Loading...
SDR1998-00003 SDR98 - 00003 A-BOY SITE Redevelopment 'NOTICE OF DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDI) 91-9003 CITY OF TIGARD �;. . � � . _,�' �.°' CommunidjDevelopmdtt' lI•BOY SITE REDEVELOPMENT Shaping A Better Community SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASES: FILE NAME: A-BOY SITE REDEVELOPMENT Site Development Review SDR 98-0003 PROPOSAL: Site Development Review approval is requested to allow construction of a 16,995 square foot retail sales building. The applicant also proposes a second building of approximately 135,000 square feet to be developed in a later phase. The second building is proposed to be developed with 5,800 square feet of general retail use on the first floor and 7,700 square feet of office use on the second floor. The applicant provided additional plans for a Phase III parking lot which cannot be reviewed with this application because it includes a property that is not part of the previous application. APPLICANT: Dolan & CO., L.L.C. OWNER: Same 1919 NW 19th Avenue Portland, OR 97209 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Central Business District; CBD. ZONING DESIGNATION: Central Business District; CBD. LOCATION: 12520 SW Main Street; WCTM 2S102AC, Tax Lot 00700. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.66, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.116, 18.120 and 18.164. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given thatthe City of Tigard Community Development Djtector's designee f-.. � hs APPROVED the above request subject to cettaln con• ® �r•Ar ,y:Y '4';;470 '.k� �= a - i"- >x ,444:4;71 ;,,r.¢.' at r sJ'. , ." <a+t. .F. he•findingsand�conciusions on which the`decision is based are notec to Section IV NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 1 OF 12 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (503) 639-4171.) 1 . Prior to issuance of a building permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the driveway, curb, sidewalk and street tree work in Main Street. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. 3. The applicant's public improvement plans shall indicate that they will replace any existing sidewalks and curbs that are damaged or in poor condition and will reconstruct the existing curb cuts which will be abandoned. 4. Final location of the street trees, as well as the tree well design, shall be approved by the City Engineer as a part of the Street Opening Permit review. Both design and installation shall meet the provisions of Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 18.100.030 and 18.100.035. 5. The applicant shall obtain a permit from Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) for connection to the USA trunk line prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. A copy of the permit shall be submitted to the City Engineering Department. 6. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay the fee in- lieu of constructing an on-site water quality facility. The fee is based on the total area of new impervious surfaces in the proposed development. 7. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, November 1989." 8. A demolition permit shall be obtained prior to demolition or removal of any structures on the site. The applicant shall notify Northwest Natural Gas prior to demolition to disconnect services. STAFF CONTACT: Jim Funk, Building Division. 9. The applicant shall provide plans concerning the location and screening of trash and recycling disposal area. The applicant shall also provide plans for screening of any roof top or other mechanical equipment. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 2 OF 12 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION BEING PERFORMED: 10. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements. 11 . Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant should grant a public sidewalk easement to the City to cover that portion of the public sidewalk along SW Main Street lying within the applicant's property. 12. All approved site and landscape improvements shall be installed and maintained as approved. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The property owner previously applied for Site Development Review approval for plans that are similar as the plans that are presently under review. Previously, the applicant had also requested a variance to the parking standard for general retail sales to allow 39 parking spaces to serve a development on the site, whereas, 44 spaces would normally be required. The Site Development Review and the Variance requests were approved on July 10, 1989 by the Planning Director subject to 14 conditions of approval. The applicant appealed the Director Decision to the Planning Commission. The applicant raised concerns with five (5) of the conditions of approval that were imposed by the Director's decision including: conditions requiring floodplain and greenway area dedication and the construction of a bicycle/pedestrian pathway within the greenway, to be accomplished by the applicant. The Planning Commission upheld the Director's Decision except for the condition requiring removal of the roof sign. This condition was modified to require removal of the sign to occur within 45 days of the issuance of the occupancy permit (Final Order No. PC 89-25 dated December 15, 1989). The applicant then appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council challenging the same five (5) conditions. The City Council upheld the Planning Commission's decision with one (1) modification. The Council reassigned the responsibility for surveying and marking the floodplain area from the applicant, to the City's Engineering/Surveying Department (Council Resolution No. 90-07 dated February 5, 1990). The applicant then appealed the Council's decision to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). On January 24, 1991, LUBA denied the appeal, thereby, upholding the City's decision on this matter (LUBA Final Order and Opinion No. 90-029). This matter was further appealed to the United States Supreme Court. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 3 OF 12 In June 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that the City of Tigard had demonstrated a legitimate public interest in requiring the conditions. However, the City had not demonstrated the required degree of connection between the conditions and the impacts on the community by the proposed Dolan development. The U.S. Supreme Court remanded the application back to the City to demonstrate the required connection between the conditions and the development. In response to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the City issued a decision with revised conditions of approval in November of 1995. The lawsuit filed by the Dolan's proceeded even though the Dolan's did not appeal the Tigard land use decision. A summary judgment ruling made by the court in October of 1996 established that, at least, a temporary taking had taken place in 1991 . Thus, the case would proceed to establish the level of damages. The City of Tigard and the Dolan family have settled out of court in the matter of Dolan vs. City of Tigard. The terms of the settlement include: $1.5 million to the Dolan's; building permits for Phases I and II in conformance with agreed upon standards; and the dedication of easements to the City of Tigard for a bikepath and flood control purposes. The complaint filed by the Dolan's in December of 1994 was for inverse condemnation, due process, civil rights and lost business profits. The settlement concludes all claims made by the Dolan's. Vicinity Information: The site is located on the south side of SW Main Street between the westerly end of SW Main Street and SW Burnham Street. The site is adjoined by other commercial uses, a single-family residential use and floodplain areas. Site Information and Proposal Description: Properties surrounding the subject site are also zoned Central Business District (CBD) and contain a variety of commercial uses. The subject site is approximately 1 .69 acres in size and is bordered by Fanno Creek on the southwestern side. The site includes a 9,700 square foot building and a partially paved parking lot which were developed in approximately the late 1940's. The property's owners plan to demolish the existing structure currently used by A-Boy Plumbing and Electrical Supply (a general retail sales use) and redevelop the site in two (2) phases. The building will be razed in sections corresponding to progress on the construction of the first phase of redevelopment of the site. The current proposal includes development of a 16,995 square foot, single-story structure on the southwestern side of the site for relocation of the A-Boy Plumbing and Electrical Supply operations. The plans also propose a Phase II building on the northeastern corner of the site. This building is approximately 135,000 total square feet and is proposed to be two (2) stories with the first story totaling approximately 5,800 square feet being used for general retail space. The second story of the Phase II building would be approximately 7,700 square feet and be used as an office. In addition, the applicant provided plans for a Phase Ill parking lot. Because the property involved in Phase Ill was not part of the 1991 application, it cannot be included with this application. The applicant may make a separate request for review of the parking lot at a later date. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 4 OF 12 SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Use Classification: The applicant is proposing to build two buildings; one is to be used as a hardware sales use and the second is to be used for retail and/office use. This use is classified in Code Section 18.42 (Use Classifications) as General Retail Sales and Professional and Administrative Services. Section 18.66 includes a use such as a hardware store as General Retail Sales. Professional and Administrative Services are also permitted uses in the Central Business District. Dimensional Requirements: Section 18.66 states that there is no minimum lot area in the Central Business Zoning District. There is no minimum lot width requirement in the Central Business District zone. Developments within the Central Business District are required to provide a minimum of 15% landscaping. The overall site size is 1 .69 acres or 73,645 square feet. The applicant has proposed landscaping over 19% of the site or 13,992 square feet. Setbacks: Section 18.66 states that there are minimum building setbacks except that 30 feet shall be maintained where the site adjoins a residential zoning district. None of the four (4) sides of the subject property abut a residential zoning district. Therefore, no building setbacks are required. Building Height: Section 18.66 states that maximum building height is 80 feet for the non-residential uses in the Central Business District. The main roof line of both buildings would be at approximately 30 feet in height. Certain non-habitable architectural projections would extend to a maximum height of approximately 38 feet. For these reasons, the buildings as proposed, are below the maximum 80-foot building height permitted in the zone. 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). Of the total 328-foot property frontage, 288 feet is required to be provided with street trees. The remaining frontage is within floodplain and access easement areas. The landscape plan proposes eight (8) Ginko Biloba trees along the site's SW Main Street frontage at various spacings. Based on their average height of up to 50 feet at maturity, these trees are considered large species. Based on the 40-foot maximum spacing, a total of eight (8) street trees are required to be provided to serve 288 feet of frontage. For these reasons, the landscape plan as proposed, is consistent with the street tree planting standards. Screening: Special Provisions: 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) NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003 LA-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 5 OF 12 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 provided a landscape plan to address these requirements. The landscape plan noted that the planter areas were to vary in width between four (4) and ten (10) feet. Because 85 parking spaces are proposed to be provided, the site would need to provide a minimum of 12 parking lot trees. A total of 17 parking lot trees are proposed to be provided. For this reason, the landscape plan complies with the minimum standard. Visual Clearance Areas: 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. The applicant has not proposed to develop improvements within these areas. Therefore, the site and landscape improvements comply with this standard as proposed. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.106.030.C.26 requires a minimum of one (1) parking space for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area of Retail Sales: Bulky Items, Furniture or Appliance Sales use. Section 18.106.030.C.1 requires a minimum of one (1) parking space for each 350 square feet of gross floor area for Administrative and Professional Office uses. Section 18.106.030.C.20 requires a minimum of one (1) parking space for each 400 square feet of gross floor area of General Retail Sales use. The applicant states that the proposed new A-Boy Plumbing and Electrical Store use meets the definition of Retail Sales: Bulky Furniture and Appliance Store use. The Director finds that because a substantial portion of the existing store is used as a showroom and warehouse area for larger appliances, that the proposed store can meet this definition. Based on its size of approximately 17,000 square feet, the applicant has allocated 17 parking spaces of the proposed parking lot to be used for the hardware store use. As part of Phase II of redevelopment of the property, the applicant has assigned one (1) parking space for each 400 square feet of gross floor area of the first floor, of the second building. The proposed first story would measure approximately 5,800 square feet of retail space which requires 15 parking spaces. The applicant has also assigned one (1) space for each 350 square feet of area for the second floor of the Phase II building as office use. The second story is 7,900 square feet of floor area which requires 23 parking spaces. Therefore, a total of 55 parking spaces would be required for the entire development. The applicant has proposed 80 parking spaces which complies with the minimum parking ratio standard. The applicant has proposed to develop 22 of the parking spaces as compact parking spaces. This equals 40% of the total required parking spaces and for this reason, complies with the minimum parking ratio standard. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 6 OF 12 Bicycle Parking: Section 18.106.020(P) requires one (1) bicycle park; ig rack space for each 15 vehicular parking spaces in any development. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas, or pedestrian ways. Because a minimum of 55 parking spaces are required to be provided, a minimum of four (4) bicycle parking spaces are required. The applicant has provided seven (7) bicycle parking spaces in an area next to a pedestrian walkway into the site and the sidewalk along SW Main Street. Off-Street Loading Spaces: Section 18.106.080 requires that buildings or structures to be altered which receive and distribute material by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space for buildings with more than 10,000 square feet. A loading space was provided for the proposed A-Boy hardware store building that will apparently provide a safe and efficient loading space area. Although over 10,000 square feet in area, this standard does not appear to be applicable to the Phase II building. The retail portion of the Phase II building would be less than 10,000 square feet. Access: Section 18.108.080 requires that commercial and industrial uses which require less than 100 parking spaces provide one (1) driveway. The driveway shall be a minimum width of 30 feet and a minimum pavement width of 24 feet. The applicant proposes to provide a 30-foot paved width driveway to serve the proposed 85 parking spaces in compliance with the minimum standard. Walkways: Section 18.108.050(A) requires that a walkway be extended from the ground floor entrance of the structure to the street that provides the required ingress and egress. The site plan as proposed provides walkway connections from SW Main Street to both main building entrances. In compliance with this requirement. Signs: Section 18.114.130(C) lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the Central Business District Zone. The applicant did not request a specific review of signage for this development. Certain proposed building elevations show signage that appears to comply with the wall sign standards. Site Development Review - Approval Standards: 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 Sections 18.42, 18.66, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.120, and 18.164. The proposal's consistency with these Sections is reviewed in the following sections. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapters 18.84 (Sensitive Lands), 18.92 (Density Computations), 18.94 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations) or 18.98 (Building Height Limitations: Exceptions), 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) or 18.150 (Tree Removal) which are also listed under Section 18.120.180.A.1. These Chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Section 18.120.180(A)(2) provides other Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. The applicable portion of these other standards are addressed immediately below. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of 18.120.180.(2)(A)(3) (Exterior Elevations), 18.120.180.(2)(A)(5) (Privacy and Noise), 18.120.180.(2)(A)(6) (Private Outdoor Areas: Residential Use), 18.120.180.(2)(A)(7) (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 7 OF 12 Residential Use), 18.120.180.(2)(A)(8) (100-year floodplain), 18.120.180.(2)(A)(9) (Demarcation of Spaces), and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(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. No trees will need to be removed to develop the property as proposed. Therefore this standard is not found to be applicable. The applicant has proposed to maintain existing topography to the extent possible given the development constraints with the proposed more intensive use of the property. Natural drainage has also been maintained to the extent possible given the intensity of the proposed development. Buffering, Screening and Compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(4)(a) states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses. This standard is not found to be applicable because the site is immediately adjoined by existing commercial uses on all or a portion of each side of the property. Where the site does adjoin an existing single-family residential use to the east, the residential use itself abuts SW Burnham Street and not the subject property. For this reason, screening and buffering are not applicable. Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(4)(b) states that on-site screening from view of adjoining properties of such things as service and storage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops shall be provided. The parking lot is screened to the extent possible due to the proposed placement of the buildings up to SW Main Street. Service and storage areas are also screened from view to the extent possible by the proposed buildings. The applicant did not provide details concerning the proposed screening of roof-top mechanical equipment. The applicant shall submit a mechanical equipment screening plan. The applicant shall also provide a screening plan for trash and recycling facilities. Pedestrian Pathway: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(8) states that where landfill and/or development is allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. As part of the stipulated judgment, the applicant was required to comply with this standard by providing a pedestrian pathway easement that is already dedicated to the City along the property frontage on Fanno Creek. This easement area was shown on the applicant's site and landscape plan, in compliance with the Judge's order. Crime Prevention and Safety: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(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's plan provided a security lighting plan. The applicant proposes to provide a 25-foot tall, two (2) head pole with the development of Phase I. Two (2) additional 25-foot tall single-head poles and a third single-head light are to be provided as part of Phase II. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 8 OF 12 Access: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(11) requires that site access meet the minimum standards set forth in Section 18.108. Provisions for emergency vehicle access circulation shall be addressed. Provisions for pedestrian ways and bicycleways shall be provided if such facilities are shown on an adopted plan. The site has been reviewed for compliance with the access standards set forth in Section 18.108 elsewhere within this staff report. Emergency vehicle circulation access has been provided as a turn around within the proposed parking lot. A detailed review and any required site modifications will be completed prior to the issuance of building permits. The pedestrian and/or bicycleway easement has been provided in compliance with the stipulated judgment. Transit: Section 18.120.180(2)(A)(12) states that provisions within the plan shall be made for transit based on the location of other transit facilities, the size and type of proposal. The following facilities shall be required where applicable: bus stop shelters, turnouts for buses and connecting paths to the shelters. Presently, SW Main Street is transit served. Based on previous discussions with TRI-MET, the proposed commercial development by itself would not warrant transit facilities. Also, an existing bus stop is provided on the south side of SW Main Street, west of the subject property. Parking: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(13) requires that the standards of Section 18.106, the Clear Vision standards of Section 18.102 and the Access. Egress and Circulation standards of Section 18.108 be reviewed. These standards are reviewed elsewhere within this decision. Landscaping Plan: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(14) requires that the applicant submit a landscaping plan. This requirement has been satisfied as the applicant has submitted a plan indicating the number, type, and location of trees and shrubs. Drainage: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(15) requires that the applicant comply with the adopted 1981 Master Drainage Plan. The Engineering Department has reviewed the applicant's preliminary drainage proposal and is discussed elsewhere within this report. Handicapped Accessibility Provisions: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(16) requires that the handicapped facilities be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 487 of the Oregon Revised Statutes. The provision for a handicapped accessible walkway route from the street, and handicapped accessible parking has been addressed preliminarily on the site and landscape plans. A detailed review for compliance will be conducted prior to the issuance of building permits. Signs: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(17) requires that the prior to the construction of any signage that permits be obtained. The applicant has not requested sign permits through this development review process. Underlying Zoning Provisions: Section 18.120.180(2)(A).18 requires that an application comply with the all other applicable standards of the provisions of the underlying zone shall apply. The applicable 1991 development review standards have been reviewed elsewhere within this report. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 9 OF 12 PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS: Sections 18.164.030(E)(1)(a) (Streets), 18.164.090 (Sanitary Sewer), and 18.164.100 (Storm Drainage) shall be satisfied. Water Service, Grading and Erosion Control issues are also addressed below: Streets: The site is located on SW Main Street which is classified as a major collector street. The street is fully improved with curbs and sidewalks along the site frontage. The City has also completed certain paving improvements on Main Street within the last two years. There are three existing curb cuts along the frontage of this site that will be abandoned with this project. A new commercial driveway will be constructed to serve the site. In addition, there are portions of the existing curb and sidewalk that are damaged. The applicant should be required to replace any existing sidewalks and curbs which are damaged or in poor repair and reconstruct the existing curb cuts which will be abandoned. The applicant's plans indicate that they will repair the pavement, curb and sidewalk where the existing driveways will be removed. At present, there is approximately 80 feet of right-of-way (ROW) along SW Main Street, which is adequate for a major collector street. However, the City's surveyor, as well as the applicant's engineer, discovered that the existing sidewalk fronting the applicant's property lies partially on the applicant's property. Staff believes the reason for this is due to the original roadway improvements not being fully centered within the ROW. Staff has discussed this issue with the applicant's engineer and has suggested that a public sidewalk easement be granted to the City in lieu of dedicating additional ROW. The applicant's engineer indicated that this would likely be a good solution. Street trees are required to be installed along the frontage of a public street in accordance with TMC 18.100.030. The applicant's plans indicate that they plan to install street trees along the frontage of the site. Installation of these trees shall meet the provisions of TMC 18.100.035. The applicant proposes to install the trees within the sidewalk in tree wells which are allowed by 18.100.035(12)(a). Final location of the street trees and the design of the tree wells shall be approved by the City Engineer as a part of the Street Opening Permit review. Water: There is an existing public water line in Main Street that presently serves this site. The applicant's plans indicate that two new services will be requested for the new buildings. Water services are installed by the City Water Division once the applicant applies for water service. Sanitary Sewer: There are two existing public sanitary sewer trunk lines that cross this site in existing easements. One line is 24 inches in diameter and lies within a 10-foot public sanitary sewer easement. The other line is 60 inches in diameter and lies within a 30-foot public sanitary sewer easement. Both sewer trunk lines are maintained by USA. Any connection to either line will require a permit from USA. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 10 OF 12 The site plan indicates that both buildings will be constructed outside of the easement limits, which was a concern when the City reviewed the previous site development review in 199' (SDR 91-0005). The applicant's plans do not clearly indicate where the private sewer laterals for the buildings will connect to a sewer trunk line. Prior to construction, the applica-it will need to obtain a permit from USA to allow connection into one of the sewer trunk lines. Storm Drainage: Fanno Creek lies to the south of this site. The applicant plans to direct the storm water from this site into the creek. The outfall location on the plans is not very well detailed. Staff will need to review the final construction plans to ensure that the outfall will be constructed at the bank of the creek in a suitable location. The outfall construction shall include any necessary erosion prevention, such as rip-rap, and shall be inspected by the City upon completion. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44 which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. However, in accordance with the recent court decision related to this site, the City will review this issue under the rules that were in place in 1991 , which were USA Resolution and Order No. 90- 43. Under that R&O, developers had a choice between constructing on-site water quality facilities or paying fees in-lieu of their construction. In the 1991 decision, the City was of the opinion that this site would qualify for the fee in-lieu. Therefore, the fee in-lieu will be required. 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. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS Due to the timing required to issue this decision, no comment period was provided. SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS Due to the timing required to issue this decision, no comment period was provided. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 11 OF 12 SECTION VII. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and the presiding judge. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON MONDAY MARCH 2, 1998 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The applicant or the judge may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.340 of the City of Tigard 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 and can be obtained 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 MARCH 2, 1998. 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 . 