen down partially to the northeast,yet is continuing to grow. It is multi-stem, full of deadwood and in decline. It also has a major dying stem at the base, 8" diameter, growing toward the west. The tree is a hazard now and the hazard will increase with added weight of growth. This tree should be removed. It is shown to be removed by construction. 5) Recommendations: a) Before Construction: Removal of trees for buildings and parking lot area. 1) The tree clearing contractor should be required to submit and review with the developer and the Consulting Arborist plans for how the trees will be removed. Specifically, the plan should describe the equipment to be used, method of curing,directions of fall as necessary,routes for removal of wood debris, loading area for wood and debris, how trees to be retained will be protected from damage in the process (both above and below ground), and any other information necessary in a good clearing and removal plan in a sensitive, closely proximate, tree preservation area. This plan must be approved by the developer and the Consulting Arborist before the clearing begins and must be strictly followed. 2) As a prerequisite to#1 above,tree area protection fencing shall be installed at the drip line of each tree to be preserved. The fencing shall be orange plastic type,at least 4'high,wired firmly to steel posts,driven into the ground no farther apart than 8' O.C., stretched as tightly as possible to give a smooth appearance. The fencing installation must be inspected and final approval given by the Consulting Arborist before clearing, grading, or other such construction activity begins on the project. The fencing shall only be moved or removed on written permission of the Consulting Arborist. 3) In light of(1)above, it must be made clear to the clearing contractor that he will be held responsible for damages(as professionally appraised)to any tree Phoenix Inn/WLO&Assoc#9905 6 or trees marked to be preserved, if such damage is due to contractor negligence by failing to operate in a safe and prudent manner in the clearing, grading and tree removal operation. 4) The Consulting Arborist must be notified at least 48 hours in advance of any work on the site,and will be on call during fence installation and site clearing work, and will also inspect without prior notice, to insure full compliance with 1, 2 and 3 above. b) During Construction: During construction of the parking lot and buildings,decisions may be made on-site by the Consulting Arborist regarding specific root impact/interface problems, working closely with the construction contractor. Long experience has demonstrated that this technique is the best way to maximize retention of trees. Often,only on-site, in specific reference to the building layout,exact location of buildings,parking lots, etc. can these decisions best be made. I have been retained by VIP, Inc.to supervise tree preservation activities on this construction site,beginning to end. By working closely in pre-construction meetings, meetings on-site with the contractor and as necessary on-site during near-tree construction, critical work around trees to be retained can be done with the least impact on the trees. c) Post Construction Therapy: 1) Ongoing maintenance specifications required for all trees retained. All tree work to be done only by State Licensed/Intemational Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborists, as directed by the Consulting Arborist. a) Pruning to be done to Standards of the American National Standards Institute for tree work (see enclosed ff.) 1) Dead wood, stub,hanger removal 2) Crown shaping as needed for better appearance/balance. 3) Thinning for wind sail reduction, where necessary, tree by tree, as recommended by the Consulting Arborist. Note: thinning of any tree crown shall not exceed 10% unless specifically directed by Consulting Arborist. b) Fertilization to National Arborist Association Standards,DRF method (see enclosure). 1) Formula to be slow-release, liquid with trace elements, with Mycorrihiza supplements. 2) Specific ratio NPK and trace elements to be approved by Consulting Arborist in advance. 3) Specific timing of application to be set by Consulting Arborist,but must occur only between July 15 and August 15 Phoenix Inn/WLO&Assoc#9905 7 of the first growth year following completion of construction work around trees unless specified otherwise by the Consulting Arborist. c) Irrigation for the trees need be by natural rainfall only,except as may be modified by Landscape Architect and Consulting Arborist in relation to the designed-in landscape trees and shrubs. (Plantings under native tree species should be chosen accordingly.) d) Insect and disease control(plant healthcare)treatments, if any,will be based on specific need only. The type, amount and timing of applications to be worked out by the Consulting Arborist in conjunction with the Certified Arborist Contractor chosen to do the work. 2) Monitoring Program: a) A critical element in tree preservation in construction trauma impacted trees is periodic, ongoing inspection of the trees by the Consulting Arborist who 1) did the initial examination, and 2) witnessed the construction impact on a specific,tree-by-tree basis. b) Tree monitoring inspection should be done twice annually,spring and fall (April-May and September-October) for the first three growth years following completion of construction, then (normally) once annually thereafter. c) Inspection findings for maintenance therapies should be specified in writing for necessary tree maintenance work. Phoenix Inn/WLO&Assoc#9905 8 6) Summary: I believe the foregoing shows clearly what is necessary and possible to do on the site regarding tree preservation, both now and ongoing,how and when the necessary work should be done,by whom, and under whose direction. If the findings and instructions herein are noted, observed and carried out as recommended,the result can be a well done motel building addition to the City of Tigard,with a preserved natural tree population that should survive the construction, and with professional care as provided for herein,have a chance to be natural amenities for much longer than they would if left in their present neglected con.ition. AO, 479, William L. •wen, B.S., M.A.,'C.A. Date American Society of Consulting Arborists Registered Member#114 Diplomate, American Board of Forensic Examiners Phoenix Inn/WLO&Assoc#9905 9 VIP INDUSTRIES, INC. PHOENIX INN GREENBURG ROAD ADDITION PROJECT SPECIES GLOSSARY Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii Empress Pawlonia tomentosa Pine Pinus latifolia Willow Salix spp. Cedar Thuja plicata Apricot Prunus spp. Apple Malus spp. Dogwood Cornus spp. Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua Hawthorne Crataegus douglasii Pear Pyrus communis Cherry Prunus spp. Phoenix Inn/WLO&Assoc#9905 10 VIP INDUSTRIES, INC. PHOENIX INN GREENBURG ROAD ADDITION PROJECT Mitigation Plan Total caliper inches of trees over 12"on site: 232 Total caliper inches of qualifying trees over 12" removed from site: 56 Mitigation percentage required by Ordinance: 56 = 232= .2413% This allows for 75.87%retainage Per Ordinance,retainage of 75%or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation Phoenix Inn/WLO&Assoc#9905 11 , „".. ••-• . 4 • . A.., "-CON 40 .7*.••6 ( 0,.. 4.. Woo.. . • -- -.706,4(.6.......(.1 ZA i... •• . \ . -.4.0 . • ::KR!. 7. \ I) 8 -.....•' S.W.COM STREET tri.-pl. „ • . • ..,-.:.,i)-:•! low. • ••••• :::•••.•/.1 Xrt•!:11 — ....: . • ' 1 r–C.X'--2--S.---- .10••••:-.7--' _____--•-----/ . – !: :.(2..*: . 7' Ka= ...--------- '" -''''''' __ ....... •IV 1#U _. ."- __ 'ai- -if•••----e•IrSKIS -17 .- . / .....------ ' • I. ,, 2.--•'. a : .. .................._i,.....• I .:.....‘, II I .• ///-7– ,.....,-- • - . • .- ../".....".-- I te ',1.1 .,../ .• 4t: 7 •1 i . I,.......--- • ., V • ,,,, ; ,,.• . 1,40(0C.110.442 . 1 '.. " • _._7- .644----4-4- -- . . . . . -7.7.777:7 • ' ..! - 16-0(C .0.sr" ___-- . c •:16 • . I ! F ,---- 7 „,-• . . • .• •.:0- / . I .. • . I , , . . . ...tzig=a-. ---- . et .. . •- - . _ i ki 76-.! -• • _:,..•r:i VP' • 19 . .., ____ ----. . , • . . . . t : 42. . • ••• It _ s . ... '1..-7;.•• . . I/ ‘.• i •1 ' -1r •EMMA 04' I ,. I C ,•' l - SIVYY601,-, . O 31 I 0, .. - - - . 58830•1.im u 1 .--...."-- ' '''•– ;-_-....-..:.serary ita.,:i,, .^- ......___, IA:=1 . si••,.------ • 2 .._., •••'• - •,....„...-_-_,::_--- •..... ...... I, I - •3 – •-• e: •••• •V XI .-0 I ... \ ,..- ■ ,/ ; -••••+.41.. .••••9 / r------ N • 1 .., e i I \ ; .l:erg,r 201.0 ,< ./.. . , .......'...... . % l 91(0.40 y tc04-V6 92 .... / ,,, .. • 4 / 0.a0 Room•224 66 1 1 • ..,, •••.208% ■IV • , ..1 i CM?ow 4/ ,4 I . . i , \ I / 1%Y 1:21: ,, ‘_,.....".,,.., • ,' ; 1 , / : •,-:r. , i • • ,- , , :-. - , 1 1 ''''' ---'-*--'--,•// ■-• 1 edla LAKJI7SCAPE A / t■ : I :1 /f . 1 : i' /(.. - I; . r I .4.1.0s ..0.7"..„-- . ,...: r s.r.",-,.1!.1...,,,,,,-17 6,4 t .,..L. :....... ay. 4.6110121 2C6 614 rk • ..... 0 . I • 6 . ■ Sirs.2 2r.a __.... .' _._______j t . i 1 ...., - I s.vo LOCUM STREET II • . 11.11011111101.1W~6.*Noirm.~.........1 .160.44110.4.4rogosom.....– PRLIING STANDARDS With the American National Standard for pruning, ANSI A300, specifications can be written in a virtual infinite number of combinations. The following information is designed to help you understand exactly what will be accomplished in a pruning operation. Branch Size A minimum or maximum diameter size of branches to be removed should be specified in all pruning operations. This establishes how much pruning is to be done. Pruning Objectives Pruning objectives should be established prior to beginning any pruning operation. A300 provides two basic objectives. Hazard Reduction Pruning Hazard reduction pruning (HRP) is recommended when the primary objective is to reduce the danger to a specific target caused by visibly defined hazards in a tree. For example, HRP may be the primary objective if a tree had many dead limbs over a park bench. Maintenance Pruning Maintenance pruning (MP) is recommended when the primary objective is to maintain or improve tree health and structure, and includes hazard reduction pruning. An example here might be to perform a MP operation on a front yard tree. Pruning Types Hazard reduction pruning and maintenance pruning should consist of one or more of the pruning types noted below. Crown cleaning....Crown cleaning shall consist of the selective removal of one or more of the following items: dead, dying, or diseased branches, weak branches and watersprouts. Crown thinning....Crown thinning shall consist of the selective removal of branches to increase light penetration, air movement, and reduce weight. Crown raising....Crown raising shall consist of the removal of the lower branches of a tree to provide clearance. Crown Reduction, or Crown Shaping....Crown Reduction decreases the height and/or spread of a tree. Consideration should be given to the ability of a species to sustain this type of pruning. Vista Pruning....Vista Pruning is selective thinning of framework limbs or specific areas of the crown to allow a view of an object from a predetermined point. Crown Restoration....Crown Restoration pruning should improve the structure, form and appearance of trees which have been severely headed, vandalized, or storm damaged. - over - Example Specifications Tree: 24 inch dbh Oak in back yard of residence. Maintenance Prune - Crown clean 2 inches or greater, crown thin branch in east side over 101 pool. Trees: Nine, 20 to 25 inch silver maples on ` y street. Hazard Reduction Prune - l� Crown clean 3 inches or greater, Crown raise to 15 feet (Figures 1 & 2) j .. Tree: 30 inch White Pine in back yard, overlooking sea. Maintenance Prune - Crown Clean 2 inches or greater, Vista Prune south side to improve view of sea. Tree: 10 inch Redbud in front yard. Main- tenance Prune-Crown thin, 1/2 inch or greater. Figure 1 (above). Tree.before pruning. Tree: 19 inch red maple in back yard. Haz- Figure 2 (below). Tree after Hazard and Reduction Prune - Crown clean Reduction Prune - Crown clean 3 inches dead wood only 2 inches or greater, or greater, Crown raise to 15 feet Crown reduction prune away from antenna on house. The American National Standard for tree pruning is ANSI A300.Its development process was approved by the American Na- tional Standards In- stitute. This prun- � it/ ing standard should be followed where = 1 possible in all prun- ing situations to re- main consistent with o industry standards. r.1..u..-.°• Please note that the A300 standard has 48 been drafted to ad- AI dress pruning speci- .a, — _^`1 fications across all '+ geographic areas. Knowledge of the growth habits of certain tree species within a given environment may alter how the recommendations of A300 are interpreted. NATIONAL ARBORIST ASSOCIATION Standard for Fertilizing Shade & Ornamental Trees (Revised 1987) INTRODUCTION This standard serves to provide a guide in drafting specifications for the application of fertilizer to shade and ornamental trees as well as a standard of practice. Trees in the forest or commercial nursery, either field or container grown, may have different environmental considerations and are not addressed in this standard. tt is suggested that the entire text be read before specifications are developed.All of the following should be included:soil test, type of fertilizer, fertilizer analysis, rate of application, time of year, and method of application. The purpose of fertilizing landscape plants is to maintain satisfactory vigor, promote healthy growth, assist the plant in overcoming the adverse effects of diseases or insects,or to correct mineral element deficiencies. Plants require at least sixteen chemical elements for proper growth and development. Three of these elements — carbon, hydrogen and oxygen — are provided by air and water:the other essential elements are obtained by the roots from the soil.Nitrogen is used in large amounts by plants,is easily leached and often volatile.It may be necessary to apply nitrogen annually or biennially.Variations in methods and recommendations are expected in different regions. Therefore, it is recommended that soil be tested every two to three years. The test will report quantities of chemical elements:calcium, phosphorus, potassium and magnesium. The test will also provide a pH reading,which is a measure of the acidity or alkalinity of the soil.The actual soil pH influences nutrient absorption and plant growth through the effect of hydrogen ions on nutrient availability. Each essential nutrient is only available to plants within a specific pH range. The presence of a chemical element(nutrient)in the soil is no guarantee that it is in a soluble form available for plant absorption. The concentration of hydrogen and associated ions affects soil reaction and the formation of soluble and insoluble compounds. All nutrients must be in solution to be available for root absorption. Foliar analysis for determination of chemical element needs is recommended for trees showing specific nutrient deficiencies. It is possible to have a soil test indicate that adequate levels of all nutrients are present in a soil and still have nutrient deficiency symptoms appear on a plant. The nutrient may occur in a form that is unavailable to the plant. There may also be physical problems within the soil, such as compaction, poor drainage, or poor aeration that can affect nutrient absorption. SECTION A: TYPES OF FERTILIZER 1. Organic Fertilizer — is that categorized as derived from a plant, animal or synthetic organic source. Nitrogen (N) occurs naturally in organic fertilizers (manures), and gradually becomes available for plant use as the material is reduced by microorganisms. Synthetic organic nitrogen fertilizers are created by coating urea with sulphur or resin-like materials which make the material slowly available for plant use. Organic fertilizers are characterized by a slow rate of nitrogen release, long residual, low burn and root injury potential, and low water solubility. The higher efficiency of slow release fertilizers means less nitrogen runoff to contribute to pollution of streams and subsurface water.The unit cost of slow release fertilizer absorbed by the plant is actually lower than that of readily available materials. II Inorganic(Chemical) Fertilizer— is that derived from chemical sources These nutrients are readily available in the soil and are rapidly soluble, with a short residual period. 111 Soluble Fertilizer—is mixed with water and applied in liquid form.Soluble fertilizers may be applied to the foliage, to the soil via the deep root feeding method, or as a soil drench treatment. Soluble fertilizers are usually inorganic and readily available, but may be organic and slowly available. Materials with a limited solubility that dissolve slowly are often listed on fertilizer labels as water insoluble nitrogen — WIN (See EXAMPLE I, page C-5 for WIN calculations) SECTION B: FERTILIZER ANALYSIS New Plantings — use a high phosphorus fertilizer to assist in plant establishment, such as those with nitrogen, phosphorus and potash (N-P-K) ratios of 0-20-0, 0-46-0, 4-12-4, or 5-10-5. C-1 II. Established Plantings—use fertilizers with N-P-K ratios of 3-1-2 or 3-1-1 for best response.These formulations may be supplemented with trace elements as local conditions dictate. Nitrogen fertilizers such as 21-0-0, 38-0-0 or 45-0-0 can be applied if soil analysis indicates no other nutrients are required. Inorganic (water soluble) nitrogen fertilizers should be applied annually.Very little available nitrogen remains in the soil from year to year, since most of it is either used by plants when available or carried away by water.Synthetic or organic nitrogen (WIN) may be applied biennially due to its slow availability. Phosphorus and potassium are chemically bound to the soil and become slowly available through several growing seasons. They should be included in fertilizer application in most cases, every 2-3 years in either spring or fall, whichever is more convenient. In light-textured or sandy loam soils, potassium must be applied annually.Soil tests every 2-3 years are a must when using nitrogen fertilizers. SECTION C: RATES OF APPLICATION Importance of Proper Rates—the rates suggested in this Standard should only be used as a guideline for fertilizing trees. Specific soils and foliar test recommendations from university or private testing labs should be followed when available. Good judgement is necessary to determine whether frequency, rate, or methods should vary in given situations.Trees of the same species may respond differently to rates of fertilizer due to location in the landscape,soil conditions, rainfall, and other environmental factors. Actual fertilizer rates should be adjusted after considering on-site inspections of foliage color, previous stem or twig growth,general health of the tree,or other environmental factors. I. Transplanting—fertilization at time of transplanting is recommended to assist in plant re-establishment and to supply phosphorus necessary for root growth because that element moves very slowly in soils.Apply 10 lbs.of phosphate- containing fertilizer, such as 0-20-20, 0-46-0, 4-12-4, or 5-10-5 per cubic yard of backfill. A rate of 10 lbs. of super phosphate per cubic yard is approximately equal to 0.5 lb: fertilizer per bushel of backfill. II. Established Plantings— a) Square foot method— For optimum plant growth,it is generally recommended to apply 3 lbs.of actual nitrogen per 1,000 sq. ft. of area under the branch spread of the tree per year, or 6 lbs. every two years. If foliage color, annual growth or general vigor is not normal, increase annual application rate to 5-6 lbs.The surface area under the circular branch spread of a tree can be calculated as follows:Surface area = Radius'x 3.14. The radius is the distance from the trunk to the edge of the branch spread.As an example,a tree with a total branch spread of 36 feet would have a radius of 18 feet. The area, according to the formula, would equal 18 x 18 x 3.14, or 1,017 sq. ft. Considering the recommendation of 3 lbs. of actual nitrogen per 1,000 sq. ft., one would apply about 17 lbs. of 18-5-11 fertilizer:3.0 +0.18 x 16.6 lbs. Caution:If the area under the circular branch spread contains impervious surfaces, such as walks, drives, and foundations, then judgement should be exercised as to whether to use the square foot method for calculation. Reduced soil area does not diminish a tree's need for fertilizer: however, over-application of fertilizer can cause sod and tree root damage. Alternative fertilizing methods may have to be utilized. b) Diameter Breast High (DBH) — Measure the trunk diamater at 4' feet above grade. Generally for optimum growth,apply lb.actual nitrogen per inch DBH to trees under 6 inches in diameter.The rate can be increased to 1 lb. N per inch DBH for most trees over 6 inches DBH. Fertilizing trees using the DBH formula results in similar quantities as the surface area method. Using the same 6 inch DBH tree as above and fertilizing with'/a lb.actual N per inch DBH would require 16.7 lbs. of 18-5-11: 6 inches(dia.) x 0.5 lb /inch(rate) = 3.0 lb.(amount of N). 3.0 lb.(amount of N) + 0.18 (%N in 18-5-11) = 16.7 lbs. of 18-5-11. Caution: With trees growing in restricted areas such as sidewalk strips, planters, etc. the square foot method is preferable to the DBH method. c) Liquid application — Dilute fertilizer solutions should be applied at the rate recommended by the manufacturer according to operating pressure and flow rate of the equipment to be used. Apply sufficient liquid mixture to supply the required rate of fertilizer as determined by the surface area of DBH method. It is suggested that one apply 150 gallons to each 2.000 sq. ft. of surface area. Inject approximately 1 gallon of fertilizer solution per injection at 2' ft. spacings. C-2 • 1. Square toot method: Apply 5 lbs. of N per 1,000 sq. ft. to trees on the lawn using 32-7-7 formulated fertilizer. Calculation: 5.0 (lbs. N) + .32 (% N) = 15.6 (lbs. 32-7-7 fertilizer) 15.6 lbs. fertilizer x 2 = 31 lbs. of fertilizer added to each 150 gal. of water. Each 150 gal. of water covers 2,000 sq. ft. if pump pressure is 150 Igs. and injection spacing is 2' ft. The pump can be calibrated by counting the seconds it takes to pump 1/2 gallon of solution into a bucket. Each operator should calibrate his pump, counting off the seconds, and use this same count and cadence while injecting the probe into the soil. 2. Diameter at Breast Height Method: Apply 1/2 lb. of N per caliper inch to trees on lawn using a 32-10-5 formulated fertilizer. Calculation: .5 (amount of N/inch cal.() + .32 (% of N in 32-10-5) = 15.6 lb. of fertilizer. 15.6 lbs. of fertilizer x 2= 31 lbs. of fertilizer added to each 150 gal. of water and applied as per grid above in surface application problem. SECTION D: TIMING OF FERTILIZER APPLICATIONS All of the following guidelines are subject to regional and climatological differences.Autumn is an ideal time to fertilize,generally after the first hard freeze and until the moisture in the soil freezes and root activity ceases. In the southern areas of the country where the ground does not freeze,root growth in many cases will continue all winter long.Early spring,before budbreak is also an appropriate time.When leaves have fully expanded, fertilizing can continue until early July. However,treatments of readily available inorganic nitrogen between July and September could promote a late flush of growth which may not harden off before freezing temperatures in autumn, and injury could occur. Mid to late-summer fertilizer applications should be limited to correcting specific element deficiency problems. SECTION E: METHODS OF FERTILIZER APPLICATIONS I Surface applications—Fertilizer is placed in a spreader calibrated to apply the proper amount of material per 1,000 sq. ft.Care should be taken to avoid excessive overlapping.The application can be made in either concentric circles or in linear strips starting 2 or 3 feet from the trunk out to 5 to 10 feet beyond the drip line of the tree. Only fertilizer sources that contain nitrogen alone should be surface applied. Fertilizer should be applied when grass blades are dry. After the fertilizer has been distributed, it should be washed off the grass blades immediately, using a lawn sprinkler or irrigation system. Fertilizer remaining on grass blades that become wet following a light rain or dew formation occasionally causes burning. To prevent the soil from becoming deficient in phosphorus or potassium following annual surface applications of nitrogen, it is desirable to add these nutrients as needed according to soil analysis. Without soil reports, the NAA suggests phosphorus at 3.6 lbs.of phosphoric acid (P205) per 1,000 sq. ft.and potassium at 6 lbs.of potash (K20) per 1,000 sq. ft. Phosphorus will not burn grass if used at recommended rates. Phosphorus should be applied with the drill hole or liquid injection method because it is so insoluble and does not move down to the roots if applied as a surface treatment. Caution: potassium and nitrogen may burn turfgrass when applied at recommended rates. Irrigation of lawn areas should follow surface applications of these fertilizers. II Drill Hole Method—The drill holes should be placed in concentric circles in the soil around the tree beginning 2-3 feet or more from the trunk and extending 5-10 feet or more beyond the drip line. Space holes 2 feet apart and drill them 8-15 inches deep, depending upon the tree species, root growth patterns, and type of soil in the root area. The recommended rate of fertilizer should be uniformly distributed among the holes. Depending on the diameter of the hole,it can be filled following fertilization with peat moss,calcine clay,perlite,small crushed stone,sand,or other soil amendment. If the area beneath the spread of the branches is restricted. reduce the application in proportion to the area or number of holes that cannot be made. Use a suitable measuring device and a funnel to apply the fertilizer in the holes. If desirable in sodded areas,the holes may be closed by pressing from different angles with the heel of the worker's shoe.or by cutting and lifting a plug of grass. filling the hole to within 4 inches of the top,adding soil and replacing the plug. Keep the fertilizer at least 4 inches below the top of the hole in turf areas to prevent burning of the grass by dehydration.Irrigation following fertilizer application will help prevent ir1}ury to turf: however,do not flood the area, as dissolved fertilizer may be carried to the surface and cause turf injury. C-3 When fertilizing trees that contain shrub or herbaceous plant beds within the root area of trees,care must be taken not to punch holes closer than 6 inches to the crown of small plants.Azaleas and other plants have been injured or killed by fertilizer in holes placed too close to the plants. The opening of the soil that results from use of the drill hole method allows for penetration of both water and air. This increase in soil oxygen supply is often as valuable as the addition of fertilizer. Ill. Liquid Injection Method— Injections using a soil probe or lance should be 21/2 feet apart, and 8-12 inches deep for trees. Begin lance injection 2-3 feet from the tree trunk,and work out 5-10 feet beyond the drip line of the branches. Use a hydraulic sprayer at 100-200 lbs. pressure and a soil lance designed for liquid fertilizer with a manual shut off valve and three or four horizontal discharge holes at 90 degrees in its point.Inject half a gallon of fertilizer solution into each hole. The addition of water to dry soil as occurs during the liquid injection process is an excellent side-benefit. IV. Foliar Sprays—To correct minor element deficiencies,spraying liquid fertilizer on the foliage should be considered, especially for correcting iron deficiency using chelated iron. This method should not be regarded as an adequate means of providing all the necessary mineral eV ..nts required by major element-deficient plants in the amounts necessary for satisfactory growth. Micronutrient spray applications are most effective when made just before or during a period of active growth,usually from spring to early summer.Response,as indicated by greening of chiorotic foliage and normal growth coming from buds on affected shoots,is usually observed from 2 to 8 weeks after treatment, but response time varies. Factors in response time include the plant species,age of plant and its parts,time of year, severity of the deficiency and soil conditions under which plants are growing.One or two applications during the year will generally prevent or control deficiencies, but under some conditions, it may be necessary to make several treatments annually to maintain healthy growth. V. Trunk Injections and Implants — These methods are used for specific element deficiencies, particularly iron or manganese, as well as for trees growing where there is restricted soil surface area under the drip line. Injections or implants should be made as low as possible on the trunk.Normally,this is done with a clean,sharp drill of the appropriate size. Capsules should be implanted beneath the bark and completely into the xylem tissue. Early spring before growth starts is the best time for trunk implants and injections. Wound closure is most rapid from spring treatment. Trees under 4 inches in diameter should not be treated with injection or capsule implants. Do not inject or implant when soil moisture is low as severe foliar burning may occur. SECTION F: ADDITIONAL FERTILIZER GUIDELINES Proper and timely applications of fertilizer will produce beneficial results on most trees. Newly established trees will grow more rapidly following fertilization with a nutrient or combination of nutrients that previously were present in only limited amounts in the soil.The results are shown in increased leaf size. length of current season twig growth,and more rapid increase in height. Slow-growing tree species may also be stimulated to grow faster by fertilizing. Abnormal leaf color and small leaf size often indicate nutrient deficiencies in the soil.Various colors or patterns of color indicate deficiencies of specific essential nutrients. The leaves of many trees become darker green following fertilization,making them more conspicuous and attractive. Fertilizing can help maintain mature trees in a vigorous growing condition.A vigorously growing tree is more winter hardy and less susceptible to many diseases and insect pests than is a less vigorous tree.Canker-causing fungi occur more commonly in weakened trees.Also,many of the non-infectious tree diseases develop when soil nutrient,oxygen and moisture conditions are unfavorable.Healthy,vigorous trees tend to resist borers.while those growing under unfavorable moisture or nutrient conditions are more susceptible to attack by these insects. Established trees weakened by leaf diseases, insect defoliation, mechanical injury, soil compaction, drought, or other causes often show reduced twig and trunk growth or dying of branch ends.Fertilizing may stimulate additional growth so that the plant can compensate for the adverse conditions that caused decline. I. To Prevent Plant Injury— Avoid use of lawn fertilizer/herbicide combinations where the roots of desirable and sensitive vegetation could pick up herbicide. Herbicides for use around trees should be applied separately at the rates suggested on the label. II. Fertilizing Sensitive Plants— a) When fertilizing American Beech and broadleaf evergreens,reduce applications of inorganic fertilizers to one-half the label-recommended rates of fertilizer. or use slow-release materials instead. b) Be aware that over-fertilizing small trees such as flowering crabapples can result in excessive succulent growth. Succulent growth is more prone to fireblight symptoms on susceptible plants such as pear, Jonathan apple and mountain ash. C-4 ill. Fertilize in Moist Soils — Fertilizer should always be applied to moist soils to enhance fertilizer uptake, reduce fertilizer injury to plants,and aid in soil injection or drill hole treatments. If soils are not moist,irrigation should precede fertilization to moisten the plant root zone area.The liquid injection method of fertilizing trees and shrubs will help moisten the soil in the root zone while applying desired nutrients. The benefits of water in dry soil will reduce nutrient as well as moisture stress. iv. Fertilizing Excessively Wet Soils—Avoid fertilizing trees growing in soil that is excessively wet. The roots in wet soil are often damaged from lack of oxygen caused by the accumulation of toxic gases. Adding fertilizer in any form may contribute to root injury. V. Read the Label—Read the entire label of any fertilizer product before application,and apply per label recommendations. EXAMPLE I Slow release fertilizer is measured by the percentage of water insoluble nitrogen,(WIN).Use the following formula to determine the percentage of water insoluble nitrogen in a bag of fertilizer: %of WIN x 100 = %of N that is slow release of total N Example for a fertilizer label that reads 32-7-7: Guaranteed Analysis Total Nitrogen (N)....32% Water Insoluble Nitrogen....12.5% Nitrate Nitrogen....2.0% Water Soluble Nitrogen....17.5% Available Phosphoric Acid....7% Soluble Potash....7% 12.5%of WIN x 100 lbs. of fertilizer = 390/0 32%of total N 39% of the available N is slow release SELECTED REFERENCES KUHNS, LARRY J. 1985. Fertilizing Woody Ornamentals. Cooperative Extension Service, The Penn State University. NEELY, DAN. 1980. Tree Fertilizing Trials. Illinois Journal of Arboriculture: 6(10). NEELY, DAN and E. B. Himelick. 