The URL can be used to link to this page

SDR1998-00009 SDR98 - 00009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE NOTICE OF DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW [SDR] 98-0009 CITY IGARD Community Development KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE Shaping A Better Community 120 DAYS = 11/13/98 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE CASE NO.: Site Development Review SDR 98-0009 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Site Development Review approval to convert an existing dwelling unit into a dental office. APPLICANT: Steve Kerby OWNER: Anna Knecht 7100 SW Hampton, Suite 121 10483 SW Bonanza Way Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. ZONING DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. The site is located on the northwest corner of SW Gonzaga Street and SW 70th Avenue. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150 and 18.164. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has DENIED the above request because the project does not meet development code standards for streets, landscaping, walkways, street trees, lighting, access and sewer. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 1 OF 17 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The property is developed and has been used as a single-family residence. A search of City records indicates that there are no previous land use approvals granted for the site. Vicinity Information: The subject site is located on the northwest corner of SW Gonzaga Street and SW 70th Avenue. The property to the west and south, along SW Gonzaga Street, is currently developed as single-family residences. The zoning of all surrounding properties is Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The zoning permits commercial businesses and the two properties directly to the west of the subject parcel are currently operating, illegally, as commercial businesses. Planning Staff and the Code Enforcement Division are aware of this and action is under way to bring these sites into compliance. The owner of the parcels has attended a pre-application conference and is moving forward in applying for Site Development Review. The property to the east, across the SW 70th Avenue right-of-way has received approval for the construction of a dental office. The properties to the north have access onto Beveland and several of those homes are operating commercial businesses. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is identified as 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. The site is within the Tigard Triangle, therefore, the Tigard Triangle Design Standards apply. The site is currently developed with a single-family residence. The proposal is to convert the existing structure to an office, pave the parking areas and install landscaping. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Section 18.120.180 states, "The Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application:" Impact Study: Section 18.32.050 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.32.250 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 2 OF 17 The applicant is required to dedicate a portion of the property to allow for the full required street width of SW 70th Avenue. In accordance with Section 18.164.030.A and J and consistent with the Tigard Triangle standards, the applicant is required to pay for and construct their portion of the local street fronting the property. In order for the local street system to function to serve all properties at buildout, streets meeting minimum standards must be provided. The required improvements provide for the share of local street improvements needed to serve this development in conjunction with the standard improvements that are required of all other properties. In other words, the applicant is only paying for their portion or segment of the local street system. With the improvements, the applicant will be providing services that will be adequate to serve the needs of the proposed use. The applicant has provided an impact statement that states the required dedication and improvements are not roughly proportional to the conversion. Staff believes that this is not a true quantification of the impact. All new commercial developments are required to have approved access on a local street. Customers of a commercial establishment on a local street utilize the local street network. Because a commercial development on a local street is only contributing to improvements to their frontage, the local street improvement is proportional to the impact which that use has on the rest of the local street system. While the proportionality of local street improvements has been discussed, additional evidence of proportionality for the dedication requirement is demonstrated in the following TIF analysis. 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 Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32% of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. Presently, the TIF for each trip that is generated is $174. The total TIF calculated for a residential conversion to a dental office is $5,333.10 (40.65 trips - 10 trips credited for residence x $174). The applicant is being required to dedicate an additional 24 feet (3362 square feet) of right-of-way along SW 70th Avenue. Based on the City's CIP budget for purchases of property for street ROW, property is assessed at $3 per square foot. Assuming a cost of$3 per square foot, it is estimated that the total cost of the dedication of SW 70th Avenue is $10,086 (3362 sq. ft. x $3). Upon completion of this development, the applicant will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $5,333. 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 this projects traffic impact is $16,665 ($5,333 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid and the full impact, is considered an unmitigated impact. Since the TIF paid is $5,333, the unmitigated impact can be valued at $11,332. Given these estimates ($10,086 dedication), the dedication requirement meets the roughly proportional standard. The cost of the street improvements is not reviewed for proportionality, as the requirement to have access to a commercial site from an approved street is necessary to meet the minimum City standards for pedestrian-vehicular safety and drainage. As stated previously in this Impact Analysis, because all development requires use of the public street network, and local streets are not covered by the TIFs, the requirement to improve local streets is proportional to the use the development has on the rest of the local street network. The street improvement and dedication requirements is discussed in this decision under Street and Utility Improvements Standards. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 3 OF 17 PROVISIONS AND REGULATIONS OF UNDERLYING ZONE The MUE zone states that dimensional requirements for all commercial use types shall be the same as the C-G district (Section 18.62.050). Section 18.62.050 states that there is no minimum lot area and the average minimum lot width is 50 feet. Developments are required to provide a minimum of 15% landscaping. The proposal provides for more than 15% landscaping, thus meeting the underlying zones landscaping regulations. Please note: Additional landscaping standards apply which may increase the amount of landscaping currently proposed. The MUE zone states that the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for all commercial and industrial use types shall not exceed 0.40. The existing structure does not exceed 40% of the site, therefore, the FAR has been met. Setbacks: Section 18.62.050 states that no front, side, or rear yard setback is required except a 20 foot side and rear yard setback is required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. The maximum building height is 45 feet This section is not applicable as the structure is existing and setbacks will not be altered as a result of this proposal. Setbacks related to landscaping requirements are discussed further elsewhere within this decision. FINDING: Because the proposed use is permitted in the underlying zone and meets the setback and dimensional requirements for that zone, the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone have been met. Tigard Triangle Design Standards: Section 18.67. Design standards for public street improvements and for new development and renovation projects have been prepared for the Tigard Triangle. These design standards address several important guiding principals adopted for the Tigard Triangle, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. All new developments, including remodeling and renovation projects resulting in non single-family residential uses, are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described below and other development standards required by the Development and Building Codes, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle. If a standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code, standards in this section shall govern. BECAUSE THE PROPOSAL INVOLVES AN EXISTING STRUCTURE, THE FOLLOWING DESIGN STANDARDS DO NOT APPLY: A. Site Design Standards including: building placement, building setback, front yard setback design and; NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 4 OF 17 B. Building Design Standards including: ground floor windows, building facades, weather protection, building materials, roofs and roof-lines, and roof-mounted equipment. THE FOLLOWING DESIGN STANDARDS ARE APPLICABLE TO THIS DEVELOPMENT: Site Design Standards A 6 foot wide scored concrete or modular paving walk way is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway. The applicant has not indicated a 6-foot-wide walkway meeting the above standards will be installed. FINDING: Because a walkway is not existing or proposed, the standard requiring a 6-foot-wide walkway from the building entrance to the public street has not been satisfied. Street Connectivity: All development must demonstrate how one of the following standard options will be met. Variance of these standards may be approved per the requirements of Chapter 18.134 where topography, barriers such as railroads or freeways, or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street extensions and connections. Design Option: A. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. B. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way shall be provided at intervals of no more that 330 feet. Performance Option: A. Local street spacing shall occur at intervals of no less than eight street intersections per mile. B. The shortest vehicle trip over public streets from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than twice the straight-line distance. C. The shortest pedestrian trip on public right-of-way from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than one and one-half the straight-line distance. The applicant's impact statement states that the design option has been met because they say SW 70th Avenue connects with SW Gonzaga Street across the street. The intent of the 660 foot design option is to provide for connecting routes along local streets which will reduce trips from being forced onto the regional network. In order for the local connection to provide an alternate route to the regional system, it must be able to extend in such a way as to connect local streets both north and south, east and west. Therefore, in order for the 660 design option to be satisfied, SW 70th Avenue must be extended north to connect already dedicated portions of SW 70th Avenue. There is a portion of SW 70th Avenue already dedicated adjacent to this site, however it is not of an adequate width that would allow for street improvements consistent with the development code. There is 950 feet between SW 72nd and SW 69th if SW 70th Avenue were not extended. Therefore, not meeting the 660-foot design option standard. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 5 OF 17 FINDING: Because the local street spacing between SW 72nd and SW 69th is greater than 660 feet, the design option has not been met. Because the applicant has not shown how they meet or will meet the design option or the performance option, this standard has not been satisfied. Site Design Standards; Parking Location and Landscape Design: Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50 percent of the street frontage, and must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The minimum depth of the L-1 landscaped area is five feet or is equal to the building setback, whichever is greater. Interior side and rear yards shall be landscaped to a L-2 Landscape Standard, except where a side yard abuts a public street, where it shall be landscaped to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The proposed parking spaces are located in the rear of the existing building, thus meeting the standards. The L-2 standards require compliance with Section 18.100 which will be discussed in more detail further in this decision. The landscape standards are discussed elsewhere within this decision. FINDING: Because the parking lot location standard is met and because the landscaping requirements will be addressed elsewhere within this decision, this standard has been satisfied. Signs: In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.114 of the Development Code the following standards shall be met: Zoning District Regulations: non-residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone (18.114.130 D). Sign Area Limits: The maximum sign area limits found in 18.114.130 shall not be exceeded. No area limit increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Height Limits: The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs shall be 10 feet. Wall signs shall not extend above the roof line of the wall on which the sign is located. No height increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Sign Location: Freestanding signs within the Tigard Triangle shall not be permitted within required L-1 landscape areas. The applicant has not indicated signs are proposed. If a sign is requested, it must be approved through the sign permit process as administered by the City of Tigard Development Services Technicians. Compliance with sign standards will be reviewed at that time. A sign permit must be obtained for ANY signs located on the property. FINDING: Because compliance with sign codes will be required if and when a sign permit is applied for, these standards have been satisfied. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 6 OF 17 Landscaping And Screening: Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are define in other sub-sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. L-1 (Low Screen): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.100 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial, trees shall be planted at 3 1/2-inch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a 3 foot high screen and a 90% opacity within one year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2- inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. L-2 (General Landscaping): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.100 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. Trees shall be provided at a minimum 2 1/2-inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2-inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. Because the site is on a local street, the L-1 and L-2 landscape standards defer to the planting standards of Section 18.100. These standards are discussed further in this decision. FINDING: Because the landscape standards of 18.100 are required in-lieu-of the L-1 or L-2 landscape standards, and because the landscape standards of Section 18.100 are discussed further in this decision, the landscaping and screening standards of the Tigard Triangle have been satisfied. PROVISIONS OF DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTERS Section 18.120.180(A)(1) requires that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of the Community Development Code. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.62, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164, 18.67 (MUE Standards and Tigard Triangle Design Standards). The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. The proposal contains no elements related to the following Code Chapters which are also listed under Section 18.120.180.A.1: 18.80 (Planned Developments), 18.84 (Sensitive Lands), 18.92 (Density Computations), 18.94 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations), or 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) These Chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards, and are not discussed in this decision. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 7 OF 17 Landscaping and Screening (18.100 and 18.120): Buffering, Screening and Compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.120.180.4(A) states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses. The site is surrounded by MUE to the north, south, east and west. There are existing residences to the north and south. To the west is a residence being used as a business without City approval, but is working on achieving compliance. To the east, across SW 70th Avenue is a site being developed as a commercial dental office. This area is zoned MUE which will continue to allow residences. The buffering and screening requirement is to screen from different types of uses. Because the north and south properties are currently residential use types, the change of the site in question from residential to commercial requires buffering and screening between the adjacent uses. The following landscaping is required for buffers as per Section 18.100.080: at least one (1) row of trees, no less than ten (10) feet high for deciduous trees or five (5) feet for evergreen trees at time of planting; at least ten (10), five (5)-gallon shrubs or 20, one (1)-gallon shrubs per 1000 square feet of required buffer area; and the remaining area must be planted in lawn, groundcover, or bark mulch. In addition, one (1) of the following screening methods is required: A hedge of narrow or broad leaf evergreen shrubs which forms a four (4)-foot high continuous shrub within two (2) years; an earthen berm planted with evergreen materials which forms a continuous screen six (6) feet in height within two (2) years; or a five (5)-foot or taller fence or wall to provide a continuous sight obscuring screen. The applicant has indicated an existing 6 foot high fence will remain and a 5-foot-wide buffer will be provided in the rear. The front yard buffer will be 30 feet. The Tigard Development Code allows reduced buffer widths provided equivalent landscaping and screening are provided to provide the same level of privacy. The applicant has not provided a landscape plan that shows the required buffer landscaping will be met or that shows additional landscaping to allow the required 20-foot-wide buffer to be reduced. FINDING: Because the applicant has not proposed landscaping and buffer widths as described above and required in Section 18.100, the buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses standard has not been met. Section 18.100.110(A) requires the screening of parking and loading areas. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three-feet-wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The applicant has proposed to retain the existing 6-foot high good neighbor fence which will screen the parking lot. The existing trees meet the requirement for 1 tree for every 7 parking spaces. FINDING: Because the existing fence will effectively screen the parking lot and the existing trees provide 1 tree for every 7 parking spaces, this standard has been met. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 8 OF 17 Street Trees: Section 18.100.033 states that all development projects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.100.035. Section 18.100.035 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). Tigard Triangle Design Standards (which supersedes all other code provisions) call for spreading street trees that spread to 25 feet along local streets. The applicant has shown 1 existing 15-inch plum tree on the property frontage. The entire frontage is 112 feet, which would require between 2 and 5 trees to be planted depending on the species. FINDING: Because the applicant has not indicated existing or proposed street trees planted 20 to 40 feet apart (distance based on the size classification at maturity), and because they are required by the Tigard Triangle Design Standards and applicable code sections, the street tree standards have not been met. Visual Clearance Areas (18.102): Section 18.102 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight (8) feet in height (trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30-foot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway, and then connecting these two (2), 30-foot distance points with a straight line. There are no structures, other than an existing utility pole proposed within the vision clearance triangle on the applicants property. FINDING: Because there is not vegetation or structures located within the vision clearance triangle, this standard has been satisfied. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.106) - Minimum off-street parking: This section requires one (1) parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. The existing structures total 1,851 square feet, therefore, a total of 9 parking spaces are required. The applicant has indicated that 9 parking spaces will be provided, therefore, the off-street parking and loading standard has been met. Bicycle Parking: Section 18.106.020(P) requires one (1) bicycle parking rack space for every 15 required vehicular parking spaces in any development. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas, or pedestrian ways. Because the site has between 1 and 15 parking spaces, one (1) bicycle parking space is required. The applicant has shown that a bicycle space will be installed in the rear of the building near the parking lot. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 9 OF 17 FINDING: Because the applicant has shown that the required number of parking spaces will be provided and the bicycle parking will be installed, this standard has been met. Access, Egress and Circulation (18.108): Section 18.108.080 requires that commercial and industrial uses which require 0-99 parking spaces provide at least 1 access with a minimum width of 30 feet and a minimum pavement width of 24 feet. There are less that 99 parking spaces proposed, therefore, one (1) 30-foot-wide access is required, with 24 feet of pavement. The applicant's plan does not show a 30 foot wide access. While there are circumstances on the site which may have allowed for a variance to be granted, the applicant has not requested a variance. FINDING: Because the proposed access does not meet the standards, and a variance was not requested, this standard has not been met. Signs (18.114 ): Section 18.114.130(D) lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C- G Zone. This provision is superseded by the Tigard Triangle Design Standards which were discussed previously in this decision. FINDING: Because the Tigard Triangle Design Standards relating to signs take precedence, this standard does not apply. Tree Removal (18.150) Section 18.150.025 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12-inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. The applicant has indicated that no trees will be removed. Based on the location of the few trees on the site, and the proposed and required improvements, staff agrees with the applicant's assessment that no trees must be removed. FINDING: Because no trees over 12-inch caliper will be removed as a result of this proposal, this criterion has been met. Street And Utility Improvement Standards (18.164): Streets: This site is bordered on the south side by SW Gonzaga Street and on the east side by the unimproved right-of-way (ROW) for SW 70th Avenue. TDC 18.164.030(E) states that street ROW widths shall not be less than what is specified in the TDC. In addition, the Tigard Triangle Design Standards (TTDS) (Section 18.67) state that in addition to Development Code standards, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 10 OF 17 water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle. An Impact Analysis, provided at the beginning of this report, addresses the proportionality of required street improvements. Section A(1) of the TTDS, entitled "Street Connectivity, Design Option", states that local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. SW Gonzaga Street Southwest Gonzaga Street is classified as a local street in the TTDS, and is required to be improved within a 60-foot ROW. At present, there is approximately 25 feet of ROW north of the street centerline adjacent to this site. The applicant's plan and narrative indicate that they are willing to dedicate additional ROW on SW Gonzaga Street to provide 30 feet from centerline to meet the TTDS standards. Southwest Gonzaga Street is a paved roadway but is not built to meet the City's width and structural section standards. The TTDS indicates that a local street shall have a paved width of 36 feet curb-to-curb (18 feet from curb to centerline). In accordance with the TTDS and TDC standards for development requirements, the applicant should be required to make street improvements to the frontage of SW Gonzaga Street. The applicant has proposed to not construct the street improvements as a part of the development, but suggests that the improvements be delayed with the use of a non-remonstrance agreement because they feel the surrounding neighbors do not want the street improved. They also state that the cost of constructing an improvement along their frontage will be more costly than if it were included with a larger project, such as a local improvement district (LID). They also state that the dead-end sidewalk will serve no useful purpose, as their customers will more than likely arrive by car. Staff does not believe the applicant's statements warrant a delay in the improvement of SW Gonzaga Street. The surrounding area, although still partially occupied by single- family uses, is beginning to intensify in redevelopment proposals. Staff has even held a pre-application conference recently with a potential developer for a parcel of land to the west of this site. In addition, the City Council, when adopting the TTDS, was very clear in stating that local streets within the Triangle should be improved as development occurs. The applicant's statement concerning costs of improvements is not necessarily true. If the improvements were not built now, but delayed for a time, the cost of road improvements will only increase with inflation. In addition, the applicant's argument of making the improvements a part of a LID will not guarantee a lower cost to each property owner. TDC 18.164.030(A)(c) states that a non-remonstrance agreement could be considered if one of the following conditions exist: 1. a partial improvement is not feasible due to the inability to achieve proper design standards; 2. a partial improvement may create a potential safety hazard to motorists or pedestrians; 3. it is unlikely that additional street improvements will occur in the foreseeable future; 4. the improvement would be in conflict with an adopted capital improvement plan; 5. the improvement is a part of a residential land partition and the partition does not create any new streets; or 6. additional planning work is required to define the appropriate design standards for the street. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 11 OF 17 Criteria #1 is not met because it is possible for the applicant to meet the current TDC and TTDS design standards. Criteria #2 is not met because the applicant can construct a half- street improvement with appropriately designed pavement tapers at each end of the improvement that would not create a public safety hazard. Criteria #3 is not met because there are other properties in the area that will likely develop in the foreseeable future and will also be required to make street improvements. There are other sites within the Triangle that are redeveloping in a similar manner to what is proposed on this site, and the adjacent streets are being improved. Criteria #4 is not met because there is no capital improvement project planned for SW Gonzaga Street. Criteria #5 is not met because this project is not a residential land partition. Criteria #6 is not met because appropriate design standards have already been established in the TDC and TTDS. It is Staffs opinion that none of the six criteria listed in 18.164.030(A)(c) exist. In addition, the roadway would need to be improved to meet fire apparatus access standards of the UFC. Therefore, the applicant should make the improvements to the street in accordance with the TDC and TTDS standards. Since the applicant has proposed an alternative that Staff does not find will meet City standards, the application should be denied. One other concern to be raised is the fact that the existing paved width of the roadway is approximately 17.5 feet to 18 feet. The Uniform Fire Code, which is enforced by a City ordinance, requires a minimum unobstructed paved width of 20 feet (UFC 902.2.2.1) for fire apparatus access. If the roadway is not improved to meet City standards, this UFC standard will also not be met. SW 70th Avenue This roadway is also classified as a local street in the TTDS, and also requires a 60-foot ROW. Staff discussed the ROW situation with the applicant on a number of occasions and acknowledged that the existing garage to the house is approximately 25 from the existing ROW line of SW 70th Avenue (which is actually the centerline of the required ROW). Staff indicated that because of the conflict with the existing structure, the applicant would only have to dedicate ROW up to the edge of the building. The TTDS and TDC would allow a zero setback to the ROW. The applicant's plan and narrative indicate that they are unwilling to dedicate the additional ROW on SW 70th Avenue because they claim the TTDS Street Plan does not show SW 70th Avenue extending north of SW Gonzaga Street. They also refer to ROW vacations that took place in 1987 and 1988. The applicant again raises the apparent concern from the neighbors that this street not be improved. They also argue that the TTDS criteria for street connectivity is met because the distance along the south ROW line of SW Gonzaga Street is 645 feet between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 70th Avenue. They make this argument because there is ROW for SW 70th Avenue dedicated south of SW Gonzaga Street. Staff again does not agree with the applicant's arguments. The street connectivity standard of the TTDS applies to this site because in order to fully meet the standard, SW 70th Avenue would need to be improved between SW Gonzaga Street and Beveland Street to the north. If SW 70th Avenue were not improved in this section, there would be a gap of approximately 950 feet between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 69th Avenue, and therefore the "660-foot standard" would not be met. The applicant's argument only works for the section of SW 70th Avenue lying south of SW Gonzaga Street, which is not adjacent to the subject site. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 12 OF 17 TDC Section 18.164.030(G)(2) states that all local and minor collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation. SW 70th Avenue is considered a local street and there are portions of dedicated ROW extending from SW Hampton Street to SW Dartmouth Street. The previous ROW vacations mentioned in the applicant's narrative are irrelevant in this case because they merely reflect a decision made over 10 years ago when the City was not sure if SW 70th Avenue would be needed as a public street. Due to the change in zoning in the Triangle, where there will be more traffic generated by commercial and mixed uses, it makes sense to include SW 70th Avenue as another north/south connection between other streets. SW 70th Avenue is not improved adjacent to this site at this time and the applicant is not proposing direct access onto this roadway. It is Staffs opinion that the applicant should not be required to improve SW 70th Avenue at this time, as there are no other paved improvements to the north of the site for connection, and there will not likely be any other street improvements made to SW 70th Avenue in the foreseeable future. Therefore, Criteria #3 of 18.164.030(A)(c) is met. Staff has recommended execution of non- remonstrance agreements covering future improvements to SW 70th Avenue for other projects within the Triangle that have frontage on the roadway. For this project, Staff also would recommend that the applicant sign such an agreement. However, the applicant has clearly stated in their narrative that they do not agree that SW 70th Avenue should be improved and have not indicated that they would sign such an agreement. In summary, the applicant's plan does not meet the TTDS standard for street connectivity. Therefore, based upon the deficient plan and the statements in the narrative indicating that the applicant is not willing to dedicate the ROW or sign a non-remonstrance agreement for the future improvement of the SW 70th Avenue roadway, Staff finds that this issue provides further cause for denial of this application. Water: This site will be served from the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. There is presently a water service that feeds the site. Sanitary Sewer: TDC 18.164.090(A)(1) states that sanitary sewers shall be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in the City's public improvement design standards and the comprehensive plan. At present, the nearest public sanitary sewer line is over 500 feet away in SW 72nd Avenue. In accordance with the City Council's direction for project sites in the Triangle that are over 300 feet away from a public sewer line, if the applicant/property owner can demonstrate that the existing on-site sanitary sewer septic system is functioning adequately to serve the new use, the City will allow the continued use of the system provided the applicant/property owner pays a fee in-lieu of constructing off-site sanitary sewer improvements for the site. The fee will be based on an engineer's estimate of the cost to extend public sanitary sewer to the area surrounding the site. The fee shall be paid prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. The applicant would need to coordinate with the City Engineer to determine the fee amount. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 13 OF 17 The applicant's plan does not clearly indicate the location of the existing drainage field for the septic tank. In addition, the applicant did not indicate whether or not they have sought or obtained approval from the Washington County Health Department to continue use of the existing system for the proposed dental office use. It is not possible at this time to determine whether or not the existing septic system will function adequately for this project. Therefore, the applicant has not met the City's standard with regard to sanitary sewer service. Storm Drainage: The topography of this site falls primarily to the southwest toward SW Gonzaga Street. The applicant submitted a downstream analysis which indicates the capacities of the culverts downstream of this site will be more than adequate to handle the small increase in storm water runoff from this site. 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 is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of a 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 is proposing to construct an on-site vegetated swale to treat the additional runoff from this site. The preliminary sizing calculations provided by the applicant's engineer indicate that the swale shown on the plans will adequately treat the additional runoff. 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 adjacent to SW Gonzaga Street. Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 112 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $ 3,080.00. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the site plan and proposal, does not meet the Street and Utility Improvement standards or the Tigard Triangle Design Standards, specifically those related to required street connectivity, street improvements and sanitary sewer service. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 14 OF 17 ADDITIONAL SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL STANDARDS Section 18.120.180(A)(2) through 18.120.180(A)(17) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.120.180.3 Exterior Elevations); 18.120.180.5 Privacy and Noise); 18.120.180.6 Private Outdoor Areas: Residential Use); 18.120.180.7 Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Residential Use); 18.120.180.8 100-year floodplain); and 18.120.180.9 Demarcation of Spaces). The following sections were discussed previously in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.120.180.11 Access and Circulation); 18.120.180.13 Parking); 18.120.180.14 Landscaping); 18.120.180.15 Drainage); and 18.120.180.17 Signs). Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Section 18.120.180.2 states that buildings shall be located to preserve existing trees, topography, and natural drainage and that trees having a six (6)-inch caliper or greater, shall be preserved or replaced by new plantings of equal character. The proposal is to change the use of an existing structure. No buildings will be added or expanded, therefore, this standard is not applicable. FINDING: Because the proposal does not involve the location of a new structure, this standard does not apply. Crime Prevention and Safety: Section 18.120.108.10 requires that exterior lighting levels be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime and shall be placed in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic. The applicant has not provided information on lighting, therefore staff can not determine if this standard has been satisfied. FINDING: Because crime prevention lighting has not been discussed in the applicants narrative, staff finds that the proposal does not satisfy this criterion. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Section 18.106.020(M) became effective on January 26, 1992. All parking areas shall be provided with the required numbers and sizes of disabled person parking spaces as specified by applicable State of Oregon and federal standards. All disabled person parking spaces shall be signed and marked on the pavement as required by these standards. This section requires 1 disabled parking space if 1 to 25 parking spaces are provided. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 15 OF 17 This proposal indicates that one (1) handicap parking space will be provided. The ADA requirements for handicap accessible parking requires that at least one (1) of the parking • spaces be van accessible. The space proposed meets the van accessible requirements of a nine (9)-foot space with an eight (8)-foot aisle. FINDING: Because the plan provides for a handicap accessible space that meets the required dimensions, this standard has been met. SECTION V. AGENCY COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: The applicant must comply with requirements of policy (tab1011) for change of use. Provide fire hydrant within 250 feet of all exterior walls. Accessible parking and access aisle slope not to exceed 1-inch in 50 inches. Provide an accessible route from parking to main entry. Provide an approved storm drain system with catch basins, roof drain connection, etc. and connect to the public system. Provide detail and grade of ramp into the buildings, door, landing, etc. Connect to public sewer as drainfield is most likely covered with asphalt. The City of Tigard Property Manager has reviewed the application and provided the following comments: The property owner should show verification of the location of the existing drainfield for the septic tank and that the drainfield and septic tank are in good working order. Storm runoff from the new parking lot should not be allowed to flow towards drainfield as there is not curbing all around the parking lot. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the application and provided the following comments: Request a "more comprehensive" detail of lighting plan. SDR provides comments that "photo-electric" cells installed at building. Improved lighting may be required as the parking lot may not be totally served by wall mounted lights. The City of Tigard Long Range Planning Division has reviewed the application and provided the following comments: The Tigard Triangle Design Standards clearly state that all new development including remodel will be required to meet design standards and dedicate and improve public streets. The proposal does not comply with that intent. Tualatin Valley Water District has reviewed the application and provided the following comments: Medical facilities require addition of reduced pressure principle type backflow devices to be installed immediately following existing meter. GTE, PGE, US West and NW Natural Gas have all reviewed the proposal and offered no comments or objections. SECTION VI. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 16 OF 17 Final Decision: DATE OF FILING: SEPTEMBER 3, 1998 THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON MONDAY SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Sections 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.340 of the Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal must be filed. The deadline for filing an appeal is specified below. The appeal fee schedule and appeal form are available from the Community Development Department or Planning Division at Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 3:30 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 14, 1999. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division or Community Development Department of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. // /1441—*/ September 3, 1998 PREPARE Y: Julia Powell rajduk DATE Associate Planner < Pp September 3. 1998 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersd•• DATE Planning Manager is\cu rpl n\ju lia\knecht.doc NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 17 OF 17 'FS.W. BEVELAND STREET - - . .! TAX LOT 2500 TAX LOT 2400 BENCHMARK TAX LOTx2800 MAP NO.25-1-1A8 MAP NO.2S-1-1A8 ��' >ET t3']IWa HAP NO. tell LOT LOT o o''�r Ems`.-i«.=E 112.09' 25-1-1A6 } 7 8 _ N89'00'40'E twa �'� LEGEND _ -D- E.YUp Mom O•Wn I�� ..., 1: i 5 ..'. E ' 3tr\ '� .r.a sxxT �I�M ; t I n.*E..w..Q. I _ 1 t ''' •. :»~ 4 TAX LOT 9600 E�u.E A i.w _ rrt ' :us MAP NO. 2S-7-1AA NEW EHY1(H1S AREA 1 I.W 34it. t ` i OEM TAZ Lor z2ao M1rq. '�" - Oa �i MAP NO.25-1-1A0 O IOW T�MM1.�• I �` wur.axci 'n +.! ry'? ( mwaei ..aro (: : ...4 0-_---I .C- 03 4 L5 trliw .xaw -....... -..:\ - ns. . - Cr) a ova. c214-h. i !, `,ice " .z , m_.,'4 ♦^ F F I I ��" fir„ 242 mac,. ►L. _ SWALE DETAIL 'II I- �� 4 =u- _ �: Z s.nt. r-r Ili w 11 I!! PROPOSED DENTAL PI! a WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS w ... _ IRE'.11Cnt.OUS E,tMO SO.iitSR 2Vr - _nN..ru aY/.N a0►NAR �' 11 OFFICE Z mAttOIT NOW OA.�t x•,tno Sail./Mm YC_ ! I t.ts tYta «E.anu ca �IO*E A MKT(too•Mal i t I�.w. TAX LOT 100 `,' � z iw moon :111971C> III `�~- ■ MAP N0.25-1-IAC 1 A4,A. ROM M W 111,42 3 9 tMl1ES L I 1 tw.;w:,�° r ROM Dent 003 r�T I ,�, ammo � vi • 030)TOMO0114 : =„T., ,•: 1 ill I ....,0„,„, VP COMMIT OM.415 SAM TO TAX LOT 200 1 III i1 _ pfdf rr� i • «I BENCHMARK ❑MOM 5Ar MAP N0.25-1-1AC I I „" V NEW 121V n 241 72 iffaissionisam. IC'TM -:'4111. i,,,....-. .-IF,A%,,..10till=BILEICIIMPS --" Abiall. - ., Alo. 11111rEitt`""`" ?a , ... -, ..:_,ArAwAgripp".....f...41v., at1iaxiiinamaigrisaa_. ► .41M. 2. 1r*" 1/1 0 L!''''' cm,al. R. InijiwIl"=MMI■ 416 Alir ' S.W. GON1AGA STREET _ _ _ __. , - - ►, - 11.. MN Ida WT U• ' TAX LOT 1000 \ r GRAPHIC SCALE MAP NO 25-1-1AC \�_-- $ TAX LOT 200 \ '4, MAP NO.25-1-1AC :sE, l 4 W m) ttr-w n - CASE NOISI 8 CASE NA/A BSI: S1TE PLAN 114 SDR 98-0009 EXHIBIT MAP N Knecht Dental Office �_ I I CITY of TIGARD DARTMOUTH ST Ali GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 5V5TEY VICINITY MAP 1 11 E .0 ile,„,„.„ ....I°I,I..y- ST SDR 98-0009 •Ills ij HE Mil RMOSO �,P 4 Knecht Dental Office 1 1.. N UN Subject ST I.,r Parcel 3T � ��r 111 ,� :a . ■ 11,■ .�► T p MEL 1111 Z, WI IlL 0 111111 I 1111111 co 1111,16 • 1 iii 1) N 0 200 400 600 Feel 1'v 451 feet 1111 ■ VIP 41111_I_■. City of Tivard iI1 '■ Iouldrnetive oe with th is toe general locatich rio s only Di and should be verified with the Development Servces Division. I 13125 SW Hall Blvd (----ivhar-al---, Tigard,)OR 97223 . iim (503)639-4171 fellnluni Development nt�YAvww.d.Ugare.o.w __ 4 Plot date Jul I&1998:c\magicVnagicOl.apr REQUEST FOR COMMENTS MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: August 27, 1998 TO: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer I" RE: SDR 98-0009, Knecht Dental Office Description: This application is for the conversion of a single-family residential structure into a dental office within the Tigard Triangle. The site is located at 7025 SW Gonzaga Street (WCTM 2S1 01AC, Tax Lot 100). Findings: 1. Streets: This site is bordered on the south side by SW Gonzaga Street and on the east side by the unimproved right-of-way (ROW) for SW 70th Avenue. TDC 18.164.030(E) states that street ROW widths shall not be less than what is specified in the TDC. In addition, the Tigard Triangle Standards (TTS) state that in addition to Development Code standards, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle. Section A(1) of the TTS, entitled "Street Connectivity, Design Option", states that local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. SW Gonzaga Street SW Gonzaga Street is classified as a local street in the TTS, and is required to be improved within a 60-foot ROW. At present, there is approximately 25 feet of ROW north of the street centerline adjacent to this site. The applicant's plan and narrative indicate that they are willing to dedicate additional ROW on Gonzaga Street to provide 30 feet from centerline to meet the TTS standards. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 1 . 