72. Lre February 20, 1998 PREPARED BY: Mark Roberts DATE Associate Planner, AICP 1Z ¢ / ,vt_ � �• February 20, 1998 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdorff DATE Planning Manager I:\CURPLN\MARK R\SDR98-03.DEC NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 12 OF 12 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: February 19, 1998 TO: Mark Roberts, Planning Division FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer RE: SDR 98-0003, A-Boy Site Redevelopment Description: This project is for the construction of two buildings at 12520 SW Main Street (2S1 2AC, Tax Lot 700). Findings: 1. Streets: The site is located on SW Main Street which is classified as a major collector street. The street is fully improved with curbs and sidewalks along the site frontage. The City has also completed certain paving improvements on Main Street within the last two years. There are three existing curb cuts along the frontage of this site that will be abandoned with this project. A new commercial driveway will be constructed to serve the site. In addition, there are portions of the existing curb and sidewalk that are damaged. The applicant should be required to replace any existing sidewalks and curbs which are damaged or in poor repair and reconstruct the existing curb cuts which will be abandoned. The applicant's plans indicate that they will repair the pavement, curb and sidewalk where the existing driveways will be removed. At present, there is approximately 80 feet of right-of-way (ROW) along SW Main Street, which is adequate for a major collector street. However, the City's surveyor, as well as the applicant's engineer, discovered that the existing sidewalk fronting the applicant's property lies partially on the applicant's property. Staff believes the reason for this is due to the original roadway improvements not being fully centered within the ROW. Staff has discussed this issue with the applicant's engineer and has suggested that a public sidewalk easement be granted to the City in lieu ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0003 A-Boy Site Redevelopment PAGE 1 of dedicating additional ROW. The applicant's engineer indicated that this would likely be a good solution. Street trees are required to be installed along the frontage of a public street in accordance with TMC 18.100.030. The applicant's plans indicate that they plan to install street trees along the frontage of the site. Installation of these trees shall meet the provisions of TMC 18.100.035. The applicant proposes to install the trees within the sidewalk in tree wells which are allowed by 18.100.035(12)(a). Final location of the street trees and the design of the tree wells shall be approved by the City Engineer as a part of the Street Opening Permit review. 2. Water: There is an existing public water line in Main Street that presently serves this site. The applicant's plans indicate that two new services will be requested for the new buildings. Water services are installed by the City Water Division once the applicant applies for water service. 3. Sanitary Sewer: There are two existing public sanitary sewer trunk lines that cross this site in existing easements. One line is 24 inches in diameter and lies within a 10-foot public sanitary sewer easement. The other line is 60 inches in diameter and lies within a 30-foot public sanitary sewer easement. Both sewer trunk lines are maintained by USA. Any connection to either line will require a permit from USA. The site plan indicates that both buildings will be constructed outside of the easement limits, which was a concern when the City reviewed the previous site development review in 1991 (SDR 91-0005). The applicant's plans do not clearly indicate where the private sewer laterals for the buildings will connect to a sewer trunk line. Prior to construction, the applicant will need to obtain a permit from USA to allow connection into one of the sewer trunk lines. 4. Storm Drainage: Fanno Creek lies to the south of this site. The applicant plans to direct the storm water from this site into the creek. The outfall location on the plans is not very well detailed. Staff will need to review the final construction plans to ensure that the outfall will be constructed at the bank of the creek in a suitable location. The outfall construction shall include any necessary erosion prevention, such as rip-rap, and shall be inspected by the City upon completion. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0003 A-Boy Site Redevelopment PAGE 2 5. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44 which require the construction of on- site water quality facilities. However, in accordance with the recent court decision related to this site, the City will review this issue under the rules that were in place in 1991, which were USA Resolution and Order No. 90- 43. Under that R&O, developers had a choice between constructing on- site water quality facilities or paying fees in-lieu of their construction. In the 1991 decision, the City was of the opinion that this site would qualify for the fee in-lieu. Therefore, the fee in-lieu will be required. 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. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMIT: Note: Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact for the following conditions will be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (639-4171). 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the driveway, curb, sidewalk and street tree work in Main Street. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0003 A-Boy Site Redevelopment PAGE 3 3. The applicant's public improvement plans shall indicate that they will replace any existing sidewalks and curbs which are damaged or in poor repair and will reconstruct the existing curb cuts which will be abandoned. 4. Final location of the street trees, as well as the tree well design, shall be approved by the City Engineer as a part of the Street Opening Permit review. Both design and installation shall meet the provisions of TMC 18.100.030 and 18.100.035. 5. The applicant shall obtain a permit from Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) for connection to the USA trunk line prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. A copy of the permit shall be submitted to the City Engineering Department. 6. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay the fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site water quality facility. The fee is based on the total area of new impervious surfaces in the proposed development. 7. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, November 1989. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: 8. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements. 9. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant should grant a public sidewalk easement to the City to cover that portion of the public sidewalk along SW Main Street lying within the applicant's property. I:\engthrianr\comments\sdr98-03.bdr ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 98-0003 A-Boy Site Redevelopment PAGE 4 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CRYOI TIGARD Community Development S(aping) Better Commuraty S7,A'It. OAF OREGON ) County of-Washington )ss. City of Tigard" ) I, Tatricia L. Lulls-lank being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative S'pecia1st II for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: ;Check/V.Amnate goods)Bdw) O NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: (5DI. q _03 M-&)V 51 TE { Dri,'`t)LtpropvT ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (Fie No.Meme Refeoe) (1( City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No Name Reference) (Date cf Public Heanng) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) (Date d Public Healing) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council O NOTICE OF: FOR: Lt- (TypeJKino of Notice) ;File No/Name Reference) (Date of Public Hearing,rt applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICES] of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B',.on the AJigli day ofc_-4.-hrU42t/ 1998, and deposited in the United States Mail on the day of G-. 1998,postage prepaid. d-64.V(11/e2\ >1/' la/1 (Person that Prepared 10• -) A 1 �/ Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the de of ii, , 19, I . "-•'f, OFFICIAL SEAL /3 '' , DIANE M JELDENOTARY PUBLIC•O /7(1 ,� ;;� COMMISSION NO MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07,1999 UBS C OF I 'E I N . Hi Commission Expires: y Z tXHJI3i • NOTICE OF DECISION 4141,, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 98-0003 CITY O IIGARD A-BOY SITE REDEVELOPMENT Shaping Development ity SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASES: FILE NAME: A-BOY SITE REDEVELOPMENT Site Development Review SDR 98-0003 PROPOSAL: Site Development Review approval is requested to allow construction of a 16,995 square foot retail sales building. The applicant also proposes a second building of approximately 135,000 square feet to be developed in a later phase. The second building is proposed to be developed with 5,800 square feet of general retail use on the first floor and 7,700 square feet of office use on the second floor. The applicant provided additional plans for a Phase III parking lot which cannot be reviewed with this application because it includes a property that is not part of the previous application. APPLICANT: Dolan & CO., L.L.C. OWNER: Same 1919 NW 19th Avenue Portland, OR 97209 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Central Business District; CBD. ZONING DESIGNATION: Central Business District; CBD. LOCATION: 12520 SW Main Street; WCTM 2S102AC, Tax Lot 00700. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.66, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.116, 18.120 and 18.164. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 1 OF 12 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (503) 639-417t) 1 . Prior to issuance of a building permit, a Street Opening Permit will be required for this project to cover the driveway, curb, sidewalk and street tree work in Main Street. The applicant will need to submit five (5) copies of a proposed public improvement plan for review and approval. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include information relevant to the public improvements. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. 3. The applicant's public improvement plans shall indicate that they will replace any existing sidewalks and curbs that are damaged or in poor condition and will reconstruct the existing curb cuts which will be abandoned. 4. Final location of the street trees, as well as the tree well design, shall be approved by the City Engineer as a part of the Street Opening Permit review. Both design and installation shall meet the provisions of Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 18.100.030 and 18.100.035. 5. The applicant shall obtain a permit from Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) for connection to the USA trunk line prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. A copy of the permit shall be submitted to the City Engineering Department. 6. Prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit, the applicant shall pay the fee in- lieu of constructing an on-site water quality facility. The fee is based on the total area of new impervious surfaces in the proposed development. 7. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, November 1989." 8. A demolition permit shall be obtained prior to demolition or removal of any structures on the site. The applicant shall notify Northwest Natural Gas prior to demolition to disconnect services. STAFF CONTACT: Jim Funk, Building Division. 9. The applicant shall provide plans concerning the location and screening of trash and recycling disposal area. The applicant shall also provide plans for screening of any roof top or other mechanical equipment. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 2 OF 12 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION BEING PERFORMED: 10. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements. 11. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant should grant a public sidewalk easement to the City to cover that portion of the public sidewalk along SW Main Street lying within the applicant's property. 12. All approved site and landscape improvements shall be installed and maintained as approved. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The property owner previously applied for Site Development Review approval for plans that are similar as the plans that are presently under review. Previously, the applicant had also requested a variance to the parking standard for general retail sales to allow 39 parking spaces to serve a development on the site, whereas, 44 spaces would normally be required. The Site Development Review and the Variance requests were approved on July 10, 1989 by the Planning Director subject to 14 conditions of approval. The applicant appealed the Director Decision to the Planning Commission. The applicant raised concerns with five (5) of the conditions of approval that were imposed by the Director's decision including: conditions requiring floodplain and greenway area dedication and the construction of a bicycle/pedestrian pathway within the greenway, to be accomplished by the applicant. The Planning Commission upheld the Director's Decision except for the condition requiring removal of the roof sign. This condition was modified to require removal of the sign to occur within 45 days of the issuance of the occupancy permit (Final Order No. PC 89-25 dated December 15, 1989). The applicant then appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council challenging the same five (5) conditions. The City Council upheld the Planning Commission's decision with one (1) modification. The Council reassigned the responsibility for surveying and marking the floodplain area from the applicant, to the City's Engineering/Surveying Department (Council Resolution No. 90-07 dated February 5, 1990). The applicant then appealed the Council's decision to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). On January 24, 1991 , LUBA denied the appeal, thereby, upholding the City's decision on this matter (LUBA Final Order and Opinion No. 90-029). This matter was further appealed to the United States Supreme Court. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 3 OF 12 In June 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that the City of Tigard had demonstrated a legitimate public interest in requiring the conditions. However, the City had not demonstrated the required degree of connection between the conditions and the impacts on the community by the proposed Dolan development. The U.S. Supreme Court remanded the application back to the City to demonstrate the required connection between the conditions and the development. In response to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the City issued a decision with revised conditions of approval in November of 1995. The lawsuit filed by the Dolan's proceeded even though the Dolan's did not appeal the Tigard land use decision. A summary judgment ruling made by the court in October of 1996 established that, at least, a temporary taking had taken place in 1991 . Thus, the case would proceed to establish the level of damages. The City of Tigard and the Dolan family have settled out of court in the matter of Dolan vs. City of Tigard. The terms of the settlement include: $1 .5 million to the Dolan's; building permits for Phases I and II in conformance with agreed upon standards; and the dedication of easements to the City of Tigard for a bikepath and flood control purposes. The complaint filed by the Dolan's in December of 1994 was for inverse condemnation, due process, civil rights and lost business profits. The settlement concludes all claims made by the Dolan's. Vicinity Information: The site is located on the south side of SW Main Street between the westerly end of SW Main Street and SW Burnham Street. The site is adjoined by other commercial uses, a single-family residential use and floodplain areas. Site Information and Proposal Description: Properties surrounding the subject site are also zoned Central Business District (CBD) and contain a variety of commercial uses. The subject site is approximately 1.69 acres in size and is bordered by Fanno Creek on the southwestern side. The site includes a 9,700 square foot building and a partially paved parking lot which were developed in approximately the late 1940's. The property's owners plan to demolish the existing structure currently used by A-Boy Plumbing and Electrical Supply (a general retail sales use) and redevelop the site in two (2) phases. The building will be razed in sections corresponding to progress on the construction of the first phase of redevelopment of the site. The current proposal includes development of a 16,995 square foot, single-story structure on the southwestern side of the site for relocation of the A-Boy Plumbing and Electrical Supply operations. The plans also propose a Phase II building on the northeastern corner of the site. This building is approximately 135,000 total square feet and is proposed to be two (2) stories with the first story totaling approximately 5,800 square feet being used for general retail space. The second story of the Phase II building would be approximately 7,700 square feet and be used as an office. In addition, the applicant provided plans for a Phase III parking lot. Because the property involved in Phase III was not part of the 1991 application, it cannot be included with this application. The applicant may make a separate request for review of the parking lot at a later date. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 4 OF 12 SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Use Classification: The applicant is proposing to build two buildings; one is to be used as a hardware sales use and the second is to be used for retail and/office use. This use is classified in Code Section 18.42 (Use Classifications) as General Retail Sales and Professional and Administrative Services. Section 18.66 includes a use such as a hardware store as General Retail Sales. Professional and Administrative Services are also permitted uses in the Central Business District. Dimensional Requirements: Section 18.66 states that there is no minimum lot area in the Central Business Zoning District. There is no minimum lot width requirement in the Central Business District zone. Developments within the Central Business District are required to provide a minimum of 15% landscaping. The overall site size is 1 .69 acres or 73,645 square feet. The applicant has proposed landscaping over 19% of the site or 13,992 square feet. Setbacks: Section 18.66 states that there are minimum building setbacks except that 30 feet shall be maintained where the site adjoins a residential zoning district. None of the four (4) sides of the subject property abut a residential zoning district. Therefore, no building setbacks are required. Building Height: Section 18.66 states that maximum building height is 80 feet for the non-residential uses in the Central Business District. The main roof line of both buildings would be at approximately 30 feet in height. Certain non-habitable architectural projections would extend to a maximum height of approximately 38 feet. For these reasons, the buildings as proposed, are below the maximum 80-foot building height permitted in the zone. 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). Of the total 328-foot property frontage, 288 feet is required to be provided with street trees. The remaining frontage is within floodplain and access easement areas. The landscape plan proposes eight (8) Ginko Biloba trees along the site's SW Main Street frontage at various spacings. Based on their average height of up to 50 feet at maturity, these trees are considered large species. Based on the 40-foot maximum spacing, a total of eight (8) street trees are required to be provided to serve 288 feet of frontage. For these reasons, the landscape plan as proposed, is consistent with the street tree planting standards. Screening: Special Provisions: 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) NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 5 OF 12 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 provided a • landscape plan to address these requirements. The landscape plan noted that the planter areas were to vary in width between four (4) and ten (10) feet. Because 85 parking spaces are proposed to be provided, the site would need to provide a minimum of 12 parking lot trees. A total of 17 parking lot trees are proposed to be provided. For this reason, the landscape plan complies with the minimum standard. Visual Clearance Areas: 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. The applicant has not proposed to develop improvements within these areas. Therefore, the site and landscape improvements comply with this standard as proposed. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.106.030.C.26 requires a minimum of one (1) parking space for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area of Retail Sales: Bulky Items, Furniture or Appliance Sales use. Section 18.106.030.C.1 requires a minimum of one (1) parking space for each 350 square feet of gross floor area for Administrative and Professional Office uses. Section 18.106.030.C.20 requires a minimum of one (1) parking space for each 400 square feet of gross floor area of General Retail Sales use. The applicant states that the proposed new A-Boy Plumbing and Electrical Store use meets the definition of Retail Sales: Bulky Furniture and Appliance Store use. The Director finds that because a substantial portion of the existing store is used as a showroom and warehouse area for larger appliances, that the proposed store can meet this definition. Based on its size of approximately 17,000 square feet, the applicant has allocated 17 parking spaces of the proposed parking lot to be used for the hardware store use. As part of Phase II of redevelopment of the property, the applicant has assigned one (1) parking space for each 400 square feet of gross floor area of the first floor, of the second building. The proposed first story would measure approximately 5,800 square feet of retail space which requires 15 parking spaces. The applicant has also assigned one (1) space for each 350 square feet of area for the second floor of the Phase II building as office use. The second story is 7,900 square feet of floor area which requires 23 parking spaces. Therefore, a total of 55 parking spaces would be required for the entire development. The applicant has proposed 80 parking spaces which complies with the minimum parking ratio standard. The applicant has proposed to develop 22 of the parking spaces as compact parking spaces. This equals 40% of the total required parking spaces and for this reason, complies with the minimum parking ratio standard. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 6 OF 12 Bicycle Parking: Section 18.106.020(P) requires one (1) bicycle parking rack space for each 15 vehicular parking spaces in any development. Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas, or pedestrian ways. Because a •• minimum of 55 parking spaces are required to be provided, a minimum of four (4) bicycle parking spaces are required. The applicant has provided seven (7) bicycle parking spaces in an area next to a pedestrian walkway into the site and the sidewalk along SW Main Street. Off-Street Loading Spaces: Section 18.106.080 requires that buildings or structures to be altered which receive and distribute material by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space for buildings with more than 10,000 square feet. A loading space was provided for the proposed A-Boy hardware store building that will apparently provide a safe and efficient loading space area. Although over 10,000 square feet in area, this standard does not appear to be applicable to the Phase II building. The retail portion of the Phase II building would be less than 10,000 square feet. Access: Section 18.108.080 requires that commercial and industrial uses which require less than 100 parking spaces provide one (1) driveway. The driveway shall be a minimum width of 30 feet and a minimum pavement width of 24 feet. The applicant proposes to provide a 30-foot paved width driveway to serve the proposed 85 parking spaces in compliance with the minimum standard. Walkways: Section 18.108.050(A) requires that a walkway be extended from the ground floor entrance of the structure to the street that provides the required ingress and egress. The site plan as proposed provides walkway connections from SW Main Street to both main building entrances. In compliance with this requirement. Signs: Section 18.114.130(C) lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the Central Business District Zone. The applicant did not request a specific review of signage for this development. Certain proposed building elevations show signage that appears to comply with the wall sign standards. Site Development Review - Approval Standards: 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 Sections 18.42, 18.66, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.120, and 18.164. The proposal's consistency with these Sections is reviewed in the following sections. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapters 18.84 (Sensitive Lands), 18.92 (Density Computations), 18.94 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations) or 18.98 (Building Height Limitations: Exceptions), 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) or 18.150 (Tree Removal) which are also listed under Section 18.120.180.A.1. These Chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Section 18.120.180(A)(2) provides other Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. The applicable portion of these other standards are addressed immediately below. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of 18.120.180.(2)(A)(3) (Exterior Elevations), 18.120.180.(2)(A)(5) (Privacy and Noise), 18.120.180.(2)(A)(6) (Private Outdoor Areas: Residential Use), 18.120.180.(2)(A)(7) (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 7 OF 12 Residential Use), 18.120.180.(2)(A)(8) (100-year floodplain), 18.120.180.(2)(A)(9) (Demarcation of Spaces), and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(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. No trees will need to be removed to develop the property as proposed. Therefore this standard is not found to be applicable. The applicant has proposed to maintain existing topography to the extent possible given the development constraints with the proposed more intensive use of the property. Natural drainage has also been maintained to the extent possible given the intensity of the proposed development. Buffering, Screening and Compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(4)(a) states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses. This standard is not found to be applicable because the site is immediately adjoined by existing commercial uses on all or a portion of each side of the property. Where the site does adjoin an existing single-family residential use to the east, the residential use itself abuts SW Burnham Street and not the subject property. For this reason, screening and buffering are not applicable. Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(4)(b) states that on-site screening from view of adjoining properties of such things as service and storage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops shall be provided. The parking lot is screened to the extent possible due to the proposed placement of the buildings up to SW Main Street. Service and storage areas are also screened from view to the extent possible by the proposed buildings. The applicant did not provide details concerning the proposed screening of roof-top mechanical equipment. The applicant shall submit a mechanical equipment screening plan. The applicant shall also provide a screening plan for trash and recycling facilities. Pedestrian Pathway: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(8) states that where landfill and/or development is allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. As part of the stipulated judgment, the applicant was required to comply with this standard by providing a pedestrian pathway easement that is already dedicated to the City along the property frontage on Fanno Creek. This easement area was shown on the applicant's site and landscape plan, in compliance with the Judge's order. Crime Prevention and Safety: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(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's plan provided a security lighting plan. The applicant proposes to provide a 25-foot tall, two (2) head pole with the development of Phase I. Two (2) additional 25-foot tall single-head poles and a third single-head light are to be provided as part of Phase II. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 8 OF 12 Access: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(11) requires that site access meet the minimum standards set forth in Section 18.108. Provisions for emergency vehicle access circulation shall be addressed. Provisions for pedestrian ways and bicycleways shall be provided if such facilities are shown on an adopted plan. The site has been reviewed for compliance with the access standards set forth in Section 18.108 elsewhere within this staff report. Emergency vehicle circulation access has been provided as a turn around within the proposed parking lot. A detailed review and any required site modifications will be completed prior to the issuance of building permits. The pedestrian and/or bicycleway easement has been provided in compliance with the stipulated judgment. Transit: Section 18.120.180(2)(A)(12) states that provisions within the plan shall be made for transit based on the location of other transit facilities, the size and type of proposal. The following facilities shall be required where applicable: bus stop shelters, turnouts for buses and connecting paths to the shelters. Presently, SW Main Street is transit served. Based on previous discussions with TRI-MET, the proposed commercial development by itself would not warrant transit facilities. Also, an existing bus stop is provided on the south side of SW Main Street, west of the subject property. Parking: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(13) requires that the standards of Section 18.106, the Clear Vision standards of Section 18.102 and the Access. Egress and Circulation standards of Section 18.108 be reviewed. These standards are reviewed elsewhere within this decision. Landscaping Plan: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(14) requires that the applicant submit a landscaping plan. This requirement has been satisfied as the applicant has submitted a plan indicating the number, type, and location of trees and shrubs. Drainage: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(15) requires that the applicant comply with the adopted 1981 Master Drainage Plan. The Engineering Department has reviewed the applicant's preliminary drainage proposal and is discussed elsewhere within this report. Handicapped Accessibility Provisions: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(16) requires that the handicapped facilities be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 487 of the Oregon Revised Statutes. The provision for a handicapped accessible walkway route from the street, and handicapped accessible parking has been addressed preliminarily on the site and landscape plans. A detailed review for compliance will be conducted prior to the issuance of building permits. Signs: Section 18.120.180.(2)(A)(17) requires that the prior to the construction of any signage that permits be obtained. The applicant has not requested sign permits through this development review process. Underlying Zoning Provisions: Section 18.120.180(2)(A).18 requires that an application comply with the all other applicable standards of the provisions of the underlying zone shall apply. The applicable 1991 development review standards have been reviewed elsewhere within this report. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 9 OF 12 PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS: Sections 18.164.030(E)(1)(a) (Streets), 18.164.090 (Sanitary Sewer), and 18.164.100 • (Storm Drainage) shall be satisfied. Water Service, Grading and Erosion Control issues are also addressed below: Streets: The site is located on SW Main Street which is classified as a major collector street. The street is fully improved with curbs and sidewalks along the site frontage. The City has also completed certain paving improvements on Main Street within the last two years. There are three existing curb cuts along the frontage of this site that will be abandoned with this project. A new commercial driveway will be constructed to serve the site. In addition, there are portions of the existing curb and sidewalk that are damaged. The applicant should be required to replace any existing sidewalks and curbs which are damaged or in poor repair and reconstruct the existing curb cuts which will be abandoned. The applicant's plans indicate that they will repair the pavement, curb and sidewalk where the existing driveways will be removed. At present, there is approximately 80 feet of right-of-way (ROW) along SW Main Street, which is adequate for a major collector street. However, the City's surveyor, as well as the applicant's engineer, discovered that the existing sidewalk fronting the applicant's property lies partially on the applicant's property. Staff believes the reason for this is due to the original roadway improvements not being fully centered within the ROW. Staff has discussed this issue with the applicant's engineer and has suggested that a public sidewalk easement be granted to the City in lieu of dedicating additional ROW. The applicant's engineer indicated that this would likely be a good solution. Street trees are required to be installed along the frontage of a public street in accordance with TMC 18.100.030. The applicant's plans indicate that they plan to install street trees along the frontage of the site. Installation of these trees shall meet the provisions of TMC 18.100.035. The applicant proposes to install the trees within the sidewalk in tree wells which are allowed by 18.100.035(12)(a). Final location of the street trees and the design of the tree wells shall be approved by the City Engineer as a part of the Street Opening Permit review. Water: There is an existing public water line in Main Street that presently serves this site. The applicant's plans indicate that two new services will be requested for the new buildings. Water services are installed by the City Water Division once the applicant applies for water service. Sanitary Sewer: There are two existing public sanitary sewer trunk lines that cross this site in existing easements. One line is 24 inches in diameter and lies within a 10-foot public sanitary sewer easement. The other line is 60 inches in diameter and lies within a 30-foot public sanitary sewer easement. Both sewer trunk lines are maintained by USA. Any connection to either line will require a permit from USA. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE REDEVELOPMENT PAGE 10 OF 12 The site plan indicates that both buildings will be constructed outside of the easement limits, which was a concern when the City reviewed the previous site development review in 1991 (SDR 91-0005). The applicant's plans do not clearly indicate where the private sewer laterals for the buildings will connect to a sewer trunk line. Prior to construction, the applicant will need to obtain a permit from USA to allow connection into one of the sewer trunk lines. Storm Drainage: Fanno Creek lies to the south of this site. The applicant plans to direct the storm water from this site into the creek. The outfall location on the plans is not very well detailed. Staff will need to review the final construction plans to ensure that the outfall will be constructed at the bank of the creek in a suitable location. The outfall construction shall include any necessary erosion prevention, such as rip-rap, and shall be inspected by the City upon completion. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44 which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. However, in accordance with the recent court decision related to this site, the City will review this issue under the rules that were in place in 1991 , which were USA Resolution and Order No. 90- 43. Under that R&O, developers had a choice between constructing on-site water quality facilities or paying fees in-lieu of their construction. In the 1991 decision, the City was of the opinion that this site would qualify for the fee in-lieu. Therefore, the fee in-lieu will be required. 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. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS Due to the timing required to issue this decision, no comment period was provided. SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS Due to the timing required to issue this decision, no comment period was provided. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 11 OF 12 SECTION VII. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and the presiding judge. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON MONDAY MARCH 2, 1998 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The applicant or the judge may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.340 of the City of Tigard 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 and can be obtained 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 MARCH 2, 1998. 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 . 7H-er-64 fate4/ February 20, 1998 PREPARED BY: Mark Roberts DATE Associate Planner, AICP 11,- D. (3• February 20, 1998 APPROVED BY: Richard gewersdorff DATE Planning Manager I:\CURPLN\MARK R\SDR98-03.DEC NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 98-0003/A-BOY SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT PAGE 12 OF 12 4, •a all 4)7‘ Z 0 Cn S.W. MAIN STREET _ ..._ A IlWar t OW .0 ___ wr r ... • • r . w .. a w r . r % (.9 - AIM impkr.m c ° .....giumpomme , . .. ...:.... .r-----.. ..... ..=a.....=.3.8";iailitar..r-dTuriEr . 17...'.!:"rE ----------------1, \ \ I, Itie ,..;,e1-4%....47!...:W.Y.:z,..;2.2t-r,; -1,?::.:rii \"i2. Is? c> ,' c' 0 , , 1 ' \ ., \ 1 WM=NMI 0 <c I• C •? ° KT "-MG Z • MOSE 2 I \ '‘ . M c.` :f. i. e, WOO SF•nRsT FWOR FT-152.40 l'gi • ;''2-161 i 0 i', . \ td 1 A-ECIY BUILDPIG •.i Ir. .7 '`. '- ' : - . • -11:1 \ \ ei\ < % . Fwa , r;,:,•,.:2,71. , . -;, ; • _ ; A W I, —I .z ) • 's5i'J' I ' .'1E, 71711./.FP 11 //, `ri., CI- li 0 ■ \ •-• - -pi i ° •MEI : //,.\ ei \nt , pirmairgi,,, ,i1 .,, • \ 1 4. c F t Rd ‘\ G•71M5 I k Ali 1c . // \ \ Ce \ i ) FPI I he, ...„, • ..0,........,,, ! .,. . . nor : ; - Joggs--vg--r--*- • _- ; ;.1. , • I -- „.4. .1. / / \ (.9 0 I I• i / , - . i 11. ISM 1 t i v o / 1 ,,.. 0 0 ==E 1 a io, 0 I, I / / ... .... illy k d , // / \ 0 V SITE PLAN ; CASE N . A-Boy Site Redevelopment EXHIBIT MAP Site Development Review 98-0003 • • ',` ,~ , _ ,,�. .-op CITY of TIGARD 1 OEOORAPXIG rMFORYATION ereTEY f# w•g . � •I �....f4 ,�, VICINITY MAP S.A<,,,,s, SDR 98-0003 5� IV, A-Boy Site A4‘ >. soGT Redevelopment / rST `9(°;Pl T Vii .,..I I t ti s -#0,li.,*,„4",* / ‘47/4 .9 4,*' . . N 4 0 100 200 300 400 500 Feet • 1'=395 feet C'rt�of Tigard ♦ , ■ infer naaan an this mep Sa for general bastion only and should be verified vrXh the Dewloprran[Services Division �S� _ 13125 SW Hall Blvd '� Tigard,OR 97223 I ' '�� 'DP (503)839 171 • •s ) • 0. A /\ hltpl(503)5i9-417.a.us Commufiity Development Plot date:Feb 20, 1998;c:lmagic\magicdd.apr Lans Stout SDR 98-0003 Corir'nercial Industrial Design Architecture P.C. A-BOY SITE REDEVELOPMENT 5200 SW Macadam Avenue, Suite 420 NOTICE OF DECISION Portland OR 97201 (Page 1 of 1) Judge Donald Joe Willis EXHIBIT B Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt P.C., Attorneys at Law PacWest Center, Suites 1600-1800 1211 SW Fifth Avenue Portland OR 97204-3795 Dan Dolan Dolan & Co., L.L.C. 1919 NW 19th Avenue Portland OR 97209-1735 Stephen F. Crew O'Donnell Ramis Crew Corrigan & Bachrach 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland OR 97209 Robert E. Franz, Jr. Law Office of Robert E. Franz, Jr. PO Box 62 Springfield, OR 97477 John W. Shonkwiler, Attorney at Law 13425 SW 72nd Avenue Tigard OR 97223 H:\PATTY\DOC S\S D R98- SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ' APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 SzFNERAL INFORMATION PRE-APP. HELD WITH: y-'�, DATE OF PRE-APP.: (2-/l7 f"7 Property Address/Location(s): /252c) s,43 jt4 jAJ ST. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Tax Map & Tax Lot#(s): 2 S/— 2/4 c r'rX LOT 7O0 Case No.(s): �� l( y 6063 Other Case No.(s): Site Size: -f- l•�0 9 ,6-c- . Receipt No.: —1 R' - 3O3 17/4 Application Acc ptecl By: 1/14 Owner/Deed Holder(s)*: PO L i4- GO• L, L' G ' Date' `? q ,I Address: i'1 q q( l IV W ( l-tk Ave Phone: 225" 1 001 Vcrg City: ?O -t444,1) I or_ Zip: Iii O_l - 11 3j 5j Date Deter fined To Be Complete: Applicant*: 5 etme. Comp nl,ZonAtion: Address: Phone: City: Zip: CIT Area: aSsil-- *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.4/21/97 i:lcurpinVnastersusdra.doc authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owner(s) must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS PROPOSAL SUMMARY ✓ Application Elements Submitted: C l _.:Application Form 1471 The owners of record of the subject property request Site Development Review approval to allow (please be specific): Owners Signature/Written Authorization Title Transfer Instrument or Deed 1`L,e, rl .S171E. Dfc SL C.& ic i Uie-u) Fc re- NEc-() f, 0- F,-cic iT--j tec,,Z. /a-X30 / evp #ite/Plot Plan 1.(Q�1 `T (�9f copies based on pre-app check list) "C-4 p14 L w -ic, r v�N-�- S/�,e� , I [Q/Site/Plot Plan (reduced 8'/1"x 11") , S /g cc-vet�t �nll Arkiz/z-tan vim. , Applicant's Statement A u (#of copies based on pre-app check list) I Construction Cost Estimate C /57 e71oW C ;7- EST : % 207 6-543 p USA Sewer Use Information Card (Distributed/completed at application submittal) p Filing Fee (Under •0.000) 00.00 '( ($100,000-$99..-- ....$1,600.00 Fees ($1 Million : Over) , 80.00 (+55/51•.:10) 1 List any VARIANCE, CONDITIONAL USE, SENSITIVE LANDS, OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: APPLICANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as described on the front of this application In the "Required Submittal Elements" box. (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request, for all types of Land Use Applications.) THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that mai be attached to or imposed upon the subject • If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and (imitations of the approval. • All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, may be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property. DATED this qTh- day of Re bt'.‘.r Y 19 '16 cok Gv". n LCkrGh Owner's Signature Owner's Signature ,.wner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 CITY Gi TIGARD A DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SERVI6CES ur building plans ARE NI ou must satisfy the land use permit r_on, prmi.t plans review pror.ess. k .,1- the building plans review process has been comp.L. ��.., 'uilding permit will NOT be issued without approval from the engineering 1 --.iing departments. r yuu have any questions regarding this notice, ul.ca:tbt, u.r-‘:•ut. xy 39-4171 for further clarification. $x+rnre�t '-►. 4° rt,1 t FOT�M No. 633—WARRANTY DEED (Individual er Corporate). �� STEVENI•NISI LAW PueL,/VINO co .PORTLAND,OR.57204 1.1.74 WARRANTY DEED 8 2 0 1 1 4 1 4 twl • KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That..HarOld 5, Boehi % L hereinafter called the grantor, for the consideration hereinafter stated, to grantor paid by. John . T. Dolan hereinafter called the grantee, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the said grantee and grantee's heirs, successors and assigns, that certain real property, with the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or ap- pertaining, situated in the County of.Washington . _ and State of Oregon, described as follows, to-wit: Beginning at a point on the Northwesterly line of Lot 1 of BURNHAM TRACT, a recorded plat in Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon, South 57° 54' ' West 140 Feet from the most Northerly corner thereof; running thence South 32° 53 ' East 184.2 feet to an iron pipe ; thence South 33° 55 ' East 103.3 feet to an iron pipe in the Southerly line of Lot 1 ; thence South 63° 54' West along said South line 332.7 feet to the most Southerly corner of Lot 1 ; thence North 18° 15 ' West 121 .4 feet along the Westerly line of Lot 1 ; thence North 49° 30' West 128.7 feet to the center of the County Road; thence North 57° 54' East 340.8 feet tracing the center of the County Road to the place of beginning. (IF SPACE INSUFFICIENT, CONTINUE DESCRIPTION ON REVERSE SIDEI , To Have and to Hold the same unto the said grantee and grantee's heirs, successors and assigns forever. And said grantor hereby covenants to and with said grantee and grantee's heirs, successors and assigns, that grantor is lawfully seized in fee simple of the above granted premises, free from all encumbrances and that grantor will warrant and forever defend the said premises and every part and parcel thereof against the lawful claims and demands of all persons whomsoever, except those claiming under the above described encumbrances. The true and actual consideration paid for this transfer, stated in terms of dollars, is $89,500.00 . .. . ' 'X XX46XXdGXXadGXKUX XXrXXiXXXXXXXXoXXXXiXXX X YoXikX4A4XXA XIX'XX1XVAXXAXp,J X49)iXXXXiXXsX ki tAX((1, X(XX1XiX(X/X *XlXfXX0. (The sentence between the symbols <®,if not applicable,should be deleted.See ORS 93.030.) In construing this deed and where the context so requires, the singular includes the plural and all grammatical changes shall be implied to make the provisions hereof apply equally to corporations and t individuals, R In Witness Whereof, the grantor has executed this instrument this .,f/24 day of 2.71-ox--)1 _. . ., 19' ; if a corporate grantor, it has caused its name to be signed and seal affixed by its officers, duly authorized thereto by order of its board of directors. /^ ,t7 e/1-.' `e-Gt .S /5 0-Pyvc. (It tad by acarporaII.R, Harold S. Boehi • er1k corporal.seal) STATE OF OREGON, ) STATE OF OREGON, County of )8s. 71 /-r-- .. ss, , 19 County of .��L. .L.ILG'.��.. . c--2L (((!0 (2 Personally appeared and Ol 19.G �--'' who, being duly sworn, each for himself and not one for the other, did say that the former is the Personally appeared the above named ....HaroId:�..&.., Boehi president and that the latter is the i secretary of , a corporation, and acknowledged the foregoing instru- and that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal men; to be,.:it:t1.i.e 'h.t:,..voluntary act and deed. of said corporation and that said instrument was signed and sealed in be- half of said corporation by authority of its board of directors; and each of •IT ;to a ale: t} them acknowledged said instrument to be its voluntary act and deed. y/,' 6,-,.......) 6 / Before me: (OFI'ICIAi ,�tQ za. tPC� (.u/ �.�G.,P-/ (OFFICIAL SEAL) • ,<. SEAL) Notary."bile for Oregon Notary Public for Oregon 1 likle commission expires: c —..,/s_N., My commission expires: ...Harold...S.... Boehi I 11 ll , ...7925...SW P.arrua Dr. STATE Ot= ORfcGON SS j y. ; _Portland, Oregon._....97225 County of Washington I ' �r" GRANTOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS , ,' ARA~� 1 /r I .Ir.� John T. ;Dolan I,Donald ;M or{•pfrec t�A ssessment 4025 SE Brooklyn and Taxation npp �r,Otticic?' �jsbf of of iron- y veyances foY1}Qfd,00ltn dq,li r6B,• rtify that Portland, Oregon 97202 the with) et 1ni1,i*a s,(ilt gi*e ecelved.11 GRANTEE'S NAME AND ADDRESS and recd Q V e40 d 4ii oust . , SPACE Rff SERVED y,.1 ,., • �t.tr�}f,V • rr•, Altar ncardln,nlurn lo, FOR R� RECORDER'S USE f• •,, Y tf\iii;111 ,• Ir for of Jahn L. Qalan N seql. rd a12a n, Ex- 4025 SE Brooklyn ' •d RI��jta._Portland, -'• NAME,ADDRESS,ZIP I rr!• � 4 (!�?��>;i('(r'rr r••rl • 1 • r g n •Trrnr.'rl Until a then,e Is requested all lot statements shall b./mt re the following address. �/� ....A-Boy.. Supply 4050_NE. .Br.oadway Portland,- Oregon...97232 1981 KAY -5. Ph 4 : Of ' NAME.ADDRESS,ZIP t - • WARRANTY DEED KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, FLORENCE T. DOLAN, hereinafter called the grantor, for the consideration hereinafter stated, to grantor paid by DOLAN AND COMPANY, LLC, an Oregon Limited Liability Company, hereinafter called the grantee, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the said grantee and grantee's heirs successors and assigns, that certain real property, with the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or appertaining, situated in the County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows, to-wit: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and hereby incorporated herein by reference. To Have and to Hold the same unto the same grantee and grantee's heirs, successors and assigns forever. And the grantor hereby covenants to and with the said grantee and grantee's heirs, successors and assigns that said real property is free from encumbrances created or suffered thereon by grantor and that grantor will warrant and defend the said premises and every part and parcel thereof against the lawful claims and demands of all persons whomsoever, except those claiming under the above- described encumbrances. The true and actual consideration stated in terms of dollars is: $ None In construing this deed and where the context so requires, the singular includes the plural and all grammatical changes shall be implied to make the provisions hereof apply equally to corporations and to individuals. s After Recording Return to: B. Rupert Koblegarde, Attorney 1130 S. W. Morrison Street, Suite 510 Portland, Oregon 97205-2275 Until a Change Send All Tar Statements to: Dolan and Company, LLC c/o Florence T. Dolan 4025 S.E. Brooklyn Portland, Oregon 97202 Page 1 - WARRANTY DEED . THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. DATED this /0 day of (.Y/..-41--6t- , 19 1 A OFFICIAL SEAL -1. B- �: C.RUPERT KOSLEGARDE .i_ '-�_. ,� .� f,7 NOTARY PUBLIC OREGON Florence T. Dolan \-r;n/ COMMISSION NO.029311 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DEC.14,1997 STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH ) On this /62 day of % `-/ 19 f$ , personally appeared FLORENCE T. DOLAN, who, did say that the foregoing instrument was said person's individual voluntary act and deed. ,44',„---- -,a,2---,,,,,z____- OFFICIAL SEAL '"' D.RUPERT. KOBLEGARDE Notary Public for Oregon `,' NOTARY PUBLIC OREGON My Commission Expires: / >' ?7 COMMISSION NO.029311 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DEC.14.1997 Grantor's Name and Address: Florence T. Dolan 4025 S.E. Brooklyn _ Portland, Oregon 97202 Grantee's Name and Address,: Dolan and Company, LLC c/o Florence T. Dolan 4025 S.E. Brooklyn Portland, Oregon 97202 Page 2 - WARRANTY DEED Exhibit "A" Beginninc at a point on the Northwesterly line of Lot I of BURNHAM TRACT, a recorded plat in Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon, South 57° 54' West 140 Feet from the most Northerly corner therio;; running thence South 22° 53 ' East 184.2 feet to an iron pipe; thencs South 33° SS' East 102.3 feat to an iron pipe in the Southerly line of Lot 1 ; thence South 52° 84' West along said South lino 522.7 feet to the most Southerly corner of Lot 1 ; thence North 18° 1S ' West 121.4 . feet along the Westerly line of Lot 1 ; thence North 49° 30' West 128.7 feet to the center of the County Road; thence North 57° 54' East 240.8 feat tracing the center of the County Road to the place of beginning. • • • Exhibit"A" I 5200 S.W.MACADAM AVENUE,SUITE 420 PORTLAND,OREGON 97201 TEL:(503)226-1285 FAX:(503)226-1670 TOLL FREE:(888)226-1285 E-MAIL: cida@teleport.com TRANSMITTAL PROJECT NO.: q- ( 7-5 DATE: /1 PROJECT NAME: A- D/V ATTN: jig) qqq ��-� wwD f ADDRESS:COMPANY: ENCLOSED: ' PLANS o SPECIFICATIONS . COPY OF LETTER o DETAILS ❑ SHOP DRAWINGS ❑ CALCULATIONS o SKETCHES lir OTHER NO.OF COPIES DESCRIPTION i $i+ P l� �l• �iL�c.S /?c /c ( R c h:. P(4 ft (.t/-f- i'r-fkrt A-f/et--& C 4,c4)-" ❑ FOR YOUR USE o FOR REVIEW ❑ RETURNED q, FOR APPROVAL ❑ AS REQUESTED ❑ OTHER COMMENTS: COPIES TO: • F, /u V Sit6" " [' 7 MP� t DELIVER 0. PICK UP / ❑ MAIL SIGNED: �� / L ❑ NEXT DAY • COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL DESIGN ARCHITECTURE P.C. • CIDA INC. 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that on the •L,day of December, 1997,I served the foregoing 3 AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK TO ENTER PARTIAL SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT 4 on the following parties at the following addresses: 5 Stephen F. Crew O'Donnell Rarnis Crew Corrigan 6 &Bachrach 1727 NW Hoyt Street 7 Portland,OR 97209 g Robeit E.Franz,Jr. Law Office of Robert E.Franz,Jr. 9 P.O.Box 62 Springfield,OR 97477 10 John W.Shonkwiler 11 Attorney at Law 13425 SW 72nd Avenue 12 Tigard,OR 97223 13 by facsimile and mailing to them a true and correct copy thereof,certified by me as such,placed 14 in a sealed envelope addressed to her at the address set forth above,and deposited in the U.S. 15 Post Office at Portland,Oregon on said day with postage prepaid. 16 , 17 /n � d/j 18 Donald'Joe Wiltrs 19 Jill Gelineau 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Page 3 - AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK TO ENTER PARTIAL SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT Kw"I' Ml Fry a.' h�71i�.W�►f�,^���" PPrtI.nd.Or.per•97200.3795 r l+o5 &( /ihrrcth ✓e 5200 SW MACADAM AVENUE, SUITE 420 PORTLAND, OREGON 97201 TEL: 503.226.1 285 FAX: 503.226.1 670 E-MAIL: cida @teleport.com February 9, 1 998 City of Tigard Attn.: Dick Bewersdorff 1 3125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: A-Boy Permit Submittal Project No.: 97125 Dear Dick: Enclosed are five sets of drawings indicating the re-development of the A-Boy site on Main Street. The following will summarize our discussion regarding procedures and development assumptions: Development Concept and Phasing The enclosed drawings indicate full build-out at Phases I and II. Phase I will include demolition of the "wing" on the existing building, and construction of the new building for A-Boy along with related site development. Phase II will include demolition of the remaining portion of the existing building and completion of the parking and landscaping. You will note that the plans show the greenway as resolved through the Settlement Agreement and also provide a second site access to SW Burnham to improve accessibility. We believe that the plans meet all of the standards of the 199 I Tigard Development Code as required by the Settlement Agreement. Unified Sewerage Agency Standards Mark Roberts of the Tigard Planning Department investigated the applicability of the USA standards with respect to water quality, detention, and wetlands. His determination was that since the original application was filed prior to the effective date of USA R+O 9 I-47, which established the standards, the development will not have to provide on-site water quality nor detention facilities. Also, any wetland setback that would be currently required is not applicable. Site Design Review The Settlement Agreement, as described in Joe Willis' letter of November 17, 1 996, is not clear as to the anticipated Site Design Review process. Therefore, you and I agreed that CIDA would •ARCHITECTURE provide sufficient detail in our drawings that the City staff can review the documents with •ENGINEERING respect to the applicable Development Code provisions, and that we will file a new SDR •PLANNING •LANDSCAPE FI GENADMINIPROJECTS197197I25102-09-98_PEPwpd •INTERIORS COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL DESIGN ARCHITECTURE P. C . • CIDA INC . A-Boy,Permit Submittal February 9,1998 Page 2 application even though City file SDR 89-13 approved this general development concept. The conditions of SDR 89-13 are addressed as follows: I. (Greenway) Addressed through the settlement. 2. (Sewer Connection) USA permits will be separately processed. 3. (Revised site plan) The accompanying site plan shows lighting, bicycle parking and other information as required. 4. (Landscaping) The accompanying landscape plan addresses the required information. 5. (Flood plain boundary) This condition will be addressed by the City if required. 6. (Demolition permit) A demolition permit will be acquired along with the building permits. 7. (Plywood fence) The contractor will install the temporary fence. 8. (Completion by occupancy) Site improvements will be completed, or bonded if required, prior to occupancy. 9. (Signage) Separate sign details will be submitted for staff approval. 10. (Billboards) The billboards have been removed. I 1. Sidewalk Repair) If the sidewalk is damaged, it will be repaired prior to occupancy. 12. (Roof sign) The roof sign will be removed when the building is demolished. Review Letter of April 25, 1995 Building Plan In a"Pre-Application Conference" on December 17, 1997, it was agreed that the City Building Division would prepare a new plan check based on CIDA's revised documents and the 1991 U.B.C. We believe that all items in the City's 1995 letter have been addressed, and consequently I will not recite each one. If any issues remain, we will promptly respond to the new plan check. New Site Design Review Narrative. the pre-application conference notes dated 12/17/97 identify several code sections that apply to the project. Each is addressed as follows: 1 8.102 Visual Clearance:The 35-foot vision clearance triangle standard is met by the site design. 1 8.106 Parking:The pre-application notes indicate that the new A-Boy store requires 44 spaces, however, as stated in the City's Final Order No. 89-25PC, dated 02/05/90, the business is a wholesale/retail type of business which sells bulky merchandise. The parking analysis is summarized as follows: A-Boy/ Retail, Bulky 17,000 sq. ft. @ I:1000 = 17 spaces Phase II Retail 5,800 sq. ft. @ 1:400 = 15 spaces Phase 11 Office 7,900 sq. ft. @ 1:350 = 23 spaces Total Required = 55 spaces Total Provided = 80 spaces F.IGENADMINIPROJECTS19719 7I25102-09-9 8_PEP wpd • A-Boy,Permit Submittal February 9,1998 Page 3 The proposed site plan meets all dimensional standards of the code, including compact and handicapped space allocations. 18.108 Access/Circulation: The locations of curb cuts, driveways, pedestrian connections and handicapped access are shown on accompanying plans. While the code requires only one access for less than 100 parking spaces, a second access is to be provided via SW Burnham St. to improve circulation. 18.120 Site Development Review: Plans and documentation as required by 18.120.090 are included in this package for a limited SDR based on 1991 standards. All applicable standards are met. 18.134 Variances: No variances are proposed. 18.150 Tree Removal: There are no trees on the site that are to be removed and that are subject to the 1991 Code standards. 