1971. Fertilizing and Watering Trees. Illinois Natural History Survey Circular #52. RATHJENS, RICHARD and Roger Funk. 1984.Guide to Turf, Trees and Ornamental Fertilization. Weeds,Trees&Turf Magazine (October). SMITH, ELTON M. 1978. Fertilizing Trees and Shrubs in the Landscape. Journal of Arboriculture: 4(7). This Standard was revised in 1987 with the assistance of: Dr. Elton M. Smith, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH C-5 II. Established Plantings—use fertilizers with N-P-K ratios of 3-1-2 or 3-1-1 for best response.These formulations may be supplemented with trace elements as local conditions dictate. Nitrogen fertilizers such as 21-0-0, 38-0-0 or 45-0-0 can be applied if soil analysis indicates no other nutrients are required. Inorganic (water soluble) nitrogen fertilizers should be applied annually.Very little available nitrogen remains in the soil from year to year,since most of it is either used by plants when available or carried away by water.Synthetic or organic nitrogen (WIN) may be applied biennially due to its slow availability. Phosphorus and potassium are chemically bound to the soil and become slowly available through several growing seasons. They should be included in fertilizer application in most cases, every 2-3 years in either spring or fall, whichever is more convenient. In light-textured or sandy loam soils,potassium must be applied annually.Soil tests every 2-3 years are a must when using nitrogen fertilizers. SECTION C: RATES OF APPLICATION Importance of Proper Rates—the rates suggested in this Standard should only be used as a guideline for fertilizing trees.Specific soils and foliar test recommendations from university or private testing labs should be followed when available. Good judgement is necessary to determine whether frequency, rate, or methods should vary in given situations.Trees of the same species may respond differently to rates of fertilizer due to location in the landscape,soil conditions, rainfall, and other environmental factors. Actual fertilizer rates should be adjusted after considering on-site inspections of foliage color,previous stem or twig growth,general health of the tree,or other environmental factors. I. Transplanting—fertilization at time of transplanting is recommended to assist in plant re-establishment and to supply phosphorus necessary for root growth because that element moves very slowly in soils.Apply 10 lbs.of phosphate- containing fertilizer, such as 0-20-20, 0-46-0, 4-12-4, or 5-10-5 per cubic yard of backfill. A rate of 10 lbs. of super phosphate per cubic yard is approximately equal to 0.5 lb. fertilizer per bushel of backfill. II. Established Plantings— a) Square foot method— For optimum plant growth,it is generally recommended to apply 3 lbs.of actual nitrogen per 1,000 sq. ft. of area under the branch spread of the tree per year, or 6 lbs. every two years. If foliage color, annual growth or general vigor is not normal, increase annual application rate to 5-6 lbs.The surface area under the circular branch spread of a tree can be calculated as follows:Surface area = Radius'x 3.14.The radius is the distance from the trunk to the edge of the branch spread.As an example,a tree with a total branch spread of 36 feet would have a radius of 18 feet. The area, according to the formula, would equal 18 x 18 x 3.14, or 1,017 sq. ft. Considering the recommendation of 3 lbs. of actual nitrogen per 1,000 sq. ft., one would apply about 17 lbs. of 18-5-11 fertilizer:3.0+0.18 x 16.6 lbs. Caution:if the area under the circular branch spread contains impervious surfaces, such as walks, drives, and foundations, then judgement should be exercised as to whether to use the square foot method for calculation. Reduced soil area does not diminish a tree's need for fertilizer: however, over-application of fertilizer can cause sod and tree root damage.Alternative fertilizing methods may have to be utilized. b) Diameter Breast High (DBH) — Measure the trunk diamater at 41 feet above grade. Generally for optimum growth,apply 1/,lb.actual nitrogen per inch DBH to trees under 6 inches in diameter.The rate can be increased to 'h- lb. N per inch DBH for most trees over 6 inches DBH. Fertilizing trees using the DBH formula results in similar quantities as the surface area method.Using the same 6 inch DBH tree as above and fertilizing with'h lb.actual N per inch DBH would require 16.7 lbs. of 18-5-11: 6 inches(dia.) x 0.5 lb./inch(rate) = 3.0 lb.(amount of N). 3.0 lb.(amount of N) 0.18 (%N in 18-5-11) = 16.7 lbs. of 18-5-11. Caution: With trees growing in restricted areas such as sidewalk strips, planters. etc. the square foot method is preferable to the DBH method. c) Liquid application— Dilute fertilizer solutions should be applied at the rate recommended by the manufacturer according to operating pressure and flow rate of the equipment to be used. Apply sufficient liquid mixture to supply the required rate of fertilizer as determined by the surface area of DBH method. It is suggested that one apply 150 gallons to each 2.000 sq. ft. of surface area. Inject approximately '/2 gallon of fertilizer solution per injection at 21/2 ft. spacings. • C-2 LJ) 1) -171n5 Repor* • tiff,Mloodiight CF Serifs ; . . . .4,•' ,. ?' 'nls Cu,v+l!urp±nauc has ar+ RUUD ;i -I,,imp i,„ ,11,., rj aptical$ystirn,sp;t:AC,Jly i :es,gred tc,assure t^ac,,+,:m ; I�.I G HT I N G 4 Main beam projection,while ' generally p spill light it is fA_A‘ ga!leratly ptxtticnt�,kitn a . 15'to 25'tilt above horizc^ta: • to reduce glare and OptinUm rtn3^ce. ` ee_- : _ __ • a -`^ham..'"?-.._� ,t,C..;., X1` !� \ "• } f {{ r!. .14 n'.S ! `��� f��' iii_ ;I, n<� .. .. .. -_- _ __ P/- i, L i ,\ ! --,,w! i i l `� :J T•t r 1 » C ,` F r; I r C.?nile:-wer DtSi;,ht:ton Csr fk c,'a 51 taco+.n Curie.1 [� i rtt L. rt ii:`0, ';a 1 CN IP$Yutgr,fi.',Y1iilitlt.''tilt '•:3;Vs'Life. ' r:ir?,.ct9M.c tin -x,••+ fly- ,u r 4 �] '�'�^ )ti �;k.. , cb:TBhori2^,•r,!3r. 3DCidf."r.Q'ltZ` w �! ry� _. ( lg F 1 ,•-�i, / .�I `,'1 reT ���{,fr: �S 1./! ,e'J4C• �V'- ear JO' y •<, 'C 4 a4 iv!N' fti{' $. IC' w' 4Y G �} 44Y i41' iv,'.b• c Cutoff Floodlight Order Information ,p�r ' 14 f _',^�-��`� , ' Housing Wattage; Catalog ,:. Mourning Code ei x' .,�' - . ..1. .� ,— -•,.. ' Size 1s4 +iar,;D tJunher 1u etnserl Code at in Coming at rOdd�. It !"('^ .x.. fly: 1„,..-7.--,-...-7. .. --.- 1 uu r _ -L l ' •': t$� $ 1-.r+ :_ j_.•.. __.J. j a..11"•�i c_.-.... .,• t ', i!�• •`•4 i ..!...''.141')-=). ¢i.?G a i3F? : t tt1 ■ 1 r j( tT' _ . e ` 7.`.H ?.tt,rti-r'7-�i.pit!" '� x $ ,rr i .J .'t�-fr^'t"'T-...-• __ i iH '....4-:-',141744 3rd :d' r.r rr `B;.r,12'cct,5'.r•�•.'^l1 :o' ■i f l ! :,(;?;'M� t',;_4251,1 $i14, 8_Wit" _t ,1,. -a'_e.l ar_' t ._ �� �:-,mot J' 1'f ia:i1M b4H �F_44r)-1 9`>$d �~ ` ` ..j.. 1::,::. y r,q ••�J IY 11iti l.�_-+9- ,'j`'$$$ lSJtOOtC3l1d12(I1O1 D1 Gne 4^ON h?' -, _d,:m=,'.. .v -- Cutott Flo:.dityjht a136'inocnr,, t! _ i4P,? NICF_ ?.-1 StG4 a r;e4ptlt,and 20'tiltabovanuri:. ..- IF - q.:•IF; ;1i:r'1r5 $l/P a5/f'dC tour HPS MCF:S(l7-A6 aC!I i t 12' 100V''i31'5 MCF*7.4-,1#022 12 ,SNPI HPS MCF:„,t`-.;$114 i 16' ^ '2 t'rHPS '>f_525-M . 't60 , 143%31----” , - _ ;p rly HPS CF L540-1,1 417,0 444;-.....'-- 1)GG�'+H?5 ':F-'.559-Td , t0 ux re f/ l , =tons:(Ioni4r{•installed) Change Add Atter "'•zytdy i A" ���;so• I 1 Description Sulk To Sulflx ,4�,(� i 1201,:ax(ar*atlas:t5Cr`1 5'r.NNPS12 ,aus'vrtt,'; 1 .l s et.$l0 i ?eri�P+rFrwe, i , !i 4S�'r: tte(175-10364 PAAH S' •14 $o'r;'i 5 ---._.. .ra��s's ( t;r F,.�arc 1 ,1 043-d108 autos C5-100W mil•06.', At —_.—_. — — __, ! i Ir.-�.il!?,a1FSt.rt.l;vsvua a t'.o.rol:L•Sovf.;. .1,11,+•f: J___ __ .._me.. The main beam is 50'above a tine • , 1 31:V ii Fat'i'•"C`i.27T1 i r:AM 1.?or C-�F _It Dape'3'.ilt!to the tact:et Hit ia;ora I 'veal Fuse*V.MV,Za0V or 416011) 4,4 cr 5 F $16 -- ---+-- i ' ' 4 hr r r ; — ACCesatkies: (tietd•instaied)(Page 80) ( 2-.. i-..r-0717 r.PS entr;(Pages 50.51, voltage sutiix /I # 4 : I 0%3:2 Sant':(inclo-les tt7C6 C ii:r.C)(Ket dalay-r°ia;rice• Q $44 152:1-111021.15111g ;"}ie� t6'housing s 22'Botttif� tipiig17 GC4;,,x 02•S 1e'Ydi' rr,;stt ut vr:Itie4 t5 ii pr..ae:0 et 46 Wrr!G,=t; Fv 12 $10 Ft'1C t5 Ala n'l�r7igDk j t1 tGa F�G14i4li' 8hw:�trt Shield SeL 15 .L 22 1 1 F?t_•l -,-stoned'.vnna'.:�.DUr n95.ir,.rthar A.�gi:stentpFitter POI., irnrrtasa t j, ';x;e0t'1U-,T+er12Jb;air 4S5',/! wa14+�,7,su tii ° •tl2 Varcal SruNd LS-12 $re c7.15 $ir,LS-n $'30 ' ,r 1 era:a:PCCtUe.i•ihKtery-instanui}moot a4' - 1 ' I I S eCiticalion Sheets:MCF3.1'2',MCF4.12'.t•A!'*5-12-.MCFE-12' CF3.16'. 4 cr!:rturczv11XCN,12+3`1 t P i #IP CF4.16-.CF5.16' 03.22' CF4.22' CF5522'_ i F,...;;1,'c5 x:'48Ck' 5 P See 2devel Option;250-4aO:d'i-IPS)... gages 50-51 r E12*,7.F'•)1 Dili' Catalog a Optical Symms .. Pages 50-57 f,..:14-?:?talied ui!ix+ca:;win;1.%.:t:.z!t Fi;er Mountings ... ,. .Page 58 i F5:fidurssw;l2UVte1-eD1 lt)(1)4 i FC•; r Catalog Numt:er!ogle:Voltage Sink Key . Page 59 i ( Mounting Alternatives Page,81 1 ( For nz res w,208.240 et 277V PC 2 fie" Accessories 80 • ' F+:4!:it.i?i.4347ti PC,'6 $5' Mounting 8raciiats Pages 82-83 13 'NOTE:F:,,'e5 4•ih l_.,Jryiitll,ibL prcloze l in:i•sr ht's.•s:.:,:..■gv w':ir 5.•■„ie.::∎;e"_''sit. I ewes.. ... Pages?4--87 . t' i IL'.: . THE BEST CUSTOMER SERVICE IN THE j,_ i INDUSTRY! Order by phone (800) 236-7000 or I' tremer ees te , ► amususas+- by fax (800) 236-7500 .1, 11.7 -- -J ? _ 2"11 1 _. ..-d:'. i•J.S t.jt?;'[_t:_1! [.,E-.i:1,1-5.-- J i (. i • 4 E.P.A. RATING F P A 711 frig cinglP fixtiirP with "Cr tilt (Consult fartory for E.P.A. rating on multiple units or other lilt angleS). I 12" (305 mm) CUTOFF FLOODLIGHT APPLICATION DATA 80' eo 40' 20 0' 20 40 ea e0' 80' So 40' 2 0• 20 40 e17 60' _ 140' ^ 14x' lX ' •� / '140° ` E"L"Ff% � i � :' \ 1.,_ icy•S-.51`.1. `�• ',All 127 ' ") ;!'" ..Ell • } J� -�-� -_ 100 F�%•r't ••R 1' '/1-:....-'-: l� ,7 1�A .. i.. . ., \ir 41,,,,,,. 0 {fi' i1 Wtr�� y` A .'IIM L1_\ 7. t •' 180001, 1 . a iv-... a...l.` �`M.�4.> .`�`- 27 11 :' =4-.4. ?•. � 1.l'i- r.: Candlepower distribution curve of Isofoolcandle plot of 175VV MH Cutoff l otootcandle plot of 175W NH Luton 150W HPS 12°(305 mm)Cutoff Floodlight a1 I:i' (4.6 m)mounting Floodlight at 20' (6.1 ml mounting Floodlight at 20°vertical tilt. height and 20'vertical tilt. height and 20- vertical tilt. I 60' 60' 40' Dff 0' 20 40 80' 80' e0 60 40 40 Cr 4Q 40' 60 aw i 140 r -_ nr►.a•-KVr-:----- 'd0' 1„ p,�„..'"'.''fi', t ;s 1 - 127 120 ii a DZ,E '1,:, • s '•. . :r ,, -,t'..{nt ti a�.: Q ' , Ai 19 4:i 1, iQ� (v • ''.'k-'-•'"-*4Aitrjfiffliiiii f Isofouicandle plot of 150W H1'5 Cutoff Isp400lc4mile plot of 150W HPS Cu tuft 1 Floodlight at IS'',4.6 m)mounting floodlight at 20' m)mounting height and 20"vertical till. height and 20`vertical tilt. I I Pole Spacing Example Data I Catalog _ L_am_p __ -__ Vole Pole Avg. Initial Poofcandles• Number 7vpe Lumens I!eight Spacing 4 tixtures per pole -- -..-_�_.._._ . .. 10'(3.0 m)--- 50'(15.2 m) 3.43 MC.1540.5-[7 SOW Nth 3,060 MCF5407.D 70W MH 5 040 10'13.0 11l} 50'(15.1 ml 5.67 MCFS41 U-D 100W NH 8,100 . ._'u, ;.e ml W its a ml 9:10. -T _ ____ 13'0.6 rat :S't22.9m1 4A6 P.1(154174%4 _ - 1751A'MH --12,000 tf ta.(.ml '3'122.9 mu a 02 30'?e I ml 100'130.5141 1.39 MCF5503.1 33W HPS 2,250 10'(3.0 tn) 50'(15.2 ml 2.53 I AMCF5505-0 stns'KIPS 4,000 10'(3.0 m) so'el 5.2 ml 4 50 1 MCF5507-M 70W HPS 6.400 10'i3.0 m) 50'(15.2 ml 7.19 IMC;F.551 O-M 100W Hl'S 9,500 ice MO Ili 30..11.4 ml ur.7c }! _--.-.------ _ _ -__-.._ m•___ _ .' •44.9 ml MCF551 s-M 150W HPS 2 6,(x10 '} ;4.M ml S'RZ 9 011 h.QJ I - °--- - 21.r.b t_ns 100'I30.5 t" ° � i 1 RUUD LIGHTING INC. v.794'e41''"'t'" INC,IN( i . Printrd;rot)S4 U.S. 9201 Washington Avenue Racine,Wisconsin 53406-3772 PHONE (8001236-i000 FAX (1300)236-7500 1 ('ANAriA c ri'.71mhmrfts RI•r4 I!nit 1 PvItcciccau''i (lnlartn 141,11 T1() Fl If 1N1 lttflfl14-. 4_I 7'44 f.X IRO)(1(J 74N-151,111 eg.d Iv --seal:-0d9 01 DWI .7.1r10 d d1 l5 WLldd 14J501 N'. 6661-61-90 "• `� .r . FIXED,"20' MOUNT • 1 (305 mm) CUTOF- FLOODLIGHT } SPEC.* WATTAGE CATALQC rt (a)VOLTAGE (b)OPTIONS(Factory Installed) 50W MH MCF5405-D M:120,208/240.277V rHA F=Fusing •Aifii . 70W MH MCF5407•D `' an 3c-:0:rx MH a 35.5C"F.5 ! 0=Quartz Standby(Inman toow 100W MH A9CF5410 D_ ,_�'?'_ T=120i277/34,V(W4an sa1Oaw Aar a 35.smv)1PS aaart lima t(Mn ertsr•;c.•r.:Nec) 175W MH MCF541 " "' 1=120V(Rstta Ilrent fa`P=8 tt n Photocell t t t, „� 35W HPS MCF5503_1 10' • oersrri$OW4PSl -SP=External Photocell(ter 4eov, • � SOW HPS MCF5505-D a• 5=480V(tii4'n so-la.vi MFt • r v t kr -___-- 70W HPS - MCF5507- ", tp Is.220t2NPsi i 500=220'240V 50 Hz r• a. •i - °-tn;F.-): 100WHPS MCF5510-''' i l s07owi. d35wHCs1• _ri _ 150W HPS MCF5515-,�)-.t^-�l 8=220V 60 Hz rµ'A or Sow MH • ,-'_,, +, SDecity(a)Voltage.and(b)00; 5 t b 35,"I HPS) RT1JUD I r Housing. i Reflector. Ballast• - Seamless, Prefinished L I G H TING die cast aluminum, semi apecular Capacitor \ • Finish color;bronze. diffuse aluminum, Ignitor--------. . .- • -. - (Where required) 13015 tn0 l` - "\ \ Fixed 20' --' �'1? , / 01�21�t1�1 Mounting Arm.^\ -- \ _.-'� Finish color:bronze.` " , '-- ,, it Mounting Rods ‘\ l u . / -.� i t Steel Backin • 1 Plate Backing - - - Lamp i r /� - L:,mpholder tt' - , - r • I S roo,`' ■. r A- k1i i i • — Ballast s •Lens Frame. I i 1 •' Compartment Die cast aluminum f tt! Cover door frame>ecures i t lens;sealed with Cord. Patented silicone gasket. + I 24"(610 mm)long. Hinge Finish color.black. • Assembly ' -- — - — _ _ -. _...1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION: Sharp cutoff luminaire for HID lamp, totally enclosed. Housing is seamless,die cast aluminum. Mounting Consists of a 1.75"(44 mm)wide by 2.5"(64 mm)high by 7"(178 mm) long extruded arm. The arm is held in place with two.5/1,5"(8 mm)dia. mounting rods fastened to a steel backing plate inside the pole,and by two nuts inside the fixture housing with sealing washers provided. Lens assembly consists of rigid aluminum frame and high impact, clear tempered glass. ELECTRICAL: Fixture includes dear, medium base lamp. Porcelain enclosed,4kv rated screw shell type lamp holder.All ballast assemblies are high power factor and consist of the following: 50-100W MH&50W HP5: !)ual-tap(in U.5.: 120/277V;in Canada:50W MH &50W HP5= 120/277V, 70& 100W Mlle I 20/347V)High Reactance ballast. 175W MH:Constant Wattage Autotransformer, see voltage options. 35W HF'S; 1 20V Reactor ballast. 7,Q-1SQ,W,1-HP : High Reactance ballast, see voltage options. FINISH: Exclusive DeltaGuardT"finish features an C-coat epoxy primer with medium bronze acrylic powder topcoat, providing excellent resistance to corrosion, ultraviolet degradation and abrasion. the finish is covered by our 7 year limited warrant■.. LABELS: ANSI lamp wattage label supplied, visible during relamping. UL Listed for wet locations and I. enclosure classified IP54 per IEC 529; ill Canada.CCSA Certified or Canadian UL Listed for wet locations. ACCESSORIES: FWG-12 =wire Guard - L5-12 = Polvcarbonate Vandal Shield SHL-12 - Backlight Shield LU-d lC' --SdHci*-l1r-'9 f=u LNI 3NU d3dFIS l 0d. twrj90:c t Lb L-51-'old ✓�6-12-1997 1 :22M FROM SUPER ONE i NC �u _ � Round Bollard HC anu NT Series , • --. ;.,. :.' ons ruc ion Performance•jQ � - Unr Ike otne:bol lards.;his uni,ue The exciuSrvedjicalsystemofthe 4, . ,, -, G `. design positions Me lens on the top clear lens 1.1C Series produces Neil �• s Githelixture eotntheclearandthe the ti htoutorrtatm ir�� '''. ,a• >., I ^4 u 45ttompe(iiiva,� yi ' °i i ~' h• "+ r y« translucent lef3e5ate sturdy. products.A?�•main m QtOVltle� v � 3 G`t } t :nl?C'.i0n molded polytdtt(`r$te Uril(Grm Ijlri'but10nWi.n:OW yr '.' s x•? ` ;-` -r. Theyalts-0to MP.rnGUStngw'h��?n drtghtnessats a�,r,n I a r �h •, . alc; ,I• I g While only p high.the F to feet.{ j .gx`{j}�?rl�'•1pt �. - .rt. oYer,aO?+In dleC�r$talUr?t,nlm ' n s Series Z S I! r : r y'• r tJ 1 .* �.2 retainer ring.For Jutr'r.rtiatnping, achieves ah.;ht center slightly less• 'ri! • r i,r{� etc rrr S „••• only t:r9.,(lul rnaunl2L'Sfulnle$, than 3'.(Other b011ards need 42'• 1r F '`_ =: et. i.� � t•-- steel fastener5n•,eoloberetnuveJ hcighttoaCCCmpliShtnrSj. i•" �' Y: [�-r --Syr (SHIT the r'ng.Two silicone lens•s•1 4 .'; yr`r t;,ek'.' sraispr event moisture lrOmentertnQ A;d0•Snielded Lens option,and a ° _;��"may +retenS.Optionaldecot alive Dome Louver accessory aft 2v8i' r + • i' 1x;.M:: "''` '`*•': -�'� ipoorez;ended Flat Top styles ate• theHCSeries. , ..r:4,. • ' ., -'` ' .... i". I also available. w t4 , ti The HT Series translucent tens jI )..,:,,,,.,,,i+A;A` ,,.�„ : , The"c•ustngisanalu,nrnum chi fuses glare and provides lightinal ` ' r J h _ extrusion that is St3ndar0 h'ittt our ;i[,Q•pattern wstnaS;:r r;ter •; „_4•,•••,_4 e c+usi:eOettaGuard'otimsn. Ocm rnancainlheuoper+ternisphers. \ �-ft� e2tuIu,g3n;C6dte'oxy^rtler Y,�A + (hjS Bollard isai exce• llent CglCe ii „T ' • --n ' , * j'-� w ib1oateacrylicpode(topcoat. to(lanoscapeligitng."'Q � ^ lent ti , -5 ;:• . ConSU. actor/tor avallabltyot ^ e ferieg. .•.,';- ' Cthertinisicolors,The housing Labels fastens to acastaluminum Past with IOUrsupplied'!! 20 liar Head The Pound eottard is ILL.listed tO I r Round Bollard Older Information stainless Steel screws wellorattonsandCSACUtrtird utage/ Ci(IOgNumber __ w CaraloIMumbsr .thtn the nouslr,y.aiart?:rrer,c lamp rype 34ndird Dane Top taNnd.t1 Ain Top rt ctIcli el£)tteayyv.I.Ir ilSP?;;1 'a;l,e . Cltarinis j.�y e py 'cc. Supportsttieelectre:aicorripo net;r5 :3wFturo3Sr ell <213.1 .S!'/76 :4C3213•1 Ht:F2r3•I 4 .! I I SOW MH H 405.0 $256 i-,CGr05.0 Ml:FxiS•a r a+�drelteCOt AIIOUbre-,,pSitt Gnr, • X2 6 S_al al the top el the reflector and a Taw 4t++- ?i;4CT p i .7 4C04O7.O wiF4QI O 524'3 , I :1(YWMH Hf110.0 :224 rCOdlO0 tl r41tt•, -1'23.4 sedlan rio, GCAe,prevent;nse;:ta. 35w HP5 HC503•i 5 '3 0563.1 3.05 3-I .52O; 4 d;'t yal Syst+StU(e trOrnMt2::!;,tf i8 ``.' 50W Hg HC505•C _$/94' H;". ,•D 5204 ?'rC21Sy5tem. 1+CF5�5 0 j,' 113W 4F$ HCSO?-0 t46 k05o7.8 +Cfr gr•p $206 Ballast toowsprr - 4010-O :/4b' �3Tao 520b' Arigh;]cwerlacior ai; •is " ! Tr�sluCtNtLrrrf D. ��+ ' :landed.The i3W F'uo;esce:tt and .�-. , j 13wFrvorescers HT213-1 5/56 HrO213-I Hr$21s•I '/66 35WHP;Bollardsarestandarcwltn Jtt I't sow ktH Hi40p•Q •2/6 HT0405•0 HFF405.D • 9 t ! . .. NHPS Ht503-; x^26 a.20VOailas•..?rd3fea%atlabl? 5/72 r}iO503 I r 03 i y/g? ail ail optional 277y Gai!a51 A11 ' vYHPS H�,05-o x/7s/ Ht050S-0 HfSO5.O S/Yq other wattages are standard with a 'Hi 7owlP5 H o7-o $176 HTOS07.0 HrF507.0 .'/s6 dual-tap battastOn U.S..!2(/277y: rrrinsrvicentteneROUna/o4rd 'l! VoitagaSutlix Say.lanir;gy•arrtr, al*eyd OM.onoi151 In Caniida'50W MH Ad 50W 1 ft 1. 12ov 2.277V 32oev 4240V 6•347v HPS=120/277V70810;i ' % 0. Ou>r-ra to U.S 120r7V vH,t2 0�4'V 1.?a II t Op tt )^Slur'r. S' IACarteda50w:.1M and;ow MPS.12ornrv.7O 100WMH:i20/247,r. t, rrO FE:le Canoes,705:0OwHPSsuiud rl el senderewrrf+AIn•iaptar`.lsI:I6/277131 7`/ Mu tap Y0/SLOfiar;lare • I M.hint,-lao: 1 a :7V ,..u.nw,H,.-11X n Mufti-1a i 120) 40/217V ar '' 2O/Oe/: 0!1 1' W11d 9,w 1r1 p 208/2 1 ' 'p i i Options:ratxar went CAaApe Add Alit? 4 �,, Tri tap( 2(1/177j34iV), ; ' t° Description SultiATo Suttia !-irirr,- '} ` Muki•lapr>.lriSl M $4 Lamps S�. rt�; 11.1apwT- :liXr' r t6 NC Sr rics.taw Fluorescein:SC.70. r" i I' S rnVI1PU3 ert2wv.n,u•w1.,1r.,,x,1 r S.S' l0(WMH,35.50,70anti l 00 P _ 1 F ` &atFuyap1 5/6 HPS.et i Series:t3WFluorescent:tt , SOW M1i:35 50 and i0w HPS 3,i P t tO 11ry�pp4nl.anywy:,u14p:1a,ttr-tt +uii,n)1::.- x ? /? •� M. r ` i 4 1 r ism&0,004 Lai!Fi»no<+i .I 1 !' :80'$tnt:deG C har Lois 0'4 I1C St:WS) A „i t' kft n a d n T a {I' A.,....,,..,r,I oeseription Cararo9Number r-Ye<c Installation '1fl _x!'¢'I I:r(MC S�id:∎,<IU•n,Niiili ill Nla �f /J le stiIi?!=XtrUSidn and ails C3Iib * t;i e'.u rCtool 51;1 t+.Cr,rer tPS I $/2 rernoved ham the base as one ' , itiI ass=rrOl, ilie base is secured pttoo r, i's 180'shielded Lou.e• c0�crese loOIIng using 316 A 'j! C(errltns :- ':=r• • �_Cessory ;)r 's a anchor bolts SUpplre0.'.VP, - +t1 noon 4.`m HCSenes 1' .. 4!' MC Stries 9ou�rU �Ub9est instatlati0n in3 2'deep X , . ,,. 2-dtaineier poured base.unless • t eetufa I . "• ► wit type and host line in your area d:'-.'i i1 ti ,:irtaW,tdeeue,rh;ls.. A:;•itl;ittvI-r ie rill) IIIU 1.I 11 t�, ill" ..,r , ) -3U " ',c.m 1-EL :503-544- 1360 Tun 16 'q7 1 3 :44 No . 00?. P .02 7 r to 4 Ni i . . . . [ MINI -• Jr) > .B' .►.• - _ .■ i° r' P.7.- - !y_F,• - i Y .r. w . '^,N a `. •ilia° 4-. .. il.. ■1..*., .I::7:4 cga) 'i r Iso. '..1 ,.....; ., ::.,41...: _ t: . , .. . .„.,; ._....„.-1.....44,, t„ .. ... , , ., . _ . _., .. .. ,.; ,._ •. . „ . ..._0:$ . . . ' 0 !•'• • 1-.n. re r r� Va r C 14 Pe 4. °C4IIIILIM - x .[ 8" Square HID Light SE Series .t'Surface Square Ugh SS Series i- This compact fixture is supplied with medium Great looking, easy to install and energy-efficient! t lase 50-70W fti1H & 35-70W HPS lamps, avail- This great combination is no�ir available in Our ab:e in tou- optical systems. Translucent, Ceiling 8" square housing with a 21 watt 2D lamp ,;ri E. ,.,..tcii Pe• ;�,eter Cutoff arc uo�'C v,P 0 toff. electronic. low temperature ballast r . i- `1A PAGES HID 8-13 PAGES-HID 14-15 AND H1O 79 I. --, • f s j . " « . . - '. Extended Flat Top Bollard Z y :✓ ti , L: ThF ,ie :lie Fiat r ■ is r option adds to tree } aesthetic versatitit, - < our unique Round Bollard. Get twice the L competitive boliarJs. combined th :iradl • , die cast a(umint: i 7r _.Y�,..,,,:t4, � ' .: •= construction featt:-:r;L t • :_.,_. -, , , our DeltaCuar;a'`' ! . . finish, and a ir.,'„ '. Y 12" ` '" .• insect- and watertigr?; 12 Square HID/Fluoreaoent Light SE Series .r' E ,, \.. gasketin; sys:em iii The SE Series line is extended with this size, to ccomrnodate 100-175W MH & 100-150W HPS medium base lamps. The 12" square SE3 & SEA �` /0 30-31 er,-es are also available in 26 W Fluorescent, l r,:e cptucai systems are offered: Translucent, '� IC ! Ci iing Cutoff Up/Down, Ceiling Cutoff, 710e is Perimeter Cutoff and Up/Down Cutoff. - PAGES HID 8-13 0 u ag\nu ►•n,+CJa+TM WJO4S • . . 45-UNIT ADDITION PHOENIX INN MOTEL 9575 SW LOCUST STREET TIGARD, OREGON STORM WATER DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS The attached calculations were prepared March 30, 1999 by: Timothy R. Turner, P.E. TRT Engineering, Inc. 2636 SE Market Portland, Oregon 97214 (503) 235-7592 — fax (503) 235-7593 The proposed drainage system consists of roof drains, parking lot catch basin inlets, and underground detention storage. Discharge will be to an existing stormsewer manhole located in SW Locust Street. Design features are depicted on the site plans (by TRT Engineering, Inc.) submitted by to City of Tigard Public Works by the motel owner, VIP's Industries, Inc. The detention system was designed consistent with Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) technical guidelines. On-site pipe sizes and slopes were calculated per the guidelines of the State of Oregon UPC Specialty Code. '- 14,494 ?ter �j h-- ` p�REGON p, 1'2 6, 1 J2� t 4ft. ,,2Y f. 613e1oo 3-3O '/'f IA5 calccoverph.doc 1?e 4:5 21, Ft{ 1)( !Kw livff EL- GR Roko -T,4a(2.0 otz 4d_ UN,T ADD'i1Dr) PRAIk/A6k CALciLA T tuts_ pe.itNT1u1J AND I°RC-TREATWLNT 12ERk fit nntrrvTS ,SASE 0 tpu,r, e SL NAI E.0 A6E A6rtNLY slSN Awvo t-0lvS Tao cTtor/ S A' "AftOS (Jc1L I let 4) 't RIAN0F= Ft2tWIN P O FS, St(JLwAl--14S Aivo f'Af_\<14 DoT` RoaSc o 1.4N0ER-6RJ',iO (3e- t +DTIor. pie_ To E-st 1tr'(r-- P2C -ifLeAT A l. RGTENTrON PoP)17 POST- peVeLormEJT PEAK nvsvopF vHt'►E'€D B'-f oRIP\cE 600►(1.J L To rJDT e'c..ec O P(Lt-1(2 E A T wA E N P r A K R a,)o f v RATE DESIErN 5T i►2- Z4 - Noun. . W Irc1eS p/LE-1{/LEATvo NT VU(.(.l G 6A 5E0 a 9ESI60 STD 11-4A = o. 34 +r/4 hr se AT,ActiEn F t9“.11ezgP Z pc a. p,'^ /pi/0e- Art..tA S piPG S1'2 ,tJ6- (0,)- ,SITE) ^PEa_ 'YAi car' o{Z-CCrani 11/ 6 Sf Ec IALT Y c.v C, 14SrAe G- 3- / 1 Rya & f LL ()RAINA(5--r AfcA S -DE vYcUOP/0Evki" = 341 91 a f f i = 0, C( . I.A,V0 CASE= OFF' r3u}i.0r0 trS I Cat- D AAP,NEy! RESIDetr i IAL 0.6 r T I vo 6. cow G 6-di,PA j(p N T = o.q L o4 S o-3 L- tso f- ) n = 0,1s (317O lid 41e-61 - 'I 1122 POST- pEvELDwawLdr = 34, q, 8 )c( ' = D. ca _ r~A,to (4 31 - �gLtuond&-) Spar: 1AIKj rAvV I<INe aO c to i i �A ICI rJ / 1i t &toe r(i/is to o = /p ✓h t�kfes (wk/A1MU ) WAY- Rut NoFF BEAK r u orF FATE 17ElEgmiNE0 Like NG- SANIA ( QR03ARA UNIT H`iOti)(1uAPI) 1'ht T 110 VC!ri& -- p 1- Al sro1v (5tr ATTAct'Cto IncIe fZN 1 yi FALL TA€L-�.) pa'- 10 E v L=Lop roE f wf a )too s AREA 00.28 acs cN = 98 Rv)Jv,S AREA = • Q. SI GL CN - 00 poST- 06\ALof N4E01- IvAP61 -001As A(c.fA = G_SS (N_ q r3 peavnvuc Aftt A = 0.2S fN = 60 prix' -1o8j C uvPwte,�s' rot-J1\< e tol o PF RA''t = 0.14 r. fs 56E Ac a&o f.1Yvrz-O6RAPO Post- ptvEL6P rnf-' ,reAK- P6fo0PF RATE = 0,45 CTS t 3�2z ptL — TEA1 MENT vox__ Mf v't vv,E•9 i LYPA4F516 J of E✓K1S1-(1`)& _ poov L.o A C 10 co A } J' ST tom0-H E r. of SI T�t vo t_ i E r2 t to 4 yi-E-e, /y T- eA SE N 0.3(L 1;4./4 y,r AiLEA 1S, 1 ) 3 4'fz V0LLA,AE - 0,30 X �f )c Zs, {l 3 c1:2- /0 753 +3 voLinmE NET- (r.ct-EAS— ArTE2 Ekts1(r&r' PotiO is Et' tAt2G(20 7go -ct 3 7 53 7 SO ✓ VOL Liume a PT 6N ►Us' DETE ovs) U sc OF 40-- INL N f1km E J E.2.1 Glek) 11s2G ,2vv No PI PE ( S0- fT Lgri!STI-j, ST-A6e- RaA, qc - R 207, 0 o vOLU iC tN 6,ANNJLE 700, 5 O A ssi,w'Eo Q 7 ocf U Q.O0S Z.oR. S O.00G 4c3 ' p,p. 2-I0 .D 6. 001 flee t_LLv.= 212.s t ) ,S ca. 067 211-D 0.007 '7. 11 .5 0.906 21 2.D a. .9:)S Gctd.= z1)f3.S x , 1 , 5 1 C7L 1 LE T (tk ?'YZ o pEAK pt bru WAX lw, wvh Flow pm F V,A! JTA1wf0 e't oal FIL ( LJcA're,r) tN FLow t 'N VRc)L WAN NO LE (SEE '0t3I(31J ()MA/ t+06-S) URIF1CP 6 LEVA;tooi — - 01 10 oF` F�C.L piAv^ ..Tao - 2 — �/C> 11 v11AY► i Dt=SIOV SVAGe -241 . 31- 0. 669, 6E tow' IAA A-ctw►uvv `eV. 5 ir�r►AGE elk" ' Ot- (N Fuovu 0.27 cfs 0. 07 cfS LEIS T10 Pa-g- O V& LoP. SCE oerEN-1-10,./ eotAT 1N6- TABLE) , . 