7)b Gonzaga Street is a paved roadway but is not built to meet the City's width and structural section standards. The TTS indicates that a local street shall have a paved width of 36 feet curb-to-curb (18 feet from curb to centerline). In accordance with the TTS and TDC standards for development requirements, the applicant should be required to make street improvements to the frontage of SW Gonzaga Street. The applicant has proposed to not construct the street improvements as a part of the development, but suggest that the improvements be delayed with the use of a non-remonstrance agreement because they feel the surrounding neighbors do not want the street improved. They also state that the cost of constructing an improvement along their frontage will be more costly than if it were included with a larger project, such as a local improvement district (LID). They also state that the dead-end sidewalk will serve no useful purpose, as their customers will more than likely arrive by car. Staff does not believe the applicant's statements warrant a delay in the improvement of SW Gonzaga Street. The surrounding area, although still partially occupied by single-family uses, is beginning to intensify in redevelopment proposals. Staff has even held a preapplication conference recently with a potential developer for a parcel of land to the west of this site. In addition, the City Council, when adopting the TTS, was very clear in stating that local streets within the Triangle should be improved as development occurs. The applicant's statement concerning costs of improvements is not necessarily true. If the improvements were not built now, but delayed for a time, the cost of road improvements will only increase with inflation. In addition, the applicant's argument of making the improvements a part of a LID will not guarantee a lower cost to each property owner. One other concern to be raised is the fact that the existing paved width of the roadway is approximately 17.5 feet to 18 feet. The Uniform Fire Code, which is enforced by a City ordinance, requires a minimum unobstructed paved width of 20 feet (UFC 902.2.2.1) for fire apparatus access. If the roadway is not improved to meet City standards, this UFC standard will also not be met. TDC 18.164.030(A)(c) states that a non-remonstrance agreement could be considered if one of the following conditions exist: 1 . a partial improvement is not feasible due to the inability to achieve proper design standards, 2. a partial improvement may create a potential safety hazard to motorists or pedestrians, 3. it is unlikely that additional street improvements will occur in the foreseeable future, ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 2 4. the improvement would be in conflict with an adopted capital improvement plan, 5. the improvement is a part of a residential land partition and the partition does not create any new streets, or 6. additional planning work is required to define the appropriate design standards for the street. Criteria #1 is not met because it is possible for the applicant to meet the current TDC and TTS design standards. Criteria #2 is not met because the applicant can construct a half-street improvement with appropriately designed pavement tapers at each end of the improvement that would not create a public safety hazard. Criteria #3 is not met because there are other properties in the area that will likely develop in the foreseeable future and will also be required to make street improvements. There are other sites within the Triangle that are redeveloping in a similar manner to what is proposed on this site, and the adjacent streets are being improved. Criteria #4 is not met because there is no capital improvement project planned for SW Gonzaga Street. Criteria #5 is not met because this project is not a residential land partition. Criteria #6 is not met because appropriate design standards have already been established in the TDC and TTS. It is Staffs opinion that none of the six criteria listed in 18.164.030(A)(c) exist. In addition, the roadway would need to be improved to meet fire apparatus access standards of the UFC. Therefore, the applicant should make the improvements to the street in accordance with the TDC and TTS standards. Since the applicant has proposed an alternative that Staff does not find will meet City standards, the application should be denied. SW 70th Avenue This roadway is also classified as a local street in the TTS, and also requires a 60-foot ROW. Staff discussed the ROW situation with the applicant on a number of occasions and acknowledged that the existing garage to the house is approximately 25 from the existing ROW line of 70th Avenue (which is actually the centerline of the required ROW). Staff indicated that because of the conflict with the existing structure, the applicant would only have to dedicate ROW up to the edge of the building. The TTS and TDC would allow a zero setback to the ROW. The applicant's plan and narrative indicate that they are unwilling to dedicate the additional ROW on 70th Avenue because they claim the TTS Street Plan does not show 70th Avenue extending north of SW Gonzaga Street. They also refer to ROW vacations that took place in 1987 and 1988. The applicant again raises the apparent concern from the neighbors that this street not be improved. They also argue that the TTS ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 3 criteria for street connectivity is met because the distance along the south ROW line of Gonzaga Street is 645 feet between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 70th Avenue. They make this argument because there is ROW for 70th Avenue dedicated south of Gonzaga Street. Staff again does not agree with the applicant's arguments. The street connectivity standard of the TTS applies to this site because in order to fully meet the standard, 70th Avenue would need to be improved between Gonzaga Street and Beveland Street to the north. If 70th Avenue were not improved in this section, there would be a gap of approximately 950 feet between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 69th Avenue, and therefore the "660-foot standard" would not be met. The applicant's argument only works for the section of 70th Avenue lying south of Gonzaga Street, which is not adjacent to the subject site. 18.164.030(G)(2) states that all local and minor collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation. SW 70th Avenue is considered a local street and there are portions of dedicated ROW extending from SW Hampton Street to SW Dartmouth Street. The previous ROW vacations mentioned in the applicant's narrative are irrelevant in this case because they merely reflect a decision made over 10 years ago when the City was not sure if SW 70th Avenue would be needed as a public street. Due to the change in zoning in the Triangle, where there will be more traffic generated by commercial and mixed uses, it makes sense to include 70th Avenue as another north/south connection between other streets. SW 70th Avenue is not improved adjacent to this site at this time and the applicant is not proposing direct access onto this roadway. It is Staff's opinion that the applicant should not be required to improve 70th Avenue at this time, as there are no other paved improvements to the north of the site for connection, and there will not likely be any other street improvements made to SW 70th Avenue in the foreseeable future. Therefore, Criteria #3 of 18.164.030(A)(c) is met. Staff has recommended execution of non-remonstrance agreements covering future improvements to 70th Avenue for other projects within the Triangle that have frontage on the roadway. For this project, Staff also would recommend that the applicant sign such an agreement. However, the applicant has clearly stated in their narrative that they do not agree that 70th Avenue should be improved and have not indicated that they would sign such an agreement. In summary, the applicant's plan does not meet the TTS standard for street connectivity. Therefore, based upon the deficient plan and the statements in the narrative indicating that the applicant is not willing to dedicate the ROW or sign a non-remonstrance agreement for the future ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 4 improvement of the roadway, Staff finds that this issue provides further cause for denial of this application. 2. Water: This site will be served from the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. There is presently a water service that feeds the site. 3. Sanitary Sewer: TDC 18.164.090(A)(1) states that sanitary sewers shall be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in the City's public improvement design standards and the comprehensive plan. At present, the nearest public sanitary sewer line is over 500 feet away in SW 72nd Avenue. In accordance with the City Council's direction for project sites in the Triangle that are over 300 feet away from a public sewer line, if the applicant/property owner can demonstrate that the existing on-site sanitary sewer septic system is functioning adequately to serve the new use, the City will allow the continued use of the system provided the applicant/property owner pays a fee in-lieu of constructing off-site sanitary sewer improvements for the site. The fee will be based on an engineer's estimate of the cost to extend public sanitary sewer to the area surrounding the site. The fee shall be paid prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. The applicant would need to coordinate with the City Engineer to determine the fee amount. The applicant's plan does not clearly indicate the location of the existing drainage field for the septic tank. In addition, the applicant did not indicate whether or not they have sought or obtained approval from the Washington County Health Department to continue use of the existing system for the proposed dental office use. It is not possible at this time to determine whether or not the existing septic system will function adequately for this project. Therefore, the applicant has not met the City's standard with regard to sanitary sewer service. 4. Storm Drainage: The topography of this site falls primarily to the southwest toward SW Gonzaga Street. The applicant submitted a downstream analysis which indicates the capacities of the culverts downstream of this site will be more than adequate to handle the small increase in storm water runoff from this site. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 5 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 is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of a 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 is proposing to construct an on-site vegetated swale to treat the additional runoff from this site. The preliminary sizing calculations provided by the applicant's engineer indicate that the swale shown on the plans will adequately treat the additional runoff. 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 adjacent to SW Gonzaga Street. Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 112 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $ 3,080.00. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 6 Recommendation: Based upon the findings above, specifically those related to required street connectivity, street improvements and sanitary sewer service, Staff recommends that this application be denied. I s\eng\bria n r\com m e nt s\sdr98-09.bdr ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 7 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: August 27, 1998 TO: Julia Hajduk, Planning Division FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer i ` -- RE: SDR 98-0009, Knecht Dental Office Description: This application is for the conversion of a single-family residential structure into a dental office within the Tigard Triangle. The site is located at 7025 SW Gonzaga Street (WCTM 2S1 01AC, Tax Lot 100). Findings: 1. Streets: This site is bordered on the south side by SW Gonzaga Street and on the east side by the unimproved right-of-way (ROW) for SW 70th Avenue. TDC 18.164.030(E) states that street ROW widths shall not be less than what is specified in the TDC. In addition, the Tigard Triangle Standards (TTS) state that in addition to Development Code standards, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle. Section A(1) of the TTS, entitled "Street Connectivity, Design Option", states that local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. SW Gonzaga Street SW Gonzaga Street is classified as a local street in the TTS, and is required to be improved within a 60-foot ROW. At present, there is approximately 25 feet of ROW north of the street centerline adjacent to this site. The applicant's plan and narrative indicate that they are willing to dedicate additional ROW on Gonzaga Street to provide 30 feet from centerline to meet the TTS standards. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 1 Gonzaga Street is a paved roadway but is not built to meet the City's width and structural section standards. The TTS indicates that a local street shall have a paved width of 36 feet curb-to-curb (18 feet from curb to centerline). In accordance with the TTS and TDC standards for development requirements, the applicant should be required to make street improvements to the frontage of SW Gonzaga Street. The applicant has proposed to not construct the street improvements as a part of the development, but suggest that the improvements be delayed with the use of a non-remonstrance agreement because they feel the surrounding neighbors do not want the street improved. They also state that the cost of constructing an improvement along their frontage will be more costly than if it were included with a larger project, such as a local improvement district (LID). They also state that the dead-end sidewalk will serve no useful purpose, as their customers will more than likely arrive by car. Staff does not believe the applicant's statements warrant a delay in the improvement of SW Gonzaga Street. The surrounding area, although still partially occupied by single-family uses, is beginning to intensify in redevelopment proposals. Staff has even held a preapplication conference recently with a potential developer for a parcel of land to the west of this site. In addition, the City Council, when adopting the TTS, was very clear in stating that local streets within the Triangle should be improved as development occurs. The applicant's statement concerning costs of improvements is not necessarily true. If the improvements were not built now, but delayed for a time, the cost of road improvements will only increase with inflation. In addition, the applicant's argument of making the improvements a part of a LID will not guarantee a lower cost to each property owner. One other concern to be raised is the fact that the existing paved width of the roadway is approximately 17.5 feet to 18 feet. The Uniform Fire Code, which is enforced by a City ordinance, requires a minimum unobstructed paved width of 20 feet (UFC 902.2.2.1) for fire apparatus access. If the roadway is not improved to meet City standards, this UFC standard will also not be met. TDC 18.164.030(A)(c) states that a non-remonstrance agreement could be considered if one of the following conditions exist: 1. a partial improvement is not feasible due to the inability to achieve proper design standards, 2. a partial improvement may create a potential safety hazard to motorists or pedestrians, 3. it is unlikely that additional street improvements will occur in the foreseeable future, ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 2 4. the improvement would be in conflict with an adopted capital improvement plan, 5. the improvement is a part of a residential land partition and the partition does not create any new streets, or 6. additional planning work is required to define the appropriate design standards for the street. It is Staff's opinion that none of the six criteria listed in 18.164.030(A)(c) exist. In addition, the roadway would need to be improved to meet fire apparatus access standards of the UFC. Therefore, the applicant should make the improvements to the street in accordance with the TDC and TTS standards. Since the applicant has proposed an alternative that Staff does not find will meet City standards, the application should be denied. SW 70th Avenue This roadway is also classified as a local street in the TTS, and also requires a 60-foot ROW. Staff discussed the ROW situation with the applicant on a number of occasions and acknowledged that the existing garage to the house is approximately 25 from the existing ROW line of 70th Avenue (which is actually the centerline of the required ROW). Staff indicated that because of the conflict with the existing structure, the applicant would only have to dedicate ROW up to the edge of the building. The TTS and TDC would allow a zero setback to the ROW. The applicant's plan and narrative indicate that they are unwilling to dedicate the additional ROW on 70th Avenue because they claim the TTS Street Plan does not show 70th Avenue extending north of SW Gonzaga Street. They also refer to ROW vacations that took place in 1987 and 1988. The applicant again raises the apparent concern from the neighbors that this street not be improved. They also argue that the TTS criteria for street connectivity is met because the distance along the south ROW line of Gonzaga Street is 645 feet between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 70th Avenue. They make this argument because there is ROW for 70th Avenue dedicated south of Gonzaga Street. Staff again does not agree with the applicant's arguments. The street connectivity standard of the TTS applies to this site because in order to fully meet the standard, 70th Avenue would need to be improved between Gonzaga Street and Beveland Street to the north. If 70th Avenue were not improved in this section, there would be a gap of approximately 950 feet between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 69th Avenue, and therefore the "660-foot standard" would not be met. The applicant's argument only works for the section of 70th Avenue lying south of Gonzaga Street, which is not adjacent to the subject site. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 3 18.164.030(G)(2) states that all local and minor collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation. SW 70th Avenue is considered a local street and there are portions of dedicated ROW extending from SW Hampton Street to SW Dartmouth Street. The previous ROW vacations mentioned in the applicant's narrative are irrelevant in this case because they merely reflect a decision made over 10 years ago when the City was not sure if SW 70th Avenue would be needed as a public street. Due to the change in zoning in the Triangle, where there will be more traffic generated by commercial and mixed uses, it makes sense to include 70th Avenue as another north/south connection between other streets. 74'4, SW 70th Avenue is not improved adjacent to this site at this time and the applicant is not proposing direct access onto this roadway. It is Staff's opinion that the applicant should not be required to improve 70th Avenue at this time, as there are no other paved improvements to the north of the site for connection. Staff has recommended execution of non- remonstrance agreements covering future improvements to 70th Avenue for other projects within the Triangle that have frontage on the roadway. For this project, Staff also would recommend that the applicant sign such an agreement. However, the applicant has clearly stated in their narrative that they do not agree that 70th Avenue should be improved and have not indicated that they would sign such an agreement. In summary, the applicant's plan does not meet the TTS standard for street connectivity. Therefore, based upon the deficient plan and the statements in the narrative indicating that the applicant is not willing to dedicate the ROW or sign a non-remonstrance agreement for the future improvement of the roadway, Staff finds that this issue provides further cause for denial of this application. 2. Water: This site will be served from the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. There is presently a water service that feeds the site. 3. Sanitary Sewer: At present, the nearest public sanitary sewer line is over 500 feet away in SW 72nd Avenue. In accordance with the City Council's direction for project sites in the Triangle that are over 300 feet away from a public sewer line, if the applicant/property owner can demonstrate that the existing on-site sanitary sewer septic system is functioning adequately to serve the new use, the City will allow the continued use of the system provided the applicant/property owner pays a fee in-lieu of constructing off-site sanitary ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 4 sewer improvements for the site. The fee will be based on an engineer's estimate of the cost to extend public sanitary sewer to the area surrounding the site. The fee shall be paid prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. The applicant would need to coordinate with the City Engineer to determine the fee amount. The applicant's plan does not clearly indicate the location of the existing drainage field for the septic tank. In addition, the applicant did not indicate whether or not they have sought or obtained approval from the Washington County Health Department to continue use of the existing system for the proposed dental office use. Therefore, it is not possible at this time to determine whether or not the existing septic system will function adequately for this project. 4. Storm Drainage: The topography of this site falls primarily to the southwest toward SW Gonzaga Street. The applicant submitted a downstream analysis which indicates the capacities of the culverts downstream of this site will be more than adequate to handle the small increase in storm water runoff from this site. 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 is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of a 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 is proposing to construct an on-site vegetated swale to treat the additional runoff from this site. The preliminary sizing calculations provided by the applicant's engineer indicate that the swale shown on the plans will adequately treat the additional runoff. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 5 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 adjacent to SW Gonzaga Street. Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 112 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $ 3,080.00. Recommendation: Based upon the findings above, specifically those related to required street connectivity, street improvements and sanitary sewer service, Staff recommends that this application be denied. 1\eng\brianr\comments\sdr98-09 bdr ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0009 Knecht Dental Office PAGE 6 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CI TIGARD Community(Development RECEIVED PLANNING ShapingA Better Community DATE: August 6,1998 S E P 0 3 1998 TO: Lori Dorney,US West Communications CITY OF TIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone:[50316394171 Fax:[5031 684-7297 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISOR]98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE < The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to convert an existing single-family residence to a dental office. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment (MUE). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.150 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (MONDAY - AUGUST 17,1998). 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. K. Written comments provided below: ate. ti �S EsS R- 4 ■ (Please provide the fodowing information)Name of Person(sl Commenting: Phone Number(s): SDR 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PROPOSAL/REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CI OFTIIGARD Community(Development Shaping A'Better Community DATE: August 6,1998 TO: Nadine Smith,Advanced Planning Supervisor FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone:15031639-4171 Fax:15031684-1291 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDR] 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to convert an existing single-family residence to a dental office. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment (MUE). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.150 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (MONDAY - AUGUST 11,19981 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: Lam.-A Ii "l. L r t t. 13th/.i • 'd7"/"k:-) i J 14,1-th <aL. .i (Please provide the fodowing information)Name of Personfsl Commenting: Y *4 - I Phone Numberfsl: •,C 1 SDR 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PROPOSAUREQUEST FOR COMMENTS • 1 • [TAX LOT 2500 TAX LOT 2400 BENCHMARK TAX LOT 2800 MAP NO. 2S-1-1AB MAP NO.2S-1-1AB MT 12 BP'WE MAP NO. f°"•,o.�. ai LOT LOT wpio..� uEV.-zw.n 112.09' 25-1-lA6 / 7 8 - N89'00'40�E Y1 �'�• Otoll 41.WI.. -Y 'mow ass LEGEND y ....X 'A 0 E6Mq swan wan y 1 9 i , f 3 ♦ v.'�tm x.a. Ada Slone Dr. ,m t 1 _"—1 * 1 ; - PI.*UV*nrt �• , r_ r ` - ■ r E...imago.- TAX LOT 9600 Eutws 5Wwwl _ : 5rr I At 2.4ro MAP NO. 25-1-1AA 5s0..a esbt • f. 7 1 ■ ' A-o•W 1 1/7 ANw O.tiuy • 1I E Ors Aj NEW ERNWS AREA _T. EdetnY[anete I ‘ .550 S i1. 1 I�•ew w�twe A.. i / I TAX LOT 2700 — E2.trw Bn1hJ&S• �'--:•--- �m MAP NO.25-1-1A0 O lOW Ts el War �i-xo -_..-.ii+:r- -��___.�-i +rY v.a lm VOW S: ._ 1. - __° ` - ' .vr 1�. ';i a (/ Ito u,dr NM—\ .±.___ZOO.O0 ilit,)41:\ ‘ ." :';/AP. ...t,- .4..... 4...1... ,-'''''' 011.114... IMIt ow E._J 0 Yr. M/icni C T Ora \1 CI I - I v I m I Niti, 1, ,..a .. -....jr ,...„.„ ,..,,..7.,... , \ ICI ��r ., -.-- Z SWALE DETAIL fi�iai-``�� • ..r,. I k PROPOSED DENTAL ..�4 reign l - a Z WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS a, 1 OFFlCE r!W'S.FIf'1A'IS 220 50.(1.2 55% COMM z� SwrsAU Axi4 ru.'AS ow NO I I, 1 Z TgEATWEN FLOW 000 SI tls X 4.250 SOFT./5500 SEC 1 I I " LPN/ 1'• Z swwE LEMON - 01 C 1100'wW.l TAX LOT 100 - 4 swAEE SLOPE n III 1 1425 RAW wEaatt 21 a 17/ZC MAP NO.25-1-1AC Imi'Am'. B. �i ROW ocw. 0.BM01[S,2'I'11'1F5 s I 1; C ' Q now WE OJ 1 C „—, .2.�, t - .r r , .C�i:: uo•.... T I I I ■ ► pz r,w / I �1�+4 Q,B, JII1i1 �. 1► a TAX LOT 300 4,4A/4 1 I Is Eau W 1� , 11 11 BENCHMARK Q Apr MAP N0.25-1-1AC fro I II �, I I III '''' ' .m! , B�NEW N I I .aW km., IX 68••.5'00. ✓ �.. E�,f�+,O. w. ' � E - tli��`� ►� � a MRS ' GONZAGA- 0•"STREET— — II E -_ — E iiii I ' ' 10 OF B pull •` •4 TAX LOT 1000 1n GRAPHIC SCALE MAP NO. 2S-1-14C �O TAX LOT 200 \ •I. - S MAP NO.2S-1-1AC re. . l • I CASE NO(S)8 CASE MAME(SM: • SITE PLAN 144 sDR 98-0009 EXHIBIT MAP N Knecht Dental Office UI I CITY of TIGARD O I EOORAPNIO INFORMATION SYSTEM DARTMOUTH ST llt 1 I E -- VICINITY MAP ■ ■ M . kSI °.•.1:1.m.som sr SDR 98-0009 ■ i HERPales °' - MOSO �,iiiipr 1.1 Knecht Dental• r Office c, -•NA IN Subject sr BEVED II ST IParcel 1111 Z H ....�� GONZAGA ST II I 1.11 W. 111111 _ ,. A _,1 iiih, I N L. i]'illiat feet 0 200 600 Feet 1'•451 feel . ° ■ ■1111■■■. City of Tigard mom milk should be n m tN1 map Is ev lopmen location calk s Di and should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tlgard,OR 97223 (503) r-----tVM L-1-__ 4 (503)639-4171 h tip l/www.G.li pa rd.or.us Community Development Plot date:Jul I f,1998;c4nagic\magicOl.apr REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community DATE: August 6,1998 TO: John Roy,Property Manager/Operations Department FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone:[5031 639-4171 Fax:[5031684-1297 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDR] 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to convert an existing single-family residence to a dental office. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment (MUE). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.150 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (MONDAY - AUGUST 11,1998). 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 belo : / �iL/ 1 _. /� —w1/ / _ewe, ./, mifreittrwmaffaviifiamiemweArar"-- AZT Mal _ 4..MI■IIMr��iii , i ittriT: mss!..:.,. T TATIK ATM WhL�ffi�'_h .�.;L� Loam ►BIllrail1ANIAWAW ■ • V � (Please provide the foil-owing information)Name of Persontsl Commenting: Phone Number[sl: 3q C//7 I 3 4 SDR 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PROPOSAUREOUEST FOR COMMENTS vad■10 MOT TAX LOT 2500 TAX LOT 2400 BENCHMARK TAX LOT 2800 MAP NO.2S-1-1A8 MAP NO.25-1-1A8 rW41 >ET 1Y 24411 MAP N0. �.. LOT LOT �`'-��"r 2$-1-1AB _1 P489'00'407E 112.09• * ` 7 8 I / �1cra i LEGEND -r- �r� -0- Cabby Novo 0.•I. _ ' ' 5 i ♦ I a l \ ' ..erg 4x10* 1 -, i i ------ howl Nom Oral �N. * , o_� hwa 44.41.1 440 �'.„ , r. � , • Y .-r x TAX LOT 9600 . [rru.•aa•rx • _ ..1 • h' � 1 F�Ma MAP NO 2$-1-1AA = h.•w/1-1/2.Ayrx 0.4w .! T Hi Y. NG"AREA ' �� T+MI.p C•.wb IG SO 1. t aww � :.r 1�i.,. . .- _ f 1 TAX LOT 2700 — ca.lb ox.A/s.+• I Y /, ` . - MN MAP NO.25-1-1A0 O TOW T40 of NOY fV 2� _, h^ 414-_ _\ n .wtm f•Hi + rw n CO ... e� I \ i A'� rr..v` 111 1 � I . 1 �♦ CI a. ! I r• I Ilth•�.- 1 No COMM 4'WO, J4 r.•1. \ 0 }�) 1 SWALE DETAIL II II �I_ �ME _ ., Z r Ilk 1` PROPOSED DENTAL .a.� WATER OUAUTY CALCULATIONS 1 1 OFFICE _ 7� NCS•rolwan moo aalM.NM ' I`� n..1. �� 2� - Z IKAi161T�'IIJ1111S 4 p� 0 4.040 SOFT/2030 SEG 1 I 0 4�marts ', i Z !NNW M1xCN 14Q RUT 040'M) I I 1 S TAX LOT 100 arsn ``.4 fi i' ¢ Z S404(ilOM ROM Ty oa s I �, I I k■ MAP N0.2S-1-1AC ML MOW�Tx 000 rar •Muss ),I 1 I i ,per Y +�>..c ll` .•.'lr 'r G I I tv IT Ov i A. _ f I 1 1 sf.'amia rtolap d ' TAX LOT 300 . _ 7"' I uo BENCHMARK �- MAP N0.25-1-1AC ro-� \_�'�.�� I �u-•1 �x��,� .~f I� Q." I� 11111k ¢Tx.241 79 Iril� I�;` `gip + �,,,��r..l® —,� .�..��;°-'� 1 i o f I ► _ —_ Mr O7 L 1orgs�nebr 16 =0,.... PAM '-•-■:1'.4.......-. s ............. TAX LOT 1000 N GRAPHIC SCALE MAP NO 25-1-1AC TAX LOX 200 �\ a4 MAP NO.25-1-1AC erL ': .1 u.e,t _ CASE NO(S]&CASE NAMEISI: -,., SITE PLAN SDR 98-0009 EXHIBIT MAP N Knecht Dental Office II11.1-1 lila CITY of TIGARD GEOGRAPHIC EOORA/NIC INFORMATION NYC TE4 DARTMOUTH ST EMI I f VICINITY MAP ire ill 1-I MKIR ST SDR 98-0009 I III I ■ i' HER•• MOSO •., ro, i.....,w. 4A Knecht Dental or,,,, Office . . Nd N SUbje sr I JParcel r ■■ imialivia � 1 BEVELAND iI :i 111111 13 iJ! ". ,... " K "ST • is N 1) 0 200 400 600 Feet 1'=451 feet II Ail /11 \ VAR S gT City of Ti van! Information on this map Is general l location only and . Mak 1-- should be verified with th e Development S.rvlo ss Division. n. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 639-4171 • / J VAR7$ $T \ I J— h J N,N p U gardoros C01a^"t"ry Development Plot date:Jul I i,1991:c\magiclmagicOl.apr • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TI'GARD Community(Development SliapingA Better Community DATE: August 6,1998 TO: Michael Miller,Operations Utility Manager FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone:[5031639-4111 Fax:[50316841291 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR) 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to convert an existing single-family residence to a dental office. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment (MUE). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.150 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (MONDAY - AUGUST 17,1998). 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: V 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: ats 1,1 W t-rwik-1 Tv W O SE& vtc 44 �► (Please provide the fodowing information)Name of Person's)Commenting: Phone Number's): k 3 4S- SDR 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PROPOSAL/REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ,I TAX LOT 2500 TAX LOT 2400 BENCHMARK TAX LOT 2800 MAP NO. 2S-1-1AB MAP NO.2S-1-1AB mar a. SET 1r SR< MAP N0. LOT LOT . �o..'� uFV.-201 Et 112.09• 2$-1-1AB _,•/�- N89.00 AO E wfY'i .»a y • LEGEND � =-.- E Mv.n[ha. 1 rnTw Rl 1 i 1-N--l- .. ��i i 1- - na.Ny uti.y.y we , M„« _ TAX LOT 9800 { ' 2ww MAP NO.25-1-1AA <ow4 M1�. iiiii T� T+s.■d -1h•W.+.per �1.,�' NEW EANCYJS AREA { .�— [yMYq C-ma '�`f+!'1� - a NO sari. 1 e 1 TAX LOT 2700 1201000 00.110 Erwry..a/.r. IN MAP N0.2S-7-1A0 t .- •i yam N. M.M V0. 2 EYAta6 v!°` �2r'y. O ..ins wQ. Cr) + am i r n v 1 'yv �. , \\ � D Ow1.i L_J i*- MN bdr. y Y. I . I " I 1I 1 242 l.'' 006060I MOM arc, ,� .. \ { \_ SWALE DETAIL ;I I Isl e- ��21/Eu. 2,,. v M Z I 1 1 PROPOSED DENTAL 2w.�� { �. WATER OVAUTV CALCULATIONS e, 1 I I 1 OFFICE �. ,�, ��i Z .rlcwrr Nrwmovs 4 wins 0•011.. xnw"` I I' «° 1 o Z 1.411 T ROM OM was%4.200 004./12..SEC Y I we ..�2.... .+e.L ' Z WALE M'NC12 102 RR 0.c'12x1 '�I i I TAX LOT 100 OA,� Al Z GARAGE MALE • 1 w j . ` a ROW<mtt ao2 n sC� I MAP NO.25-1-1AC (�p(1 ROW MON X111 003 REl •u2uxs 5 1•I I i 1 �, igO�rt. ��,y�7/ /-��e �� l� �6'. eo••melt Q 10 OD 11101E y . 1 f I vat MIMI 1 I V 1 , rat. TAX LOT J00 '{I 1 I �I QENCNMARK Q . MAP N0,25-1-1AC 10.01 1 `4I 1 i 1 I {1°, .e, 2�v� alit IL t e1ai us�w A/ ,17�/� 1 1 I r s / �� ELEV.00T. riles ._. ' :_n_l .- tilliik431111 -11.041.f,,,AA„Of : 1:01MIC h. { s w GZ�Gti — — — STRk�3 LL. 0 _ � � f = D . — - 04 2R OM IMO U TAX LOT 1000 '� N GRAPHIC SCALE MAP NO. 25-1-1AC %LOT 200AP NO 2$-1-1AC 1&8'-- - - —.r_x s 111111LA . r r 1 . I CASE NO(Sl&CASE NAMEISI: --- . u SITE PLAN SDR 98-0009 EXHIBIT MAP N Knecht Dental Office U RI - ' CITY of TI • - 1 DARTMOUTH ST 11111k GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION{TOTEM I E -I VICINITY MAP Irim Illikmi ■ FIMHUR 1 ST SDR 98-0009 i ■., - HER,, MOSO ,,. ■ III lifient, Q Knecht Dental Offi ce : IN Subject ST illaillfall ' : A.D T p BEVED r Parcel ST J ■■ ‘11.c, ...-,,,, G .1, ONZAGA ST „ ,, ■■ irl ILI” \ IIIII rim 1 ,1 . N ii) • 0 200 400 600 Feet V.451 feet 1111 jji&\ '■ ■.■■■■ . City of Tigard ■■S ST ....■ Mak Informaen on this map is for general location only and � should be verified with the Development Service{Divsbn. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR• �� S I \ I I i. h (7ww p.tigar. us fasl{uaity Development Pet data Jul IC 1998;c)na8ic'anagic91.apr 416k, REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community DATE: August 6,1998 TO: David Scott,Building Official FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone:[5031639-4171 Fax:[5031684-7291 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDR] 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to convert an existing single-family residence to a dental office. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment (MUE). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.150 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (MONDAY - AUGUST 17,19981 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: e/.9plv i7 c�v- A G ee ut z h eo- 1 o P Pc/1(z� / 0/1) C0//4 rye I j I`1) G Or/1 J)`J / ll A-- 1/ j7�rK � n -4Mn .4C �r1J .41Yle /opt ± ?tub Fe/ ��Crr� 11-1 So pi sly Cji < n t,r Gl l y).P 'v war Fr c,PrA 1/A r ��-n/S" ?�p J Pry✓i[/e = 1 �101ro�lr� _f1-0 u. Y-1, c�ra�., f 1 it,,, ur�7 ��, }'k i LRI Jrij YLo fa i1rA�r l��e�?�, e Ise /lO h n [ 7 7 J �� t 1/ 1. y I 71-0 M C[,ie dr+kiL Ct,.d '"•"46 01- ip 1s7 - btii r� +�y c/j.rr� 1.5 n sieHy / [ f f UY 2-- rtnJC7 g1.d5 ? Cd h r et Y"-- t o G'h G J i c / J'P w,l r or J 44-1 / i// i t 64, A * J s e 17 l v v f✓ s w FP (Please provide the following information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: 1^ trl Phone Number[sl: q v SDR 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PROPOSAUREQUEST FOR COMMENTS M. WWI.001M TAX LOT 2500 TAX LOT 2400 BENCHMARK TAX LOT 2800 MAP NO.25-1-1A8 MAP NO.25-1-IAB '0rr0T _ zT 12.911E MAP NO. u°V-244." 112.09' LOT LOT 'O'er" N89'00'40'E 2S-t-1AB -4( ' 7 B • LEGEND 1 _Y_-_, r r -o- Eaaq sl...w.n r_w~, ; 7 . 1: 5 i_ � 3 1 ..D.�W-, tar. 1 :. n.9.r.Eaw..O. •,• I 1 i • I t .-r ,wa I� "Y1 TAX LOT 9800 N I i Emm9•-.m �o 2 ! MAP NO. 25-1-1 AA RI.-..41-1/'T 090.910-b0 p !. .._.. [OTA .II 1 n NF�lFJ7 v10US AKA i 7.--...--, . . E■41M Csa.b I ' 1900.rt. _ ` 1 TAX LOT 2700 T- - - — Em. aml /1.0. �� >- �� MAP NO.2S-1-1A0 O 109 rag a r. �I Ir.+o ___ ,oe�_"-"-` �`__. +`� o- ""' C//) - I I ` :17 -t.:1 4- + A / w�s w % I I 40 17 1 \]\ \ 111 ;11 mrR.0 t. WM//w-c ../ �\ O E. ' I ' I _• .14 :42 t �,. .Ra.9 U w r l"� L ;� SWALE DETAIL ∎I I EI ''z. ,_r" .■.� -9 r sat r-1' .9,-w, O I !1( PROPOSED DENTAL°rr+W`rEA a.�� >b WATER QUALITY CALCULAnONS a I I j 1 OFFICE ___o Ar 111 `; 7� MEW 9RSRV015 4.9.0 SOFY.S9s IEIR°"'°`1 JY �" W L RMIEILL 0.Y'/4 moms 009 M/1N I I, �-• Z 19E41NRIT FLOW OM 65 0 4.990 SOFT MOD SEC 1 1 I 11°�� M9L 1 - yWZ� S01LE 10)0111 102.SET 000'b.l IA i IrDr TAX LOT 100 '°l `,4. I > z SOWE 9HD0Ott OM n/scc )I 'hi! ~a MAP NO.25-1-IAC � p p��®® i a fLOW 02.00 M. 21 WOOLS>9 w11ES Q /IOW D2.vr9 o.00 RV E I i( i ,o„ , � �' f 919 am aap CL • r I 11 I 1.99�rN CD TAX LOT app A// I f..=.;_ w BIDET NNCHMARR all MAP N0.25-1-1AC ! ,4 .,li'� Ip I IC 49 -,r-- ..,,;&411:1 ,. I i 11_ �, - - — T... 0 °`- --� .. . . .. .., .--.04._, :‘ � = R 3 0 TAX LOT/ODO ''� . GRAPHIC SCALE MAP NO.25-1-IN TAX LOT 200 4\ 7 , % MAP NO.25-1-1AC >9 L ire m 1 CASE NOISI&CASE MAMEISI: — SITE PLAN SDR 98-0009 EXHIBIT MAP N Knecht Dental Office iiiiii .71. -_um ..- CITY of TIGARD '.11'11 GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM DARTMOUTH ST _ VICINITY MAP irid Millim ziyai.t mi- ST SDR 98-0009 1.„, HER'lii MOSO 1111 ii - . .A Knecht Dental �I Nrl� r' Office Nall 11.EPIC' RANKLIN Subject ST Parcel 41111 IaBEVED I 1111 BEVELAND ST ' Z IIII c, ONZAGA I'll " • x NM ■ m ails _______I in IIIII 1111 F 111111166, • •• II N 11)e 1111, feet 0 200 400 600 Feet 1'=451 feet 1111, ■■■11..11 City of Tigard S ST 7 -----i -, Information ulbe verified on with map the is for general location Services only and should be verified with the Development Services Divisbn. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 IVARTS ST \ I I (503)639-4171 Commum Development I nttp�www.d.tlga d.or.us L 4 jY Plot date:f ul 16,1998;dmagiclmagicf l.apr • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TICiARD Community Devetopment Shaping (Better Community DATE: August 6,1998 TO: Jim Wolf,Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Halduk,Associate Planner Phone:[5031 639-4171 Fax:[5031684-7297 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR]98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE — The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to convert an existing single-family residence to a dental office. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment (MUE). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.150 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (MONDAY - AUGUST 17,19981 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: 940toIdk o► wwi t, cwt• tAtta.\ Vez Std ow r. c ors t!, of Q •44(N4■c ` cA \y \vt4 Gli 0.3c 'cm 41. 10104 $„t WIL t eotA4ItA 966" * Nwy "dt hL. wad\ -wt.wtrd► ‘ti*. Or'afise provi&the foaming information)Name of Personfsl Commenting: 6\µ \4. I Phone Number(s): ad.4) SDR 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PROPOSAL/REQUEST FOR COMMENTS • WAND MKT TAX LOT 2500 TAX LOT 2400 BENCHMARK TAX LOT MO MAP NO. 25-1-168 MAP NO.25-1-IAB KT 12-WOK MAP NO. 211•Z .4 .......Eve LOT LOT .117.17. U.CV VI•It 9 MOW 25-1-1A13 148'00.40-E 4r• Mr .171.1•1"...=171 ../ ..... • LEGEND L r...., 1 • :„, -0- COW C4., war.111.il l'.7-. , z,,,, 111111111111m4A P._,, ,,iihWlimp. R.,.EA...0.., ii • • i .....,...11rewilgira:zi., ,.....r E.-. TAX LOT 9600 .-,---1111-7-1IA..Mph. , .,,,, , _,,,..., 1 1■4.11 V •-' 2 ir.-it MAP NO 25-1 0 4 3= .141.4441 440101 ... = Pr...4-1/21 A44 ,4...47 10 I14 1.11n,Caw. WW1 mem 1 o..A ..,...z__.. ERNOUS A■REA i 4 IMO KM 0. , alV TAX LOT 2700 MAP NO. 25-1-1AD Z +144 i„ TOW T.0 W. a.m. .4.0 [.1 .. I PV't .. ....--■ ...,'En sr., • • Pr...Cen4ew . 'g / 46 -... ,..,4 L... ,■,.,.r• Cr) S: ''' *1-44"r 1• I "174_ -''' + ,''',1 4Q44 .,.. ---- . 1,N ..... " \e\ '•"f",....,. \ -1 ..„/, s\ 1 1 ••:.4 ..1.1- 4-'--- 1 ' " CI,,, 1•22./ Imet, um &A.,- • ...... , 7 Ptl. .1 Ir... 114 7,14., 242 .. . , I =:Z. i/I. . ... • .1.„ 1 i 0 SWALE DETAIL Hi IT , , =MI . wag _, _ _ _ _ „.. Sc•IK r••1' I I i, ........... r....r z ....,Z.I MK I I t I PROPOSED DENTAL=TA 1 . 1 ■ A rill .' WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS . ■ I. 1 I OFFICE rir40,41 ' 2 'CO 111PLINC05 ONO so.ruza ONIM 1•1071.. 4.1 RAPIMI.0.3074 HOOK 000 KA. • 1 I mum ..,-1.0P Ii. D ITKANDIT FLOW ON 04,4011 A 400 SOFT/MOO'C• .0.01 PS I\ : I:. I "' •74 .0)...4, ; r, Z SWALE KIK. 102 FEET OW.W.) TAX LOT 100 VOLE KOK re '111P6." i WAGE et,A MAP NO.2S-1-1AG ILOW KLOOTT L, FLOW 111K 11110710>9 104.11ES I. I 0,07 I =."' WO A.u now IF MT 1 I ... •=11,11■■••••1111 1 ,,,, 111=maili=ostiontagireve4 ..-I .... ' ;•:,---: , - i I ..„- *-....... 1 1 1 , . MULL MAL ... AO {01•01T POND& CL i II I 11 I' ' ......‘ •4. Irr:::^4 11 DENCHMARN i,4000 ii, NMENINE MAP NO.25-1-1AC 0,41i 1 II 11 1.-.! ci 4 ,,,,, itikA , ...- If W1 Al ' . 1 '... Al ,. .. .'9.11. IntWAIL,...5.00‘WVMIMIT.WAgedredillig.fit‘ ....1\\,ft.A...... Ma MIIIIIIIIII.""... .r.4.■ 4 --- .--**"."4-5-1/1 Ce ---------....=. , .... •■•■.4117400.4 400,,, . ..fr..icolimpo jor < bli, 43119/ . irap pa- .. . , , . . . . ------ t ■ft.,.._.:6,, ..... . 1 1 i >8 — liklIN- 1116. or .... INNE ftliiiik 24°-\ 1 rty•0 4', ”.■W,'I "1\ .."'... • ..moomja 0 V/ TAX LOT IOW GRAPHIC SCALE MAP No 2S-I-IAC TAX LOT 200 r MAP NO.2S-I-IAG . W 4 Yob.VI 0. CASE NO(S)&CASE MAMELSI: F4. r SITE PLAN 4141 SDR 98-0009 EXHIBIT MAP N Knecht Dental Office �_ :NI -F CITY of TIGARD i1ii 0E 33 RAPNIG INFON lATION$TNTEU DARTMOUTH ST 11 „A,1 VICINITY MAP 1 ri i S IIIMIL ill z.,.1:III:i.se= ST SDR 98-0009 pa"-OSO 1111 to, Iii.,- Knecht Dental Office 1ii$Iitv ' - N IN Subject BE ST JParcel " il—i BEVELAND ST‘llo in csi n GONZAGA ST 11111 Ms m 11111111 co F • Nib, ,: ..: I N 111111 0 200 400 600 Feel 1'=481 feet 1111, ' 4\ ■ •■1111■■. City of Tigard S ST 1 Illak should be verified on this map is ev general location Di and Division. should be yenned with the Development Services DMsion. 13125 0)SW 639-4171 H411 Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 r r—IvAaits-1—\ L—L 4 1 (503)839-4171 -, 7 http l/ww.v.d.tlgard.a.u$ Community Devibpment Plot date:Jul If,1998:c\magic\tupc01.apr REC'D AUG o REQUEST FOR COMMENTS C.OF TIIGARD Community(Development Shaping,4 Better Community DATE: August 6,1998 TO: Tualatin Valley Water District Administrative Offices FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone:[5031639-4171 Fax:[5031 684-7297 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 98-0009 ➢ KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to convert an existing single-family residence to a dental office. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment (MUE). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.150 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (MONDAY - AUGUST 11,1998). 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 .rovided below: 01 014 1$4 � • Itr S"10,040C-d :•VA/1"4412 4• ' ,' Q.•�, , , eve—{7)-r• of ►. �1r'lease provide t(u'follaunng information)Name of Person's]Commenting: �.� I Phone Number[s): SDR 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PROPOSAL/REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CI OF TIIGARD Community Cevefopment Shaping.,4 Better Community DATE: August 6,1998 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk,Associate Planner Phone:(5031639-4171 Fax:(503)684-7297 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to convert an existing single-family residence to a dental office. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment (MUE). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.150 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (MONDAY - AUGUST 17,199k. 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: (Please provide the foffowing information)Name of Person(sl Commenting: I Phone Number(s): I SDR 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PROPOSAL/REQUEST FOR COMMENTS .1EQUEST FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE&COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CR Area:(C) [©IS) Min CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS ®Place ler rarlaw In library CIT Bookts1 I FILE NOLSl.: c1:R 9- Obo1 FILE NAME'S]: I / _ , / Op'7 CITY OFFICES . VANCED PLANNING/Nadine Smith,Planning sewrru. COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./o.wnor.sve..r.ennc,.n. '/ISOLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Cm,.Prevention on¢• (_,ZBUILDING DIV./David Scott,a iw om .i /ENGINEERING DEPT.iBnan Rager,Won.R«..EnQnw L–WATER DEPTJMichael Miller,oo«.«...n.,« _CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,CM/R.cproprop.",a« OPERATIONS DEPT./John Roy,P, . 1.4..9. _OTHER SPECIAL DISTRICTS _TUAL HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.O TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE * ✓TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT* _UNIFIED SWRGE.AGENCY * Planning Manager Fire Marshall Administrative Office Julia Huffman/SWM Program 15707 SW Walker Road Washington County Fire District PO Box 745 155 N. First Street Beaverton, OR 97006 (place in pick-up box) Beaverton,OR 97075 Hillsboro,OR 97124 LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS _CITY OF BEAVERTON * _C:TY 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,r nuts.copra. PO Box 369 PO Box 59 Salem,OR 97310-1337 PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 Portland,OR 97207 Beaverton, OR 97076 _OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. _METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING * _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street, NE _CITY OF DURHAM * 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland,OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 PO Box 23483 _US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. Durham,OR 97281-3483 _Paulette Allen.Growth Management Coordinator _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP. 333 SW First Avenue _Mel Huie,GreensoaceaCoom,nai«(CPA's,ZOA's) 1175 Court Street,NE PO Box 2946 _CITY OF KING CITY * Salem,OR 97310-0590 Portland,OR 97208-2946 City Manager _METRO AREA BOUNDARY COMMISSION 15300 SW 116th Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street _OREGON DEPT.OF TRANS.(ODOT) _WASHINGTON COUNTY* King City,OR 97224 Building#16,Suite 540 Aeronautics Division Dept.of Land Use&Trans. Portland,OR 97232-2109 Tom Highland,Planntng 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 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Routing TTRC-Attn: Renae Ferrera _ODOT,REGION 1 * _ Brent Curtis(CPAs) PO Box 3621 Sonya Kazen,Dv Ipeu Rev coon _ Scott King(CPA's) —CITY OF PORTLAND Portland,OR 97208-3621 123 NW Flanders — Mike Borreson(Engineer/ David Knowles, Planning Bureau Dir. Portland,OR 97209-4037 _ Jim Tice(IGA'e) Portland Building 106, Rm. 1002 OREGON,DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY _ Tom Harry(arrant P o Aa, 1120 SW Fifth Avenue 811 SW Sixth Avenue _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A * _ Phil Healy(arrant P.APIA Portland, OR 97204 Portland,OR 97204 Jane Estes,Permit Specialist _ Sr.CartographerrcvazcA-us ., PO Box 25412 Portland,OR 97298-0412 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES _BURLINGTON NORTHERN/ SANTA FE R/R _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS .-PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC _TCI CABLEVISION OF OR. Reed Fay, Division Superintendent Jason Hewitt Brian Moore,Svc.Design Consultant Linda Peterson 1313 W. 11th Street Twin Oaks Technology Center 9480 SW Boeckman Road 3500 SW Bond Street Vancouver,WA 98660-3000 1815 NW 169th Place, S-6020 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97201 Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 —COLUMBIA CABLE COMPANY i' _PORTLAND WESTERN R/R —TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Craig Eyestone NNW NATURAL GAS COMPANY Steve Myhr,Region Manager Michael Kiser,Project Planner 14200 SW Bngadoon Court Scott Palmer Catellus Property Management 710 NE Holladay Street Beaverton,OR 97005 220 NW Second Avenue 999 Third Avenue,Suite 2120 Portland,OR 97232 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Seattle,WA 98104-4037 '-GENERAL TELEPHONE Elaine Self, Engineering _OREGON ELECTRIC R/R _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO. R/R US WEST COMMUNICATION MC: ORO30546 (Burlington NortherniSanta Fe RJR Predassor) Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Lori Dorney, Engineering Dept. Tigard,OR 97281-3416 Reed Fay,Division Superintendent 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard 421 SW Oak Street, Rm. 110 1313 W. 11th Street Portland,OR 97232 Portland,OR 97204 Vancouver,WA 98660-3000 * - IMOICATCS AUTOMATIC NOTI/ICATION It WITMIM!SO• Of VMS SUSJSCT PROPLATY FOR ANY/ALL CITY PAO/SCTf. faOIICT PLAIINSR If RSSPOMSISLU JOR U4OICATL C PARTILf TO NOI1IVI li..attyVnastersldcrcuce.mst 16-Jan-98 MAILING RECORDS . . , • AFFIDAVIT OF MAlL1NG ....1.CRY Of A*. fl TIOARD Community,Development Shaping)1 Better Community ,S'xAtlik, OAF CR,EGOX ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) 1, Patricia t L. Gunsford being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for the City of7"zgard Waslington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (7 e.o.i NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: '` P ,' Q 0 b o a_ , 1, , ., .1 0 ; / ❑ AMENDED NOTICE NaiNemeR--1 "-) k City of Tigard Planning Director , ❑ NOTICE OF PUBLIC NEARING FOR: I f ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (Fie No.Meme Reference) (Dam of Pudic I-banng) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: I , ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (Fie No/Name Reference) (Dam d Pudic 4arn,q) ■ ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ NOTICE OF. FOR: 7-7 I j (Type Kind at Nccce) (Fie No.Mame Reference) (Dated Pud,c rbanvg.f aop,oarl A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF OECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICEtSI of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was ailed to each m-d per on(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked E>hyblt :",o the 2m r- -' day of l_i...,i 1 /t- 1998, and deposited in the United States Mail on the ' day of .,..„4/'- .0— i/. _ 4 1998,postage prepaid. IA_ �� a (Persort t at Pree-red N• i - - — rI Subscribed and swor /affirmed before me on the day of J9g4LLr- , 19 ; . G•�� OFFICIAL SEAL a DIANE M JELDERKS //�/J�/J / I NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON 1�+(.Ci t,, COMMISSION NO.046142 ; i! MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07.1999 NOTARY PUBLIC OFO My Commission Expires: 7 4 EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 98-0009 CITY OFTIGARD Community(Development KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE Shaping i7 Better Community 120 DAYS = 11/13/98 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE CASE NO.: Site Development Review SDR 98-0009 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Site Development Review approval to convert an existing dwelling unit into a dental office. APPLICANT: Steve Kerby OWNER: Anna Knecht 7100 SW Hampton, Suite 121 10483 SW Bonanza Way Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. ZONING DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. The site is located on the northwest corner of SW Gonzaga Street and SW 70th Avenue. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150 and 18.164. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has DENIED the above request because the project does not meet development code standards for streets, landscaping, walkways, street trees, lighting, access and sewer. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 1 OF 17 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The property is developed and has been used as a single-family residence. A search of City records indicates that there are no previous land use approvals granted for the site. Vicinity Information: The subject site is located on the northwest corner of SW Gonzaga Street and SW 70th Avenue. The property to the west and south, along SW Gonzaga Street, is currently developed as single-family residences. The zoning of all surrounding properties is Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The zoning permits commercial businesses and the two properties directly to the west of the subject parcel are currently operating, illegally, as commercial businesses. Planning Staff and the Code Enforcement Division are aware of this and action is under way to bring these sites into compliance. The owner of the parcels has attended a pre-application conference and is moving forward in applying for Site Development Review. The property to the east, across the SW 70th Avenue right-of-way has received approval for the construction of a dental office. The properties to the north have access onto Beveland and several of those homes are operating commercial businesses. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is identified as 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. The site is within the Tigard Triangle, therefore, the Tigard Triangle Design Standards apply. The site is currently developed with a single-family residence. The proposal is to convert the existing structure to an office, pave the parking areas and install landscaping. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Section 18.120.180 states, "The Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application:" Impact Study: Section 18.32.050 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.32.250 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 2 OF 17 The applicant is required to dedicate a portion of the property to allow for the full required street width of SW 70th Avenue. In accordance with Section 18.164.030.A and J and consistent with the Tigard Triangle standards, the applicant is required to pay for and construct their portion of the local street fronting the property. In order for the local street system to function to serve all properties at buildout, streets meeting minimum standards must be provided. The required improvements provide for the share of local street improvements needed to serve this development in conjunction with the standard improvements that are required of all other properties. In other words, the applicant is only paying for their portion or segment of the local street system. With the improvements, the applicant will be providing services that will be adequate to serve the needs of the proposed use. The applicant has provided an impact statement that states the required dedication and improvements are not roughly proportional to the conversion. Staff believes that this is not a true quantification of the impact. All new commercial developments are required to have approved access on a local street. Customers of a commercial establishment on a local street utilize the local street network. Because a commercial development on a local street is only contributing to improvements to their frontage, the local street improvement is proportional to the impact which that use has on the rest of the local street system. While the proportionality of local street improvements has been discussed, additional evidence of proportionality for the dedication requirement is demonstrated in the following TIF analysis. 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 Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32% of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. Presently, the TIF for each trip that is generated is $174. The total TIF calculated for a residential conversion to a dental office is $5,333.10 (40.65 trips - 10 trips credited for residence x $174). The applicant is being required to dedicate an additional 24 feet (3362 square feet) of right-of-way along SW 70th Avenue. Based on the City's CIP budget for purchases of property for street ROW, property is assessed at $3 per square foot. Assuming a cost of $3 per square foot, it is estimated that the total cost of the dedication of SW 70th Avenue is $10,086 (3362 sq. ft. x $3). Upon completion of this development, the applicant will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $5,333. 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 this projects traffic impact is $16,665 ($5,333 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid and the full impact, is considered an unmitigated impact. Since the TIF paid is $5,333, the unmitigated impact can be valued at $11 ,332. Given these estimates ($10,086 dedication), the dedication requirement meets the roughly proportional standard. The cost of the street improvements is not reviewed for proportionality, as the requirement to have access to a commercial site from an approved street is necessary to meet the minimum City standards for pedestrian-vehicular safety and drainage. As stated previously in this Impact Analysis, because all development requires use of the public street network, and local streets are not covered by the TIFs, the requirement to improve local streets is proportional to the use the development has on the rest of the local street network. The street improvement and dedication requirements is discussed in this decision under Street and Utility Improvements Standards. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 3 OF 17 PROVISIONS AND REGULATIONS OF UNDERLYING ZONE The MUE zone states that dimensional requirements for all commercial use types shall be the same as the C-G district (Section 18.62.050). Section 18.62.050 states that there is no minimum lot area and the average minimum lot width is 50 feet. Developments are required to provide a minimum of 15% landscaping. The proposal provides for more than 15% landscaping, thus meeting the underlying zones landscaping regulations. Please note: Additional landscaping standards apply which may increase the amount of landscaping currently proposed. The MUE zone states that the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for all commercial and industrial use types shall not exceed 0.40. The existing structure does not exceed 40% of the site, therefore, the FAR has been met. Setbacks: Section 18.62.050 states that no front, side, or rear yard setback is required except a 20 foot side and rear yard setback is required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. The maximum building height is 45 feet This section is not applicable as the structure is existing and setbacks will not be altered as a result of this proposal. Setbacks related to landscaping requirements are discussed further elsewhere within this decision. FINDING: Because the proposed use is permitted in the underlying zone and meets the setback and dimensional requirements for that zone, the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone have been met. Tigard Triangle Design Standards: Section 18.67. Design standards for public street improvements and for new development and renovation projects have been prepared for the Tigard Triangle. These design standards address several important guiding principals adopted for the Tigard Triangle, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. All new developments, including remodeling and renovation projects resulting in non single-family residential uses, are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described below and other development standards required by the Development and Building Codes, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle. If a standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code, standards in this section shall govern. BECAUSE THE PROPOSAL INVOLVES AN EXISTING STRUCTURE, THE FOLLOWING DESIGN STANDARDS DO NOT APPLY: A. Site Design Standards including: building placement, building setback, front yard setback design and; NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 4 OF 17 B. Building Design Standards including: ground floor windows, building facades, weather protection, building materials, roofs and roof-lines, and roof-mounted equipment. THE FOLLOWING DESIGN STANDARDS ARE APPLICABLE TO THIS DEVELOPMENT: Site Design Standards A 6 foot wide scored concrete or modular paving walk way is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway. The applicant has not indicated a 6-foot-wide walkway meeting the above standards will be installed. FINDING: Because a walkway is not existing or proposed, the standard requiring a 6-foot-wide walkway from the building entrance to the public street has not been satisfied. Street Connectivity: All development must demonstrate how one of the following standard options will be met. Variance of these standards may be approved per the requirements of Chapter 18.134 where topography, barriers such as railroads or freeways, or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street extensions and connections. Design Option: A. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. B. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way shall be provided at intervals of no more that 330 feet. Performance Option: A. Local street spacing shall occur at intervals of no less than eight street intersections per mile. B. The shortest vehicle trip over public streets from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than twice the straight-line distance. C. The shortest pedestrian trip on public right-of-way from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than one and one-half the straight-line distance. The applicant's impact statement states that the design option has been met because they say SW 70th Avenue connects with SW Gonzaga Street across the street. The intent of the 660 foot design option is to provide for connecting routes along local streets which will reduce trips from being forced onto the regional network. In order for the local connection to provide an alternate route to the regional system, it must be able to extend in such a way as to connect local streets both north and south, east and west. Therefore, in order for the 660 design option to be satisfied, SW 70th Avenue must be extended north to connect already dedicated portions of SW 70th Avenue. There is a portion of SW 70th Avenue already dedicated adjacent to this site, however it is not of an adequate width that would allow for street improvements consistent with the development code. There is 950 feet between SW 72nd and SW 69th if SW 70th Avenue were not extended. Therefore, not meeting the 660-foot design option standard. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 5 OF 17 FINDING: Because the local street spacing between SW 72nd and SW 69th is greater than 660 feet, the design option has not been met. Because the applicant has not shown how they meet or will meet the design option or the performance option, this standard has not been satisfied. Site Design Standards: Parking Location and Landscape Design: Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50 percent of the street frontage, and must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The minimum depth of the L-1 landscaped area is five feet or is equal to the building setback, whichever is greater. Interior side and rear yards shall be landscaped to a L-2 Landscape Standard, except where a side yard abuts a public street, where it shall be landscaped to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The proposed parking spaces are located in the rear of the existing building, thus meeting the standards. The L-2 standards require compliance with Section 18.100 which will be discussed in more detail further in this decision. The landscape standards are discussed elsewhere within this decision. FINDING: Because the parking lot location standard is met and because the landscaping requirements will be addressed elsewhere within this decision, this standard has been satisfied. Signs: In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.114 of the Development Code the following standards shall be met: Zoning District Regulations: non-residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone (18.114.130 D). Sign Area Limits: The maximum sign area limits found in 18.114.130 shall not be exceeded. No area limit increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Height Limits: The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs shall be 10 feet. Wall signs shall not extend above the roof line of the wall on which the sign is located. No height increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Sign Location: Freestanding signs within the Tigard Triangle shall not be permitted within required L-1 landscape areas. The applicant has not indicated signs are proposed. If a sign is requested, it must be approved through the sign permit process as administered by the City of Tigard Development Services Technicians. Compliance with sign standards will be reviewed at that time. A sign permit must be obtained for ANY signs located on the property. FINDING: Because compliance with sign codes will be required if and when a sign permit is applied for, these standards have been satisfied. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 6 OF 17 Landscaping And Screening: Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are define in other sub-sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. L-1 (Low Screen): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.100 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial, trees shall be planted at 3 1/2-inch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a 3 foot high screen and a 90% opacity within one year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2- inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. L-2 (General Landscaping): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.100 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. Trees shall be provided at a minimum 2 1/2-inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2-inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. Because the site is on a local street, the L-1 and L-2 landscape standards defer to the planting standards of Section 18.100. These standards are discussed further in this decision. FINDING: Because the landscape standards of 18.100 are required in-lieu-of the L-1 or L-2 landscape standards, and because the landscape standards of Section 18.100 are discussed further in this decision, the landscaping and screening standards of the Tigard Triangle have been satisfied. PROVISIONS OF DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTERS Section 18.120.180(A)(1) requires that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of the Community Development Code. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.62, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164, 18.67 (MUE Standards and Tigard Triangle Design Standards). The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. The proposal contains no elements related to the following Code Chapters which are also listed under Section 18.120.180.A.1: 18.80 (Planned Developments), 18.84 (Sensitive Lands), 18.92 (Density Computations), 18.94 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations), or 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) These Chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards, and are not discussed in this decision. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 7 OF 17 Landscaping and Screening (18.100 and 18.120): Buffering, Screening and Compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.120.180.4(A) states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses. The site is surrounded by MUE to the north, south, east and west. There are existing residences to the north and south. To the west is a residence being used as a business without City approval, but is working on achieving compliance. To the east, across SW 70th Avenue is a site being developed as a commercial dental office. This area is zoned MUE which will continue to allow residences. The buffering and screening requirement is to screen from different types of uses. Because the north and south properties are currently residential use types, the change of the site in question from residential to commercial requires buffering and screening between the adjacent uses. The following landscaping is required for buffers as per Section 18.100.080: at least one (1) row of trees, no less than ten (10) feet high for deciduous trees or five (5) feet for evergreen trees at time of planting; at least ten (10), five (5)-gallon shrubs or 20, one (1)-gallon shrubs per 1000 square feet of required buffer area; and the remaining area must be planted in lawn, groundcover, or bark mulch. In addition, one (1) of the following screening methods is required: A hedge of narrow or broad leaf evergreen shrubs which forms a four (4)-foot high continuous shrub within two (2) years; an earthen berm planted with evergreen materials which forms a continuous screen six (6) feet in height within two (2) years; or a five (5)-foot or taller fence or wall to provide a continuous sight obscuring screen. The applicant has indicated an existing 6 foot high fence will remain and a 5-foot-wide buffer will be provided in the rear. The front yard buffer will be 30 feet. The Tigard Development Code allows reduced buffer widths provided equivalent landscaping and screening are provided to provide the same level of privacy. The applicant has not provided a landscape plan that shows the required buffer landscaping will be met or that shows additional landscaping to allow the required 20-foot-wide buffer to be reduced. FINDING: Because the applicant has not proposed landscaping and buffer widths as described above and required in Section 18.100, the buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses standard has not been met. Section 18.100.110(A) requires the screening of parking and loading areas. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three-feet-wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The applicant has proposed to retain the existing 6-foot high good neighbor fence which will screen the parking lot. The existing trees meet the requirement for 1 tree for every 7 parking spaces. FINDING: Because the existing fence will effectively screen the parking lot and the existing trees provide 1 tree for every 7 parking spaces, this standard has been met. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 8 OF 17 Street Trees: Section 18.100.033 states that all development projects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.100.035. Section 18.100.035 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). Tigard Triangle Design Standards (which supersedes all other code provisions) call for spreading street trees that spread to 25 feet along local streets. The applicant has shown 1 existing 15-inch plum tree on the property frontage. The entire frontage is 112 feet, which would require between 2 and 5 trees to be planted depending on the species. FINDING: Because the applicant has not indicated existing or proposed street trees planted 20 to 40 feet apart (distance based on the size classification at maturity), and because they are required by the Tigard Triangle Design Standards and applicable code sections, the street tree standards have not been met. Visual Clearance Areas (18.102): Section 18.102 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight (8) feet in height (trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30-foot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway, and then connecting these two (2), 30-foot distance points with a straight line. There are no structures, other than an existing utility pole proposed within the vision clearance triangle on the applicants property. FINDING: Because there is not vegetation or structures located within the vision clearance triangle, this standard has been satisfied. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.106) - Minimum off-street parking: This section requires one (1) parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. The existing structures total 1,851 square feet, therefore, a total of 9 parking spaces are required. The applicant has indicated that 9 parking spaces will be provided, therefore, the off-street parking and loading standard has been met. Bicycle Parking: Section 18.106.020(P) requires one (1) bicycle parking rack space for every 15 required vehicular parking spaces in any development. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas, or pedestrian ways. Because the site has between 1 and 15 parking spaces, one (1) bicycle parking space is required. The applicant has shown that a bicycle space will be installed in the rear of the building near the parking lot. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 9 OF 17 FINDING: Because the applicant has shown that the required number of parking spaces will be provided and the bicycle parking will be installed, this standard has been met. Access, Egress and Circulation (18.108): Section 18.108.080 requires that commercial and industrial uses which require 0-99 parking spaces provide at least 1 access with a minimum width of 30 feet and a minimum pavement width of 24 feet. There are less that 99 parking spaces proposed, therefore, one (1) 30-foot-wide access is required, with 24 feet of pavement. The applicant's plan does not show a 30 foot wide access. While there are circumstances on the site which may have allowed for a variance to be granted, the applicant has not requested a variance. FINDING: Because the proposed access does not meet the standards, and a variance was not requested, this standard has not been met. Signs (18.114 ): Section 18.114.130(D) lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C- G Zone. This provision is superseded by the Tigard Triangle Design Standards which were discussed previously in this decision. FINDING: Because the Tigard Triangle Design Standards relating to signs take precedence, this standard does not apply. Tree Removal (18.150) Section 18.150.025 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12-inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. The applicant has indicated that no trees will be removed. Based on the location of the few trees on the site, and the proposed and required improvements, staff agrees with the applicant's assessment that no trees must be removed. FINDING: Because no trees over 12-inch caliper will be removed as a result of this proposal, this criterion has been met. Street And Utility Improvement Standards (18.164): Streets: This site is bordered on the south side by SW Gonzaga Street and on the east side by the unimproved right-of-way (ROW) for SW 70th Avenue. TDC 18.164.030(E) states that street ROW widths shall not be less than what is specified in the TDC. In addition, the Tigard Triangle Design Standards (TTDS) (Section 18.67) state that in addition to Development Code standards, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 10 OF 17 water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle. An Impact Analysis, provided at the beginning of this report, addresses the proportionality of required street improvements. Section A(1) of the TTDS, entitled "Street Connectivity, Design Option", states that local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. SW Gonzaga Street Southwest Gonzaga Street is classified as a local street in the TTDS, and is required to be improved within a 60-foot ROW. At present, there is approximately 25 feet of ROW north of the street centerline adjacent to this site. The applicant's plan and narrative indicate that they are willing to dedicate additional ROW on SW Gonzaga Street to provide 30 feet from centerline to meet the TTDS standards. Southwest Gonzaga Street is a paved roadway but is not built to meet the City's width and structural section standards. The TTDS indicates that a local street shall have a paved width of 36 feet curb-to-curb (18 feet from curb to centerline). In accordance with the TTDS and TDC standards for development requirements, the applicant should be required to make street improvements to the frontage of SW Gonzaga Street. The applicant has proposed to not construct the street improvements as a part of the development, but suggests that the improvements be delayed with the use of a non-remonstrance agreement because they feel the surrounding neighbors do not want the street improved. They also state that the cost of constructing an improvement along their frontage will be more costly than if it were included with a larger project, such as a local improvement district (LID). They also state that the dead-end sidewalk will serve no useful purpose, as their customers will more than likely arrive by car. Staff does not believe the applicant's statements warrant a delay in the improvement of SW Gonzaga Street. The surrounding area, although still partially occupied by single- family uses, is beginning to intensify in redevelopment proposals. Staff has even held a pre-application conference recently with a potential developer for a parcel of land to the west of this site. In addition, the City Council, when adopting the TTDS, was very clear in stating that local streets within the Triangle should be improved as development occurs. The applicant's statement concerning costs of improvements is not necessarily true. If the improvements were not built now, but delayed for a time, the cost of road improvements will only increase with inflation. In addition, the applicant's argument of making the improvements a part of a LID will not guarantee a lower cost to each property owner. TDC 18.164.030(A)(c) states that a non-remonstrance agreement could be considered if one of the following conditions exist: 1. a partial improvement is not feasible due to the inability to achieve proper design standards; 2. a partial improvement may create a potential safety hazard to motorists or pedestrians; 3. it is unlikely that additional street improvements will occur in the foreseeable future; 4. the improvement would be in conflict with an adopted capital improvement plan; 5. the improvement is a part of a residential land partition and the partition does not create any new streets; or 6. additional planning work is required to define the appropriate design standards for the street. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 11 OF 17 Criteria #1 is not met because it is possible for the applicant to meet the current TDC and TTDS design standards. Criteria #2 is not met because the applicant can construct a half- street improvement with appropriately designed pavement tapers at each end of the improvement that would not create a public safety hazard. Criteria #3 is not met because there are other properties in the area that will likely develop in the foreseeable future and will also be required to make street improvements. There are other sites within the Triangle that are redeveloping in a similar manner to what is proposed on this site, and the adjacent streets are being improved. Criteria #4 is not met because there is no capital improvement project planned for SW Gonzaga Street. Criteria #5 is not met because this project is not a residential land partition. Criteria #6 is not met because appropriate design standards have already been established in the TDC and TTDS. It is Staff's opinion that none of the six criteria listed in 18.164.030(A)(c) exist. In addition, the roadway would need to be improved to meet fire apparatus access standards of the UFC. Therefore, the applicant should make the improvements to the street in accordance with the TDC and TTDS standards. Since the applicant has proposed an alternative that Staff does not find will meet City standards, the application should be denied. One other concern to be raised is the fact that the existing paved width of the roadway is approximately 17.5 feet to 18 feet. The Uniform Fire Code, which is enforced by a City ordinance, requires a minimum unobstructed paved width of 20 feet (UFC 902.2.2.1) for fire apparatus access. If the roadway is not improved to meet City standards, this UFC standard will also not be met. SW 70th Avenue This roadway is also classified as a local street in the TTDS, and also requires a 60-foot ROW. Staff discussed the ROW situation with the applicant on a number of occasions and acknowledged that the existing garage to the house is approximately 25 from the existing ROW line of SW 70th Avenue (which is actually the centerline of the required ROW). Staff indicated that because of the conflict with the existing structure, the applicant would only have to dedicate ROW up to the edge of the building. The TTDS and TDC would allow a zero setback to the ROW. The applicant's plan and narrative indicate that they are unwilling to dedicate the additional ROW on SW 70th Avenue because they claim the TTDS Street Plan does not show SW 70th Avenue extending north of SW Gonzaga Street. They also refer to ROW vacations that took place in 1987 and 1988. The applicant again raises the apparent concern from the neighbors that this street not be improved. They also argue that the TTDS criteria for street connectivity is met because the distance along the south ROW line of SW Gonzaga Street is 645 feet between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 70th Avenue. They make this argument because there is ROW for SW 70th Avenue dedicated south of SW Gonzaga Street. Staff again does not agree with the applicant's arguments. The street connectivity standard of the TTDS applies to this site because in order to fully meet the standard, SW 70th Avenue would need to be improved between SW Gonzaga Street and Beveland Street to the north. If SW 70th Avenue were not improved in this section, there would be a gap of approximately 950 feet between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 69th Avenue, and therefore the "660-foot standard" would not be met. The applicant's argument only works for the section of SW 70th Avenue lying south of SW Gonzaga Street, which is not adjacent to the subject site. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 12 OF 17 TDC Section 18.164.030(G)(2) states that all local and minor collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation. SW 70th Avenue is considered a local street and there are portions of dedicated ROW extending from SW Hampton Street to SW Dartmouth Street. The previous ROW vacations mentioned in the applicant's narrative are irrelevant in this case because they merely reflect a decision made over 10 years ago when the City was not sure if SW 70th Avenue would be needed as a public street. Due to the change in zoning in the Triangle, where there will be more traffic generated by commercial and mixed uses, it makes sense to include SW 70th Avenue as another north/south connection between other streets. SW 70th Avenue is not improved adjacent to this site at this time and the applicant is not proposing direct access onto this roadway. It is Staff's opinion that the applicant should not be required to improve SW 70th Avenue at this time, as there are no other paved improvements to the north of the site for connection, and there will not likely be any other street improvements made to SW 70th Avenue in the foreseeable future. Therefore, Criteria #3 of 18.164.030(A)(c) is met. Staff has recommended execution of non- remonstrance agreements covering future improvements to SW 70th Avenue for other projects within the Triangle that have frontage on the roadway. For this project, Staff also would recommend that the applicant sign such an agreement. However, the applicant has clearly stated in their narrative that they do not agree that SW 70th Avenue should be improved and have not indicated that they would sign such an agreement. In summary, the applicant's plan does not meet the TTDS standard for street connectivity. Therefore, based upon the deficient plan and the statements in the narrative indicating that the applicant is not willing to dedicate the ROW or sign a non-remonstrance agreement for the future improvement of the SW 70th Avenue roadway, Staff finds that this issue provides further cause for denial of this application. Water: This site will be served from the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. There is presently a water service that feeds the site. Sanitary Sewer: TDC 18.164.090(A)(1) states that sanitary sewers shall be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in the City's public improvement design standards and the comprehensive plan. At present, the nearest public sanitary sewer line is over 500 feet away in SW 72nd Avenue. In accordance with the City Council's direction for project sites in the Triangle that are over 300 feet away from a public sewer line, if the applicant/property owner can demonstrate that the existing on-site sanitary sewer septic system is functioning adequately to serve the new use, the City will allow the continued use of the system provided the applicant/property owner pays a fee in-lieu of constructing off-site sanitary sewer improvements for the site. The fee will be based on an engineer's estimate of the cost to extend public sanitary sewer to the area surrounding the site. The fee shall be paid prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. The applicant would need to coordinate with the City Engineer to determine the fee amount. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 13 OF 17 The applicant's plan does not clearly indicate the location of the existing drainage field for the septic tank. In addition, the applicant did not indicate whether or not they have sought or obtained approval from the Washington County Health Department to continue use of the existing system for the proposed dental office use. It is not possible at this time to determine whether or not the existing septic system will function adequately for this project. Therefore, the applicant has not met the City's standard with regard to sanitary sewer service. Storm Drainage: The topography of this site falls primarily to the southwest toward SW Gonzaga Street. The applicant submitted a downstream analysis which indicates the capacities of the culverts downstream of this site will be more than adequate to handle the small increase in storm water runoff from this site. 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 is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of a 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 is proposing to construct an on-site vegetated swale to treat the additional runoff from this site. The preliminary sizing calculations provided by the applicant's engineer indicate that the swale shown on the plans will adequately treat the additional runoff. 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 adjacent to SW Gonzaga Street. Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 112 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $ 3,080.00. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the site plan and proposal, does not meet the Street and Utility Improvement standards or the Tigard Triangle Design Standards, specifically those related to required street connectivity, street improvements and sanitary sewer service. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 14 OF 17 ADDITIONAL SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL STANDARDS Section 18.120.180(A)(2) through 18.120.180(A)(17) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.120.180.3 Exterior Elevations); 18.120.180.5 Privacy and Noise); 18.120.180.6 Private Outdoor Areas: Residential Use); 18.120.180.7 Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Residential Use); 18.120.180.8 100-year floodplain); and 18.120.180.9 Demarcation of Spaces). The following sections were discussed previously in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.120.180.11 Access and Circulation); 18.120.180.13 Parking); 18.120.180.14 Landscaping); 18.120.180.15 Drainage); and 18.120.180.17 Signs). Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Section 18.120.180.2 states that buildings shall be located to preserve existing trees, topography, and natural drainage and that trees having a six (6)-inch caliper or greater, shall be preserved or replaced by new plantings of equal character. The proposal is to change the use of an existing structure. No buildings will be added or expanded, therefore, this standard is not applicable. FINDING: Because the proposal does not involve the location of a new structure, this standard does not apply. Crime Prevention and Safety: Section 18.120.108.10 requires that exterior lighting levels be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime and shall be placed in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic. The applicant has not provided information on lighting, therefore staff can not determine if this standard has been satisfied. FINDING: Because crime prevention lighting has not been discussed in the applicants narrative, staff finds that the proposal does not satisfy this criterion. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Section 18.106.020(M) became effective on January 26, 1992. All parking areas shall be provided with the required numbers and sizes of disabled person parking spaces as specified by applicable State of Oregon and federal standards. All disabled person parking spaces shall be signed and marked on the pavement as required by these standards. This section requires 1 disabled parking space if 1 to 25 parking spaces are provided. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 15 OF 17 This proposal indicates that one (1) handicap parking space will be provided. The ADA requirements for handicap accessible parking requires that at least one (1) of the parking spaces be van accessible. The space proposed meets the van accessible requirements of a nine (9)-foot space with an eight (8)-foot aisle. FINDING: Because the plan provides for a handicap accessible space that meets the required dimensions, this standard has been met. SECTION V. AGENCY COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: The applicant must comply with requirements of policy (tab1011) for change of use. Provide fire hydrant within 250 feet of all exterior walls. Accessible parking and access aisle slope not to exceed 1-inch in 50 inches. Provide an accessible route from parking to main entry. Provide an approved storm drain system with catch basins, roof drain connection, etc. and connect to the public system. Provide detail and grade of ramp into the buildings, door, landing, etc. Connect to public sewer as drainfield is most likely covered with asphalt. The City of Tigard Property Manager has reviewed the application and provided the following comments: The property owner should show verification of the location of the existing drainfield for the septic tank and that the drainfield and septic tank are in good working order. Storm runoff from the new parking lot should not be allowed to flow towards drainfield as there is not curbing all around the parking lot. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the application and provided the following comments: Request a "more comprehensive" detail of lighting plan. SDR provides comments that "photo-electric" cells installed at building. Improved lighting may be required as the parking lot may not be totally served by wall mounted lights. The City of Tigard Long Range Planning Division has reviewed the application and provided the following comments: The Tigard Triangle Design Standards clearly state that all new development including remodel will be required to meet design standards and dedicate and improve public streets. The proposal does not comply with that intent. Tualatin Valley Water District has reviewed the application and provided the following comments: Medical facilities require addition of reduced pressure principle type backflow devices to be installed immediately following existing meter. GTE, PGE, US West and NW Natural Gas have all reviewed the proposal and offered no comments or objections. SECTION VI. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 16 OF 17 Final Decision: DATE OF FILING: SEPTEMBER 3, 1998 THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON MONDAY SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Sections 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.340 of the Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal must be filed. The deadline for filing an appeal is specified below. The appeal fee schedule and appeal form are available from the Community Development Department or Planning Division at Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 3:30 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 14, 1999. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division or Community Development Department of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. s;'-'41---'1 September 3, 1998 PREPARE Y: Julia Powell ajduk DATE Associate Planner n �— J� 11 --ti ' September 3, 1998 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersd. DATE Planning Manager i:\curpin\jul is\knecht.doc NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 17 OF 17 *"S.W. BEVELAND STREET ---)•• • • • • TAX LOT 2500 TAX LOT 2400 BENCHMARK TAX ACM LOT 2800 MAP NO.2S-1-1AB MAP NO. 2S-1-1AB 1 0.. A NT u'MA MAP NO. LOT LOT A.MU NB9'CO'40"E (EY.-2.4.10 112.09• 2S-1-1AB _(� ' 7 • LEGEND ,» \ = , -p Slam vNYWa PR/ r' . /1�SMm OE. -+_ a ,iv ~ ny.w4 CriuON CAY i. I r- ..11.-2. ,41 A_ s ...eo �_ TAX LOT 9800■ ,. E,y10q.r.At Y MAP NO, 2S-1-1AA 1 �0 aw. I r' .- PES...e•.ore. / r 2- '�;;c...b Ai 1 A-...e 1-1/2 ...di a..Y., � !! ` C. 1 a1°�- I NEW i(PERV00U5 AREA Z EA.uq c.n0.a i t X x•000 91I1. 0p TAX LOT 2700 Drainage frivol. 0.11 9�� MAP N0.2700 P. __ r iuW Tro m Walk ± "�Oaa ,\�-.." _�-woe :,�\ __.�"� \,` $ v.c•Wn=MT �. r-----• Prop..Como. m ■ wnm f. "' _ Cl) t f.,1 1 , -ar M..47.4.ci. \ 1, 1 / _ �� Q ,11 �L_J ' la /fir i�TM . Iy. r• r 14 r• L1r�h'Y.Yy�-!1y�y \\1 b.plr a uYa w..a�v 1• SWALE DETAIL i I I II -_ z P 0 - aY.