18.164 Street and Utility Improvement Standards: There are no public facility improvements required by this project. As noted above, U.S.A. Stormwater standards are not applicable. We appreciate your assistance in processing these documents. Please call Linda Wall, Project Architect; Karl Koroch, Civil Engineer, or me, if you have questions in any of our respective areas. Sincerely, (41/M Lans Stout Planner LS\kg enclosure cc: Dan Dolan John Shonkwiler Project Team File F 1 GENADMINIPROJECTS197197I25\02-09-96 PERwpd Landscape narrative for A-Boy Landscape Improvements Soils - The Existing soil on the site is McBee silty clay loam as mapped on the 1982 Washington County Soil Survey dated 1 982. The site's urban location makes the existence of fill soils in the area a possibility. The soil survey describes the following about the mapped soil's condition: The McBee soils occur in the areas along Fanno Creek. These soils are moderately well drained and are formed of alluvium in floodplain areas. Native vegetation generally includes ash, cottonwood and willow. The permeability of these soils is moderate, with available water-carrying capacity to approximately 12 inches. The effective rooting area is more than 60 inches in depth. Runoff on McBee silty clay loam is slow and flooding is frequent. Hazard of erosion is generally slight except along streambanks where erosion is high. Erosion Control - Erosion Control measures will be in place prior to the start of any construction and remain in place during all construction and site disturbance. Specific practices include: • Gravel is to be placed within the construction entrance area. • Steep slopes greater than 30% will have sediment fencing placed along the contours at a maximum distance of every 25 feet. • Temporary grass cover will be established along all sloping areas to reduce erosion until the proposed planting materials are established. • Work within the floodway and to the water channel will occur during the dry season while the water elevations are at their yearly lows. F:IGENADMINIPROJ ECTS19 719 7 I 25Vandnar.wpd =a MCGRAW-EDISC '® • ec DESCRIr r ION DIMENSIONS F• 1 V Enhancing natural landscapes as E.W. well as cityscapes,the — Concourse III brings outstanding V performance and style to walk 19 3/e' 19 314' CC ways,parking lots,roadways, 1502mm1 /i l (502mm) 14 7/8'Q loading docks,building areas, ! I 1147/8' and any security lighting n I I ` 55 re' application.U.L.listed for wet --{ I I (143m'^) locations.CSA certified. ' 6 3/8' 6 1/4' (162mm) 1159mm) Round Pole Square Pole Front View EPA•Effectiva Projected Area: .9 CSCONCOURSE III ORDERING INFORMATION SAMPLE NUMBER: CS71529 70W- 400W I I I I I I I Product Family Mounting Housing Lamp Type Lamp Optics Voltage nl Options& High Pressure Sodium C-Concourse I Method Series 1.MH Wattage/Base 2-Design 20/30 1.120V Accessories Metal Halide III S-Mast 7-7000 2-HPS 1.70W/Mogul 3-Design 22 2.208V (See Below) Arm 2.100W/Mogul 4-Design 40 3.240V 3-150W/Mogul 5-Design 50 4.277V ARCHITECTURAL 4.175W/Mogul 5.480V AREA LIGHT 5.250W/Mogul 6.Triple-Tap I'l / 6.400W/Mogul 9-Multi-Tap lit 2j`7 r l)D l t Pole Top Mounting for Square and Round Poles(order separately) C Slipfitter accommodates 23/8'-3'O.D.pole top tenons.Catalog number includes slipfitter and mounting arm(s). Square unit height is 8 1/4'.Round unit height is 6 3/4'. • Spring-steel quick release latches for toolless entry NA I C• Die-cast aluminum housing cs CA44s CA45$ A 4 features soft-corner design A46SS • Closed cell gas filled high 8 = % / temperature silicone 1 ` gasketing CA43R CA44R CA45R CA48R CA47R • Thermal shock and impact- resistant clear tempered glass PRODUCT INFORMATION • Hydroformed anodized catalog Lamp Lamp aluminum reflectors for 5 Number Wattage Type Options(add as suffix) Accessories(order separately) different optical CS7212 70 HPS P-Button-type Photocontrol,Field CAll-House Side Shield—Design 20 distributions CS7222 100 HPS Installed CA14-Wall Mount Adapter CS7232 150 HPS F.Single Fuse(120.277 or 347V1 CAt6-House Side Shield—Design 40 • Universal mounting clamp CS7252 250. HPS FF•Double Fused(208,240 or 480V) CA40-Direct Arm Mount for Square concealed in housing fits CS7262 400 HPS V.Vandal Shield Pole(EPA 0.2) 1 1/2"to 2 3/8"O.D. CS7213 70 HPS O-0uartz Restrike(Limit to 150W max. CA41-Direct Arm Mount for 3' CS7223 100 HPS quartz lamp only.Lamp not Diameter Round Pole(EPA 0.2) horizontal tenons without C67233 150 HPS included) CA42-Direct Arm Mount for 3 1/2'-4' adapters.Provides a+5° C57253 250 HPS R-NEMA Twistlock Photocontrol Diameter Round Pole(EPA 0.2) vertical leveling adjustment CS7283 400 HPS Receptacle 0A1016-Photocontrol-Multi-Tap CS7214 70 HPS 0A1027•Photocontrol-480V • High power factor HID C57224 100 HPS 0A347V Nhotoetectric Control, Multi-Tap ballast is CS7234 150 HPS Lt.-Lamp Includedpe L-- standard CS7254 250 HPS CS7264 400 HPS • Integral hinges prevent CS7215 70 HPS door rocking and optimize CS7225 100 HPS sealing CS7235 150 HPS CS7255 250 HPS • Mogul-base porcelain CS7142 400 HPS i g CS7142 175 MH socket CS7152 250 MH CS7162 400 121 MH • Approximate net weight: CS7143 175 MH 39 lbs.(18 kgs.) CS7153 250 MH CS7163 400121 MH (I` CS7144 175 MH CS7154 250 MH CS7164 400121 MH CS7145 175 MH C57155 250 MH CS7165 400 tat MN NOTES'"'Multi-Tap ballast is 1201205/240/277V.TNple-Tap ballast is 120/2711347V(21400W Metal Halide fixtures use E2$Vamps Only pl Products also available in C.:' COOPER LIGHTING non-OS voltages and 5011i for mtemabonel markets.Consult factory for syailabdity and ordering information. 'L-_- ''"- y i kE1'S AND Goo t , 14 ,.�b =s' EMBLEM SIGN �`:,�. . .. ON BRACKETOM ST SN•516 WE NpPH ON ` r............/.\ ROCKET STEP SN. 1` �, Lod '� W NECK DOME l 1, g GNP SPq ON �.� �CKET 1 I . *.i ")-- _, RADIAL D/A�WAVE SIGN RW (#.'s I ON cusrom ..,./� BRAT WITH G 6 GL OBEBRACKEt li f i t EMBLEM SIGN DOME ON 516 W BRACKET pG BRACKET t,i Aill% 5*B ON / -w Wl TN PECI t F RECKET - °'► \� °Fj�ER SHALLOW ANGLE A CUSTOM DOME ON ST DOME SN•516 wM GNgp SP itThl STEP RACKET BRACKET E ON PT SCi BRACKET tv) STEP 5516 ON WM G K DOME ^- BR4CKE 'SpC Oniatissinatirsial) 'ThRw 4b `. ANGLE ON 60.9 / A US p WAVE ON ''� �.� BRACKET N 'SPA AND SCROLL 'II"' I El ENCLOSING N ,Ni CYLINDER OSI WITH 1 GUAD°31.CG IN• I D SPEC/At WM'GN S/ �, /, f ' N 1 G-8 DOME ON P BRACKET PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES z ,..:�'r* '.«,si ..... .3 , FT---.... ;,.a, ,.. E... - 1 .i .` — a , 1 +„* tr s3: ,, � '°°' a'` '�'s!.. r� air xt I r tiY ;mac .x I F CONEERENCENOTES• ; a � r. ,,ly ; + , 10 1 , I � • : e " ' A "°` - _ . I _eatbn;tetintNotesare. ali o,Sfx i6 omds1ti__ _ NON-RESIDENTIAL 7 PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: 17// 9 STAFF AT PRE-APP.: l e e f re 1 APPLICANT: D co, 0 o!a c, AGENT: La ui s S¢au+ / C t 4.34! Phone:[ l Phone: [ l 22 6—/7 s5 PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GEN.LOCATION: L-7'3_,30 <W eu--til ar,f t SV vee TAX MAP[S:/LOT#[S): ZS I o'7 A'C I ci.x Low ��O r NECESSARY APPUCATION[SI: S;-e l-3-e LiQ(6LT 144 e 7 eevJ.- JJJ1 Se(-�t�/VC-- c7 Q 1° C? o t .. - . ), V. v14� ? PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: D.eveIc a aa,,�'�r 1av a J ate,'veWa c/ fie acc-e5; r 'P�J�� �¢- R buo y / COMPREHENSIVE PLAN I / j MAP DESIGNATION: £ D ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: - r?D r C LT.AREA: Cas FACILITATOR: �� �—J PHONE [5031 ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot sze: Q sq. ft.Average lot width: N/Q ft. M imum building height:4 ft. Setbacks: Fronts a ft. Side Ha ft. Rear I Q ft. Corner s4 ft. from street. Maximum site coverage: SS % 'Minimum landscape or natural vegetation area: /S % [Refer to Code Section 18.66.0 s,d l J.t— f ey&I ion- veer t a p� (,$)� st'LQ� s V- ADDMONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIRE be 44,e¢— MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition ust have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15 foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL EXCEED 2', TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1 times the minimum I ize of the applicable zoning district. [Refer to Code Section 18.164.060-Lots) CRY OFTIGARD Pre-a„nncanon conference Notes Pape 1 el 9 MAN-IsslIntlal q/Ilcatl.U►In.lal OmnrtMsIt UM' I SPECIAL SETBACKS l > Streets: d feet from the centerline of S LU l' Lu�,c�tq, S ,P� > Established areas: feet from . > Lower intensity zon feet, along the site's boundary. > Flag lot: 10-fo side yard setback. [Refer to Code Se on and 18.961 SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT UJVI IONS BUILDING HEIGHT �CEPTIONS - Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provi ed that: > A maximum building flo ,r area to site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; > All actual building setbacks will be at least half (VI) of the building's height; and > The structure will not abut esidential zoned district. [Refer to Code Section 18.98. O] PARKING AND ACCESS / Required parking for this type of use: li 0 1 �r�IH ✓�u)' Parking shown on preliminary plan(s): 16 s pa c. I Secondary use required parking: la 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 1 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 i 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: O 2. Minimum access width: 3 ' i Minimum pavement width: 2L/' All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: Q [Refer to Code Section 18.106 and 18.1081 _ CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Applilcatlen Conference Notes Page 2 N 9 M11-lasllaatlal sullcatl.UPloalal lalartaaat Seeds' �y WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS WALKWAYS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. [Refer to Code Section 18108.050] LOADING AREA REQUIREME Every COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. [Refer to Code Section 18.106:00-0901 CLEAR VISION AREA . -_ The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE AND EIGHT % FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification. [Refer to Code Section 18.1021 BUFFERING ANDS • 3 a' 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. I p ��e �o w&la, dS a RI IQ Ks ► F o-t [Refute Code Chapter 18.100) S a�cs a k e ec *tie_ I a F� ,� u�d •1 e 'b ,.0✓ to . -wcjr uC ✓ec)f• ..! The REQUIR D BUFFER WIDTHS whicni are app able to your proposal area are as Tolls: S-ee_ /•o Meet along north boundary. �4. feet along east boundary. 4 q feet along south boundary. k% feet along west boundary. In addi '•n si•ht obscuring screening is required along . ( SING 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 18.100,18.10. ;nd 18.1081 CITY OF T1GARD Pre-AnpUcatlon Conference Notes Page 3 119 NON-Inldaatlal aaallcatlaa/PIaaalao Oaaartsaat Sactla■ SIGNS SIGN PERMITS MUS B OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Si n Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standa ds may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. tematively, 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 UNSUITAB - -- 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 STE , 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 18.843407B- 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 rR anon B,3. /UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY NSA)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, Ifrom the defined boundaries of the sensitive area, except where approval has been granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an area of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable encroachment shall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the length of the vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in width. In any case, the average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, ,' dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: A GRAVEL WALKWAY OR BIKE PATH, NOT EXCEEDING 8 FEET IN WIDTH. If the walkway 1 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 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 T16ABO Pro-AvpHcatloa Conference Not Page 4 at 9 NSW-{utaeutlal arpIIcatl..RlaiI.ilepartssn ectlaa r WATER QUALITY Ft _ITIES may encroach into the vegetc , corridor a maximum of 10 feet with the approval of the Agency or City. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. to R&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 1 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 i 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 erosion; maintain and enhance I fish and wildlife habitats; and 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 I mapped and protected. The Tualatin River, which is also a "fish-bearing stream," has an average annual flow of more than 1000 cfs. aior Streams: Streams which are mapped as "FISH-BEARING STREAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry 1 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: i Streams which are NOT "FISH-BEARING STREAMS" according to Oregon Department of Forestry maps . Minor streams in Tigard include Summer Creek, Derry Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and certain short tributaries of the Tualatin River. i 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 FEET, unless modified in accordance with this chapter. > ISOLATED WETLANDS AND MINOR STREAMS (including adjacent wetlands) have no I riparian setback; however, a 25-foot "water quality buffer" is required under Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) standards adopted and administered by the City of Tigard. (Refer to Code Section 18.85.010) CITY drTIGARD Pro-Application Conference Notes Page 5 If 9 N111-Iss11.utlal appUcation/111 Wte,Osiar seat 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 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 REDUCTION, the applicant must demonstrate that the riparian corridor was substantially disturbed at the time this regulation was adopted. This determination must be based on the Vegetation Study required by Section 18.85.050.0 that demonstrates all of the following: j > Native plant species currently cover less than 80% of the on-site riparian corridor area; > The tree canopy currently covers less than 50% of the on-site riparian corridor and healthy trees have not been removed from the on-site riparian setback area for the last five years; > That vegetation was not removed contrary to the provisions of Section 18.85.050 regulating removal of native plant species; > That there will be no infringement into the 100-year floodplain; and > The average slope of the riparian area is not greater than 20%. [Refer to Code Section 18.85.1001 TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS A TREE PAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, major partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. The TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: > Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City; > Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.150.070.D. according to the following standards: b 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; a Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D; b Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.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 18.150.0251 CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Aopgcatlon Conference Notes Page 6 019 r$M1ssli .n.i.ppnc.n.■rn..n.pap.rn..rt$.cn.■ • 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 18.150.070111] SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVA ON PRIOR TO SUBMITTI - s SUBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicant's are required to com.•lete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyor's Office in o •- to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepted as omplete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivis an Name Reservation. [County Surveyers 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 18.32] CODE SECTIONS J� 18.80 _ 18.92 102 18.116 18.150 18.84 18.96 15-106 _f8.120 18.160 1 18.85 18.98 _I./18.108 18.130 _ 1.8-162 18.88 100 18.114 — 18.134 _1/18.164 IMPACT STUDY As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the CITY OF T16ARO Pre-Aoogcatleu Cenferoace Notes Page T et 9 NON-issldsnUal an1IaUsIRllIRII IspttautSWWUs. public at large, public fact. .:s systems, and affected private prom, _rty 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) (NEIGHBORHOOD MEE 6 , THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 250 FEET AND TI APPROPRIATE CIT FACILITATOR AND THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE 1 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.) ---- 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 1 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. / RECYCLING Applicant ould CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING •e,, 'ATIBILITY with Pride Disposal's vehicles. CONTACT PERSON: Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal a (503) 625-6177. (Refer to Code Se, f on 18.116) ADDMONA1 CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: 0 S,L-e a ws d-• 1, c we/l aJc 4'LI) �'/oocc/aiL ab'e5 n t ovi S of' e _- p vn fe,A,. / CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Applicatlon Conference Notes Page I et 9 IIIN-IsshIutlal spllatlsUPlaaslq Isgrtmaat Section • PROCEDURE Ali 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, to 20 day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard L +'q2 („e,� u 14 c I ( . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the PI nning 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: /Mi CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DMSION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP.MEETING PHONE [5031639-4171 FAX (5031684-7297 E-MAIL (staff's first name)©Cl.tigard.or.us kUaala eatnA tastanWarn-east Ltawnering innat siastsnunua-c m) 54.1-911 CRY OFI1GARO Pre-Anppcatlon Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 lI1-lssllsstlal aaallcatJaa/Plaaalal aspirant intros CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Ak APPLICATION CHECKLIST L�'10 1' 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: _Le__ Date: _th:z./ ((APPLICATION & RELATED DOCUMENTS) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE ✓ MARKED ITEMS A) Application form (1 copy) B) Owner's signature/written authorization C) Title transfer instrument/or grant deed D) Applicant's statement E) Filing Fee No. of Copies $ 5ee • 1,1 SITE-SPECIFIC MAP(S)/PLAN(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE V MARKED ITEMS II A) Site Information showing: No. of Copies Lt 1 . Vicinity map 2. Site size & dimensions @‹ 3. Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10%) a ,- 4. Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds rs� 5. Locations of natural hazard areas including: (a) Floodplain areas (b) Slopes in excess of 25% (c) Unstable ground (d) Areas with high seasonal water table C (e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential G (0 Areas having severely weak foundation soils C 6. Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Map Inventory including: (a) Wildlife habitats (b) Wetlands 7. Other site features: (a) Rock outcroppings (b) Trees with 6" + caliper measured 4 feet from ground level 8. Location of existing structures and their uses 9. Location and ❑ • type of on and off-site noise sources 10. Location of existing utilities and easements 11 . Location of existing dedicated right-of-ways LAND USE APPLICATION/LIST PACE 1 OF 5 B) Site Development ran Indicating: No. of Copies 20 1 . The proposed site and surrounding properties 2. Contour line intervals a� 3. The location, dimensions and names of all: (a) Existing & platted streets & other public ways and easements on the site and on adjoining properties (b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site (c) Alternative routes of dead end or proposed streets that require future extension 4. The location and dimension of: (a) Entrances and exits on the site (b) Parking and circulation areas (c) Loading and services area o (d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation o (e) Outdoor common areas (f) Above ground utilities 5. The location, dimensions & setback distances of all: (a) Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities, and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet of the site (b) Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site 6. Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions 7. Sanitary sewer facilities O 8. The location areas to be landscaped 9. The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques 10. The location of mailboxes o 11 . The location of all structures and their orientation t� 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements /)o C) Grading Plan Indicating: No. of Copies Zf/ The site development plan shall include a grading plan at the same scale as the site analysis drawings and shall contain the following information: 1 . The location and extent to which grading will take place indicating: (a) General contour lines (b) Slope ratios (c) Soil stabilization proposal(s) (d) Approximate time of year for the proposed site development 2. A statement from a registered engineer supported by data factual substantiating: (a) Subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering report o (b) The validity of sanitary sewer and storm drainage service proposals cZ/ (c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated ct/ LANO USE APPLICATION!UST PACE 2 OF 5 D) Architectural Dra gs Indicating: ment Ian No. of Copies - The site development p �cnposai shall include: 1 . Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures proposed for use on-site 2. Typical elevation drawings of each-structure E) Landscape Plan Indicating: The landscape plan shall be drawn at the same scale of the site of Copies "2---C 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 r�/ 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 ❑ ❑ 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's-rgr: G) Traffic Generatio stimate: ti H) Preliminary Partition/L.t Line Ad'ustment Ma. Indicatin:: No. of Copies 1 . The owner of the su•'ect parcel 2. The owner's authorized :gent ❑ 3. The map scale (20,50,1 6! .r 200 feet- 1) inch north arrow and date ❑ 4. Description of parcel locati• and boundaries 5. Location, width and names o reets, easements and other public ❑ ways within and adjacent to the parcel 6. Location of all permanent buildi :s on and within 25 feet of all ❑ property lines 7. Location and width of all water cou es ❑ ❑ 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 e. -ments ❑ 11 . For major land partition which creates a public street: ❑ (a) The proposed right-of-way location an. width (b) A scaled cross-section of the proposed street plus any reserve strip ❑ 12. Any applicable deed restrictions 13. Evidence that land partition will not preclude effic' nt future land ❑ division where applicable 0 LAND USE APPLICATION./LIST PACE 3 OF 5 I) Subdivision Prelin ry t Map and Data Indicating: No. of Copies 1 . Scale equaling 30,50,1 .0 or 200 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per sheet I ❑ 2. The proposed name of the subdivision ❑ 3. Vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial and collector streets ❑ 4. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner, developer, engineer, surveyer and designer (as applicable) ❑ 5. Date of application ❑ 6. Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided ❑ 7. Names of adjacent subdivision or names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of un-subdi■ided land ❑ 8. Contour lines related 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 water courses & drainage-ways ❑ 16. The proposed lot configurations, approximate lot dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such lots. ❑ 1 7. The location of all trees with a diameter 6 inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level, and the location of proposed tree plantings ❑ 18. The existing uses of the property, including the location of all structures and the present uses of the structures, and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting ` ❑ 19. Supplemental information including: (a) Proposed deed restrictions (if any) (b) Proof of property ownership ` ❑ (c) A proposed plan for provision of subdivision improvements ❑ 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 ❑ l.kNO USE APPUUTION J UST PACE 4 OF S J) Solar Access Calcula 'ons: 0 K) Other Information No. of Copies o h:'lo g inlp atty\rnas tersutic I is t.m s t May 23.1993 LAND USE APPLICATION I LIST PACE 5 OF 5 • PR 1 CAT10 ONFERE OTES. c 4 - � '; r r `" ° `x ' is �..• f ENGINEERING SECTION �° �,�f, h City ofTigal'kerogen �� '..,�.y'rt� PUBLIC FACILITIES A u�� Q-cc�sS --cc) The purpose of the pre-application conference is to: 2- \ ZA-C ..kvo (1.) Identify applicable Cor Iprehensive 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 developm t application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: ( ) feet from centerline. ( ) to feet from centerline. ( ) to \ feet from centerline. Street improvements: ( )\ street improvements will be necessary along ( ) \ street improvements will be necessary along ( ) Street improve ;\s on shall include feet of pavement from centerline, plus the i allation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of utility wires (a fee may be acted if determined appropriate by the Engineering Department), a five-foot wide sidewalk (sidewaiksrmay be required to be wider on arterials or major collector streets, or in the Central Business Di'strict),,, necessary street signs and traffic control devices, streetlights, and a two year streetlighting fee. ( ) Street improvements on shall i de feet of pavement from centerline, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sevWers nderground placement of CfTY OF TEAM Pre-Application Conference Notes Pagel of 5 ligloeering Department Section utility wires (a fee ' be collected if determined approf e by the Engineering Department), a five-foot wide sidewalk (sidewalks may be required to be wider on arterials or major collector sheets, or in the Central Business District), necessary street signs and traffic control devices, streetlights, and a two year streetlighting fee. ( ) Setion 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 utlity lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is proposed,Nt is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead Iin s. There are existing ove ead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW . Prior to \ , the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. 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 maybe eligible for such an agreement: (1.) . (2.) Pedestrianways/bikeways: Sanitary Sewers: C f\/J,q The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) inch line which is located in . The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developers responsibility to Water Supply: ( (n) The Water District - Phone:(503) provides public water service in the area of this site. The District should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-ApplicatIon Conference Notes Page 2 0l 5 Engineering Department Section Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (Contact: Gene Birchill, (503) 526-2469) provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. N( 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. • ¶ i M(r ST' iJ ' -€ J Armen tP _ . 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. • Ac-c--5-`>. t—oc A° -a.Jrvb . 6 De-to5.44to /DJ ..s t mss Ply. 5 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: (4 Construction of an on-site water quality facility. ( Payment of the fee in-lieu. CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 5 Engineering Deportment 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 Depertment Seale° • Site Improvement . ermit (SIT). This permit is gene. ...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: ZJ 17 he' ENGINEERING DE ARTMENT STAFF Phone: [503)639-4111 Fax: [503)684-7297 h:\pattyvna ste rs\preapp.eng (Master section:preapp-r.mst) 18-Nov-97 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Annlication Conference Notes Page 5 of 5 Engineering Department Section • Site F. The Tualatin Ri er Floodplain West of Cook Park This area of the Tualatin River has been determined to be a significant resource as a water area and as open space/recreation area (addition to Cook Park). This wooded and grassy area connects the floodplain area with Cook Park as an extended greenway. Segments of the pedestrian/bike path have been constructed to the west of this area, connecting to Cook Park.* Except for one small piece, all of the floodplain within the City limits has been dedicated to Tigard. Site G. Fanno Creek Park/Main Street This area within Tigard's Central Business District along Fanno Creek has been determined to be a significant resource as a water area and needed open space for recreation purposes. This extends from Main Street on the north to Hall Blvd. on the south and includes approximately 32.5 acres.* The Resource Document recommendation for this site was to allow conflicting uses. Several acres of encroachment upon the floodplain portions of the Stevens Marine and Familian Northwest properties occurred before the designation of this resource. On the other side of the creek from these properties, the Main Street Apartment project received approval in 1993 to reduce 114,700 square feet of existing floodplain to 97,500 square feet and to fill .75 acres of wetland. In the mid-1980s the clearing of brush and the planting of grass in the area behind the Tigard Civic Center took place. In 1992 the City initiated a project to improve the native character of this portion of the park by planting indigenous trees and plants and creating a new wetland area. The floodplain lying south of the proposed Ash Street extension is in City ownership and the floodplain northwest of the extension soon will be, as this is an approval condition for the Main Street Apartment Project now under construction. Most of the land northeast of the proposed Ash Street Extension remains-in private- ownership. The Fanno Creek Master Plan calls for the park area south of the Ash Street Extension to be maintained as a nature preserve. The area to the north is seen as a village green or urban-type park, one providing active recreational areas to support the Main Street commercial uses. 42 r • CITY OF TIGARD 1 ,,,� ��: ��." �� \ \`., 7- Wetlands Inventory-/ • j �\ ��\, M I _ Unit 7 h.,,,. /, / * SI:k.k\\;" \\ ' s\'''- 4- .. . 