5i ZZ STUBw\ ,p�AFti Ptiorvvr Sl2 € Awl 5wpt OF 00-111E- Sj'D(Lvv' n A? 1. Pen- TAi3Lt II- 2.. © F Oa Gov) SPc ctoLTL (APE ( uPc), ( q76 ( 51& ATTAr_AEo PIGuiLE 1i USE 3- 1wt w,AXi ktvl RA/?IFALL -?. D 1evc.14F5 of TAel-,6 11- 2- AftA,'JI C 1 ACP4 elPG P(P� �eNbTH PIPE 4- (3AS,N Ao.EA3 4.1-"L o A. - in s-t.oPE- 'y,c). 41. 0 P- z 1, 471 1- i?- 47 p=i, P-z 5,9D9 6 y g6 0 p- 4 3, 2_8 yd 21 0 R- 1i350 4 Yq 16 0 R- 6, R-? 11 Sao 4 Y v s 0 2-b) 12-7, S. 3,3Sb 6 yP, sq ® R-- ) s()-1_ t to, #7 0 IL-I , R--z- (,11-1 9- yg 1-1.. 0 R-►, n,Z, R-3 3,TD 3 6 yg 6 z- © (k J, R-1- 3J c,1:7 6 l/e 7.0 (L3 , R-`f' 0 VlIQ- 11 R-3 4, 053 G y`6 23 R` 4, �' S rj -z5 0 R_q 905 4- y R R-z ik-3 { -41, R- s> v-9 1, 5G1 6 8 I 0 P-I , P-z, 9-3 )2, l4-u 6 t/o, '7 (.) e= 1, 9-7 , e3 it, 140 `fig ()cre w ADO `aD --Pi' r? EN-TIP-G.' Z 0) S 21 6 'Vg 46 FLDW ' . ^ , / - ^- / 1TT TTZT � '` /- - --- - - - -- - - - --- - - --- - - -2--- 'V / | | If , ----- / / K / PHOENIX INN MOTEL ADDITION / r-'-� i / ' ^ -_--_-� / 1 DRAINAGE - - - - - - S | ' FIGURE 1 / � . / .`�`// `�- / / / / � / � ` ; ' ��--1 ' . . . / / � ---'-[} ` / . i./ /� / 3 0 0 I ~�^~*'.~~` mm.. / ' / - - - . \� ^ / |1/4 __ -�� ��`_ ^~ '^ ' /7 - / r � | _ �~~ � /i � ) / / / / L / / , / --�-�/ | I | R-4 l ~r - - 0 ' I R 1 | R 2 R ~ �- .._-. . _ | 0 �` / - ' . 1 1 / - / /-``/ / � R_ 5 / // 1 I/ / ____. - �. -l ��{ � - ' - -' -'. - - 1 I ��1 |/ / v /' t / / / / | R 9 r / / * ~ '~ / 0 / / R-6 � R-R o / / | / -1 p_ 1 p_3 ' y ' / / 1 �� / / / / V /' / / r��/ [ T ` / _ _ ---- -- - -- -_ -- -� '- ___- ��/ [� 7 / '-� ' / / � � . `-- ' / -� ---- -- -- _- _- _- -� / ---- -�---- ~~ | / � (� - ] - ___� ___ / /� / � ------'------- - `�- ------ _ L ' y -- �-- - - - ---- - ----- - ----------- - - •• / | (�) ' .. OSI RAINFALL INTENSITY - DURATION - FREQUENCY CURVES 5.0 m1.•.....m.. ■■1. ■.•n..npu nl1111Q1111111111...n1_n.■■•1....•a•.a•Otl1.1lu..O■atla.ntl1111111111111111 II II111111111111 = � MI1�• 111111 PHOENIX INN B 17.2- Flow Control Manhole Discharge Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Worksheet Circular Channel - 1 Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Full Flow Capacity Input Data Mannings 0.013 Coefficient Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Diameter 6 in Results Depth 0.50 ft Discharge 0.56 cfs Flow Area 0.2 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 1.57 ft Top Width 0.00 ft Critical Depth 0.38 ft Percent Full 100.0 % Critical Slope 0.011553 ft/ft Velocity 2.86 ft/s Velocity Head 0.13 ft Specific Energy 0.63 ft Froude Number 0.00 DES)b1�1 (�1/,klYh U1A'\ Maximum Discharge 0.60 cfs Discharge Full 0.56 cfs 0 2 - Cf5 Slope Full 0.010000 ft/ft Flow Type N/A Project Engineer:Timothy Turner c:lhaestad\fmw\phoenix inn.fm2 TRT Engineering 01/12/99 7:54 PM STORM AND GROUNDWATER DRAINAGE Table 11-2 ``t 7.-2,2, TABLE 11-2 Size of Horizontal Rainwater Piping Size of Plpe in Inches Maximum R infaii in inches per Hour 1/8" Slope 2 3 4 5 6 3 1644 1096 822 857 548 4 3760 2508 1880 1504 1253 5 8680 4453 3340 2672 2 .27 6 10,700 7133 5350 4280 3586 8 23,000 15,330 11,500 9200 7600 10 41,400 27,600 20,700 16,580 13,800 12 88,600 44,400 33,300 28,650 22,200 Size of Pipe in Inches Maximum -ainfall In Inches per Hour 1/4" Slope 2 3 4 5 6 3 2320 1546 1180 928 773 -, 4 5300 3533 2850 2120 1786 5 9440 I 6293 4720 3776 3146 6 15,100 10,066 7550 6040 5033 8 32,600 g 21,733 16,300 13,040 10,866 10 58,4001 38,950 29,200 23,350 19,450 12 94,000 62,600 47,000 37,600 31,350 Size of Pipe in inches 1 Maximum R•infaf in Inches per Hour 1/2" Slope 2 3 4 5 6 3 3288 2295 1644 1310 1096 4 7520 5010 3760 3010 2500 5 13,360. 8900 8680 5320 4450 6 21,400 1 3,700 1 0,700 8580 7140 8 48,000 30,650 23,000 18,400 15,320 10 82,800 55,200 41,400 33,150 27,600 12 133,200 86,800 68,600 53,200 44,400 15 238,000 158,800 19,000 95,300 79,250 120.7 1 6122 Hydrologic Analysis Curve Numbers by - Land Use Description Hydrologic Soil Group A B C D Mountain brush —oak brush, aspen, maple: Good Condition: ground cover>70% 40 40 41 48 Fair Condition: ground cover 30% to 70% 40 48 57 63 Poor Condition: ground cover<30% 46 66 74 79 Woods or forest land: Good condition: Natural conditions 40 55 70 77 Fair condition: Some forest litter 40 60 73 79 Poor condition: No small trees or brush 45 66 77 83 Woods/Grass combination (orchard or tree farm): Good condition: ground cover>75% 40 58 72 79 Fair condition: ground cover 50% to 75% 43 65 76 82 Poor condition: ground cover<50% 57 73 82 86 Brush with weeds and grass: Good condition: ground cover> 75% 40 48 65 73 Fair condition: ground cover 50%to 75% 40 56 70 77 Poor condition: ground cover<50% 48 67 77 83 Meadow —continuous grass: 40 58 71 78 Residential districts: '/4 acre lots: 61 75 83 87 'A acre lots: 57 72 81 86 -----41""" '/z acre lots: 54 70 80 85 1 acre lots: 51 68 79 84 Pasture or range: Good condition: lightly grazed 40 61 74 80 Fair condition: not heavily grazed 49 69 79 84 Poor condition: heavily grazed wino mulch 68 79 86 89 Newly graded areas(no vegetation established) 77 86 91 94 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries: Good condition: grass cover>75% 40 61 74 80 Fair condition: grass cover 50% to 75% 49 69 79 84 Poor condition: grass cover< 50% 68 79 86 89 Gravel roads and parking lots: 88 92 95 98 Dirt roads and parking lots: 86 90 94 98 Impervious surfaces: pavement and roofs 98 98 CIO 98 Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands,and ponds 100 100 100 100 For a more detailed description of agricultural land use and arid region curve numbers, refer to Soil Conservation Service Technical Release 55,Chapter 2, June 1986. Runoff Curve Numbers Figure 3-3.2 Highway Runoff Manual Page 3-7 February 1995 Hydrologic Analysis 11 2-Z- Sheet Flow Equation Manning's ns Smooth surfaces(concrete, asphalt, gravel) 0.011 Fallow fields or loose soil surface (no residue) 0.05 Cultivated soil with residue cover(s<0.20 ft/ft) 0.06 Cultivated soil with residue cover (s>0.20 ft/ft) 0.17 -IN- Short prairie grass and lawns 0.15 Dense grasses 0.24 Bermuda grass 0.41 Range (natural) 0.13 Woods or forest with light underbrush 0.41) Woods or forest with dense underbrush 0.80 Shallow Concentrated Flow ks 1. Forest with heavy ground litter and meadows (n =0.10) 3 2. Brushy ground with some trees (n =0.060) 5 3. Fallow or minimum tillage cultivation (n=0.040) 8 4. High grass(n =0.035) 9 5. Short grass, pasture and lawns(n =0.030) 11 6. Nearly bare ground(n =0.25) 13 7. Paved and gravel areas (n =0.012) 27 Channel Flow(Intermittent) Ice 1. Forested swale with heavy ground litter(n =0.10) 5 2. Forested drainage course with defined channel bed (n= 0.050) 10 3. Rock-lined waterway (n =0.035) 15 4. Grassed waterway(n=0.030) 17 5. Earth-lined waterway (n =0.025) 20 6. CMP pipe (n =0.024) 21 7. Concrete pipe (0.012) 42 Channel Flow kc 1. Meandering stream with some pools (n=0.040) 20 2. Rock-lined stream (n =0.035) 23 3. Grass-lined stream (n =0.030) 27 "n" AND "k" Values for Travel Time Calculations Figure 3-3.4 Page 3-14 Highway Runoff Manual February 1995 1212:2- Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road -Tigard, Oregon Drainage Calculations Design Rainfall Time Time Rain Cumulative (hr) HHMM (in) (in) 0.500 00030 0.039 0.039 1.000 00100 0.047 0.086 1. 500 00130 0. 055 0. 140 2.000 00200 0.059 0. 199 2.500 00230 0.062 0.261 3.000 00300 0.062 0.324 3. 500 00330 0.062 0. 386 4. 000 00400 0.066 0.452 4 .500 00430 0.074 0.527 5.000 00500 0.082 0.608 5. 500 00530 0.090 0. 698 6.000 00600 0.097 0.796 6.500 00630 0. 113 0. 909 7.000 00700 0. 137 1. 045 7. 500 00730 0.164 1.209 8.000 00800 0.449 1.658 8.500 00830 0.214 1 .872 9.000 00900 0. 156 2.028 9. 500 00930 0.117 2. 145 10.00 01000 0.105 2.250 10.50 01030 0.094 2.344 11.00 01100 0.086 2.430 11. 50 01130 0.082 2.512 12.00 01200 0.078 2.590 12.50 01230 0.074 2.664 13.00 01300 0.070 2.734 13.50 01330 0.070 2.804 14 .00 01400 0.066 2.870 14.50 01430 0.066 2.937 15.00 01500 0.062 2. 999 15.50 01530 0. 062 3.062 16.00 01600 0.058 3. 120 16.50 01630 0.058 3. 179 17.00 01700 0.058 3.237 17.50 01730 0.055 3.292 18.00 01800 0.055 3.346 18. 50 01830 0.051 3. 397 19.00 01900 0.051 3. 448 19.50 01930 0.047 3.494 20.00 02000 0.047 3.541 20. 50 02030 0.047 3. 588 21. 00 02100 0.047 3. 635 21.50 02130 0.047 3.682 22.00 02200 0.047 3.728 22.50 02230 0.043 3.771 23.00 02300 0.043 3.814 23.50 02330 0.043 3.857 24 .00 00000 0.043 3. 900 3.90 PHXEPRR.TXT 13I2Z Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road Tigard, Oregon Drainage Calculations Pre-development Watershed Information (expansion area) Watershed Total Area (acres) :0.8000 Impervious Area (acres) :0.2900 Time of Concentration (min) :25.0 Impervious Directly Connected :100.00 Additional Abstraction Over Pervious Area (inches) :0.00 Over Impervious Area (inches) :0.00 Infiltration Characteristics: Max Infiltration Capacity (in) :36.00 SCS Curve Number for Pervious :80 Initial Abstraction Factor • :0.20 PHXEXPRS.TXT (1- r ZZ Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road - Tigard, Oregon Drainage Calculations Santa Barbara Method Hydrograph (Pre-development) Hydrograph Type :Santa Barbara Method Time Time Rain C Rain Infiltration Excess Excess Outflow (hr) HHMM (in) (in) (in) (in) (cfs) (cfs) 0.500 00030 0.039 0.039 0.025 0.014 0.023 0.009 1 .000 00100 0.047 0.086 0.030 0.017 0.027 0.021 1.500 00130 0.055 0.140 0.035 0.020 0.032 0.027 2.000 00200 0.059 0. 199 0.037 0.021. 0.034 0.032 2.500 00230 0.062 0.261 0.040 0.023 0.036 0.034 3.000 00300 0.062 0.324 0.040 0.023 0.036 0.036 3.500 00330 0.062 0.386 0.040 0.023 0.036 0.036 4 .000 00400 0.066 0.452 0.042 0.024 0.039 0.037 4 .500 00430 0.074 0.527 0.047 0.027 0.044 0.040 5.000 00500 0.082 0.608 0.050 0.032 0.052 0.046 5.500 00530 0.090 0.698 0.051 0.039 0.063 0.055 6.000 00600 0.097 0.796 0.052 0.046 0.074 0.065 6.500 00630 0. 113 0. 909 0.055 0.058 0.093 0.079 7.000 00700 0.137 1.045 0.061 0.075 0.121 0. 100 7.500 00730 0. 164 1.209 0.067 0.097 0.156 0.129 8.000 00800 0.449 1.658 0.152 0.296 0.478 0.270 8.500 00830 0.214 1.872 0.060 0.154 0.249 0.340 9.000 00900 0. 156 2.028 0.040 0.116 0.187 0.248 9.500 00930 0.117 2.145 0.028 0.089 0. 144 0.186 10.00 01000 0.105 2.250 0.024 0.081 0.131 0. 150 10.50 01030 0.094 2.344 0.020 0.073 0.118 0. 131 11.00 01100 0.086 2.430 0.018 0.068 0.110 0. 118 11.50 01130 0.082 2.512 0.016 0.066 0.106 0.110 12.00 01200 0.078 2.590 0.015 0.063 0.102 0.105 12.50 01230 0.074 2.664 0.014 0.060 0.097 0. 101 13.00 01300 0.070 2.734 0.013 0.058 0.093 0.096 13. 50 01330 0.070 2.804 0.012 0.058 0.093 0.094 14.00 01400 0.066 2.870 0.011 0.055 0.089 0.092 14.50 01430 0.066 2.937 0.011 0.055 0.089 0.090 15.00 01500 0.062 2.999 0.010 0.052 0.084 0.088 15. 50 01530 0.062 3.062 0.010 0.053 0.085 0.085 16.00 01600 0.058 3. 120 0.009 0.050 0.080 0.083 16.50 01630 0.058 3. 179 0.009 0.050 0.080 0.081. 17.00 01700 0.058 3.237 0.009 0.050 0.080 0.080 17.50 01730 0.055 3.292 0.008 0.047 0.075 0.079 18 .00 01800 0.055 3.346 0.008 0.047 0.076 0.076 18. 50 01830 0.051 3.397 0.007 0.044 0.070 0.074 19.00 01900 0.051 3.448 0.007 0.044 0.071 0.071 19. 50 01930 0.047 3.494 0.006 0.041 0.065 0.069 20.00 02000 0.047 3.541 0.006 0.041 0.066 0.066 20.50 02030 0.047 3.588 0.006 0.041 0.066 0.066 21.00 02100 0.047 3.635 0.006 0.041 0.066 0.066 21.50 02130 0.047 3.682 0.006 0.041 0.066 0.066 22.00 02200 0.047 3.728 0.006 0.041 0.066 0.066 22.50 02230 0.043 3.771 0.005 0.038 0.061 0.064 23.00 02300 0.043 3.814 0.005 0.038 0.061. 0.062 23.50 02330 0.043 3.857 0.005 0.038 0.061 0.061 PHXEXPRH.TXT • Ic ( z- 24 .00 00000 0.043 3.900 0.005 0.038 0.061 0.061 24.50 00030 0.000 3.900 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.038 25.00 00100 0.000 3. 900 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.010 25.50 00130 0.000 3.900 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 26.00 00200 0.000 3.900 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 3.900 1.237 2.662 2.662 Totals for Watershed in inches over 0.80 acres Rational Coefficient = 0.683 Peak Flow (cfs) 00.34 PHXEXPRH.TXT 17:2" Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road Tigard, Oregon Drainage Calculation Post-development Watershed Information (expansion area) Watershed Total Area (acres) :0.8000 Impervious Area (acres) :0.5500 Time of Concentration (min) : 10.0 % Impervious Directly Connected : 100.00 Additional Abstraction Over Pervious Area (inches) :0.00 Over Impervious Area (inches) :0.00 Infiltration Characteristics: Max Infiltration Capacity (in) :36.00 SCS Curve Number for Pervious :80 Initial Abstraction Factor :0.20 PHXEX PTS.TXT 17/7:2- . , . Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road - Tigard, Oregon Drainage Calculations Santa Barbara Method Hydrograph (Post-development) Hydrograph Type :Santa Barbara Method Time Time Rain C Rain Infiltration Excess Excess Outflow (hr) HHMM (in) (in) (in) (in) (cfs) (cfs) 0.500 00030 0.039 0.039 0.012 0.027 0.043 0.026 1.000 00100 0.047 0.086 0.015 0.032 0.052 0.052 1.500 00130 0.055 0. 140 0,017 0.038 0.061 0.057 2.000 00200 0.059 0.199 0.018 0.040 0.065 0.064 2.500 00230 0.062 0.261 0.020 0.043 0.069 0.068 3. 000 00300 0.062 0.324 0.019 0.043 0.069 0.069 3.500 00330 0.062 0.386 0.020 0.043 0.069 0.069 4 .000 00400 0.066 0.452 0.021 0.046 0.074 0.072 4 .500 00430 0.074 0.527 0.023 0.051 0.082 0.079 5.000 00500 0.082 0.608 0.024 0.058 0.093 0.089 5.500 00530 0.090 0.698 0.025 0.065 0.105 0. 101 6.000 00600 0.097 0.796 0.025 0.072 0.117 0. 113 6.500 00630 0. 113 0.909 0.027 0.086 0.139 0. 131 7.000 00700 0.137 1.045 0.030 0.106 0.172 0. 160 7.500 00730 0.164 1.209 0.033 0.131 0.211 0. 198 8.000 00800 0.449 1.658 0.075 0.374 0.603 0.449 8.500 00830 0.214 1.872 0.030 0.185 0.298 0.451 9.000 00900 0.156 2.028 0.020 0.136 0.220 0.221 9.500 00930 0. 117 2. 145 0.014 0.103 0.167 0. 188 10.00 01000 0.105 2.250 0.012 0.094 0. 151 0.153 10.50 01030 0.094 2.344 0.010 0.084 0.135 0.141 11.00 01100 0.086 2.430 0.009 0.077 0.124 0. 127 11.50 01130 0.082 2.512 0.008 0.074 0.119 0.121 12.00 01200 0.078 2.590 0.007 0.071 0.114 0.116 12.50 01230 0.074 2.664 0.007 0.067 0.109 0.110 13.00 01300 0.070 2.734 0.006 0.064 0. 103 0. 105 13.50 01330 0.070 2.804 0.006 0.064 0.103 0.103 14 .00 01400 0.066 2.870 0.006 0.061 0.098 0.100 14 .50 01430 0.066 2. 937 0.005 0.061 0.098 0.098 15.00 01500 0.062 2.999 0.005 0.057 0.093 0.095 15. 50 01530 0.062 3.062 0.005 0.058 0.093 0.092 16.00 01600 0.058 3. 120 0.004 0.054 0.087 0.090 16.50 01630 0.058 3.179 0.004 0.054 0.087 0.087 17.00 01700 0.058 3.237 0.004 0.054 0.088 0.088 17.50 01730 0.055 3.292 0.004 0.051 0.082 0.084 18.00 01800 0.055 3.346 0.004 0.051 0.082 0.081 18. 50 01830 0.051 3. 397 0.003 0.047 0.076 0.079 19.00 01900 0.051 3.448 0.003 0.047 0.076 0.076 19.50 01930 0.047 3.494 0.003 0.044 0.071 0.073 20.00 02000 0.047 3.541 0.003 0.044 0.071 0.070 20.50 02030 0.047 3.588 0.003 0.044 0.071 0.071 21 .00 02100 0.047 3.635 0.003 0.044 0.071 0.071 21.50 02130 0.047 3.682 0.003 0.044 0.071 0.071 22.00 02200 0.047 3.728 0.003 0.044 0.071 0.071 22.50 02230 0.043 3.771 0.003 0.040 0.065 0.067 23.00 02300 0.043 3.814 0.002 0.040 0.065 0.065 23.50 02330 0.043 3.857 0.002 0.040 0.065 0.065 PHXEXTH.TXT • 0112- 24 .00 00000 0.043 3. 900 0.002 0.040 0.065 0.065 24.50 00030 0.000 3. 900 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.026 25.00 00100 0.000 3.900 0.000 0.000 0.000 - 0.005 3.900 0. 606 3.292 3.2.92 Totals for Watershed in inches over 0.80 acres Rational Coefficient = 0.844 Peak Flow (cfs) = 00.45 PHXEXTH.TXT ,CI' 1Zz Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road Tigard, Oregon Drainage Calculations Orifice Control Stage Storage Weir 1 Q Weir 2 Q Discharge (ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 207.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 208.50 0.00 0. 15 0.00 0.15 209.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.17 209.50 0.00 0. 19 0.00 0.19 210.00 0.01 0.21 0.00 0.21 210.50 0.01 0.23 0.00 0.23 211.00 0.01 0.24 0.00 0.24 211.50 0.02 0.26 0.00 0.26 212.00 0.02 0.27 0.00 0.27 212.25 0.02 0.28 0.00 0.28 Weir Numberl Type : Circular Orifice Equation : Q = C*A*2g^.5*H^n Weir Invert (ft) 7.00 C: 0.60 n: 0.50 Orifice Diameter (ft) 0. 18 PHX W EIR.TXT 20/2-2 ` Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road Tigard, Oregon Drainage Calculation Detention Routing Time Inflow Outflow Stage Storage (hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ac-ft) 0. 50 0.03 0.03 207.27 0.00 1 .00 0.05 0.05 207.53 0.00 1.50 0.06 0.06 207.59 0.00 2.00 0.06 0.06 207. 66 0.00 2.50 0.07 0.07 207.70 0.00 3.00 0.07 0.07 207.72 0.00 3.50 0.07 0.07 207.71 0.00 4 .00 0.07 0.07 207.74 0.00 4 .50 0.08 0.08 207.81 0.00 5.00 0.09 0.09 207.92 0.00 5.50 0. 10 0. 10 208.04 0.00 6.00 0.11 0.11 208. 16 0.00 6.50 0.13 0.13 208.34 0.00 7.00 0.16 0. 15 208.67 0.00 7.50 0.20 0. 17 209.09 0.00 8.00 0.45 0.23 210.48 0.01 8.50 0.45 0.27 211.84 0.02 9.00 0.22 0.26 211. 60 0.02 9.50 0. 19 0.25 211.22 0.02 10.00 0.15 0.23 210.70 0.01 10.50 0.14 0.22 210.22 0.01 11.00 0. 13 0.20 209.74 0.01 11.50 0.12 0.18 209.26 0.00 12.00 0.12 0. 15 208.65 0.00 12.50 0.11 0.11 208. 14 0.00 13.00 0. 11 0.11 208.08 0.00 13.50 0.10 0.10 208.06 0.00 14 .00 0.10 0.10 208.03 0.00 14.50 0.10 0. 10 208.01 0.00 15.00 0.10 0. 10 207.98 0.00 15.50 0.09 0.09 207. 95 0.00 16.00 0. 09 0.09 207. 92 0.00 16.50 0.09 0.09 207.89 0.00 17.00 0.09 0.09 207.90 0.00 17.50 0.08 0.08 207.87 0.00 18.00 0.08 0.08 207.84 0.00 18.50 0.08 0.08 207.81 0.00 19.00 0.08 0.08 207.78 0.00 19.50 0.07 0.07 207.75 0.00 20.00 0.07 0.07 207.72 0.00 20.50 0.07 0.07 207.73 0.00 21.00 0.07 0.07 207.73 0.00 21.50 0.07 0.07 207.73 0.00 22.00 0.07 0.07 207.73 0.00 22.50 0.07 0.07 207.69 0.00 23.00 0.06 0.06 207.67 0.00 23.50 0.07 0.07 207.67 0.00 PHXSTOR.TXT a , 5 24.oo 24,gQ 0.07 03 Max. •'- °•On 0.00 207.67 .... 20 ________________________________________________________._2 0.q5 - °° 207.00 7 0.00 2 /ZZ Initial Pond, p 7 207 pp 0.00 Tot Volume 211.8q °•00 al Inflow 0- ----- .. ,, Tot loW V°l e 000.0 op ' Total Put log, Vol 000.219 Op ac-ft um �Tota Pon olation V lame 00p ac-ft anal Pond Volume 000.000 ac-ft Di na---------------------------olume ((stage) : 000 pop° ao'ft (error) -- p00 Oaf ac-ft ac'ft n00.000 ac`ft ``` ` P 1XSTTR TXT . 22/27— Pond Routing (i<Lbw CooTFo1, mA..ik-\ot.0 0.5 . 4 7 i1 0.4 ; [ i , 1 1j it 0.3 1 . + % Pond Plow In I + 1 Flow(cfs) 1 k� ; 0.2 I ■ ! ■ 1 0.1 _ I /Pond Flow OW 0.0 - - - I I 1 1 20 215 1 -0.1 -I-- Time.(hours) I ` 45-UNIT ADDITION PHOENIX INN MOTEL 9575 SW LOCUST STREET TIGARD, OREGON STORM WATER DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS The attached calculations were prepared January 12, 1999 by: Timothy R. Turner, P.E. TRT Engineering, Inc. 2636 SE Market Portland, Oregon 97214 (503) 235-7592—fax (503) 235-7593 The proposed drainage system consists of roof drains, parking lot catch basin inlets, and underground detention storage. Discharge will be to an existing stormsewer manhole located in SW Locust Street. Design features are depicted on the site plans (by TRT Engineering. Inc.) submitted by to City of Tigard Public Works by the motel owner, VIP's Industries, Inc. The detention system was designed consistent with Unified Sewerage Agency (USA)technical guidelines. On-site pipe sizes and slopes were calculated per the guidelines of the State of Oregon UPC Specialty Code. ��QEQ P R0FFs t4GINEF tiie 14,494 Syr 4d75 "1Z ORECO `4o 1 ��r�e. 0 ?4Q by R. lV P e'`P 6/a%° a.jt-540404J 1 5ife *W* h�tN eT 'ADD) / 12 pp"" FN 'X ;LA, no„ n EN 1.4L-11./pNS 14�t G¢N Ttv, STS2 4 6 E "up�p PA(LOS +i ul "--es/6.,,,,, ;4 4214 Fp Fet()M t� /71,9 �N AN, 4"`'F� Rao r F BPS J CON s;��cTi f p Ra 7'H , Si�4� �M �`k/4.7 �`°`4Gl�! '�LA`S Poi 1^�G uNaE ! Xn"o �VG�v�1MtM rron S 4Mi" /0t r K/n,0 1.6 7_ p� rtec.. a T It^k �'�' �.o ti����.► tit1Id�,� Rc.,vdFF � Exec�pvF� fTt rryL t f kyr- STan „ '�' P/Z.F_ +5vt o r d2 Rut✓OFJ= zs_ Y � E ►c,GE A,'�r �`''� xp,�Nl , 2 -N0Gr2. l F�Q�i,�vp �' ' S p/Q R D'� X92 `"'�TEa�© QNYS tc',�T� ,I����S' G'F �oTE `�U �ncj7�. c�E TF��c. �xCs �xIS';�,til PR �T7AcNt p D� 7iW� �- p 6��r� / P'E'E 5i2IN� F 6tertr �v�• tn�c�k0 �S / So,- GILT ©,rJ .SyTr' ) Ain' PR��+1r^ cp�L, ,/ PEA S 6C 4,4 / r-At _ of �S �.t'^,'��q� ��9` L�"'� — iS '636 _t'' l �sF ; I 7I"tE GfiFgCES/ < 0.4 s at 6)00:..„. .6) r 14 se 2s i• 01,n I ;1 z/ 22- POST -oirEwPoENr [ 53 G ;f L. L-/f D t06 t 13Ut WOG., Slr?kWAL\C) PAA1t1NG. Lo" (OA 1" tAv-) PEnlc (VAN t FF t't Aic. ZuNV FF PATE.s wER6 nE i En-A 1 WEo U.c)►4 G- 6/110-45/14A vN 1 T" t-i Y p n0 GRIA 9)) yt\61\i00 KS/f46- TtitPE 11-A 510p-w■ (st_ e AT'IM-1-1 E1D PLS16N AAJti p/1L.L TAOLe) PQ.E -OIrUELOe�L+Jr- I tt# A'/\Db.S 14nr/l = 0.20 el C ■ E3 Arty I vu s 4rLrA 0,15 ac 5ott T4P r 1 crJ = 4.611_44 _ C. f vtT- M4ELoprn6'r1r- u,, S AYt to % 0, 55 .- cN _ 9S etkvit * t Aft-kli = /�� r11c1ItY� cN = So TABLES PRE - OEvt w fw∎E,Jr S PEAK- QuNVFF (()t T t Q. 24 cf s Posy - DEVi.LuP+.E►Jr 0 A\c- (40J u rF pATE = O. 5 S a fs ' I 3 /2z DE-ran/TOO ot-ri_o-s,o►) c1- A&F tr.) 4 S- ►"tr 0)A , uNoc:r-G 1400 r v' ( S0- FT LtNGT -J 45" 90 ELEV=2 2,& TOTAL, uSA( LE VOLt1wtE IN E 2, 262. .E+3 51- Abe: m1_0, a c_ lo8.5 0 0`t• o O.po s CLEW=2oo,s Lo4_S 0 ,006 • Z�o .S 0 . 007 1-11- o 0. 007 211. 5 0 . 006 7„ o os ti. 1(S � t ATT Act)EO TAVLE� z �z. s OuT SET c-cN 1 RDL ?EAY- Of PATE tmAX 1 w ow OAT6 y►‘niruTA)Ntio By 2_ 516 " DIAw`t 'IE F►LC LOA Eh ,N PiOw �•441R01. ►nWAiv ljAl..E 6.5L•"E- OEcif:4J ORAwir� GSJ ORIFICE L-I,rYA7(04 = 207: of►60,1D.0 R0,7(NG ..00 1,6. • 4/2,.- • 46- (.04 11- AOOrricnJ Not'-1' INK) 6 Ra•tq p L a(r RoA O —j 16A,2D , 02-6(ror-) S rc c- (DRAW S SUz€ Ac"O St-ofe St—of OF ON- .Ii1 e sTo(zw, ,ORA!NS PE 2 TAR LE ti-z. OF Q -Epo,J sPrc)ALTY c.voc (upc,i 1996 (SEE I'tcrU r-4 1) 1.45E 3- I,Jc.H WAxtv., tA� 2A1 iJ FAL L (SEE ATrAchieo TAr31-10 2c- FEAR-, PEAK fr Tc:Nsiry Fore S - r„\10,AYE -rot,c c'F cp►jcr dig ATIoJ _ 9.,f idthE,S -- IAsE 3,0 iJrcArs /N TA(3X PMINA6r BAslw Pt PE Pi PE L€NGTti P t P G• 4 eAs IQ A2EA, {.}L 0)A, ►n S co Pk, trin ts+ 0 P- 2 2,4 7 r 4 tis 47 0 P- I, P-Z S,`i 09 6 l`8 C:3, CC.), P- I- 3,52.s 6 Ye 21 irl R- (o 0 s 4 /6 1(v, k- 6) R-7 t.soo 4- %e 51 a-6, R-7, c-8 3,3 S , 6 VS S 9 Z R- 1 52- 4 Ye 47 C) R- 1, R-2- 11121 4 /6 42- Q R-1, g---z, R-3 3, Zo 5 6 Y9 6,2- Q R-1) C-z., 3, 627 6 YB 20 R-3, R-4 P-1, R-2, R-3 41053 4 YB 23 K-4i s--S R-9 Vas 4 '/9 2g (2--1. k-1, R-3 41 06 I 6 V 4- 15 12-4, R-S, R-9 Q P-1 , P-7- r-3 12, 140 (o y4- 7 fAITtQEO 0 P-1, e-z, P-3 11_, 14-0 4-f3 ' OE if. X NT)Dr-) 0 F - ENT's X 5, 6 3 6 6 , 1/6 23 9- -- -- --- -- '-_. c NIX INN MOTEL ADDITION 1 '� PH JE DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS I I` ii f FIGURE 1 1 I I I' \• I h ! 1 is M I ; © ii 4 � 7-- _ - - P_2 �._4 _' ii i �. -sd o-�I - �,'J ' I I ii 1 � I I II �`` .6 I I i R-4 i - ` � l I R-1 : R-2 R-3 I © I i �- i! II I I` I, / i - R-5,: / ....___...L. I Q.:I/ ! II 1 d ► / I. II i"A...I / I I R-g O J R-6 I R-8 I r 1 P-4 I P-3 �' /. i el 9 1 I / Vi-R-7 J I ill / / (5-- / II rte=_=_-- —1_________________. 1)-2) il n N N RAINFALL INTENSITY - DURATION - FREQUENCY CURVES • 5.0 .1. _w1ti.-..■ ■■ ■ rIIIs11■ ■ 11111 •.uISu■111111�11IIIInllp�l�1���� IMIlm•..I.1.u1\II 11t 11111:%nY.111l:111° Illliiill 4.0 seam h onnuil uiii=uIOIII1i_iiw__!!•SZ_•!IIUUilio/!III. 11.IUuness11ii111II1I111111II Zone 7 5 i :: m:C===C-�x:=s•s_----=cif y:; .1=:C ..ismili 'isi-.•1i.. ■•ii... a.1:ML.t "11".---ri.•.. :I■inll=..us T.... u■.. ■: {{UI, ..o.� .fi■.■ .... ■--..s.1■up..•rII ..1....11.1. •:-./.H.1.IIn/..... •U■ :1111. ..■. _::::. -:I I .........2............. salver.=.. ■Iln.tut 1'1 11w��■■ 1. .. !1� 3.0 ..iii'..- .111.-===w-....... a■11 ■:rma 1■1-a�ii l:=w//zszw.... .. la 111. ..■.■1■■■a Ul�nln1.11..wss..�.w- 1.■■■ w�1f1i..:•nnw __.._,.ww...■■■=■■■■Ii■IIJ11.1.■■ 11 rllrllll■1_==.I..w..■■.111 ■■�.al.l..11l 11 111�...1■.M-. ■ ■■■■ 11111 ..■�. 1I�r��....■■.. �■ .. x:•11■I m1.1..1.1.. 2.� -i■■■■_ iil.:••1,111111 ■■■■■■■■1■I/II/ IlIUI■■■■■■1■ II111III/IIII11ur11 ■■■■■■■I■■1■1/11111 ■■■■■■..-•■NxIN:■t111.11��EATA...■■■■■■■■■■■1I11IIlllll■■■■■■ ■1■1/t VIII I 1111111____1111..■■■■■■1■■/■1II/11111 someIu.li1111:::.IluaUi°pp:I�im►���i m...1U1111191111 III.UIUIii us 111 1 i li iiiII iii"rum nssiUU1 1111111 i fi Numb gissun11m.munimimmib�m.■■■ss�1..11111 11.IIIillo mm/01111IQ111111111U111ssssslsl s1.msssime 1uesmmi 2.0 imorniiiiiii.. risgi iniig� :�i sommu ui lumsiiiiiii 1111 i um iii nIMINiiiiilliii111111111ii1iiili L 1 UB1111.:!IIIfI111N..«III UMIWZIO■WI•iOM1111NIIIIIIIIIIIi■11111111111111 111111111111ll...t•/t■■1011111111111111111111 • 1 111111111fi::lillfl ilino1mi=osi,assCssib`�1. 111 11IIIIIIIIIUIIIIIm111IIIIIIIIIIIliii.UR•RIUIU111111 111111111111tH 1111111I� /■1a\�\ .11C. o Dtltt(111I11111111 MIM - . M !Uh L 11111 11111111111t111tIb1�; 1U���■�>t�1.. 1�. •!IIf1111111II11/IIIIIIIIf11111111111111111IIII■/■IIwIMI/1U1111111111111111 ■ 11111111111116:91IIp111111111■�11 111111101 1101 111:9111111111111111111111111111111■■���11�111111111111111111111111 1111= �I •� '111 ''I =11111UNIMI111 MIIII1I■■■ OilliIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Iniiiiii llili 11111011Ml.aiiiii biliiling "' Bali, _.'... H�1 '1111ii�llln:. ''�1111111111111illlll 111!!■■E�����1111111111111111111111 C• 1.0 - ... .........ili=�- - =_== ::E :ass:: ='e' ---- s..... .::??:_�= ====s- ---- I 0.9 - - _ 2-is:: "1111: s-Nknh....i... s:�=e-=e. s::::■:: • 2-:..��-..:...::i. 1::��.-O .. ::.i SM..-.CIA',lane. Er-•'::1� ...........===.^--=- _ Oa =--��s=-=mils:: ... ibt...•....'L: i '�����-------: -i ..s- �.-...... •:N:.....•..p.•0..::1-1111 .r•t��....... :.0■. .m�..��-.. �- ..�....•..ui:.. ..•.. i.t-�� . ... N O.T its =...n..-..•:riri===•3.�.Z=ice :..a..1�••.n etr.iii..l .gym■..■ .. ../.�. 1'VII .�N . 1.1. w. .-.. ..■ ..n nulls.tl!•....�A� 1■.. •■11. r=�■■7•ww-.......if■■s�.. ■ Z �� :::#0111....-II=__..=..... :•U•► ..-.•.. ■.N:I.! IIN:•..../ ■ ■ ..:a!11I.■. 1.".111.. H YI ���a.... W 0.6 ' ..■I/.■INIUIIlwln===t=■■2=_• • ■ !Mira 1/11ii1.l11i..:'a=i►��-ww.�ti.■ �, .1..11.1■11■.� ■11•.11. ■■a h..1.�� e,0.... unwul��a.a.� . i1w.Go■ia•/-lti- �.'t'.1■��.w.'� Z �.....Ilnlllnlllnlll���.I�.w..1 ..Ia..■■■■■■i1• ..Il:llnnrrim-�r�\\...■■■■■ ■1111.1 - 0.5 ■■■■■ /1■11 E■■�.r..■1■ 1■■►�■■■■■/1I.•I.II1111:■111I1� ���..� ■■■■ / .111 1111 ■n x11.11.011 Il��MMi..w..■■■1 J ....I::11111,,11111 111.1111 11il i,����iiiiiii■ii■ii•0iiriiil11111=iiil�lliimi elltuiiiiil;LC����gi liMIII iiiiilillM111ii 100 Yr. J jj PHOENIX INN ill-- Flow Control Manhole Discharge Worksheet for Circular Channel Project Description Worksheet Circular Channel - 1 Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Full Flow Capacity Input Data Mannings 0.013 Coefficient Slope 0.010000 ft/ft Diameter 6 in Results Depth 0.50 ft Discharge 0.56 cfs Flow Area 0.2 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 1.57 ft Top Width 0.00 ft Critical Depth 0.38 ft Percent Full 100.0 % Critical Slope 0.011553 ft/ft Velocity 2.86 ft/s Velocity Head 0.13 ft Specific Energy 0.63 ft Froude Number 0.00 DES Maximum Discharge 0.60 cfs Q ' U4S16N �EYhk1�/1 Discharge Full 0.56 cfs — 0 II' Cl Slope Full 0.010000 ft/ft .r Flow Type N/A Project Engineer Timothy Turn c\haestad\fmw\phoenix inn fm2 TRT Engineering 01/12/99 7:54 P STORM AND GROUNDWATER DRAINAGE Table 11-2 W22-- TABLE 11-2 Size of Horizontal Rainwater Piping Size of Pipe Iniall in Inches per Hour in inches Maximum • 5 6 118" Slope 2 3 4 1644 1098 022 657 548 3 4 3760 2506 1880 1504 1253 5 8680 4453 3340 2672 2672 227 6 10,700 7133 5350 3566 8 23000 15,330 11,500 9200 10 41,400 27,800 20,700 10,580 13,800 12 68,600 44,400 33,300 28,650 22,200 Size of Pipe Hour in Inches Maximum -ainfall in inches pe 3 4 5 6 114' Slope 2 3 3 2320 1546 1180 928 72128 17773 4 5300 3533 X720 3776 3146 5 9440 8293 7550 6040 5 6 15,100 10,E 3 10,00333 8 32,800 21,733 18,300 13,040 58,400 1 38,950 29,200 23,350 19,450 10 12 94,000 62,600 47,000 37,800 31,350 Size of Pipe Maximum R.410 In Inches per Hour in Inches 3 4 5 6 1/2` Slope 8 2 ( 2295 1644 1310 1096 3 7520 5010 3760 3010 X50 5 13,360 8900 6680 5320 4 50 6 21,400, 13,700 10,700 1 8580 0 1 7140 8 48,000 30,650 23,000 10 82,800 55,200 41,400 33,160 27,600 44,400 12 138, 00 68,600 53,200 158,800 19,000 95,300 78,250 15 238,0004 120.7 yf i_ Hydrologic Analysis Curve Numbers by Land Use Description Hydrologic Soil Group A B C D Mountain brush —oak brush, aspen, maple: Good Condition: ground cover> 70% 40 40 41 48 Fair Condition: ground cover 30% to 70% 40 48 57 63 Poor Condition: ground cover< 30% 46 66 74 79 Woods or forest land: Good condition: Natural conditions 40 55 70 77 Fair condition: Some forest litter 40 60 73 79 Poor condition: No small trees or brush 45 66 77 83 Woods/Grass combination (orchard or tree farm): Good condition: ground cover> 75% 40 58 72 79 Fair condition: ground cover 50% to 75% 43 65 76 82 Poor condition: ground cover<50% 57 73 82 86 Brush with weeds and grass: Good condition: ground cover> 75% 40 48 65 73 Fair condition: ground cover 50% to 75% 40 56 70 77 Poor condition: ground cover< 50% 48 67 77 83 Meadow —continuous grass: 40 58 71 78 Residential districts: '/4 acre lots: 61 75 83 87 '/3 acre lots: 57 72 81 86 ''411'' 'h acre lots: 54 70 80 85 1 acre lots: 51 68 79 84 Pasture or range: Good condition: lightly grazed 40 61 74 80 Fair condition: not heavily grazed 49 69 79 84 Poor condition: heavily grazed w/no mulch 68 79 86 89 Newly graded areas (no vegetation established) 77 86 9] 94 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries: Good condition: grass cover>75% 40 61 74 80 Fair condition: grass cover 50% to 75% 49 69 79 84 Poor condition: grass cover< 50% 68 79 86 89 Gravel roads and parking lots: 88 92 95 98 Dirt roads and parking lots: 86 90 94 98 \Impervious surfaces: pavement and roofs 98 98 : 98 98 Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, and ponds 100 100 100 100 For a more detailed description of agricultural land use and arid region curve numbers, refer to Soil Conservation Service Technical Release 55, Chapter 2, June 1986. Runoff Curve Numbers __ Figure 3-3.2 Highway Runoff Manual Page 3-7 February 1995 Hydrologic Analysis t) Sheet Flow Equation Manning's ns Smooth surfaces (concrete, asphalt, gravel) 0.011 Fallow fields or loose soil surface (no residue) 0.05 Cultivated soil with residue cover(s<0.20 ft/ft) 0.06 Cultivated soil with residue cover (s> 0.20 ft/ft) 0.17 ---6111. Short prairie grass and lawns 0.15 Dense grasses 0.24 Bermuda grass 0.41 Range (natural) 0.13 Woods or forest with light underbrush 0.40 Woods or forest with dense underbrush 0.80 Shallow Concentrated Flow ks 1. Forest with heavy ground litter and meadows (n =0.10) 3 2. Brushy ground with some trees (n =0.060) 5 3. Fallow or minimum tillage cultivation (n =0.040) 8 4. High grass(n =0.035) 9 5. Short grass, pasture and lawns (n = 0.030) 11 6. Nearly bare ground (n =0.25) 13 7. Paved and gravel areas (n =0.012) 27 Channel Flow (Intermittent) kc 1. Forested swale with heavy ground litter(n = 0.10) 5 2. Forested drainage course with defined channel bed (n = 0.050) 10 3. Rock-lined waterway (n = 0.035) 15 4. Grassed waterway (n =0.030) 17 5. Earth-lined waterway (n =0.025) 20 6. CMP pipe (n =0.024) 21 7. Concrete pipe (0.012) 42 Channel Flow kc 1. Meandering stream with some pools (n =0.040) 20 2. Rock-lined stream (n =0.035) 23 3. Grass-lined stream (n =0.030) 27 "n" AND "k" Values for Travel Time Calculations Figure 3-3.4 Page 3-14 Highway Runoff Manual February 1995 111VZ Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road Drainage Calculations Design Rainfall Time Time Rain Cumulative (hr) HHMM (in) (in) 1.00 15 0.02 0.02 0.50 30 0.02 0.039 0.75 45 0.023 0.062 1.00 100 0.023 0.086 1.25 115 0.027 0. 