-Ei ,., f X11 PROPOSED DENTAL ~= i a WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS p, � I YEW MPEYY004 AY00 S0.r0Y.000 .mY i_�v�• NKN10.00005 WOWS 008 /• 111 OFFICE � - ..�'' ' o Z MAWERT ROW 000 IN/MO x 0,000 00.0-1/MOO SEC. au.m �� am CIS 1 .N410...,./ I� SANE SLOPE EX FEET(100•MN.) 1 1 I-YE TAX LOT 100 •'I ti 1r1 SAME stosE u /9E r �° 8 MAP NO.2S-1-1AC GARAGE �y FLOW TEE 1T 21 YOHJTFSCs 0 MNIIES I 1 I ��A a*. I MS1p FLOW DEPTH 0.00 FEET I• I ar. 1-1.000 ✓S I ■�i Miller 7-T r . Ym IT J ll • g '� °M rid 111 a. 1 x 1 1 1 1 Ia..rt ,T4--3'�- �, BENCHMARK TAX LOT 300 �'''' rr {�i IIM.. MAP NO 25-1-/AC Irn �' 1 ( 1 I I>--r •-`v,1111# .l�s: -. �J SimN CHM ELEV.241 72 IIIMIIII V"...7....nr ,..,.,7�ti1Q��... �1r. '•5'00-W � � sir .mow APW r�' E E E E n; I, Nom - - ■ _ • _ - p /1 ,,,,,,,,, NC00.1 We 0701 tawnErc raw °;w _ _ S.W. GONIAGA STREET _ _ _ __ �- - 1 Ll. p It d 1 MAO Ka D �► .EE 24G , I �� U ` r TAX LOT 100G '' • •.' a GRAPHIC SCALE MAP NO.25-1-1AC ' - • . r .E TAX LOT 200 , / --- �— • MAP N0.25-1-1AC .:Oi. E':• it I . CASE NO(Sl 8 CASE NAMEISI: a Ni- , 1 I SITE PLAN 1144 SDR 98-0009 { EXHIBIT MAP N Knecht Dental Office �_ 1 la CITY of IGA- ' OEOORAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM DARTMOUTH ST I -- VICINITY MAP 1 t T ill irill Illkm. =4y- ST SDR 98-0009 InIsain • Mil 1... Knecht Dental 111 .. ec t Inir Subje Office del RANKLIN bye ST. J.Parcel r ■■ saiiiiiirlall 11I BEVELAN� ■ma ST p _ Z 111 ‘1" .... V _ �� it GONZAGA ST 11111 'in .. .., ,, A .. al ,Jt 0 200 400 600 Feet ain V=451 feet • J A■■ City ofTllotrd ST fiF_ ____ • din,„ e Di Information on this map is for general locations and ' should be verified with the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd I Tigard,OR 97223 �-- -- . --- ` (503)63&4171 m�liwww.a.ngaro.or.ue Cemmenitr Development Plot due'Jul Id,1998:clmagiclmagicOl.apr SDK- qg-woq Knecht TJ.evltc !61- EMITS 13 (Pj /o fc ) . . 2S101AA-09100 2S101AA-09101 POLLOCK DONALD E KINDRICK ALFRED F&DIANNE M 1834 SW 58TH STE 202 12560 SW 70TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AA-09108 2S101AA-09600 PORTER DENISE& KINDRICK ALFRED F AND 7991 SW MOHAWK ST 12560 SW 70TH AVE TUALATIN,OR 97062 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB-02200 2S101AB-02300 CASEY EDWARD L JR&JOANNE F BOLON DEAN N 7085 SW BEVELAND RD 4022 NE LADDINGTON CT PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97232 2S101AB-02400 2S101AB-02500 ZEEK VELMA EDWARDS KIM WILLIAM YOSHIO&NINA V 7060 SW BEVELAND 7086 SW BEVELAND TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB-02800 2S101AC-00100 ZEEK VELMA EDWARDS KNECHT ANNA M 7060 SW BEVELAND 20135 SW BONANZA WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 2S101AC-00200 2S101AC-00300 DAVIS SHIRLEY A WEAVER MICHAEL D&GAIL B 4225 PENN ST 7075 SW GONZAGA ST LONGVIEW,WA 98632 TIGARD,OR 972223 2S101AC-00400 2S101AC-00600 WEAVER MICHAEL D&GAIL B ROTH JACOB T JR&THERESA A 7075 SW GONZAGA ST 12600 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AC-00900 2S101AC-01000 TOMMY BOB L SUDIE E GIESZLER JACOB F 7120 SW GONZAGA 18206 SW FALLATIN LOOP TIGARD,OR 97223 ALOHA,OR 97007 2S101AC-01100 2S101AC-01300 HUGHES JOSEPH KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH 7035 SW HAMPTON 3600 N INTERSTATE AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97227 2S101AC-02000 2S101AD-02700 HAGEL CHARLES C&JOYCE M MCCROSKEY JOHN B 11580 SW 67TH AVE 1380 MORNING SKY CT TIGARD,OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 sag_q '--ofol Knecht, -trrt- - 0-(-F-;us (pi - A oFA) • 2S101AD-02800 2S101AD-02900 MORTON DON R AND CYNTHIA SUE ROTH J T JR&THERESA A& PO BOX 596 12600 SW 72ND AVE#200 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 TIGARD,OR 97223 ANNA KNECHT STEVE KIRBY 10483 SW BONANZA WAY 7100 SW HAMPTON STREET, SUITE 121 TIGARD OR 97224 TIGARD OR 97223 • I ,.. 1 •f2 ae• 1 .'' t.1j---;:' COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, I�IC. Legal • P.O. BOX 370 PHONE(503)684-0360 Notice TT 9 218 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising 1."11111r-4 - • - - SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDR]98-0009 City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet Notice >KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE< 13125 SW Hall Blvd. The Director has issued a decision regarding a request for Site Develop- •Ti gard ,Oregon 9 722 3 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit ment Review approval to convert an existing single-family residence to a Dental office. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street: WCTM • 2S101AC,Tax Lot 00100. ZONE:Mixed Use Employment(MUE).AP- Accounts Payable • PLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18:32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150 and 18.164. - 1 1 1 _1__1 L" i EL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION °"""°'""" noFri IN STATE OF OREGON, u I r-L._� : COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss. T I i ' ' I, Kathy Snyder 1 l i r( , �I i being first duly sworn, depose and say, that I am the Advertising t 17 i —!• Director, or his principal clerk, of the Tigard-Tualatin Times i , ; in H IF a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 i i -• and 193.020; published at Tigard in the I aforesaid county and state; that they 1 11111111 J yip i ____� Review-Knecht Dental Office SDR 98-[1nn9_ IN 14.61 " a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the — AEI i__. 1 ` entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and I-1 consecutive in the following issues: j I 121 ) r-1 September 3 , 1998 I N1 7 1 1I � u if 1 j2Kr--L,7kt.Subscribed and sworn t efol me this r day o ember, 19 9 8 lb Vill N4.oteiry Public for Oregon `t:i��' V,/ J ■•UIURi .may Commission Expires: luillul �, MY cc AFFIDAVIT The adopted finding of facts,decision,and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Division,Tigard Civic Center, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon 97223.The decision shall be final on September 14, 1998. Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accor- dance with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.340 of the Com- munity Development Code, which provides that a written appeal may be filed within ten(10)days after notice is given and sent.The deadline for filing an appeal is 3:30 P.M.,September 14, 1998. TT9218-Publish September 3, 1998. • vti `16-u t1-1 r Ltc 1i 11 vl to Uttl IVIc7S ) 2S101AA-09100 2S101AA-09101 POLLOCK DONALD E KINDRICK ALFRED F&DIANNE M 1834 SW 58TH STE 202 12560 SW 70TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97221 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AA-09108 2S101AA-09600 PORTER DENISE& KINDRICK ALFRED F AND 7991 SW MOHAWK ST 12560 SW 70TH AVE TUALATIN,OR 97062 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB-02200 2S101AB-02300 CASEY EDWARD L JR&JOANNE F BOLON DEAN N 7085 SW BEVELAND RD 4022 NE LADDINGTON CT PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97232 2S101AB-02400 2S101AB-02500 ZEEK VELMA EDWARDS KIM WILLIAM YOSHIO&NINA V 7060 SW BEVELAND 7086 SW BEVELAND TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AB-02800 2S101AC-00100 ZEEK VELMA EDWARDS KNECHT ANNA M 7060 SW BEVELAND 20135 SW BONANZA WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 2S101AC-00200 2S101AC-00300 DAVIS SHIRLEY A WEAVER MICHAEL D&GAIL B 4225 PENN ST 7075 SW GONZAGA ST LONGVIEW,WA 98632 TIGARD,OR 972223 2S101AC-00400 23101AC-00600 WEAVER MICHAEL 0&GAIL B ROTH JACOB T JR&THERESA A 7075 SW GONZAGA ST 12600 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AC-00900 2S101AC-01000 TOMMY BOB L SUDIE E GIESZLER JACOB F 7120 SW GONZAGA 18206 SW FALLATIN LOOP TIGARD,OR 97223 ALOHA,OR 97007 2S101AC-01100 2S101AC-01300 HUGHES JOSEPH KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH 7035 SW HAMPTON 3600 N INTERSTATE AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97227 2S101AC-02000 2S101AD-02700 HAGEL CHARLES C&JOYCE M MCCROSKEY JOHN B 11580 SW 67TH AVE 1380 MORNING SKY CT TIGARD,OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 S/ ti.t.-L c. / C./ cos...)2900 PO BOX 596 &T �R SSA A&RAND OYN ,a SU E E os op OR 97 o ND t/ d0 T/ �97223 „Rano --_ T CITY of TIGARD OEOORAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM MOSO Wqy AREA NOTIFIED 11111111” 1111 III (250') iimor ,11111111111 FRANKLIN S D R 98-0009 ST 01AB°2'0 Knecht Dental S10U1B0230 l 2S101AA09100 la Office BEVELAND ST I 09600 III 01A60250 OtAAO 01 2S101AC00600 101AB0240 l 01AA0 I 18 dlar° 2S101A000 ,,,. � -- 2S01A000d00 . : 1 ' i i 2S101A002100 GONZAGA I ST 2S101AD02800 2S101AC0090 2S101AC00 01AC01000 1111 2S101AD02900 • \ 2S101AC01300 01AC0110 N 1 null 0.100 0 100 200 300 Feet r=211 feet III" 11111 City of Tigard Information on this map is for general location only and 2 III should be verified with the Development Services Division 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 (503)639-4171 htlpJAvww.ci.tigard.or.us CmxlMniry Development Mot date:Jul 16,1998:clmagidmagcf l.apr APPLICANT MATERIALS p. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 411.- APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 GENERAL INFORMATION PRE-APP. HELD WITH: DATE OF PRE-APP.: Property Address/Location(s): 7025 S.W. Conzaga St. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Tigard, OR. 97223 Tax Map & Tax Lot#(s): Tax lot 100 Case No.(s): Nr 9F-000 c7 Map no. 25-1-1AC Other Case No.(s): f Site Size: 15,685 SQ. Ft. Receipt No.: 9 c%- 3eav r C�', Application Accepted By: L"" Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)*: Anna M. Knecht Date: Address: 10483 S.W. Bonanza Wy Phone: 624-1881 City: Tigard, OR. Zip: 97224 Date Determined To e Complete: Applicant*: Steve Kerby //(4 Address: 7100 SW Hampton Ste. l21phone: 684-4666 Comp Plan/Zone Designation: City: Tigard, OR. Zip: 97223 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.4121197 is curpinvnasters)sdra.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 ,1 S'` d'"�`T"( �Krt-• •s 1�`41.4 form or submit a written authorization with this application. f REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS PROPOSAL SUMMARY 1 Application Elements Submitted: Application Form The owners of record of the subject property request Site Development Review approval to allow (please be specific): Owner's Signature/Written Authorization Conversion of an existing single family [r Title Transfer Instrument or Deed residence to a Dental office with 4 employees 0.% Site/Plot Plan (#of copies based on pre-app check list) and construction of a 9-space parking lot 0 Site/Plot Plan (reduced 8'/2"x 11") in the rear of the lot. O Applicant's Statement (#of copies based on pre-app check list) ' Construction Cost Estimate 9 USA Sewer Use Information Card (Distributed/completed at application submittal) ❑ Filing Fee (undersloo.000) $ 800.00 ($100,000-$999,999)....$1,600.00 ($1 Million&Over) $1,780.00 (+55 i 510.000) 1 ' List any VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE, SENSITIVE LANDS, OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: APPLICANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as 'described on the front of this application in the"Required Submittal Elements" box. (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request, for all types of Land Use Applications.) THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • 11 . • •_• • •• • • • • . • 1 • - •$.• l r 1 /• 1 • • 11 - - t.- 1 :a• • • •11 • -i• ••1 1 - ••ya j2132.22M • 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 eaoh owner of the subject property. DATED this k day of • , 19`, Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 AU. 11 CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping I4 Better Community PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION 120 DAYS = 11/13/98 FILE NO(S): SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW [SDR] 98-0009 FILE TITLE: KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE APPLICANT(S): Steve Kirby OWNER(S): Anna Knecht 7100 SW Hampton, Suite 121 10483 SW Bonanza Way Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 (503) 684-4666 (503) 624-1881 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to convert an existing single-family residence to a dental office. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. ZONE: Mixed Use Employment (MUE). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116,18.150 and 18.164. rg fl CIT AREA: East "k2 CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request DECISION MAKING BODY: DATE COMMENTS DUE: Monday AUGUST 17,1998 X STAFF DECISION DATE OF DECISION: Thursday September 9,1998 HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 1:30 PM CITY COUNCIL DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PM_ COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION K VICINITY X LANDSCAPE PLAN K NARRATIVE K SITE PLAN TREE PLAN ARCHITECTURAL PLAN K TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ARBORIST REPORT X WATER DRAINAGE/CALCS. STAFF CONTACT: Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner (503) 639-4171 Ext. 407 SDR 98-0009 KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PROPOSAUREOUEST FOR COMMENTS July 6, 1998 CITY OF T1GARD Mr. Leonard Rydell OREGON 601 Pinehurst Drive Newberg, OR 97132 RE: Notice of Incomplete Submittal - SDR 98-0009 Dear Mr. Rydell: Staff has completed a preliminary review of the application materials submitted for the Knecht Dental Office on Gonzaga Road; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. The following information is required before staff can consider your application complete and begin review: 1. Impact Statement. Section 18.32.050(5) (Application Submittal Requirements: Refusal of an Application) requires an impact study. 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. 2. Show Existing Structures Within 25 Feet Of The Property. If there are no structures within 25 feet of the property, please submit a letter explaining this. If there are structures within 25 feet of the property line, please submit an additional site plan showing this information. You do not need to submit 18 copies of this site plan, provided there are no changes to the original proposal. 3. Construction Cost Estimate. You indicated that the cost of the development was less than $100,000, however, you did not provide any details for how you came to this conclusion. 4. Clarify Tax Map And Lot Number. The tax map number in the narrative does not appear to be correct. The tax map number on the application form is 2S101 AC which corresponds with the given address. Staff is making the assumption that this is the correct map tax map number and that the number given in the narrative (2S101AD) is in error. If this is correct, no action is needed. If this is not correct, please notify staff immediately and make necessary changes. Page 1 of 2 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 Once the required information has been submitted, staff will deem the application complete and begin the review process. The 6-8 week estimated time to render a decision is based on the date the application is accepted as complete. Please be advised that because you have indicated that you do not propose certain items that staff indicated would be required (dedication of 70th, improvement of Gonzaga, etc.), staff may be forced to deny the application. If staff determines that a development code standard requires improvements, dedication, etc., and you have indicated in your proposal that you will not do this, staff may deny the application instead of conditioning the approval upon meeting this standard. Of course, the final decision is not known until a thorough review of the file is completed. If staff does deny the application, you have the right to appeal that decision to the Planning Commission in accordance with 18.32. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171 x407. Sincerely, AL1 owell Najd k Associate Planner is\curpin\julia\sdr\knecht.acc c: SDR 98-0009 land use file 7/6/98 Leonard Rydell Letter Page 2 of 2 Re: SDR 98-0009 Notice of Incomplete Application LEONARD A. RYDELL, P.E., P.LS., W.R.E. Consulting Civil Engineer-Land Surveyor () u y 1998 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132-1625 City of Tigard (503) 538-5700 FAX 538-9167 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner Re: Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office - SDR 98-0009 Dear Julia, Thank you for your preliminary review of the Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office Application. Your "Notice of Incomplete Application" has been received. Comments are as follows: 1. While the Impacts were addressed in the narrative, I will provide a separate impact statement that addresses the issues. 2. I will visit the site today to locate the two residences that are within 25 feet of the property. 3. A construction cost estimate will be provided. 4. The correct Tax Lot Number is Tax Lot 100, Map No. 2S-1-1AC. I apologize for the error. Will you need corrected copies of the Application Booklet? I am distressed that you are considering denying the application as the applicant has not proposed a dedication of S. W. 70th Street as requested by Staff. As you are aware, the Tigard Triangle Plan as adopted by Ordinance specifically does not show this street as being developed North of S. W. Gonzaga Street. I am certain that you can understand that the applicant has relied on the adopted Tigard Triangle Plan, and that the neighborhood is against improvement and extension of S. W. 70th. Therefore it would be greatly appreciated if you could provide copies of the specific ordinances that would require the dedication, and suggest the amount of dedication that would be required as a full 30 feet encroach into the garage. As stated in the application, the dedication could require up to 29% of the property being taken without compensation. I look forward to an early reply, and should you feel that it would be helpful, I suggest that we schedule a meeting with my clients, interested neighbors, the City's Community Development Director and the Mayor to discuss the dedication issue. Thank you. Sincer y yours, If / / Let4‘i Leonard A. Rydell, P.E., P.L.S., W.R.E. LAR/lar cc: Steve Kerby PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS • RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS LAND SURVEYS • WATER RIGHTS JUL_ - 10 - 98 F R I 1 1 : Z2 LEONARD A _ RYDELL P E P L S P - 01 • l LEONARD A. RYDELL, P.E., P.L.S. Consulting Civil Engineer - Land Surveyor 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132 (503) 538-5700 FAX rAQNSNilrlrA_= SHEET' DATE '2' A ` , � : FROM { ✓i /� . � , �. ._ �._ ORIGINAL COPY `�` SWILL BE TO 4... .... ❑WILL NOT BE......s,:k C.--( 6, 0- (At t n 'j,162. r,e FAX Number ®� is _7291 _1-x3 76 REGARDING �r. A1110 > itl ce G4 __. SD 'Z -DoC7 Number of Pages Including FAX Transmittal Sheet -Z-_ - Comments v /( � /00iC7Cci-ti..v / _. • C�• r /HCaIC-4,02 s. 0 2 -ro Lita. t A.,,, ..- 1.31.1M. , .........) i s I' v V v stec( 0 e, (ca „,,.....eLi (6 __7T---- /ILlair / , . / % I Si /. Please call ( 503 ) 53$-5700 should you have any questions on documents received or if any pages are missing. FAX Ha 639-91167 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS 41, RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS LAND SURVEYS • SOLAR-CONSERVATION HOMES JUL - 10 - 98 P R I 11 : 34 LEONARD A . RYDELL PE P L S R - 02 a 1 LEONARD A. RYDELL, P.E., P.LS., W.R.E. Consulting Civil Engineer-and Surveyor u y 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132-1625 City of Tigard (503) 538-5700 FAX 538-9167 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner Re: Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office - SDR 98-0009 Dear Julia. Thank you for your preliminary review of the Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office Application. Your "Notice of Incomplete Application" has been received. Comments are as follows: 1. While the Impacts were addressed in the narrative, I will provide a separate impact statement that addresses the issues. 2. I will visit the site today to locate the two residences that are within 25 feet of the property. 3. A construction cost estimate will be provided. 4. The correct Tax Lot Number is Tax Lot 100, Map No. 2S-1-1 AC. I apologise for the error. Will you need corrected copies of the Application Booklet? I am distressed that you are considering denying the application as the applicant has not proposed a dedication of S. W. 70th Street as requested by Staff_ As you are aware, the Tigard Triangle Plan as adopted by Ordinance specifically does not show this street as being developed North of S. W. Gonzaga Street. I am certain that you can understand that the applicant has relied on the adopted Tigard Triangle Plan, and that the neighborhood is against improvement and extension of S. W. 70th. Therefore it would be greatly appreciated if you could provide copies of the specific ordinances that would require the dedication, and suggest the amount of dedication that would be required as a full 30 feet encroach into the garage. As stated in the application, the dedication could require up to 29% of the property being taken without compensation. I look forward to an early reply, and should you feel that it would be helpful. I suggest that we schedule a meeting with my clients, interested neighbors, the City's Community Development Director and the Mayor to discuss the dedication issue. Thank you. Sincer y yours, Leonard A. Rydell, P.E., P.L.S., W.R.E. LAR/Iar cc: Steve Kerby PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS • RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS 1 AND SURVEYS a WAIFS? Rl( HYS LEONARD A. RYDELL, P.E., P.LS., W.R.E. Consulting Civil Engineer-Land Surveyor 5 u y 1998 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132-1625 City of Tigard RECEIVED(503) 538-5700 FAX 538-9167 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 ,JUL 1 r 1998 Attn: Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner COQ.^,' U ITY D VELUrk,L.NT Re: Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office - SDR 98-(X)09 Dear Julia, Enclosed, in response to your letter dated 6 July 1998, please find the following information with comments per your letter as follows: 1. 18 copies of an "Impact Statement". Please note that the conclusion of the impact statement clearly states that conversion of the single family residence to a dental office in itself will have little or not impact on the traffic, water, sewer or drainage facilities. The improvements requested by the City of Tigard will have a great impact on the existing neighborhood. I could find no reason that any dedication at all is required by the change of use, much less a finding for "roughly proportional". I feel that it would he appropriate for the City to defer its requirements to a future application. 2. I have located all structures within 25 feet of the property and revised the Site Plan accordingly. 18 copies are enclosed. 3. A construction cost estimate is enclosed. Please note that the private parking lot improvements are anticipated to be $15,910 and the S. W. Gonzaga Street improvements are projected to be $27,392 for a total of $43,302. Note that the public street improvements along S. W. Gonzaga will require additional private improvements. As stated in the application, the public street improvements are not warranted by the change of use and are opposed by the neighborhood. 4. The correct tax lot number is Tax Lot 100, Map No. 2S-S-O 1 AC. I apologize for the error. I hope that this completes the documents required to judge the application complete. Thank you. Sinc y yours, it ' ,r,/ ,.." Leonard A. Rydell, P.E., P.L.S., W.R.E. LAR/lar cc: Steve Kerby PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS • RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS LAND SURVEYS • WATER RIGHTS i July 16, 1998 Leonard Rydell 6 601 Pinehurst Drive ' Newberg, OR 97132 CITY OF TIGARD RE: Response to Notice of Incomplete Submittal - SDR 98-0009 OREGON Dear Mr. Rydell: Staff has received items 1-3 detailed in your July 10, 1998 letter. In response to item 4, you do not need to correct the copies in the application packet, the confirmation in your letter is sufficient. Staff is therefore, deeming your application complete and will begin the review process. The processing time for this type of application is approximately 6-8 weeks. In response to your request for copies of specific ordinances requiring dedication of SW 70th Avenue, I must point you to the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. As discussed in the meeting held with myself, Brian Rager, you and Mr. Kerby, the requirement for dedication is based on compliance with the connectivity standards, specifically the design options outlined in the Tigard Triangle Standards. While SW 70th Avenue is not shown on the Tigard Triangle Street plan, that does not indicate that it is not required. The street plan identifies streets that must be extended but does not address all streets needed to comply with the connectivity standards. In addition, the proposal to not improve SW Gonzaga Street at this time does not comply with the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. If, in the course of review, staff determines that the proposal does not meet the Tigard Triangle Design criteria or any other portions of the Tigard Development Code (and your proposal indicates that you will not comply), staff will be forced to deny the application finding that it does not meet the required standards of the Community Development Code. Staff stated in the pre-application conference, written conversations with yourself and Brian Rager and the meeting between Brian Rager, you, Mr. Kerby and myself, that these improvements are required in the Tigard Triangle area. If you feel that staff is applying the Design Standards incorrectly then it is certainly your option to appeal the decision. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171 x407. Sincerely, Julia Powell Hajduk Associate Planner ilcurpin\julia\sdr\knecht.acc c: SDR 98-0009 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 rra74ve Ih AAAA LEONARD A. RYDELL, P.E., P.LS., W.R.E. Consulting Civil Engineer-Land Surveyor 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132-1625 (503) 538-5700 FAX 538-9167 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION I r int : ti. Offi© A Proposed Conversion of a Single Family Residence to a Dental Office Located along S. W. Gonzaga Street in the City of Tigard, Washington, Clackamas County, Oregon 16 June 1998 PROc8 PREPARED FOR: vS .esEA, ia Steven Kerby "i"' 7100 S. W. Hampton, Suite 121 r ORE • Tigard, Oregon 97223 00 1600 i s2 �y1h 4),/O tigq D A.4`�l Phone: (503) 684-4666 Renewal 12/31/1998 • PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS • RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS LAND SURVEYS • WATER RIGHTS • • Ck re5IR- (40(V5 • • BACKGROUND INFORMATION PURPOSE OF APPLICATION This application requests approval of conversion of an existing single family residence to a Dental Office located along S. W. Gonzaga Street in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon. SITE INFORMATION Tax Lot No. 100 Map No. 2S-1-1AD Area: 15,685 square feet (0.36 Acres) Zone: MUE The site is located at the East end of S. W. Gonzaga Street at the intersection of S. W. 70th Street. The site slopes from Northeast to Southwest with an approximate slope of 3%. There is an existing single family house on the property. The house has a double car garage and a carport on the East side. The site is open and well landscaped and maintained in character with the surrounding neighborhood. Fruit trees and ornamental shrubs are located around the residence. North of the property is a single family residence. South across S. W. Gonzaga Street is a single family residence. The property to the East is in the process of being developed. A 30 foot dedicated public right-of-way created by the 1890 plat of "WEST PORTLAND HEIGHTS" is adjacent to the South 80 feet of the East side of the property. The right-of-way to the North was vacated in 1987 and 1988. The "Tigard Triangle Street Plan" does not show S. W. 70th extending North of S. W. Gonzaga Street. Storm drainage from the East is intercepted by a ditch along the East side of the property which discharges to the West along S. W. 70th. Drainage from the property naturally flows to the Southwest corner of the property into a grassy drainage swale West along S. W. Gonzaga Street. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL Use of the Property The existing single family house on the property which is to remain and converted to a Dental Office. Remodeling of the existing house is in progress. The garage will be converted to a storage area and handicap access restroom. Page 1 Proposed Parking The carport will be removed to allow a 24 foot wide access to a new parking lot for 9 spaces, including a handicap accessible space, to be constructed behind the residence. Room for two additional spaces exist on the concrete driveway in front of the existing garage for a total of 11 parking spaces. Storm Drainage Drainage from the parking lot will be collected by a trapped catch basin discharging into a shallow drainage swale the will discharge to the drainage swale along S. W. Gonzaga Street. Runoff from the site is 0.335 cubic feet per second as per the attached calculations based on a 10 minute time of concentration, a 25 year storm and runoff coefficients per Washington County Road Standards. Runoff after development is anticipated to be 0.551 cubic feet per second based on the proposed addition of the parking lot. The capacity of the first culvert downstream is 1.81 cubic feet per second, and the capacity of the second culvert downstream is 1.54 cubic feet per second. These capacities appear to be more than adequate to carry the additional runoff of 0.186 cubic feet per second without damage to downstream properties or structures. Water Quality The trapped catch basin and the drainage swale will provide water quality treatment for much of the new parking area and half of the existing roof drains, therefore water quality treatment is provided for the equivalent new impervious area. Therefore, a fee in lieu of construction of the facilities will not be required. The water quality storm is 0.36 inches per four hours or 0.01 cubic feet per second for the new impervious area of 4,990 square feet. A swale of a minimum length of 100 feet is provided with a bottom slope of 2.0%. Flow time is 21 minutes. The swale will pass a 25 year storm with a flow depth of 0.26 feet. Flow calculations are included in this report. Gonzaga Street The proposed dental office is served by an existing public street along the entire south frontage. The existing right-of-way is 50 feet (25 feet from centerline). Additional right-of-way dedication is proposed as part of this application to meet a 30 foot right-of-way from centerline. The street is presently paved to a width of approximately 18 feet, and well manicured and landscaped drainage swales are provided on both sides. There are conflicting codes and requirements for the improvement width as follows: Page 2 1. The Pre-Application Conference Notes request an 18 foot half street improvement including curbs, gutters, storm sewers and a seven foot wide sidewalk. 2. The Tigard Triangle Street Plan Design Standards specify a 34 foot improvement in a 60 foot right-of-way for East-West Local Service Streets. 3. The "Typical 60 Foot Right-of-Way - Local Street" in the Tigard Triangle Design Standards specifies a 36 foot improvement. 4. Figure 23 of the Tigard Development Code requires 28 to 34 foot improvement widths. The Tigard Triangle Design Standards requires that developments "be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as water, sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle." The neighborhood property owners do not support the improvement of S. W. Gonzaga Street, and have signed a petition against the widening. The timing of the improvements by the Tigard Triangle Design Standards is not clearly specified, and the applicant proposes that the street improvements be assured and funded through a non- remonstrance agreement for the improvements that will be constructed when the development intensifies to warrant the improvements because: 1. The overall feeling of the surrounding property owners voiced at the Neighborhood Meeting is to preserve the existing character of the neighborhood. The residents feel that the street is "unique" among Tigard streets and should be preserved. • 2. The existing grassy swales for drainage provide storm water quality treatment, reduce the rate of runoff, allow for recharge of ground water and provide storm water storage. Maintenance is provided by the adjoining property owners at no cost to the city. 3. The proposed widening will impact the existing vegetation and surrounding properties due to grade changes, pavement tapers, deepening of ditches to accommodate culverts with minimum cover, etc. 4. A 112 foot long dead end 7 foot wide sidewalk fronting the property at the end of a dead end street will serve no useful purpose as the cliental to the dental office will probably arrive by automobile. As the street is currently a dead end, there will be no through pedestrian traffic, and most patients will not be from within walking distance in the neighborhood. 5. The cost of spot development is approximately 1.5 to two times the cost of rebuilding the entire street at once, and it would be more affordable if constructed as part of a comprehensive improvement. 6. The additional engineering and improvement costs including additional field work, preparation and approval of construction plans, public works permit fees, construction costs, construction staking and inspections, materials testing, City inspection costs and maintenance and performance bonds are an excessive cost to the owner and are not warranted due to the existing development in the area. Page 3 S. W. 70th Street The South 80 feet of the East side of the property is bordered by a 30 foot dedicated public right- of-way created by the 1890 plat of "WEST PORTLAND HEIGHTS". The right-of-way to the North was vacated in 1987 and 1988. The Pre-Application Conference Notes request a 30 foot right-of-way dedication of S. W. 70th Avenue, but would accept a lesser amount. However, the edge of the existing garage is approximately 25 feet from the existing right-of-way line. The "Tigard Triangle Street Plan" does not show S. W. 70 extending North of S. W. Gonzaga Street, and this is supported by the 1987 and 1988 vacations of the existing right-of-ways adjoining the East property line of the application. The neighborhood property owners do not support the extension of S. W. 70th Avenue North of S. W. Gonzaga Street, and have signed a petition against the extension. The total right-of-way dedication requested by the Pre-Application Conference Notes (30 feet on S. W. 70th and 5 feet on S. W. Gonzaga) is 4,612 square feet or 29.4% of a total site area of 15,685 square feet. This dedication will provide no benefit to the property and will substantially reduce future development options. Local street connectivity as required by the Tigard Triangle Design Standard of 660 feet is met at the distance of the South right-of-way line of S. W. Gonzaga Street is 645 feet between S. W. 72nd Avenue and S. W. 70th Avenue. Therefore, the applicant requests that this Pre-Application request be deleted in accordance with the Tigard Triangle Street Plan dated 3 March 1997. Water Service Water service is provided by an existing 3/4" water meter, and is located in the service area of the Tualatin Valley Water District. The District has been contacted and has requested that a reduced pressure principle type backflow device be installed behind the water meter. The water meter will have to be relocated if a new sidewalk is installed. Sanitary Sewer Sewer service is presently provided by an existing septic tank. The nearest existing sewer is over 500 feet away on S. W. 72nd Avenue. The applicant proposes to continue using the existing septic system and signing a non-remonstrance agreement for the sewer improvements in lieu of extending the sewer. Utility Services Page 4 The property is presently served by overhead power from a power pole at the Southeast corner of the property. This overhead service will be placed underground. The existing overhead service along S. W. Gonzaga is proposed to remain as the cost of placing these utilities underground and reconnecting the existing houses served by overhead service is prohibitive. A fee in lieu of construction will be paid by the applicant. Page 5 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE REVIEW CRITERIA CHAPTER 18.100. LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING Section 18.100.012.0 - Site Plan 1 . No underground irrigation system is proposed at this time. 2. An existing fence is shown on the site plan. This fence borders the East, North and West Sides of the property except that a portion of the West line does not have a fence, but does have shrubbery and plantings along the property line. 3. The site not presently occupies is a residential lawn with shrubs and trees, most of which will stay after development of the new parking lot. 4. Existing trees have been identified and named (to the best of my knowledge, information and belief) on the site plan. Most all of the existing plantings and trees is to remain. 5. A sediment control fence will be required during construction of the parking lot and water quality swale. The swale will be seeded immediately after construction. Section 18.100.020 - General Provisions The owner intends to maintain the existing landscaping and character of the site and the well maintained and landscaped neighborhood. No changes are anticipated. Section 18.100.020, 18.100.035, 18.100.040, 18.100.060 - Street Trees The site contains a 15" plum in front of the house, and the owner desires this tree to remain. No additional street trees are anticipated. Section 18.100.070 - Buffering and Screening General Provisions Buffering of the new parking area is provided by an existing six foot high wood fence and existing ornamental and fruit trees. Section 18.100.080 - Buffering/Screening Requirements A five foot setback from the North and West property lines is proposed for the new parking lot. A setback for the 24 foot wide access is not possible due to the existing distance of less than 25 feet from the existing garage to the East property line. Section 18.100.090 - Setbacks for Fences and Walls No new fences or walls are proposed for the project. Section 18.100.100 - Height Restrictions The existing fences conform to the existing six foot height limitation. Page 6 Section 18.100.110 - Screening: Special Provisions The proposed parking lot is screened from view by the existing six foot wood Ibnces on the East, North and West sides of the property. The existing house and the hedge between the Northwest corner of the house and the West line effectively screen the proposed parking lot from S. W. Gonzaga Street. Section 18.100.120 - Revegetation The areas disturbed during parking lot and swale construction will be planted to grass after construction and finish grading has been completed. CHAPTER 18.106 - OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS Section 18.106.015.0 - Site Plan A Site Plan has been prepared that shows the existing structures, landscaping and fencing, and the existing and proposed parking, grading and water quality improvements. Section 18.106.020 - General Provisions The parking dimensions conform to the standard dimensions. One compact and one handicap accessible space is proposed. One handicap accessible space is required for one to twenty five total parking spaces per the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. Section 18.106.030.C.22 - Medical and Dental Service One parking space is required per 200 square feet of gross floor area. The area of the existing house and garage is 1,709 square feet and based on the requirement, 8.5 spaces would be required. Nine spaces are proposed in the back, and two additional standard spaces are available on the existing concrete driveway in front of the existing garage. The proposed parking exceeds the requirements. Section 18.106.040.A.1.a - Compact Car Spaces Up to 40% of the required spaces can be compact spaces for a total of 9 times 0.4 = 3.6 spaces. One compact space is proposed. Section 18.106.050 - Parking Dimension Standards A 24 foot wide aisle width is required and proposed for the access and parking lot to accommodate two way traffic. Each space will be clearly striped, and the handicap accessible space will be striped and signed. A 24 foot wide paved access from S. W. Gonzaga Street is proposed. Page 7 The parking lot will be surfaces with 2" of Class "C" asphalt over 7" of rock over a compacted subgrade. Extruded curb will be installed to direct storm drainage to the trapped catch basin. Wheel stops will be installed as required. One precast wheel stop is proposed each pair of parking spaces where possible. Lighting of the proposed parking lot will be by photo electric controlled lights mounted on the existing residence. CHAPTER 18.108 - ACCESS, EGRESS, AND CIRCULATION Section 18.108.025.0 - Site Plan A scaled site plan has been prepared showing access and circulation for the proposed parking lot. The preferred and alternate sign locations have also been shown. The proposed sign will be Dr. Anna Knecht's existing Dental Office Sign. Section 18.108.010 - Public Street Access The existing driveway access to the existing garage and carport will be utilized off of Gonzaga Street except that it will be widened to provide 24 feet of width alongside of the existing garage. The existing carport is to be removed. Vehicular access is provided to the building in the front and within 14 feet on the rear. Section 18.108.050 - Required Walkway Location The main entrance to the dental office will be in the rear of the building. A sloped concrete ramp will be provided to provide handicap access to the main entrance. The existing sidewalk and steps will remain at the front of the building. CHAPTER 18.120 - SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW The conversion of the existing single family residence to a Dental Office and the addition of a new parking lot is subject to the City of Tigard's Site Development Review Process. A pre-application conference and neighborhood meeting has been held, and a Site Development Review Application submitted. Section 18.120.090.0 - Site Plan A site plan showing the existing and proposed improvements including grading, landscaping and sign location has been prepared as part of this application. As the project consists primarily of construction of a parking lot, all of the required information has been shown on one sheet. Section 18.120.110 - Site Conditions The site plans shows the existing and proposed conditions including the property boundary, Page 8 existing and proposed street right-of-ways, contours at 0.5' intervals based on Washington County Datum, existing and proposed drainage, and the location of trees, structures and landscaping. Section 18.120.120 - The Site Development Plan The Site Development Plan has been combined with the "Site Conditions" plan as the site is to remain in its current condition so that there will be little change from the existing conditions that will be discernable from the surrounding properties. Existing and proposed conditions are shown on the "Site Plan" submitted as part of this application. Section 18.120.130 - Grading Plan The finish elevations of the parking lot and the proposed Water Quality Swale are shown on the Site Plan. The proposed grades will match the existing grades for all practical purposes. It is anticipated that some material under the proposed parking lot will need to be removed from the site to allow the parking lot to be constructed to allow for handicap access and to provide a stable subgrade for parking lot construction. Section 18.120.140 - Architectural Drawings As the proposed development consists of remodeling of an existing structure, architectural drawings are not required as no new structure is proposed for the site. Section 18.120.150 - Landscape Plan The existing landscaping is to be preserved. The proposed parking is located in the existing lawn area, and some replanting of grass will be required around the parking lot and in the water quality swale following construction. Existing trees and shrubs are to be saved so that new landscaping will not be required. The existing conditions and landscaping is shown on the Site Plan. The street scene after development will not substantially change after development except for a wider driveway, placing the overhead service underground and removing the carport. As the office is located at the end of an existing street, few people other than the Dental Office patients will notice the difference. CHAPTER 18.150 - TREE REMOVAL No trees are proposed to be removed as part of this proposal. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS Section 18.164.030.A.1.c - Future Improvement Guarantee No improvements to S. W. Gonzaga are proposed as part of this application, and the applicant proposed to execute a non-remonstrance agreement for future improvements as allowed by this Page 9 section for the following reasons: 1. The improvement is not desired by the surrounding property owners. Please refer to the attached letters and the Neighborhood Meeting Notes. 2. The design and construction cost to the property owners for a small project is significantly greater for a series of small projects compared for one large project. 3. The improvements has a significant impact on surrounding properties as follows: a. Storm drainage improvements will require modification of ditch grades and existing driveways. b. The street and sidewalk improvements will increase and concentrate storm water flows. c. The proposed 7 foot wide sidewalk will require removal of the existing plum tree and shrubs along the west line which requires additional permits and street tree plantings, all at the expense of the property owner. d. The widened street and sidewalk will stick out like a sore thumb to the neighboring property owners, occupants and residents. 