4,,,,,c / '� \ \ \� \ �" ;\r Identified Wetlands \; \E.6 , . � \ ` '� Streams' , / /."\\ Ed)<66 < \ \, / .F' \ ' _-__ -■ 1:341i4 Public Land Survey \ .<'� - , i -- `. Section IDs �. . �� i .•• - C \ - \ Resource Unit Boundary < ///( -"if .:, ' : r 1:::-t' ne \ It �. ' ' I L[) I • Sample Plot Location / �° f`� ; 16 I - Source: Scientific Resources Inc. and ' / ' t i ii Fishman Environmental Services. Aerial /\ ;� . - !. , E-20;� \ photography from April, 1994 at a �! 4.• / • r� �_ _ �I �� nominal scale of 1" 400' .11),,te■�� : \Ic;!"ii.iii i , 1 _ Information on this map is of a....,. _, \ I -- - i ` (7, generalized nature. In all cases, actua]iii • ye V.^ field conditions determine wetland...si 1 t.I�,^ . ,,, '� , `• 'w r boundaries. . 111 1111 11E11 \� ' I Plc d Srve Inmati Plc d srvey seons d on _J :.�, A , - -� --- ` within either ST P!' — T1SR1W or T2SR1W.TO AIM :■■1 .-' 1 _ - ;�� �E Index Map � —— z° rot 4.iihr- - N ,,,,,li Ain fro I 0 A Azirmitt — ,\ \ . sc . _—_ A IMO l -� 1 .,,____ ,- ------ . I ■1 \ c„ 46; \'[MD / 4. ... , ti ,-- i ,. hi ..,..rul i J _ - i . 4.-.',V._I- 't-----k-/_L,-,-, r pkik,,,:7046,6 , .:. __ ___ _ ._______ _-MIN ' LAhE - Mai "1-1- —It- _L -----A - - I 0):Pe ':- /- !"" \ E-2 \\ \ . ir I ■■�■ �', T\ - In'- -"' --- - ---- 14 -'. 16 - — T 111 - _ - J__ , L_LL Z�1 \-1-) .- I IL) M,1�s J -� , r II H 1 ---i----' lir ../ ______ t Alligrilell.. e 8 WI j'- 1L �'7`� 1 1 I I dz�� � I l L I_ L .-_. 1 I "f' III -3 r•_ ` l_.t � F tI h `l l,• 1 I III 7 �'`,""i Plot Date: 09/23/96 Scale 1" = 700 feet 1 rt3Fe J �DD IVIeetin s p 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 18 19 2 1 1 �> 15 16 17 20 21 • 2 2 22 3 24 25 6 27 2 8 i Tuesday, r '17 1998 F eb a • 8:00 8:30 8:00 Wayne Gerig''SH #� 1� '�'��E ��.::::� 9:30 10:00 D3 Dolan Phase III/Laps Stciut 226�'l2 T and ►Ear to follow 10:30 ;>;:.;:.;:.::: 11:00 Camerson Parkes 641-8800/542 6I• 11:30 12:00 12:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 11:02AM Wednesday, February 11, 1998 5200 S.W.MACADAM AVENUE,SUITE 420 PORTLAND,OREGON 97201 TEL:(503)226-1285 FAX:(503)226-1670 TOLL FREE:(888)226-1285 E-MAIL: cida@teleport.com TRANSMITTAL PROJECT NO.: � -7/2-S- DATE: --',e /i4s PROJECT NAME: /O 7 ATTN: /1249-1Z-/-- 12-0 1 5 COMPANY: 777 ?' 7) 72-1,? ADDRESS: ENCLOSED: ❑ PLANS ❑ SPECIFICATIONS ❑ COPY OF LETTER ❑ DETAILS ❑ SHOP DRAWINGS ❑ CALCULATIONS ❑ SKETCHES ❑ OTHER NO.OF COPIES DESCRIPTION 'z- SD �f�cQ0A1Z� ,O ccss� 7-2-40 du (IZ -f r7f cG - ❑ FOR YOUR USE ❑ FOR REVIEW ❑ RETURNED ❑ FOR APPROVAL ❑ AS REQUESTED ❑ OTHER COMMENTS: COPIES TO: / DELIV 6. Le ❑ PICK UP ❑ MAIL SIGNED: (.411e-7 S7V 4 ❑ NEXT DAY COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL DESIGN ARCHITECTURE P.C. • CIDA INC. "PCB •MH -= 97_ O 69.= ri x 161.2 "I" MOHAeS x 152.2 X62.2 / PART It EKING H MOH �� ^\ `` x169. i MHO t OMH / \1- 161.2 A�S / �\ ` , , Cj PARKING Ot �� \,OCB 4(;) \\ \ \ ,-....../B/ x152.7 •- •- MH J) \ �.40, O NOS/401\-\ � J 16 I.3 •Odc om : a .x 151 I ____ W -� I t I� • Cr O `�, d OMH / x 51kV CY) ..›.... " -+ \ ) I 152.6 ) 4 / �' \\ 514S / +/ 151.4 x �� x 1 5 1.9 / ��� // ♦% -\ PARKING 1 + K ^ / 151.8 _ 1 ((j"\r ` \ x147 4 -� MHO \ lo OC x 151.8 / M PARKING fr ///f 0 K 14 5.1 /Jr' 0 / \ /• + O o \ J O / +)' ■ - PK / i x144.6 — - / ,1 157.6�� x143 6 l Y/�� M\C8 1 145.1 x e ,. , .. \. ,,,_ . & PAVED ' •---N. --.•:., ---Th , \ c... \) ) , , .1. tp AR / '4.' M81Aelk \ ,, • Cx169. ......... \ x \ \ . • \___,---' / RKING ill ',44 \\\ . • •. / 4,1: M Hai HO ik • ‘_. \ 4 <>CB ,44411/4? 7.____ PARKING 441*A:\ e \ . - _..._ :,, • . • )) \ • 10\1111 i _••■•• CB \CD., ' 0 ,- -,r41 -... .■ / \ -.-' ,.4/ --) _Th- Ap• • : ) --, \ ' - _ ...• Co ■..• -4- I5x2.6 (--- CB • 1---- , Vr . N:.\ ,- /.. / r.) t,7 4\7\0 c.. e , \ . 1 ■ \ISI di'' ( / , ., / • Nk----.)-. \ \„_,_ -- -- 1---') 151.4 x ---.7.- ..-- •.__, .151 9 , ' ' / , AD . . (, • .:7\- . . I) ( (._ PARKING r ::<>1‘\\. ..... .,,) , KIX 1 , ___.-----------......- „ \\ 7 \ x , MHO\ ocE. . / , ' • • /' x 147 4 . -, I 51.8 41111.- .‘V 1, • . ' PARKING 'e:i 0 7 ; \ , „ 15 i 8 9,,, , , •. . . , 1 r . / ) x1451 150 k(() l . (.2 ' ' \ . (,) . . ,r i • I , . , • ,, %1L/7-1) Ci \\\\'\ 0 • \<>. 15-7 6 - ,- /4- / .144 6 ( , ' c __J ■ \ . MHO , , . ..-• ' . ” 1 i \.),1. ., - -: •. .-- -'-''. , .143 6 4r.:\ i . (s..___) , cr. • i . .. ! i 45 I x -• PAVED ) / •• •I • • 1P••••• •• • v am • • v • ■ a..• • . • . .•..... f•.t. GI ( PC Ur t Mt SOUTH r/2 OF JOHN WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON ,� �,� HICi(L1NO.L.G3TMOST S/ i p� p� NORTHERLY CORNER OF / /`PV� P '•A CUR NHAM TRACT. 7/. SCALE I" = loo' /�`�`�0��.�'�P �,o J;,�. 5U 0 .�, ` / ;;t I o 3 Ac o IS / 1 i bO o • es,- 600 tii '_ e .//Ac 00 s 'n / 2�b ti6 J/" yc0 �, . \ cr. 0. d t• 700 'p os b o�a4- �'0. ids+�` c 7r 8 ,, L67Ac. v3 400 - e ti ..t t° s 800 q} zas >a Qe me.; ye� �'-�� i ` 3004> 3,_ ,p p2 /I` > 00 '.s* e6' , -' D/Act S 21c. e ,t i = e te% 61 _ 2S - .90 �J-`' VP 200 ro 4Gb' i 1101 y i (i F1'' 'I) \ .63 4c o � / ` 536 5 yq3- o 1100 ;�. 6 \�/ ae 33z1 N�3o54E■ 68Aa a oc°� q. ��i� t \s \ /(C-S.No.11945) 4 �s� d o / 202 ..201 �/ 2/4.96Ac. \✓ • 2 /.26Ac. s s, ri Li 1M „to v v..., . (.. T... , . ....., P e46 6 o NIP h ----itlY ,, k iTYOFTIGABD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES . ::r, F M NON-RESIDENTIAL DATE l /i 7/q 7 STAFF 6 ,� APPLICANT: Pc/ ' 4 ` AGENT: L a0y 4ou� CIQ4 I I Phone:[ I Phone: I ) 22 - /-7- 5 I PROPERTY LOCATION: ADORES& 12SZ0 5(,{> U1/la 'i4 Qe- TAX MAP/TAX LOT: -2,570 24-0 jet-x L-oy-- 7000 i 1 NECESSARY APPI]CATION[S]: Sr`ie_ bOe Vel c t 4 Ul,2cC' ; 1 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION:- a-neve/0 ati .2x;d/lu. 14a40 I IVia /o s .deV_ s,Ve tudY-4 I- j COMPREHENSIVE l PLAN DESIGNATION: C €(AP' - ( d us 1 Hp v ,iic-v` c- X12,0 ZONING DESIGNATION: ( .eki1/0 f dusiii px 6,,.vy,` -- JCITIZENINVOLV!MENT East FACILITATOR: L sG��r/v b �p i TEAM AREA: PHONE (5031 — i ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size: 14/q sq. ft. Average lot width: ft. Maximum buil ing height:L/C ft. Setbacks Front-*Ilk ft. Side M/ ft. 'Veer al 4 ft. orner I,4 ft. from street. Maximum site coverage: ACS % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: 1. % [Refer to Code Section 18. 66 ) e. -- C)ea v v's Coin a .j 1st L° — DDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQOIR ENTS cree„Al f&.4e t Jc a1 II - Minimum lot frontage: 5 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a pa • ion must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15 foot wide access easement. The cepth of all lots shall n t exceed 2:-t. times the average width, unless the parcel is less than 1 times :he minimum lot size of a applicable zoning district. [Refer to Code Section 18.164.060-L - mi OF T1GAR0 Pre-Auufcanea Conference Motes Pagel of 8 411-18:11121031 mileiaesirlaaalse Iciartmiszt Secaes , , SPECIAL SETBACKS Streets: 50 feet from the centerline of <L() /Mot)/ -1Y''�-P Established areas: kV / feet from !t,_�g Lower intensity zones: 1117/ 4 feet. along the site's Le q boundary. Flag lot: 10-foot side yard setback. G,_ [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(4t) 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 '- -I' Required parking for this type of use: 1/1.42a) f7o ubwe- Stori,p 1—/f v-e aJ Parking shown on preliminary plan(s): 80 toy r k irQ Secondary use required parking: 6evt,eUa.l �.c ti 1 / ±O x-/00 5'7 so 4„ypd Parking shown on preliminary plan(s): 1-7 very. froveed 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. (Refer to Code Section 18.106.020] 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. I / Minimum number of accesses: )� Minimum access width: 3 O Minimum pavement width: '2_.(-/ All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: 0/4 . [Refer to Code Section 18.106 and 18.108] ;ITV OF TIGAAD P e-AopHcadoa Canferenca Motes Page 2 at 8 tat-1HhIaaaal a nUcatUaiPssaisi laaartaat Sactlaa AY REQUIREMENTS Walkways shall extend from the grourd floor ent antes or from the ground floor landing of stags. ramps or elevators of all commercial. institutional. and dustnal uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convene t 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.O501 f 0 Lk-f- £1.couvo -Q/I 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 18.106.070-0901 tft.EAR VISION •l' • —The City requi -s 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 311FTERIN6 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-fie often_advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, utilities. and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.1001 The required buffer widths which are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. feet along west boundary. • In addition. sight obscuring screening is required along '.ANDSCAPIN6 Street trees are required for all developments fronting on a public or private street as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of-way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A minimum of one (1) tree for every seven (7) parking spaces must be planted in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms. decorative walls. and raised planters. For detailed information on design requirements for parking areas and accesses. [Refer to Code Chapters 18.100.18.106 and 18.1081 ,Tf OFT1GARO Pre-Application Conference Mates Page 3 o18 i4�■slu■tl � ■utaO■■rn�u�■�l.■■tbat sacrist Sign permits must be obtaine for to installation of any sign in the of 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 L Code Exception application may be filed for review before the Hearings Officer. fBahj to Cads Sadism 181141 EMSRIYE LAMOS ``_ ___ - __-- ---� 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 sensitivq - 1• 1 •. 1•• 1 - t1- - ••, ••• •• • 1. - •• • 1 11- - 1• yen must a lands be clearly indicated on plans_submitte-dwiihthe development application. • - 1 •1 • Chapter 18.84 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. Residential development is prohibited within floodplains, tie Cade Sedls&18.841 STEM 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 18.84.040.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 18.84.040.8.3. ---- ---- --- MIRED SEWERAGE AGENCY[DSAI BUFFER STANDARDS,R&0 98-44 - Purpose: ._ Land development adjacent to sensitive areas shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet wide, measured horizontally, from the defined boundaries of the sensitive area, except where approval has been granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an area of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable encroachment shall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the length of the vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in width. In any case, the average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor. No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: A gravel walkway or bike path, not exceeding 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 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 > Water quality facilities may encroach into the vegetated corridor a maximum of 10 feet with the approval of the Agency or City. TT OFn6ARD oAtatla csateraca Nata Page 4 jOcsa.a/MSip Warmest M u = I.n •f V- • - . -. rr••r. In any residential develop ent which creates multiple parcels or lots intended for separate ownership. such as a subdivision, the vegetates ,orridor shall be contained in a separate tract. and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construc on of a dwelling unit. (Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulai s-Chapter 3.Design for SWMI TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQU ENTS A tree pan for the pl nting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot. parcel o combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, major partition. site development review, planned development or conditional use is flied. Protection is preferred over remo where possible. The tree plan shall incl de the following: Identification of th location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City Identification of a progr -to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the r acement guidelines of Section 18.150.070.D. according to the following standards: Retainage of less than 25 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.0. of no net loss of trees; Retainage of from 20 50 percent 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 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 54 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D: Retainage of 75 percent 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 Cade Section 18.150.0251 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 cr 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 s4.,bject 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. ` _ TY OF TIGARD Pre-Aapllcatlea Conference notes Page 5 of 8 -7M-iasil.aual aullculasalasalall legartmat S.cds. • The planting of a reps. Tent tree sha I take place in a me, .er reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity In lieu or tree replacement under Subsection D his section. a party may. with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in perform g such tree replacement. (Refer to Cade Section 18.150.070[D) SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATIO Prior to submitting a Subdiv ion land use application with the City of Tigard, applicant's are required to complete and file a subdivisi n plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyor's Office in order to obtain approval/reservatio r any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxe confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. (County Surveyors Office: 648-888 r.- --1 CTIOE 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 18.32) paDE SECTIONS �'t� 1 _ 18.80 _ 18.92 X1$.100 1 '8.108 .120 `✓ 18.150 °r t v' -101 18.84 18.96 18.102 vi a 18.114 _ l .130 18.160 _ 18.88 18.98 18.106 h 18.116 18.134 18,162 tp-e. tact I t-18.164 IMPACT STUDY •- As a part of the application submittal requirements, applicants are required to include impact study with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways. the drainage system. the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact. the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests. the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.32.Section.050) 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) NEIGHBORH000 MEETING The applicant shall notify ail property owners within 250 feet and the appropriate CIT Facilitator and the mercers of any land use s ommittee(s) of their proposal. A minimum of 2 weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is req . ed. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Mee . is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Hando /44 'rr OF T1GARD Pre-Aopllcatfoa Conterenca Notes Page 6 of 8 4I-tasileatlal aualleapaUHaaaiai IseatvaaatSulu FROG 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. RECYCLING Applicant should contact franchise hauler for review and approval of site servicing compatibility with Pride Disposal's vehicles. CONTACT PERSON: Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal at (503) 625-6177. (Refer to Code Section 18.1161 ADOIT10NAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: a wo,.k.� Iteck P e-- w2 au d.�l aea)00.1 wec- pug letel✓'e✓ J 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 Panning 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) 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. :ITY OF TIGARD Pre-Aollcadon Coalereace Notes Page T of 8 7l-ts:llastlal snlleatln/Plawal InartsestSact.0 The Planning Division and Engi, _ring Division will perform a prelimine. ,.evlew 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 14)141 Ga 'ss1(1,^ . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. This pre-application conference and the notes of the conference are intended to inform the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of good site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the start 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 thin pre-application conference is submitted after a period of more than six (6) months following thin conference (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). 4 / PREPARED BY: CITY OF T16ARD PLANNING DIVISION PHONE [503] 639-4171 FAX: (5031684-7297 Ja7Itl3atlr3astersUraaa*-cyst `alIIssrlsS Sactlar.misters\araau{.asp —41u-97 :ITY OF nun Pre--A011cation Conference Motes Page 8 of 8 aHs 1 isstlalaselleatlauM»raugIaurtaaatSaciUu PUBLIC FACILITIES 2_p L The purpose of the pre-application conference is to: 4-l / (1.) Identify applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and ordinance provisions. (2.) To provide City staff an opportunity to comment on specific concerns. (3.) To review the Land Use Application review process with the applicant and to identify who the final decision making authority shall be for the application. The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: ( ) to f-- om centerline. ( ) /111A to feet from centerline. to feet from centerline. Street improvements: (./j T-3 ..'C∎ street improvement will be necessary along Sv,) 1,-AAr S t k_Aue., /4.i G1.-tS tii t s)r)e s efLe D c,et. 1,4 PzEle., 2cPAIL . A� Rep�Ace. c48 C4 & c,rtS AR�c Af t�,.rEl> ( ) s ree improvements will be necessary along ( ) Street improvements on shall include feet of pavement from centerline, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of utility wires (a fee may be collected if determined appropriate 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. ( ) Street improvements on shall include feet of pavement from centerline, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 5 Engineering Department Section utility wires (a fee n be collected if determined appropi , 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 years alighting fee. ( ) Section 18.164. 20 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a develop sent to be placed underground or, the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This re uirement is val • even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from th site. If the fee in lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contain. the verhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines whic run adjacent t this site along SW . Prior to , t applicant shall either place thes- utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to execute a non-remonstrance agreement which waives the property owner's right to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district. The following street improvements may be eligible for such an agreement: (1.) . (2.) . Pedestrianways/bikeways: • Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) 4� `, (9°�� Z inch line'which is located in . The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to _ -. ) 1_, s c-ausr„a‘i Ik.s.AL- ,.;E2 HH -s AAA c 3-1 . "04..4. .e.–S.4J 'T+-ecr &AL-iiac45 i 'WA) 7t :C vt�-CS.-1 f e5,,c4_e.., .e,.'T i5 Oi 1`E�v,..'r -� 'P 3�_,•14 AlI-icn'.sT sal,�.� Chr1 02-Cricr,..s AM�✓ar_ ¶7ta►- �.fSA . t1SPt . cv--%n, tail '"`-4"1 i (1- Q'Akt). Water Supply: The 1,:,:,,__ ,. Water District - Phone:(503) C-Cg-4n1 provides public water service in the area of this site. The District should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 5 Engineering Department Section Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (Contact: Gene Birchill, (503) 526-2469) provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. A downstream analysis will also likely be necessary to determine if runoff from the proposed development will cause a dverse impacts to the existing storm system downstream of the site. ` G-13.Avr. A--cp nl'Pe_ml' . 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 ':-==:. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the •evelopment, application. It is anticipated that this project will require: it I e0112 Lt's 'A`+l Sitz.o.T,ke:j ( ) Construction of an on-site water quality facility. \ (L Payment of the fee in-lieu. Cc- 1,11 k a✓A-- J 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. (Ac 1°v1iTh 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 r ..rmit (SIT). This permit is genera..,, issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: L. .(I ' 121 197 ENGINEERING DE ARTMENT STAFF Phone: [503)639-4111 Fax: [503)684-1297 h:\patty\masters\p reapp.eng (Master section:preapp-r.mst) 18-Nov-97 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 5 Engineering Department Section CITY OF TIGARD Al il COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST :!k 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: 11,t Date: /2 ! [1APPLICTION & RELATED DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE ./ MARKE ITEMS it A) Application form (1 copy) 8) Owner's signature/written authorization 95/ C) Title transfer instrument/or grant deed D) Applicant's statement No. of Copies c E) Filing Fee $ Aff)icaYk II SITE-SPECIFIC MAP(S)/PLAN(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE / MARKED ITEMS A) Site Information showing: No. of Copies 1 . Vicinity map 2. Site size & dimensions d� 3. Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10%) 4. Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds 5. Locations of natural hazard areas including: (a) Floodplain areas 0./ (b) Slopes in excess of 25% (c) Unstable ground (d) Areas with high seasonal water table (e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential (f) Areas having severely weak foundation soils 6. Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Map Inventory including: cz/— (a) Wildlife habitats (b) Wetlands et/ 7. Other site features: (a) Rock outcroppings O (b) Trees with 6" -- caliper measured 4 feet from ground level 8. Location of existing structures and their uses 9. Location and type of on and off-site noise sources 10. Location of existing utilities and easements 5 tiou «sway 11 . Location of existing dedicated right-of-ways °5 it��l„thw�� Q eokflctl LAND LSE APPLICATION J LIST PACE , CF 5 B) Site Development Plan Indicating: No. of Copies 5 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 (b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site (c) Alternative routes of dead end or proposed streets that require future extension ❑ 4. The location and dimension of: (a) Entrances and exits on the site (b) Parking and circulation areas ,- (c) Loading and services area (d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation (e) Outdoor common areas ❑ (f) Above ground utilities ❑ 5. The location, dimensions & setback distances of all: (a) Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities, and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet of the site (b) Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site ❑ 6. Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions ar�/ 7. Sanitary sewer facilities tz/ 8. The location areas to be landscaped cd/- 9. The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques 10. The location of mailboxes 11 . The location of all structures and their orientation 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements C) Grading Plan Indicating: No. of Copies The site development plan shall include a grading plan at the same scale as the site analysis drawings and shall contain the following information: 1 . The location and extent to which grading will take place indicating: (a) General contour lines (b) Slope ratios (c) Soil stabilization proposal(s) (d) Approximate time of year for the proposed site development 0 2. A statement from a registered engineer supported by data factual substantiating: (a) Subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering report ❑ (b) The validity of sanitary sewer and storm drainage service proposals ❑ (c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION/LIST PAGE 2 OF 3 D) Architectural Dra gs Indicating: No. of Copies 5 The site development plan proposal shall include: 1. Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures proposed for use on-site 2. Typical elevation drawings of each structure E) Landscape Plan Indicating: No. of Copies The landscape plan shall be drawn at the same scale of the site analysis plan or a larger scale if necessary and shall indicate: 1. Description of the irrigation system where applicable 2. Location and height of fences, buffers and screenings 3. Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces 0 4. Location, type, size and species of existing and proposed plant materials 5. Landscape narrative which also addresses: (a) Soil conditions ❑ (b) Erosion control measures that will be used v� F) Sign Drawings: ❑ Sign drawings shal be submitted in accordance with Chapter 18.114 of the Code as part o he Site Development Review or prior to obtaining a Building Permit to co truct a sign. G) Traffic Generation Estimate: ° H) Prelimina Partition o 'ne Ad'ustment Ma. Indicatin:: No. of Copies 1 . The owner of the su.ject parcel ❑ 2. The owner's autho- zed agent ❑ 3. The map scale (20 50,100 or 200 feet-1) inch north arrow and date ❑ 4. Description of parc location and boundaries ❑ 5. Location, width and na ,es of streets, easements and other public ways within and adjacent o the parcel ❑ 6. Location of all permanent ,wildings on and within 25 feet of all property lines ❑ 7. Location and width of all ater courses ❑ 8. Location of any trees within •" or greater caliper at 4 feet above ground level ❑ 9. All slopes greater than 25% ❑ 10. Location of existing utilities and uti 'ik easements ❑ 11 . For major land partition which create . public street: (a) The proposed right-of-way locatio and width ❑ (b) A scaled cross-section of the propo -d street plus any reserve strip ❑ 12. Any applicable deed restrictions ❑ 13. Evidence that land partition will not preclu• - efficient future land division where applicable ❑ LANO USE APPLICATION.,UST PAGE 3 OF 3 I) Subdivision Prelin. ry Plat Map nd Data Indicating: No. of Copies 1 . Scale equaling 30,50,100 or 00 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per sheet ❑ 2. The proposed name of the. subdivision ❑ 3. Vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial and collector streets ❑ 4. Names, addresses and t lephone numbers of the owner, developer, engineer, surveyer and esigner (as applicable) ❑ 5. Date of application ❑ 6. Boundary lines of tract o be subdivided ❑ 7. Names of adjacent subd ision or names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of un-su ivided land ❑ 8. Contour lines related to a City-established benchmark at 2-foot intervals for 0-10% grades greater than 1 % ❑ 9. The purpose, location, type and ize of all the following (within and adjacent to the proposed subdiv sion): (a) Public and private right-o,-ways and easements ❑ (b) Public and private sanit and storm sewer lines ❑ (c) Domestic water mains • cluding fire hydrants ❑ (d) Major power telepho transmission lines (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ (e) Watercourses ❑ (f) Deed reservations fo parks, open spaces, pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ 10. Approximate plan and profi s 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 hy. ants ❑ 12. Approximate centerline profiles sh•wing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a re.sonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision ❑ 13. Scaled cross sections of proposed stre: right-of-way(s) ❑ 14. The location of all areas subject to inun. .tion or storm water overflow ❑ 15. Location, width & direction of flow of all water courses & drainage-ways ❑ 16. The proposed lot configurations, approxi ,.te lot dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used fo purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such •ts. ❑ 17. The location of all trees with a diameter 6 in hes or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level, and the location o' •roposed tree plantings ❑ 18. The existing uses of the property, including the ocation of all structures and the present uses of the structures, and a stat-ment 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 improvements ❑ 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 ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION J LIST PACE 4 OF 5 J) Solar Access Calculations: ❑ K) Other Information No. of Copies c .,o + 0J5 N�1 Lt.:Niko h:Uogin\patty\mastersU-dd ist.mst May 23,1995 LAND USE APPLICATION,/LIST PAGE 3 OF 5 °DONNELL RAMIS ET AL 0173-243-2944 Dec 17 97 14 :40 No .008 P .01/14 O'DONNELL RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1727 KW. Hoyt Street Portland,Oregon 97209 TELEPHONE (503)222-4402 FAX (503)243-2944 FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET THIS COMMUNICATIONMAY CONSIST OF ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATIO N INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUALO R ENTITY NAMED BELOW. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE TO DELIVER IT TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT,YOU ARE HERE BY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OP THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR,PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU. DATE: December 17, 1997 CLIENT NO.: 90036-07 TO: David Scott William A. Monahan, Esq. FAX NO.: 684-7297 TELF,PHONE NO.: 639-4171 FROM: Stephen F. Crew FAX NO. 243-2944 DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT TRANSMITTED: Dulan v. City of Tigard,Stipulated Judgment(entered with the court 12/15/97); and Authorization for Clerk to Entcr Partial Satisfaction of Judgment. COMMENTS: �3 PAGE(S) TO FOLLOW, EXCLUDING COVER SHEET. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL THE UNDERSIGNED AT (503)222-4402. THANK YOU. SIGNED: Lisa M. Hefty [X J AN ORIGINAL IS BEING MAILED [ J AN ORIGINAL IS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST • ODONNELL RRMIS ET HL X03-243-2944 Dec 17 97 14 :41 No .008 P .02/14 1 2 3 4 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON 5 FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON 6 FLORENCE DOLAN; DAN DOLAN; DOLAN AND COMPANY, L.L.C., fka No. C 94-1259 CV 7 JOHN T. DOLAN AND FLORENCE T. DOLAN REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST; 8 A-BOY SUPPLY CO., INC., an Oregon corporation; and OREGONIANS IN 9 ACTION LEGAL CENTER, an Oregon STIPULATED JUDGMENT • non-profit corporation, 10 Plaintiffs, 11 vs. 12 CITY OF TIGARD, an Oregon municipal corporation, 13 Defendant. 14 15 This matter came on for trial before the Honorable Jon B. Lund, Judge of the 16 above-entitled court, on November 4, 1997. Plaintiffs Florence Dolan and Dan Dolan appeared 17 personally. Plaintiffs A-Boy Supply Company,Inc. and Dolan and Company, L.L.C. appeared is through Dan Dolan and Florence Dolan respectively. All plaintiffs appeared through their 19 attorneys, Donald Joe Willis and Jill Gelineau (Schwabe Williamson &Wyatt). Defendant 20 appeared through William Monahan and its attorneys Stephen Crew (O'Donnell, Ramis, Crew 21 and Corrigan), and Robert E. Franz, Jr. (Law Offices of Robert E.Franz, Jr.). 22 A jury was selected and duly sworn, the parties made opening statements and 23 commenced the trial,and on Tuesday, November 18, 1997,reached a settlement of the matter 24 which was presented to the Court and placed on the record in the fonn of a letter dated 25 November 17, 1997(face page) from Donald Joe Willis and Jill S. Gclincau to Robert E. Franz, 26 Jr. and Stephen F. Crew. The Court being duly advised in the premises approved the settlement acwwA , aOM a WYATi,P Page - 1 STIPULATED JUDGMENT PALtu.M Pee .0 aitt le�w C- & Penland,ON 97204.3795 Telephone(603)222-VGIIt (16/1 02822/1075I4/JW1726376.1) • UDONNELL RAMIS ET AL c03-243-2944 Dec 17 97 14 :41 No .008 P .03/14 1 as stated as fair and reasonable, and discharged the jury. The settlement letter is attached to this 2 Stipulated Judgment and incorporated herein. 3 NOW,THEREFORE,pursuant to the parties settlement,this Stipulated Judgment 4 is hereby entered, 5 1. Judgment is entered in favor of plaintiffs and against defendant involving 6 both a monetary award and equitable relief, all consistent with the settlement letter marked as 7 Court's Exhibit 1 and separately restated herein. 8 2. The deeds tendered to the City of Tigard contained in plaintiff's Second 9 Amended Complaint arc deemed sufficient by the City to satisfy condition 1 of the November 10 14, 1995 remand order at issue. The City of Tigard acknowledges those deeds and any interest 11 conveyed to the City by them gives the City no right to remove or impair lateral support on 12 property adjacent to that property described in the deeds. The City further acknowledges and 13 agrees that the deeds will allow grantors and their successors and assigns the right, on reasonable 14 notice to the City, for a reasonable time and in a reasonable manner, to go on to the easement 15 area to perform construction work,ordinary maintenance,repair and additional reconstruction on 16 the land retained by grantors,which is adjacent to the deeded area, 17 3. Plaintiffs Florence Dolan and Dan Dolan, Dolan and Company, L.L.C. and 18 A-Boy Supply Company, Inc.have the right t4 place a plaque or monument in the bike path 19 easement area outside the paved portion, in a manner that shall not obstruct the pathway and 20 placed flush with the surface of the pathway. The plaque shall be approximately 12 inches by 12 21 inches and provide on it: "In Honor of John and Florence Dolan -Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 22 U.S. 374 (1994)," If additional language is desired by the grantors, it shall require the approval 23 of the Honorable Jon Lund or his designated successor. 24 4. The City of Tigard will process in an expedited manner site development 25 review, and building permits for both the Phase I and Phase It buildings. The site development 26 review and building permits shall be treated as applications made as of a date no later than Page - 2 STIPULATED JUDGMENT schwADE, 0.v�8 ,SO I4 WYATT,P.C. n.a.«1 C.m«.mod.,1644-101:4 1211 B W.FAS A.,nw Pall.M,OA 47201-725 Toiephon,(SC.)222.99e I ({ 6/102822/107514/1W/726376.1) IJDUNNELL RRMIS ET HL 503-243-2944 Dec 17 .97 14 :42 No .008 P .04/14 • September 17, 1991. No additional conditions will be imposed on these site development review 2 and building permits other than those conditions relating to Code Compliance listed as Items l 3 through 9 and 11 through 31 and those items listed as structural concerns Items 1 through 3, 4 contained in the City of Tigard's letter of April 25, 1995 (attached to Court's Exhibit 1). All 5 other conditions or provisions of the City's letter of April 25, 1995 shall be deleted. To the event 6 that liability is established by a nonparty to this agreement against the City of Tigard based 7 solely on the fact that the City of Tigard has in this agreement, agreed to and applied the date of 8 September 17, 1991 as the date of all effective standards to apply in the development and 9 construction of proposed buildings, then Dolan and Company,L.L.C. and A-Boy Supply Co., 10 Inc., or their successor in interest,will, from mid to the extent of then existing insurance 11 coverage, indemnify the City of Tigard from that loss. 12 5. Plaintiffs will submit documentation that complies with the conditions 13 referred to above within 60 days for both Phase I and Phase II. The City shall review 14 documentation applying only the applicable governmental standards that were in effect on 15 September 17, 1991 and applying only those conditions identified above and shall approve the 16 development and building permits for both Phase I and Phase II buildings,along with all other 17 related permits for full development of the property within 30 days of plaintiffs' document 18 submittal. The only extensions that shall be allowed shall be those extensions requested by 19 plaintiffs or their designees in writing. In the event the above time periods cannot be satisfied, 20 the matter shall be submitted to the Honorable Jon Lund, or his designated successor, to 21 determine the appropriateness for an extension of time for compliance and the parties agree to be 22 bound by his decision 23 6. The building permit for the Phase II building shall be automatically 24 renewed by the City for at least one additional year,providing the plaintiffs or their designees 25 with a period to construct the building of no less than two years from the time of the granting of 26 the building permit. Page - 3 STIPULATED JUDGMENT buawAac. LLwMSNN1;WYATT- P.o.eM Cmnt.. L4..1100.150C f?11 8 W.FWTh Ar.r 5 5 PorJrrr,C.OR iil?�ooaa-J1Y! T.I�ofwrx(5e3)1 2•9S 1 (16/102822/107514F1Wr126376.1) • ODONNELL RHMIS ET HL R03-243-2944 Dec 17 ' 7 14 :42 No .0U8 P .O5/14 1 7, The Honorable Jon Lund shall retain jurisdiction over this matter until 2 occupancy permits for Phase 1 and Phase II have been issued, tie shall have the right to resolve 3 any issues relating to the issuance of the development,building,or occupancy permits in 4 summary hearing fashion including any disputes over the proper amount of traffic impact fees, 5 system development charges or any other condition or matter relating thereto. In the event of 6 dispute necessitating the assistance of Judge Lund, he,or his designated successor, shall have 7 discretion to also award reasonable attorneys' fees and the cost of the proceeding to the 8 prevailing party. In the event Judge Lund becomes unavailable to retain jurisdiction over this 9 matter, a Washington County Circuit Court Judge assigned by the Presiding Judge shall retain 10 jurisdiction to monitor the final settlement in his place. 11 8. The City of Tigard further represents that it shall direct its employees, 12 representatives and agents to perform and abide by this settlement agreement in all respects. The 13 pertinent officials of the City of Tigard individually agree to comply with all conditions of the 14 settlement letter and the City of Tigard agrees that it has authority to execute appropriate 15 settlement documents. 16 9. The parties will exchange mutual releases of all claims to be drafted by the 17 parties. 18 10. This Court does have and continues to have jurisdiction over this matter 19 and based on the Stipulated Judgment and settlement herein, hereby enjoins the City of Tigard, 20 its employees, agents and attorneys and all those acting in concert with it, who receive actual 21 notice of this injunction by personal service or otherwise, to abide by the terms of the Stipulated 22 Judgment as set forth above. 23 24 25 26 Page - 4 STIPULATED JUDGMENT ocpWAoc,WILLIAMSON a WATT.•a ►.o. I 1 am Nle w dr 00 .1a40 Portland.OR 21-395 Telephone(6031 I72-9pei (1 dl o2szzn o7s t 4nwnu a7e.1) ODONNELL PRMIS• ET RL 507-243-2944 Dec 37 ,97 14 : 43 No .008 P .06/14 1 MONEY JUDGMENT 2 11. Plaintiffs are further awarded a money judgment against the City of Tigard 3 in the amount of$1.5 million (One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars) and of that amount 4 plaintiff Oregonians In Action Legal Center is allocated the sum of$100,000. The balance of the $ money judgment award is to be allocated amongst the other plaintiffs as they deem appropriate. 6 The names of the judgment creditors are as follows: 7 8 Florence and Dan Dolan, $1.4 million(One Million Four Hundred A-Boy Supply Company, Inc. Thousand Dollars) of the $1.5 million total 9 Dolan and Company, L.L.C. judgment amount to be allocated amongst themselves. 10 11 Oregonians In Action Legal Center $100,000 of the $1.5 million total judgment to be allocated to it. 12 13 12. The amount of the total judgment is $1.5 million (One Million Five 14 Hundred Thousand Dollars). No interest is owed to date. Interest will commence to run on 15 December 11, 1997 if the full amount is not paid and interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum, 16 17 compounded annually on the full unpaid amount. 18 13. No costs or attorneys' fees are awarded at this time. The Court does 19 reserve and have power in its discretion to award fees pursuant to the equitable relief portions of 20 this Stipulated Judgment. 21 14. This Judgment shall become effective immediately, but shall not be 22 entered before December 10, 1997. If defendant City of Tigard pays the full monetary amount 23 24 on or before that date, plaintiff shall file a partial satisfaction of judgment evidencing payment. 25 That shall have no effect on the Court's continuing jurisdiction under the equitable relief 26 provided for herein. Page - 5 STIPULATED JUDGMENT SCOW ABE,MALLIAMBON 1 WrA1T.P C AKA.,�... P. -• , kµµK,WNes 1106-1900 1118W.FMA.+nw Pe re OA 97204-3796 ODONNELL RAMIS ET AL R03-243-2944 Dec 17 97 14 :44 No .008 P .07/14 1 15. When the occupancy permits have been provided on both Phase 1 and 2 Phasc H buildings,plaintiff shall enter a full Satisfaction of Judgment including satisfaction of all 3 equitable relief called for in the Stipulated Judgment. 4 16. No costs or attorneys' fees are awarded to any party and to the extent 5 6 defendant's answer contains a counterclaim by virtue of any claim for attorneys' fees or costs, it 7 is dismissed with prejudice and without costs or attorney fees, 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated this CL day of December, 1997. 10 11 /S/ csc �, C* Lh L/ l�ionorable Jon B. Lund 12 Judge of the Circuit Court 13 Submitted by: 14 Donald Joe Willis, OSB #71188 Jill S. Oelineau,OSB #85208 15 Schwabe, Williamson& Wyatt 16 John W. Shonkwiler, OSB #75337 17 Of Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Page - 6 STIPULATED JUDGMENT 80nWAISC,WILLIAM/IOW WYATT,►.C. A7oe/we N Ls.r Pacm11C�MIG a11tl00•itlW 1211 A.w. nti Aran�a Pphand,OR 97201•]795 TNephoe.(5.3)2224981 (16/102822/107514/1W726376.1) - ODONNELL PPMIS ET AL 5P7-243-2944 Dec i ' .97 14 : 46 No .008 P . 12/14 RECEIVED DEC121997 1 O'DONNELL RAMIS CREW 2 CORRIGAN&BACHRACH.up 3 4 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON 5 FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON 6 FLORENCE DOLAN; DAN DOLAN; DOLAN AND COMPANY, L.C., fka No. C 94-1259 CV 7 JOHN T. DOLAN AND FLORENCE T. DOLAN REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST; 8 A-BOY SUPPLY CO., INC., an Oregon corporation; and OREGONIANS IN 9 ACTION LEGAL CENTER, an Oregon AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK TO ENTER non-profit corporation, PARTIAL SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT 10 Plaintiffs, 11 vs. 12 CITY OF TIGARD, an Oregon municipal corporation, 13 Defendant. 14 15 Plaintiffs, through their attorney, Donald Joe Willis, acknowledge that defendant 16 City of Tigard has paid and satisfied that portion of the judgment in the above, which awarded 17 plaintiffs a money judgment against the City of Tigard in the amount of S1.5 million (One 1 g Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars). 19 The clerk is authorized to enter this partial satisfaction of judgment demonstrating 20 that the City of Tigard has fully satisfied and paid that portion of the judgment awarding 21 plaintiffs the sum of$1.5 million (One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars) against the City 22 of Tigard. 23 24 25 26 Page -1 AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK TO ENTER PARTIAL SCHWABE,WI C MS,N WYAT T,P SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT p•r�,�a�' x„'00 x'00 Pormr.4.oa G72O4-37 ODONNELL RAMIS ET AL 507-243-2944 Dec 17 .97 14 :46 No .008 P . 13/14 1 This partial satisfaction of judgment has no impact on and the balance of the 2 judgment awarding other relief remaining in full force and effect. 3 DATED this day of December, 1997. 4 SCHWAB' WILLIAMSON&,WYATT 5 , ./ By: Aar A / -44-e..i f 6 bon. ' J.- i is, •SB #71188 7 Jill S. Gy in au, OSB #85208 8 John W. Shonkwiler, OSB #75337 9 Of Attorneys for Plaintiffs 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 23 24 25 26 Page 2 - AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK TO ENTER PARTIAL SCHWA°`'""u1i1i1°014"%WATT,P.C. o.�...r�}s.t L.�oo.,.00 SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT „„�'w, ,� ,.,„,. Portland,or k n maa7N °DONNELL RAMIS ET AL •07,-243-2q44 Dec 1 ' .97 14 :44 No .008 P .08/14 • SCH\VABE PACWEST CENTER,SUITES 1600-1800 WLLIAMSON 1211 SOUTHWEST FIFTH AVENUE:•PORTLAND,OitF.00N 97204.3795 &WYATT TELEPHONE: 503 222.9961 a FAX: 503 796.2900•TEI.EX:650-G86.1360 P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAM' DONALD JOE WILLIS JILL S.GELINEAU Direct Linci(503)796.288'1£796.2929 E-Mail Address:Jergochwabe.com NOVEMBER 17, 1997 VIA FACSIMILE Robert E. Franz Jr. Office of Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box 62 Springfield, OR 97477 Stephen F. Crew O'Connell Ramis Crew Corrigan & Bachrach 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland, OR 97209 Re: Dolan v. City of Tigard Washington Circuit Court Case No. 94-1259 CV Our File No. 102822-107514 Dear Bob and Steve: Here are the significant items that we need to confirm to complete our settlement agreement. 1. The City of Tigard agrees to pay to the firm of Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt for the use and benefit of the plaintiffs 1.5 million dollars, no later than December 10, 1997. The funds may be disbursed immediately from the Schwab; Williamson& Wyatt trust account at the direction of the plaintiffs. ` 2. The deeds that were tendered to the City of Tigard and contained in the Second Amended Complaint are deemed by the City of Tigard to be sufficient to satisfy Condition 1 of the November 14, 1995 Remand Order. The City acknowledges that those deeds and any interest conveyed to the City by them gives the City no right to remove or impair lateral support on property adjacent to that described in the deeds. The City agrees the dads will allow grantors and their successors and assigns the right on reasonable notice to the City, for a reasonable time and in a reasonable manner, to go onto the easement area to perform construction work on the land retained by grantors adjacent to the deeded area,do ordinary maintenance and repair and any additional reconstruction. ODONNELL RAM IS ET AL 5P7-243-2944 Dec ' , ,97 14 : 44 No .008 P .09/14 Robert E. Franz Jr. Stephen F. Crew November 18, 1997 Page 2 3. The City acknowledges that grantors have the right to place a plaque or monument in the bike path casement area outside the paved portion, but it shall not obstruct the pathway and be placed flush with the surface of the pathway. The plaque shall bo approximately 12 inches by 12 inches and shall provide on it"In Honor of John and Florence Dolan•Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994)". If additional language is desired by the grantors, that shall require the approval of the Honorable Jon Lund or his designated successor. 4. The City of Tigard will process in an expedited manner site development review, and building permits for both the Phase I and Phase II buildings. The site development review and building permits shall be treated as applications made as of a date no later than September 17, 1991. No additional conditions will he imposed on these site development review and building permits other than those conditions relating to Code Compliance listed as Items 1 through 9 and 11 through 31 and those items listed as structural concerns Items I through 3, contained in the City of Tigard's letter of April 25, 1995 (attached hereto). All other conditions or provisions of the City's letter of April 25, 1995 shall be deleted. To the event that liability is establishedby a nonparty to this agreement against the City of Tigard based solely on the fact that the City of Tigard has in this agreement, agreed to and applied the date of September 17, 1991 as the date of all effective standards to apply in the development and construction of proposed buildings, then Dolan and Company,L.L.C. and A-Boy Supply Co., Inc., or their successor in interest, will, from and to the extent of then existing insurance coverage, indernnify . the City of Tigard from that loss. 5. Plaintiffs will submit documentation that complies with the conditions referred to above within 60 days for both Phase I and Phase II. The City shall review documentation applying only the applicable governmental standards that were in effect on September 17, 1991 and applying only those conditions identified above and shall approve the development and building permits for both Phase I and Phase II buildings, along with all other related permits for full development of the property within 30 days of plaintiffs' document submittal. The only extensions that shall be allowed shall be those extensions requested by plaintiffs or their designees in writing. In the event the above time periods cannot be satisfied, the matter shall be submitted to Judge Lund to detertnine the appropriateness for an extension of time for compliance and the parties agree to be bound by his decision, 6. The building permit for the Phase II building shall be automatically renewed by the City for at least one additional year, providing the plaintiffs or their designees with a period to construct the building of no less than two years from the time of the granting of the building permit. 7. The Honorable Jon Lund shall retain jurisdiction over this matter until occupancy. permits for Phase I and Phase II have been issued. He shall have the right to resolve any issues relating to the issuance of the development,building, or occupancy permits in summary hearing fashionincluding any disputes over the proper amount of traffic impact fees, system t development charges or any other condition or matter relating thereto. In the event of dispute necessitating the assistance of Judge Lund, he, or his successor, shall have discretion to also ems........... W. ..... A lL�..-. °DONNELL PAMIS ET AL 511 -243-2`x44 Dec 17 .97 14 : 45 No .008 P . 10/14 Robert E. Fran./ .11. Stephen F. Crew November 18, 1997 Page 3 award reasonable attorneys' fees and the cost of the proceeding to the prevailing party. In the event Judge Lund becomes unavailable to retain jurisdiction over this amount, a Washington County Circuit Court Judge assigned by the Presiding Judge shall retain jurisdiction to monitor the final g ttlement in his place. 8. The City of Tigard further represents that it shall direct its employees, representatives and agents to perform and abide by this settlement agreement in all respects. The pertinent officials of the City of Tigard individually agreed to comply with all conditions of the settlement letter and the City of Tigard agrees that it has authority to execute appropriate settlement documents. 9. The parties will exchange mutual releases of all claims to be drafted by the parties. 10. The parties agree that the terms of this settlement shall be included in a judgment providing for the payment by the City of 1.5 million dollars and for specific performance relating to the issuance of the development, building and occupancy permits for both Phase I and Phase II. If the City of Tigard adheres to the monetary form of the judgment by making payment not later than December 10, 1997, then simultaneous to the entry of the judgment the plaintiffs agree to enter a partial satisfaction of judgment evidencing that the payment has been made. A final satisfaction of judgment will be issued when occupancy permits have been provided on both Phase I and Phase II. Very truly youri, 17/(/- Ronald Ice Willis Jill S. elineau JW:se cc: Dan Dolan John Shonkwiler ODONNELL RAMIS ET AL 507)-243-2944 Dec 1 . 9 1:1 : 47 No . 00S P . 14 `14 • 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that on them day of December, 1997, I served the foregoing 3 AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK TO ENTER PARTIAL SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT 4 on the following parties at the following addresses: 5 Stephen F. Crew O'Donnell Ramis Crew Corrigan 6 &Bachrach 1727 NW Hoyt Street 7 Portland, OR 97209 8 Robert E. Franz, Jr. Law Office of Robert E. Franz, Jr. 9 P.O. Box 62 Springfield, OR 97477 10 John W. Shonkwiler 11 Attorney at Law 13425 SW 72nd Avenue 12 Tigard, OR 97223 13 by facsimile and mailing to them a true and correct copy thereof, certified by me as such, placed 14 in a sealed envelope addressed to her at the address set forth above, and deposited in the U.S. 15 Post Office at Portland, Oregon on said day with postage prepaid. 16 17 e ? � t 18 Donald'Joe Wilffs Jill Gelineau 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Page 3 - AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK TO ENTER PARTIAL 4cMwA4E.w+►1.w•4oN 4 WYATT.P C. ..na- at l.W SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT "'VITA; ;, .1" Pollan&Or.Qon 97204.3795 ODUNNELL RHMIS ET HL S03-243-2944 Dec 17 97 14 :46 No .008 P . 11/14 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICF, 2 I hereby certify that on the 1st day of December, 1997, I served the foregoing 3 STIPULATED JUDGMENT, on the following party at the following address: 4 Stephen F. Crew O'Donnell Ramis Crew Corrigan 5 &Bachrach 1 727 NW Hoyt Street 6 Portland, OR 97209 7 Robert E. Franz,Jr. Law Office of Robert E. Franz, Jr. 8 P.O. Box 62 Springfield, OR 97477 9 John W. Shonkwiler 10 Atturncy at Law 13425 SW 72nd Avenue 11 Tigard, OR 97223 12 13 by facsimile to them a true and correct copy thereof. 14 15 16 Donald Joe `illis Jill Geline 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE oa PI/ADC,YWIUAMaOMi.MKATT,P h 1t116.W. Avtnu! P i,,d.Onpon11i2 9e s T.i.phan.t ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS 44 471,111 l' II MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Jim Hendryx, Dick Bewersdorff, David Scott, Gus Duenas FROM: Bill Monahan DATE: December 26, 19 7 SUBJECT: Dolan (A-Boy Supply Co.) Stipulated Judgment Attached are the first four pages of the Stipulated Judgment in the Dolan v. City of Tigard matter. Please note that Section 8 of the Stipulated Judgment, found on Page 4, states that "The City of Tigard further represents that it shall direct its employees, representatives and agents to perform and abide by this settlement agreement in all respects." Please accept this memo as direction to comply with the terms of the Settlement Agreement. Specifically, please note that Sections 4 through 7 of the Agreement pertain to site development review and building permit procedures. Please familiarize yourselves and your staff with the requirements of this judgment. Should any issues arise pertaining to the specific provisions of this judgment, please consult with me or our City Attorney. It is critical that the City comply with the judgment. Once the occupancy permits have been provided on both Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildings, a full Satisfaction of Judgment will be issued by the court. WAM\jh attachment 1%admlbd�t 2:M7.1.doc °DONNELL RHr1I:; ET HL 503-243-2'944 Dec 1 ,97 1,1 :10 No .008 P .01: 14 O'DONNELL RAMIS CRAW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland,Orcgon 97209 TELEPHONE (503)222.4402 FAX (503)243-2944 FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET THIS COMMUNICATIONMAY CONSIST OF ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATLO N INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUALO R ENTITY NAMED BELOW. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE TO DELIVER IT TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT,YOU ARE HERE BY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OP THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR,PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE AN D RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU. DATE: December 17, 1997 CLIENT NO.: 90036-07 TO: David Scott William A. Monahan, Esq. FAX NO.: 684-7297 TELF,PHONE NO.: 639-4171 FROM: Stephen F. Crew FAX NO. 243-2944 DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT TRANSMITTED: Dulan v. City of Tigard, Stipulated Judgment(entered with the court 12/15/97); and Authorization for Clerk to Entcr Partial Satisfaction of Judgment. COMMENTS: +3 PAGF.(S) TO FOLLOW, EXCLUDING COVER SHEET. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL THE UNDERSIGNED AT (503)222-4402. THANK YOU. SIGNED: Lisa M. Hefty [X ] AN ORIGINAL IS BEING MAILED [ ] AN ORIGINAL IS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST UDUNNELL P,HMI ET HL 503-243-2.344 Dec 17 ,9. 14 :41 No .003 P .02/14 1 2 3 4 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON 5 FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON 6 FLORENCE DOLAN;DAN DOLAN; DOLAN AND COMPANY, L.L.C., fka No. C 94-1259 CV 7 JOHN T. DOLAN AND FLORENCE T. DOLAN REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST; 8 A-BOY SUPPLY CO., INC., an Oregon corporation; and OREGONIANS IN 9 ACTION LEGAL CENTER an Oregon STIPULATED JUDGMENT non-profit corporation, 10 Plaintiffs, 11 vs. 12 CITY OF TIGARD, an Oregon municipal corporation, 13 Defendant. 14 15 This matter came on for trial before the Honorable Jon B. Lund, Judge of the 16 above-entitled court, on November 4, 1997. Plaintiffs Florence Dolan and Dan Dolan appeared 17 personally. Plaintiffs A-Boy Supply Company,Inc. and Dolan and Company, L.L.C. appeared 18 through Dan Dolan and Florence Dolan respectively. All plaintiffs appeared through their 19 attorneys, Donald Joe Willis and Jill Gelineau(Schwabe Williamson &Wyatt). Defendant 20 appeared through William Monahan and its attorneys Stephen Crew(O'Donnell, Ramis, Crew 21 and Corrigan), and Robert E. Franz, Jr. (Law Offices of Robert E. Franz, Jr.). 22 A jury was selected and duly sworn, the panics made opening statements and 23 commenced the trial, and on Tuesday, November 18, 1997,reached a settlement of the matter 24 which was presented to the Court and placed on the record in the form of a letter dated 25 November 17, 1997(face page) from Donald Joe Willis and Jill S. Gelineau to Robert E. Franz, 26 Jr. and Stephen F. Crew. The Court being duly advised in the premises approved the settlement Page - 1 STIPULATED JUDGMENT wiLtteu WM WYATT.P C Pla"r2 .nler, 1a00.1." t211 l.W. yi A..nw Penland,OR 1721 4.3T95 Telephone 0031222-M1 (16/102822/10731 U1wr126376.1) UDUNNELL RNMIS ET HL 503-243-_944 Dec 17 .97 14:41 No .008 P .03/l4 • 1 as stated as fair and reasonable, and discharged the jury. The settlement letter is attached to this 2 Stipulated Judgment and incorporated herein. 3 NOW,THEREFORE, pursuant to the parties settlement, this Stipulated Judgment 4 is hereby entered. 5 1. Judgment is entered in favor of plaintiffs and against defendant involving 6 both a monetary award and equitable relief, all consistent with the settlement letter marked as 7 Court's Exhibit 1 and separately restated herein. 8 2. The deeds tendered to the City of Tigard contained in plaintiff's Second 9 Amended Complaint arc dccmcd sufficient by thc City to satisfy condition 1 of the November 10 14, 1995 remand ordcr at issue. The City of Tigard acknowledges those deeds and any interest 11 conveyed to the City by them gives the City no right to remove or impair lateral support on 12 property adjacent to that property described in the deeds. The City further acknowledges and 13 agrees that the deeds will allow grantors and their successors and assigns the right, on reasonable 14 notice to the City, for a reasonable time and in a reasonable manner, to go on to thc easement 15 area to perform construction work, ordinary maintenance,repair and additional reconstruction on 16 the land retained by grantors, which is adjacent to the deeded area. 17 3. Plaintiffs Florence Dolan and Dan Dolan, Dolan and Company, L.L.C. and 18 A-Boy Supply Company, Inc. have the right to place a plaque or monument in the bike path 19 easement area outside the paved portion, in a manner that shall not obstruct the pathway and 20 placed flush with the surface of the pathway. The plaque shall be approximately 12 inches by 12 21 inches and provide on it: "In Honor of John and Florence Dolan -Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 22 U.S. 374 (1994)." If additional language is desired by the grantors, it shall require the approval 23 of the Honorable Jon Lund or his designated successor. 