113 1.50 130 0.027 0.14 1.75 145 0.029 0. 17 2.00 200 0.029 0. 199 2.25 215 0.031 0.23 2.50 230 0.031 0.261 2.75 245 0.031 0.293 3.00 300 0.031 0.324 3.25 315 0.031 0.355 3.50 330 0.031 0.386 3.75 345 0.033 0.419 4.00 400 0.033 0.452 4.25 415 0.037 0.489 4.50 430 0.037 0.527 4.75 445 0.041 0.567 5.00 500 0.041 0.608 5.25 515 0.045 0.653 5.50 530 0.045 0.698 5.75 545 0.049 0.747 6.00 600 0.049 0.796 6.25 615 0.057 0.852 6.50 630 0.057 0.909 6.75 645 0.068 0.977 7.00 700 0.068 1.045 7.25 715 0.082 1.127 7.50 730 0.082 1.209 7.75 745 0.224 1.433 8.00 800 0.224 1.658 8.25 815 0.107 1.765 8.50 830 0.107 1.872 8.75 845 0.078 1.95 9.00 900 0.078 2.028 9.25 915 0.058 2.086 9.50 930 0.059 2.145 9.75 945 0.053 2.198 10.00 1000 0.053 2.25 10.25 1015 0.047 2.297 10.50 1030 0.047 2.344 10.75 1045 0.043 2.387 11.00 1100 0.043 2.43 11.25 1115 0.041 2.471 11.50 1130 0.041 2.512 Phxratn IZ1Zz 11.75 1145 0.039 2.551 12.00 1200 0.039 2.59 12.25 1215 0.037 2.627 12.50 1230 0.037 2.664 12.75 1245 0.035 2.699 13.00 1300 0.035 2.734 13.25 1315 0.035 2.769 13.50 1330 0.035 2.804 13.75 1345 0.033 2.837 14.00 1400 0.033 2.87 14.25 1415 0.033 2.904 14.50 1430 0.033 2.937 14.75 1445 0.031 2.968 15.00 1500 0.031 2.999 15.25 1515 0.031 3.03 15.50 1530 0.031 3.062 15.75 1545 0.029 3.091 16.00 1600 0.029 3. 12 16.25 1615 0.029 3.149 16.50 1630 0.029 3.178 16.75 1645 0.029 3.208 17.00 1700 0.029 3.237 17.25 1715 0.027 3.264 17.50 1730 0.027 3.292 17.75 1745 0.027 3.319 18.00 1800 0.027 3.346 18.25 1815 0.025 3.372 18.50 1830 0.025 3.397 18.75 1845 0.025 3.422 19.00 1900 0.025 3.448 19.25 1915 0.023 3.471 19.50 1930 0.023 3.494 19.75 1945 0.023 3.518 20.00 2000 0.023 3.541 20.25 2015 0.023 3.565 20.50 2030 0.023 3.588 20.75 2045 0.023 3.611 21.00 2100 0.023 3.635 21.25 2115 0.023 3.658 21.50 2130 0.023 3.682 21.75 2145 0.023 3.705 22.00 2200 0.023 3.728 22.25 2215 0.021 3.75 22.50 2230 0.021 3.771 22.75 2245 0.021 3.793 23.00 2300 0.021 3.814 23.25 2315 0.021 3.836 23.50 2330 0.021 3.857 23.75 2345 0.021 3.879 24.00 0 0.021 3.9 3.9 Phxrain Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road Drainage Calculations Pre-development Watershed Information Watershed Total Area (acres) :0.5500 Impervious Area (acres) :0.2000 Time of Concentration (min) :25.0 % Impervious Directly Connected :100.00 Additional Abstraction Over Pervious Area (inches) :0.00 Over Impervious Area (inches) :0.00 Infiltration Characteristics: Max infiltration Capacity (in) :36.00 SCS Curve Number for Pervious :80 Initial Abstraction Factor :0.20 Preshed l4117-1 Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road Drainage Calculations Pre-development Hydrograph: Santa Barbara Method Time Time Rain C Rain Infiltr. Excess Excess Outflow (hr) HHMM (in) (in) (in) (in) (cfs) (cfs) 0.25 15 0.02 0.02 0.012 0.007 0.016 0.004 0.50 30 0.02 0.039 0.012 0.007 0.016 0.009 0.75 45 0.023 0.062 0.015 0.009 0.019 0.013 1.00 100 0.023 0.086 0.015 0.009 0.019 0.016 1.25 115 0.027 0. 113 0.017 0.01 0.022 0.018 1.50 130 0.027 0.14 0.017 0.01 0.022 0.02 1.75 145 0.029 0.17 0.019 0.011 0.024 0.021 2.00 200 0.029 0.199 0.019 0.011 0.024 0.022 2.25 215 0.031 0.23 0.02 0.011 0.025 0.023 2.50 230 0.031 0.261 0.02 0.011 0.025 0.024 2.75 245 0.031 0.293 0.02 0.011 0.025 0.025 3.00 300 0.031 0.324 0.02 0.011 0.025 0.025 3.25 315 0.031 0.355 0.02 0.011 0.025 0.025 3.50 330 0.031 0.386 0.02 0.011 0.025 0.025 3.75 345 0.033 0.419 0.021 0.012 0.027 0.025 4.00 400 0.033 0.452 0.021 0.012 0.027 0.026 4.25 415 0.037 0.489 0.024 0.013 0.03 0.027 4.50 430 0.037 0.527 0.023 0.014 0.03 0.028 4.75 445 0.041 0.567 0.025 0.016 0.035 0.03 5.00 500 0.041 0.608 0.024 0.017 0.037 0.033 5.25 515 0.045 0.653 0.026 0.019 0.042 0.036 5.50 530 0.045 0.698 0.025 0.02 0.044 0.039 5.75 545 0.049 0.747 0.026 0.023 0.05 0.043 6.00 600 0.049 0.796 0.025 0.024 0.052 0.047 6.25 615 0.057 0.852 0.028 0.028 0.063 0.052 6.50 630 0.057 0.909 0.027 0.029 0.065 0.057 6.75 645 0.068 0.977 0.031 0.037 0.082 0.065 7.00 700 0.068 1.045 0.03 0.038 0.085 0.073 7.25 715 0.082 1. 127 0.034 0.048 0.106 0.084 7.50 730 0.082 1.209 0.032 0.049 0.11 0.095 7.75 745 0.224 1.433 0.081 0.143 0.318 0.15 8.00 800 0.224 1.658 0.071 0.153 0.34 0.232 8.25 815 0.107 1.765 0.031 0.076 0.169 0.243 8.50 830 0.107 1.872 0.029 0.078 0.173 0.21 8.75 845 0.078 1.95 0.02 0.058 0.128 0.182 9.00 900 0.078 2.028 0.019 0.059 0.13 0.158 9.25 915 0.058 2.086 0.014 0.044 0.098 0.138 9.50 930 0.059 2.145 0.014 0.045 0.099 0.12 9.75 945 0.053 2.198 0.012 0.041 0.09 0.108 10.00 1000 0.053 2.25 0.012 0.041 0.091 0. 1 10.25 1015 0.047 2.297 0.01 0.037 0.081 0.093 10.50 1030 0.047 2.344 0.01 0.037 0.082 0.088 10.75 1045 0.043 2.387 0.009 0.034 0.075 0.084 11.00 1100 0.043 2.43 0.009 0.034 0.076 0.08 11.25 1115 0.041 2.471 0.008 0.033 0.073 0.077 Prehyd • 11.50 1130 0.041 2.512 0.008 0.033 0.073 0.075 11.75 1145 0.039 2.551 0.008 0.031 0.07 0.073 12.00 1200 0.039 2.59 0.007 0.032 0.07 0.072 12.25 1215 0.037 2.627 0.007 0.03 0.067 0.07 12.50 1230 0.037 2.664 0.007 0.03 0.067 0.069 12.75 1245 0.035 2.699 0.006 0.029 0.064 0.067 13.00 1300 0.035 2.734 0.006 0.029 0.064 0.066 13.25 1315 0.035 2.769 0.006 0.029 0.064 0.065 13.50 1330 0.035 2.804 0.006 0.029 0.064 0.065 13.75 1345 0.033 2.837 0.006 0.027 0.061 0.064 14.00 1400 0.033 2.87 0.006 0.028 0.061 0.062 14.25 1415 0.033 2.904 0.006 0.028 0.061 0.062 14.50 1430 0.033 2.937 0.005 0.028 0.061 0.062 14.75 1445 0.031 2.968 0.005 0.026 0.058 0.061 15.00 1500 0.031 2.999 0.005 0.026 0.058 0.059 15.25 1515 0.031 3.03 0.005 0.026 0.058 0.059 15.50 1530 0.031 3.062 0.005 0.026 0.058 0.059 15.75 1545 0.029 3.091 0.005 0.025 0.055 0.058 16.00 1600 0.029 3.12 0.004 0.025 0.055 0.056 16.25 1615 0.029 3.149 0.004 0.025 0.055 0.056 16.50 1630 0.029 3.178 0.004 0.025 0.055 0.055 16.75 1645 0.029 3.208 0.004 0.025 0.055 0.055 17.00 1700 0.029 3.237 0.004 0.025 0.055 0.055 17.25 1715 0.027 3.264 0.004 0.023 0.052 0.055 17.50 1730 0.027 3.292 0.004 0.023 0.052 0.053 17.75 1745 0.027 3.319 0.004 0.023 0.052 0.053 18.00 1800 0.027 3.346 0.004 0.023 0.052 0.052 18.25 1815 0.025 3.372 0.004 0.022 0.048 0.051 18.50 1830 0.025 3.397 0.003 0.022 0.049 0.05 18.75 1845 0.025 3.422 0.003 0.022 0.049 0.049 19.00 1900 0.025 3.448 0.003 0.022 0.049 0.049 19.25 1915 0.023 3.471 0.003 0.02 0.045 0.048 19.50 1930 0.023 3.494 0.003 0.02 0.045 0.047 19.75 1945 0.023 3.518 0.003 0.02 0.045 0.046 20.00 2000 0.023 3.541 0.003 0.02 0.045 0.046 20.25 2015 0.023 3.565 0.003 0.02 0.045 0.045 20.50 2030 0.023 3.588 0.003 0.02 0.045 0.045 20.75 2045 0.023 3.611 0.003 0.02 0.045 0.045 21.00 2100 0.023 3.635 0.003 0.02 0.045 0.045 21.25 2115 0.023 3.658 0.003 0.02 0.045 0.045 21.50 2130 0.023 3.682 0.003 0.021 0.045 0.045 21.75 2145 0.023 3.705 0.003 0.021 0.046 0.045 22.00 2200 0.023 3.728 0.003 0.021 0.046 0.045 22.25 2215 0.021 3.75 0.003 0.019 0.042 0.045 22.50 2230 0.021 3.771 0.003 0.019 0.042 0.043 22.75 2245 0.021 3.793 0.003 0.019 0.042 0.043 23.00 2300 0.021 3.814 0.003 0.019 0.042 0.042 23.25 2315 0.021 3.836 0.003 0.019 0.042 0.042 23.50 2330 0.021 3.857 0.002 0.019 0.042 0.042 23.75 2345 0.021 3.879 0.002 0.019 0.042 0.042 24.00 2400 0.021 3.900 0.002 0.019 0.042 0.042 3.900 1.235 2.664 2.664 Totals for Watershed in inches over 0.55 acres Rational Coefficent - 0.683 Peak Flow (cfs) = 0.24 Prehyd 1 `(21- Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road Drainage Calulations Post-development Watershed Information Watershed Total Area (acres) :0.5500 Impervious Area (acres) :0.5500 Time of Concentration (min) :5.0 % Impervious Directly Connected :100.00 Additional Abstraction Over Pervious Area (inches) :0.00 Over Impervious Area (inches) :0.00 Infiltration Characteristics: Max Infiltration Capacity (in) :0.00 SCS Curve Number for Pervious :80 Initial Abstraction Factor :0.20 Postshed (IfzZ Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road Drainage Calculations Post-development Hydrograph: Santa Barbara Method Time Time Rain C Rain Infiltr. Excess Excess Outflow (hr) HHMM (in) (in) (in) (in) (cfs) (cfs) 0.25 15 0.02 0.02 0 0.02 0.043 0.026 0.50 30 0.02 0.039 0 0.02 0.043 0.047 0.75 45 0.023 0.062 0 0.023 0.052 0.048 1.00 100 0.023 0.086 0 0.023 0.052 0.053 1.25 115 0.027 0. 113 0 0.027 0.061 0.057 1.50 130 0.027 0. 14 0 0.027 0.061 0.061 1.75 145 0.029 0.17 0 0.029 0.065 0.063 2.00 200 0.029 0. 199 0 0.029 0.065 0.065 2.25 215 0.031 0.23 0 0.031 0.069 0.067 2.50 230 0.031 0.261 0 0.031 0.069 0.07 2.75 245 0.031 0.293 0 0.031 0.069 0.069 3.00 300 0.031 0.324 0 0.031 0.069 0.069 3.25 315 0.031 0.355 0 0.031 0.069 0.069 3.50 330 0.031 0.386 0 0.031 0.069 0.069 3.75 345 0.033 0.419 0 0.033 0.074 0.072 4.00 400 0.033 0.452 0 0.033 0.074 0.074 4.25 415 0.037 0.489 0 0.037 0.082 0.079 4.50 430 0.037 0.527 0 0.037 0.082 0.083 4.75 445 0.041 0.567 0 0.041 0.091 0.087 5.00 500 0.041 0.608 0 0.041 0.091 0.092 5.25 515 0.045 0.653 0 0.045 0.099 0.096 5.50 530 0.045 0.698 0 0.045 0.099 0.1 5.75 545 0.049 0.747 0 0.049 0.108 0.105 6.00 600 0.049 0.796 0 0.049 0.108 0.109 6.25 615 0.057 0.852 0 0.057 0.125 0.118 6.50 630 0.057 0.909 0 0.057 0.125 0.127 6.75 645 0.068 0.977 0 0.068 0.151 0.141 7.00 700 0.068 1.045 0 0.068 0.151 0. 153 7.25 715 0.082 1. 127 0 0.082 0.182 0.169 7.50 730 0.082 1.209 0 0.082 0.182 0.184 7.75 745 0.224 1.433 0 0.224 0.497 0.371 8.00 800 0.224 1.658 0 0.224 0.497 0.523 8.25 815 0.107 1.765 0 0.107 0.238 0.337 8.50 830 0.107 1.872 0 0.107 0.238 0.218 8.75 845 0.078 1.95 0 0.078 0.173 0.203 9.00 900 0.078 2.028 0 0.078 0.173 0.167 9.25 915 0.058 2.086 0 0.058 0.13 0.148 9.50 930 0.059 2.145 0 0.059 0.13 0.126 9.75 945 0.053 2.198 0 0.053 0.117 0.123 10.00 1000 0.053 2.25 0 0.053 0.117 0.116 10.25 1015 0.047 2.297 0 0.047 0.104 0.109 10.50 1030 0.047 2.344 0 0.047 0.104 0.103 10.75 1045 0.043 2.387 0 0.043 0.095 0.099 11.00 1100 0.043 2.43 0 0.043 0.095 0.094 11.25 1115 0.041 2.471 0 0.041 0.091 0.093 Posthyd 11.50 1130 0.041 2.512 0 0.041 0.091 0.09 11.75 1145 0.039 2.551 0 0.039 0.086 0.088 12.00 1200 0.039 2.59 0 0.039 0.086 0.086 12.25 1215 0.037 2.627 0 0.037 0.082 0.084 12.50 1230 0.037 2.664 0 0.037 0.082 0.082 12.75 1245 0.035 2.699 0 0.035 0.078 0.08 13.00 1300 0.035 2.734 0 0.035 0.078 0.077 13.25 1315 0.035 2.769 0 0.035 0.078 0.078 13.50 1330 0.035 2.804 0 0.035 0.078 0.078 13.75 1345 0.033 2.837 0 0.033 0.074 0.075 14.00 1400 0.033 2.87 0 0.033 0.074 0.073 14.25 1415 0.033 2.904 0 0.033 0.074 0.074 14.50 1430 0.033 2.937 0 0.033 0.074 0.073 14.75 1445 0.031 2.968 0 0.031 0.069 0.071 15.00 1500 0.031 2.999 0 0.031 0.069 0.069 15.25 1515 0.031 3.03 0 0.031 0.069 0.069 15.50 1530 0.031 3.062 0 0.031 0.069 0.069 15.75 1545 0.029 3.091 0 0.029 0.065 0.067 16.00 1600 0.029 3.12 0 0.029 0.065 0.065 16.25 1615 0.029 3.149 0 0.029 0.065 0.065 16.50 1630 0.029 3.178 0 0.029 0.065 0.065 16.75 1645 0.029 3.208 0 0.029 0.065 0.065 17.00 1700 0.029 3.237 0 0.029 0.065 0.065 17.25 1715 0.027 3.264 0 0.027 0.061 0.062 17.50 1730 0.027 3.292 0 0.027 0.061 0.06 17.75 1745 0.027 3.319 0 0.027 0.061 9.061 18.00 1800 0.027 3.346 0 0.027 0.061 0.061 18.25 1815 0.025 3.372 0 0.025 0.056 0.058 18.50 1830 0.025 3.397 0 0.025 0.056 0.056 18.75 1845 0.025 3.422 0 0.025 0.056 0.056 19.00 1900 0.025 3.448 0 0.025 0.056 0.056 19.25 1915 0.023 3.471 0 0.023 0.052 0.054 19.50 1930 0.023 3.494 0 0.023 0.052 0.052 19.75 1945 0.023 3.518 0 0.023 0.052 0.052 20.00 2000 0.023 3.541 0 0.023 0.052 0.052 20.25 2015 0.023 3.565 0 0.023 0.052 0.052 20.50 2030 0.023 3.588 0 0.023 0.052 0.052 20.75 2045 0.023 3.611 0 0.023 0.052 0.052 21.00 2100 0.023 3.635 0 0.023 0.052 0.052 21.25 2115 0.023 3.658 0 0.023 0.052 0.052 21.50 2130 0.023 3.682 0 0.023 0.052 0.052 21.75 2145 0.023 3.705 0 0.023 0.052 0.052 22.00 2200 0.023 3.728 0 0.023 0.052 0.052 22.25 2215 0.021 3.75 0 0.021 0.048 0.049 22.50 2230 0.021 3.771 0 0.021 0.048 0.047 22.75 2245 0.021 3.793 0 0.021 0.048 0.048 23.00 2300 0.021 3.814 0 0.021 0.048 0.048 23.25 2315 0.021 3.836 0 0.021 0.048 0.048 23.50 2330 0.021 3.857 0 0.021 0.048 0.048, 23.75 2345 0.021 3.879 0 0.021 0.048 0.048 24.00 0 0.021 3.9 0 0.021 0.048 0.048 3.900 0 3.889 3.898 Totals for Watershed in inches over 0.55 acres Rational Coefficient • 1.000 Peak Flow (cfs) = 00.52 Posthyd ( 11titi Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road Drainage Calculations Orifice Information Stage Storage Orifice 0 Discharge (ft) (ac-ft) (cfs) (cfs) 208.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 209.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 209.50 0.00 0.09 0.09 210.00 0.01 0.13 0.13 210.50 0.01 0.16 0.16 211.00 0.01 0.19 0.19 211.50 0.02 0.21 0.21 212.00 0.02 0.23 0.23 Weir Numberl Type : Circular Orifice Equation 0 = C*A*2g^.5*H^n Weir Invert(ft) : 9.00 C: 0.60 n: 0.50 Orifice Diameter(ft) : 0.19 Phxweir Phoenix Inn Motel Greenburg Road Drainage Calculations Detention Routing Time Inflow Outflow Stage Storage (hr) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ac-ft) 0.50 0.03 0.00 208.74 0.00 1.00 0.05 0.02 209. 13 0.00 1.50 0.06 0.05 209.27 0.00 2.00 0.06 0.06 209.34 0.00 2.50 0.07 0.07 209.37 0.00 3.00 0.07 0.07 209.39 0.00 3.50 0.07 0.07 209.40 0.00 4.00 0.07 0.07 209.41 0.00 4.50 0.08 0.08 209.44 0.00 5.00 0.09 0.08 209.49 0.00 5.50 0.10 0.09 209.54 0.01 6.00 0.11 0.10 209.62 0,01 6.50 0. 12 0.11 209.73 0.01 7.00 0.14 0.12 209.91 0.01 7.50 0.17 0.14 210.16 0.01 8.00 0.37 0.20 211.27 0.02 8.50 0.37 0.24 212.09 0.02 9.00 0.17 0.23 211.87 0.02 9.50 0. 15 0.21 211.51 0.02 10.00 0. 12 0.19 210.97 0.01 10.50 0.11 0. 17 210.62 0.01 11.00 0.10 0.15 210.24 0.01 11.50 0.09 0.13 209.94 0.01 12.00 0.09 0.11 209.75 0.01 12.50 0.08 0.10 209.62 0.01 13.00 0.08 0.09 209.52 0.01 13.50 0.08 0.08 209.47 0.00 14.00 0.08 0.08 209.44 0.00 14.50 0.07 0.07 209.43 0.00 15.00 0.07 0.07 209.41 0.00 15.50 0.07 0.07 209.40 0.00 16.00 0.07 0.07 209.39 0.00 16.50 0.06 0.07 209.38 0.00 17.00 0.06 0.07 209.37 0.00 17.50 0.06 0.06 209.36 0.00 18.00 0.06 0.06 209.35 0.00 18.50 0.06 0.06 209.34 0.00 19.00 0.06 0.06 209.33 0.00 19.50 0.05 0.05 209.31 0.00 20.00 0.05 0.05 209.30 0.00 20.50 0.05 0.05 209.30 0.00 21.00 0.05 0.05 209.30 0.00 21.50 0.05 0.05 209.30 0.00 22.00 0.05 0.05 209.30 0.00 22.50 0.05 0.05 209.29 0.00 23.00 0.05 0.05 209.28 0.00 Phxrte Z2 23.50 0.05 0.05 209.27 0.00 24.00 0.05 0.05 209.27 0.00 24.50 0.02 0.03 209.16 0.00 25.00 0.00 0.01 209.03 0.00 25.50 0.00 0.00 209.01 0.00 Max: 0.37 0.24 12.09 0.02 Initial Pond Volume: 000.001 ac-ft Total Inflow Volume: 000.179 ac-ft Total Outflow Volume: 000.177 ac-ft Total Percolation Volume: 000.000 ac-ft i Final Pond Volume (stage): 000.002 ac-ft Final Pond Volume (calc) : 000.003 ac-ft Difference (error) 000.001 ac-ft Phxrte 22121 • Pond Routing • 04 I I 1 1 Ii M 1 1 1 1 1 1 .i I ' ( I , 1 i Pond Hon In• • 02 1 1 ' ' 1 Fiow(cfs) , , i01 •• • __ I I /Pond Flow Out 0.0 t to I5 ]0 2S 30 { s 1 i • Ali . Time(hours) • E :E'::;:Gr5'sss ` :`as <#;.;;.;:;::.;:.::•:YT3 tT i1'T E'}'Ic Pre S M T W T F S .< �� �:� < :. :%is�i•`:$i>5:�:�:2ri:'• :'•i '�i�i$:�:�i?ii+::'•#5i'?# 1 2 3 4 5 ID: 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 :'• 13 14 15 1 ,, 16 17 18 19•, :>'•>"' 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2 7 28 29 30 Tuesday , September'01, 1998 8:00 8:30 9:00 rte :; it i it Steavel 36fingoli' €82-92 10:00 1S126DC-04600& 04602: 10:30 € .` .............::...............::........:......::...::::.:::..::........::ui.ii:.......::::::::»>::>::::>::::::>:::: :::.>: :::;::; g::.: � �>:�:is ��:�:�:��:�:�:�:�:�:�:���:�:�:�:�:�:�:�:'�'�'�� '�>'�.W ii�'�5:>;;:;;i:;�:� ?�:`:::i.'•>;':>�'+.�s>,"��+;:::�iiSS:�i:� :5�:�i:�:�i:�:;:�: �:�:�i:�:�:�:'�'>�'�'�'�i'� 11:00 11:30 12:00 12:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 9:10AM Friday,August 21, 1998 - - .� , k • ITT I FTIGARD' 41,- df .,,k j _, V^� �M, f S. 5 Z T:'�'.. K,i t.., �,s.. •#. :r..' �. � ;� •- �n..r v,�; '�.. �.`* - � �f4 k .1'V I R I LjO, i 4 ON . � c NOTES k,-,-,A-, R .... . -.. --- - [P ` ' I plica�on ee ng� otes are_:Va Id lor:Six`16l Months] _ �7 t/ NON-RESIDENTIAL Sr PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: -17//40 4 14 4 e /0/10 S STAFF AT PRE-APP.: frl 64 'n / S � V Q 0 APPLICANT: �`-f-GV t c-1 J o Cv4G� U,'r GENT: Phone:I I .6. --2_— R 2- rz-f Phone: ( l PROPERTY LOCATION: 9520 .W G°I/a 1541--e-e- , ADDRESS/GEN.LOCATION: �'q'8-0 qc r IOI 5-c,c) G 6 via 6Q TAX MAP'S]/LOT# S]: / S [ 24 4 . �G 00 c. LAO . —F I JLi/ q 9500 NECESSARY APPLICATION'S]: s714e liO-e•VEIT 6,v/.e Of Li PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: 13 k i(((a 2. `-I S i/ ie kl-d cku 14 bilo,, V-0 Yle Q ..1G} i1i--)/i42.0K, O 'ELI.((/t COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: (:o o wu teve- a� v.oE /Lia / (6----P_) ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: C 0 wt (Ai 2,�ck ( Pd P,2s*siouq/f 6. —D°) CJ.T.AREA a- FACILITATOR: Ste- L-') PHONE: [503] ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT-SIZE: G0✓sq. ft. Average lot width: ` ft. Maximum building height: L-1.5 ft. Setbacks: Front I. ., ft. I Side 44 ft. Rear it, .1, ft. Corner H/a ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: 5 % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: /S %. [Refer to Code Section 18. 5 Y 1 - p 4..f u5 !off- �cviceH,l.� 4 sJ (/'ea v �1t j� ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREME TS 4�f41-"44 C t , J MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 2 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition m t have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15- foot wide access easement. \ The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL T EXCEED 2% TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1i,t times the minimum to size of the applicable zoning district. [Refer to Code Section 18.164.060-Lots) CITY OF TICARD Pre-Ant icatlon Conference Notes Page 1 01 10 MON-Mosldootlsl lullcttloa/ploiola0 Division Soctlao ■ SPECIAL SETBACKS , 4/? > STREETS: ` t) feet from the centerline of / . > ESTABLISHED AREAS: k,� feet from > LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: ,/il feet, along the site's boundary. > FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YA D SETBACK. [Refer to Code Section and 18.961 SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS - Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided that: > A maximum building floor area to site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; > All actual building setbacks will be at least half (1/2) of the building's height; and > The structure will not abut a residential ned district. [Refer to Code Section 18.98.0201 4r 6% 0P loo. 7-04 °rte Vi`4O 'Ail l( e-- J 1 s wee err yodel/1 . t/� Jwicw a1/.Wei PARKING AND ACCESS IIv'= • i x t. 1-1 sr«5 per-- V oo w%. REQUIRED parking for this type of use: 4 S C� ay.- .eaCL, V`ao "2-Li c,u`l,�1un, Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): `2. o-( f',?-11..f.. SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: I -. cte,e_for 42vev 2- 41.,4110y,2eS Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): `Z-2Y'odce ( ad'or. 17mss-')7 /.�0ul,,,,�tty /y bP r,col iv NO MORE THAN 40% of required spaces may be designated and/or dimensioned as compact spaces. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: > Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 8 inches x 18 feet. > Compact parking space dimensions: 8 feet x 15 feet. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3) feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. (Refer to Code Section 18.106.0201 Handicapped Parking: > All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. > BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Bicycle parking spaces shall be provided on the basis of one space for every fifteen (15) required vehicular parking spaces. T Minimum number of accesses: 01.442-- Minimum access width: -3Q . Minimum pavement width: 2-4 ' All driveways and parking areas, exc pt for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: 1/j 0 . (Refer to Code Section 18.106 an 18.1081 CITY OF TMGAU Pre-Appncatlon Conference Notes Page 2 of 10 11111-I ssl/eutlalpullcatleu/MeiuIe/Mile'Sectlee r --S WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS WALKWAYS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and ■ industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. [Refer to Code Section 18.108.050] LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be ' provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City `I Engineer. (Refer to Code Section 18.106.070-0901 / CLEARS VISION AREA The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE AND EIGHT FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification. [Refer to Code Section 18.1021 BUFFERING AND SCHENANG In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the- ode in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen tre and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obsc ing screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Co . The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Add! ional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Co [Refer to Code Chapter 18.100] The REQUIRED BUFFER WIDTHS whlc are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: feet along north boundary, feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary.\ feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENINC•JS REQUIRED ALONG: . LANDSCAPING STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must , be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised planters. For detailed information on design requirements for parking areas and accesses. � (Refer to Code Chapters 18.100,18.106 and 18.1081 CITY OFT16ARO Pre-Appflcation Conference Notes Page 3 of 11 Mtl Hasid aleaIA rpllcetlee/rlaaaligOM:laoSectloa SIGNS SIGN PERMITS UST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guideli es 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 pro ivdes\ EGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT UE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROU D. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference ased on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive lands areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.84 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. (Refer to Code Section 18.841 STEEP SLOPES When STEE" SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted whic .ddresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.84.040.:. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific r: ommendations for achieving the requirements of 18.84.040.B.2 and 18.84.040.B.3. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY LUSAI BUFFER STANDARDS,R&0 96-44 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 25-FEET-WIDE, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries of the sensitive area, except where approval has been granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an area of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable encroachment shall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the length of the vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in width. In any case, the average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or othe activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the getated corridor, except as allowed below: > A GRAVEL WALKWAY OR BIKE PATH, NOT EXCEEDING 8 FEET IN WIDTH. If the walkway or bike path is paved, then the vegetated corridor must be widened by the width to the path. A paved or gravel walkway or bike path may no be constructed closer than 10 feet from the boundary of the sensitive area, unless approve by the Agency or City. Walkways and bike paths shall be constructed so as to minimize distu ance to existing vegetation; and CITY(IMAM] Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 10 11011-#esldeutlaI RpplIcetlsU►tecolog OlvIslos Section > WATER QUALITY FACILITIES r ay encroach into the vegetated corridor a maximum of 10 feet with the approval of the Agency or City. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. (Refer to R&0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3,Design for SWM) WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY DISTRICT The WATER RESOURCES '(WR) OVERLAY DISTRICT implements the policies of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and is intended to resolve conflicts between development and conservation of significant wetlands, str(Iv and riparian corridors identified in the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. Specifi ally, this chapter allows reasonable economic use of property while establishing clear and objet e_ standards to: protect significant wetlands and streams; limit development in designated riparian orridors; maintain and enhance water quality; maximize flood storage capacity; preserve native plan cover; minimize streambank erosion; maintain and enhance fish and wildlife habitats; and conse e scenic, recreational and educational values of water resource areas. Safe Harbor: The WR OVERLAY DISTRICT ALSO MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 (Natural Resources) and the "safe harbor" provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660, Division 23). These provisions require that "significant" wetlands and riparian corridors be mapped and protected. The Tualatin River, which is also a "fish-bearing stream," has an average annual flow of more than 1000 cfs. Major Streams: Streams which are mapped as "FISH-BEARIN STREAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry and have an average annual flow less than 100 cubic feet per second (cfs). 7 Major streams in Tigard include FANNO CREEK, ASH CREEK (EXCEPT THE NORTH FORK AND OTHER TRIBUTARY CREEKS) AND BALL CREEK. Minor Streams: Streams which are NOT "FISH-BEARING STREAMS" according to Oregon Department of Forestry maps . Minor streams in Tigard include Summer Creek, Derry Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and certain short tributaries of the Tualatin River. Riparian Setback Area: This AREA IS MEASURED HORIZONTALLY FRO ND PARALLEL TO MAJOR STREAM OR TUALATIN RIVER TOP-OF-BANKS, OR THE EDGE OF AN ASSOCIATED WETLAND, whichever is greater. The riparian setback is the same as the "ri arian corridor boundary" in OAR 660-23- 090(1)(d). ➢ The standard TUALATIN RIVER RIPARIAN SE ACK IS 75 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. The MAJOR STREAMS RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 50 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. ISOLATED WETLANDS AND MINOR STREAMS (incl ing adjacent wetlands) have no riparian setback; however, a 25-foot "water quality buffer" is required under Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) standards adopted and administered by the ity of Tigard. (Refer to Code Section 18.85.010] cm of TIGARO Pre-aapucanon conference Notes Page 5 of u NUNaullaatlal ipolleatlaa/Plaaalou UM loa Sectloa Riparian Setback Reductions The DIRECTOR MAY APPROVE A SITE-SPECIFIC REDUCTION OF THE TUALATIN RIVER OR ANY MAJOR STREAM RIPARIAN SETBACK BY AS MUCH AS 50% to allow the placement of structures or impervious surfacectherwise prohibited by this chapter, provided that equal or better protection for identified major stream resources is ensured through streambank restoration and/or enhancement of riparian vegetation in preserved portions of the riparian setback area. Eligibility for Riparian Setback in Disturbed Areas. TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A RIPARIAN S TBACK REDUCTION, the applicant must demonstrate that the riparian corridor was substantially disturbed at the time this regulation was adopted. This determination must be based on the Vegetation Study required by Section 18.85.050.0 that demonstrates all of the following: • Native plant species currently cover less than 80%of the on-site riparian corridor area; • The tree canopy currently covers ss than 50% of the on-site riparian corridor and healthy trees have not been removed from he on-site riparian setback area for the last five years; • That vegetation was not removed ontrary to the provisions of Section 18.85.050 regulating removal of native plant species; • That there will be no infringement into the 100-year floodplain; and The average slope of the riparian area is not greater than 20%. (Refer to Code Section 18.85.1001 TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS A TREE PAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, major partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: • Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City; • Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.150.070.D. according to the following standards: Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D; • Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D; • 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 Pro-Auppcatlon Conference Notes Page 6 of 11 MOM-iesldutlal AaallcatlsUrlaulaa OM:Iee Section • 1\ MITIGATION REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: > A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: ➢ The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. > 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 Ci for its costs in performing such tree replacement. 