4. The applicant cannot afford the improvements at this time, particularly when the design, construction, permit, inspection, testing and financing costs are considered. Dedication of additional right-of-way for S. W. 70th Avenue is not proposed as it is in conflict with the "Tigard Triangle Street Plan" which does not show a street in this location. Therefore, dedication of additional right-of-way of S. W. 70th Avenue as requested at the Pre-Application • Conference is in conflict with Section 18.164.030.A.iv of the Tigard Municipal Code. This development will contribute only a minor portion of the anticipated future traffic on this street. The dental office will employ four full time employees and will treat 12 to 15 patients per day plus 8 patients for the hygienist. As some of the patients are from one family (kids and mom), not every patient will result in additional traffic. Based on 23 patients, four employees and two deliveries, 29 trips per day to the office are anticipated which is approximately three times the trips normally assigned for residential occupancy. Furthermore, the street is a dead end and only serves eight residences, so traffic is and will continue to be light. Widening of the existing pavement is not warranted due to existing and foreseeable future traffic. A five foot right-of-way dedication along the property frontage for S. W. Gonzaga Street is proposed as required to bring the half street width up from 25 feet to 30 feet as requested at the Pre-Application Conference. No new streets are proposed as part of this application. Section 18.164.100 - Storm Drainage Drainage from the East is intercepted by an existing ditch which runs South along S. W. 70th Page 10 Avenue. Some sheet flow from the North enters the site from the North, but as the proposed parking matches existing grades, this sheet flow will continue to pass across the property into the property across the parking lot, into the trapped catch basin, and through the water quality swale into the existing drainage swale along S. W. Gonzaga Street. Preservation of grassed channels will minimize the impact of storm water runoff by slowing runoff velocities thus increasing the time of concentration and lowering the runoff coefficient thus reducing the flows. Section 18.164.110 - Bikeways No bikeways are anticipated as part of this development as most patients will not be from within walking or bicycling distance, and will be arriving by automobile. A sidewalk fronting the property is proposed for construction as part of a future comprehensive neighborhood development. Financing will be assured by a non-remonstrance agreement with the City of Tigard. Section 18.164.120 - Utilities The existing overhead utilities along S. W. Gonzaga will be placed underground in the future as part as a comprehensive neighborhood development. However, all services from the street to the Dental Office will be placed underground as part of this development. Page 11 1n.in,nt■��f1.11i:. arria^ uy vAUTm neat TAX LOT 9101 i Rini■•III••Hin:._ImE'! u21■•■=la:-I I'I R: ; ` TAX LOT 2400 MAP N0. 2S-1-IAA M• I 1/ ° E` 6ENCMMARK TAX LOT 2800 MINI;Ir11■�;■ --i.a<;,,-,1� . A.° 1AB MAP N0. 2S-1-1AB /0"D8 ■- .��_�,,,;,, Em� �) �' ,j e/r SET u'SPIKE MAP N0. err 1 ;ai t, ■_�r_■ LOT LOT w'NO ELEV. 214.29 2S-1-1AB B 119 r� y=T. -■ �' jai ° ` 7 8 N89'00.40.E 112.09 .1 , _P r - 1.-1 . I, I] 9. 1110 000ob■011 ZI -I--, � . {{4 1!jj 'j!.1J! i1iI LEGEND 1 1 NW,FD a1,Qt is E,aung storm Oran og e ( ;►roporrd Stomp Oreh � ' :3■Ir,:!r.■ -4, �� ,K 1 t } . M.er ti t ao ' ^^ 9600 .1 EII 1��r=! -./ Proposed Extruded Cure �r ■'-r 11160 TAX LOT 9 0 �� -� rOP°s �- I 1 twT g .. MAP N0. 2S-1-1 "nv( 1� C 2 =7 PropoEw,-,/2 Aapndt ovan0y !FL\ , Irill4211111�IIIIn--•,, Ea `� � K 4 E + 1 TAX LOT 2700 I: ■ If1-18111111121:111111 9 - d hope MAP NO. 2S-1-1AD `ei1�� PROJECTI�fflfff�, . .■ 4.:7..... R _I _ _ .- Existing Ditch/Sale - *6..4 H91f4�a+.�11��-ri. `(In Tow Top o1 walk ^ , _I■•• 11+. r-, IN ?rte i n+ •_ M p vwtm s+■a, ik, 1i i i�I 1 W 4 •-----�• Prepoa.0 Contour v .r, - Hire �\ -�� ■�� r , ,a',� 1 e - _ Il-4 f _..��,'Yf 1 A ' Motel `!•- \./PiT i i - / •--1--- `, + �'j �tea ,�;• ,„ i rrr--r r.ANt s MIN 1 II {1 ! �111�1 �E W «,■ui MIN-,.a { <2b sIm o' e-7 ."'. /pl0t•D 11 - ::"....:"...1.4.411410, 14, x'- •I■I� ■ -- I 1 �� -- l; \ �r •� y r ,► for frN.W fhld •■■ �QI v O C% t , \ \,\\\ ; i iii ..1 MN S■i11► a, I ? 1, OPCPaCc •• .i 1TOi61/Prxoat /1111111'=I,■� e O 11151 1 • a4T41 1'!T/' �IJ \ •■•- 5 •' I 7a I Mt t ,2 0M '' gpNO■�F1E CMtMOE ' f 1 14LµWT�.. _i,CP1G-� CYCLIC.,.D , 8 Y C w _ gD SWALE DETAIL 1 I i 1 wr rarer, `�■•• ��_ �a ° N'a` VICINITY MAP Q $ o Scala: P.1' \ I I aotstAUCt oeAn ._ 5 U I I ill PROPOSED DENTAL o ��tb�*� Z ` .414 R QUALITY CALCULATIONS ' 1 OFFICE ■A �cnaK erol d W d 1-1-1 'o .tPERN0U5 4.990 SO.Fi2-S6% I 1 , \ coma Kirk , y- n c '.0 -AU 0.3674 MOORS 0.09 9t/MR f 1 I -. -n _ ,,Ta s°rT.: ws ecn. 0 Z `J VENT flow 0.DOtt X 4.990 SOFT./3600 SEC. : I i i1 `. r,,■m, p` / . 0 I w r t - to cD . LENGTH 102 FEET(100'MIN.) I ii I 1 TAX LOT 100 Cross ° c l` 1`°-' GARAGE �� AI Q N Z ° i «vEioaTT ooe FT/SEC N 1 MAP NO. 25-1-1AC DoN.ta,TD it Imo, tz I Y. THE 21 MINUTE'S>9 MINUTES S i I' I ) f' ® ,� a 7EPiH 0.03 FEET ( ). I I _M TODD■FWL[ v _ C y ! / lir may �,•'SI i i ate i■IK . t1V 1 •• = N� f-i x I 1 - - MULL .+ L,� IMMCE •' I I ( K ■KTNI L • 'WAWA'.•- Aa "0 DENTAL OFFICE $ 0 o ,. II tI �1 • •' (UMU mt57RVC11oN) T W fit _.. yy U /,I I !i 11 x E9� tAir' A w 1` dl BENCHMARK F-I TAX LOT 300 1 _ a C MAP N0. 2S-1-lAC / III I� `� L r i yr/o, Q,- - ,1le ' � ' ; i ,D[t xrartw 1 �r'1 I E1 EK. 24,.79 \. 11Wr 'rjr4Errittrril Fl".2WAtit141,11P:100,42Wil it N!" ME' ..- .. ,.[ - .F'. i_.,.e... .. -e„., ..,, 4.... ra....,. .i/tenh •1y`�`. E E twaTNl Nm1K4D ��i�,� �I..,,�+ ` Pat now �� ® 1 c ■ diod„,„,{ fd��/1 a 1 Z4a [,esiwD ETDI i 1■1■■■ tart )j ' O a to n,..) ...h. Menet � cT 4 A 1 2, 3 n m co°lo• ( 9 `o o E .. • `1 TAX LOT 2800 AREA CALCULATIONS 2 c= a M G �AC�=•, i MAP N0. 2S-1-1AD AEL6 5; `x u�i Lo ',,,--.2.:,-S., w -(LOOU axl■D > 1 1 EcISTNG HOUSE/SHED 1851 11.8% tU L n v ` , t EXISTING WALKS/DRIVEWAY 1719 11.2% - vi h ' /PARKING 7095 4 n' 0 V ` C I , PROPOSED wuxs 4990 3+.601 MORTON TREE SERVICE LANDSCAPING 5.2% d 0,0 11 C.t c � _ TOTAL 5. 100% a n F 0..La. , 635 I - c. to 0 �� 57AU 10 NOTES: D la `1 tide 240 :.•- I. 7Na m¢roe prepared to acto^.�pany a Sit Design R.vkr Applkatbn far D'.9 9f10571E.Dw0 -► conrrraion o1 en•sating .bnpra to o Dantd Orfia hdudhq prepo..d Sheet porkhq end storm 6aheq.anprov■rx.nls. t0ux0 MA (80fl) 2. E7ewlbna bawd an wb■hinglon County Elenehmork N°376,a 091D Brea C■D 0os■i1D •: 16 wt h t.s boos cure to 6xa Southraal pcn•r T conalb bldg.k09on 5. N. 7 :Pal', 1�'IA 72nd Avarwa aoaNnq of Wghroy 217,O•wtion 255.397 last- 1 O I DRM y 3 S. Topography surrey pertamxad using o Topcon G75-38.lactrenk lord delbn . .. ' orb o Trbod Data System IDS-48 Onto edl•ctor. Cantoun rata q■■alb REVISIONS TAX LOT 1p00 ? u.hq Autoeed R.teaaa,2 and Sotldstl (DG)GN Engln..tnq SoRrv.. No Dratrlp+m/oae.�� • W 4. Tld.a not o prap.Ay survey. Prop,Ay banderaa bassi an IWd tts.or 1 POND 6/10%96'JtY RAPHIC SCALE MAP NO. 25-1-1 AC .' Jo comae Frond m not.d tangtn or South the utmlYh.d p.r plat or TAX LOT 200 \ fEVEUU+D ND.2'per Deed recorded M Flook 489,Poq.S0. j 1 1 i MAP NO. 2S-1-1AC apai.at7N°E,rr'. l 11 (■raT) CJ0n2 06,17,9S 09:31 i PORN NO.NEE-PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE'S DEED(Ind*Wdud or Coeperet.). COPYNG•IT toe ETEw 4 oases LW A 0ua,ONO CO..PORTLAND.on NTed I iii C:).A N-e-J STATE OF OREGON. County of I certify that the within instrument Flat NANO Nora and*WPM was received fox record on the day Ki_)ec1'•± of ,19-_ ._,at .------ o'clock .M.,and recorded in Scone Pwtv'.11�m.end Aadrar book/reel/volume No. on page AOernrordIn$rat b em., d a,21p): SPACE RESERVED and/or as fee/file/instru- ��/� re ,-/ FOR ment/microfilm/reception No. , t[. Rt'WRDER9USE Records of said County, 7�r� DiL 17,):a y / Witness my hand and seal of County affied.umd.4w.t d&howls%send. to tatemrtn to(Nems.Add,...,21p): .. 1:-NA ft ) eI f /_7/3.0�� lN 2,4 11-321 NAME TITLC By ,Deputy. PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE'S DEED THIS INDENTURE made this day of April 19 98, by and between WJL.LIAK.C.. MCSIIAIIF..__.. the duly appointed,qualified and acting personal representative of the estate of .NEA.L_A._.. III.TON.. deceased,hereinafter called the first party, and _41121A_}1.,_ItNECHT , hereinafter called the second party:WITNESSETH: For value received and the consideration hereinafter stated,the first party has granted,bargained,sold and conveyed,and by these presents does grant,bargain,sell and convey unto the second party and second party's heirs,successors and assigns all the estate,right and interest of the estate of the deceased,whether acquired by operation of the law or otherwise,in that certain real prop- erty situated in the County of__Washington State of Oregon.described as follows,to-wit: See Legal Description Exhibit "A" • • • eF mace INSUFFIdeNT.CONTIMJe DESCRIPTION ON REVERSEI TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the second party,and second party's heirs,successors-in-interest and assigns forever. The true and actual consideration paid for this transfer,stated in temts of dollars,is$__182..50.0;011 .aHowever,the actual consideration consists of or includes other property or value given or promised which is ❑part of the ❑the whole(indicate which)consideration.0(The sentence between the symbols 6.,it not applicable,should be deleted.Set ORS 93.030.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the first party has executed this instrument:if first party is a corporation,it has caused its name to be signed and its seal,if any,affixed by an officer nr other person duly a th zed to so by ord of its board of directors. �/f � � VJjV�I r•tin.; R"""te THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN William C. McShane THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LANO USE LAWS AND REG- ULATIONS.BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSON ACOUIRING FEE TMTLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPRO- PRIATE 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. f Personal Representative J STATE OF OREGON,County of u � �na ti ss. G� C/ This instrument was acknowledged for on___—_.. 1.l_I)_!_11 ,T9 ,,c,diiitt..4,„by 1�lla1?'�--_.c:_-- '_4- -/ This instrument was acknowledged before me on 19 by as • of• is ft. .-- �rci�.lat SEAL d�, LOUISZ A,HALLMAN ublic for Oregon =(a NOT COMMISSION C OREGON My commission expires `x.: COMMISSION NO 042187 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAR.26,1999 TICOR TITLE INSURANCE Report No. W671953-TM LEGAL DESCRIPTION A tract of land in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows, to-wit: Beginning at a point on the South line of Lot 8, BEVELAND 222.03 feet Easterly from the Southwest corner of Lot 7, BEVELAND; thence South 0° 55' East 140 feet to a point thence North 89° 05' East parallel with the Southerly line of said Lot 8, 112,03 feet to a point in the West line of SW 70th Avenue; thence North 0° 55' West along the West line of SW 70th Avenue to a point, said point being the Southeast corner of the plat of BEVELAND; thence South 89° 05' West along the South line of BEVELAND, 112.03 feet to the point of beginning. 4 ' U5/28.98 THU 11:57 FAX. 503 681 1666 ORE FIN GROUP INC 0002 TRW TS74 �Q�MiSFT _ ice• •�� May 28, 1998 To: City of Tigard Brian D. Rager, PE 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard • Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Dr. Anna M. Knecht Dental Office Conversion The neighborhood meeting was held regarding the Dr. Anna M. Knecht dental office conversion at 7025 S.W. Gonzaga, in Tigard. { A total of four (4) people attended, (see attached list), however they said they had also talked with most of the other neighbors. There were two basic concerns voiced: 1. The overall "feeling" of the neighborhood be kept intact;especially with regards to the streets. It was stated that a "Mr. Anderson"--had actually built Gonzaga Street and the reason it looked so good and new after some 25 years was that he had "double-based" the street. . It was noted that the "crowning" effect of Gonzaga kept it clear of ice, snow, and water in the winter months and that it was thought to be "unique" among Tigard streets. Those in attendance suggested a letter be prepared with signatures so as to keep the charm and friendly atmosphere as long as possible, and to not disturb the neighborhood and to have as Now an impact" visually as possible. It was also stated that the pushing through of 70th Street was very undesirable from all present. Most of the people in attendance had been on Gonzaga and Beveland Streets for over 20 years. 05/28/98 THU 11:57 FAX 503 684 4666 ORE FIN GROUP INC . 009 4, 6i711A, °�s ,t ai #c • 2. There was a question asked regarding on-street parking and there of - course will be none; the back parking lot was very well accepted, everyone seemed quite happy. ; ' Other than the above two mentioned items, the conversion was very well received by all. Sincerely, • Steve Kerby I.• • { • . Y • • •1} . IV;V __- t' Je f • FILE NAME: 981000EF.WQ1 DATE: 16 JUNE 1998 RUNOFF CALCULATIONS ORIGINAL AREA AREA SO.FT. ACRES RUNOFF C A * C INTENSITY RUNOFF EXISTING HOUSE 1,851.00 0.042 0.950 0.04 2.5 0.10 EXISING DRIVEWAY 1,749.00 0.040 0.900 0.04 2.5 0.09 PROPOSED PARKING 4,990.00 0.115 0.250 0.03 2.5 0.07 LANDSCAPING 7,095.00 0.163 0.250 0.04 2.5 0.10 15,685.00 0.360 0.405 0.15 2.5 0.36 RUNOFF 0.365 CFS DEVELOPED AREA AREA SQ.FT. ACRES RUNOFF C A * C INTENSITY RU NOFF EXISTING HOUSE 1,851.00 0.042 0.950 0.04 2.5 0.10 EXISING DRIVEWAY 1,749.00 0.040 0.900 0.04 2.5 0.09 PROPOSED PARKING 4,990.00 0.115 0.900 0.10 2.5 0.26 LANDSCAPING 7,095.00 0.163 0.250 0.04 2.5 0.10 • 15,685.00 0.360 0.612 0.22 2.5 0.55 RUNOFF 0.551 CFS v . 5/24/96 ' BIOFILTRATION SWALE WORKSHEET Qanuary, 1996) 1.. ., Project Name: DR- H NN A KI�ECI-FT P E-NTA1— OGFte.- , City Project Number: I!, Computed By: LEONARD A. RYDELL, PE, PLS , WRE Date: 16Jone98 Company: RYDELL ENGINEERING Address: 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERC, OR Phone Numbers: ( 50:1 ) 53R—:c)700 1'AX ( 503 ) 538-9167 New Impervious Area Calculation. • 11,11 Total Site Area: 8 -36 acres it! 1t6$5sq. ft. home sites: = lots @ sq, ft./lot= sq. ft. buildings: _ sq. ft. parking area: 1990 sq. ft. sidewalk area: sq. ft. street area: sq. ft. other area: sq. ft. Total Impervious Area: 7747253-. sq. ft. acres Design Flow Rare. 1,11 ) Design Storm: 0.36 inches of rain falling in 4 hours. •• Calculate the volume to be treated. Vol. _ (0.36)X(1 ft/12 in.)X 9O sq, ft. = *9.70 Cu. ft. imp. area volume •1,1 Calculate the design flow rate over the 4 hour storm period. Flow rate= ki . 0 Cu. ft./(4 hrs. X 3600 sec.) = Q_Q cfs iii! volume Trapezoidal Swale Characteristics. Design Flow Rate: Q .D cfs Manning's"n"value: 0.25 11, Bottom width: 4 ft. Side Slopes (both sides) 4 H:1V Channel Slope: . 6 -O Z ft./ft. IIIFlow Depth (].a;3 ft. Flow Top Width 4--Z-4 ft. Flow Velocity: p-be, ftJsec III, Required Swale Length. Calculate the swale length needed for the 9 minute residence time. oil (9 min.)X(60 sec./min.)X 0. O 8 ft./sec. = 43 •Z-feet velocity • h:landy_hlquantity\BIOSWFRM.XLS Page 1 Ifil • ti ti WAt CO UA L W sro le MAN-MADE CHANNELS VARIABLES LIST: Y - FLOW DEPTH B - CHANNEL BOTTOM WIDTH S - CHANNEL SLOPE Q - FLOWRATE M - CHANNEL SIDE SLOPE N - CHANNEL ROUGHNESS VARIABLE TO BE SOLVED (Y,Q, B,M, S OR N) ? Y Q (CFS ) ? . 01 RESULTS B (FT) ? 4 -. M (FT/FT) ? 4 Y= 0 . 03 FT S (FT/FT) ? . 02 A= 0 . 13 SF N (FT"1/6 ) ? . 25 P= 4 . 25 FT V= 0 . 08 FPS F= 0 . 08 SUB-CRITICAL FLOW SWALE LENGTH = 102 feet FLOW TIME = 102 ' /0 . 08 FPS = 1 ,275 SECONDS = 21 MINUTES > 9 MINUTES <Shift> <Prt Sc> print <Return> repeat <Space Bar> back to menu Z YA re tc1•1/4 ev eter MAN-MADE CHANNELS VARIABLES LIST: Y - FLOW DEPTH B - CHANNEI. BOTTOM WIDTH S - CHANNEL SLOPE Q - FLOWRATE M - CHANNEL SIDE SLOPE N - CHANNEL ROUGHNESS VARIABLE TO BE SOLVED (Y,Q,B,M, S OR N) ? Y Q (CFS ) ? . 38 RESULTS B (FT) ? 4 M (FT/FT) ? 4 Y= 0. 26 FT S (FT/FT) ? . 02 A= 1 . 28 SF N (FT"1/6 ) ? . 25 P= G . 11 FT V= 0 . 30 FPS F= 0 . 11 SUB-CRITICAL FLOW <Shift> <Prt Sc> print <Return> repeat <Space Bar> back to menu . : I r • • , ,_ -: _ 1 I Do o ,}f___} o � ; o__ 1 D 1 , _______ I t 1 )_ I 1 1 r1_1 ►---- _ 11____ L TAX LOT 2500 TAX LOT 2400 wno s., TAX LOT 9101i mil••81'• :Ialrl x/1:1 r••am:- 1.%I o E I'f ENCHMARK TAX LOT 2800 III:1111/�,.i.:-'• IL;R.�� I c 3 MM NO.25-1-1AB MAP N0. 2S-1-1A8 g ,q,09A. MAP Na N0. 25-ti-1 AA _ �, . �,. �� MT 12•lP.,C NM N0. •• _�� ip-ralta I '�I .:jv�•LOT LOT ..� REV-244.211 2S-I-1A8 B ;19 li: ' I�'r -7 E N89'00'40'E 112.09 __:+/ $24I14'I T __ '`�■ ,‘ 414 ,r.4 1 I -- Pr......E.w...co. : „ + _.. w I I .•►' x _ TAX LOT 9600 111(11! -!I�,°('' li - M tir l+ MAP 440.25-1-144 r Al '��..,,,,,:i.:1 .11..11+-vr 4 m o.q • 'MO I .� 'i,�__' .._i p. 1.. NEVI •ERNOUS AREA tire, B`; ■ TAX LOT 2700 i 11-1111 l' .0111 �1' x I ..wD sur. i n`� •1 I� • 1; E az ,� '-� .M..* MAP Na 25-1-1A0 1 PROJECT i99fl9,.!.. L -. - - EMmN 01c1/1004. 'I ♦ ug1.1. �. I . lam; illii: c...) �A _� ,,, , '•` KC'I -I•04.95.Ill 9 CI A i "V•" ;/1 �> tea;-•9.Momml. E .-a 1.5 ail• _ 1 rwaw Am.. Ft l,J . .K. ' ,`IEE,�, 9<1116 L + 11 ��a , '.' • �� l_ _ _ I w _— W d 6 j SWALE DETAIL I � �_ w s I •••- ».m VICINITY MAP A F i V IrI.�t!'�i I ■I I PROPOSED DENTAL.""..ter I s z i g c E.WATER OUAUTY CALCULATIONS a III ;I OFFICE , ! 3 a E. `0 NEW 10.03 / 4.990 e0J32.9.. o.M >< O, PNKALL 19.0 KUM 0009 O. • I 01. .. rY ( 7 S •C mEA IADar ROW _o.a a5 x.,.M SORE/].OD KC. I ; �.a e.n. .r v+ Z U . SWALE,u cn� 1D2 11[[11 NO".x.> I wa """` -1 «' ( 1W-w p` o 8 TAX LOT 100 + l Q • '; ...1 LOW LEIOOOOTr 0.n n/SEc III II�a ■ MAP NO. 25-1-1AC �i� Z a AL014.E OEPI. 0103 FEETS>9 IMAMS S f I I i 1 4 / a ® 1:— T1 :;iz ..;1.s. I 1 a` .p Q.9 �n..,1 1 ,u �; arm COITAL OFFICE Po... I I I I I I N.'o.a �•«!� I U...mr.ucrNl TAX LOT 300 '. I BENCHMARK Z I O lim MAP NO 25-1-1At ��II! I ,Ivy- fir` �vfR �! � COED SA' 1.. Il I I I _c Id •'.Iir;'a�rl,a-%"41� III NM IIEeM.). Riga _ :iii1:Ali ?'' �..D. rte • �� F al _ o pn elm .9.�ircr m..¢ � - n. ... A 1 2 3 pp wui5• uow,.•ry+ _ —\ _._ — , — ,1 'A%LOT 2800 AREA CALCULATIONS w' ii= $nn -S_ yy.� - GON[AGA - -STREET- - I1 E MAP NO.25-1-1AD 6246 v G3 X'R$ +.�i° amE 1n..n t E EAe11P0 HOUSE/SIAM lest t 1E m 4 H •� 1 cum.WMXS/b.KWA1 1749 t 7W y{ PROPOSED 1r111.5/P/A,N.L 4990 0100X p 90901044 TREE SEWAGE IA.DSCAPMG ttNe tl OS g g 6 8 TOTAL +sees +*00 a b ,n F k∎°. .� m_c �--_ -.. _ — I " I ; j .D.1111 /al - - ti b u�. --- -t,o> +.0 I 10 NOTES: __�- ..0 I Or. ____ 2�1 Ws 1.W 11190 m 0 Colon w.......b2 a 1..a0..9' 'Pr+«•ee' on was>swc •• .o'O'O, On, L O.wYa.Imoo9 b/d'M 0.1.9y rw.Y.ne..090 boos Ci Sheet Q, .1Mmoo.l..n.1.5.0.1 Co.of e.+.0.btl/..L. •,••g .-•1 T.A.......,,of WV.311.8..Ib.165.397 A,N. 1 of 1 • 3 . T.P.. or.Warr..wig.Tap...011-.7..ee..e MW 0.09E .J.TrW DW&A.• 01 Mb M.l.. Con....11..9,.44! •. • d ring A.Im.9.1...13..MI..(pDA1 CM 0....q Win.. .M.. h TAX LOT 1000 W A 1..0..•pr..w... 1.+90..C�.1...e Um of •.... GRAPHIC SCALE MAP NO.25-1-lAC 1.61 P....w I.4M^.no.11..~mow .pw•1 TAX LOT 200 �s9r \ 'IWA.O I..2.I 0...1 1*M 14.49...y.!6. - MAP NO.25-1-1AC cpn. \ 11 _ .ww l om1 IMPACT STATEMENT Bikeways - Gonzaga Street is designated as a Local Street on the "Tigard Triangle Street Plan". A typical right-of-way section for a "Local Street" is shown but does not designate a bicycle lane for the street, nor does the plan address the specific design requirements for a bike way. This is typical for lower travelled streets. The dental office will employ four full time employees and will treat 12 to 15 patients per day plus 8 patients for the hygienist. As some of the patients are from one family (kids and mom), not every patient will result in additional traffic. It is anticipated that almost all of the patients will arrive by automobile as they will be from the greater Tigard area rather than the immediate vicinity, therefore there is no need for a designated bikeway, a conclusion reflected by the requirements of the "Tigard Triangle Street Plan" which allows sharing of bicycle and automobile traffic on public streets. The "Tigard Triangle Street Plan" requires bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way at intervals of no more than 330 feet. S. W. 70th from S. W. Gonzaga south to S. W. Hampton has been designated a Local Street on the "Tigard Triangle Street Plan". This street will be 280 feet long which meets the 330 foot requirement. As this connection fronts the applicant's property, bike and pedestrian access meeting the design requirements is available without additional dedication. A sidewalk fronting the property is proposed for construction as part of a future comprehensive neighborhood development. A seven foot width has been requested by staff, but the "Typical 60 Foot Right-of-Way- Local Street" Street Section does not address the required width, nor does the Narrative of the plan. Financing for future sidewalk improvements will be assured by a non-remonstrance agreement with the City of Tigard. The "Tigard Triangle Street Plan" states that, "All new developments, including remodeling and renovation projects resulting in non-single family residential uses, are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the areas. In addition to meeting the design standards described below and other development standards required by the Development and Building Codes, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle." This requirement does not specify timing of the improvements, therefore, a "Non-Remonstrance Agreement" complies with the development standards. Public Street Improvement-The dental office will employ four full time employees and will treat 12 to 15 patients per day plus 8 patients for the hygienist. As some 1 of the patients are from one family (kids and mom), not every patient will result in additional traffic. Based on 23 patients, four employees and two deliveries, 29 trips per day to the office are anticipated which is approximately three times the trips normally assigned for residential occupancy (10 trips per day). Gonzaga street contains three single family residences, two residences that are being used as wholesale distributing business, two vacant lots and two commercial developments. One of the commercial developments has 24 parking spaces, and the second has 100 but has two connected accesses, one from S. W. Gonzaga Street with 50 spaces and one to S. W. Beveland Street with 50 spaces. The 24 space parking lot had seven vehicles, and the 50 space parking lot of S. W. Gonzaga had 12 vehicles at the time of survey. Traffic was observed to be almost non-existent. Based on 10 trips per day per single family residence, 29 trips for the dental office, 20 trips per day for each wholesale businesses, a total of 99 trips per day are anticipated for the eastern 400 feet of S. W. Gonzaga Street. Based on a nine hour working day, this averages one car every 5.45 minutes. Fire access is currently available as the existing pavement is 17 to 18 feet wide, not including gravel shoulders. In that fire trucks utilize local streets approximately once every 27 years, widening a local street for fire access to the detriment of the neighborhood landscaping, values and aesthetics is not a wise use of community resources. The residences currently do not have on street parking, and all businesses are required to have on-site parking. Therefore, it construction of a 36 foot wide street in order to provide on-street parking is not warranted. The requirements of the "Tigard Triangle Street Plan" are inconsistent with each other. The "Typical 60 Foot Right-of-Way - Local Street" Street Section requires an improvement width of 36 feet. The "Street Classification and Function Table: Streets" requires an improvement width of 34 feet for "East-West Local Service Streets". The existing 50 foot right-of-way contains sufficient room for a 34 foot street improvement, one foot for curbs and two 5 foot wide sidewalks for a total of 45 feet. Should 7 foot wide sidewalks be required as per the Staff Report, a right-of-way width of 49 feet would be required which is still less than the existing 50 feet. Therefore, the additional right-of-way requirement dedication of 5 feet to allow a future 60 foot wide road is not justified as its sole purpose would be to provide a landscape strip. A landscape strip is not required for conversion of an existing single family residence to a dental office, and in fact, the additional right-of-way dedication and proposed improvements will reduce the landscaping between the existing residence and the public street improvements. Therefore,the real property dedication 2 is not "roughly proportional" to the projected impacts of the development. In that the existing and proposed traffic on S. W. Gonzaga Street do not warrant the improvements at this time, the applicant proposes a non-remonstrance agreement to allow deferment of the improvements to the future as part as a coordinated neighborhood plan. This meets the participation requirements of the "Tigard Triangle Street Plan Design Standards". The "Tigard Triangle Street Plan" requires local street spacing at intervals of no more than 660 feet. This applicant's site meets these requirements without additional dedication as S. W. 70th connects to S. W. Gonzaga across the street from the applicant's property. The west site of the applicant's property is 564 feet from S. W. 72nd Avenue and 284 feet from S. W. Hampton. Therefore, this site meets the Design Option requirements in both directions for local street spacing. Drainage System-Drainage from the East is intercepted by an existing ditch which runs South along S. W. 70th Avenue. Some sheet flow from the North enters the site from the North, but as the proposed parking matches existing grades, this sheet flow will continue to pass across the property into the property across the parking lot, into the trapped catch basin, and through the water quality swale into the existing drainage swale along S. W. Gonzaga Street. Present drainage is carried west along S. W. Gonzaga Street by grassy ditches with culverts under driveways. Preservation of grassed channels will minimize the impact of storm water runoff by slowing runoff velocities thus increasing the time of concentration and lowering the runoff coefficient thus reducing the flows. Grassed channels also reduce erosion and improve water quality by removing pollutants prior to discharge into creeks and rivers. Runoff from the site is 0.335 cubic feet per second as per the attached calculations based on a 10 minute time of concentration, a 25 year storm and runoff coefficients per Washington County Road Standards. Runoff after development is anticipated to be 0.551 cubic feet per second based on the proposed addition of the parking lot. The capacity of the first culvert downstream is 1.81 cubic feet per second, and the capacity of the second culvert downstream is 1.54 cubic feet per second. These capacities greatly exceed the additional runoff of 0.186 cubic feet per second or total runoff of 0.551 cubic feet per second without damage to downstream properties or structures. The trapped catch basin and the drainage swale will provide water quality treatment for much of the new parking area and half of the existing roof drains, therefore water 3 quality treatment is provided for the equivalent new impervious area. Therefore, a fee in lieu of construction of the facilities will not be required. The water quality storm is 0.36 inches per four hours or 0.01 cubic feet per second for the new impervious area of 4,990 square feet. A swale of a minimum length of 100 feet is provided with a bottom slope of 2.0q. Flow time is 21 minutes. The swale will pass a 25 year storm with a flow depth of 0.26 feet. Flow calculations are included in this report. In conclusion, no offsite damage to downstream properties or structures is anticipated due to construction of the new parking lot. However, should widening of S. W. Gonzaga be required at this time, downstream runoff volume and intensity will be increased. Parks System - Conversion of a single family residence to a dental office will have little impact on the parks system. It will reduce the population of the area and decrease the demand for public park facilities. The only anticipated park use would be if the employees take a lunch break in a nearby park. Increase property values as a commercial versus residential use are anticipated which will increase the tax base to support parks without placing additional demands on the park system. Water System - No impact to the water system is anticipated as water use will be roughly comparable to the existing single family residence. While there may be more day time occupants for the dental office, there will not be a demand for clothes washing, showers and baths associated with residential use. Sewer System - No impact to the sewer system is anticipated as sewer use will be roughly comparable to the existing single family residence. While there may be more day time occupants for the dental office, there will a demand for clothes washing, showers and baths associated with residential use. Noise Impacts - A dental office will not generate noise from inside the building. Some additional traffic noise from the projected additional 19 trips per day is anticipated, but should not be objectional to neighboring properties, especially since the neighborhood is already subject to traffic noise from S. W. 72nd Avenue, Highway 217 and Interstate Five. 4 . 1 CONCLUSION The conversion Pre-application P ct to th of a single f by the applicant. COnferg properties l residence to a ant Conference Staff Aort long a,sdt nth °Vice The public imPr are o here 11 h Supported b f the neighborhood ents proposed A StPone�into the nts cori a°S1gni fca Y the chano by the std, future a a the use. re9uiru hav requested 3, i significant costly e a improvements tha act on the t are not 5 ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE DR. ANNA KNECHT PARKING LOT The unit prices hereinafter written are submitted with the clear understanding that the actual measured quantities may vary somewhat from from the estimate and that payment will be based on the unit price of each item. No. Item Quantity Unit Price Total PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS 1. Excavation 1 lump su $ 4000.00 $ 4,000.00 2. 7" Rock 655 sq. yd. $ 6.00 $ 3,930.00 3. 2" Class "C" Asphalt 549 sq. yd. $ 6.25 $ 3,431.25 4. 1-1/2" Asphalt Overlay 171 sq. yd. $ 4.70 $ 803.70 5. Trapped Catch Basin 1 each $ 1200.00 $ 1,200.00 6. Extruded Curb 105 feet $ 6.00 $ 630.00 7. Sidewalk 16 sq. ft. $ 10.00 $ 160.00 8. Parking Lot Striping 1 each $ 450.00 $ 450.00 9. Bumper Stops 6 each $ 80.00 $ 480.00 10. Underground Electrical 1 each $ 825.00 $ 825.00 Sub Total - Parking Lot Improvements $ 15,909.95 ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE S. W. GONZAGA STREET IMPROVEMENTS The unit prices hereinafter written are submitted with the clear understanding that the actual measured quantities may vary somewhat from from the estimate and that payment will be based on the unit price of each item. No. Item Quantity Unit Price Total PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS 1. Excavation 1 lump su $ 4000.00 $ 4,000.00 2. 10" Rock 178 sq. yd. $ 10.20 $ 1,815.60 3. 4" Class "C" Asphalt 119 sq. yd. $ 19.20 $ 2,284.80 4. 8" Storm Drain 19 feet $ 4.70 $ 89.30 5. 12" Storm Drain 64 feet $ 4.70 $ 300.80 6. Catch Basin 1 each $ 1200.00 $ 1,200.00 7. Curb and Gutter 112 feet $ 16.80 $ 1,881.60 8. Sidewalk 784 sq. ft. $ 5.00 $ 3,920.00 9. Ditch Inlet 1 each $ 1150.00 $ 1,150.00 10. Street Trees 2 each $ 100.00 $ 200.00 10. Commercial Driveway Approach 1 each $ 1950.00 $ 1,950.00 11. Street Barricade 1 each $ 600.00 $ 600.00 12. Engineering/Inspection 1 each $ 8000.00 $ 8,000.00 Sub Total - Gonzaga Street Improvements $ 27,392.10 OREGON FINANCIAL GROUP June 17, 1998 City of Tigard Brian D. Rager, PE 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Dr. Anna M. Knecht Dental Office Conversion Dear Brian, As both Leonard Rydell and I hand in our applications to both the City and yourself on Dr. Knecht's property, I wanted to give you again all of the notes and copies of the neighborhood meeting. I had sent these to you on May 15, however I want to make certain that you had a full copy in your files. If there is anything missing please get back in touch with me. I have enclosed the site development review application along with a check for $800.00 which covers the filing fee for everything under$100,000. I've also enclosed a list of signatures from the surrounding property owners, which they specifically asked me to prepare for review by the City. To a person and landowner, their feelings were very adament about leaving the neighborhood in "as is" condition, so as to have little or no impact on the neighborhood visually. Specifically they do not want small parcels segregated out for street improvement because of the cutting up and in one's words "harry scarry chopping up" of this parcel and that parcel of land. The various property owners feel that when this needs to be done that it should be done at a point in the future when all the properties on the street can be done at an economical rate for all concerned. As you know, by isolating individual property owners, costs skyrocket some 600% versus doing one nice neat job all at once. I have talked to each of the individual property owners face to face and I can't tell you how adament they are about not tearing up the street on a one by one basis, individually discriminating against each property owner. Their feelings are incredibly strong. 684-4666 office • mbl 780-4666 • 7100 S.W. Hampton • Suite 121 • Portland, Oregon 97223 • OREGON FINANCIAL GROUP I would like to review a copy of your final decision draft BEFORE it is released and printed. If there is anything else needed, please get back to me as soon as possible. Thank you. Best regar's, Steve Kerby SK:lk enclosures 684-4666 office • mbl 780-4666 • 7100 S.W. Hampton • Suite 121 • Portland, Oregon 97223 RECEIVED JUN 1 7 1998 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Alikk LEONARD A. RYDELL, P.E., P.LS., W.R.E. Consulting Civil Engineer-Land Surveyor 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132-1625 16 June 1998 (503) 538-5700 FAX 538-9167 City of Tigard 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner Re: Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office Dear Julia, Enclosed, for your review, please find 18 copies of the Site Development Review Application for the Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office proposed for S. W. Gonzaga Street in the Tigard Triangle of the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon. The signed application form and fee will be delivered by Steve Kerby, the applicant's representative, along with copies of the petitions and letters from the neighboring property owners. I would appreciate receiving a review copy of your staff report prior to its finalization by the City of Tigard. As per our meeting today, the applicant and the neighborhood is concerned about the proposed street improvements and right-of-way dedications. Please let me know as soon as possible whether or not the application is considered complete, and should you have any questions or need further information, please feel free to give me a call. Thank you. S. cerely yours, Leonard A. Rydell, P.E., P.L.S., W.R.E. LARIj end: as stated cc: Steven Kerby PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS • RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS LAND SURVEYS • WATER RIGHTS May 28, 1998 cz;r,,; \ CITY OF TIGARD Mr. Leonard A. Rydell O R E GO N 601 Pinehurst Drive Newberg, OR 97132-1625 VIA FAX: 538-9167 RE: DR. KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE WCTM 2S 1 01 AC, TAX LOT 100 Dear Leonard: I apologize for the delay in getting back to you regarding the letter you sent, dated May 5, 1998. I will respond below according to the order listed in your letter. 1. SW 70th Avenue Right-of-way It is intended that SW 70th Avenue will be a continuous street from SW Hampton Street to SW Dartmouth Street. As development occurs, the City will require dedication of the right-of-way. 2. Half-street Improvement on Gonzaga When the City Council adopted the Tigard Triangle Plan,they made it very clear to City Staff that when properties develop or redevelop in the Triangle that the streets need to be constructed to meet the Triangle Plan standards. Although a half-street adjacent to the Knecht site will "stand out"for a time until other properties in the area develop,the City will require the improvement to be constructed as a part of the development. 3. Fee in-lieu of Undergrounding The applicant has the choice of whether to pay the fee or physically place the lines underground. I concur with your finding that the fee option is likely the best choice in this case. As a part of the Site Development Review, we will calculate the fee. 4. Use of Existing Septic System Since the public sewer is over 500 feet away, Staff could support the payment of a fee in-lieu of extending the public sewer to this site. The City Engineer will need to calculate the fee that would be required and it would need to be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD(503)684-2772 f Mr. Leonard A. Rydell May 28, 1998 Page 2 S. Storm Drainage and Water Quality I would push to keep the curb and catch basin in your plan to ensure that all of the surface water is able to travel through the full length of the proposed swale. Sheet flowing may result in only partial treatment in the swale. Since additional impervious areas will be added to this site, a downstream analysis is required in accordance with USA design and construction standards. This analysis must be submitted as a part of the Site Development Review application submittal. 6. Swale Sizing Sizing of water quality facilities in Tigard must be per USA design and construction standards. As a part of the Site Development Review submittal, we will need to see a preliminary sizing calculation that shows your swale will meet USA standards. I hope this information helps and I look forward to working with you on this project. Sincerely, (24,Cr- Brian D. Rager, PE Development Review Engineer \brianr\knechtl.ltr 1 IC , May 27, 1998 To: City of Tigard Re: Gonzaga- Beveland Streets Neighborhood Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office We would like the neighborhood and area surrounding Gonzaga and Beveland Streets to retain the charm and friendly atmosphere of the present time. We appreciate a "low impact" approach from a visual standpoint, and we feel the streets should be kept in "as is condition" until an appropriate and jointly economical time for sidewalk, gutter, new paving,etc. �,y2J 70 7d -I1 71,:k2 Peterson s�z,,..• ;-7 �t[¢ 7` ci J� �ti 9 Q�.� r�J� Martin / 5bQ cc.0 '70 Kindrick id45-4*() 7 Kindrick l>14--V45 — -)(-0 �°c SL-.) 13i V 5-( 0 Bo ion Q 366 Zeek 70 85- SG ,? ZeUdk1oJ Casey 1 . ' .26c sty �� Roth Weaver 0 ,, 7/os- citi [ - , - , _ Weaver fittlatQL/2----- ‘, /,5-5 4 5 c l i .� °` Andrus /> � Zahm/0-65- 749 6(.4J 0;7 Tommy .1� * Ala.. 7/2 5. • ettz.A Tommy / / ./• / / • DeLeon / / ri1i;.f - - - w _ �. —. .mss 10�nginee LEONARD A. R Y D E L L, P.E., P.LS., W.R.E. Consulting civil Er-Land Surveyor 5 May 1998 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132-1625 City of Tigard (503) 53 8-5700 FAX 53 8-9167 City of Tigard 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard nst Tigard, Oregon 97223 \c. .`3\ ;AK/Y 199 Attn: Mr. Brian Rager C1 . Re: Dr. Knecht Dental Office Dear Brian, Thank you for including my name in your recommendations to Steven Kerby regarding the engineering and surveying services for the proposed Dr. Knecht Dental Office along Gonzaga Street in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon. Enclosed, for your review and comments, please find two preliminary review copies of the Site Plan. In reviewing the Engineering Section of the Pre-Application Conference Notes, I have the following questions: 1. The notes require additional dedication along S. W. 70th Avenue. However, the "Tigard Triangle Street Plan" shows that S. W. 70th Avenue will run South from Gonzaga Street only. Therefore, it appears that S. W. 70th Avenue to the East of the Dental Office Site could be vacated. Your comments will be appreciated. 2. You are also requesting a half street improvement along Gonzaga Street fronting the project. This improvements will be out of character for the neighborhood which is nicely developed with well maintained grassy ditches. Would it be acceptable to sign a non-remonstrance agreement to avoid the piecemeal installation of pavement and curbs? Note that due to pavement transitions, the proposed pavement would impact adjoining properties. 3. I will recommend that the developer pay a fee in lieu of installing the overhead facilities underground as the existing overhead line spans 222 feet and probably serve additional properties. Therefore, placing utilities underground entails trenching across other properties, pavement patching, conduit, an electrician for each house to convert from an overhead to underground service, and separate trenching for telephone and T. V. Cable to existing house connections would be difficult and expensive. I will suggest that they covert the existing overhead to an underground service PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS • RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS LAND SURVEYS • WATER RIGHTS Pir/ Mr. Brian Rager 5 May 1998 Page 2 of 2 4. The developer is planning on utilizing the existing septic system. The location of the septic tank as determined by a patch of dead grass is shown. 5. The existing storm drainage patterns for the site are to be continued. While the preliminary plan shows the new parking lot draining to a trapped catch basin to a water quality swale to the existing ditch, I would appreciate your comments on eliminating the curb and catch basin and having sheet flow across the parking lot to the swale. 6. Approximately 4,050 square feet of impervious area will be added due to the new parking lot. The 97 foot long swale will provide water quality for the design storm under City of Lake Oswego Standards which do not split the flows into a water quality and overflow component, but would may not meet the USA requirements for split flows. Would a fee be required with the proposed design? Your comments on the above items would be appreciated so that I can complete the application documents. Again, I greatly appreciated your recommendation and look forward to working with you on this project. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Leonard A. Rydell, P.E., P.L.S., W.R.E. LAR/lar end: as stated cc: Steven Kerby -a sma- if //.:� ,i5 "r lr'•. s " 41111411i - . :.� CITY OF TIGARD NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTIFICATION PROCESS Neighborhood meeting/notification is required for the following applications: D Comprehensive Plan Amendments • Zone Changes - Subdivisions ( ."I Sensitive Lands _ Conditional Uses and; j,�,c au ill D Site Development Review. �, u i Applicant makes arrangements for neighborhood meeting, v Applicants choice of date (using staff guidelines). - Applicant schedules a meeting facility. • 1 Applicant prepares a letter regarding the upcoming meeting to be held with the neighborhood, n Letter briefly describes the development, location and sets the date, time and place for meeting. D NOTE: Meeting date to be within 2-4 weeks of the date the letter is sent. Two (2) weeks minimum notice must be provided to the neighborhood property owners within 250 feet plus the CIT contacts! Applicant mails letter of meeting. m Applicant acquires list of affected property owner(s) from available sources. D Applicant gets list of Community Involvement Team (CIT) contacts from the City Planning Department. ► Applicant prepares affidavit of mailing on form provided by the City at the pre-application meeting. Applicant posts site and on the same day. letter of meeting is mailed to affected property owners. • Sign must be posted at a location easily observable from a public right-of-way. x- Sign shall state that site may be under consideration for a land use application and include a phone number where the applicant can be reached for additional information or comments. 1 Applicant prepares affidavit of posting on the form provided by the City at the pre-application meeting. Applicant holds meetirlgfor neighborhood as previously scheduled, x- Applicant presents their proposal, including City requirements and answers any questions. '> Applicant makes note of the names and addresses of all individuals who speak at the meeting and provides documentation of their comments, concerns or issues. u ••• •r- I .11- 11 e. f. l•win• i- -'. ,.. ••• -e .n. • • consideration recommendations. concerns or issues which could delay the applications approval process. 1.) Applicant submits their proposal to the City for review accompanied by the following essential documents: • A copy of the letter mailed to the affected property owners in regard to the meeting along with a copy of the mailing list and the corresponding affidavit of mailing the meeting letter/notice. • A copy of the sign-up sheet(s) from the meeting(s) held with interested citizens/affected property owner(s) on the land use proposal. h:Uoginlpattylrnasters\crtnotd mst 5-13-98 Resident 7070 S.W. Gonzaga Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Anna M. Knecht Dear Interested Party: I'm representing the owner, Anna M. Knecht, with regards to the property located at 7025 S.W. Gonzaga Street in Tigard. Anna is a dentist and is proposing to use the property as her dental office. Anna's aim and intention is not to change the exterior of the home, or the grounds, but to leave the property much as it is, as allowed by the City of Tigard. Hopefully, there will be little or no impact from a visual standpoint, other than a very clean, well kept property. 