24 4. The City of Tigard will process in an expedited manner site development 25 review, and building permits for both the Phase I and Phase II buildings. The site development 26 review and building permits shall be treated as applications made as of a date no later than Page - 2 STIPULATED JUDGMENT SCOWAIIE.ws� so..wYA P c. Poo rek Cam,....e..11-00-14.:4 4211 8 W.FMr Avenue op91W,OR V7704-379S Two: (161101822/1075I4/JW/726316.1) �a 00312224"i UDUNNELL RHMI:: ET HL 5u3-243-2944 Dec 17 .97 14 :42 No .008 P .04/14 • 1 September 17, 1991. No additional conditions will be imposed on these site development review 2 and building permits other than those conditions relating to Code Compliance listed as Items 1 3 through 9 and 11 through 31 and those items listed as structural concerns Items 1 through 3, 4 contained in the City of Tigard's letter of April 25, 1995 (attached to Court's exhibit 1), All 5 othcr conditions or provisions of the City's letter of April 25, 1995 shall be deleted. To the event 6 that liability is established by a nonparty to this agreement against the City of Tigard based 7 solely on the fact that the City of Tigard has in this agreement, agreed to and applied the date of 8 September 17, 1991 as the date of all effective standards to apply in the development and 9 construction of proposed buildings, then Dolan and Company,L.L.C. and A-Boy Supply Co., 10 Inc., or their successor in interest,will, from and to the extent of then existing insurance 11 coverage, indemnify the City of Tigard from that loss. 12 5. Plaintiffs will submit documentation that complies with the conditions 13 referred to above within 60 days for both Phase I and Phase II. The City shall review 14 documentation applying only the applicable governmental standards that were in effect on 15 September 17, 1991 and applying only those conditions identified above and shall approve the 16 development and building permits for both Phase I and Phase II buildings, along with all other 17 related permits for full development of the property within 30 days of plaintiffs' document 18 submittal. The only extensions that shall be allowed shall be those extensions requested by 19 plaintiffs or their designees in writing. In the event the above time periods cannot be satisfied, 20 the matter shall be submitted to the Honorable Jon Lund,or his designated successor, to 21 determine the appropriateness for an extension of time for compliance and the parties agree to be 22 bound by his decision 23 6. The building permit for the Phase II building shall be automatically 24 renewed by the City for at least one additional year,providing the plaintiffs or their designees 25 with a period to construct the building of no less than two years from the time of the granting of 26 the building permit. Page - 3 STIPULATED JUDGMENT ""`.04c.•utlAAasew wrATT.r.c ARC,*P,Lf� .c."311 B.W.idn vw.w comma.q O(R 03 Z42•J w (I 6/(02!22110751 U1wn26376.I) UL'IJNNELL RHMIS ET HL 503-243-'_2944 Dec 17 .97 14 :42 Na .UU9 P .05/14 • 1 7. The Honorable Jon Lund shall retain jurisdiction over this matter until 2 occupancy permits for Phase I and Phase II have been issued. Iie shall have the right to resolve 3 any issues relating to the issuance of the development,building, or occupancy permits in 4 summary hearing fashion including any disputes over the proper amount of traffic impact fees, 5 system development charges or any other condition or matter relating thereto. In the event of 6 dispute necessitating the assistance of Judge Lund, he,or his designated successor, shall have 7 discretion to also award reasonable attorneys' fees and the cost of the proceeding to the 8 prevailing party. In the event Judge Lund becomes unavailable to retain jurisdiction over this 9 matter, a Washington County Circuit Court Judge assigned by the Presiding Judge shall retain 10 jurisdiction to monitor the final settlement in his place. 11 8. The City of Tigard further represents that it shall direct its employees, 12 representatives and agents to perform and abide by this settlement agreement in all respects. The 13 pertinent officials of the City of Tigard individually agree to comply with all conditions of the 14 settlement letter and the City of Tigard agrees that it has authority to execute appropriate 15 settlement documents. 16 9. The parties will exchange mutual releases of all claims to be drafted by the 17 parties. 18 10. This Court does have and continues to have jurisdiction over this matter 19 and based on the Stipulated Judgment and settlement herein, hereby enjoins the City of Tigard, 20 its employees, agents and attorneys and all those acting in concert with it, who receive actual 21 notice of this injunction by personal service or otherwise,to abide by the terms of the Stipulated 22 Judgment as set forth above. 23 24 25 26 Page - 4 STIPULATED JUDGMENT K .M•IL.UAMISON w,A-s..C At�s�^+��1�.r ►.o,t1 f.�nyr,i.9J 7.7.01iCC 1 11 9.w.Gtn.. w. vau•,a.00 Y??e431�3 T.4evcne f6C3122241,S1 (16/102822/10i$14/3W/72(.p6.1) ODONNELL RAMIS ET HL 503-243-294a Dec 1 , 97 14 :43 No . 008 P .06/14 • 1 MONEY JUDGMENT 2 11. Plaintiffs are further awarded a money judgment against the City of Tigard 3 in the amount of S1.5 million (One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars) and of that amount 4 plaintiff Oregonians In Action Legal Center is allocated the sum of 5100,000. The balance of the 5 money judgment award is to be allocated amongst the other plaintiffs as they deem appropriate. 6 The names of the judgment creditors are as follows: 7 8 Florence and Dan Dolan, S1.4 million (One Million Four Hundred A-Hoy Supply Company, Inc. Thousand Dollars) of the 51.5 million total 9 Dolan and Company, L.L.C. judgment amount to be allocated amongst themselves. 10 11 Oregonians In Action Legal Center 5100,000 of the 51.5 million total judgment 12 to be allocated to it. 13 12. The amount of the total judgment is S1.5 million (One Million Five 14 Hundred Thousand Dollars). No interest is owed to date. Interest will commence to run on 15 16 December 11, 1997 if the full amount is not paid and interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum, 17 compounded annually on the full unpaid amount. 18 13. No costs or attorneys' fees are awarded at this time. The Court does 19 reserve and have power in its discretion to award fees pursuant to the equitable relief portions of 20 this Stipulated Judgment. 21 14. This Judgment shall become effective immediately, but shall not be 22 entered before December 10, 1997. If defendant City of Tigard pays the full monetary amount 23 24 on or before that date, plaintiff shall file a partial satisfaction of judgment evidencing payment. 25 That shall have no effect on the Court's continuing jurisdiction under the equitable relief • 26 provided for herein. • Page - 5 STIPULATED JUDGMENT au+r►'A,era.WILLw,laoM wrArr.r.c, Psw 1 ..106.1900 1211 B.W. t Awn,. par7r.0.OR 972j:3796 UDUNNELL PHMI;; ET HL 503-243-2944 Dec 17.97 14 :44 No .008 P .07/14 • 1 15. When the occupancy permits have been provided on both Phase 1 and 2 Phase 11 buildings,plaintiff shall enter a full Satisfaction of Judgment including satisfaction of all 3 equitable retief called for in the Stipulated Judgment. 4 16. No costs or attorneys' fees are awarded to any party and to the extent 5 defendant's answer contains a counterclaim by virtue of any claim for attorneys' fees or costs, it 6 7 is dismissed with prejudice and without costs or attorney fees. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated this jL day of December, 1997. 10 11 ISl ost, �, aiw� 1 ionorable Jon B. Lund 12 Judge of the Circuit Court 13 Submitted by: 14 Donald Joe Willis, OSB #71188 Jill S. Gelineau, OSB 485208 15 Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt 16 John W. Shonkwilcr, OSB #75337 17 Of Attorneys for Plaintiffs 18 19 20 • 21 22 23 24 25 26 Page - 6 STIPULATED JUDGMENT scrnr�ec wluw.ao.i�w,wTT,r.c. .r., k t+. Aaw��l CwntR,jjyy��11�����W-1aW 'ill 6 W,f tt,�Arv+w Pvnwe,OA 10204.37111 TPVymns(S03)221-991l (16/102$22/107514i1W/726376.1) ODONNELL RAr1I5 Er AL 50.3-243-2944 Dec 17 .97 14 : 46 No . 008 P . 12/14 RECEIVED 1 DEC 1 2 i997 O'DONNELL RAMIE CREW 2 CORRIGAN a BACHRACH.LIP 3 4 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON 5 FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON 6 FLORENCE DOLAN; DAN DOLAN; DOLAN AND COMPANY, L.C., fka No. C 94-1259 CV 7 JOHN T. DOLAN AND FLORENCE T. DOLAN REVOCABLE LIVNG TRUST; • 8 A-BOY SUPPLY CO., INC., an Oregon corporation; and OREGONIANS IN 9 ACTION LEGAL CENTER, an Oregon AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK TO ENTER non-profit corporation, PARTIAL SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT 10 Plaintiffs, 11 vs. 12 CITY OF TIGARD, an Oregon municipal corporation, 13 Defendant. 14 15 Plaintiffs, through their attorney, Donald Joe Willis, acknowledge that defendant 16 City of Tigard has paid and satisfied that portion of the judgment in the above, which awarded 17 plaintiffs a money judgment against the City of Tigard in the amount of 51.5 million (One 18 Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars). 19 The clerk is authorized to enter this partial satisfaction of judgment demonstrating Z0 that the City of Tigard has fully satisfied and paid that portion of the judgment awarding 21 plaintiffs the sum of S1.5 million (One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars) against the City 22 of Tigard. 23 24 25 26 Page -1 AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK TO ENTER PARTIAL InftWA8E,"^ „O "'T.r SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT Pie 1 +I" Porla,d.OR G72 4- 795 1JLIONNELL RAMIS ET AL 5C)3-243-2944 Dec 1 ,97 14 : 46 No .008 P . 13/ 14 1 This partial satisfaction of judgment has no impact on and the balance of the 2 judgmcnt awarding other relief remaining in full force and effect, 3 DATED this&day of December, 1997. 4 SCHWAB WILLIAMSON&,WYAT F 5 n : � 6 By: _ , onald J 1 Is, SB #71188 7 Jill S. Galin au, OSB #85208 8 John W. Shonkwiler,OSB #75337 9 Of Attorneys for Plaintiffs 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Page 2 - AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK TO ENTER PARTIAL °c w*i .w,u.wr.or+a wvATr•P.C. SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT ° .,.at.m �:�i'�'.w.�1u+A..rw oe,u.rw,or.➢m,11729447HH °DONNELL RHMIS ET HL 503-243-2944 Dec 17 ,97 14 : 44 No .008 P . 08/14 Sc H'\VABE PACWEST CENTEX,SUITES 1600-1800 WLLIAMSON 121I SOUTHWPST PIFTl1 AVENUE•PORTLAND,OkFGON 9720d-3795 & YATT TeLEPHONC; 503 222.9981 a PAX; 503 796.2900•TG.I.X:650.686.1360 P.C. •TTOAp EYS AT LAW DONALD JOE WILLIS Js...S.GELINFAU Direct Ilan(503)796.2887&796-2929 E-Malt Address Jweschwatar.com NOVEMBER 17, 1997 VIA FACSIMILE Robert E. Franz Jr. Office of Attorneys and Counselors P.O. Box 62 Springfield, OR 97477 Stephen F. Crew O'Connell Ramis Crew Corrigan & Bachrach 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland, OR 97209 Re: Dolan v. City of Tigard Washington Circuit Court Case No. 94-1259 CV Our File No. 102822-107514 Dear Bob and Steve: Here are the significant items that we need to confirm to complete our settlement agreement. 1. The City of Tigard agrees to pay to the firm of Schwab; Williamson & Wyatt for the use and benefit of the plaintiffs 1.5 million dollars,no later than December 10, 1997. The fluids may be disbursed immediately from the Schwab;Williamson &Wyatt trust account at the direction of the plaintiffs. 2. The deeds that were tendered to the City of Tigard and contained in the Second Amended Complaint are deemed by the City of Tigard to be sufficient to satisfy Condition 1 of the November 14, 1995 Remand Order. The City acknowledges that those deeds and any interest conveyed to the City by them gives the City no right to remove or impair lateral support on property adjacent to that described in the deeds. The City agrees the deeds will allow grantors and their successors and assigns the right on reasonable notice to the City, for a reasonable time and in a reasonable manner, to go onto the easement area to perform construction worlcon the land retained by grantors adjacent to the deeded area, do ordinary maintenance and rrpair and any additional reconstruction. ODONNELL FHMI'.: ET HL 503-^43-?944 Dec 17 ,97 14 : 44 No . 008 F .09/14 Robert E. Franz, Jr. Stephen F. Crew November 18, 1997 I'agc 2 3. The City acknowledges that grantors have the right to place a plaque or monument in thc bike path casement area outside the paved portion, but it shall not obstruct the pathway and be placed flush with the surface of the pathway. The plaque shall be approximately 12 inches by 12 inches and shall provide on it"In Honor of John and Florence Dolan- Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994)". If additional language is desired by thc grantors, that shall require the approval of the Honorable Jon Lund or his designated successor. 4. The City of Tigard will process in an expedited manner site development review, and building permits for both the Phase I and Phase II buildings. The site devclopmcnt review and building permits shall be treated as applications made as of a date no later than September 17, 1991. No additional conditions will be imposed on these site development review and building permits other than those conditions relating to Code Compliance listed as Items 1 through 9 and 11 through 31 and those items listed as structural concerns Items 1 through 3, contained in the City of Tigard's letter of April 25, 1995 (attached hereto). All other conditions or provisions of the City's letter of April 25, 1995 shall be deleted. To the event that liability is establishedby a nonparty to this agreement against the City of Tigard based solely on the fact that the City of Tigard has in this agreement, agreed to and applied the date of September 17, 1991 as the date of all effective standards to apply in the development and construction of proposed buildings,then Dolan and Company, L.L.C. and A-Boy Supply Co., Inc., or their successor in interest, will, from and to the extent of then existing insurance coverage, indemnify . the City of Tigard from that loss. 5. Plaintiffs will submit documentation that complies with the conditions referred to above within 60 days for both Phase I and Phase II. The City shall review documentation applying only the applicable governmental standards that were in effect on September 17, 1991 and applying only those conditions identified above and shall approve the development and building permits for both Phase I and Phase II buildings, along with all other related permits for full development of the property within 30 days of plaintiffs' document submittal. The only extensions that shall be allowed shall be those extensions requested by plaintiffs or their designees in writing. In the event the above time periods cannot be satisfied, the matter shall be submitted to Judge Lund to determine the appropriateness for an extension of time for compliance and the parties agree to be bound by his decision, 6. The building permit for the Phase II building shall be automatically renewed by the City for at least one additional year, providing the plaintiffs or their designees with a period to construct the building of no less than two years from the time of the granting of the building permit. 7. The Honorable Jon Lund shall retain jurisdiction over this matter until occupancy. permits for Phase I and Phase II have been issued. He shall have the right to resolve any issues relating to the issuance of the development, building, or occupancy permits in summary hearing fashion including any disputes over the proper amount of traffic impact fees, system L development charges or any other condition or matter relating thereto. In the event of dispute necessitating the assistance of Judge Lund, he, or his successor, shall have discretion to also i)DONNELL RRMIS ET RL 503-243-2944 Dec i ,97 14 : 45 No . 003 P . 10/14 Robert E. Franz. Jr. Stephen F. Crew November 18, 1997 Page 3 award reasonable attorneys' fees and the cost of the proceeding to the prevailing party. In the event Judge Lund becomes unavailable to retain jurisdiction over this amount, a Washington County Circuit Court Judge assigned by the Presiding Judge shall retain jurisdiction to monitor the final Sittlement in his place. 8. The City of Tigard further represents that it shall direct its employees, representatives and agents to perform and abide by this settlement agreement in all respects. The pertinent officials of the City of Tigard individually agreed to comply with all conditions of the settlement letter and the City of Tigard agrees that it has authority to execute appropriate settlement documents, 9. The panics will exchange mutual releases of all claims to be drafted by the parties. 10. The parties agree that the terms of this settlement shall be included in a judgment providing for the payment by the City of 1.5 million dollars and for specific performance relating to the issuance of the development, building and occupancy permits for both Phase I and Phase II. If the City of Tigard adheres to the monetary form of the judgment by making payment not later than December 10, 1997, then simultaneous to the entry of the judgment the plaintiffs agree to enter a partial satisfaction of judgment evidencing that the payment has been made. A final satisfaction of judgment will be issued when occupancy permits have been provided on both Phase I and Phase II. Very truly you , / (.7r- 7/ Donald oe Willis Sill S. elineau JW:se • cc: Dan Dolan John Shonkwiler 0DONNELL RhMIS ET hL 503-243-2944 Dec 1 . 9 14 : 47 No . 003 F . 14/ 14 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that on theme day of December, 1997, I served the foregoing 3 AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK TO ENTER PARTIAL SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT 4 on the following parties at the following addresses: 5 Stephen F. Crew O'Donnell Ramis Crew Corrigan 6 & Bachrach 1727 NW Hoyt Street 7 Portland, OR 97209 8 Robert E. Franz, Jr. Law Office of Robert E. Franz, Jr. 9 P.O. Box 62 10 Springfield, OR 97477 John W. Shonkwiler 11 Attorney at Law 13425 SW 72nd Avenue 12 Tigard, OR 97223 13 by facsimile and mailing to them a true and correct copy thereof, certified by me as such, placed 14 in a sealed envelope addressed to her at the address set forth above, and deposited in the U.S. 15 Post Office at Portland, Oregon on said day with postage prepaid. 16 • 17 18 Donald Joe Wiltfs Jill Gelineau 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Page 3 - AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK TO ENTER PARTIAL oc►4wse.roLLAusco4 ,71.r c. SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT "`"Tr,Sar, A o�o.�.co , Po 1L. d.3r n 912O4-3795 UDUNNELL RHMI'S ET HL 5U3-243-7944 Del. 17 .'37 14 :46 No .008 P . 11/14 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICF, 2 I hereby certify that on the 1st day of December, 1997, I served the foregoing 3 STIPULATED JUDGMENT, on the following party at the following address: 4 Stephen F. Crew O'Donnell Ramis Crew Corrigan 5 & Bachrach 1727 NW Hoyt Street 6 Portland, OR 97209 7 Robert E. Franz,Jr. Law Office of Robert E. Franz, Jr. 8 P.O. Box 62 Springfield, OR 97477 9 John W. Shonkwiler 10 Atta-vy at Law 13425 SW 72nd Avenue 11 Tigard, OR 97223 12 13 by facsimile to them a true and correct copy thereof. 14 15 16 Donald Joe illis Jill Geline 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 11uIWADL.a1lLW4O: ATT.P P rit 6t rhAw+ut1em Pa ar .on- }720+47'6 r..onon.,l;a3}222.49}t r DOLAN AND COMPANY LLC _ i 1919 NW 19TH AVE. PORTLAND OR 97209 February 11, 1998 Dick Bewersdorff City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard OR 97223 RE: DOLAN DEVELOPMENT PLANS Dear Mr. Bewersdorff, I was quite disappointed about your decision Monday to treat our access driveway to Burnham Street as not part of our phase II plan. We have been trying to develop our property for over ten years and have been stopped at every step of the way by the city of Tigard. I was taken by surprise at how suddenly and firmly you decided that the access driveway to Burnham could not be considered as part of our phase II development. Please allow me to lay out some points that you might want to consider before getting your position in concrete. 1) If we had not met with delays from 1986 to 1989 by the city of Tigard we would have had presented our application for phase II site development by 1991. 2) We acquired the Burnham Street property with investment-backed expectations to be part of the overall development and intended it to provide and access and some parking to the project. We were prevented from making a complete phase II plan by the city's unconstitutional restrictions to phase I. 3) The phase II building has moved to a Main Street orientation with parking in the back. The early designs had the phase I and II buildings parallel to each other creating a "strip mail" type of look. The current design is more pedestrian friendly and has better a Main Street appeal. 4) In order to orient the phase II building to Main Street it is important that we have access through to Burnham for the following reasons: a) Better access to parking though Burnham b) Relieves traffic congestion at the intersection of Main and Burnham. (Which I know is a concern) c) Better fire truck access to phase I and II d) Main Street access could be closed and we would need an alternate entrance. It could be closed for many reasons, among them are as follows: i) Maintenance work on USA large sewer line that runs through the entrance. page 2. ii) Paving or other utility work on Main Street. iii)During August each year on a Saturday Main Street is shut down for "Tigard Daze". 5) A Burnham entrance during construction would reduce construction traffic on Main Street. 6) With the entrance and associated parking spaces the West wing of the existing store would not be required to be demolished during the construction of the phase I building. 7) If we had not met with delays from 1986 to 1989 by the city of Tigard we would have had presented our application for phase II site development by 1991. 8) The Stipulated Judgement never said that we could not modify our plans. We have made extensive changes to the entire site plan and both buildings. The only difference seems that we never submitted the extension to Burnham in our previous plans. In my opinion this is a poor reason not to consider this change under the same rules as the rest of the plan. 9) This is the first time since 1988-89 we have had enough time to analyze our needs for this development, in which we only submitted plans for phase I. As you might recall we were given just two weeks in 1995 by the city to come up with our original phase II plans just before the remand hearing. I don't feel it is fair to come back now to us and say we didn't have the Burnham driveway in our plans in back then when it is you who put us in this position. I think we proved at trial that our due process rights were violated all through this decade-long process. Making us come up with complete phase II plans in a two week period was just part of the gauntlet we had to run. 10) If we were Eagle Hardware would you be taking the same position? In essence your position that the access and driveway should fall under current regulations, not the earlier regulations that the rest of phase II is under is a decision that builds upon your previous delays and conditions that you caused us. You forced us unreasonably to come up with phase H plans in two weeks so we had to leave off the Burnham driveway. The previous conditions and delays were wrong and I can see no reason why you cannot now reasonably accommodate our complete phase II plans including the Burnham access. The point here is to stop the madness and let everyone to get on with life. I sincerely hope you will reconsider your decision. Sincerely, CAJOL,-- Dan Dolan Dolan & Company LLC February 18, 1998 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Dan Dolan Dolan and Company, L.L.C. 1919 NW 19th Avenue Portland, OR 97209 Dear Mr. Dolan: This is in response to your letter of February 11, 1998. The reason why a separate Site Development Review (SDR) application for the Bumham Street parking lot is necessary is due to the fact that it was not part of the original application nor was it included in the court's review. We have -.o apply 1991 standards to the application reviewed by the court. The added parcel must be reviewed in terms of the standards in effect today. While a separate SDR is required for the added property, the timing of application and approval may not delay Phase II. This assumes there are no wetlands, floodplain or other unusual conditions. A pre-application conference, neighborhood meeting and Director's Decision will be necessary. The sooner your consultants submit plans for the additional property, the sooner the City will be able to proceed with the Site Development Review. Sincerely, 4 ,_,L03,J 0 / Richard Bewersdorff / Planning Manager 1:'curoln dick`dciansuo.let c: 1998 Planning correspondence file Bill Monahan Jim Hendryx Tim Ramis 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 i•� ^ 5200 S.W.MACADAM AVENUE-SUITE 420 PORTLAND,OREGON 97201 TEL:(503)226-1285 FAX(503)226-1670 TOL FREE(888)226-1285 E-MAIL: cidaeteleport.com FAX COVER LETTER PROJECT NO.: '7125— DATE, 272-5("471 PROJECT NAME: .4 -6e. 7 TIME: ATTN: 44,8 le-cf:Akil--73" FAX #: 6,B c74—) Z41 7 COMPANY: DESCRIPTION: ,i61v 14 C O /dv/S,-S _ FROM: CAS FAX#:(503)226-1670 PAGE / OF 2- (INCLUDING COVER LETTER) COMMENTS: /*42. OAT Ce.GSSZ-61J 41/1..., cc: Fax: n 0 0 0 ORIGINALS TO FOLLOW 0 ORIGINALS NOT TO FOLLOW CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The information contained in this fax is confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,or If this transmission was received it error,pleese netlfyus immediately at(503)226-1285 Zit .d C Ic '0 ° kCIAL INDUSTRIAL DESIGN ARCHIT CTUR PVGID ___ V17 :6 ` 8661 '9Z .98,4_ _. 5200 SW MACADAM SUITE 420 clorrirnunication Record PORTLAND,OR 97201 0 Meeting Minutes (503)226-1285 FACSIMLE(503)226-1670 0 Memorandum E-MAIL cidaSteleport.com 0 Notes Project Number 97/0% _ Date: Zz//Os 7 Project Name: A —00'7 Phone: Company: . Gc? Di ?? 2-0 FAX: ( Contact: �l� r��C,f�Z� Page of Address.: Front o Originals to Follow Regarding: ( riginals Not to Follow !se ' « kd. a 1/ 4w / 014i by tI Alm ' - .vfI4I - (A/70- :. a4 tI Z�if>< �p / .5::?;;pp7z-, ) 70reekr W/ S1�2dLlfyBzZf'�I . �Z-f��2� fY j p2)& 7 wi-[-C- L i E, wall� �- = I -,yr= C-171 o ` " S IV L! - s.a L -AA 4 stivc 7 G/. S A A . Sl a3 d,872 0,1 A4ir "V &;?- - l�✓!.0--- ��1 f 1r4+/ _ 7 G—T L(d wl? J mice. LT &C c C, e_ ,"u- sa'C eLaz. !i . _ Si AA-Ai ! _ 1. • iiArir .r•,# C.-♦ r S L- ANL- • co f F--r)()DW147 Ztz■ ,6D/DL U its{ P.Pf SSS''-S'. CC: ✓ J L�ti FAX 2 '{ — r ?r. Z jot-ilk( ,stfp)J 14./E- f _ 684 - «c- C-I' - � v J 'd 1620 'UN ERCIAL INDUSTRIAL DESIGN ARCHITECTUR'VU k 8661 4øk j' SETTING THE STANDARD FOR SERVICE EXCELLENCE Facsimile To: Lans Stout Company: CIDA Phone: 226-1285 Fax: 226-1670 From: Mark Roberts Company: City of Tigard Phone: 639-4171 Fax: 684-7297 Date: February 24, 1998 Pages including this page: 14 COMMENTS: This fax is related to your question concerning Condition of Approval #6. In Brian's comments on Pages 10-11 he refers to USA Resolution and Order (R & 0 90-43). R & 0 90-43 was adopted in June of 1990 and therefore is applicable to this application. R & 0 90-43 set in place standards for a fee in leiu system. These are the same development standards that were applied in 1991 to this project (old Condition of Approval #8) I've attached an excerpt from the previous 1991 Final Order and also I've included an excerpt of R & 0 90-43. JOHN W. SHONKWILER,P.C. Attorney at Law 13425 SW 72nd Avenue Tigard,Oregon 97223 Fax 684-8971 Phone 624-0917 February 24, 1998 Mark Roberts Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Dolan & Co., L.L.C. (SDR 98-0003) Dear Mark: After reviewing the Notice of Decision for the above described site development review, I suggest that you should identify in the record that there were a few "typos" or "scribner's errors." These are all minor but, given the circumstances, they should be clarified: 1. Page 1 in the "Proposal" paragraph identifies that the second building is "approximately 135, 000 square feet." However, the correct size of the building is 13,700 sq.ft.. 2. Page 1 in the "Proposal" paragraph identifies that the second floor of the Phase II is "7,700 square feet." However, the second floor is actually 7, 900 sq.ft. 3. Page 4, second to last paragraph on the page, repeats the "135, 000" sq.ft. This needs to the changed to 13,700 sq.ft. Finally, at page 10 in the third paragraph of the "Streets" section, you refer to a sidewalk "easement" for the missing public ownership of the sidewalk along Main Street. This is also included in condition No. 11 at page 3. The Applicant would prefer to be allowed to "dedicate" a fee title to this sidewalk area. Maybe you can revise or clarify this to allow either an easement or a fee dedication. I do not think it is necessary to issue a revised "notice of decision." A written clarification of these items by the City planning director, placed in the record, should be sufficient. Page - 1 Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, JOHN W. SHONKWILER, P. C. 111 (t) John W. Shonkwiler cc: Dolan CIDA Page - 2 /AA& Y City of Tigard MEMORANDUM aping ratty ter Development mmon siiaytnd A setter community CITY OF TIGARD , OREGON TO: File FROM: Mark Roberts DATE: February 25, 1998 SUBJECT: Typos and Clarification Issues for SDR 98-0003 This memorandum is in response to a letter dated February 24, 1998 from Mr. John Shonkwiler, the Attorney representing the Dolan's. The letter concerns typographic errors and clarifications of the staff decision issued for Phases I and II A-Boy Redevelopment . On Pages 1 and 4 of the decision the square footage of the phase II building was incorrectly noted at 135,000. This should have been listed at 13,700 square feet based on the application that was filed. Part of the confusion related to the square footage of Phase II has to do with both 7,700 square feet and 7,900 square feet being used on the zoning calculation's sheet of the plan set. The 7,700 square foot number was used for the parking calculation. The 7,900 square foot number was used for the square footage of the floor plan. However, the square footage calculations of the second floor of the Phase II building could equal 7,900 square feet due to its irregular shape and including staircase areas. Off-street parking was provided in excess of the minimum standards therefore the higher square footage would not require site and or landscape plan revisions. To address Condition of Approval #11 the Dolan's could also offer to dedicate the portion of the sidewalk along the SW Main Street frontage that is still on private property to the City. However, dedicating the sidewalk area instead of providing an easement is at the applicant's discretion. is\curpin\markr\dolanclr.doc 2/26/98 Memo to File Page 1 of 1 Clarification of Director's Decision 02/26/98 10:07 T2503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD 2001 4.4.4. ACTIVITI' REPORT s*s EkEEISIIi'4iEi ! ! iEE ! I.4' :E h: 8e$ TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. 