4,42a1,s •#-., #0 " a�I,ivc �^e, / ,� (Refer to Code Section 18.150.010(Dl s ,s A, / gy m : (NARRATIVE 4--a !o,e__ 07."°-'iii-i , The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE whic provides rovides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. [Refer to Code Section 18.32] WG A1J O: .l5c J c+r Lfs tAq. 6L-1 CODE SECTIONS �-- / — 18.80 _ 18.92 .21102 J l._ 1 .116 18.150 — 18.84 18.96 (/1$ /1 106 . 8.120 18.160 18.85 _ 1 :98 j/ 08 _ 18.130 181-62 18.88 ,/18.100 18.114 18.134 V 18.164 IMPACT STUDY As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. ` [Refer to Code Chapter 18.32,Section.050) _� CITY OFTIGARO Pre-AppicatIon Conference Notes Page]WO MOM-tuIdutlalAullcatlai/Mudu,IllNslou Sactlaa 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 APPROPRIATE CIT FACILITATOR AND THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE(S) of their proposal. A minimum of 2 weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION PRIOR TO SUBMITTIUG A. SUBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicant's are required to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyor's Office in order to approvaVreservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. (County Surveyor's Office: 503-648-8884) ( BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE ;� DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME IN WHICH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED.) RECYCLING — --- Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY with Pride Disposal's vehicles. CONTACT PERSON: Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal at (503) 625-6177. ' (Refer to Code Section 18.116) i CITY OF T1GARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 10 NDM-I4111dsiUal RpaticaUaa/Tlaaatea OtN:foa SacUoo ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: PROCEDURE 1- Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other week days. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. One (1), 81/2" x 11" map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Division will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-20 day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard Pia uu)tiqq (/(1,441 1c,-, . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. CITY OF TIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 10 NONa•sldsutlsl iAOIIcatlsu/Planning Division Section 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: CITY OFTIGARD PLANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP.MEETING PHONE 15031639-4111 FAX: 15031 684-7297 E-MAIL (staff's first name)©Ci.tigard.or.us 0:11e0114attYVtuton4nepp-c. $t Unla rtn0 Soctlon:masters4nopp-C.enp1 Opdttid: 213-11iy-911 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 10 of 10 NON-IssIdeatlal Pjpllwtlae/?Iannfp0 OMslon Section CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ., APPLICATION CHECKLIST „ tj�111 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. Staff: 141 ig fe 2 te Date: ct q 1APPLICATION & RELATED DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE J MARKED ITEMS 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-2-1-' E) Filing Fee $ l(3R.s4dm t./4(we o-R- wc•-1C I SITE-SPECIFIC MAP(S)/PLAN(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE J MARKED ITEMS A) Site Information showing: No. of Copies --243 1. Vicinity map 2. Site size & dimensions tz/ 3. Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10%) 4. Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds of 5. Locations of natural hazard areas including: 0 (a) Floodplain areas 0 (b) Slopes in excess of 25% 0 (c) Unstable ground O (d) Areas with high seasonal water table C (e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential 0 (f) Areas having severely weak foundation soils 0 6. Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Map Inventory including: 0 (a) Wildlife habitats 0 (b) Wetlands 0 7. Other site features: (a) Rock outcroppings 0 (b) Trees with 6" + caliper measured 4 feet from ground level 0 8. Location of existing structures and their uses 9. Location and type of on and off-site noise sources 10. Location of existing utilities and easements 11 . Location of existing dedicated right-of-ways LAND USE APPLICATION J UST PAGE 1 OF 5 B) Site Development Plan Indicating: No. of Copies ,2-4—;) 1 . The proposed site and surrounding properties ®f� 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 (b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site ml (c) Alternative routes of dead end or proposed streets that require future extension he • � 4. The location and dimension of: (a) Entrances and exits on the site (b) Parking and circulation areas (c) Loading and services area p� (d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation (e) Outdoor common areas ❑ / (f) Above ground utilities 5. The location, dimensions & setback distances of all: (a) Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities, and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet of the site t✓ (b) Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements / on the site ttff � 6. Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions 7. Sanitary sewer facilities d/ 8. The location areas to be landscaped 9. The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques 10. The location of mailboxes 11 . The location of all structures and their orientation / 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements c/ C) Grading Plan Indicating: No. of Copies 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 (b) Slope ratios (c) Soil stabilization proposal(s) (d) Approximate time of year for the proposed site development 2. A statement from a registered engineer supported by data factual substantiating: (a) Subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering report (b) The validity of sanitary sewer and storm drainage service proposals (c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated qr/ LAND USE APPLICATION/LIST PAGE 2 OF 5 D) Architectural Dray gs Indicating: No. of Copies _2:a 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 -20 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 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 5. Landscape narrative which also addresses: (a) Soil conditions (b) Erosion control measures that will be used F) Sin Dra m Sign drawings hall be submitted in accordance with Chapter 18.114 ❑ of the Code a of the Site Development Review or prior to obtaining a Building Permit to onstruct a sign. G) Traffic Generation Estimate: ❑ H) Prelimina Partitio of Line Ad'ustment Ma. Indicatin_: No. of Copies 1. The owner of the subject parcel ❑ 2. The owner's au orized agent ❑ 3. The map scale (0 0,50,100 or 200 feet-1) inch north arrow and date ❑ 4. Description of •.rcel location and boundaries ❑ 5. Location, width a • names of streets, easements and other public ways within and adja•-nt to the parcel ❑ 6. Location of all perman-nt buildings on and within 25 feet of all property lines ❑ 7. Location and width o all water courses ❑ 8. Location of any tree within 6" or greater caliper at 4 feet above ground level ❑ 9. All slopes greater than % ❑ 10. Location of existing utilitie .nd utility easements ❑ 11. For major land partition whic, creates a public street: (a) The proposed right-of-wa location and width ❑ (b) A scaled cross-section of e proposed street plus any reserve strip ❑ 12. Any applicable deed restrictions ❑ 13. Evidence that land partition will no •reclude efficient future land division where applicable ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION/UST PAGE 3 OF 3 I) Subdivision Prelim .-Yo Plat Map and Data Indicating: No. of Copies 1 . Scale equaling 30 50,100 or 200 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per sheet ❑ 2. The proposed n me of the subdivision ❑ 3. Vicinity map s owing property's relationship to arterial and collector street ❑ 4. Names, addres s and telephone numbers of the owner, developer, engineer, surveyec,and designer (as applicable) ❑ 5. Date of application , ❑ 6. Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided ❑ 7. Names of adjacent subdivision or names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of u -subdivided land ❑ 8. Contour lines related o a City-established benchmark at 2-foot intervals for 0-10% grades gr ter than 10% ❑ 9. The purpose, locati n, type and size of all the following (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): (a) Public and pri ate right-of-ways and easements ❑ (b) Public and priv e sanitary and storm sewer lines ❑ (c) Domestic water ma' including fire hydrants ❑ (d) Major power telephon transmission lines (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ (e) Watercourses ❑ (f) Deed reservations fo parks, open spaces, pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ 10. Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated on the plans ❑ 1 1 . Plan of the proposed w er distribution system, showing pipe sizes and the location of valves and 're hydrants ❑ 12. Approximate centerline proles showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions r a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision ❑ 13. Scaled cross sections of pr posed street right-of-way(s) ❑ 14. The location of all areas s bject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ 15. Location, width & directio of flow of all water courses & drainage-ways ❑ 16. The proposed lot configurati s, 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 measured at 4 feet above ground level, and the location of proposed tree plantings ❑ 18. The existing uses of the property, including the location of all structures and the present uses of the structures, and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting ❑ 19. Supplemental information including: (a) Proposed deed restrictions (if anK ❑ (b) Proof of property ownership ❑ (c) A proposed plan for provision of sub ivision improvements ❑ 20. Existing natural features including rock outcroppi s, wetlands & marsh areas ❑ 21 . If any of the foregoing information cannot pra ticably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application ❑ LANG USE APPLICATION I LIST PACE 4 OF 5 J) Solar Access C lations: 0 K) Other Information No. of Copies c7 A -; --/ m'`1lt_ a'ftc I , .� J/5-Gcl s s ✓'e, • . Yre61/oel 144 ea5(141 VI. ¢d ` ColAS'h-u�. t, _J h:Vogin\patty\mastersVtid ist.mst May 23,1995 LAND USE APPLICATION J LIST PAGE 5 OF 5 • PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ➢ ENGINEERING SECTION Q CommuunitygDevelopment Shaping A Better Community PUBLIC FACILITIES iucoi ` z The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: (✓( cjk3, 4L 12D• to 4C7 feet from centerline. S �AS►+� ( ) to feet from centerline. ( ) to feet from centerline. • ( ) to feet from centerline. Street improvements: v kw. co. -) (v)� >�i -�i�x- street improvements MI be necessary along GRr to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 6 Engineering Department Section ( •; ; stre( iprovements will be necessary alor _ S1O Cvr2a"— ST• to include: LK I i feet of pavement F12-w-i■ Sc&-i-k, [— oncrete curb [ torm sewers and other underground utilities -foot concrete sidewalk street trees I7t4t-reet signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ( ) street improvements will be necessary along to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ( ) _ street improvements will be necessary along to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk • street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ( v,)' Section 18.164.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW � -�' (2-9 s ue- Sc. . Prior to , the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 6 Engineering Department Section . In,some cases, where stre iprovements or other necessary p .c improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to execute a non-remonstrance agreement which waives the property owner's right to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district. The following street improvements may be eligible for such an agreement: (1.) (2.) Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) inch line which is located v-4 L_.z,f„ s, . Ph;b ,,, +� 5�. . The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to J&.€ “- Water Supply: The J1 `�"I �A�:e_ f 57. - Phone:(503) -3"I provides public water service in the area of this.site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (Contact: Gene Birchill, (503) 526-2469) provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. A downstream analysis will also likely be necessary to determine if runoff from the proposed development will cause adverse impacts to the existing storm system downstream of the site. `aif>jn�t c J 4s-ibe. ANAL-{S0> AA) s-c4-4 ∎ �i��tr.tAl�� i l Ft�- /VP/a-VAL_ Iti1Tr1 - L' s AFT' 4. `` Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 6 Engineering Department Section - to pay a fee in-lieu of con, sting an on-site facility provided ific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of new impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $210. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ( ■-) Construction of an on-site water quality facility. ( ) Payment of the fee in-lieu. Other Comments: All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. LT A 77, kAMS 0-51 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. II PERMITS Engineering Department Permits: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a permit from the Engineering Department. There are two types of permits issued by Engineering, as follows: Street Opening Permit (SOP). This permit covers relatively minor work in a public right-of-way or easement, such as sidewalk and driveway installation or repair, and service connections to main utility lines. This work may involve open trench work within the street. The permittee must submit a plan of the proposed work for review and approval. The cost of this type of permit is calculated as 4% of the cost of the work and is payable prior to issuance of the permit. In addition, the permittee will be required to post a bond or similar financial security for the work. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 6 Engineering Department Section • Compliance Agreen (CAP). This permit covers morE. tensive work such as main utility line extensions, street improvements, etc. In subdivisions, this type of permit also covers all g") grading and private utility work. Plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The cost of this permit is also calculated as 4% of the cost of the improvements, based on the design engineer's estimate, and is payable prior to issuance of the approved plan. The permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security, and execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. Prior to City acceptance of any permitted work, and prior to release of work assurance bond(s), the work shall be deemed complete and satisfactory by the City in writing. The permittee is responsible for the work until such time written City acceptance of the work is posted. NOTE: If an Engineering Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Engineering Department Section .GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS HI JBDIVISIONS 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: • r-— 1� zg lqa ENGINEERING DEP RTMENT STAFF Phone: [5031639-4171 Fax [5031684-7297 h\patty\masters\preapp.eny (Master section:preapp-r.mst) 01-Sept-98 CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 Engineering Department Section • PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES r ENGINEERING SECTION Ci y of Tigard,( tt Oregon [t SIumirui51 Better Community `SL 2Le i)C PUBLIC FACILITIES - 4 e o The purpose of the pre-application conference is to: {� `iie° Z C/1-1°E■u1K IN..i• ADMTt.,J 7 (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 be 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 protection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public. (1 .) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code: or- (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for .-� 5v`1 Q,Q, to – — -- feet from cen o,-1..,=, T/146(44•c-0 Atek )_ to feet from center':• ( )_ _ to feet from centerline. Street improvements. ( pAeXtAA__ street improvements be necessary along G -� c- 14 ' Cc. ' ) street improvements will be necessary along ( ) Street improvements on shall include feet of pavement from centerline, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of uti:Ity wires (a fee may be collected if determined appropriate by the Engineering Departmenv i a five-foot wide sidewalk (sidewalks may be required to be wider on arterials or major collector streets, or in the Central Business District), necessary street signs and traffic control devices. streetlights, and a two year streetlighting fee. ( ) Street improvements on shall include feet of pavement from centerline, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 5 Engineering Department Section utility wires (a fee r be collected if determined approp 3 by the Engineering Department). a five-foot wide sidewalk (sidewalks may be required to be wider on arterials or major collector streets, or in the Central Business District). necessary street signs and traffic control devices. streetlights, and a two year streetlighting fee. ✓� Section 18. 164. 120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is proposed. it is equal to 3 27 50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. Thee are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW j . Prior to oco-PANS`{ , the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to execute a non-remonstrance agreement which waives the property owner's right to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district. The following street improvements may be eligible for such an agreement: ( 1 .) — —---- — --— __ (2.1 Pe•estrianwa s•keways: Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) inch line which is located in (--6w5T �. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to C�›.*A .-r Ntw►?1 )•11 -vim_-- Water Supply: r The � to lip c-f _ Water District - Phone:(503) t -331 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 Conference Notes Page 2 of 5 C ngineenng Oeoartment Section Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (Contact: Gene Birchill. (503) 526-2469) provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. A downstream analysis will also likely be necessary to determine if runoff from the proposed development will cause adverse impacts to the existing storm system downstream of the site. StA.Mtr R? l /41,44,-195 AID S7a�M Aa+4n.�►c{, �t.a.J f"2= '4932a`n4c" `'`4iJ4 LA t/Sc A9A-lLt1 .! . 1 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. —*pm_ cat . Vow s t-T 1.0 . act 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 be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that the:, !' require: ( Construction of an on-site water quality facility. ( ) Payment of the fee in-lieu. CITY OF TIGARO Pre-Apnlication Conference Notes Page 3 of 5 toglneering Department Section • ' -TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990 Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee ITIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00 PERMITS Engineering Department Permits: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a permit from the Engineering Department. There are two types of permits issued by Engineering, as follows: Street Opening Permit (SOP). This permit covers relatively minor work in a public right-of-way or easement, such as sidewalk and driveway installation or repair. and service connections to main utility lines. This work may involve open trench work within the street. The permittee must submit a plan of the proposed work for review and approval. The cost of this type of permit is calculated as 4°%0 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''0 of the cost of the improvements, based on the design engineer's estimate. and is payable prior to issuance of the approved plan. The permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security, and execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. Prior to City acceptance of any permitted work. and prior to release of work assurance bond(s). the work shall be deemed complete and satisfactory by the City in .v:sting. The perrnittee is responsible for the work until such time written City acceptance of the work is posted. NOTE: If an Engineering Permit is required, the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171 , ext. 304. CITY OF TIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 5 Engineering Oenartment Section Site Improvement ..rmit (SIT). This permit is generc...., 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: ►_� I/ h e ENGINEERING DEPA' MENT STAFF Phone: 15031639-4171 Fax: 15031684-7297 h:\patty\masters\preapp.eng (Master section:preapp-r.mst) 18-Nov-97 CITY OF TIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 5 Engineering Department Section APPLICATION FOR PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE 1. PROJECT PROPOSAL: Expansion of existing Phoenix Inn hotel at NE corner of SW Locust Street and SW Greenburg Road by the addition of 24 units on adjacent property now being acquired. 2. PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: The adjacent property now being acquired for the proposed addition consists of approximately 17,900 square feet of land located adjacent to, and north of,the existing Phoenix Inn hotel. Description is of a part of Lot 6,Block C, Lehman Acre Tract, known as tax lots 4600 and 4602. The expansion property is currently improved with two(2) buildings—one is a residential rental, and the other is an insurance agency office. Both buildings will be demolished to make way for the addition. 3. APPLICANT: VIP's Motor Inns, Inc. Attn: Steven V. Johnson 29757 SW Boones Ferry Rd. Wilsonville, OR 97070 Telephone (503) 682-9284 Fax (503) 682-9257 4. CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER: Carla S. Boivin and James D. Huegli C/O James D. Huegli 790 Benjamin Franklin Plaza 1 SW Columbia Portland, OR 97258 Telephone (503) 274-0232 Fax (503) 274-0236 *Property owner is under contract to sell the subject property to applicant. 5. SITE PLAN AND SURVEY: See attached. /S/a (a – 0 96 60 /S/, 4Lc - .096,002 iltiz I (1 -.{. ��w*,∎ �∎N.%N. % %�� . �����������. ' MS's%%%%% r i dvW • £0 ZS 11 cent A 9s 's ,041 061 )61 to 6 m �vyr Z069,'S ONb ,OCI ,6'6si91 a,92 06111 "N ,91.96 a *-Itr6F 0018 t'Of ,91'96 Im ml I. VP� 91'96 Im C'O u m ro 09 .''Pr" 0006 3 ••V2 • 0o OO t ,t'O, I ,91'96 0 , 9F' Sts or• 006b 108b ,QI'96 ,9196 sez N / b r, 0 • • r ▪ , a A / / fv 'd 6. �d ib' err tfr• w / _ 008b IOI.b OOLV / — r 91'06 Ale S 09b'r9' F1 IOE /vie? e O09b 9 a i • or it V'Af 00bfl 005b ,9I'96 ,9i'96 q Ie / g •3y9Z• 1094 ev s*• / III 6PI61.26 031V0VA—? / Y iY V 03 °tY1 1I'3 o M`J ,C 61 (09911"°N'S J) ,91'66 ,91'91 ,O 926 N / / 0 6 9 1 'N10311 / G I • THIS MAP IS FURNISH—.)AS A CONVENIENCE IN LOCATING PROPERi . .• D THE COMPANY ASSUMES NO LIABILITY FOR ANY VARIATIONS AS MAY BE DISCLOSED BY ACTUAL SURVEY I; irst z e-ic F: Title Insurance company of are -or _,v_ : =1411V1"1"._ An assumeo Dus,ness name c'TITLE INSUAANCa COMPANY 0:JRE.ON /� 1700 E.W. FOURTH AVENUE. PORTLAND. ORS7201-5512 (5031 222-3651 MAP 1S1W26DC • / - %--r- Ic' rCSi — - _--I I 86 I 67.- ne=' e S. 89"55 E. / TERM. 850 _ a.: �/ / I L . i MAN ST. O I910.3' ? 3 9, Z`_5.2 3302 5301 3200 3100 / .3 .8Ac. . 8Ax. 1.38.4:. .30 ac. / 5300 / 2.2OAc. 3o / / 45 , s / 7 7 / / . m C^i 0;m V 0 ref ctx :VI — — 2 B 2.B' - _ ... 19..3' m 3300 13300 D 3700 a -39 At. .38 4.^.. 4.74z. C _ (CS.No.1 l66d0) L, o �� 4 i 2 �/ / F`?;. / `S0' 3 2 6.0' 95.15' 95.15' 190.3' / ` I IS4 BEGIN. 1 6 3 0 �•g C.W 2 C.R. 1630 CORAL ST. 1 N .r+ N. B9� / - 'it—vmar 92-19149 96.15' 95.15' I 95.15' l5.t5' I 40.3'. 130' / .9 a 4500 Id400 / ^ 4601 .38 Ac 7'7,gc. 4200 • 4100 / m .29A:. $ i 55 AC. I •o .::. -/ I I 7- / - / v e o� �9 .,l to 00 c 1T-E. Orr 9 4 ss E_Y. 5�•I-‘'p 1 i! tirtdv� 4 JS ! C � ll u U l Cia � I I ..,, 187. 95.15' 95.15' 1160 i 1 • 40.3 i 150' re 47'03 <<OI f i I i I ` 3 / eV . ;8 I 4-0O < c 47 Ac 1 .30 At .384c 5000 15100 5101 •/ <; _ c. !,ii N w .384x. .39Ac. .38Ac of 1 l I ■4.l S-7-, V C fi0 _I — e A I 0 :; P 'o C4J l)4 I I 0 ti 1 .� 3 N tL n t0 1 �' w u � � � S0 U�t� 1 ;3 . 245.01 95.15' 1.a31 95.i.f' t9C:3' T S W i 4. STREET ------ :I �..._ ..anima�M., + �`, x2kU.8 ... r X00 .---.--- . X eii - )14 1 pr."... . . , ,,, ,......, -....., » I 1 1 ,.( 210.9 .Y / / ,- / 0 1 o ) �� O r iii i —:,` • .� r 4 r A A. 0 �_ z, \ / ,CP9 ille"V ^ -� CB 207.5 x Ceisi 207." O7 2 1 . , 205.5x PAVE D A co co co j I t 1 to-miimagne goesposp:wigiampxamspisps. • o x 20 202.9 PARKIN(', 1 / !� KCB Q IA n x rs1 .7 I APPLICATION FOR PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE 1. APPLICANT: VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. Attn: Steven V.Johnson 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville,OR 97070 Telephone: (503) 682-9284 Fax: (503) 682-9257 2. PROPOSED USE/PROTECT PROPOSAL: The Applicant is owner and operator of the existing Phoenix Inn hotel located at 9575 SW Locust Street, Tigard,OR 97223. The existing facility consists of 56 guest units. The Applicant's proposal is to expand the existing Phoenix Inn by the addition of 48 new and additional units on adjacent properties now being acquired to the north of the existing Phoenix Inn. 3. SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: The project involves expansion on two separate properties adjacent to the existing Phoenix Inn. The first adjacent property (Parcel #1) consists of approximately 17,900 square feet of land located adjacent to, and north of,the existing Phoenix Inn. A description of Parcel #1 is "Part of Lot 6, Block C,Lehman Acre Tract, Tax Lots 4600 and 4602 aka 1S126DC-04602 and 04600." Parcel #1 is currently improved with two buildings,one is a residential rental,and the other is an insurance agency office. Both buildings will be demolished to make way for the expansion. The second adjacent property (Parcel #2) consists of approximately 16,553 square feet located adjacent to, and northeast of, the existing Phoenix Inn hotel. A description of Parcel #2 is "West one-half of Lot 7, Block C, Lehman Acre Tract,Tax Lot 4500 aka 1S126DC-04500. Parcel #2 is currently improved with one single family residential dwelling. This building will be demolished to make way for the addition. The building improvements for the expansion will be physically located on Parcel #1,while all parking for the expansion will be located on Parcel #2. 4. CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER: Parcel #1: Carla S. Boivin and James D. Huegli c/o James D. Huegli 790 Benjamin Franklin Plaza 1 SW Columbia Portland, OR 97258 Telephone: (503) 274-0232 Fax: (503) 274-0236 *Property owner is under contract to sell the subject property to Applicant. Parcel #2: Lillian Drinkard c/o Ruth Timmins The Equity Group Inc. 6245 SW Capitol Highway Portland, OR 97201 Telephone: (503) 245-6400 Fax: (503) 244-8444 5. SITE PLAN AND SURVEY: See attached. • THIS MA0 IS FURNIS! \S A CONVENIENCE IN LOCATING PROPERT D THE COMPANY ASSUMES NO LIABILI?I FOR ANY VARIATIONS AS MAY BE DISCLOSED _. ACTUAL SURVEY is I: rst American Title Insurance company of Gregor_ —r.— An assumeo Dusmiss name o'TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Or 3REGO'" • 1700 E.W. FOURTH AVENUE. PORTLAND, OR 57201-5512 II. (503) 222-3651 If MAP 1S1W26DC Ice i 86 I 677 IIB_' t?E / / S. 59°53 E. 1 f /TERM. 850 • s�-o � '� L 1 R� A[�'� • I / o E `i111trn ST. i of r / a 255.2' 1910.3' ?9J 3302 3301 3200 3100 / .38Ac. .584:. 38 =9A:. of 3300 - / 2.20Ac. / o 30 ^ . / 45 5 f / / b1w . V orn �Vy /,� 2 8 2.8' 198.2' e� & ;,500 3x00 D 3700 . / M •39 Ac. .3B A: �V i 434:. 57(.34.: (CS.Nc.116ao) e,f 4 = 3 ti of/ a°' 3 2 6.0' 9 6.15' 9 5.15' 1 9 0.3' / A. I / 44 BEGIN. 1 6 3 0 t '0'� aW 2 c.R. 1630 COR i1. ST.`" N. 89° �V1 '�vASAT3D 92-1914 95.15' 1 95.13' 95.15' I 40.3'. 150' 9 4300 4400 ! 4200 ; 4100 P4001 .3B T7Ac. .55`° 2°A. m A,1 / " GtL ., 4000 $ g / 244c. 3o, 79 (104iN�iI1G I ,ni 197.5f jir 95.15' t 95.15' I l r 410.3 i ISO'1190 r I e 4707 4701 4800 1 4801 :4900 ( 5100 J 5101 cv N. 4� 47 Ac I .30 Ac i 3B,Cc I 5000 / r 44 Ac. .0 N .38A:. .39Ac. .38 A: 10 1 1 U ei STI -_ 60 _ of at �-: 'PAGE %k = / N. 3 L ti 1� Tzn l := '..-71/ .. i N46l ! 35 - 245.0 I 95.15' u m 95.1'' — I9C:3'• •z _ .\ 1 \ � 7 1 1 %V n 11 "'� E.- _ N/1'/',' ����������,�'lr�������������v�c=.lam.?^.�'�n � 1 � � � - � � --- - - Pre-Apps CD Meetings) s S M T W T F S <' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Thursday ursda October 29, 1998 8:00 • 8:30 9.00 lfl' ~ Gilt11e1 •: C . .n., 2s3 8AA...