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, MAY 27, 1998 7:00 P.M. 7025 S.W. GONZAGA STREET TIGARD, OREGON 97223 Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 684-4666 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Steve Kerby Project Coordinator SK:lk Anna M. Knecht Property 7025 S.W. Gonzaga Tigard, OR 97223 CIT Members 4 From East District Plus Additional Addressees 7020 S.W. Gonzaga 7070 S.W. Gonzaga 7075 S.W. Gonzaga 7105 S.W. Gonzaga 7120 S.W. Gonzaga 7060 S.W. Beveland 7065 S.W. Beveland 7085 S.W. Beveland 7086 S.W. Beveland 7115 S.W. Beveland 7155 S.W. Beveland 7175 S.W. Beveland 12520 S.W. 70th 12560 S.W. 70th 12600 S.W. 72nd 4• 1,4 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) )ss. City of Tigard ) Steven Kerby , being duly sworn, depose and say that on May 13 , 1998 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) 7025 S.W. Gonzaga St. Tigard, OR. 97223 a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at Tigard. OR. with postage prepaid thereon. Signature (In the resence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON,NOTARY PUBLIC ITO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the / day of #7/7 , 19,??9! •C�1 /� Nor "seem 4� NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON YrCO EssiRfNO. n My Commission Expires: y 2 i -O 7 (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) 1 NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: Anna M. Knecht, DMD, P.C. I TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Dental Off - interior remodal of house. Name ofApplicant/Owner. Anna M. Knecht Address or General Location of Subject Property: 7025 S.W. Gonzaga St. Tigard, OR. 07223 LSubject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s). At (i AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE 4;-P WITHIN SEVEN f'r1-CALi%I'IDAB DAYS OF THE SIGN POSTING,RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT TO:: offTigard mss Dtt , ss >: resikCIIV.97228 Steven Kerby , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed Dental office affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) 7025 S.W. Gonzaga St. Tigard, OR. 97223 and did on the 13th day of May 19 S411_personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a Dental Office application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at 7025 S.W. Gonzaga St. on front of house. (state location you posted notice on property) Signature (In the pr en= of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the - day of , 19 7P wrrrulAL SEAL (-2 BE - NOTARYP PAAq U3L NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APR 22, My Commission Expires: 5!z Z-O Z (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: Dr. Anna M. Knecht, DM'D, P.G. (TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Dental Office - interior remodal of house. Name of Applicant/Owner: Anna M. Knecht Address or General Location of Subject Property 7025 S.W. Gonzaga St. Tigard-, Or. 97223 LSubject Property Tax Map(e)and Lot#(e} n:YognlpatlyVnaitertiallpon n' Planning Seminar Annual �� N~Q N�� N��\�� wm� ��w�� ~ ~��~~� `~=~=�~~~~~�~ � ~ �v/� �� [�� [ �� D, INC' " * ESTATE ~~..`.`.^`.~ `~.~ ~^`-~ OF PORTLAND,/ �� • , /� w ~l w / K= w �' - ^�- ~�-~�' 8�&� __.«�� w��_�^��' - --'--- 166r- 5-deer`,- ------------' ' --- - '--� -' -_'--_ _ -- - _- -- - ---_-__ 706-5~~ ' -~-- - --- �~�°_-~� ��~_� '_ • .xv m ^- �== ----- - ` 11%0_acy --'---'--- -- --- - ---- - --'--- __________-'--- • . - _ _-_-___'-_-_---'_______-__-- _- _ _ -__�__- • _ • �� __--. -___--____-_---_--___ - �� ' -______-___--_- •- -4011‘ May 28, 1998 To: City of Tigard Brian D. Rager, PE 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Dr. Anna M. Knecht Dental Office Conversion The neighborhood meeting was held regarding the Dr. Anna M. Knecht dental office conversion at 7025 S.W. Gonzaga, in Tigard. A total of four(4) people attended, (see attached list), however they said they had also talked with most of the other neighbors. There were two basic concerns voiced: I. The overall "feeling" of the neighborhood be kept intact; especially with regards to the streets. It was stated that a "Mr. Anderson" had actually built Gonzaga Street and the reason it looked so good and new after some 25 years was that he had "double-based" the street. It was noted that the "crowning" effect of Gonzaga kept it clear of ice, snow, and water in the winter months and that it was thought to be "unique" among Tigard streets. Those in attendance suggested a letter be prepared with signatures so as to keep the charm and friendly atmosphere as long as possible, and to not disturb the neighborhood and to have as "low an impact" visually as possible. It was also stated that the pushing through of 70th Street was very undesirable from all present. Most of the people in attendance had been on Gonzaga and Beveland Streets for over 20 years. -411k 2. There was a question asked regarding on-street parking and there of course will be none; the back parking lot was very well accepted, everyone seemed quite happy. Other than the above two mentioned items, the conversion was very well received by all. Sincerely, Steve Kerby PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES socz- q CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES CITT Or TIQiIIM OlRLQO Community t [Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six[61 Months) Shaping Better Community NON-RESIDENTIAL PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: - al _ / I STAFF AT PRE-APP.: 54 iM APPLICANT: 7,20/ay i o'e/// ?L Ker/y AGENT: Sa- Phone:( l S3?-5.700/ Phone: [ ) PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GEN.LOCATION: 7,2 SG✓ C-,,-►z9 - 2 TAX MAP[SI/LOT/AU 2 3/ O/,/,'� -9x /0-X( /aD NECESSARY APPLICATIONESI: ,52h z9 ev%ryie r PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: Ca ive.-/ (.siv/eccs 4 c cs COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: ,4fvE ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: /vl v� C.I.T.AREA: s-A FACILITATOR: PHONE: [503) ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT SIZE: sq. ft. Average lot width: 5o ft. Maximum building height: 'Y" ft. Setbacks: Front ft. Side O/2 ft. Rear 0/2 c ft. Corner - _ ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: QS % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: %. [Refer to Code Section 18. 72-0 l ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet, unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 21/2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 11/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. [Refer to Code Section 18.810.060) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section i SETBACKS.- ➢ STREETS: 3° feet from the centerline of ➢ ESTABLISHED AREAS: feet from ➢ LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet, along the site's boundary. ➢ FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.730] SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS BUILDING 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 zoned district. (Refer to Code Section 18.730.010.B.1 PACKING AND ACCESS . i REQUIRED parking for this type of use: i 3 ; ? - /V9X 9/ tv Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): NO MORE THAN 40% of required spaces may be designated and/or dimensioned as compact spaces. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: ➢ Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 6 inches x 18 feet. ➢ Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 inches x 16 feet, 5 inches. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3) feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. (Refer to Code Section 18.765.0401 Handicapped Parking: ➢ All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. ➢ BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: Minimum pavement width: , All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: (Refer to Code Chapters 18.165 and 18.705) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS 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 18.705.030] LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. (Refer to Code Section 18.165.080) ILMIlltION ARM') The eitri.equires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7951 BUFFERING AND SCREENING In order-TO-INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO 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 Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.745] « tr The REQUIRED BUFFER WIDTHS which are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: /o 20 feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. /0-L'-r, feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: (1ANDSCAPING ' STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised planters. For detailed information on design requirements for parking areas and accesses. [Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 18.105] CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Minnlni Derision Section (SIGNS SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for review before the Hearings Officer. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.780) SENSITIVE LANDS The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to5recisely identify sensitive lands areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the appli nt. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans sub tted with the development application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modificati n of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.775) STEEP SLOPES When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C.2 and 18.775.080.C.3. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY[USA]BUFFER STANDARDS,R&0 9 44 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENS IVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enoug o protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR S LL BE A MINIMUM OF 25-FEET-WIDE, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries of, e sensitive area, except where approval has been granted by the Agency or City to reduce the-width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width"of a portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an'area of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable;encroachment shall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the length of the vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in width. In any case, the average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from he water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: ➢ A GRAVEL WALKWAY OR BIKE PATH, NOT EXCEEDING EIGHT (8) FEET IN WIDTH. If the walkway or bike path is paved, then the vegetated corridor must be widened by the width to the path. A paved or gravel walkway or bike path may not be constructed closer than ten (10) feet from the boundary of the sensitive area, unless approved by the Agency or City. Walkways and bike paths shall be constructed so as to minimize disturbance to existing vegetation; and CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section ➢ WATER QUALITY FA.,ILITIES may encroach into the vegetated corridor a maximum of ten (10) feet with the approval of the Agency or City. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. (Refer to R a 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, streams and riparian corridors identified in the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. Specifically, this chapter allows reasonable economic use of property while establishing clear and objective standards to: protect significant wetlands and streams; limit development in designated riparian corridors; maintain and enhance water quality; maximize flood storage capacity; preserve native plant cover; minimize streambank ero on; maintain and enhance fish and wildlife habitats; and conserve scenic, recreational and ducational values of water resource areas. Safe Harbor: The WR OVERLAY DISTRICT ALSO MEETS THE REQUIRE NTS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 (Natural Resources) and the "safe harbor" provisions f the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660, Division 23). These provisions require that "signific t" wetlands and riparian corridors be mapped and protected. The Tualatin River, which is als a "fish-bearing stream," has an average annual flow of more than 1000 cfs. Major Streams: Streams which are mapped as "FISH-BEARING S REAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry and have an average annual flow less than 1000 cubic feet per second (cfs). ➢ Major streams in Tigard include F NO CREEK, ASH CREEK (EXCEPT THE NORTH FORK AND OTHER TRIBUTARY EEKS) AND BALL CREEK. Minor Streams: Streams which are NOT "FISH-BEA 'NG STREAMS" according to Oregon Department of Forestry maps . Minor streams in Tigard in ude Summer Creek, Derry Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and certain sh tributaries of the Tualatin River. Riparian Setback Area: This AREA IS MEASURED/HORIZONTALLY FROM AND PARALLEL TO MAJOR STREAM OR TUALATIN RIVER TOP- F-BANKS, OR THE EDGE OF AN ASSOCIATED WETLAND, whichever is greater. The riparia setback is the same as the "riparian corridor boundary" in OAR 660-23- 090(1)(d). ➢ The stands TUALATIN RIVER RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 75 FEET, unless modified in accordanc with this chapter. ➢ The M OR STREAMS RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 50 FEET, unless modified in accordance with t s chapter. ➢ IS LATED WETLANDS AND MINOR STREAMS (including adjacent wetlands) have no r arian setback; however, a 25-foot "water quality buffer" is required under Unified Sewerage 'Agency (USA) standards adopted and administered by the City of Tigard. [Refer to Code Section 18.797.0301 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section Riparian Setback Reductions The DIRECTOR MAY APPROVE A SITE-SPECIFIC REDUCTION OF THE TUALATIN RIVE R ANY MAJOR STREAM RIPARIAN SETBACK BY AS MUCH AS 50% to allow the plac ent of structures or impervious surfaces otherwise prohibited by this chapter, provided that equal or better protection for identified major stream resources is ensured through streambank restoration and/or enhancement of riparian vegetation in preserved portions of the riparian setback area. Eligibility for Riparian Setback in Disturbed Areas. TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A RIPARIAN SETBACK REDUCT , the applicant must demonstrate that the riparian corridor was substantially disturbed a e time this regulation was adopted. This determination must be based on the Veget 'on Study required by Section 18.797.050 that demonstrates all of the following: . Native plant species currently cover less than 80% of the on-site riparian corridor area; • The tree canopy cu ntly covers less than 50% of the on-site riparian corridor and healthy trees have not n removed from the on-site riparian setback area for the last five years; That veg ion was not removed contrary to the provisions of Section 18.797.050 regulating remo 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 18.791.100] EE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIRE ENTS ; A TREE PA E PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, major partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: • Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City; • Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D. according to the following standards: Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.790.060.D. of no net loss of trees; b Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; b Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and :- A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. [Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.CJ CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9 NON-Residential AppilcaUoo/Plaoolou IMelon Section MITIGATION , _ ('CACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: ➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. ➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. ➢ If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property; and ➢ The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. [Refer to Code Section 18.790.060.E.1 NARRATIVE The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.321 CODE CHAPTERS 18.330 18.390 z- 18.520 18.715 18.765 18.795 18.350 18.420 18.530 r" 18.730 18.775 18.797 18.360 18.430 T 18.620 —18.745 _ 18.780 —. 18.800 18.370 18.510 ±18.705 a 18.755 18.790 IIPACT STUD part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 5Q FEET AND THE APPROPRIATE CIT FACILITATOR AND THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE(S) of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESER ION PRIOR TO SUBMITTING UBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with theity of Tigard, applicant's are y6quired to comp e and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Sury or's Office in order to obtain approval/rese 'ation for any subdivisior'i�,name. A cations w III not be accepted as complete until the C. receives the faxed confirmation of appro�Tal fcefn the County of the Subdivision N e Rese ion. [County Surveyor's Office: 503-648-88841 (Ui[DING 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 Chapter 18.755) ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: /lc',.5-/,...(X2'i_../"'at,/S,-/a Cs v //_/ NCCexS�c/63","62 7W ) is iirr/Jrc'✓c d, l\Je e d (e Swe 57.1- 0 ,- t o.,A<on c*' 7041-A jir/1, U�"ea / Ve w . . s, / , !i CC.o. . 4e/l,�o,...fe ol. '] cal' +lc e s-s - oc 4 0 .7 - D -f �,c e _57,A,,,A C", 1J / "Gn Q t0`i'97 ,1/4 (_,---_-.e c ..,0 iY/ cer l t c r1� v ✓Se. a./ :1A eOi,y/ Q -k () At"%,, Lo (Att...fr, 67 rep T, c pi,„I.:, fh#j.../. C* v ii 4 ifA/`it Vs'1 Ur 10'41,•a V1/-e4 1- o / A - -- - _ • 1 • 7:.. ,A * a . A ( ) A r 1.1 ,,,,,t 6. 4„ 11+1 2-re' o f a 1/ o.x/'-/r 1. - V R 1 /f (4) i'A e )1",A A,7 r il�r•A.t[L i') 11 44_ a e'er/Mt )r. 1'7 i1" ,, • r. asr /Ali ievl/ #/"'r• aZet� CITY OF TIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Manning Division Section PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other week days. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. One (1), 81/2' x 11" map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Division will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period fojiows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of ood site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: J'O'j . CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: 503 639-4171 FAX: 503 684-7291 E-MAIL: staffs first name)@ci.tigard.or.us 1:\cu rpl n\masters\revis ed\preapp-c.mst (Engineering section:preapp.eng)\ Revised 1/28/99 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ➢ ENGINEERING SECTION Q m' peve opment Shaping A Better Community PUBLIC FACILITIES 25 of AC_ 1(N -� 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: ZAGIA to feet from centerline.6rTDS ('t to feet from centerline. ( ) to feet from centerline. ( ) to feet from centerline. Street improvements: ( `) street improvements will be necessary along C7a,-Iz.6.cA S r. to include: 137 feet of pavement FF.„,,, T� c Q'concrete curb ['storm sewers and other underground utilities 5 -foot concrete sidewalk [street trees [4treet 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 ( ) stret ,iprovements will be necessary alo, to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ( ) street improvements will be necessary along to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ( ) _ street improvements will be necessary along to include: ❑ feet of pavement ❑ concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ( ,) Section 18.164.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW 1■M4•C.a . 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 str€ mprovements or other necessary ic 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 � . The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developers responsibility to f eR--K..4.*31- Ca.-) S{>v„) /Tw SLAS s.nA rs 1W7 Water Supply: The Wpi I2- - Phone:(503) 2 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. If ADP i C-' A-AC cJM . +4A1C-D S TAI !xiciT£ 067 c1 Rre-rQu,-53_ 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 cons sting an on-site facility provided sr. sic 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: (L.4 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. • ' `f g.\- re. A a plv� 10 AVE,. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. { PERMITS Engineering Department Permits: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a permit from the Engineering Department. There are two types of permits issued by Engineering, as follows: Street Opening Permit (SOP). This permit covers relatively minor work in a public right-of-way or easement, such as sidewalk and driveway installation or repair, and service connections to main utility lines. This work may involve open trench work within the street. The permittee must submit a plan of the proposed work for review and approval. The cost of this type of permit is calculated as 4% of the cost of the work and is payable prior to issuance of the permit. 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 Agreer t (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 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 F6 11BDIVISIONS 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. s 3!2 PREPARED BY: ' 4 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT STAFF Phone: [5031639-4171 Fax: [5031684-7297 h:\patty\rnasters\preapp eng (Master section:preapp-r mst) 01-Sept-98 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 Engineering Department Sectton CITY OF TIGARD LAND USE APPLICATION CHECKLIST Please read this form carefully in conjunction with the notes provided to you at the pre- application conference. This checklist identifies what is required for submittal of a complete land use application. Once an application is deemed complete by Community Development staff, a decision may be issued within 6-8 weeks. If you have additional questions after reviewing all of the information provided to you, please contact the staff person named below at the City of Tigard Planning Division, (503) 639-4171. Staff: Date: 3-a -99 1. BASIC INFORMATION ALL LAND USE APPLICATIONS REQUIRE THE FOLLOWING: Completed Application Form with property owner's signature or name of agent and letter of authorization Title transfer instrument or grant deed Written summary of proposal Narrative demonstrating compliance with all applicable development standards and approval criteria (as specified in the Pre-Application Conference notes) Two (2) sets of stamped, addressed envelopes and a notarized list of all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. Mailing envelopes shall be legal-size, addressed with 1" x 4" labels Documentary evidence of neighborhood meeting (if required) Impact Study per Section 18.390.040.B.2.(e) Copy of the Pre-Application Conference notes Filing Fee 2. PLANS REQUIRED In addition to the above basic information, each type of land use application will require one or more of the following maps or plans. PLEASE SUBMIT EACH OF THE PLANS CHECKED BELOW WITH YOUR APPLICATION (Section 5 of this checklist provides details on what information to include on each plan): ▪ Vicinity Map 0 Preliminary Grading/Erosion Control Plan • Existing Conditions Map 9 Preliminary Utilities Plan ❑ Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan ❑ Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan 1;i7/ Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan ❑ Site Development Plan 0 Architectural Drawings ▪ Landscape Plan ❑ Sign Drawings ❑ Public Improvements/Streets Plan 3. NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED The City requires multiple copies of submittal materials. The number of copies required depends on the type of review process. FOR AN APPLICATION SUCH AS YOU ARE PROPOSING THE CITY REQUIRES a}/ COPIES OF ALL APPLICATION MATERIALS. City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 1 of 5 4. SPECIAL STUDIES AND REPORTS Because of the nature of your project and/or the site you propose to develop, THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL STUDIES WILL BE REQUIRED. These studies must be prepared by certified professionals with experience in the appropriate field: ❑ Traffic Study El Local Streets Traffic Study El Wetlands/Stream Corridor Delineation and Report ❑ Habitat Area Evaluation ❑ Storm Drainage System Downstream Analysis ▪ Preliminary Sizing Calculations for Proposed Water Quality and/or Detention Facility El Geotechnical Report ❑ Other 5. PREPARING PLANS AND MAPS Plans and maps should be prepared at an engineering scale (1" = 10/20/50/100/200') and include a north arrow, legend and date. The same scale should be used for all your plans. Where possible the City prefers the use of a scale that allows a site plan or subdivision plat to be shown on a single sheet. Architectural drawings may be prepared at an architectural scale. One copy of each plan must be submitted in photo-ready 81/2 x 11 format. THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR EACH TYPE OF PLAN (If the plans you submit do not include all of the information requested because you feel it is not applicable, please indicate this and provide a brief explanation). t/se 4,0,xe S / 1-1re Vicinity Map , q/1 rcpvir. --C1/1"..b cve ,p.�✓i do d' Showing the location of the site in relation to: 0 • Adjacent properties ❑ • Surrounding street system including nearby intersections ❑ • Pedestrian ways and bikeways El • Transit stops El • Utility access ❑ Existing Conditions Map Parcel boundaries, dimensions and gross area ❑ Contour lines (2' intervals for 0-10% slopes or 5' for slopes >10%) ❑ Drainage patterns and courses on the site and on adjacent lands ❑ Potential natural hazard areas including: • Floodplain areas ❑ • Areas having a high seasonal water table within 24"of the surface for three or more weeks of the year ❑ • Slopes in excess of 25% ❑ • Unstable ground ❑ • Areas with severe soil erosion potential ❑ • Areas having severely weak foundation soils ❑ Locations of resource areas including: • Wildlife habitat areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan ❑ • Wetlands ❑ Other site features: • Rock outcroppings ❑ • Trees with >_ 6" caliper measured 4'from ground level ❑ Location and type of noise sources ❑ Locations of existing structures and their uses ❑ Locations of existing utilities and easements ❑ Locations of existing dedicated right-of-ways ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 2 of 5 Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map The proposed name of the subdivision ❑ Vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial and collector streets ❑ Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner, developer, engineer surveyor and design (as applicable) ❑ Scale, north arrow and date ❑ Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided Names of adjacent subdivisions or names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of unsu ivided land ❑ Contour lines related to a City-established benchmark at 2' intervals for 0-10% grades a 5' intervals for grades greater than 10% ❑ The purpose, location, type and size of all of the following (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): • Public and private right-of-ways and easements ❑ • Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines ❑ • Domestic water mains including fire hydrants ❑ • Major power telephone transmission lines (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ • Watercourses / ❑ • Deed reservations for parks, open spaces, pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ • The location of all trees with a diameter 6 inches or grea r measured at 4 feet above ground level ❑ • The location of all structures and the present uses of t e structures, and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting ❑ Supplemental information including: • Proposed deed restrictions (if any) ❑ • A proposed plan for provision of subdivision,ilrtprovements ❑ Existing natural features including rock outcrop(5ings, wetlands and marsh areas The proposed lot configurations, lot sizes and dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such lots ❑ If any of the foregoing information cannot practicably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application materials ❑ Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan The owner of the subject parcel ❑ The owner's authorized agent ❑ The map scale, north arrow and date ❑ Proposed property lines ❑ Description of parcel location and boundaries ❑ Contour lines (2' intef als for slopes 0-10% or 5' for slopes >10%) ❑ Location, width and names of streets, easements and other public ways within and adjacent to the parcel ❑ Location of all permanent buildings on and within 25' of all property lines ❑ Location and width of all water courses ❑ Location of ayny trees with 6" or greater caliper at 4' above ground level El slopes g eater than 25% ❑ Location of existing and proposed utilities and utility easements ❑ Any applicable deed restrictions ❑ Evidence that land partition will not preclude efficient future land division where applicable ❑ Future street extension plan showing existing and potential street connections ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 3 of 5 Site Development Pla The propose site and surrounding properties ❑ Contour line intervals ❑ The locations, dimensions and proposed names of the following: • Existing and platted streets and other public ways ❑ • Easements on the site and on adjoining properties ❑ • Proposed streets or other public ways and easements on the site ❑ • Alternative routes of dead-end or proposed streets that require future extensions ❑ The locations and dimensions of the following: • Entrances and exits on the site ❑ • Parking and circulation areas ❑ • Loading and service areas ❑ • Pedestrian and bicycle circulation ❑ • Outdoor common areas ❑ • Above ground utilities ❑ • Trash and recyclable material areas ❑ The locations, dimensions and setback distances of the following: • Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25' of the site ❑ • Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site ❑ • Sanitary sewer facilities ❑ • Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements ❑ • Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions ❑ Locations and type(s) of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques ❑ The locations of the following: • All areas to be landscaped ❑ • Mailboxes ❑ • Structures and their orientation ❑ scape P an Location of trees to be removed ❑ Location, size and species of existing plant materials ❑ General location, size and species of proposed plan materials ❑ Landscape narrative that addresses: • Soil conditions and how plant selections were derived for them ❑ • Plans for soil treatment such as stockpiling the top soil ❑ • Erosion control measures that will be used ❑ Location and description of the irrigation system where applicable ❑ Location and size of fences, buffer areas and screening ❑ Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces ❑ Public Improvements/Streets Pla Proposed right-of-way locations and widths ❑ A scaled cross-section of all proposed streets plus any reserve strips ❑ Approximate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 4 of 5 • Gractifig7rosion Control Plan The locations and extent to which grading will take place ❑ Existing and proposed contour lines ❑ Slope ratios ❑ Oilities Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated on the plans ❑ Plan of the proposed water distribution system, showing pipe sizes and the locations of valves and fire hydrants ❑ Prelim ary-Storm Drainage Plate The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ Location, width and direction of flow of all water courses and drainageways ❑ Location and estimated size of proposed storm drainage lines ❑ Where applicable, location and estimated size and dimensions of proposed water quality/detention facility ❑ Tree-Preservation/Mitigation PI Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees ❑ Program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal (Section 18.790.030) ❑ A protection program defining standards and methods to be used during and after construction ❑ cchitectural Drawings Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures and their proposed use ❑ Elevation drawings for each elevation of the structure ❑ Sign Drawings Specify proposed location, size and height ❑ is\;curpin\masters\revised\chklist.doc 26-Nov-98 City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 5 of 5 Of-y666 411.- LEONARD A. RYDELL, RE., P.L.S., W.R.E. Consulting Civil Engineer-Land Surveyor 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132-1625 24 February 1999 (503) 538-5700 FAX 538-9167 larydell W'teleport.com City of Tigard 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner Re: Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office Dear Julia, Thank you meeting with us yesterday regarding Dr. Anna Knecht's proposed Dental Office. As scheduled, a Pre-Application Conference on the project will be held at 9:00 AM on Tuesday. 2 March 1999. Enclosed,please find two copies of a proposed site plan as well as a second copy of this letter. A summary of the required information is as follows: • Applicant is Dr. Anna M. Knecht, 10483 S. W. Bonanza Way, Tigard, Oregon 97224. Phone (503) 775-4000. The Agent is Steve Kerby, 7100 S. W. Hampton. Suite 121, Tigard, Oregon 97223, Phone(503)684-4666, FAX(503)598-7765. The Engineer and Surveyor for the project is Leonard A.Rydell,P.E.,P.L.S.,W.R.E.,601 Pinehurst Drive. Newberg, Oregon 97132-1625, Phone: (503) 538-5700, FAX (503■ 538-9167. E-Mail "larydell @teleport.com". • The project is the conversion of an existing single family residence to a Dental Office • The proposed use is for a Dental Office for Dr. Anna M. Knecht, D.M.D., P.C. • Two copies of a Site Plan based on a field survey are enclosed showing the required information. • Two copies of the Tax Assessor's map are attached. • Current owner of the property is Dr. Anna M. Knecht, D. M. D. • Topographic information based on Washington County Benchmark No. 378 and a field survey is shown on the enclosed Site Plan. • A check for the Pre-Application Conference in the amount of$240.00 is attached. Should you require additional information, please contact this firm. Thank you. Sinc-..ely yours, I Leonard A. Rydell, P.E., P.L.S., W.R.E. LAR/lar cc: Steve Kerby Michael Robinson PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS • RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS LAND SURVEYS • WATER RIGHTS r .I • • • 2S I IAC SW 1/4 NEI/4 SECTION ` I T2S R I W W.M. WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON. SCALE 1•1 IOOt FOR •SSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY DO NOT RELY ON FOR ANY OTHER USE SEE MAP 2S 1 1 A .. ....•m1..,4.,i•a. IM.� IN . soo :sue I .. . 8 rz= V E A N 12),..0..... :; 1 S i _ ads a.1900 % .�.... tom. 1 _:1:"Ly•Wea . zam 1 I 400 300 k - - �. r I� 11 - ill l0 = 9 = f !• : _ � � SIv �_ -L A =N D ; j 1 ems" seat "{»smut t..-a1 , �' 1' �' : = SW OONZAGA STREET t• �' - Z 1 ' , ~ — I• ♦ • _ • .Y. ..•. I ; 900 I 1000 20D I 700 IMO I I I t s 3O Ae s r" I Mt IS •I I• 11 I I; = 1• jl �fli •1 r . M cl 1 23-81 • '. N 4:-,c q�- ! - . • 11! (I I . I •i.,Mi,• ` .a 1 t , I 1100 ------ --- ' 1 • ,t t • t 1300 Ir _ D'I• r fit: .s SEE NAP • • �� ! I I �i. i�4 :1� HI • 17 = 23 t 1AD 4LF tl • t s0 IS -I. i I. 2000 4 - 1901 I •i 144 is. • 1 _ N. ,N1f• �` �C + I S.W. HAMPTON 1„,� STREET WNW/MN 0 1800 Al I A., r+ ! I - '/ I I 41 I I • \ I T HUNZIKER STREETN ',4 I \ Y SW I --��-------------- ------��i r i - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - 1 I } \ —�� s Y IR SEE MAP I I as I ID I I \ 3 } I i f} I 5 \\ _ or 1. +., .. 1 ... ! STREET w..u+t \ SEE MAP SEE MAP •2S 1 DA 23 1 108 TIGARD • • 2S I IAC S 1 \ Pb‘ ( i /f CITY OF TIGARD (C.O.T.) Policy Number 1-700 RE: Minimum requirements for change of use; 1. Specific for R-3 occupancy (single family dwellings) to B, F, S, M, H other than H-1 & H-2 occupancy only. Effective date: January 7, 1997 SUBJECT: Change of Use, OSSC, Section 3405 Building(s) undergoing a change of occupancy shall comply with the requirements of the code for such division or group of occupancy. This is interrupted to mean that the existing structure shall meet all requirements as if the building is new construction. Exception to OSSC, Section 3405 The Building Official is granted broad authority in determining whether or not the new or proposed use is less hazardous, based on life and fire risk, than the existing use. MODIFICATION: The Uniform Code for Building Conservation (ucsc) establishes life-safety requirements for all existing building that undergo alterations or change of use. Its provisions offer alternate methods of achieving safety so that the inventory of existing buildings can be preserved. An existing building undergoing an occupancy change shall comply with the requirements of the Oregon Structural Specialty Code, except as specified herein. The Building Official, in utilizing this code as a guide has selected the provisions of the following sections and chapters as specific minimum requirements. Chapter 1 , Section 106 Change of Occupancy Chapter 4, Minimum standards for existing buildings Chapter 5, Minimum provisions for change of occupancy Appendix Chapter 3, Accessibility For assistance, specific sections of chapter 5 are listed below and Appendix Chapter 3 follows. Each category has a sub-paragraph A& B. A is the most restrictive requirements of the OSSC, and B. is the minimum (alternate) allowed by the UCBC. UCBC, Chapter 5 503.1 Life Safety: Exits and Egress systems A. All elements of the exiting system shall comply with the requirements OSSC, Chapter 10 B. UCBC, Section 503.1 Exception 1 and 2, Occupancies B, F, M, S-1, S-2, H other than H-1 and H-2. 503.3 Separation of Occupancies A. Separation of occupancies hall be in accordance with OSSC, Section 302 and Table 3-B B. Exception Occupancies B, F, M, S-1, S-2, H other than H-1 and H-2. 504.1 Fire Resistance of Exterior walls: A. Exterior walls shall have fire resistance as set for in OSSC, Section 503.2 and Table 5A B. UCBC, Section 504.1, Exception 2, Occupancies B, F-1, S-3, S-4 and S-5 504.2 Protection of openings on exterior walls: A. Openings shall be protected when required by OSSC, Section 503.2.1 and Table 5A. D. UCBC, Section 504.2 Exception 3, Occupancies B, F-1, S-3, S-4 and S-5 505.1. Floor loads : A. Floors shall be capable of supporting loads required by OSSC, Section 1604 and Table 16A for type of occupancy use. B. UCBC, Section 505.1 Exception 1, (use of UCBC 3 Archaic Material is approved) 505.1 Roof Loads: A. Roofs shall be capable of supporting those loads required by OSSC. Section 1605. B. UCBC, Section 505.1 Exception 2. Existing roof may be retained providing any unsafe overload conditions are corrected, etc.. 505.2 Seismic Loads: A. Buildings shall meet seismic requirements of OSSC, Section 1624 B. UCBC, There is no exception. Provide seismic strengthening in accordance with the provisions of UCBC, Appendix Chapter 6. UCBC, Appendix Chapter 3 A304.1.1 Accessibility: A. A change of occupancy shall not be made unless the building is made to comply with all requirements of the code for such division or group of occupancy(OSSC. Section 3405). 1. OSSC. Section 202-A and UCBC, Appendix Chapter 3. Section A304 defines chance of use as an Alteration. therefore. UCBC, Section A304 applies. B. UCBC, Appendix Chapter 3, Section A304.1.1 directs compliance with, OSSC, Chapter 11, Section 1101.5 "Application to Existing Buildings". 1. Alterations to existing buildings shall comply with ORS 447.241 (1)through(8)(OSSC, Section 1113.1). 2. Alterations shall conform to that required for a new building (OSSC, Section 3403.2). A change of use project utilizing this policy shall include a barrier removal improvement plan providing these minimum standards of accessibility regardless if the cost is deemed disproportionate to the overall alteration. 1. Accessible parking space(s), access aisle and signs in accordance with OSSC, Section 1104.1, Ors 447.233(1) through (5) and section 1104.4 and, 2. an accessible route connecting the accessible parking to a accessible building entry. Vertical access shall comply with OSSC, Section 1109.7 [ramps] and UCBC, Section 304.3 and, 3. an accessible building entry complying with UCBC, Section A304.3.5 for width requirements and OSSC, section 1109.1 for hardware requirements. Every application for a change of use must include documents, drawings and specifications showing how each of these categories will be addressed. CONCLUSION: The application of this modification is specific to residential properties undergoing a change of use. Therefore, the Building Official, David Scott, approves this modification effective immediately. N Date: la atv!, 1998 ,171,72 /V' /7/1/ D. Scull.Building Official Tigard Building Dq artmun ITYOFTICARD , PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES Co of De,Oregon (Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six(6) Months) S1 p Co"�` ry / NON-RESIDENTIAL PRE APP.MTG.DATE: Z. l( 2 W/� STAFF AT PRE-APP.: IAA 1/ niA JOM4 APPLICANT: AGENT: STEVe KP,P6y Phone:[ l Phone: I ] g . - 4Gco , PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GEN.LOCATION: —7D as 5v.) 6-0/0 EA ,-,4 TAX MAP[Sl/LOT#(SI: 251 I AC - /co NECESSARY APPLICATION[Sl: E1-CE 1-)E VELoPME `-- E VIEW ! PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: CONV S\oIJ c)F A- 5 F. std CE_ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: MBE ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: E CIT.AREA 'I 5T FACILITATOR: PHONE: [5031 ONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS) Minimum lot size: 1JA sq. ft.Average lot width: Oft. Maximum building height: 146'ft. Setbacks: Front ----ft. Side eft. Rear -eft. Corner -ft. from street. Maximum site coverage: % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: /5- % (Refer to Code Section 18. G z.45C1 ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15 foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL`PQT EXCEED 2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 111 times the minimum size of the applicable zoning district. [Refer to Code Section 18.164.060-Lots) CITY OF TIMARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9 N0N-1Ktdeatial application/Plaguing pepertmeat Section SPECIAL SETBACKS Streets: feet from the centerline of Established areas: feet from Lower intensity zones: feet, along the site's boundary. • Flag lot: 10-foot side yard setback. [Refer to Code Section and 18.961 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 (h/t) of the building's height; and > The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. [Refer to Code Section 18.98.0201 PARKING AND ACCESS Required parking for this type of use: I ' Z00 41. C.* FA, Parking shown on preliminary plan(s): Secondary use required parking: Parking shown on preliminary plan(s): NO MORE THAN 40% of required spaces may be designated and/or dimensioned as compact spaces. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: > Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 8 inches x 18 feet. > Compact parking space dimensions: 8 feet x 15 feet. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3)feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. [Refer to Code Section 18.106.0201 Handicapped Parking: All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Bicycle parking spaces shall be provided on the basis of one space for every fifteen (15) required vehicular parking spaces. Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: TL Minimum pavement width: ?�f All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: /f/eN [Refer to Code Section 18.106 and 18.1081 CITY OF11 AIM Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 NON�osldeotlol appllcatlpo/PIioolop Oogrtmoot Section ( - WALKWAY REQUIREMENT$ ) -- —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 ABTA REQUIREMENTS Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be provided with a ading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. (Refer to Code Section 18.106.070-0901 CLEAR VISION AREA The Cit9,requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE AND EIGHT FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification. (Refer to Code Section 18.1021 BUFFERING AND SCREENING In order 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 Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.100] g �OD.C��1O (0.1) T~J� `P/- The REQUIRED BUFFER WIDTHS which are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. ZO feet along west boundary. IF R�6IDENCF N '- 4Occi - In addition, sight obscuring screening is required along i€, 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 18.108] CITY OF T1GARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9 NIM4b:Identlal impllcausu/PIaaaleo DevartmeetSecuso SIGNS SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or • height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for review before the Hearings Officer. [Refer to Code Section 18.114) SENSITIVE LANDS The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive lands areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.84 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. (Refer to Code Section 18.841 STEEP SLOPES When TEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitte which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.84.040.B. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of 18.84.040.B.2 and 18.84.040.B.3. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY[USA)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, t e average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corrido : NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided'Ist the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: A GRAVEL WALKWAY OR BIKE PAT\ NOT EXCEEDING 8 FEET IN WIDTH. If the walkway or bike path is paved, then the vegetate corridor must be widened by the width to the path. A paved or gravel walkway or bike path m not be constructed closer than 10 feet from the boundary of the sensitive area, unless app by the Agency or City. Walkways and bike paths shall be constructed so as to minimize isturbance to existing vegetation; and CITY OF TIGARD Pro-Application Conference Notes Page 4 419 NON-Iosldontlal apollcatloN/P uaIu0 Ospartmaet Sectlee WATER QUALITY FAL.._ITIES may encroach into the vegeta,__, corridor a maximum of 10 feet with t4e 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 a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3,Design for SWMI 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, streams and riparian corridors identified in the City of Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. Specifically, this chapter allows reasonable economic use of property while establishing clear and o jective standards to: protect significant wetlands and streams; limit development in designate riparian corridors; maintain and enhance water quality; maximize flood storage capacity; preserve n tive plant cover; minimize streambank erosion; maintain and enhance fish and wildlife habitats; a d conserve scenic, recreational and educational values of water resource areas. Safe Harbor: The WR OVERLAY DISTRICT ALSO MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 (Natural Resources) and the "safe harbor" provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660, Division 23). These provisions require that "significant" wetlands and riparian corridors be mapped and protected. The Tualatin River, which is also a "fish-bearing stream," has an average annual flow of more than 1000 cfs. Major Streams: Streams which are mapped as "FISH-BEARING STREAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry and have an average annual flow less than 1000 cubic feet per second (cfs). > Major streams in Tigard include FANNO CREEK, ASH CREEK (EXCEPT THE NORTH FORK AND OTHER TRIBUTARY CREEKS) AND BALL CREEK. Minor Streams: Streams which are NOT "FISH-BEARING STRE MS" according to Oregon Department of Forestry maps . Minor streams in Tigard include Summer reek, Derry Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and certain short tributaries of th Tualatin River. Riparian Setback Area: This AREA IS MEASURED HORIZONTALLY FROM AND PARALLEL TO MAJOR STREAM OR TUALATIN RIVER TOP-OF-BANKS, OR THE EDGE OF AN ASSOCIATED WETLAND, whichever is greater. The riparian setback is the same as the "riparian corridor boundary" in OAR 660-23- 090(1)(d). • The standard TUALATIN RIVER RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 75 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. • The MAJOR STREAMS RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 50 EET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. > ISOLATED WETLANDS AND MINOR STREAMS (inc ding adjacent wetlands) have no riparian setback; however, a 25-foot "water quality buffer" required under Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) standards adopted and administered by the ity of Tigard. [Refer to Code Section 18.85.0101 CITY OF T1GARD Pre-Anpllcatlon Conference Notes Page 5 of 9 MOM-Resldeotlal eppllatlea/Planelug Department Section • 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 ot\iimpervious surfaces otherwise prohibited by this chapter, provided that equal or better protection for identified major stream resources is ensured through streambank restoration and/or enhancement of riparian vegetation in preserved portions of the riparian setback area. • Eligibility for Riparian Setback in Disturbed Areas. TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A RIPARIAN SETBACK REDUCTION, the applicant must demonstrate that the riparian corridor was substantially disturbed at the time this regulation was adopted. This determination must b based on the Vegetation Study required by Section 18.85.050.0 that demonstrates all of the f lowing: :- Native plant specie currently cover less than 80% of the on-site riparian corridor area; • The tree canopy curr ntly covers less than 50% of the on-site riparian corridor and healthy trees have not been rer\oved from the on-site riparian setback area for the last five years; That vegetation was not emoved contrary to the provisions of Section 18.85.050 regulating removal of native plant spies; > 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 REQUIREMEN -- EE 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 Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9 NON-assidentlel epplIcatloe/Plenelog Oepsrtmeet Sectlee 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 City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. [Refer to Code Section 18.150.070[Dl SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicant's are required to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveys Office in order to obtain approvaVreservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not-lap accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. (County Surveyors Office: 648-88841 NARRATIVE .' The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. (Refer to Code Section 18.321 CODE SECTIONS 18.80 18.92 _ 18.102 _ 18.116 18.150 _ 18.84 _ 18.96 _ 18.106 18.120 18.160 _ 18.85 _ 18.98 _ 18.108 _ 18.130 _ 18.162 _ 18.88 _ 18.100 _ 18.114 _ 18.134 18.164 IMPACT STUD 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 CITY OF TIGARD Pro-Application Conference Notes Page 1 et 9 NON-BssldeuUel appllaUen/PlennIng DepartmentSscUon public at large, public facilt.,�s systems, and affected private pror...ity 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) 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) CNEIGNBORHOOD MEETING ' THE APPL CANT 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) 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. (uicYC .G 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] ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: 716t-AM — 21A LE DES/6i\1 €`N0(r\vE- LA©`macpc cDt)‘N t'xiS (`a ■ \N cctpor,4-{ccE. 711 ) r . i• a" t 1 lv� CF�f i t Q<C/./, 4 /7 6' /1 f y - /- 100 41.4 d ffi-74',A Y t 0 / I e,"..1. 501.x/ ] Dv,de re;/›"lc y � hIK cac. & A!!!t/1 6//i7+ /t ; `1. /. / eeIF/ < f Orrf'1 '7 A f, H c-v / 4/1 e'-x ier /br iv I/ I CITY OF TARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page lief 9 NON-lesldentlaI application/Planning Department Sectbe PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other week days. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. One (1), 81/4" 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, to 20 day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard TEA CL,pAx \ S[c,OA basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of good site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure 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: `.4I a Th) 0 CP CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP.MEETING PHONE: (5031639-4171 FAX: (503)684-7297 E-MAIL (staff's first nameaCi.tigartl.Or.ns b:Uees.\patUY\masters\prsapp-e.mst (E.ptneerins Section:mastsrs\preapp-c.a.al 54eb-98 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 IIOMaesids.tlal application/Planning Department SecUo. PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ➢ ENGINEERING SECTION Q CCCityof Tigard,Oregon Shaping A Better Community 2-5‘ Ac PUBLIC FACILITIES l 1co The purpose of the pre-application conference is to: 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 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: (✓)' 3■ G0+• P to 2,0 feet from centerline. rET-1uJL T 514 �O to feet from centerline. `° ''es� is DELI out-tes-r (S. ( � C - ,�c— to feet from centerline. p`�S` Street improvements: ) viZ street improvements will be necessary along ( ) street improvements will be necessary along ) Street improvements on . shall include 1 e feet of pavement from centerline, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of ut ji wires (a fee may be collected if determined appropriate by the Engineering Department), a -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 OF TIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Pagel 015 Engineering Department Section • utility wires (a fee n be collected if determined approp ) 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 $ 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 �,o, . Prior to -Dr c.A L { , 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.) 1O (2.) Pedestrianways/bikeways: • Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) inch line which is located in A . wr-h4.k c � Awe. . The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's res Donsibility to cvc .- F •.r. o, s-c,_.u,,�� -546 �. 1,-l+.iE �v xD C�►.3Tin►uG �5++4C�1 1", -(llrC� s_ts-(6-& Water Supply: The kfa Water District - Phone:(503) '245- Ws,I provides public water service in the area of this site. Thd District should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. CITY OF TIGARD Pro-AppNcatlon Centerlines Metes Page 2 of 5 Ei I�••111Nu•ruu•.tsettle. ' • 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. • Pg,,.')t t ct P CW— APP At- • At.4,o - A (>4 • aS-taP-•iA 1 Oi'( At— 144Z-1) Sc?-F,c -c ( 4 ) t-ty Amt.!,. Other Comments: All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. STORM WATER QUALITY The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of new impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $210. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ( ) Construction of an on-site water quality facility. ( 0-- Payment of the fee in-lieu. CITY Of TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 5 Engineering Department Section TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic • Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee • category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. PERMITS Engineering Department Permits: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a permit from the Engineering Department. There are two types of permits issued by Engineering, as follows: Street Opening Permit (SOP). This permit covers relatively minor work in a public right-of-way or easement, such as sidewalk and driveway installation or repair, and service connections to main utility lines. This work may involve open trench work within the street. The permittee must submit a plan of the proposed work for review and approval. The cost of this type of permit is calculated as 4% of the cost of the work and is payable prior to issuance of the permit. In addition, the permittee will be required to post a bond or similar financial security for the work. ® Compliance Agreement (CAP). This permit covers more extensive work such as main utility line extensions, street improvements, etc. In subdivisions, this type of permit also covers all grading and private utility work. Plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The cost of this permit is also calculated as 4% of the cost of the improvements, based on the design engineer's estimate, and is payable prior to issuance of the approved plan. The permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security, and execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction 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. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 5 Engineering Department Section $ Site Improvement rmit (SIT). This permit is generu.,y 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: � .`_�; 2126 J ENGINEERING DEP RTMENT STAFF Phone: (5031 639-4171 Fax: (5031684-7297 h.\patty\maste rs\preapp.eng (Master section:preapp-rmst) 18-Nov-97 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 5 Engineering Department Section { CITY OF TIGARD (C.O.T.) Policy Number 1-700 RE: Minimum requirements for change of use 1 . Specific for R-3 occupancy (single family dwellings) to B, F, S, M, H other than H-1 & H-2 occupancy only. Effective date: January 7, 1997 SUBJECT: Change of Use, OSSC. Section 3405 Building(s) undergoing a change of occupancy shall comply with the requirements of the code for such division or group of occupancy. This is interrupted to mean that the existing structure shall meet all requirements as if the building is new construction. Exception to OSSC, Section 3405 The Building Official is granted broad authority in determining whether or not the new or proposed use is less hazardous, based on life and fire risk, than the existing use. MODIFICATION: The Uniform Code for Building Conservation (ucBC) establishes life-safety requirements for all existing building that undergo alterations or change of use. Its provisions offer alternate methods of achieving safety so that the inventory of existing buildings can be preserved. An existing building undergoing an occupancy change shall comply with the requirements of the Oregon Structural Specialty Code, except as specified herein. The Building Official, in utilizing this code as a guide has selected the provisions of the following sections and chapters as specific minimum requirements. Chapter 1, Section 106 Change of Occupancy Chapter 4, Minimum standards for existing buildings Chapter 5, Minimum provisions for change of occupancy Appendix Chapter 3, Accessibility For assistance, specific sections of chapter 5 are listed below and Appendix Chapter 3 follows. Each category has a sub-paragraph A & B. A is the most restrictive requirements of the OSSC, and B. is the minimum (alternate) allowed by the UCBC. UCBC, Chapter 5 503.1 Life Safety: Exits and Egress systems A. All elements of the exiting system shall comply with the requirements OSSC, Chapter 10 B. UCBC, Section 503.1 Exception 1 and 2, Occupancies B, F, M, S-1, S-2, H other than H-1 and H-2. 503.3 Separation of Occupancies A. Separation of occupancies hall be in accordance with OSSC, Section 302 and Table 3-B B. Exception Occupancies B, F, M, S-1, S-2, H other than H-1 and H-2. 504.1 Fire Resistance of Exterior walls: A. Exterior walls shall have fire resistance as set for in OSSC, Section 503.2 and Table 5A B. UCBC, Section 504.1, Exception 2, Occupancies B, F-1, S-3, S-4 and S-5 504.2 Protection of openings on exterior walls: A. Openings shall be protected when required by OSSC, Section 503.2.1 and Table 5A. D. UCBC, Section 504.2 Exception 3, Occupancies B, F-1, S-3, S-4 and S-5 505.1. Floor loads : A. Floors shall be capable of supporting loads required by OSSC, Section 1604 and Table 16A for type of occupancy use. B. UCBC, Section 505.1 Arc" Exception 1, (use of UCBC 3 Archaic Material is approved) 505.1 Roof Loads: A. Roofs shall be capable of supporting those loads required by OSSC. Section 1605. B. UCBC, Section 505.1 Exception 2. Existing roof may be retained providing any unsafe overload conditions are corrected, etc.. 505.2 Seismic Loads: A. Buildings shall meet seismic requirements of OSSC, Section 1624 B. UCBC, There is no exception. Provide seismic strengthening in accordance with the provisions of UCBC, Appendix Chapter 6. UCBC, Appendix Chapter 3 A304.1.1 Accessibility: A. A change of occupancy shall not be made unless the building is made to comply with all requirements of the code for such division or group of occupancy (OSSC. Section 3405). 1. OSSC. Section 202-A and UCBC, Appendix Chapter 3. Section A304 defines change of use as an Alteration. therefore. UCBC. Section A304 applies. B. UCBC, Appendix Chapter 3, Section A304.1.1 directs compliance with, OSSC, Chapter 11 Section 1101.5 "Application to Existing Buildings". 1. Alterations to existing buildings shall comply with ORS 447.241 (1)through(8)(OSSC. Section 1113.1). 2. Alterations shall conform to that required for a new building (OSSC. Section 3403.2). A change of use project utilizing this policy shall include a barrier removal improvement plan providing these minimum standards of accessibility regardless if the cost is deemed disproportionate to the overall alteration. 1. Accessible parking space(s), access aisle and signs in accordance with OSSC, Section 1104.1, Ors 447.233(1)through (5) and section 1104.4 and, 2. an accessible route connecting the accessible parking to a accessible building entry. Vertical access shall comply with OSSC, Section 1109.7 [ramps] and UCBC, Section 304.3 and, 3. an accessible building entry complying with UCBC, Section A304.3.5 for width requirements and OSSC, section 1109.1 for hardware requirements. Every application for a change of use must include documents, drawings and specifications showing how each of these categories will be addressed. CONCLUSION: The application of this modification is specific to residential properties undergoing a change of use. TIirefore, the Building Official, David Scott, approves this modification effective immediately. N Date: J7. 1998 ll. ' Sae.Building Official Tigard Building 1)partmcnt CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST ,6,0�J L 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: v\.)21 Date: ( 19 s APPLICATION & RELATED DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE , MARKED ITEMS A) Application form (1 copy) B) Owner's signature/written authorization ra- C) Title transfer instrument/or grant deed D) Applicant's statement C3' Filing Fee No. of Copies I g $ SEA SciA. LE r I�SITE-SPECIFIC MAP(S)iPLAN(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE / MARKED ITEMS 11 A) Site Information showing: No. of Copies 1 �s 1 . Vicinity map �- 2. Site size & dimensions 3. Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10%) 4. Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds o/ 5. Locations of natural hazard areas including: (a) Floodplain areas 0 (b) Slopes in excess of 25% 0 (c) Unstable ground 0 (d) Areas with high seasonal water table 0 (e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential ❑ (f) Areas having severely weak foundation soils c 6. Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive ,flap Inventory including: (a) Wildlife habitats c (b) Wetlands Q 0 7. Other site features: (a) Rock outcroppings 0 (b) Trees with 6" caliper measured 4 feet from ground level 8. Location of existing structures and their uses -Er-- 9. Location and type of on and off-site noise sources la' 10. Location of existing utilities and easements z7� ( 11 . Location of existing dedicated right-of-ways , LANO LSE APPLICATION/LIST P.ACE ICF3 B) Site Development Plan Indicating: No. of Copies 1 . The proposed site and surrounding properties • 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 ye(' (b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site Azr- (c) Alternative routes of dead end or proposed streets that require future extension ❑ 4. The location and dimension of: (a) Entrances and exits on the site (b) Parking and circulation areas (c) Loading and services area C (d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation (e) Outdoor common areas ❑ (f) Above ground utilities tzr 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 (b) Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site 6. Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions 7. Sanitary sewer facilities 8. The location areas to be landscaped 9. The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime 7 prevention techniques k 9 10. The location of mailboxes ❑ 11 . The location of all structures and their orientation ❑ 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements / ❑ 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 "fit' (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 of (c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated ''�"fp' 't LAND USE APPLICATION/LIST PACE 2 Of 5 D) Architectural Dray 4s Indicating: The site development plan proposal shall include: No. of Copies • 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 / 6 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 tam 3. Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces ❑ 4. Location, type, size and species of existing and proposed plant materials r 5. Landscape narrative which also addresses: (a) Soil conditions (b) Erosion control measures that will be used ❑0 F) Sign Drawings: Sign drawings shall be submitted in accordance with Chapter 18.114 ❑ of the Code as part of the Site Development Review or prior to obtaining a Building Permit to construct a sign. G) Traffic Generation Estimate: ❑ H) Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Map Indicating: No. of Copies 1 . The owner of the subject parcel 2. The owner's authorized agent ❑ 3. The map scale (20,50,100 or 200 feet- 1) inch north arrow and date ❑ 4. Description f parcel location and boundaries 5. Location, wi h and names of streets, easements and other public ❑ ways within and adjacent to the parcel 6. Location of all jiqermanent buildings on and within 25 feet of all ❑ property lines \ ,, 7. Location and width of all water courses 0 8. Location of any trees within 6" or greater caliper at 4 feet above ground level ❑ 9. All slopes greater than 25% ❑ 10. Location of existing utilities and utility easements 11 . For major land partition which creates a public street: ❑ (a) The proposed rightf-way location and width ❑ (b) A scaled cross-section of the proposed street plus any reserve strip ❑ 1 2. Any applicable deed restri 'ons 13. Evidence that land partition ill not preclude efficient future land ❑ division where applicable ❑ LAND LSE APPLICATION.1 LIST PACE 3 OF 5 I) Subdivision Prelim y 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 name of the subdivision ❑ 3. Vicini map showing property's relationship to arterial and • collector treets ❑ 4. Names, a resses and telephone numbers of the owner, developer, engineer, s rveyer and designer (as applicable) ❑ 5. Date of app 'cation ❑ 6. Boundary lin s of tract to be subdivided ❑ 7. Names of adja ent subdivision or names of recorded owners of adjoining parce s of un-subdivided land ❑ 8. Contour lines re'}ated to a City-established benchmark at 2-foot intervals for 0-10% grades greater than 10% ❑ 9. The purpose, location, type and size of all the following (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): (a) Public and private right-of-ways and easements ❑ (b) Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines ❑ (c) Domestic water mains including fire hydrants ❑ (d) Major power telephone transmission lines (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ (e) Watercourses ❑ (f) Deed reservations for parks, open spaces, pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ 10. Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated on the plans ❑ 11 . Plan of the proposed water distribution system, showing pipe sizes and the location of valves and fire hydrants ❑ 12. Approximate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision ❑ 13. Scaled cross sections of proposed street right-of-way(s) ❑ 14. The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ 15. Location, width & direction of flow of all ter courses & drainage-ways ❑ 16. The proposed lot configurations, approximat lot dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for p rposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such lots. 1 7. The location of all trees with a diameter 6 inch or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level, and the location of prbposed tree plantings ❑ 18. The existing uses of the property, including the location of all structures and the present uses of the structures, and a statem nt of which structures are to remain after platting ❑ 19. Supplemental information including: (a) Proposed deed restrictions (if any) ❑ (b) Proof of property ownership ❑ (c) A proposed plan for provision of subdivision improv rnents ❑ 20. Existing natural features including rock outcroppings, wetlands & marsh areas ❑ 21 . If any of the foregoing information cannot practicably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application ❑ ,. r LAND USE APPLICATION J LIST RAGE 4 Of 3 N )) Solar Access Calculations: ❑ K) Other Information No. of Copies ❑ h:lorn\patrylmasters\kiclist.mst may 23,1995 L NO USE APPLICATION/LIST PACE 5 OF 5 # * . Is s. " °F� a � , , , ii € { _ # * -1111i1 I I • = . 1 ail ., Y y/� j ' ',ir ;.'_ a ,} ( / R.• " ' ' r . as F„ arrrrr v kF• ' �:fie_: �) d .: wv� j ' v P jr. IN ' ii,,ow ' ' .' '4.4*,,,-:, - '' , ''°I; ' ..', ' '' # , '". "",'..e.:-1,0 ,' ii . .„ ,,,i i ' p � I k t °fie �. . ,� �` • � per; #‘• � w . it . -:, rit. - .,t:N--..----. ---;:-..: - --- . „ .4 :i E . 41144 jp, 1 A "1tiyy a oa-r y J r N a tdELIEdr-dr"Ar-drillt 2.354C. u+I o' J r rlo !J r o i T! 1\� J loi W M V� 6 N ' <INITIAL POINT > m 20 157' 1 N . Q1 s .564.03, �y _ 20 •/.///j%lailf ----zdoi7I/�� %�//QA-/./ .4.,:�,;-/!/ZO, hs�� igx ° � 30 VACATED 400 30 0 I (f 30 Ad 87.50900 • o 12 I� 11 0 10 0° 9 -Ca° i o - — — �n 0 inIa e r p : �i / / f I N 89005.E ! N 89°OS E 154.24 j 180.00 110.0 109.46 I: 03 -/ • # "' . i TO PUBLIC 5I7-451 •;. • ° SW GONZAGA 2z58 STREET . on 113.04 S .00 I I ,-.:;;,..;.•1-:;•:;.:=1,:..,--1, "-•' • 9041tl.00 1 1000 .x. 200; 700 I I i ° 35.4c•. $ 3• 13 .0 14 0 1 �WIO 15 Go1 16 '.\ o :' a -• N - I- Z°, 2 1 8 , ,ie v. °m 701 I 4"I `_' 1 2 ;� sea°05.114 Lii 41 118.000 0 116.00 \mil 116.00•115.35 > 'S IOS.91 N 81i0.`E 9700 \,d,% ?,;;:: %'!�::+� N sue°O$! e N 89°050 o ( 1 1 00 ... i i. 1400 i �_ I a''0. I 130 0 1 \u: W •• o\ /c \: 1 ryi °m i 9'y X1'0 0° r N SEE MAP• i `_ 21 �� 20 1 9 XI8 18 g 17 g 2S 1 ( AD o 1 -1 l" S 1 2000 , o I .07 Ac. a 2';'i/.//,.:,/%/S4A•a '� .,•:0 /�.�'/./C�4/4 7. / f%%9riiiir/�/' i%%:,b%V2/r✓�iN.`;/%:�//rf3Y.' r/ !'4 r".::::o;%%"%zA,..',:1! i 40� 660 S 89°05 W S. W. ` I I HAMPTON 674.6 STREET � swHAwit• EI I T tr../In I ;= Sri 7s / I AL "VI • M NV FINANCIAL GROUP To: City of Tigard Planning Department Re: Dr. Anna M. Knecht Dental Office 2-18-98 A - The applicant is Dr. Anna M. Knecht of 10483 S.W. Bonanza Way,Tigard, Oregon 97224, her phone number is 624-1881 at home and 235-3955 at work. Her contact agent is Steve Kerby of 7100 S.W. Hampton, Suite 121,Tigard, Oregon 97223; phone number 684-4666. B - Site plan is attached, see exhibit "A". The property is located at 7025 S.W. Gonzaga,Tigard, Oregon 97223. C - The proposed use is that of a dental office. D - Map is attached, see exhibit "B". E - Current owner is Dr. Anna M. Knecht,just purchased. F - The property is basically flat with very little contour. If any slope at all, it would be extremely slight from east to west. G - Other questions, concerns. 1. We would like to use the existing septic system in use currently. 2. We would like to provide for "rear-lot" or north property line parking facilities. 3. Dr. Knecht has a staff of 3 full-time employees and sees an average of 10-12 patients per day, plus 8 patients for the hygienist. 684-4666 office • mbl 780-4666 • 7100 S.W. Hampton • Suite 121 • Portland, Oregon 97223 IIPP71 OREGON FINANCIAL GROUP 4. Dr. Knecht uses a "bottled water" system for all dental work; plumbing should be at a minimum. Thank you, 7z)-ii) Anna M. Knecht, DMD 684-4666 office • mbl 780-4666 • 7100 SW. Hampton • Suite 121 • Portland, Oregon 97223 L. I - -) .4. , L_ 1 . .__. _. _— . I '......,_:. -- r„. I I N I . -59 ---q• -_-__-;"----,--_-_______ •L ....7- --.-- i.,i _ ___-r.. i • -----.5-!---4----.- 3° -----.1 - .4 1. ... -• -4 . •lo 4.3 - 42 ._ __ _ - - .52 _.. 1 ..,: 1 f 41A. ... ( .__ _ _ EL/A4R4T 24 23 T., ... ii _. ....___ _... . __ .._ _ .. . __ _ ,. ._ „ E,,m4A,i,A,/ i , __ J 1 .- 1 1 49 - -_! IN ST. • 1 II I . I 7117- .-- -4/ •1 :E4L,IiNr) . 7.. i• il - 1; I 48 -, --•--• -4 Flit AN I ._. _.._.__ ), . I- I - 5 BEV5yLANI4 ST. - --- ...... 1 i .L 3 __._ I926 u.i i 3 31GONZAG Sll 16 > \ 1 J [. 1- . . 2 . . _ 26 cr, • • \ -4- 4.2_..... . 5 L HI PTON NN. \NNNN • 6 7 8 l _Ii 9 91.1 Lir=4 _sT. I \\ 'i 34 • '' !Ir., > A9 28 < - ..... i- cL 0 IE'W .VE. --- l,------- cPcd'M , F - ---1 1 . -I I V'RN ST. J i l l. - 1 --- I 1"--. _ 1.\\ r '.-6-/---:,,_.' 18.1 - - 19 , N EXHIBIT A _ ' �d_. � — — 1 _+ 11 ! l I i • • 7I I I ! I 1 i • ! - j I --H1H' 1 I ' 1 I �( j . --� 1 I __A ' 5_ &Q ; S aR! i ( ! j II , I I III , 1 I f I • I T I I I I ), I 1 , , i t , I I . I t I I I t 1 1111 ; I ' 1111111111 I � � -_I I i l i i 1 I ! I 1 ! �— j 1 l !i.4� I ( I 11 I i _ 1 j ____�_ I ! I I I � ' t 10 , I i 1 ! 1 ` iA I I I I I I I ! t I ' I 1j ` I I ! , I I i II I C, ! I I I FXtSIru i t , 1 ! I i I ; I : --- - - , I- t T•I 1 . 't- _____E— _.,-7- --. I: ---1-7,---- '. I ti -717 7. i - �' t to I 7i I I • 1 ^',..-- EXHIBIT B Rs / 01 A c_-001-co AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE r WITHIN SEVEN(7) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE SIGN POSTING,RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT TO: ' City of Tigard PIanning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223 Steven Kerby , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed Dental office affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) 7025 S.W. Gonzaga St. Tigard, OR. 97223 , and did on the 13th_ day of May 19 98 personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a Dental Office application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at 7025 S.W. Gonzaga St. on front of house. (state location you posted notice on property) Signature (In the pr ence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETEJNOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the -' _.t day of , 19 7(P pui BE narAE SEAL 4,� NOTARYPU3L.CNSON OREGON NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON MY COMMISS ONMEXPIRES APR 31faB2 22 200Z My Commission Expires: /Z z-U Z_ (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) ENAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: Dr. Anna M. Knecht, DMD, P.C. TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Dental Office — interior remodal of house. Name of Apphcant/Owner: Anna M. Knecht Address or General Location of Subject Property: 7025 S.W. Gonzaga St. Tigard, Or. 97223 Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): h:\doginlpattymasters'affpost mst ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS /\1111V LEONARD A. RYDELL, P.E., P.LS., W.R.E. Consulting Civil Engineer-Land Surveyor 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132-1625 (503) 538-5700 FAX 538-9167 22 July 1998 City of Tigard 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner Re: Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office - SDR 98-0009 Dear Julia, This letter is a follow up to my phone call this afternoon. As per my telephone voice mail, the "Impact Statement" prepared by this firm concludes that the conversion of a single family residence and construction of a parking lot in itself will not have a significant impact on street, water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage or park systems. Based on a lack of major impact, perhaps many of the City's dedication and improvement requirements can be postponed into the future, or deferred to such time when the development changes to a more intensive character that does have significant impacts on traffic, utilities and parks. Please keep me informed as to the status of the application. Thank you. Since ly yours, Ill •i ik. .. Leonard A. Rydell, P.E., P.L.S., W.R.E. LAR/lar cc: Steve Kerby PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS • RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS LAND SURVEYS • WATER RIGHTS 4...4.0.. e._.‘ a. August 11, 1998 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Leonard Rydell, P.E. 601 Pinehurst Drive Newberg, OR 97132-1625 Dear Mr Rydell: This letter is in response to your request concerning City standards that call for completing street improvements for a project in the Tigard Triangle. Section 18.67.070 says..."development will be required to dedicate and improve public streets...". A highlighted section is provided for your reference. This language was adopted by the City Council and Planning Commission to unequivocally require improvements at the time of development. This standard was provided to you during your preapplication conference, subsequent conversations with staff and reiterated in a letter dated May 28, 1998 from Brian Rager. Sincerely, da-i v/- 6ce� GU''Richard Bewersdorff +"*. Planning Manager i:\curpin\dick\rydell.let Enclosure c: SDR 98-0009 Land use file Steve Kirby, 7100 SW Hampton, Suite 121, Tigard, Oregon 97223 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 Page 2 Section 3. Design Standards for Street Connectivity Cities and counties have the option to implement either the "Design Option Requirements"or the "Performance Option Requirements"for purposes of complying with this section. Design Option Requirements: ❑ Prepare a map of possible local street connections for all contiguous areas of vacant and primarily undeveloped land of five acres or more(lines 157-159). The map is required to include: ❑ street intersections spaced at intervals of no more than 530 feet*,with some exceptions (lines 161-165);and ❑ accessways for pedestrians,bicycles or emergency vehicles on public easements or right- of-way where full street connections are not possible,with spacing between full street or accessway connections of no more than 330 feet,with some exceptions. (lines 166-170) ❑ Amend the plan to adopt"Map of Possible Local Street Connections" and require that new streets provide connections similar to the map and meet the street intersection spacing requirement (lines 152-154) ❑ Amend the plan to require local street plans for new residential and mixed-use developments that demonstrate meeting the requirements listed in lines 172-193. (line 171) ❑ Amend the plan to identify new street connections to be made as redevelopment occurs. (line 196) Performance Option Requirements: ❑ Amend the plan and/or local street standards to establish street intersection spacing intervals of no more than 530 feet*for residential and mixed-use areas,with some exceptions. (line 201) ❑ Amend the plan to require demonstration of the following for new residential and mixed- use developments:that local vehicle trips on a regional facility do not exceed the 1995 arithmetic median of regional trips for facilities of the same motor vehicle functional classification by more than 25 percent (lines 208-211) ❑ Amend the plan to require demonstration of the following for new residential and mixed- use developments: (1)the shortest motor vehicle trip over public streets from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than twice the straight-line distance; and(2)the shortest pedestrian trip on public right-of-way is no more than one and one-half the straight-line distance. (lines 212-216) Additional staff interpretations/comments provided at June 19, 1998 workshop: 3.1. Street intersections in new residential and mixed-use developments should be spaced from 330 feet to 530 feet apart and connect to the arterial system. The intersection spacing requirements apply to all intersections for all streets in new residential or mixed-use developments,whether the street is classified as an arterial, collector or local street, and should be measured on both sides of the street.Intersection spacing on major and principal arterials designated on the Regional Motor Vehicle System Map may be greater than 530 feet if local or state access management standards have been adopted for that facility. 3.2. A "right Wright out" intersection design (instead of a full street intersection) is appropriate in some situations, such as when the intersection is near a major arterial intersection or when there .are conflicting turning movements. AI■11- DATE: PLANS CHECK NO. G ' PROJECT TITLE: COUNTYWIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE WORKSHEET APPLICANT: (FOR NON-SINGLE FAMILY USES) MAILING ADDRESS: CITY/ZIP/PHONE: TAX MAP NO.: SITES NOADDRESS: LAND USE CATEGORY RATE PER TRIP RESIDENTIAL $ 189.00 �USINESS AND COMMERCIAL $ 48.00 OFFICE $ 174.00 _l� 4,7( INDUSTRIAL $ 182.00 11-)/INSTITUTIONAL $ 79.00 PAYMENT METHOD: 1)-1) /CASH/CHECK rl CREDIT BANCROFT(PROMISSORY NOTE) INSTITUTIONAL ONLY DEFER TO OCCUPANCY LAND USE CATEGORY DESC 2IPTl1ONO F USE WEEKDAY A WEEKEND AVG.TRIP RATE (( L! TRIP RA BASIS: CALCULATIONS: / 7e 9 JJJ 0?a X 3.7 71,1 Om /BPS 6 C-12, P'- / 709 X lb 6 ., t, �°�,P &4t x,73 n / / !7 ' PROJECT T. IP GENERATION: �/�,to x G ! `r 335 /O FEE: vwcvU -77 PS FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES ONLY ADDITIONAL NOTES: LA-) .� ,t?-'<. 10—04 e.Aia / ROAD AMT.: TRANSIT AMT.. PREPARED BY I:TIFWKST.DOC (DST) EFF: 07-01-98 CITY OF TIGARD August 28, 1998 OREGON Leonard A. Rydell, P.E. 601 Pinehurst Drive Newberg, OR 97132-1625 Dear Mr. Rydell: You received the development code section that requires, at the time of development, projects to make street improvements. The issue of when improvements will be constructed, is when the project is built. Even if impact study statements may indicate street improvements and dedications exceed the demand of a change, the standard in Section 18.67 is for new development to improve streets to the standard for a local street. The property in question has never provided basic minimum street, sidewalk and curb improvements that provide for safety, pedestrian and vehicular traffic flow or drainage. This is why we have said to you that projects that do not meet the standards will likely be denied. Given the code, Dolan issues, and advice from our attorneys, there is no choice if projects do not meet the standard. Sincerely, 6,4 Richard Bewersdorff Planning Manager i:\curpin\clicklryde12.1et c: 1998 Planning Correspondence File SDR 98-0009 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 ANIV LEONARD A. RYDELL, P.E., P.LS., W.R.E. Consulting Civil Engineer-Land Surveyor 24 August 1998 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132-1625 (503) 538-5700 FAX 538-9167 City of Tigard 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Mr. Richard Bewersdorff Re: Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office - SDR 98-0009 Dear Mr. Bewersdorff, Thank you for sending the adopted copy of the Tigard Municipal Code, Section 18.67 covering the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. It appears that the Tigard Triangle ordinance does not clear up the issue as to when the improvements will be constructed. As we discussed at the meeting, the applicant proposes to sign a non-remonstrance agreement agreeing to pay his share of the improvements at such time as the street is improved in front of other properties. The percentage of other properties is open to negotiation and may he via a local improvement district or sharing the cost with adjoining developments. It appears that your selective interpretation of the ordinance requires the S. W. Gonzaga street. curb, and sidewalk improvements now. I had hoped to receive other sections of the development code that clarified exactly when the improvements are to be constructed, particularly since the impact statement submitted conclude that the level of improvements and dedication requirements far exceed the demands of the change of use. Please research the issue further to clarify as to when the improvements have to he constructed. Again, thank you for your fast response in providing the requested documentation. Thank you. Sine. ly yours, t1 /j Leonard A. Rydell, P.E., P.L.S., W.R.E. LAR/lar cc: Steve Kerby PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS • RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS LAND SURVEYS • WATER RIGHTS RECEIVED PLANNING DEC 2 3 1998 AVIV CITY OF TIGARD LEONARD A. RYDELL, P.E., P.LS., W.R.E. Consulting Civil Engineer-Land Surveyor 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132-1625 (503) 538-5700 FAX 538-9167 21 December 1998 City of Tigard 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Mr. Richard Bewersdorff Re: Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office - SDR 98-0000 Dear Mr. Bewersdorff, Despite my written request, I have not received a copy of the Notice of Decision in the Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office, S.D. R. 98-0009. I am entitled to notice under O. R. s. 227.175(10)(a). I will appeal the decision upon receipt of that notice. Please forward me a copy of the decision as required by law. Thank you. Sincerely yours, V7 i i Al Leonard A. •ydell, P.E., P.L.S., W.R.E. LAR/lar cc: Steve Kerby PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS • RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS LAND SURVEYS • WATER RIGHTS CITY OF TIGARD December 30, 1998 OREGON Leonard Rydell 601 Pinehurst Drive Newberg, OR 97132 RE: SDR 98-0009/Knecht Dental Office Director's Decision Dear Mr. Rydell: Enclosed is a copy of the Director's Decision for Site Development Review (SDR) 98-0009/Knecht Dental Office per your request. You indicated that you will appeal this decision upon receipt. Please be aware that the appeal period has expired and an appeal will not be accepted by the City of Tigard. The Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) that you referenced is for a Hearings Officer Decision without a public hearing. The decision for SDR 98-0009 was a Director's Decision. In any event, the only notice required under ORS 197.763 (as referenced in the section you cited) is the applicant, property owner and property owners within 100 feet of the subject site. The application submitted by the applicant for this project lists Steve Kerby as the applicant and Dr. Anna Knecht as the property owner. They were both mailed notice of the decision as required by state law and the City of Tigard Community Development Code. Sincerely, 2-4- 4J Julia Powell Hajduk ----- Associate Planner I'\curpin\julia\rydel.let Enclosure c: Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager Steve Kerby, 7100 SW Hampton Street, Suite 121, Tigard, OR 97223 SDR 98-0009 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 CITY OF TIGARD-" { 'L Shaping Better Community COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD,OREGON 97223 FAX COVER SHEET DATE: December 17, 1998 TIME: TO: Gary Firestone PHONE: 222-4402 City Attorney's Office FAX 243-2944 FROM: Patty Lunsford PHONE: (503) 639-4171 City of Tigard FAX: (503) 684-7297 Planning Department RE: SDR 98-0009/KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE C: Number of pages including cover sheet ZO Gary, Dick asked that I fax you a copy of this decision. If the site plan is not legible, please call me and I will place a copy in the mail. Thank you. I:\CURPLN\MASTERS\FAX.MST NOTICE OF DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDR) 98-0009 CITY OF TIGARD Community Decxropment KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE Shaping if Better Community 120 DAYS = 11/13/98 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE CASE NO.: Site Development Review SDR 98-0009 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Site Development Review approval to convert an existing dwelling unit into a dental office. APPLICANT: Steve Kerby OWNER: Anna Knecht 7100 SW Hampton, Suite 121 10483 SW Bonanza Way Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. ZONING DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Employment; MUE. LOCATION: 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. The site is located on the northwest corner of SW Gonzaga Street and SW 70th Avenue. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.67, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150 and 18.164. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has DENIED the above request because the project does not meet development code standards for streets, landscaping, walkways, street trees, lighting, access and sewer. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 1 OF 17 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The property is developed and has been used as a single-family residence. A search of City records indicates that there are no previous land use approvals granted for the site. Vicinity Information: The subject site is located on the northwest corner of SW Gonzaga Street and SW 70th Avenue. The property to the west and south, along SW Gonzaga Street, is currently developed as single-family residences. The zoning of all surrounding properties is Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The zoning permits commercial businesses and the two properties directly to the west of the subject parcel are currently operating, illegally, as commercial businesses. Planning Staff and the Code Enforcement Division are aware of this and action is under way to bring these sites into compliance. The owner of the parcels has attended a pre-application conference and is moving forward in applying for Site Development Review. The property to the east, across the SW 70th Avenue right-of-way has received approval for the construction of a dental office. The properties to the north have access onto Beveland and several of those homes are operating commercial businesses. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is identified as 7025 SW Gonzaga Street; WCTM 2S101AC, Tax Lot 00100. The site is within the Tigard Triangle, therefore, the Tigard Triangle Design Standards apply. The site is currently developed with a single-family residence. The proposal is to convert the existing structure to an office, pave the parking areas and install landscaping. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Section 18.120.180 states, "The Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application:" Impact Study: Section 18.32.050 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.32.250 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 2 OF 17 The applicant is required to dedicate a portion of the property to allow for the full required street width of SW 70th Avenue. In accordance with Section 18.164.030.A and J and consistent with the Tigard Triangle standards, the applicant is required to pay for and • construct their portion of the local street fronting the property. In order for the local street system to function to serve all properties at buildout, streets meeting minimum standards must be provided. The required improvements provide for the share of local street improvements needed to serve this development in conjunction with the standard improvements that are required of all other properties. In other words, the applicant is only paying for their portion or segment of the local street system. With the improvements, the applicant will be providing services that will be adequate to serve the needs of the proposed use. The applicant has provided an impact statement that states the required dedication and improvements are not roughly proportional to the conversion. Staff believes that this is not a true quantification of the impact. All new commercial developments are required to have approved access on a local street. Customers of a commercial establishment on a local street utilize the local street network. Because a commercial development on a local street is only contributing to improvements to their frontage, the local street improvement is proportional to the impact which that use has on the rest of the local street system. While the proportionality of local street improvements has been discussed, additional evidence of proportionality for the dedication requirement is demonstrated in the following TIF analysis. 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 Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32% of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. Presently, the TIF for each trip that is generated is $174. The total TIF calculated for a residential conversion to a dental office is $5,333.10 (40.65 trips - 10 trips credited for residence x $174). The applicant is being required to dedicate an additional 24 feet (3362 square feet) of right-of-way along SW 70th Avenue. Based on the City's CIP budget for purchases of property for street ROW, property is assessed at $3 per square foot. Assuming a cost of $3 per square foot, it is estimated that the total cost of the dedication of SW 70th Avenue is $10,086 (3362 sq. ft. x $3). Upon completion of this development, the applicant will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $5,333. 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 this projects traffic impact is $16,665 ($5,333 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid and the full impact, is considered an unmitigated impact. Since the TIF paid is $5,333, the unmitigated impact can be valued at $11,332. Given these estimates ($10,086 dedication), the dedication requirement meets the roughly proportional standard. The cost of the street improvements is not reviewed for proportionality, as the requirement to have access to a commercial site from an approved street is necessary to meet the minimum City standards for pedestrian-vehicular safety and drainage. As stated previously in this Impact Analysis, because all development requires use of the public street network, and local streets are not covered by the TIFs, the requirement to improve local streets is proportional to the use the development has on the rest of the local street network. The street improvement and dedication requirements is discussed in this decision under Street and Utility Improvements Standards. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 3 OF 17 PROVISIONS AND REGULATIONS OF UNDERLYING ZONE The MUE zone states that dimensional requirements for all commercial use types shall be the same as the C-G district (Section 18.62.050). Section 18.62.050 states that there is no minimum lot area and the average minimum lot width is 50 feet. Developments are required to provide a minimum of 15% landscaping. The proposal provides for more than 15% landscaping, thus meeting the underlying zones landscaping regulations. Please note: Additional landscaping standards apply which may increase the amount of landscaping currently proposed. The MUE zone states that the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for all commercial and industrial use types shall not exceed 0.40. The existing structure does not exceed 40% of the site, therefore, the FAR has been met. Setbacks: Section 18.62.050 states that no front, side, or rear yard setback is required except a 20 foot side and rear yard setback is required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. The maximum building height is 45 feet This section is not applicable as the structure is existing and setbacks will not be altered as a result of this proposal. Setbacks related to landscaping requirements are discussed further elsewhere within this decision. FINDING: Because the proposed use is permitted in the underlying zone and meets the setback and dimensional requirements for that zone, the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone have been met. Tigard Triangle Design Standards: Section 18.67. Design standards for public street improvements and for new development and renovation projects have been prepared for the Tigard Triangle. These design standards address several important guiding principals adopted for the Tigard Triangle, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. All new developments, including remodeling and renovation projects resulting in non single-family residential uses, are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described below and other development standards required by the Development and Building Codes, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle. If a standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code, standards in this section shall govern. BECAUSE THE PROPOSAL INVOLVES AN EXISTING STRUCTURE, THE FOLLOWING DESIGN STANDARDS DO NOT APPLY: A. Site Design Standards including: building placement, building setback, front yard setback design and; NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 4 OF 17 B. Building Design Standards including: ground floor windows, building facades, weather protection, building materials, roofs and roof-lines, and roof-mounted equipment. THE FOLLOWING DESIGN STANDARDS ARE APPLICABLE TO THIS DEVELOPMENT: Site Design Standards A 6 foot wide scored concrete or modular paving walk way is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway. The applicant has not indicated a 6-foot-wide walkway meeting the above standards will be installed. FINDING: Because a walkway is not existing or proposed, the standard requiring a 6-foot-wide walkway from the building entrance to the public street has not been satisfied. Street Connectivity: All development must demonstrate how one of the following standard options will be met. Variance of these standards may be approved per the requirements of Chapter 18.134 where topography, barriers such as railroads or freeways, or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street extensions and connections. Design Option: A. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. B. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way shall be provided at intervals of no more that 330 feet. Performance Option: A. Local street spacing shall occur at intervals of no less than eight street intersections per mile. B. The shortest vehicle trip over public streets from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than twice the straight-line distance. C. The shortest pedestrian trip on public right-of-way from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than one and one-half the straight-line distance. The applicant's impact statement states that the design option has been met because they say SW 70th Avenue connects with SW Gonzaga Street across the street. The intent of the 660 foot design option is to provide for connecting routes along local streets which will reduce trips from being forced onto the regional network. In order for the local connection to provide an alternate route to the regional system, it must be able to extend in such a way as to connect local streets both north and south, east and west. Therefore, in order for the 660 design option to be satisfied, SW 70th Avenue must be extended north to connect already dedicated portions of SW 70th Avenue. There is a portion of SW 70th Avenue already dedicated adjacent to this site, however it is not of an adequate width that would allow for street improvements consistent with the development code. There is 950 feet between SW 72nd and SW 69th if SW 70th Avenue were not extended. Therefore, not meeting the 660-foot design option standard. NOTICE OF DECISION SOR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 5 OF 17 FINDING: Because the local street spacing between SW 72nd and SW 69th is greater than 660 feet, the design option has not been met. Because the applicant has not shown how they meet or will meet the design option or the performance option, this standard has not been satisfied. Site Design Standards; Parking Location and Landscape Design: Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50 percent of the street frontage, and must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The minimum depth of the L-1 landscaped area is five feet or is equal to the building setback, whichever is greater. Interior side and rear yards shall be landscaped to a L-2 Landscape Standard, except where a side yard abuts a public street, where it shall be landscaped to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The proposed parking spaces are located in the rear of the existing building, thus meeting the standards. The L-2 standards require compliance with Section 18.100 which will be discussed in more detail further in this decision. The landscape standards are discussed elsewhere within this decision. FINDING: Because the parking lot location standard is met and because the landscaping requirements will be addressed elsewhere within this decision, this standard has been satisfied. Signs: In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.114 of the Development Code the following standards shall be met: Zoning District Regulations: non-residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone (18.114.130 D). Sign Area Limits: The maximum sign area limits found in 18.114.130 shall not be exceeded. No area limit increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Height Limits: The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs shall be 10 feet. Wall signs shall not extend above the roof line of the wall on which the sign is located. No height increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. Sign Location: Freestanding signs within the Tigard Triangle shall not be permitted within required L-1 landscape areas. The applicant has not indicated signs are proposed. If a sign is requested, it must be approved through the sign permit process as administered by the City of Tigard Development Services Technicians. Compliance with sign standards will be reviewed at that time. A sign permit must be obtained for ANY signs located on the property. FINDING: Because compliance with sign codes will be required if and when a sign permit is applied for, these standards have been satisfied. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 6 OF 17 Landscaping And Screening: Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are define in other sub-sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. L-1 (Low Screen): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.100 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial, trees shall be planted at 3 1/2-inch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a 3 foot high screen and a 90% opacity within one year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2- inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. L-2 (General Landscaping): For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.100 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. Trees shall be provided at a minimum 2 1/2-inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2-inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. Because the site is on a local street, the L-1 and L-2 landscape standards defer to the planting standards of Section 18.100. These standards are discussed further in this decision. FINDING: Because the landscape standards of 18.100 are required in-lieu-of the L-1 or L-2 landscape standards, and because the landscape standards of Section 18.100 are discussed further in this decision, the landscaping and screening standards of the Tigard Triangle have been satisfied. PROVISIONS OF DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTERS Section 18.120.180(A)(1) requires that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of the Community Development Code. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.62, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164, 18.67 (MUE Standards and Tigard Triangle Design Standards). The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. The proposal contains no elements related to the following Code Chapters which are also listed under Section 18.120.180.A.1: 18.80 (Planned Developments), 18.84 (Sensitive Lands), 18.92 (Density Computations), 18.94 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations), or 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) These Chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards, and are not discussed in this decision. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 7 OF 17 Landscaping and Screening (18.100 and 18.120): Buffering, Screening and Compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.120.180.4(A) states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses. The site is surrounded by MUE to the north, south, east and west. There are existing residences to the north and south. To the west is a residence being used as a business without City approval, but is working on achieving compliance. To the east, across SW 70th Avenue is a site being developed as a commercial dental office. This area is zoned MUE which will continue to allow residences. The buffering and screening requirement is to screen from different types of uses. Because the north and south properties are currently residential use types, the change of the site in question from residential to commercial requires buffering and screening between the adjacent uses. The following landscaping is required for buffers as per Section 18.100.080: at least one (1) row of trees, no less than ten (10) feet high for deciduous trees or five (5) feet for evergreen trees at time of planting; at least ten (10), five (5)-gallon shrubs or 20, one (1)-gallon shrubs per 1000 square feet of required buffer area; and the remaining area must be planted in lawn, groundcover, or bark mulch. In addition, one (1) of the following screening methods is required: A hedge of narrow or broad leaf evergreen shrubs which forms a four (4)-foot high continuous shrub within two (2) years; an earthen berm planted with evergreen materials which forms a continuous screen six (6) feet in height within two (2) years; or a five (5)-foot or taller fence or wall to provide a continuous sight obscuring screen. The applicant has indicated an existing 6 foot high fence will remain and a 5-foot-wide buffer will be provided in the rear. The front yard buffer will be 30 feet. The Tigard Development Code allows reduced buffer widths provided equivalent landscaping and screening are provided to provide the same level of privacy. The applicant has not provided a landscape plan that shows the required buffer landscaping will be met or that shows additional landscaping to allow the required 20-foot-wide buffer to be reduced. FINDING: Because the applicant has not proposed landscaping and buffer widths as described above and required in Section 18.100, the buffering, screening and compatibility between adjoining uses standard has not been met. Section 18.100.110(A) requires the screening of parking and loading areas. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three-feet-wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The applicant has proposed to retain the existing 6-foot high good neighbor fence which will screen the parking lot. The existing trees meet the requirement for 1 tree for every 7 parking spaces. FINDING: Because the existing fence will effectively screen the parking lot and the existing trees provide 1 tree for every 7 parking spaces, this standard has been met. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 8 OF 17 Street Trees: • Section 18.100.033 states that all development projects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.100.035. Section 18.100.035 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). Tigard Triangle Design Standards (which supersedes all other code provisions) call for spreading street trees that spread to 25 feet along local streets. The applicant has shown 1 existing 15-inch plum tree on the property frontage. The entire frontage is 112 feet, which would require between 2 and 5 trees to be planted depending on the species. FINDING: Because the applicant has not indicated existing or proposed street trees planted 20 to 40 feet apart (distance based on the size classification at maturity), and because they are required by the Tigard Triangle Design Standards and applicable code sections, the street tree standards have not been met. Visual Clearance Areas (18.102): Section 18.102 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight (8) feet in height (trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30-foot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway, and then connecting these two (2), 30-foot distance points with a straight line. There are no structures, other than an existing utility pole proposed within the vision clearance triangle on the applicants property. FINDING: Because there is not vegetation or structures located within the vision clearance triangle, this standard has been satisfied. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.106) - Minimum off-street parking: This section requires one (1) parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. The existing structures total 1,851 square feet, therefore, a total of 9 parking spaces are required. The applicant has indicated that 9 parking spaces will be provided, therefore, the off-street parking and loading standard has been met. Bicycle Parking: Section 18.106.020(P) requires one (1) bicycle parking rack space for every 15 required vehicular parking spaces in any development. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas, or pedestrian ways. Because the site has between 1 and 15 parking spaces, one (1) bicycle parking space is required. The applicant has shown that a bicycle space will be installed in the rear of the building near the parking lot. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 9 OF 17 FINDING: Because the applicant has shown that the required number of parking spaces • will be provided and the bicycle parking will be installed, this standard has been met. Access, Egress and Circulation (18.108): Section 18.108.080 requires that commercial and industrial uses which require 0-99 parking spaces provide at least 1 access with a minimum width of 30 feet and a minimum pavement width of 24 feet. There are less that 99 parking spaces proposed, therefore, one (1) 30-foot-wide access is required, with 24 feet of pavement. The applicant's plan does not show a 30 foot wide access. While there are circumstances on the site which may have allowed for a variance to be granted, the applicant has not requested a variance. FINDING: Because the proposed access does not meet the standards, and a variance was not requested, this standard has not been met. Signs (18.114 ): Section 18.114.130(D) lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C- G Zone. This provision is superseded by the Tigard Triangle Design Standards which were discussed previously in this decision. FINDING: Because the Tigard Triangle Design Standards relating to signs take precedence, this standard does not apply. Tree Removal (18.150) Section 18.150.025 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12-inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. The applicant has indicated that no trees will be removed. Based on the location of the few trees on the site, and the proposed and required improvements, staff agrees with the applicant's assessment that no trees must be removed. FINDING: Because no trees over 12-inch caliper will be removed as a result of this proposal, this criterion has been met. Street And Utility Improvement Standards (18.164): Streets: This site is bordered on the south side by SW Gonzaga Street and on the east side by the unimproved right-of-way (ROW) for SW 70th Avenue. TDC 18.164.030(E) states that street ROW widths shall not be less than what is specified in the TDC. In addition, the Tigard Triangle Design Standards (TTDS) (Section 18.67) state that in addition to Development Code standards, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 10 OF 17 water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle. An Impact Analysis, provided at the beginning of this report, addresses the proportionality of required street improvements. Section A(1) of the TTDS, entitled "Street Connectivity, Design Option", states that local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. SW Gonzaga Street Southwest Gonzaga Street is classified as a local street in the TTDS, and is required to be improved within a 60-foot ROW. At present, there is approximately 25 feet of ROW north of the street centerline adjacent to this site. The applicant's plan and narrative indicate that they are willing to dedicate additional ROW on SW Gonzaga Street to provide 30 feet from centerline to meet the TTDS standards. Southwest Gonzaga Street is a paved roadway but is not built to meet the City's width and structural section standards. The TTDS indicates that a local street shall have a paved width of 36 feet curb-to-curb (18 feet from curb to centerline). In accordance with the TTDS and TDC standards for development requirements, the applicant should be required to make street improvements to the frontage of SW Gonzaga Street. The applicant has proposed to not construct the street improvements as a part of the development, but suggests that the improvements be delayed with the use of a non-remonstrance agreement because they feel the surrounding neighbors do not want the street improved. They also state that the cost of constructing an improvement along their frontage will be more costly than if it were included with a larger project, such as a local improvement district (LID). They also state that the dead-end sidewalk will serve no useful purpose, as their customers will more than likely arrive by car. Staff does not believe the applicant's statements warrant a delay in the improvement of SW Gonzaga Street. The surrounding area, although still partially occupied by single- . family uses, is beginning to intensify in redevelopment proposals. Staff has even held a pre-application conference recently with a potential developer for a parcel of land to the west of this site. In addition, the City Council, when adopting the TTDS, was very clear in stating that local streets within the Triangle should be improved as development occurs. The applicant's statement concerning costs of improvements is not necessarily true. If the improvements were not built now, but delayed for a time, the cost of road improvements will only increase with inflation. In addition, the applicant's argument of making the improvements a part of a LID will not guarantee a lower cost to each property owner. TDC 18.164.030(A)(c) states that a non-remonstrance agreement could be considered if one of the following conditions exist: 1. a partial improvement is not feasible due to the inability to achieve proper design standards; 2. a partial improvement may create a potential safety hazard to motorists or pedestrians; 3. it is unlikely that additional street improvements will occur in the foreseeable future; 4. the improvement would be in conflict with an adopted capital improvement plan; 5. the improvement is a part of a residential land partition and the partition does not create any new streets; or 6. additional planning work is required to define the appropriate design standards for the street. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 11 OF 17 Criteria #1 is not met because it is possible for the applicant to meet the current TDC and TTDS design standards. Criteria #2 is not met because the applicant can construct a half- street improvement with appropriately designed pavement tapers at each end of the improvement that would not create a public safety hazard. Criteria #3 is not met because there are other properties in the area that will likely develop in the foreseeable future and will also be required to make street improvements. There are other sites within the Triangle that are redeveloping in a similar manner to what is proposed on this site, and the adjacent streets are being improved. Criteria #4 is not met because there is no capital improvement project planned for SW Gonzaga Street. Criteria #5 is not met because this project is not a residential land partition. Criteria #6 is not met because appropriate design standards have already been established in the TDC and TTDS. It is Staffs opinion that none of the six criteria listed in 18.164.030(A)(c) exist. In addition, the roadway would need to be improved to meet fire apparatus access standards of the UFC. Therefore, the applicant should make the improvements to the street in accordance with the TDC and TTDS standards. Since the applicant has proposed an alternative that Staff does not find will meet City standards, the application should be denied. One other concern to be raised is the fact that the existing paved width of the roadway is approximately 17.5 feet to 18 feet. The Uniform Fire Code, which is enforced by a City ordinance, requires a minimum unobstructed paved width of 20 feet (UFC 902.2.2.1) for fire apparatus access. If the roadway is not improved to meet City standards, this UFC standard will also not be met. SW 70th Avenue This roadway is also classified as a local street in the TTDS, and also requires a 60-foot ROW. Staff discussed the ROW situation with the applicant on a number of occasions and acknowledged that the existing garage to the house is approximately 25 from the existing ROW line of SW 70th Avenue (which is actually the centerline of the required ROW). Staff indicated that because of the conflict with the existing structure, the applicant would only have to dedicate ROW up to the edge of the building. The TTDS and TDC would allow a zero setback to the ROW. The applicant's plan and narrative indicate that they are unwilling to dedicate the additional ROW on SW 70th Avenue because they claim the TTDS Street Plan does not show SW 70th Avenue extending north of SW Gonzaga Street. They also refer to ROW vacations that took place in 1987 and 1988. The applicant again raises the apparent concern from the neighbors that this street not be improved. They also argue that the TTDS criteria for street connectivity is met because the distance along the south ROW line of SW Gonzaga Street is 645 feet between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 70th Avenue. They make this argument because there is ROW for SW 70th Avenue dedicated south of SW Gonzaga Street. Staff again does not agree with the applicant's arguments. The street connectivity standard of the TTDS applies to this site because in order to fully meet the standard, SW 70th Avenue would need to be improved between SW Gonzaga Street and Beveland Street to the north. If SW 70th Avenue were not improved in this section, there would be a gap of approximately 950 feet between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 69th Avenue, and therefore the "660-foot standard" would not be met. The applicant's argument only works for the section of SW 70th Avenue lying south of SW Gonzaga Street, which is not adjacent to the subject site. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 12 OF 17 TDC Section 18.164.030(G)(2) states that all local and minor collector streets which abut a • development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation. SW 70th Avenue is considered a local street and there are portions of dedicated ROW extending from SW Hampton Street to SW Dartmouth Street. The previous ROW vacations mentioned in the applicant's narrative are irrelevant in this case because they merely reflect a decision made over 10 years ago when the City was not sure if SW 70th Avenue would be needed as a public street. Due to the change in zoning in the Triangle, where there will be more traffic generated by commercial and mixed uses, it makes sense to include SW 70th Avenue as another north/south connection between other streets. SW 70th Avenue is not improved adjacent to this site at this time and the applicant is not proposing direct access onto this roadway. It is Staffs opinion that the applicant should not be required to improve SW 70th Avenue at this time, as there are no other paved improvements to the north of the site for connection, and there will not likely be any other street improvements made to SW 70th Avenue in the foreseeable future. Therefore, Criteria #3 of 18.164.030(A)(c) is met. Staff has recommended execution of non- remonstrance agreements covering future improvements to SW 70th Avenue for other projects within the Triangle that have frontage on the roadway. For this project, Staff also would recommend that the applicant sign such an agreement. However, the applicant has clearly stated in their narrative that they do not agree that SW 70th Avenue should be improved and have not indicated that they would sign such an agreement. In summary, the applicant's plan does not meet the TTDS standard for street connectivity. Therefore, based upon the deficient plan and the statements in the narrative indicating that the applicant is not willing to dedicate the ROW or sign a non-remonstrance agreement for the future improvement of the SW 70th Avenue roadway, Staff finds that this issue provides further cause for denial of this application. Water: This site will be served from the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. There is presently a water service that feeds the site. Sanitary Sewer: TDC 18.164.090(A)(1) states that sanitary sewers shall be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in the City's public improvement design standards and the comprehensive plan. At present, the nearest public sanitary sewer line is over 500 feet away in SW 72nd Avenue. In accordance with the City Council's direction for project sites in the Triangle that are over 300 feet away from a public sewer line, if the applicant/property owner can demonstrate that the existing on-site sanitary sewer septic system is functioning adequately to serve the new use, the City will allow the continued use of the system provided the applicant/property owner pays a fee in-lieu of constructing off-site sanitary sewer improvements for the site. The fee will be based on an engineer's estimate of the cost to extend public sanitary sewer to the area surrounding the site. The fee shall be paid prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. The applicant would need to coordinate with the City Engineer to determine the fee amount. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 13 OF 17 The applicant's plan does not clearly indicate the location of the existing drainage field for the septic tank. In addition, the applicant did not indicate whether or not they have sought or obtained approval from the Washington County Health Department to continue use of the existing system for the proposed dental office use. It is not possible at this time to determine whether or not the existing septic system will function adequately for this project. Therefore, the applicant has not met the City's standard with regard to sanitary sewer service. Storm Drainage: The topography of this site falls primarily to the southwest toward SW Gonzaga Street. The applicant submitted a downstream analysis which indicates the capacities of the culverts downstream of this site will be more than adequate to handle the small increase in storm water runoff from this site. 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 is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of a 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 is proposing to construct an on-site vegetated swale to treat the additional runoff from this site. The preliminary sizing calculations provided by the applicant's engineer indicate that the swale shown on the plans will adequately treat the additional runoff. 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 adjacent to SW Gonzaga Street. Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 112 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $ 3,080.00. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the site plan and proposal, does not meet the Street and Utility Improvement standards or the Tigard Triangle Design Standards, specifically those related to required street connectivity, street improvements and sanitary sewer service. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 14 OF 17 ADDITIONAL SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL STANDARDS Section 18.120.180(A)(2) through 18.120.180(A)(17) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.120.180.3 Exterior Elevations); 18.120.180.5 Privacy and Noise); 18.120.180.6 Private Outdoor Areas: Residential Use); 18.120.180.7 Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Residential Use); 18.120.180.8 100-year floodplain); and 18.120.180.9 Demarcation of Spaces). The following sections were discussed previously in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.120.180.11 Access and Circulation); 18.120.180.13 Parking); 18.120.180.14 Landscaping); 18.120.180.15 Drainage); and 18.120.180.17 Signs). Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Section 18.120.180.2 states that buildings shall be located to preserve existing trees, topography, and natural drainage and that trees having a six (6)-inch caliper or greater, shall be preserved or replaced by new plantings of equal character. The proposal is to change the use of an existing structure. No buildings will be added or expanded, therefore, this standard is not applicable. FINDING: Because the proposal does not involve the location of a new structure, this standard does not apply. Crime Prevention and Safety: Section 18.120.108.10 requires that exterior lighting levels be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime and shall be placed in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic. The applicant has not provided information on lighting, therefore staff can not determine if this standard has been satisfied. FINDING: Because crime prevention lighting has not been discussed in the applicants narrative, staff finds that the proposal does not satisfy this criterion. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Section 18.106.020(M) became effective on January 26, 1992. All parking areas shall be provided with the required numbers and sizes of disabled person parking spaces as specified by applicable State of Oregon and federal standards. All disabled person parking spaces shall be signed and marked on the pavement as required by these standards. This section requires 1 disabled parking space if 1 to 25 parking spaces are provided. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 15 OF 17 This proposal indicates that one (1) handicap parking space will be provided. The ADA requirements for handicap accessible parking requires that at least one (1) of the parking . spaces be van accessible. The space proposed meets the van accessible requirements of a nine (9)-foot space with an eight (8)-foot aisle. FINDING: Because the plan provides for a handicap accessible space that meets the required dimensions, this standard has been met. SECTION V. AGENCY COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: The applicant must comply with requirements of policy (tab1011) for change of use. Provide fire hydrant within 250 feet of all exterior walls. Accessible parking and access aisle slope not to exceed 1-inch in 50 inches. Provide an accessible route from parking to main entry. Provide an approved storm drain system with catch basins, roof drain connection, etc. and connect to the public system. Provide detail and grade of ramp into the buildings, door, landing, etc. Connect to public sewer as drainfield is most likely covered with asphalt. The City of Tigard Property Manager has reviewed the application and provided the following comments: The property owner should show verification of the location of the existing drainfield for the septic tank and that the drainfield and septic tank are in good working order. Storm runoff from the new parking lot should not be allowed to flow towards drainfield as there is not curbing all around the parking lot. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the application and provided the following comments: Request a "more comprehensive" detail of lighting plan. SDR provides comments that "photo-electric" cells installed at building. Improved lighting may be required as the parking lot may not be totally served by wall mounted lights. The City of Tigard Long Range Planning Division has reviewed the application and provided the following comments: The Tigard Triangle Design Standards clearly state that all new development including remodel will be required to meet design standards and dedicate and improve public streets. The proposal does not comply with that intent. Tualatin Valley Water District has reviewed the application and provided the following comments: Medical facilities require addition of reduced pressure principle type backflow devices to be installed immediately following existing meter. GTE, PGE, US West and NW Natural Gas have all reviewed the proposal and offered no comments or objections. SECTION VI. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 16 OF 17 Final Decision: DATE OF FILING: SEPTEMBER 3, 1998 THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON MONDAY SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Sections 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.340 of the Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal must be filed. The deadline for filing an appeal is specified below. The appeal fee schedule and appeal form are available from the Community Development Department or Planning Division at Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 3:30 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 14, 1999. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division or Community Development Department of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. 61-1441L'i September 3, 1998 PREPARE Y: Julia Powell rajduk DATE Associate Planner cce September 3. 1998 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersd•. DATE Planning Manager i:lcurpin\juli a\knecht.doc NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0009-KNECHT DENTAL OFFICE PAGE 17 OF 17 -E-S.W. BEVELAND STREET --,- WA.SM. tAx LOT 2500 TAX LOT NCO I3PNCHIA ARK TAX LOT 2800 NW NO 2S-1-1A8 NAP NO 2S-1-1A8 -,tr-swE 1AAP NO 20.00 VC ..4.. A4 on.sff LOT LOT ,KA mug N139.00.401 112.09. 25-1-1A8 - ,'799.9 r mot-, r ..•13, 9.• ice 199.9orr 1 LEGEND .,.., - -, INE7-.- 4--;4141111rTV: - ,:rt&f 44, __ ., , ..... .3., „......., _ A 'I 41•44 ,1100:10. a —0— C.O.Sow On. "4'I I - 1 4,„_.4 MIMI iLdilipatia,90. war=44.4, I.•••••Slown Oran hop••••raleY••■VUot 1-%.' • ....:....r...,kigialgra _ ,...E._-c •_Eg—Lir TAX LOT 9600 MAP NO 2S-1-1AA ZiES=22 0,414••••4.2.0 _......a 3.-.. i • 1, '4- --'-- ..'m ., -1 "*".' 1 NW........ , ' NCA' A,A0,117,AREA 1 lg.. Ir ' " i 09.19•99 99.19.9 A --- MAP-----"- EL4V TAX LOT 2700• NO 25-- 11A0 0 MI , -----_ -- :--------- ... 2.0 V. Gomm ---------_444-.'4' .... 14 S• 10.044444- ::•.e, ''' vmem•wen ....— .., CO R ,7•-r.' t,.:-. r liol A .1._ 7•07 I ■,‘ . I \\ 71._.1 ,.. 111994._ ' 4 i- - I ' I - I 'It'li '" . - =mu 4,4 4. .1 -. *"..emi%mbIL - - 0 SWALE DETAIL 'II =NM -- iiit■ .e.... n- I itO.114.7 "."I WM rar . .'' = LL.I I I 1 I PROPOSED DENTAL -,....' 11 ... ...c Ammo WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS .o, i I 1 1 Pm NAmmove OW WILMS I I OFFICE .— - eorb. 1-- Z ItIOC91.93Ia WA' ..1:..,41.moo sort nalo Ms \ : ... . —.1- - -, o .lel WS • *; I , '''' = ;9 4/2111P r-- MAIL LING111 let rICT 009'9.9 TAX LOT 100 1' Z 99■IlE SLOPE IX 'fl ij Pt 1 Or 4 MAP NO.2S-1-1AC WAGE MIR WIDOW I,1 arm UM 9199=e9•994./IES b = 90.e%' •.4,41; . 1101.I1911 9.93 flIET I .1 M MM.. eripf. A''.'" I 1 . Z A A.1 '''irl.771, 11) 1 11=111i1 iiimm =1Pkr.71.'44641141%4E4011" Yr1 I .....1 1 1 '' . lionsx QM "",.. WM/ rifrA;40..161 illi VKITI.O.A.0 4 i I 1 II 1 1 ....... ''..; '',.'.:7',-:• TAX LOT 300 ' ' A*OB 1/ I 41115 0,....- OEN'UM ARK rm.s/A• glefaMP11-3 MAP NO.2S-1-1AC Olt 'I I I I IrZ''''" . 4 1'410 til z.....!-74,. CC ..., , .....„ MIRIMIWI..rlg'''--.....p'AEIffr.Ar,dro.rPA.. Air Wilt _ .4 ,,,..„7-7-- , ,,,,..----,--..... .,,_ _ - a :41100■Tref4 _ *f., Ad't `MNM1•5•1 S W GONLAGA STREET , \----- i. - - , , - - - -2-..--. , t aft.,10;::, V . amm !' - . I , i Mg 1 .... ... – . -= ° 1101111MINIL • .. _ c.,..) o ..wAte. 7, - . • . ,• 4_ . : • • :.'" \.'.••'- ....'• TAX LOT 1(MY) ..' . A\ GRAPHIC SCALE MAP NO 2S-1-1AC .. ' ., TAX LOT 200 ! T 1 7 A I % MAP NO.2S-1-1AC 4444) \ CASE NOES)&CASE?IAMBS)- SITE PLAN 414 SDR 98-0009 i EXHIBIT MAP N Knecht Dental Office U 11111111 CITY of TIG ' . DARTMOUTH ST OEOORA►NIO IN►OR YATION tViTEY 11111 VICINITY MAP I' 11 11111111 ■ ra .",:l.1:4.Ytt. 5T SDR 98 000/ I a NN Nalll: � _O1■ 1111.ro%air Knecht Dental I'! Office ■ laillisim At N Subject ST as, _ :4 AA,•BEVE D s ST 'Parcel ,� ■■ • c.q ajIII GONZAGA ST _ Iii ILI!" ' .10 . So' - • .;1 ■ N IIIII 0 200 400 600 Feet liZi 1'•157 feet, 11111, A III _�'S■■■■■. City of Tigard ■■ S Infonnaoon m this map Is for general location only and J should ha verified with the Devalolmert Sarvicas Dlvlslan. .■ / 13125 lg ,SW OR Hail Blvd C Tigard."^ 171 (SOJ+°'^-4171 111111111111111 111.11.1.111L httpJ/vn vd.or.ua Conanulury Dexlopn, Plot date., 1998:clnu`iclniagicD Laps 12/17/98 12:30 $503 6R4 7297 CITY OF TIGARD 0 001 .}TTi ii*'i**:E:*:1**:1:******:f:***$* 1.4.4. ACTIVITY REPORT *ss ***:f:*****sf::{:.F::f:*:f:** :******4.h.* TRANSMISSION OK TX/RI NO. 0724 CONNECTION TEL 222 CONNECTION ID START TIME 12/17 12: 17 USAGE TIME 13'47 PAGES 20 RESULT OK LEONARD A. RYDELL, P.E., P.LS., W.R.E. Consulting Civil Engineer-Land Surveyor 4 January 1999 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132-1625 (503) 538-5700 FAX 538-9167 City of Tigard 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner Re: Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office - SDR 98-0009 Dear Julia, Thank you for mailing a copy of the Director's Decision for the Dr.Anna Knecht Dental Office, SDR 98-0009 on 30 December 1998. On 22 July 1998, I requested that you keep me informed as to the status of my application. A copy of that letter is enclosed. Unfortunately, I was not kept informed as to the status of the application until your mailing of the Notice of Decision dated 30 December 1998. Under Section 18.32.130.A,1.e of the Tigard Development Code, I am entitled to a copy of the decision, and notice given dated 30 December 1998 is hereby acknowledged. In that you did not make a "good faith" effort to notify this firm, my appeal period begins 30 December 1998. I hereby appeal the decision to the planning commission, and enclosed, please find a check for S398-:(10„sand an executed appeal form. 2.50*--1-4e Thank you. Sin = ely yours, ' / ce, Leonard A. Ry ell, .E., P.L.S., W.R.E. LAR/lar cc: Steve Kerby PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS • RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS LAND SURVEYS • WATER RIGHTS yes1U ANIV LEONARD A. RYDELL, P.E., P.LS., W.R.E Consulting Civil Engineer-Land Surveyor 601 PINEHURST DRIVE, NEWBERG, OREGON 97132-1625 (503) 538-5700 FAX 538-9167 22 July 1998 City of Tigard 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Ann: Julia Powell Hajduk, Associate Planner Re: Dr. Anna Knecht Dental Office - SDR 98-0009 Dear Julia, This letter is a follow up to my phone call this afternoon. -- As per my telephone voice mail, the "Impact Statement" prepared by this firm concludes that the conversion of a single family residence and construction of a parking lot in itself will not have a significant impact on street, water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage or park systems. Based on a lack of major impact, perhaps many of the City's dedication and improvement requirements can be postponed into the future, or deferred to such time when the development changes to a more intensive character that does have significant impacts on traffic, utilities and parks. Please keep me informed as to the status of the application. Thank you. - ^ Sine• ly yours, I Leonard A. Rydell, P.E., P.L.S., W.R.E. • LAR/lar cc: Steve Kerby PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS • RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS LAND SURVEYS • WATER RIGHTS January 11, 1999 . . Leonard Rydell CITY OF TIGARD 601 Pinehurst Drive OREGON Newberg, OR 97132 Dear Mr. Rydell: The City received your appeal to the decision on SDR 98-0009 on January 5, 1999. As stated previously by Staff, the appeal period expired on September 14, 1998. Notice was sent as required by the Tigard Development Code, to the parties listed as owner and applicant on the application form submitted and all property owners within 250 feet of the subject site. In addition, notice of the decision was published in the Tigard Times Newspaper (a.k.a. Community Newspapers). You are not recognized as a party on this application as you were not listed on the application. You indicated you were a party to appeal because you requested notice in writing. You did not formally request notice in writing. Your request was to be kept informed as to the status of the application. The letter was written prior to the application being accepted as complete and was sent in response to completeness discussions. Because this comment was made in a letter regarding application completeness and there was no request to be mailed notice of the decision, Staff did not interpret it to mean anything more than that you wished to be kept informed as to the completeness status of the application. Because you were not listed as owner or applicant on the application form, you are not a property owner within 250 feet of the subject site, and you did not request notice of the decision in writing as required by the Tigard Development Code, you are not a party to appeal. Because the appeal period expired on September 14, 1998 and you are not recognized as a party to appeal, the City of Tigard can not process this appeal. We are, therefore, returning this appeal form and have begun the process to refund your appeal fee. Sincerely, James N.P. He dryx Community Development Director i:\curpin\julia\sdr\knechtappeal.doc c: 1998 Planning correspondence file SDR 98-0009 Land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 APPEAL FILING FORM ,111.1 FOR LAND USE DECISIONS TYPE II r' 2.n ..� • CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223(503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 The City of Tigard supports the citizen's right to participate in local government. Tigard's Land Use Code, therefore, sets out specific requirements for filing appeals on certain land use decisions. The following form has been developed to assist you in filing an appeal of a land use decision in proper form. To determine what filing fees will be required or to answer any questions you have regarding the appeal process, please contact the Planning Division or the City Recorder at the phone/fax listed at the top of this form. GENERAL INFORMATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Property Address/Location(s) and Name(s) of the Case No.(s): �5� $_000 9/ Application Being Appealed: fit. 0,0 &PC f7 f Case Name(s): 7178 9P -6e L-) Receipt No.: ?4' -- 3//5 3 How Do You Qualify As A Pa ?: � A/.�r�T�«�j J��T PeC ( 5G /t6 CY r CI 0 kW/440V Application Accepted By: q--- ::F 1),,,/%u jev ,SEc_ 7 !e-3 Z. 130-4. 1. P Date: /- "5- 7 SiZ ' / j Approved As To Form By: Appellant's Address: KO/ ki P`(c' r .4, v Q Date: City/State: P Q-r (/k Zip: 5713 Z--Ir{Z.5 y/ Denied As To Form By: Day Phone Where You Can Be Reached:( )5A3-5767 ) Date: Scheduled Date Decision Is To Be Final: 30 f7ec 199&1 (€thiS, Rev.11/26/98 iacurpin\masters■appeal.doc Date Notice of Final Decision Was Given: 3 t A-c. (99f$ S ecifc grounds For Appeal or Review: REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS Pc t5 1 cG�Io1h/5 C' XCF'SSItle !k 97140441-i 0 7 ?�''f ' -3)41k:770"/ aPec CS Olt it Application Elements Submitted: / I_ . ❑ Appeal Filing Form (completed) 7`�C/It�l/(C%K/6, �- ) _Alf /'P �W(44(tCi(� ❑ Filing Fee(based on criteria below) / + 111 D Director's Decision to Planning Commission $ 250.00 !�� j e �SS �J�C`�� > Expedited Review(deposit) $ 300.00 £ 1d6tJ ➢ Hearing Refer ee $ 500.00 s te5 t . td! K�r 6 F ➢ Planning Commission/Hearing's Officer to City Council $1,745.00 / I Y JCS" (+Transcript) Q Si ature(s) of Appell.nt ): i ��, r ` i APPEAL FILING FORM FOR LAND USE DECISIONS (OVER FOR ADDITIONAL WRITING SPACE) PAGE 1 OF 2 APPEAL FILING FORM FOR LAND USE DECISIONS TYPE II (Coned) • APPEAL FILING FORM FOR LAND USE DECISIONS PAGE 2 OF 2