`....: 9:30 10:00 *Tim Roth 639-2529($DR)2S1 "IAA 8300 10:30 11:00 Steve JQhrsOn - Phoenix )nn 9575 SW Locust SIR 682-9284 Mark 11:30 12:00 12:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 • 5:00 5:30 6:00 10:05AM Monday,October 26, 1998 .,...............-,.-",.,' ' 1,1r -7 ''' ,,,,i-;7'W...A ',,'" • - • •''•• — --- . .,...„ ....„ . . ... . . ‘1,., -..,--: '. • ''• . ......- - ,. ,... :,-. .... .. .. ., . . . .) • ' • i • ;,,.i , ,.. ;,-4•4.4....1 ....".... ^'$ v. .0110 5 ii .rd . . , • '%,. . , '• . . ... L. ■ <, 7, ... . . ,.a li ' 4 0 ;I-,. . ..- - - ----- - •---'-'-'t i...,„ .... , # +:.:', ‘,.. -....k dr - •••. . Mii0 if : Or . 41 •-•.'; .. . 1 • i•:,, ''''' II/ °,4 i,.•'' '.4.' .. .... ,0•40,•••'1'0',.'.1k' .. , c .• 4.•• ..,....„.......„:„... ..t V.,' • ',,,,,::Sr.f.':,.',,',',. '4411k, . i:....., , ,. ,,,,,,....n,F.,:=4,,:::::::::4$041:1, 'S ai;,7.',i,'Pr' ':' ....:-'1,Z:::A16,,:„:.„.lia : off 04• 2.:-:.„..1:1•shgrjt,,...,.....' , , • --. -04 ,,,••••,-,.e.-!..40,,•:0'..".70s-i,...0i,:o•••••,•.:.,7:7" ' .' . '' g". - .- 441,1r-,!-• , „' , ::::„',- ::: ; , , ..... .., . ..„„........., -,...„..„ .-„ . . . -'-i.e, , • , - ON , „.....„. ,'. . --, a,„...,.„ . . . ',• ..„,' . .„.. ..,, ,.,...„.,.., ••'?..! 7' .'4, I . . t -vc . • ' ., .. NB .,... — .. .... . , : % i ,•• , .,•.. ... ' ,...:,...„ . ....,... . • ... . ,........ , ,.... .„ , ...:„.... . • . , „,...:„.. . .. . , ..... ••,,,,,,,,,, - „, • • . ..„. ,. ..:: :....., .... :. . .„:.. s ,...,. . . .. -... . . ., . . .., 1 .... i 1 .......s.... .-.,. , NO . I -- ..3 ,.„..„--„,..... , -411* ' N"...•••-•"... 'A NO°....... . - - ''''' .......„ .. .' .4, N. „4 .4.. VP, i ,‘..,„:" ' •"'• ' _,..„ .. .'k...,;;.3..-,..,,,N4.:;47....N.,.N.N.=-.....'=,54',-..e."...f.-1:.::.4.N.,....24•244:"'. ••..t.:.,:-.P.--.'-,. '......-' l'.......' it .M ,t -0 .,,ttill'it..k. .,. ,.,.714r1., ,, , ..40 . '114.111111111#,, . N....:.;.,.,r*,.....N.,..N.k.....t.4...,....,...4.**,, -. ,..- . ..m., * --- - .-."'"4- 1 ...." :::: '',c„..4k.U.§.: ,.; ••■• „.4 444; r.-...0.4 . ..... ,: ,:. .. ,..4.14,'-- 44, •' v5, . „.i.i.,, 1!4:4.-:-. 7;;•4'21 ''•---7,:',-; .„.. 1 1:1- 7 "f°7•.';''f't'''),5..' kl*:,1; "...P.,-.4" t ,4,i-J,`.:A•4„,,,!`j,i:1,,,,,,,, „:','•0''',.! -"A'V4i"":',,,,,-4'=•rtf .••••: .'..,'''..,...:. :•••-• "•-•••••••: -•:—,.- ---- '';:!'.:::.'.. .1`.!0.-trli',1'.*Z10-''''' '''''''"?.!'"'-''.i''''' •, ..1.:;•!:::-.:.''''' - , ",,,..:71:: _.,.,.,!..i!.t.47,;!5;;;;.:„.,....., . .. '.'"'.-- ''''''''''''' — . - ' ' --•--'•', ,..,„ ...:,,.; ,,.: ,. •... ,:.„..„ r 'A--''''''7'- '•';'4. "AA ..,....,.— ,-..-.,k„..44..i..:4NN.';-,--:'"400106i0111111111111 ' '., ' ' * • .., • ...-N 4 '_ .. .:: -.. . - ' ' ' '.'.:!4:.4 .' ' .:... .....','..:.7:::::.:44...•...7.N.,...N,......: '' "0;... •',N. ....,- . ' - - - ' • - : I ir • .., :::.,.... • r,.......:1 I . . . . ..,„. , , -,...... 1 _ ... .. .......,...,_ ' ' •- •-11.-:,,• k ..., ", •. .......44....-.,N, ,......, ., - . • • 4 .--.•. .•' • - ' ••--- • 1 ' ..'',N4•10.':...4:,4:..0'.'''.."'t''':,-.3",`,N.•‘isf'-`,,','''0.4 ..,,,,,,,, , . - -'"•,.'N-....,, , ,,, 1.. ,,. , ..1.!,,,,,,,„..:::.i,•,,,,,P,,,•'k,,.... : ,,. It'''''''", ' ::::-.;"'...i„, .mP • ... '. , 0 . ,..144-f::::',?' . '''...r.gga.*'i:";°;'..1 ' ,. '''. - . - ''••••-'••• , „ .. . , ,i, 14 . •• _ „..,.... 6 „ .... • „......,. ,. , 1 :..,.. , . , „..., .„,... ,.,., -, I' AL.4: '.:' ,5 '44:„ - ..••4.-.. , ',4' , :,[', - � I .. ,�- -v _ j rte" ,y ,)"' ; t �t 3 'mR% Fa ydk4 r R *P F ' fR' T E « yat an . •z , .� > .� 4: ek. , i " " , _ �.a y 1irbia it .' •A up" ' * `' s: i NO . { � r,_,,,o.,,,,,4. ... ,..pAr., - --- . „„, '..--..,t,.. 4,,,,,... .1 ,..,:, ,... ',, . .,....... �.fq _ a ::.4.;,4 __tt.''''4 a ,,, ,,,. . .,,, oe, - ,4 4 , ,,, , ,.'!4;''''..„ '" V .�A2 .e -:. ,h'-',4 ..,;;;;*.; ' " — —:: #iiii - ,4. *- *" x ' • -. ,Nr.• '''. • 4. i ,,„. ....,..: , 74,,,,,,r,24.., „,-.,--...,..e..-1;A ,,,&44„..4. --,---, .r - c sse. +s -. ly-n #, °� . s y" .. s wwt f.. "" n • Development • �)e tEa CITY OF TIGARD Washington, County NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY PLANNING COMMISSION 1. Concerning Case Number(s) : SDR 94-0008 2 . Name of Owner: Bank of America Name of Applicant: VIPS Industries, Inc. 3 . Address 280 SE Liberty Street City Salem State OR Zip 97301 4. Address of Property: 9575 SW Locust Street Tax Map and Lot No(s) . : 1S1 26DC, tax lots 4700 and 4701 5. Request: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 94-0008 VIPS/BANK OF AMERICA An appeal of a Director's Decision approving a 56 unit motel with morning breakfast service. APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.64, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.120, 18.150, and 18.164. Zone: C-P (Professional Commercial) The C-P zoning district permits a range of professional and personal services. The zone allows transient lodging and restaurant facilities. 6. Action: Approval as requested X Approval with conditions Denial 7 . Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall, and mailed to: X The applicant and owner(s) X Owners of record within the required distance X Affected governmental agencies 8. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON September 21, 1994 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision, and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd. , Tigard, Oregon 97223 . 9 . Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32 .290(B) and Section 18.32 .370 which provides that a written appeal may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee ($315.00) and transcript costs, (varies up to a maximum of $500.00) . The deadline for filing of an appeal is 3:30 p.m. September 21, 1994 10. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, 639-4171. CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 94-04 PC BANK OF AMERICA - OWNER VIPS - APPLICANT A FINAL ORDER WHICH APPROVES REVISIONS TO THE DECISION ISSUED FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 94-0008 FOR A PHEONIX INN LOCATED ON A 0.85 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER SW LOCUST AVENUE AND SW GREENBURG ROAD. APPLICATION: A request for Site Development Review approval for a a 54 to 56 unit motel. Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Professional (C-P) , Zoning: Commercial Professional (C-P) Location: 9575 SW Locust Street (WCTM 1S1 26DC, tax lot 4700 and 4701) SECTION I - DECISION: Notice is hereby given that the Planning Director' s designee for the City of Tigard has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section II. Recommendations: PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED OR FINANCIALLY SECURED: 1. The site and landscape plan shall be modified to indicate the ultimate right-of-way width of 49 feet from the centerline of SW Greenburg Road. The area of future right-of-way shall not be included when calculating the areas of landscaping and parking required to satisfy the requirements of the Community Development Code. The applicant shall provide a copy of the site boundary survey to verify the existing rights-of-way. STAFF CONTACT: Michael Anderson, Engineering Department. 2 . The applicant shall sign a waiver of remonstrance against the future formation of a Local Improvement District to improve SW Greenburg Road to the ultimate street width. STAFF CONTACT: Michael Anderson, Engineering Department. 3 . The applicant shall provide street lighting along SW Locust Street in accordance with the City standards. STAFF CONTACT: John Hagman, Engineering Department (639-4171) 4. Three (3) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. Seven (7) sets of approved drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, all prepared by a Professional Engineer, shall be submitted for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. STAFF CONTACT: John Hagman, Engineering Department (639-4171) . 5 . A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. A soils report shall be provided detailing the soil compaction requirements. STAFF CONTACT: Michael Anderson, Engineering Department (639-4171) . 6. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as established under the guidelines of Unified Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-47 and designed in accordance with the USA minimum standards. The maintenance of the facility shall be the responsibility of the property owner. STAFF CONTACT: Greg Berry, Engineering Department (639-4171) . 7. The applicant shall demonstrate that storm drainage runoff can be discharged into the existing drainageways without significantly impacting properties downstream. STAFF CONTACT: Greg Berry, Engineering Department (639-4171) . 8 . a) The applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to removal of any trees on site in excess of six inches or more measured four feet above ground level. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. b) The applicant shall provide an arborist report which reviews the suitability of trees on site for preservation or relocation on site. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. c) The applicant shall revise the landscape plan to provide a minimum of a 15 foot buffer along the portion of the property which abuts the single family residence. The applicant shall provide increased landscaping within the buffer area if less than 20 feet is provided. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. IN ADDITION THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; SECTION 18.120.060 (BONDING AND ASSURANCES) AND SECTION 18.164 (STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS) . COPIES MAY BE OBTAINED THROUGH THE PLANNING OR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS. THIS APPROVAL IS VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN MONTHS OF THE DATE OF THE FINAL DECISION. SECTION II. - FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Background: The subject property was annexed into the City on April 16, 1987 through Boundary Commission Action 2344. Site Development Review #90-0016 for a 4,600 square foot bank branch was approved for this site in 1990. That approval expired becuase the applicant did not develop the site for the approved bank. On June 17, 1994 a decision recommending approval for a 56 room motel was issued for a vacant property at the south east corner of Locust Avenue and Greenburg Road. On June 27, 1994 the applicant appealed two of the conditions of approval related to right-of-way dedication and street improvements along the site's SW Greenburg Road frontage. These conditions of approval required that the applicant dedicate and improve the site' s street frontage along SW Greenburg Road to the ultimate right-of-way width which is 49 feet from street centerline. This improvement would require approximately 17 feet of additional right-of- way and street improvement construction. A traffic study for the SW Greenburg Road and SW Hall Boulevard area was recently completed. The study recommended that within 1-3 years that the City acquire right-of-way along SW Greenburg Road to have a continuous roadway design of five lanes in total width along its entire length from SW Locust Avenue to SW Hall Boulevard. The study recommended this ultimate street width to provide for future capacity needs. The existing three lanes is adequate for now and likely for the next five years. On August 22nd the applicant appeared at the Public Hearing for the Appeal filed of the staff decision issued for this proposal. The applicant concurred with the revised wording but objected to a similar right-of-way dedication requirement made by the Washington County FINAL ORDER SDR 94-0008 - BANK OF AMERICA/VIPS PAGE 2 Department of Land Use and Transportation Planning. The Planning Commission reviewed the appeal and concurred with the City Attorney's recommendation concerning required street improvements for this development and approved revisions to Conditions of Approval #1 and #2 . 2. Vicinity Information: The surrounding properties are zoned for Commercial Professional use and are developed with Lincoln Center to the south. Adjoining areas to the south of Locust are developed with a mixture of professional office uses within Lincoln Center. Across the street on SW Greenburg are general commercial areas within Washington Square and a cemetary. The site adjoins an older residence and a commercial store to the north. The site also adjoins a professional office building to the east. 3 . Site Information and Proposal Description: The subject parcel is approximately 37,402 square feet in size. The applicant has proposed a three story, 54 to 56 unit motel with 59 parking spaces. The floor plan currently shows two rooms to be used for maid storage which may be converted to guest room use in the future. The site is a vacant property located on the northeast corner of SW Greenburg Road and SW Locust Street. Both streets are designated as major collector streets. The property contains several mature deciduous and evergreen trees. The proposed architectural elevations use a smooth finish with tile accent materials along the first floor elevation to accent the main building entrance. The front elevations towards SW Greenburg and SW Locust provide prominent fascade features designed to break up the continuous height of the building roof line. 4. Agency and CIT Comments: The Engineering Department, the Police Department, the Building Department, Tualatin Valley Water District, the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, Northwest Natural Gas, Portland General Electric, Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation Planning and the Oregon Department of Transportation were provided with copies of this. The City of Tigard Engineering Department and the Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation responded with comments. The Engineering Department reviewed this application and provided the following comments: Findings: 1. Streets: The applicant has submitted a traffic study prepared by ATEP dated May 9, 1994. In reviewing projects in this area, Engineering staff is relying on the Hall/Greenburg/Scholls Area Traffic Needs Study Report prepared by Parametrix, dated January, 1994. This report is the most comprehensive traffic review available for the area, and the ATEP study has referenced the data included in the report. The Parametrix report assumed that the subject site, when developed, would generate approximately 207 vehicles per peak hour based on new office commercial development. The traffic report submitted with the application shows that this specific development proposal will generate FINAL ORDER SDR 94-0008 - BANK OF AMERICA/VIPS PAGE 3 an estimated 34 vehicles per peak hour, substantially less than the previous report. The Parametrix report also identifies improvements needed to correct existing deficiencies and improvements that accommodate expected growth. The major growth-related improvement identified in the area of the subject site is the widening of the Greenburg bridge overcrossing of Highway 217. This bridge widening is already funded under the County's MSTIP program. Therefore, we conclude that no off-site traffic improvements are required with this development. In addition, the Parametrix report reaffirms the status of SW Greenburg Road and the need to construct the road to major street standards. Additional improvements required for this site development include the street lighting in both SW Greenburg Road and SW Locust Street and the sidewalk along SW Locust Street as shown on the site plan. The motel will have relatively small peak hour traffic and does not by itself justify a future need for five lanes. The study found that this portion of SW Greenburg Road currently operates at Level of Service C and would be expected to continue to operate at that level in the forseeable future. The motel itself will be a relatively small contributor to street capacity issues. The applicant has been required within revised conditions of approval to participate in a future local improvement district which will ensure that when widening does occur that the property owner will pay its fair share of the widening. The plan submitted by the applicant provides landscaping and parking beyond the planned ultimate right-of-way for SW Greenburg Road in accordance with the development criteria of the Commercial-Professional Zoning District. SW Greenburg Road and SW Locust Street are both designated as major collectors. Eventual improvements along the property frontage would include the dedication of additional right-of-way for SW Greenburg Road, a Washington County road, to a width of 49 feet as measured from centerline to comply with the requirements of of the County. The right- of-way for SW Locust Street is 70 feet and is adequate for a major collector. 2. Sanitary Sewer: The site is served by the 8" public sanitary sewer located in SW Locust Street and the sewer has sufficient capacity for the development. 3 . Storm Sewer: The Unified Sewerage Agency has established and the City has agreed to enforce (Resolution and Order No. 91-47) Surface Water Management Regulations requiring the construction of on-site water quality facilities or fees in-lieu of their construction. The site plan for the proposed project provides for an on-site water quality facility that should connect to the underground system in SW Locust Street. The applicant should demonstrate that the storm drainage runoff can be discharged into the existing system without significantly affecting the properties downstream. The on-site facility should be designed in accordance with USA minimum standards. The Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District indicated that access was acceptable as designed for fire equipment to turn around to serve the FINAL ORDER SDR 94-0008 - BANK OF AMERICA/VIPS PAGE 4 site. The Fire District required that the site be provided with a hydrant at an acceptable location. It appeared that an acceptable location would be at the corner of SW Locust Street and SW Greenburg Road. The Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation commented on this proposal and stated that a traffic analysis for this development proposal is being performed by the County Traffic Analyst, whose findings and recommendations will be forwarded to the City at the time of completion of the review. This review and the recommended conditions of approval which will be developed as a part of that review are required by Resolution and Order 86-95 and Section 501-8.2.B. of the Community Development Code. REQUIRED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I. PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL AND ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT BY THE CITY OF TIGARD: A. Submit to Land Development Services (Public Assurance Staff, Tracy Stone/ Carolyne Cook, 648-8761) : 1. Completed "Design Option" form. 2 . $500.00 Administration Deposit. NOTE: Any portion of the Administration Deposit not used by Washington County for plan approval, field inspections, and contract administration will be returned to the applicant. If at any time during the project, the County' s costs are higher than the amount deposited, Washington County will bill the applicant the amount needed to cover the costs. 3 . Two (2) sets of complete engineering plans for the construction of the following public improvement: a. Repair concrete sidewalk to County standard a l o n g S W G r e e n b u r g R o a d frontage. b. Close all existing driveways c. Any additional off-site safety improvements found to be required for compliance with R&O 86-95 upon completion of the County's Traffic Analyst' s review. B. Obtain a Washington County Facility Permit upon completion of the following: 1. Obtain Engineering Division approval and provide a financial assurance for the construction of the public improvements listed in conditions I.A.3. NOTE: The Public Assurance staff (Tracy Stone/Carolyn Cook, 648- 8761) of Land Development Services will send the required forms to the applicant's representative after submittal and approval of the public improvement engineering plans. 2. Provide evidence that the documents required by condition I.D. have been recorded. C. The following documents shall be executed and recorded with Washington County: FINAL ORDER SDR 94-0008 - BANK OF AMERICA/VIPS PAGE 5 1. Dedicate additional right-of-way to provide 49 feet from centerline of SW Greenburg Road frontage. 2 . Sign a waiver not to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district or other mechanism to improve the base facility of SW Greenburg Road between SW Hall Boulevard and State Highway 217. 3 . Provide a one-foot non-access reserve strip along SW Greenburg Road frontage, except at approved access points. NOTE: Washington County Survey Division (Jamil Kamawal, 693-4543) will send the required forms to the applicant's representative. II. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY The road improvements required by conditions I.A.3. above shall be completed and accepted by Washington County. SECTION III. - ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION A. COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Use Classification: The applicant has indicated that the proposed use of this site is for itinerant lodging with breakfast service. Section 18.64 allows itinerant lodging within the Commercial Professional zoning district as long as a restaurant use is provided in conjunction with the lodging use. The applicant has proposed to provide continental breakfast service to guests in compliance with the restaurant service requirement. Minimum Lot Area: Section 18.62.050 states that there is a 6, 000 square foot minimum lot area for parcels in the Commercial Professional zone. The average lot width of each parcel in the Commercial Professional zone is 50 feet. The site will be reconfigured as one parcel through a lot consolidation action. As a consolidated parcel the property is 37,402 square feet and a width of 176 feet which complies with lot area requirements. Development proposals within this zoning district may not exceed 85% of the site with buildings and hard surfaces. The site plan indicates that 81% of the site will be developed with impervious surfaces such as structures and parking lot areas which complies with the requirement. A minimum of 15% of the site must be landscaped. The applicant has provided 19% of the site with landscaping in compliance with this requirement. Setbacks : Section 18 .64 does not require building setbacks except where a property abuts a residentially zoned parcel. The Development Code also requires that applicable areas of each site comply with line of site distances for structures at the site entrance to the street. The site improvements as proposed comply with line of site distance regulations at the sites driveway onto SW Locust Street. Structures must also comply with the Special Setbacks set forth in Section 18. 96 which is 30 feet from the centerline of SW Greenburg Road. The applicant has 97 feet of setback from the centerline of SW Greenburg to the edge of the proposed structure. Section 18.100 requires buffer areas for commercial uses which abut existing residential uses. Because this parcel is surrounded on three and a half sides by other properties which are developed with commercial FINAL ORDER SDR 94-0008 - BANK OF AMERICA/VIPS PAGE 6 uses a buffer area is required only along portions of the northern property line which abuts an existing single family residence. Condition of Approval #8 requires that the site and landscape plan be amended to provide an additional five feet of buffer area within the northeast corner of the property in compliance with the basic buffering requirement. The applicant may also amend the site plan and landscape plan to provide additional screening materials within the reduced 15 foot buffer area currently shown on the site plan. Through either design the applicant shall modify the site plan to delete parking and drive aisle uses within the 15 foot buffer area. Building Height: Section 18.62 states that no building shall exceed a height of 45 feet. The architectural elevations for the structure do not exceed a height of 39 feet. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.106 requires one parking space for each motel suite plus one for every two employees. Based on the proposed floor plan 57 parking spaces are required. The site plan currently provides 59 parking spaces in compliance with the requirement. Bicycle Parking: Section 18 .106 requires one bicycle rack for each 15 vehicle parking spaces in any development. A minimum of 59 parking spaces are required for this proposal. Four bicycle racks have been provided in compliance with this requirement. Access, Egress and Circulation: Section 18.108 requires commercial development with 99 or less required parking spaces to provide a minimum access width of 30 feet and a minimum pavement width of 24 feet. The site plan complies with this requirement through a driveway located at the southern property line of SW Locust. This location is the farthest available location from the intersection of SW Locust Street and SW Greenburg Road. Walkway: Section 18.108 requires that a walkway extend from the main ground floor entrance of all commercial developments to the streets which provide the required ingress and egress. Condition of Approval #8 requires that the site plan and landscape plan be modified to provide pedestrian access to the building from SW Greenburg Road and SW Locust Street. The walkway shall be designed to minimize pedestrian conflicts with vehicles in the parking lot area. Street Trees : Section 18 .100 requires that all development projects fronting on a public street more than 100 feet in length shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section 18 .100.035. This site has frontage on SW Greenburg Road and SW Locust Street for a combined distance of 400 feet. The landscape plan provided 10 Flowering Pear trees centered at 30 to 40 feet. Due to their size at maturity, 40 feet, the provision of these trees complies with the City' s street tree requirements for the site. Visual Clearance Areas : Section 18 .102 requires that a clear vision area for motorist and pedestrian safety shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or private driveways. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade. Trees exceeding this height may be located in the clear vision area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. The current landscape plan maintains sufficient clear vision due to the use of lower ground cover materials adjacent to the driveway on SW Locust Street. FINAL ORDER SDR 94-0008 - BANK OF AMERICA/VIPS PAGE 7 Tree Removal: Section 18.150 contains standards for obtaining a required permit for removal of trees on site which have a trunk six inches or more in diameter measured four feet above the ground. The existing conditions plan indicates that several mature trees are proposed to be removed. Condition of Approval #8 requires that prior to removal of trees that the applicant prepare an arborist report to investigate the suitablility of trees on site for relocation. The applicant shall also apply for a tree removal permit prior to removal of trees. Landscaping Plan: Section 18 .100 requires that the applicant submit a detailed landscaping plan. The Development Code requires a minimum of one tree for every seven parking spaces. The landscaping plan currently provides nine trees which provides one tree for each six and a half parking spaces. A variety of shrubs and ground cover are also required to comply with Development Code criteria for landscaped areas. Signs: Section 18 .114 lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the General Commercial zone. Precise signage plans for this site shall be reviewed by the Planning Division through the sign permit process. SECTION IV. - PROCEDURE 1. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: XX The applicant and owners XX Owners of record within the required distance XX Affected government agencies // 2 . Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON q A'9 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. 3 . Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32 .290(A) and Section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal must be filed with the City Recorder within 10 days after notice is given and sent. Appeal fee schedule and forms are available at Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd. , Tigard, Oregon. The deadline for filing of an appeal is 3:30 p.m. 9 L/ 9y. 4 . Questions: If you have questions, please contact the Planning Division at 639-4171, City of Tigard, City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd. , Tigard, Oregon. SECTION V. DECISION The Planning Commission concludes that the conditions of approval of the Staff Decision shall be revised as provided within the Final Order in order to address concerns raised by the applicant in their appeal of the staff decision. It is further ordered that the applicant and the parties to these proceedings be notified of the entry of this order. PASSED: This ____ __ day of A aet, 1994 by the Planning Commission of the City of Tigard. / // / � i .d AfrAFfIl m 1/F .n F. Fry F Pla, ing Com, .n President FINAL ORDER SDR 94-0008 - BANK OF AMERICA/VIPS PAGE 8 I ! 1 1 I 1 L___ r-----0 - tOKOEIIf,iiiiiii - � - I.ENMAKK / 1 : a. =�. 1 TIT .I Ll.!. COM& 11 0 0 iti itt i H z Liiiittlir,4111111111111 IIP I z iocucr St E IN AihilliplIbmw a WAPLEIEAF ST a. 111r1W ■■ 0 LIIi ! por 4 i 0 r INAOr LN -_ r ---7- I • >- U PLOT PLAN CASE NO. SITS DEVELOPMENT REVIEW EXHIBIT MAP _ #94-0008 14.44PF ...., (C S N0.1 I6b0) C • w 4 2 f a / .I)L l o / L 1�° 3 2 9 O' 98.15' � 95.15' 1l0.3' 96.16' j9EOIN. 1630 -- — —. _ -- — —1— — —J — — —• C` S, 11 2 C.R. 1630 CORAL / a • r -�t— i° N. •9° 28'E. 1639.9' / —VACATE092.19149 95.13' 93.15' r 95.14' 95.16' I 40.3' I30' -- S.89°2 'N Of 49 4500 4400 4200 / 4601 Se Ac 77.4c. 4EI00 4000 q i w .28Ac. a .55 AC. I W I / • e s g I 1 _ f� \ 6 4600 jo, 74 602 I 9 = S. •9 01 at 4602 r6.lc. I ..- C el Y 1L� 197. 95.16' _i__ 95.15' I C �.s is.). .. ti 4700 4701 4800 f 480f 4900 [V 19c.3' - 5203 re v 42 dr. q4 Ac. 47 Ac 1 .30 At 38 Ac 5000 5f 5101 39Ac. .38Ac. .474c. / `‘i SBAC c • ` • 6 v i 60 h 5 cc N1 p. 4 - 2 I • no ��2 Iz1 ' a .� 5 i6 �3 24S 0• 1 ! 95.16' �W m� 96.111x' L. 190.3' 19C o • •• 11.11.1L3L\ ■S ∎••••%%% %%%%�*&. L®vVil�l� ~ ..t,......... ..�"�l\�'V.(,R T...ArlaH Is i VIPS INDUSTRIES/PHOENIX INN EXPANSION RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION ASSUMPTIONS Total Right of Way Required: Approximately 20 feet x 99.4 feet of frontage or 1,988 square feet Estimated Value of Right-of-Way: $3 per square foot x 1,988 square feet =$5,964 Applicant's stated Value of Right-of-Way: $15 per square foot x 1,988 square feet = $29,820 Traffic Impact Fee: 48 motel units x 10.19 trip rate x $48 per trip TIF Fee= $23,477 Traffic Impact Fee Credits For Existing Development: $1,890 x 2 for two existing homes = $3,780 3,000 sq.ft. existing office building = $8,513 Dolan/A-Boy Total Transportation System Impact Assumption Fee Covers 32% of impact: After TIF Credits a net of $11,183 TIF is due. A fee of$34,946 covers entire impact of development. After dedication of right-of-way $5,964 value and payment of the TIF Fee an unmitigated traffic impact of $17,799 remains. STAI t Uh tnitUUN - Coun' Washington Jti SS s gl_cac02 'r�tn �s t•r of -" I'aN t rry l ment and r; -115n .1. * * o County Clerk for =�•1•►` • 1 A,-. r •� �f-rtify that �$ the with,. itr•�� i ,) and re•.,�.�,..-...� .� . of said -� ,,.- After recording,please return to: county. * I• a 1 �r Washington County Surveyor's Office 1 ;; a'; 155 North First #350-15 9.^^ T `'"• Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 yyA ti. •c irector of _f'sh• y .• axation,Ex- lerk • RIGHT-OF-WAY Doc 99109541 D Inv 8451 21.00 DEDICATION DEED 09/23(.1.999 02:29:04pm KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that VIP'S MOTOR INNS INC.,an Oregon corporation,grantor, in consideration of the granting of a Site Development Review Approval,Item No. SDR 99-0002,which is the whole consideration,does hereby grant to Washington County,a political subdivision of the State of Oregon,Grantee,for the use of the public as a public way forever,an easement for right-of-way purposes over that certain real property situated in the City of Tigard,County of Washington and State of Oregon,as shown on the attached Exhibit"A" and being more particularly described as follows: A portion of that tract of land situated in the South one half of Section 26,Township 1 South,Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian,Washington County,Oregon, described in deed to Vip's Motor Inns,Inc.,an Oregon corporation,as recorded in Document No. 98-143649,in the Washington County Book of Records. Said portion of said tract being a strip of land lying Northwesterly of a line which is parallel with and 49.00 feet Southeasterly from,when measured at right angles to,the centerline of County Road No. 2472(SW Greenburg Road). EXCEPTING THEREFROM,that portion thereof lying within the right-of-way of County Road No. 2472(SW Greenburg Road). Grantor hereby covenants to and with Grantee,that it is the owner of said property which is free from all encumbrances,except for easements,conditions and restrictions of record,and will warrant and defend the easement rights herein granted from all lawful claims whatsoever,except as stated herein. • To Have and To Hold,the above described and granted premises unto Washington County for the public forever for the uses and purposes hereinabove mentioned. Dedication Deed,Page 1 of 2 Item No. SDR99-0002 Jk 1 - 3 i IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Grantor above named,by and through its President has caused this instrument to be duly signed hereto. Dated this 07 day of 1Qp1-999. VIP'S MOTOR INNS,INC By: \. ii„..c2_,_. Steven V.Johnson,Presideut STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of Washington ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on 34 s k-day of SSuere.w.11'C.� , 1999 by Steven V.Johnson,President on behalf of said Inc. / „ ie"t4 - ���., OFFICIAL SEAL "'^' JAMIL KAMAwRE Notary Public for Oregon , ew-t!+ - NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON 3 ^' ' `e � COMMISSION NO. os2135 My Commission Expires: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAR 25,2001 Accepted on behalf of Washington County, Oregon. rS Dated this , .- of je. i. , 1999 "PA" By: �i'�._ ld i/, enneth A.Bauer,County urveyor Approved as to form: Loretta S. Skurdahl Senior Assistant County Counsel Date: 12/17/98 Dedication Deed,Page 2 of 2 Item No. SDR99-0002 Jk Z ......... . . . ............... .... N ' RIGHT— --WAY DEDICATION:;:;:::: r (1) '1GARDEN-1OM o C.R. 2472 y- � of . 5 `1 e4Vp %\/ TAYLOR'S EE t 1003 FERRY SITE it OAK • V II ICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE LEHMAN N N r!- CV SW LEHMAN STREET 0 2 0 0 ACRES 0 J 2 W it 0 SW CORAL STREET 3 0 OTAL 49'� TRACT :OW FROM :ENTERLINE 7 • I ._ 30' EXISTING ROW FROM CENTERLINE SW LOCUST STREET - 3 0 PAGE 1 OF 1 STATE OF OREGON l S C c:_�Z Co of Washington j o 10 I,Jerry i n:,� •.r= �•r f Assess- L ment and : -i•n Ti• �: ± lo County Clerk for =4:i•` • . �`�� -rtify that •� After recording,please return to: the with i� t ,„ , ^: .��= ecelved and re.•rde• i•: •••• •�•t-' •�-•- of said Washington County Surveyor's Office county * (•c' / * 155 North First #350-15 'i, tiA rj Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 iyG� T - . . rector of setiw •+ axation,Ex- R•.Q lerk • RESTRICTIVE COVENANT Doc : 99109542 FOR A NON-ACCESS I nv : 8451 16.00 RESERVE STRIP 09/23/1999 02:29:04pm KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS,that VIP'S MOTOR INNS,INC.,grantor, being lawfully seized in fee simple of the following described premises,in consideration of the granting of a Site Development Review Approval,Item No.SDR 99-0002,which is the whole consideration,heretofore granted by Washington County,a political subdivision of the State of Oregon,does hereby establish a one foot,non-access reserve strip along SW Greenburg Road frontage,over that certain real property situated in the County of Washington and State of Oregon, and being more particularly described as follows: That tract of land situated in the South one half of Section 26,Township 1 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian,Washington County,Oregon,described in deed to Vip's Motor Inns,Inc.,an Oregon corporation,as recorded in Document No. 98-143649,in the Washington County Book of Records. This restrictive covenant shall run with the land,burdening the subject site and to the benefit of the citizens of Washington County. It is binding on the parties, their successors, heirs, assigns and grantees, and before this restrictive covenant can be removed, authorization must first be obtained from the City of Tigard,with the written consent of Washington County. The covenantor agrees that execution of this agreement in no way limits,restricts,or pre-empt the authority of Washington County/City of Tigard to exercise any of its governmental authority applicable to said property. Restrictive Covenant, Page 1 of 2 Item No. SDR99-0002 Jk I - 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Grantor above named,by and through its President has caused this instrument to be duly signed hereto. Dated this day og4RAA P ;1999. VIP'S MOTOR INNS,INC • ,___ cCL._ By: (..___ Steven V.Johnson,President STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of Washington ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on�s� day oftr"1::r Y.---, 1999 by Steven V.Johnson,President on behalf of said Inc. 49_,.eliperrixte.04 .�., OFFICIAL SEAL " JAMIL KAMAWAL otary Public for Oregon _�ra-.+ - NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON '3.. �� �'L11 COMMISSION NO. 062135 My Commission Expires: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAR 25.2001 Restrictive Covenant,Page 2 of 2 Item No. SDR99-0002 Jk a Ijip/S INDUSTRIES,INC. Sent via Hand Delivery September 29, 1999 Julia Hadjuk j /444 44' Associate Planner `� City of Tigard raorde G'jiy 13125 SW Hall Blvd. fi �' Tigard, OR 97223 Re: VIP'S Motor Inns—Phoenix Inn Hotel Expansion Site Development Review 1999-00002 Condition of Approval—Deed Restriction Language vis-à-vis Existing Douglas Fir Trees Dear Ms. Hadjuk: Per¶4 of the Conditions of Approval relating to our Phoenix Inn hotel expansion, requiring"deed-restriction language for trees to be preserved," please find attached a first draft Tree Agreement for your review and approval. You should find the document to be in conformity with the requirements of Tigard Development Code 18.790.040B. I would appreciate any comments you have at your earliest convenience. If possible, I would like to have your approval as to form and content by the end of this week. Thanks for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your reply. Very truly yours, Arthur E. Coyne Corporate Counsel AEC/me cc: Steven V. Johnson,President, VIP'S Industries, Inc. C:\Phoenix#205\tree agreement drt,doc 29757 SW Boones Ferry Rd. • Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 Telephone 503-682-9284 • FAX 503-682-9257 TREE AGREEMENT This Tree Agreement (the"Agreement") is made this day of September, 1999, by VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. ("VMI"). RECITALS: WHEREAS: VMI applied to the City of Tigard, Oregon(the"City") to develop a three-story, 45 unit hotel building, and associated parking on property identified as Washington County, Oregon Tax Map and Lot Numbers 1 S 126DC 4500, 4600 and 4602; and WHEREAS: The City reviewed the Application of VMI, 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 1 S 126DC 4600 and 4602, to Tigard Development Code § 18.790.040.B; and WHEREAS: VMI 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: VMI agrees as follows: TERMS AND CONDITIONS: 1. VMI agrees and shall not remove any of the four(4)Douglas Fir 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, VMI 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 four(4) existing Douglas Fir trees located on that property described as Washington County, Oregon Tax Map and Lot Numbers 1 S 126DC 4600 and 4602, 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 DAY OF OCTOBER, 1999. CITY OF TIGARD VIP'S MOTOR INNS, INC. Sign Name Sign Name Print Name Print Name State of Oregon ) )ss: County of Clackamas ) Before me, a Notary Public in and for said State and County, appeared the above named Steven V. Johnson, President of'VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc., 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 VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. for the uses and purposes therein described. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal this day of October, 1999. Notary Public for: My Commission Expires: 2 D101 V.? e T. C. //07 . .. ---- - _. , 4600 N 4500 * 4602 o, 4700 470/ 4800 , 071 ore 55' Q. T s�,,,�`s5 '.z.� 28rc . 10229 S to D11' Ct 7 10231 8" 4, 1 .005' * 310' 8" .004 D13' S . W. LOCU 1ST JST.I 310' k e< ABANDONED Co 7- a0 ic r 0 co B" .0131 4134' ,r7-677-4---)O r`►° N N o 52' PI 0241 7 13401 *' DII' D14' ��6� o �w 071 7 43107, J CO /000 2 41 / _ Ct" 0 S' 07' • _ ABANDONED LINE 7 1023 DII ;,., 591 I 2 4 Inn 2 — /---"\ ..%N.. P.0i ��;s cs �,,,a/'f�°�` - I - (1eCorJed o�acv�tL,1 L ffib(-4 ,o-/3-99 TREE AGREEMENT This Tree Agreement (the"Agreement") is made this day of September, 1999, by VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. ("VMI"). RECITALS: WHEREAS: VMI applied to the City of Tigard, Oregon(the"City")to develop a three-story,45 unit hotel building, and associated parking on property identified as Washington County, Oregon Tax Map and Lot Numbers 1 S 126DC 4500, 4600 and 4602; and WHEREAS: The City reviewed the Application of VMI, 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 1 S 126DC 4600 and 4602, to Tigard Development Code § 18.790.040.B; and WHEREAS: VMI 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: VMI agrees as follows: TERMS AND CONDITIONS: 1. VMI agrees and shall not remove any of the four(4)Douglas Fir 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, VMI 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 four(4)existing Douglas Fir trees located on that property described as Washington County, Oregon Tax Map and Lot Numbers 1 S 126DC 4600 and 4602, 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 DAY OF OCTOBER, 1999. CITY OF TIGARD VIP'S MOTOR INNS,INC. Sign Name Sign Name Print Name Print Name State of Oregon ) )ss: County of Clackamas ) Before me, a Notary Public in and for said State and County, appeared the above named Steven V. Johnson, President of VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc., 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 VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. for the uses and purposes therein described. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal this day of October, 1999. Notary Public for: My Commission Expires: 2 DIO' .6,vs — T. C. . 1/07 • _ _ _ 4 600 - . n°, 4602 4500 m 4 70 0 470/ 4800 c :'•,. • 4 cr D7' 0 Dress' Q T - c—`ss . -z� 284. ar 10229 s Ix O L o DII' 7 10231 8" .005' • 310' 8" .004 ' • DI3 s , w . LOCU ST� 310 t . ABANDONED X. coo o•o N N 0 8" .0131 4I34' tr71-374-c-;), n. 52' s X )24I `f 13401 �' DII' 014' 176' D r 7 0 -i 7 143'07, J /000 m Z 4! • / , Ct S' ABANDONED LINE 71023 DII ;,, 259, , 09s i%AN. 10.15.99 FRI 10: 21 FAX 503 682 9257 YIPS IND INC 1J001 \ IP'S INDUSTRIES,INC, FAX ZRANSMISSION SLIVER SHEET DATE. /0 -1 Safi} TIME: /1 i .c TOTAL r;,;,E3. (Including this one) ATTENTION: Laak COMPANY: N C TLSQ!C�J FAX NO: — 7 FROM: TITLE: FAX NO: 503-682-9257 (AVA R Y QUESTION AND/OR PROBLEMS: CALL AT t c ck AT (503) 682-9284. COMMENTS', co, o vtic„, Yr V,, 11 , 5��,� Sum This message 1s intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is transmitted and may contain information that is privileged and confidential . If the reader of this communication is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and destroy the original communication. 29757 SW Boones Ferry Rd. • Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 Telephone 503-682-9284 • FAX 503-682-9257 10/15/99 FRI 10:21 FAX 503 682 9257 VIPS IND INC 2002 Cia' 15 '99 09:29AM MI' VS P.1 4117/eCeelejleigX. SANITARY SERVICE, INC. F A X T R A N S M I S S I O N DATE : JO - /S- ?9 TO : �.�' �U'e 1 1$t. FAX NUMBER: - I FROM: `'fl 41,UL atjj) FAX NUMBER: 643-3462 IF THERE ARE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THIS TRANSMITTAL, PLEASE CALL MILLER'S SANITARY SERVICE, INC. AT (503) 644-6161. MESSAGE: / � 9154A- Jut LHLt tee. -6,0-14. n LS1O) L l nix a_ ego", al-- , tici- /6 # OF PAGES: (INCLUDI G COVER SHEET) on onw 917 • RraVFATYIN f)RF(If)N 07c175-15217 • (5a31 84443161 10/15/99 FRI 10:22 FAX 503 682 9257 VIPS IND INC 003 OCT 15 '99 09:29AM MI 'S P2 Date : r(&'. .e.1 l Dear. Sirs, Ws have reviewed your plan and/or attachments tor the proposed development at TY'c; llx4-17 and find them to be in compliance_ with our compatibility requirements wi:h the following exceptions : — Lk) 1 L Y Cn u415 i rR d i ie ILA (X. `` G irk_ 0 • _ 4,Gri,'i 4-r- `t-/46 go TEE . • :bt.. - Q 4 o-{-1-4 . Thank you for your consideration and timely submittal of these materials for our review. MILLER' S SANITARY SERVICE, INC. `��' (Lac 7.1'cpoq,_ VIP INDUSTRIES,INC. - MEMORANDUM TO: Karen Fox Planning Department City of Tigard FROM: Steven V. Johnson RECEIVED VIP'S Motor Inns,Inc. M �Ot° A DATE: May 18,2000 `( 1 8 RE: 9575 SW Loco Addition Street �MMUNIix 0Et0PMENS Tigard,Oregon SDR 1999-00002 LANDSCAPE PLAN Karen: Per our telephone conversation, I need to ask you to fill in for the series of planners that have preceded you on this file but have since left their jobs. As discussed,a Decision was entered under the above referenced file number approving our expansion project. That Decision was dated 6/3/99. Condition of Approval number 1 required the submission of a revised landscaping plan for review and approval. I do have a landscaping plan from our landscaping contractor (Seven Dees Landscaping) dated 7/27/99. I assume that this landscaping plan is the appropriately revised one prepared in response to that Condition of Approval. However,I have no record in my file of confirmation from the City of Tigard to the effect that there has been appropriate review and approval of that revised plan. Given the absence of both the planners that previously worked on this file,I can't confirm that directly with anyone at the City. Accordingly,I must ask you to step in,review our revised landscaping plan,and contact me with formal approval and/or comment so that we may proceed. We are expecting completion of the project in six weeks, so it would be most helpful if we could have your courtesies in taking a look at this at your earliest possible convenience as we need to give our landscaper appropriate time to purchase the required nursery stock and schedule installation during this busy time of the year. Enclosed herein,please find one counterpart of the revised landscaping plan dated July 27, 1999. Please review and provide your comments directly to me at 682-9284 at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions, or need any further information to complete your review, please don't hesitate to give me a call by phone at that number in the intere of time. � \ Thank you for your help in stepping in. ; 29757 SW Boones Ferry Rd. • Wilsonville,Oregon 97070 Telephone 503-682-9284 • FAX 503-682-9257 SITE PLAN REVIEW 1-u !!►, CITY OF TIGARD COMMENTS Community Development Sh aping A Better Community Date: /0 f/I by Staff Person Commenting: y,,_ ') Department 1 I Phone Number/Extension: Q I S Project Name: Neu t n i x ak n - Site Permit No.: Land Use Case File No(s): IOR I g'i'i- boo° Z The Prop.oled,Plans Submitted For A Site Permit Have Been Reviewed By Our Department And We Have The Following CoMments: PLANS ARE APPROVED. All land use conditions related to this department have bn satisfactorily met. <<,-) c<ui c,uci A.d,� "5 jjvc�%ei/ )5 r`x��� (vn�,lc>��.y� /1," (. X145 c7uc,/ ! �ier2 ❑ PLANS ARE GENERALLY CONSISTENT with the land use approval, HOWEVER, THER , ARE STILL LAND USE CONDITIONS THAT MUST BE MET PRIOR TO RELEASE OF THE &214.4_,:,) SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS, OR PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION. Specifically, 'I�4 -14/1 441%' r9'41 Y�' I I PLANS ARE NOT CONSISTENT with the land use approval AND MUST BE REVISED. Specifically, NOTE: IF THE PERMIT APPLICANT HAS ANY QUESTIONS WITH REGARD TO THE COMMENTS ABOVE, THEY MUST CONTACT THE STAFF PERSON SPECIFIED AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE. h:\patty\masters\siteplan.mst CITY OF TIGARD BU!l DING INSPECTION DIVISION MST 24-Hour Inspection Line: 63S '5 Business Line: 639-41S B P l 11-DD 7( 7 173&? T Date Requested r z'176 AM PM / J BLD Location S �`�� d(✓ �L�2�Z� Suite MEC Contact Person t'6'/CG1 )'t -k Ph 54' /�I Vg PLM �ju� Qrt l� �i1 C Contractor /, POP SWR " PI1 SWR BUILDING Tenant/Owner ,l4-' ELC Retaining Wall ELR Footing Access: Foundation FPS Ftg Drain SGN Crawl Drain Inspection Notes:/ �s,,,�' '�-` Slab (�"�� ����'`` 1 SIT Post& Beam Ext Sheath/Shear Int Sheath/Shear L��- Framing Insulation Drywall Nailing Firewall fF / Fire Sprinkler Vt� Fire Alarm Susp'd Ceiling e , l ./e414, a, r/\ Roof Misc: Final — PASS PART FAIL PLUMBING Post& Beam Under Slab Top Out Water Service Sanitary Sewer Rain Drains Final PASS PART FAIL MECHANICAL Post& Beam Rough In Gas Line Smoke Dampers Final PASS PART FAIL ELECTRICAL - Service Rough In UG/Slab Low Voltage Fire Alarm Final PASS PART FAIL SITE Backfill/Grading Sanitary Sewer Storm Drain [ ] Reinspection fee of$ required before next inspection. Pay at City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd Catch Basin Fire Supply Line [ ] Please call for reinspection RE: [ ] Unable to inspect- no access ADA Approach/Sidewalk Other Date Inspector Ext Final PASS PART FAIL DO NOT REMOVE this inspection record from the job site. ".. • ,-CWI . .., 10 ..:-.•, . • : i •,:•..erc ,/,'•:::4 A W: , ••• ‘,..„. ' .:22Cil NN1/44441111141141111411, • 1 . I- ..•' . 1 / • •W CORAL STREET ' .4 S:Iii)..f.i., • • 1. .,.2.U.': .r. 1-7---..-.-• ....!*1" -------.• .11:1...1.-...--'''- •'-''-- I I' —----r4f-Fi.:.._.-——— -...E • ' -77-71 rIllifr ': r • ,,...--. . •-....." _____ ...a .--- . . , 'fri.,/"..i--__ ---* , .._____ • . -.--, . II _.... ,., .; • / , 44 • — • • I----- . „../ ..., . ,.....s.. 114.2192;7.- , MUD ew•SC ... i 1 ...•'-* rati/W-41 •' I ". eTi;ifre.' A i 1,00....Oura, ..... • • z..141.0, ...__. __• _■_,_ -_-_,,,.._........_,Se3u1s.1.-. --- . (i=•_- Z ' voraliffiraiaagi . . Nelkft,„....."1111.11111 - -_ ,- -- .• NI -.■ -■-. 1-r11•■■•;;/.-------"-"--4 ' ..I.' ..• „,-------.' •:4 \...t. I • . i../ * -' " •a&.15. . 1 i ...N. , , . ... . • . 1 / 4''' •• , • . . .. ; ; 1 .. ' . . . 2.2.. 22 II ■...■ 1 i..i. f• a iiir ...• 1,.............r:.1. ....., • . . . . ' . i .... 42 9 -*-....------"-- 1........-N, .... I • - - • 1;• _ • ---55. •1.•47.:•` ' • . .smarm Cr, . ..- t • st1.3014,e I . . .. 031' - - 411117 -. .. ..r........ ..:_,.... ..-2elo 0 r..0_0.;,.. ......,7./_:-.. .---... _ _...t._ELci • ! Id r ••• ',L„ : •11 :, 7,■ I 1 ' •,,„,c.1........__________----, ia ' ,'/ r...---------. • ..,•• 1:/ I* ..":........,...'-.. i .I WNW 11,11.•200 GO 1; , I .--------- •\ S. , WORD•1.00.•Elf 07. IMMO ROO.•224 N. ,".' *. I RR i09 55 • 'as ..,.. ! 1 ;E•10/DO r .•, -, ya, so... r , a • I i -....1 O.... RN.20 21 .E•2Oti•0 I . i lita ma, . , . r; 'i .. i I 1' . s. . .... • / ■ %...1 : Q ri - • ei I 1 ea LAkiri'sGA.F7E. F1_,AKI . .1 :I a • I / .■ I I 7 PI I / . I . . 7 I I •••• 2.1.41;,„..../ • • ..... i . JOS II Car 114. L Ili: V411". ...i.- a 2C4 4' ....i 0 . •s '5. v. I I ,., s.---.6--—U172.-. .1__--—-11.1.-d-qi t------...--:-.F ._ I . . . Ii \.. .....,..r....,... _1:- _ ,..,._____ • • .:..-.."'. • -.i...-:I.1.4 I SA,/LOCulli srmuT ,.. • , .,,..,,, ......... ....v,. .,w, ,iw*a.00iisoijmioavgfMNavirg.egnallgIMMIIMMIWaIIIIIIIMIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII l 7/«iao Ws/f. S fie ZK S 7•,.:.. {z, 4Ani.r5 T ` _ � . 4 ••Sri. J Siee/- Kees II 4(4 br 9 ex1y 2.. t 'I Corte Sf- _n•...,r- .I . : fir 07. 4 sa Se.4 4.,..� 4-p k..a q-f d tw//ti.. 5 # - Scie ni /a,�. 1 /w /it ( _ _ me _ S$Pr� �S `7' ! N.[.W Lac[ U ` 4) s.l hvxt c - k- AO 4- (4) — 1 A,..J (1vy) as nichi.2 & cL( 44 tin c c 7rceci< MI 111 X) 69ine5 a 5 5/clew,,,1/ 4 t eta:` 1 —5-1-z(-yt 6� r,,'.', e. ? Ghi ex fy 0,4 4o a- aZ (mow• !f ve,r�/ (arta . 640-f_a-de-447 (,vie %�a� r€yy...v�ile(� 's� th�uC/ :7 7Z& CicIOvu.-.4„, 095-2.0 6'=6ax 6/--4 " 1,614xy r/b 6p-C . ee tec44, J . - --- Tfittit))7 ie_ -� c:-0 - vvl ti dvx-4-P icuc, trrc i w - Ai Z.-(2`) I-y 7.4_ PS _ a54- Cc,/02..5.! ..... i ..4..c?i,il4) SG & 4, �, (2Y./3 St-) 1p ,Gin �� r Pees, 7ee4 ' /- 5 / (5i 17'e Z er- Greek bet, I i s. Si /J/4 ,) M.4d-114115 Aft -4. c, adc/.fei -la 6t•!'C.7 tvyri &h lee 41/ i _ Aft4it Itenus.!yeosJ -& Tr« 1'46---- • . ! . ei4af t eiti: 'AA r 111 pai 41 2•/ Seau4 efrIA (Auk -,elete owl"wee 44.1--- --aheee4 frtide,#,<A-4,40,y- _____________/6// /5, 2_ 114. 2 pP62._ _ ctk rt.. I pa,t_i4,6 Luiti j+e.., o< LA.-X.Li c MA/IA-Ted -1-tet32- q tau(4 - 1 Atklmj', , . . _ . .. , , . : . - i 4 . ■ . . ; •■• ..---. - -,- ., .- -. 1 . _ -. . .,... ...., -.- . • J • ,S . .- Vt .. ■ .... . . • • July 17, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD VIP's Industries, Inc. Attn: Steven Johnson OREGON 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville, OR 97070 Re: Phoenix Inn Expansion, SDR 99-0002 Status by Planning Division Dear Steve: In response to a request for a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO) by your Project Manager, Jerry Bennett, I conducted a site inspection on July 14, 2000 to determine compliance with the approved plans and the land use decision for this project. I have signed-off on the TCO, however, there are deficiencies on the site, and they will need to be corrected no later than August 25. 2000, and prior to issuance of a Final Occupancy permit by the Building Division. The following need to be corrected to correspond with the approved revised site plan, sheet 1 of 17, dated August 10, 1999, and the approved revised landscape plan dated July 27, 1999. 1. Parking: There are 104 parking spaces required on the site. On the approved site plan, 47 spaces are shown as part of the expansion and 57 are shown as existing. There should be no more than 50% compact spaces on the site. The minimum dimensions for standard parking spaces are 18.5' deep x 8.5' wide and compact spaces are 16.5' deep x 7.5' wide. From field measurements, I have determined that a number of parking spaces do not match the minimum depth requirements. While some of these spaces can be rectified via extending the parking striping, several cannot and will require more extensive correction. To bring the parking space depth into compliance the following will need to be done: a. The two spaces in the far-southeast corner of the site to the east of the new addition have depths of 13 feet (the compact space) and 14 feet (the standard space), respectively. Even with an overhang allowance of 3 feet into the landscaped area, the spaces are 16 feet and 17 feet in depth, and do not meet the minimum requirement for depth for either a compact or standard parking space, respectively. These spaces shall be marked with a no parking sign, and shall not be used until they are improved to meet the code standard for space dimensions and are inspected and approved by this office for use. Please provide a revised parking plan showing how you propose to bring these parking spaces into code compliance. In any case, you must meet the minimum requirement of 104 parking spaces on the site. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 Page 1 of 4 • b. The parking space at the far northeast corner of the site protrudes into the access aisle. The minimum pavement width for the access is 24 feet. As the access is wider than the minimum adjacent to this parking space, it appears that this problem could be rectified by relocating the eastside of the access curb further to the west (still allowing a 24-foot curb to curb access width) to provide more room for the parking spaces at the northeast corner of the site. You will need to field verify this and provide a revised site plan for review and approval showing how you propose to meet the code requirements for parking depth. This parking space shall be marked with a no parking sign, until the space is brought into compliance with the code. c. Parking striping on numerous spaces in the parking lot are considerably shorter than the required depth of the parking space as shown on the site plan (even considering the overhang proposed in some locations). Parking spaces will need to be striped for the full depth of the spaces as shown on the plans. d. Please clarify whether you are intending a one-foot or a three-foot bumper overhang around the perimeter of the site. Plans show a three (3') foot overhang, while the Project Manager, Mr. Bennett has informed me that he intended a one (1') foot overhang on site. 2. Landscaping: a. The area of the three (3') foot auto overhang (beyond the curb) at the perimeter of the site has been planted with shrubs. These shrubs are not allowed as plants in this area and will likely not survive. Planting should be held back three (3') feet from the edge of the curb other than very low lying planting such as grassy lawn. Planting in the overhang area can not be counted toward the minimum landscape requirement of 15% for the site. You will need to recalculate the landscape percentage to ensure that the landscape requirement is met after all revisions are made in accordance with this letter. b. There are several trees shown to be retained on the approved landscape plan dated July 27, 1999 which have been removed. They are tree #6 (8" Pine), #12 (42" Cedar) and #13 (24" Hawthorne-Aggregate 3 stem) as noted on the tree removal plan. No revisions were submitted to this office to explain this change to the landscape plan as required when changes are made to the plans. These trees were, however, included in the tree report by William Owen and Associates dated February 16, 1999 to be removed. Phoenix Inn Expansion, SDR 99-0002 Page 2 of 4 7/14/2000 Planning Status/Site Inspection c. Planting for screening along the east and south property line to the east of the new addition was not completed on the site. Screening plants shall be placed beyond the three (3') bumper overhang area. d. Bill Owen, Consulting Arborist, contacted me this week to inquire about removing Tree #1, a 24" Fir, the southern-most fir tree located just to the southwest corner to the Phoenix Inn addition. As Mr. Owen has stated that the tree is not an immediate hazard and has not died, but rather is in slow decline, removal of the tree does meet the terms and conditions of the Tree Agreement. Therefore, this request to remove Tree#1 is denied. e. Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall submit a copy of the recorded Tree Agreement to this office. 3. Accessibility: a. The accessible walkway which connects the sidewalk along Greenburg Road has been constructed farther south than shown on the plans without review and approval of revisions. As no revisions were submitted to this office for approval prior to the change in location, the change is not in compliance. The walkway was constructed about two (2') feet from the tree trunk and under the dripline of Tree #2, a 30" Douglas Fir in fair to good condition. The present entry walkway location is likely to be damaged by roots from the fir tree. Provide an assessment by your arborist, as to the potential of walkway and tree damage as a result of the current walkway location. The arborist report shall include a recommendation as to the most optimal location of the accessible entry walkway for tree preservation and walkway conditions. The applicant shall revise the site plan and locate the accessible entry walkway to meet ADA requirements for walkways and to preserve the Douglas Fir trees along Greenburg Road to the greatest extent possible. 4. Type I Minor Modification required: Within 14 days, the applicant shall submit a Type I Minor Modification land use application (with a $100 fee) to include proposed changes in location for the entry walkway, changes to the parking configuration, and changes to the landscape plan (including documentation of the existing trees which were removed from the site). Type I Minor Modifications are typically reviewed within ten (10) days. All work to bring the site design into compliance shall be completed within 45 days of this letter. You have been issued a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the 45 day period in which all conditions shall be met and all work must be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning and Building Divisions. If you do not obtain approval and complete all work within that time period, you will be sited for violation of occupancy ($250 per day), Phoenix Inn Expansion, SDR 99-0002 Page 3 of 4 7/14/2000 Planning Status/Site Inspection • • • At • Final Occupancy will be withheld, and other code enforcement measures may be taken as deemed necessary. If you have any questions, please contact me at 503-639-4171, ext.315. Sincerel , K ren Perl Fox Associate Planner I:cu rpin\karen'sdr\sdr99-02.status Enclosure c: Charles Hagel, Architect Bill Owen, Arborist Hap Watkins, Building Inspection Supervisor Rick Bolen, Inspector II Gary Lampella, Building Official Dick Bewersdorff, Current Planning Manager Phoenix Inn Expansion, SDR 99-0002 Page 4 of 4 7/14/2000 Planning Status/Site Inspection CHAP.11,DIV.I 40 ill 11032.4 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1104.1 1103.2.4 Walks. ORS 447.233(1)through(7)are not a part of this code but are 1103.2.4.1 Width. All walks on accessible routes shall be con- reproduced here for the reader's convenience: tinuous with a minimum clear width complying with Section 447.233 Accessible parking space requirements; inspec- 1109.4.1. bon of spaces; remedy for violation.(1)The Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services shall include 1103.2.4.2 Height. There shall be a clear continuous minimum in the state building code,as defined in ORS 455.010,a require- height complying with Section 1109.4.2. ment that the number of accessible parking spaces specified in subsection(2)of this section be provided for affected buildings 1103.2.4.3 Slope. The running slope shall not exceed 1 unit ver- subject to the state building code and that the spaces be signed tical in 20 units horizontal (5% slope). Cross slopes shall not as required by subsection(2)of this section.Spaces may also be exceed 1 unit vertical in 50 units horizontal(2%slope). marked in a manner specified in the state building code. EXCEPTION:Where site infeasibility precludes a running slope (2)(a)The number of accessible parking spaces shall be: ■. of I unit vertical in 20 units horizontal(5%slope),the least possible running slope shall be provided.Walks with slopes in excess of 1 unit Required vertical in 20 units horizontal(5%slope)shall comply with Section Total Parking Minimum Number 1109.7.In no case shall a walk which is part of an accessible route have in Lot of Accessible a running slope greater than 1 unit vertical in 12 units horizontal Spaces (8.33%slope). 1 to 25 1 Handrails are not required on walks with a slope of 1 unit verti- 26 to 50 2 cal in 20 units horizontal(5%slope),or less. 51 to 75 3 76 to 100 4 1103.2.4.4 Passing space. Walks less than 60 inches (1524 101 to 150 5 mm) in continuous width shall provide passing space at reason- 151 to 200 6 able intervals but not to exceed every 200 feet(60 960 mm)corn- 201 to 300 7 plying with Section 1109.2.1. Passing space may be provided at 301 to 400 8 landings at building entrances or at the intersection of two walks. 401 to 500 9 The passing space at the intersection of two walks shall have the 501 to 1,000 2 percent of total minimum possible running slope and a cross slope that does not 1,001 and over 20 plus 1 for each exceed 1 unit vertical in 50 units horizontal(2%slope). 100 over 1,000 (b)In addition,one in every eight accessible spaces,but not less 1103.2.4.5 Surfaces. Surfaces shall be firm, stable and slip-re- than one,shall be van accessible.A van accessible parking space shall sistant complying with Section 1109.6. be at least nine feet wide and shall have an adjacent access aisle that is at least eight feet wide. 1103.2.4.6 Grates. Grates shall comply with Section 1109.6.4. (c)Accessible parking spaces shall be at least nine feet wide „ and shall have an adjacent access aisle that is at least six feet 1103.2.4.7 Separation. Walks paralleling vehicular ways shall wide. be separated from vehicular ways by curbs, planted areas, rail- (d)The access aisle shall be located on the passenger side of ings,or other barriers between the pedestrian area and vehicular the parking space except that two adjacent accessible parking areas. Walks not separated shall be defined by a continuous de- spaces may share a common access aisle. tectable warning which is 36 inches(914 mm)wide.Separations shall comply with Sections 1109.5 and 1109.7. (e)A sign shall be posted for each accessible parking space. The sign shall be clearly visible to a person parking in the space, 1103.2.4.8 Protruding objects. Protruding objects shall not shall be marked with the International Symbol of Access and reduce the minimum clear width of the walk and shall comply shall indicate that the spaces are reserved for persons with dis- with Section 1109.5. abled person parking permits. Van accessible parking spaces shall have an additional sign marked "Van Accessible" 1103.2.4.9 Islands. Islands which obstruct walks shall have mounted below the sign. crossings cut through level with the walk or have curb ramps or (1)Accessible parking spaces and signs shall be designed in other sloped areas at the sides and a level area 36 inches wide(914 compliance with the standards set forth by the Oregon Trans- mm) by 48 inches long(1219 mm) minimum in the part of the portation Commission in consultation with the Oregon Disabil- island between the ramps. ities Commission. (3)No ramp or obstacle may extend into the parking space or SECTION 1104—PARKING FACILITIES the aisle,and curb cuts and ramps may not be situated in such a way that they could be blocked by a legally parked vehicle. 1104.1 Accessible Parking Required.Accessible parking faci- (4) Parking spaces required by this section shall be main- lities shall be provided, constructed, striped, signed and main- tained so as to meet the requirements of this section at all times tained as required by ORS 447.233 and this section. and to meet the standards established by the state building code. (Continued) 1-132 08/01/00 TUE 15:05 FAX 503 682 9257 VIPS IND INC 0 001 VIP'S INDUSTRIES INC. FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET DATE:-01 A, � 1 � aQ TIME: a 00 TOTAL PAGES: \\ (Including this one) ATTENTION: rx)c-e_r' Qp Vtr, COMPANY: ‘c FAX#: FROM: \). X'N - Title: ?c eS�CLo U FAX#: 503-682-9257 QUESTIONS AND/OR PROBLEMS: CALL AT (503) 682-9284 COMMENTS: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is transmitted and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this communication is not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination,distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and destroy the original communication. 29757 SW Boones Ferry Rd. Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 Telephone 503-682-9284 Fax 503-682-9257 08/01/00 TUE 15:05 FAX 503 682 9257 VIPS IND INC [21 002 VM"C11. 11.7. INDUSTRIES,INC. August 1, 2000 Karen Perl Fox Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,OR 97223 Re: Phoenix Inn Expansion SDR 99-0002 CORRECTION LETTER-7/17/00 Dear Karen: Per item 2(e) of your Correction Letter dated 7/17/00 in the above referenced matter, enclosed herein please find a copy of the recorded Tree Agreement between VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. and the City of Tigard,with recording information noted on the face thereof. I am operating under the assumption that our General Contractor,Super One, Inc.,will be handling all other items recited in your Correction Letter of 7/17/00 directly with you. If the need arises for you to contact me directly on behalf of the Owner, please don't hesitate to call. Thank you for your courtesies and cooperation throughout Ve truly yo , Steven V. Johnson President cc: Super One,Inc. (Fax- 643-5976) 29757 SW Boones Ferry Rd. • Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 Telephone 503-682-9284 • FAX 503-6829257 08/01/00 TUE 15:06 FAX 503 682 9257 VIPS INI) INC E003 STATE OF OREGON 1 County of Washington I SS I, Jerry - . t.;r r of Assess- ment and�s^;f Y�r; *., 'o County Clerk for ' +�' l.y 4... �s'?y �:rtify that Re �n the wit i r;.,..r_,.:.. . cesaId and re......: '�r�l !��. ,� •f said county ff °O41.. ';�c 17° VIP'S Industries, Inc. 1* ►. +51 rtiFf rare halt! i4 `. ci 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road *:"„�4r:.;: ''��' tt Wilsonville, Oregon, 97070 �`'�r..: '"ar� irector of O�• _ v��•,: :�� •i axatlon,Ex- .i!,C?ag.b Clerk Doc : 2000061392 Rect: 259988 37.00 TREE AGREEMENT 08/01/2000 11: 39: 50am This Tree Agreement(the "Agreement") is made this 26th day of July, 2000 by VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. ("VMI"). RECITALS: WHEREAS: VMI applied to the City of Tigard, Oregon (the "City") to develop a three story, 45 unit hotel building, and associated parking on property identified as Washington County, Oregon Tax Map and Lot Numbers 1S126DC 4500, 4600, and 4602,more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein. WHEREAS: The City reviewed the Application of VMI, and conditioned its approval,in part, upon a deed restriction, which subjects prospective removal of certain trees located on that property identified as Washington County Tax Map and Lot Numbers 1S126DC 4600 and 4602, to Tigard Development Code § 18.790.040.B; and WHEREAS: VMI has identified the trees subject to this Agreement by drawing attached hereto as Exhibit"B," and incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein; THEREFORE: VMI agrees as follows: TERMS AND CONDITIONS: 1. VMI agrees and shall not remove any of the four (4) Douglas Fir trees identified on Exhibit"B" 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,VMI first provides the written confirmation of the certified arborist to the City before taking any further action to remove the affected tree. 1-� 08/01/00 TUE 15:06 FAX 503 682 9257 VIPS IND INC 0 004 • 2. This Agreement shall apply only to the four (4) existing Douglas Fir trees located on that property described as in Exhibit"A," each tree being identified by drawing in the attached Exhibit "B," and does not apply to any other trees or vegetation located on the Exhibit"A" property. AGREED TO THIS 26TH DAY OF JULY, 2000. VIP' MOTOR I 0 • Steven V. Johnson, President State of Oregon ) County of Clackamas ) Before me, a Notary Public in and for said State and County, Appeared the above named Steven V. Johnson, President of VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc., 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 VIP'S Motor Inns, Inc. for the uses and purposes therein described. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal this 26th day of July, 2000. !;-•: OFFICIAL SEAL _ MONICA MONiCA E. HAMILTON Notary Public NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON MVC COMMISSION N0.328601 r My Commission Expires: \CO%1C)'T MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCT.28,2003 08/01/00 TUE 15:07 FAX 503 682 9257 VIPS IND INC j 005 EXHIBIT A A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE LOTS 6 AND 7 OF BLOCK "C" "LEHMANN ACRE TRACTS" IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 26 AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, BEING FURTHER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 7 , BEING A POINT ON THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SW CORAL STREET; THENCE S88°51 ' 45"E, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID STREET, A DISTANCE OF 95 . 17 FEET; THENCE S01°05 '41"W, ON THE LINE DIVIDING THE EAST AND WEST HALVES OF SAID LOT, A DISTANCE OF 176 . 15 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 7; THENCE N88°54 '31"W, A DISTANCE OF 95. 15 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY CORNER COMMON TO SAID LOTS 6 AND 7; THENCE CONTINUING N88°54 '31"W, ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6 , A DISTANCE OF 201 .28 FEET TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SW GREENBURG ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 2472 ) ; THENCE N11°30 ' 56"E, ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 0 . 31 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE, SAID POINT BEING 30. 00 FEET EASTERLY OF, WHEN MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLE THERETO, THE CENTERLINE of SAID ROAD; THENCE N15°42 '23"E, ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 99 .28 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 96-000045 OF THE WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS; THENCE S88°51 '45"E, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID DEED, A DISTANCE OF 176 . 15 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 7; THENCE N01°05 ' 18"E, A DISTANCE OF 80. 00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL CONTAINS 34 ,942 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS . DIO' 6-0' GO k,,,,,.........,_■ -...IIIIIIIIIIIIIIMI"a //07 �K �y . 4600 o ,,�� C * 4602 4500 4700 470/ 4800 ,..' ,• ,- ..--...' 0 177• o .�� D 7► o cn W i c: pr28 Nt - 10229 A. .mss '-z�1•X€. 5 co O �a DI _ s 44 c. T 1023 • 8" 1 .005' . 310' 8" .004 D13' • O k S . W. LOCO 1ST I 310' c ABANDONED ^ Co 77.7c-1- cn cn ' .0131 .134' 8" O m ^� (NJ 52' f K �_ 713401 N 1 DI4' /76'0 a 7, 7 49107, 2 /000 m LIJ - _ _ •—.. '-U w 0 5' • 071 • _ ABANDONED LINE 7 1023 DI rr. 0 O 259, 1 0 9 r K 0 co 0 /107 r - - 4600 0 c CD .4r i 1-1602 4 500 Ai t. o P 4700 470/ 4800 ` :r- NO 071 i I o W 2s� o oe Dr it 10229T -` S z�Z �� N 0 7:07-.u� DU SO CC C q om N.- o F Fri U 4..(/-1), T 10231 8" 1 .005' • 310' 8" .004 D13 0 S . W. LOCU f ST IST.1 310' c i ABANDONED co— - 7 En 8" .0131 4134' 8" n,° `�' (NI ° d 52' r sK EI T 13401 _ ' D14 X76' D,, o 0 � 7 /43107, /000 CO 2 / , Ct 0 07, • ABANDONED LINE - --- -- a. p.-- -4- — — -- 71023 D11 ;,, 0 259, nom, ,' 09, ' 08/01/00 TUE 15:08 FAX 503 682 9257 VIPS IND INC 0 008 July 17, 2000 hi1drr4h, iy .� ' rte ._� CITY OF TIGARD VIP's Industries, Inc. Attn: Steven Johnson OREGON 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road Wilsonville, OR 97070 Re: Phoenix inn Expansion, SDR 99-0002 Status by Planning Division Dear Steve: In response to a request for a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO) by your Project Manager, Jerry Bennett, I conducted a site inspection on July 14, 2000 to determine compliance with the approved plans and the land use decision for this project. I have signed-off on the TCO, ho - 1- , - : -ficiencies on the site, and y they will need to be corrected no later tha August 25, 2000, :nd prior to issuance of a Final Occupancy permit by the Building Divi • • Th- • e g need to be corrected to correspond with the approved revised site plan, sheet 1 of 17, dated August 10, 1999, and the approved revised landscape plan dated July 27, 1999. 1. Parking: There are 104 parking spaces required on the site. On the approved site plan, 47 spaces are shown as part of the expansion and 57 are shown as existing. There should be no more than 50% compact spaces on the site. The minimum dimensions for standard parking spaces are 18.5' deep x 8.5' wide and compact spaces are 16.5' deep x 7.5' wide. From field measurements, I have determined that a number of parking spaces do not match the minimum depth requirements. While some of these spaces can be rectified via extending the parking striping, several cannot and will require more extensive correction. To bring the parking space depth into compliance the following will need to be done: a. The two spaces in the far-southeast corner of the site to the east of the new addition have depths of 13 feet (the compact space) and 14 feet (the standard space), respectively. Even with an overhang allowance of 3 feet into the landscaped area, the spaces are 16 feet and 17 feet in depth, and do not meet the minimum requirement for depth for either a compact or standard parking space, respectively. These spaces shall be marked with a no parking sign, and shall not be used until they are improved to meet the code standard for space dimensions and are inspected and approved by this office for use. Please provide a revised parking plan showing how you propose to bring these parking spaces into code compliance. In any case, you must meet the minimum requirement of 104 parking spaces on the site. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Page 1 of 4 08/01/00 TUE 15:09 FAX 503 682 9257 VIPS INI) INC 01009 b. The parking space at the far northeast corner of the site protrudes into the , °',, access aisle. The minimum pavement width for the access is 24 feet. As the access is wider than the minimum adjacent to this parking space, it appears that this problem could be rectified by relocating the eastside of the access curb further to the west (still allowing a 24-foot curb to curb access width) to provide more room for the parking spaces at the northeast corner of the site. You will need to field verify this and provide a revised site plan for review and approval showing how you propose to meet the code requirements for parking depth. This parking space shall be marked with a no parking sign, until the space is brought into compliance with the code. c. Parking striping on numerous spaces in the parking lot are considerably shorter than the required depth of the parking space as shown on the site plan (even considering the overhang proposed in some locations). Parking spaces will need to be striped for the full depth of the spaces as shown on the plans. ,,.rr�� d. Please clarify whether you are intending a one-foot or a three-foot bumper \On overhang around the perimeter of the site. Plans show a three (3') foot overhang, while the Project Manager, Mr. Bennett has informed me that he intended a one (1') foot overhang on site. 2. Landscapina: a. The area of the three (3') foot auto overhang (beyond the curb) at the perimeter of the site has been planted with shrubs. These shrubs are not Sro... allowed as plants in this area and will likely not survive. Planting should be held back three (3') feet from the edge of the curb other than very low lying planting such as grassy lawn. Planting in the overhang area can not be counted toward the minimum landscape requirement of 15% for the site. You will need to recalculate the landscape percentage to ensure that the landscape requirement is met after all revisions are made in accordance with this letter. b. There are several trees shown to be retained on the approved landscape plan dated July 27, 1999 which have been removed. They are tree #6 (3' File T, #12 (42" Cedar) and #13 (24" Hawthorne-Aggregate 3 stem) as (.?_2Q-) noted on the tree removal plan. No revisions were submitted to this office to explain this change to the landscape plan as required when changes are made to the plans. These trees were, however, included in the tree report by William Owen and Associates dated February 16, 1999 to be removed. Phoenix Inn Expansion, SDR 99-0002 Page 2 of 4 7/14/2000 Planning Status/Site Inspection 08/01/00 TUE 15:10 FAX 503 682 9257 VIPS IND INC Ij010 c. Planting for screening along the east and south property line to the east of the new addition was not completed on the site. Screening plants shall be placed beyond the three (3') bumper overhang area. d. Bill Owen, Consulting Arborist, contacted me this week to inquire about X removing Tree #1 , a 24" Fir, the southern-most fir tree located just to the southwest corner to the Phoenix Inn addition. As Mr. Owen has stated that the tree is not an immediate hazard and has not died, but rather is in slow decline, removal of the tree does meet the terms and conditions of the Tree Agreement. Therefore, this request to remove Tree#1 is denied. e. Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall submit a copy of the recorded Tree Agreement to this office. 3. Accessibility: a. The accessible walkway which connects the sidewalk along Greenburg ' `‘-\''› Road has been constructed farther south than shown on the plans without review and approval of revisions. As no revisions were submitted to this office for approval prior to the change in location, the change is not in compliance. The walkway was constructed about two (2') feet from the tree trunk and under the dripline of Tree #2, a 30" Douglas Fir in fair to good condition. The present entry walkway location is likely to be damaged by roots from the fir tree. Provide an assessment by your arborist, as to the potential of walkway and tree damage as a result of the current walkway location. The arborist report shall include a recommendation as to the most optimal location of the accessible entry walkway for tree preservation and walkway conditions. The applicant shall revise the site plan and locate the accessible entry walkway to meet ADA requirements for walkways and to preserve the Douglas Fir trees along Greenburg Road to the greatest extent possible. 4. i f►SIIw h_ ifica ' nr- s1 ' e• : Within 14 days, e applicant shall submit a Type I Minor Modification land ,,,),_\..N.) - - a•• • - ••a ith a $100 fee) to include proposed changes in location for the entry walkway, changes to the parking configuration, and changes to the landscape plan (including documentation of the existing trees which were removed from the site). Type I Minor Modifications are typically reviewed within ten (10) days. All work to bring the site design into compliance shall be completed within 45 days of this letter. You have been issued a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the 45 day period in which all conditions shall be met and all work must be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning and Building Divisions. If you do not obtain approval and complete all work within that time period, you will be sited for violation of occupancy ($250 per day), Phoenix Inn Expansion, SDR 99-0002 Page 3 of 4 7/14/2000 Planning Status/Site Inspection 08/01/00 TUE 15:10 FAX 503 682 9257 VIPS IND INC I ]011 Final Occupancy will be withheld, and other code enforcement measures may be taken as deemed necessary. If you have any questions, please contact me at 503-639-4171 , ext.315. Sincere) , ate„ Ai2et/ i6e K ren Perl Fox Associate Planner I curpin\karen\sdr■sdr99-02.status Enclosure c: Charles Hagel, Architect Bill Owen, Arborist Hap Watkins, Building Inspection Supervisor Rick Bolen, Inspector II Gary Lampella, Building Official Dick Bewersdorff, Current Planning Manager Phoenix Inn Expansion, SDR 99-0002 Page 4 of 4 7/14/2000 Planning Status/Site Inspection August 22, 2000 VIP's Industries, Inc. CITY OF TIGARD Attn: Steven Johnson 29757 SW Boones Ferry Road OREGON Wilsonville, OR 97070 503-682-9284 503-682-9257 (fax) Sent by US Mail and Facsimile Re: Phoenix Inn Expansion, SDR 99-0002 Status by Planning Division Dear Steve: I inspected the site today to determine if the site deficiencies had been corrected to bring the parking and landscaping into compliance as outlined in my letter of July 17, 2000. I met with Jerry Bennett, your on-site project manager. This is to notify you that there you are shy of one parking space of the total of 104 parking spaces required on the site. To meet the minimum parking requirement Mr. Bennett and I arrived at the following solution: 1) Convert and re-stripe the two accessible parking spaces to the east of the existing building and just south of the stair well into (3) three parking spaces (2 standard and 1 compact); and 2) Convert the standard parking space located to the north of the existing accessible space at the east entry door of the existing building to an accessible space with a shared access aisle 3) Eliminate the parking space off of the emergency exit to the south of the existing building. Please be aware that this work must be done by August 25, 2000 at the latest as your Temporary Occupancy permit will expire on that date. Please contact Sherman Casper, Permit Coordinator, at 639-4171 ext. 322 to obtain a final site inspection of this work. Yours truly, Ka en Fox Associate Planner C: Hap Watkins, Building Inspection Supervisor Sherman Casper, Permit Coordinator Dick Bewersdorff, Current Planning Manager Bob Poskin, Senior Plans Examiner I:curpin\karen\sdr\sdr99-02.status2 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 SUSCe rcn ANC /i//'AAAAA ATCA v■ ■c 11111010111-vn,11 c� 10950 S.W. Fifth, Suite 150 Beaverton, OR 97005 OR CCB#57193 • WA C#SuperO1120P7 • CA CSLB#764425 • (503)643 • 5721 • (503) 643 • 5976 FAX July 28, 20Q0 Ms. Karen P(erl Fox City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Ms. Fox, This letter is in response to the site inspection of Phoenix Inn expansion. At this time there are 104 parking spaces on site as required. IA. To meet the minimum requirement for depth, one parking bay has been eliminated by paint hash markers in the Southeast corner making the bay to the South the proper depth. 1B. The curb at the parking entry has been moved and replaced to make the entry 24 ft wide to comply to code. 2A. The.shrubs have been placed 3 ft from the face of the curb as requested, however they were planted in accordance with the approved landscape plans. 2B. As for removal of trees that is something I have asked Bill Owen about. He said he would contact your office. 2C. Screening plants have been placed beyond the three(3)ft. bumper overhang area. 3A. Bill Gwen has or will contact you regarding providing an assessment as to the potential of walkway and tree damage of current walkway location. • • ■ I CAFE.MS...l l I ,� p - - - - . : . 24•DIM..J I / �I • / ._`E.W.CORAL STREET _• - ergAinHoo ;� [v—,ter-, — Scw[N FELT / / -V--__ ..1ftl-. ■ONIIMV!!= e'LRTRUOED / / I c.. ,E Cune . /l xl r aNac OKRNANO 1 i 134 / uro IANDSCAPL AAA 1 t.--. 1 / a./ xwwlmvr 1 ': Y 1 N i` vA LKxr RETUNING WALL ' ®' :--- NI / y. 47 TOTAL NEW PARKING SPACES MOTTO[MM6 DRWeWATS AND - ?•_ ' 'T"I .. im �l II!•L MI I KRA.°ba 01•11 MD 1110.0 28 STANDARD[ r �� 19 COMPACT TaTq �[`` ''.` ,,./ vn--'�,_-21:.. -•-..^' SfK.A NOSCAA"RCA I I! �wDLA "', :: i b■ I IL rrrun eeesE6eng15 •:i'/ja AS• ; ' ..1 D ClRale UTOT 7•sN M ASA.=MCNEIL .� I EWSnxa xuWnt E CERT LiPt AY / ISI f✓' wt[� •� ; tmn.a SPOT ntv.nw is nrcT.e NN ti D.tolallR TIN iLE WA D,. yotWALI1 _D°1^_''3 2p� LTA 1.-� f-f t-f- ■—PROPOSED.o W omW.WaW . OA M A ED bv1J I•A v.',1L I —LA—EAS.0 Mw(AD NRITY UNE AMORAL WAR / I\ !y .•. -J•.ti -... ;..__-'_ .. ....,•_..._. OE MLA 111AAT10N I \ / •�/ \\ / TAeMD 111f_ J'KMCCC 0A4[RM(UID I MAW STORM DOER V RAM L 1 / / \\ / ]N M Y /IIAIA / 1 NO ,A•ID ————[TASOxt SINIMT MVO n▪ r..A UK J1 / 1 1 \ I 4,•`n noa.n.N \\ % I —•—Crow WArte LIRE RD WoaeoRwN /1 g r Il J )1 S.(/*�'_ 'I MAW CLOD z. SYRIA. rc« i I.' PROPOSED CD. SP EPATIC S.AL POLL(. �"k)Rti i I \T. l 1 i I LOST..MACE AI salmi SAM.canto en I 44 TPA SA O.4 tanro Rg1T_OP-WAL J ' 1 ' / VP COWPER SIDEWALK .NGNM 1 i i rtuRMOT[PD.. AV TOP OF PALL RCN INIELI CAW RAMP J 1 •1 O. _ rl A ^I WATER x[ER WATER VALVE [.PANE MST.: r T/ 4'. (NT 0[1.1) 1, 1• ilT.":"." i/ II / / I • ,. "'•,1 --_1 J__9N.IAW--_,� . I .. .. / I I .t.:IF( —_--]t0]'LLERie.___ uNw wrr, / A'w/ • T _ I T:TRN - __E.w.LOCUEisTREET _1 I ., 1 I .Le n.;r Is i , a �,rr1.i \V VIP•S INDUSTRIES, INC OR"'-w MO. b+ • TRT ENGINEERING.INC. 29757 SO BOONES (503) ROAD �. i�2r1A.•°• WILSONVILLE•OREGON - (503)682-9284 1 1� .. • I .. _ - 4.4.• MARKET SMUT a5-UNIT ADDITION-PHOENIX INN F _ , IOTNINO.*NOON MN PY gtlN °'I ut "`�^^ 14.1714444+ 9575 SW LOCUST ST- TIGARD.OREGON PPM.NO. 1 A"iZII Mt ,.__11f .. • REVISED SITE PLAN(7/26/00) WTI), / A i _ ,.,r. ' DATE: _(t , q c] PLANS CHECK NO. PROJECT TITLE D 1 1 COUNTYWIDE S`h IN - nr- TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE WORKSHEET APPLICANT: (FOR NON-SINGLE FAMILY USES) MAIUNG ADDRESS: CITY/ZIP/PHONE: TAX MAP NO.: SITES NOADDRESS: LAND USE CATEGORY RATE PER TRIP R ENTIAL $ 189.00 USINESS AND COMMERCIAL $ 48.00 OFFICE $ 174.00 INDUSTRIAL $ 182.00 � } ( V/\AT_(j__ UAL o INSTITUTIONAL $ 79.00 Wil ( kit PAYMENT METHOD: f� CASH/CHECK 6 ; e,( __V ui (ilJl of t�� porwtot- CREDIT qP)\ we 3111 , I BANCROFT(PROMISSORY NOTE) INSTITUTIONAL ONLY: DEFER TO OCCUPANCY LAND USE CATEGORY QESCRI TI OF USE WEEKDAY AVG. b WEEKEND AVG.TRIP RATE 7-A2-0 b TRIP RATE 0, BASIS: L1 S u� l� oDt-el CALCULATIONS: -11e: de- wIv av\ C td a.lOral_ *,r rata 160j, L) GeL:21:At- „ - 2-'1 -11) t) 2-4° *4d1 ' PROJECT TRIP,CpE�t-��4ATION: FEE:,)2.7 to 2 OO FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES ONLY ADDITIONAL NOTES: jeci _ :--r, Imo; ROAD AMT.: lc; /DO 60 U TRANSIT AMT.: Q/„(O 0 PREPARED BY:f� C �' • I:TIFWKST.DOC (DST) EFF: 07-01-98