9744 CONNECTION TEL 503 684 8971 CONNECTION ID SHONK GIBON HOEL START TIME 02/26 10:06 USAGE TIME 00'44 PAGES 1 RESULT OK Post-its Fax Note 7671 pace„ i,jil-8515► / T —j- 1. I From ar >eoi :" Co.IDept. 44J <N Lou) Co. Phone �T/z _I I l J 41-7 Phone#(,3/0 L ?l Fax A � — $97 Fax if 6`<S�f City f Tigard tY c I INiaii y DcvclrynErnI MEMORANDUM ti tpyl A I;ttu COnintPnity CITY OF TIGARD , OREGON TO: File FROM: Mark Roberts DATE: February 25, 1998 SUBJECT: Typos and Clarification Issues for SDR 98-0003 This memorandum is in response to a letter dated February 24, 1998 from Mr. John Shonkwiler, the Attorney representing the Dolan's. The letter concerns typographic errors and clarifications of the staff decision issued for Phases l and II A-Boy Redevelopment . On Pages 1 and 4 of the decision the square footage of the phase II building was incorrectly noted at 135,000. This should have been listed at 13,700 square feet based on the application that was filed. Part of the confusion related to the square footage of Phase II has to do with both 7,700 square feet and 7,900 square feet being used on the zoning calculation's sheet of the plan set. The 7,700 square foot number was used for the parking calculation. The 7,900 square foot number was used for the square footage of the floor plan. However, the square footage calculations of the second floor of the Phase II building could equal 7,900 square feet due to its irregular shape and including staircase areas. Off-street parking 02/25/98 13:09 $503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD 0 001 .d.d i 1 i . .....L*3-1.4.4. 4....... .I4:*$$ :1: :a: ACTIVITY REPORT :i:** s************************** TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. 9713 CONNECTION TEL 503 226 1670 CONNECTION ID CIDA START TIME 02/25 13:06 USAGE TIME 02'48 PAGES 6 RESULT OK /* t� __ �J SETTING THE STANDARD FOR SERVICE EXCELLENCE Facsimile To: Lans Stout Company: CIDA Phone: 226-1285 Fax: 226-1670 From: Mark Roberts Company: City of Tigard Phone: 639-4171 Fax: 684-7297 Date: February 25, 1998 Pages including this page: 6 COMMENTS: We understand your question concerning the timing and applicability of standards. The Dolan's applied for land use decisions concerning this property in 1989 and 1991 (See file excerpts). In the stipulated judgement we believe the judge referred to the standards in effect as of September 17, 1991 because this was the effective date of the 1991 land use Final Order before it went up to the Supreme Court. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD, 13125 SW Hall, PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503) 639-4171 FOR STAFF USE ONLY CASE NO, s-be F_, 2 I/Eck " J rr OTHER CASE NO'S: RECEIPT NO. APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY: - DATE: t- /"974F 1. GENERAL INFORMATION Application elements submitted: PROPERTY ADDRESS/LOCATION/2'77 2-61 s uJ V (A) Application form (1) / -f4 I IV ST T I,ARP i/x (B) Owner' s signature/written TAX MAP AND TAX LOT NO. T I ._ 700 authorization L/• (C) Title transfer instrument (1) SITE SIZE 1 401 AC. (Dos_Aiv ) v (D) Assessor's map (1) PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER* S1N1 T F. F►,OR..ENCe ✓(E) Plot plan (pre-app checklist) ADDRESS 7 5 4 4 S E rOS (L PHONE `.25-906 9 ✓(F) Applicant's statement CITY POrc.T ,c„{v E) Q R. ZIP 972 Q 6 (pre-app checklist) APPLICANT* E3,6,1-1 /..-:0, 4 e— !`-e-/JA// J/Z- P ✓cG) List of property owners and ADDRESS q=.OL, S!U e e 4 // PHONE 2,44- �/cf, 1 addresses within 250 feet (1) CITY I ZIP /,' / /(H) Filing fee ($3( c. ( ) When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a leasee in possession with written authorization DATE DETERMINED TO BE COMPLETE: from the owner or an agent of the owner with written - f -) authorization. The owner(s) must sign this application in the space provided on page two or FINAL DECISION DEADLINE: 5(7 if,/q?; submit a written authorization with this application. COMP. PLAN/ZONE DESIGNATION: 2. PROPOSAL SUMMARY b The owners of record of the subject property / request site development review approval to N.P.O. Number: allow SEEP'-ACC.Hct..vr DF Exr&-r%1■14 Approval Date: SALES F-4 c L.iT( W IT f-► A LA2c,- - BJt ►-O�^�4 Final Approval Date: Planning r Eng;r._!ering - �..-- 0524P/13 Rev'd 5/37 CITY OF TIGARD • Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY PLANNING COMMISSION 1. Concerning Case Number(s) : SDR 89-13/V 89-21 2. Name of Owner: John T. & Florence Dolan Name of Applicant: Albert R. Kenney, Jr. 3. Address 9500 SW Barbur Blvd. City Portland State OR Zip 97206 4. Address of Property: 12520 SW Main Street Tax Map and Lot No(s) . : 2S1 2AC, tax lot 700 5. Request: An appeal of a Director's decision to approve the re- construction of a general retail sales facility, A-boy Electric Plumbing and Supply, with a new 17,600 square foot building on a 1.67 acre parcel subject to 14 conditions. The decision included approval to a Variance request to allow 39 parking spaces instead of 44 as required by the Code. Zone: CBD-AA (Central Business District - Action Area) . 6. Action: / Approval as requested Approval with conditions Denial 7. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall, and mailed to: X The applicant and owner(s) X Owners of record within the required distance X The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization X Affected governmental agencies 8. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON JZ UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision, and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall, P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 9. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 13.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 which provides that a written appeal may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The deadline for filing of an appeal is -Z Cj' 0 10. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, 639-4171. bkm/SDR89-13.BKM !r / • 02/27/91 14.54 /T503 684 7297 CITY OF T I CARD Z0()7 it CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON SITE DEVLOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATIO'4 CITY OF TIGARD, 13125 SW Hall, PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503) 639-4171 FOR STAFF USE ONLY CASE NO. SP R 9/-c OTHER CASE NO'S: J 'U— /c2"' RECEIPT NO. (— Z'I i -,??_? APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY: "` ) DATE: 3- rc-L_>? -� I 1. GENERAL INFORMATION Application elements submitted: PROPERTY ADDRESS/LOCATION 12520 S .W. Main Street, x (A) Application form (I) Tigard, Oregon x (3) Owner' s signature/written TAX MAP AND TAX LOT NO. 2S1 ZAC, TAX LOT 700 authorization rx (C) Title transfer instrument (1) SITE SIZE 1 . 67 x (D) Assessor' s map (1) T John T. Dolan PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER* F l John T.P Dolan (E) Plot plan (pre-app checklist) ADDRESS 1919 N.W. 19th Ave. PHONE 225-9009 X (F) Applicant' s statement CITY Portland, Oregon ZIP 97209 (pre-app checklist) APPLICANT, Attorney: Joseph R. Mendez x (C) ADDRESS 1318 S.W. 12th Ave. PHONE 294-0442 CITY Portland, Oregon ZIP 97201 X (H) Filing fee ($.315-1- *When the owner and the applicant are different ( I) Construction Cost Estimate people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a leasee tn possession with written authorization DATE DETERMINED TO BE COMPLETE: from the owner or an agent of the owner with written authorization. The owner(s) must sign this application in the space provided on page two or FINAL DECISION DEADLINE: submit a written authorization with this application. 2. PROPOSAL SUMMARY COMP. PLAN/ZONE DESIGNATION: (Pb) C 5204_ SUS i,J ss DisT The owners of record of the subject property request site development review approval to N.P.O. Number: allow The construction of a 17 , 600 Approval Date: square foot building having a general retail sales facility Final Approval Date: Planning Engineering • n5')[,p/, io 0227/91 14.54 $503 684 7297 CITY OF TICARD Q1008 List any variance, conditional use, sensitive lands, or other land use actions to be considered as part of this application: See Attachment A • Applicants: To have a complete application you will need to submit attachments described in the attached information sheet at the time you submit this application. THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: A. The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject property. B. 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. C. 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. D. 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. DATED this /4? day of March 19 91 LGNATURES of each owner (eg. husband and wife) of the subject property. _ ,yL J DOLAN FLORENCE DOLAN - I KSL:pm/0524P) CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY CITY COUNCIL 1. Concerning Case Number(s) : SDR 91-0005/VAR 91-0010 (Appeal) 2. Name of Owner: John T. & Florence Dolan Name of Applicant: Knappenberger & Mendez 3. Address 1318 SW 12th Avenue City Portland State OR Zip 97201 4. Address of Property: 12520 SW Main Street Tax Map and Lot No(s) . : 2S1 2AC, tax lot 700 5. Request: An appeal by John Dolan of a Planning Commission decision to deny a requested variance sub-ect to conditions requiring the applicant to: (1) dedicate to the City as qreenway all property within the 100 year flood plain; (2) dedicate property 15 feet above the 150 foot floodplain boundary for a pathway; (3) survey the boundaries of the dedication; and (4) remove a roof sign within 45 days of the issuance of an occupancy permit for the new building. ZONE: CBD-AA (Central Business District zone with the Action Area overlay zone) 6. Action: Approval as requested Approval with conditions Denial x Approved in part, denied in part 7. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall, and mailed to: X The applicant and owner(s) X Owners of record within the required distance X The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization X Affected governmental agencies 8. Final Decision: THE DECISION WAS SIGNED ON 9/17/91 , AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON 9/17/91 The adopted findings of fact, decision, and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall, P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. A review of this decision may be obtained by filing a notice of intent • with the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) according to their procedures. 9. QUESTIONS: If you have any questions, please call the Tigard City Recorder at 639-4171. bkm/SDR91-05.BKM • 5200 S.W.MACADAM AVENUE,SUITE 420 RECEIVED PORTLAND,OREGON 97201 TEL:(503)226-1285 FAX:(503)226-1670 MAR 0 9 1998 TOLL FREE:(888)226-1285 E-MAIL: cida@teleport.com TRAMaIMil EAL PROJECT NO.: 11 (2 DATE: 3 - q - 7, 1 PROJECT NAME: 7l V 0 ATTN: MAP tobfr-6 T 71 G- lit/- COMPANY: t'l- a -ADDRESS: I 1.J5 fn) 7.W' 1( yArd [ ot if/ z2 ) ENCLOSED: ❑ PLA S ❑ SPECIFICATIONS ❑ COPY OF LETTER ❑ DETAILS ❑ SHOP DRAWINGS ❑ CALCULATIONS ❑ SKETCHES ❑ OTHER NO.OF COPIES DESCRIP ION p • I b� i ; 1 a%-- t,evt ,v ) 01� RA Cfrj6- V i ,-IL S-` & - r A / - i :, - , '' , ffiatI�MEMERMIO i► 7.. ❑ FOR YOUR USE ❑ FOR REVIEW ❑ RETURNED ❑ FOR APPROVAL ❑ AS REQUESTED ❑ OTHER COMMENTS: A-• J., O , COPIES TO: ✓ GJ u k s� b DE eta"avy ,� P , / PICK LIVER UP ,V ❑ MAIL C SIGNED: D NEXT DAY ilfr6 COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL DESIGN ARCHITECTURE P.C. • CIDA INC. 5200 SW MACADAM AVENUE, SUITE 420 PORTLAND, OREGON 97201 TEL: 503.226.1 285 FAX: 503.226.1 670 E-MAIL: cida@teleport.com March 6, 1998 City of Tigard Attn.: Mark Roberts 1 3125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: A-Boy CIDA Project Number. 97 125 Dear Mark: This will follow up our recent discussion with respect to permits for the A-Boy re-development Phases I and II. As you know, we submitted applications for Site Design Review and Building Permits on February 9, 1 998, within the time frame specified by the Settlement Agreement. The City promptly issued a Site Design Review Notice of Decision on February 20, 1998, site work plan check comments on February 18, 1 998, Phase I building plan check comments on February 23, 1 998, and Phase II building plan check comments on March 4, 1998. The Settlement Agreement appears to have been based on the assumption that the permit documents would be a revised version of the originally submitted documents, and hence the City could issue permits if the previous plan check comments were addressed. However, since the plans changed, new plan checks were issued for Phase I and Phase II. This effected both the time available to make revisions and the time for the City to check the revisions and issue permits. We understand that the City will interpret the agreement to allow the City 30 days of plan review time, not including time required for CIDA to prepare and submit revisions to the first plan check. In a telephone conversation on March 3, 1998,John Shonkweiler indicated to Lans Stout that this would be acceptable. In order to expedite your review, following is a summary of all the conditions and comments along with the resolution of each. These are also reflected in the accompanying revised permit documents. Site Development Review Conditions I. Street Opening Permit: Documents have been submitted to the Engineering •ARCHITECTURE Department. •ENGINEERING •PLANNING •LANDSCAPE F:\GENADMIN\PROJECTS\97\97125\03-03-98 Itr.wpd •INTERIORS COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL DESIGN ARCHITECTURE P. C . • CIDA INC . A-Boy-Permit follow-up March 6, 1998 Page 2 2. Responsible Individual: Dolan & Co., L.L.C. I 9 I 9 NW I9t Portland, OR 97209 3. Damaged curb and sidewalk: The drawings include a note to this effect. 4. Street tree design: The street trees are included in the Street Opening Permit documents as required by code. 5. U.S.A. Permit: A permit submittal to U.S.A. has been made. 6. U.S.A. Water Quality Fee: A check-is-enclosed. u-r'S t I,vA0- t - �✓ 7. Erosion control plan: Included in the drawing package. 8. Demolition Permit: To be applied for prior to Phase li construction. 9. Trash and recycling, roof top screening: The trash enclosure and screening is noted on the site plan; roof top mechanical equipment will be painted to match the roof. 10. Public Improvements: To be completed prior to final building inspection. I I. Sidewalk Easement: An easement will be provided prior to final building inspection (a standard easement form should be sent to CIDA by the City). 12. Maintenance: The owner intends to maintain the site improvements as required. Site Work Plan Check Comments I. The scope of the geo-technical report has been expanded to include the Phase II building site. The amended report will be available for review the week of March 9. 2. A separate application will be submitted for the secondary access area. 3. Program for Inspection services form is enclosed. 4. During construction, Geo-Design will provide inspection reports for: a. Acceptance of proof rolling. b. Observation of prepared footing subgrade for shallow footing design. c. Observed construction. d. Excavation of fill debris to subgrade, preparation of subgrade, refill and compaction under floor slab. 5. The applicant will contract a hydrologist report as recommended by Geo-Design addressing potential for loss of footing support through stream bank erosion. 6. We understand that the landscape plans are not part of site plan review. 7. A backflow prevention valve will be installed at the footing perimeter drain connection to the storm drainage system, as indicated on the revised drawings. Accessibility: I. The access aisle at the van accessible parking stall will be I'-0" wider than minimum required by Code. 2. Brian Rager indicated that we should use the standard City driveway detail not withstanding whether it is ADA compliant. We have added an ADA accessible route to connect the buildings on-site. 3. Detail 6/SD has been revised to indicate the correct accessible parking sign height at 7'. Fire and Life Safety: I. The structural drawings have been revised to indicate panel #13 thickness as 7". F:1GE NA DM I N\PROJECTS\97\97 125\03-03-98_Itr.wpd A-Boy-Permit follow-up March 6, 1998 Page 3 2. One existing hydrant remains on Main Street and one new hydrant will be added along Main Street. One hydrant will be added within the site, as reflected on the site utility plan. (See attached fire flow worksheet.) 3. Access to within 150' of all portions of the building is available from Main Street and the parking lot drive aisle. 4. The site plan has been revised to provide an approved fire apparatus turn-around. 5. The note on SD3 has been revised to read: "Relocate gas meter. Coordinate with NW Natural Gas." Phase I Plan Check Comments: Energy Compliance: 1. A lighting power budget for the interior of the building will be submitted with the tenant improvement permit application. 2. Revised plans show details and specifications of the exterior walls with 3-5/8" metal furring at 24" O.C. and R-13 ban insulation, in compliance with Package "B",table 53-C, UBC 3. Revised plans show details and specifications of R-4.5 rigid insulation at perimeter of building foundation and slab. Fire and Life Safety: 1. The exit system at Door 100D will be connected to the public way at the bicycle easement, as indicated on the revised drawings. 2. A storage and fixture layout showing aisle widths will be submitted with the tenant improvement permit application. 3. A reflected ceiling plan showing exit illumination and locations of lighted exit signs will be submitted with the tenant improvement permit application. 4. Locations of fire extinguishers will be included in drawings submitted with the tenant improvement permit application. 5. A Knox box will be located adjacent to the main entry door, I 0' above grade. 6. Panel #13 of the south wall will be 7" thick. Structural calculations have been revised and are attached. 7. Detail 3/A7.0 had been revised to delete the wood top plate. 8. The drawings have been revised to reflect correct the terminology for the mezzanine. 9. The catwalk has been deleted. Opotions are being reviewed for access to displays in clerestory windows. If it is determined that a catwalk provides optimal access to displays, a revised design will be inlcuded in tenant improvement permit application drawings. 10. The catwalk has been deleted. (See note #9 above.) I 1. Clerestory glazing adjacent to the potential future catwalk will be safety glazing. 12. Roof hatch is accessed via ladder with protective cage as described in Note #I7, Sheet A8.0. 13. Specifications have been revised to require automatic flush bolts at exterior pair doors. 14. A storage and fixture layout showing height of storage will be submitted with the tenant improvement permit application. F:\GENADM IN\PROJECTS\97\97125103-03-98_Itr.wpd • • A-Boy-Permit follow-up March 6, 1998 Page 4 Structural: I. See attached inspection form. 2. The calculation on page 8 was used instead of the one on page six. The panel number 6 reinforcement referenced on S4 is appropriate. 3. An inspection report will be provided. 4. Keynote order corrected on sheet S2. 5. See attached calculations. 6. Correction made. 7. Detail 8 / S6 provided on drawings. 8. See attached calculations. 9. Calculations will be provided when available. 10. Calculations will be provided when HVAC information is available. I I. See attached calculations 12. This bidder designed item will be provided when available. 13. Corrections made. Plumbing: I. Detail 8/A7.0 has been revised to require 4" downspouts, typical; 5" at column grid C.1/4. A. East Exterior Elevation 4/A2.0 and Roof Plan/A5.0 have been revised to show scupper and downspout at column grid C.I/3 at north end of east wall. Mechanical: I. When a mechanical sub-contractor is selected, he/she will submit an application for a mechanical permit. Plan Review comments have been forwarded to the contractor. Phase II Plan Check Comments: Responses will follow under separate cover. Thank you for your assistance in processing these permits. Y , rs Trul , r„, lam - \Linda C. Wall Architect Enclosures cc: D. Dolan J.Shonkweiler B.Ward,Grigsby Construction J. Funk,City of Tigard B.Rager,City of Tigard D.Welsh,CIDA L.Stout,CIDA K.Koroch,CIDA M. Nelson,CIDA F:\GENADM IN\PROJECTS\97\97 125\03-03-98_Itr.wpd STATE OF OREGON 1 County of Washington / SS I, Jerry R. Hanson, Director of Asse. ment and Taxation and Ex-Officio Cow Clerk for said county, do hereby certify tt the within instrument of writing was receiv and recorded in book of records of s< county. Jerry R. Hanson, Director Assessment and Taxation, E. D g g Officio County Clerk 20 Rect: 4b4912 03/10/1998 01 : 10: 49pm 43 ! + 7 35 AGREEMENT FOR EASEMENTS THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1st day of March, 1996, by and between DOLAN AND COMPANY, L.L.C., hereinafter called the first party, and CITY OF TIGARD, hereinafter called the second party; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS: the first party is the record owner of following described real estate in Washington County, State of Oregon, to-wit: Beginning at a point on the Northwesterly line of Lot 1 of BURNHAM TRACT, a recorded plat in Section 2,Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon, South 57°54' West 140 feet from the most Northerly corner thereof; running thence South 32° 53' East 184.2 feet to an iron pipe; thence South 33°55' East 103.3 feet to an iron pipe in the Southerly line of Lot 1; thence South 63°54' West along said South line 332.7 feet to the most Southerly corner of Lot 1; thence North 18°15' West 121.4 feet along the Westerly line of Lot 1; thence North 49°30' 128.7 feet to the center of the County Road; thence North 57°54' East 340.8 feet tracing the center of the County Road to the place of beginning. And has the unrestricted right to grant the easement hereinafter described relative to the real estate; NOW, THEREFORE, in view of the premises the first party does hereby dedicate, donate, grant, assign and set over to the second party an easement to all portions of the real estate that fall within the existing 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek(ie., all portions of the real estate below elevation 150.0) (the "Drainage Area", more particularly described in the attached Exhibit "A") and all property 15 feet above (to the east of)the 150.0 foot floodplain boundary (the "Bike/Pedestrian Path Area", more particularly described in the attached Exhibit"B") (the Drainage Area and the Bike/Pedestrian Path Area shall be collectively referred to as the "Easement Area"). The easement shall allow the second party to undertake only the following uses in the Easement Area: Agreement For Easements between Dolan and Company, L.L.C. and City of Tigard After recording return to: City of Tigard, do City Mayor 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 AGREEMENT FOR EASEMENTS- 1 A. The easement will allow the second party access to the Drainage Area only for the purpose of conducting or constructing flood and drainage controls, repairs and improvements for the purposes of reducing or preventing flooding and erosion and for improving drainage within the City boundaries of the second party. The easement will not allow the general public to access the Drainage Area. B. The easement will allow the second party access to the Bike/Pedestrian Path Area for the purpose of constructing and maintaining a bicycle and pedestrian path and to use as necessary for activities allowed in the Drainage Area. The easement will allow the general public access to the Bike/Pedestrian Area only for the purpose of walking and using unmotorized forms of transportation such as bicycles. C. The first party may build a fence to exclude the general public from the Drainage Area and from access to the rear of the first party's building or buildings existing or proposed to the located upon the real estate. Except as to the rights herein granted, the first party shall have the full use and control of the above described real estate. The easement described above shall continue for a period of perpetuity and run with the land. This easement shall bind and inure to the benefit of, as the circumstances may require not only the immediate parties hereto but also their respective heirs, executors, administrators and successors in interest. In construing this agreement, where the context so requires, the singular includes the plural and all grammatical changes shall be made so that this easement shall apply equally to individuals and corporations, or limited liability companies. The first party is a limited liability company organized and authorized pursuant to the laws of the State of Oregon, and 't has caused its name to be signed and sealed by an officer or member duly authorized to do sc by its members. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands in duplicate on this, the day and year first hereinabove written. DOLAN AND COMPANY, L.L.C. br, /e0114Ger/ r'Z Florence T. Dolan, Member-Manager STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss County of Washington ) This instrume t was acknowledged before me on thel day of 1996, by Florence T. Dolan as authorized member-manager of Dolan and Co pany, L.L.C. Ló. OFFICIAL SEAL L 1t) % KAREN M.BRAUNSTEIN 1 otary Public for Orego CO NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON .. !! / �� Mht1SSION NO A01530 `6 MY Y COMMISSION EXPII-IES JUN` 'F '° ' My Commission Expires: ��? AGREEMENT FOR EASEMENTS-2 3 EXHIBIT A GREENWAY EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION : A tract of land for Greenway easement purposes below the flood plain elevation of 150. 0 feet along Fanno Creek, being a portion of that certain Bargain and Sale Deed recorded March 19 , 1993 by Recorder' s Fee No. 93017744 , situated in the Northeast one-quarter (NE 1/4 ) of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, more particularly described as follows : Beginning at point on the southeasterly right of way line of SW Main Street , 60 feet wide, said point bears South 57°00' 00" West , (South 57°54 ' 00" West, Deed) 444 .91 feet, more or less, and South 33°00' 00" East, 30.00 feet from the most northerly corner of Lot 1 , Burnham Tract, a recorded subdivision; thence South O1°22 ' 00" West, 16.10 feet; thence South 46e18'00" East, 34 . 80 feet; thence South 56°56' 00" East, 12.40 feet; thence South 52°07 ' 00" East, 23.50 feet; thence South 55°00' 00" East, 37 . 50 feet; thence South 44°36 ' 00" East, 9.70 feet; thence South 40°45 ' 00" East, 22.30 feet; thence South 31°30' 00" East, 29 . 50 feet; thence South 34030100" East, 44 .58 feet, more or less , to the southeasterly line of said Lot 1 , thence along _ _ - - said southeasterly line South 63°54' 00" West, 55.55 feet, more or less , to the most southerly corner thereof; thence along . the southwesterly line of said Lot 1 , North 16°15' 00" West, 126 . 44 feet to an angle point therein; thence North 49°30' 00" West , 97 .41 feet , more or less, to said southeasterly right of way line ; thence along said right of way line, North 57°00' 00" East , 15 . 34 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing therein 4 , 583 square feet . REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR - 4....a}Q_,"/"1/ OREGON 'MAY 7. 1•C? DONALD H. HOLLY 891 C. . EXPIRES 6/30/97 4 (S 57'54'00' DEED) . N 57'00'00_- ---`-�-� \ �j _ 140.00' S.W . Main td. 444,`91' T-- MOST NORTHERLY \ --- -��-�-rr -304.91' I CORNER LOT 1 --� BURNHAM TRACT ■ wr P.O.B. N 57°00'00"E 15.34' -\, c 304.85' di r � _ S 01.22'00"W N e u... 2 ` 18.10' ° 0 ` 2 S 46•18'00"E LA to F- V m ` I W '34.A0' 6 ' /O Oo CO ec O S 56•58'00"E U N LLl " 12.40' • = U- / ` W o 1 \ s 52•07'00"E cD 23.50' Fee No. N 93017744 N'' 5 55•00'00"E • -.37.50' SCALE: 1• - 60' Oct. 11, 1995 / . S 44.38'00"E n c ; 9.70' 1 , s 40•45.00"E SURVEYOR: ►•s1 / 22.30' t/1 / / LA Jim Weddle and Assoc. , Inc. �pp / S 31.30'00"E 1750 SW Sky ! ln� Blvd. $ / 2v 50' ELEVATION 150.0' o ul Portland, Or. 97221 / O / 100 YEAR w o ( 503 ) 292-8083 GREENWAY to / H ' FLOOD PLAIN o q ( 503) 292-0938 FAX EASEMENT . s 34 30'00"E rn AREA 95 S5' /4 277.15' REGISTERED S 63°54'00"W 332.70' PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR Exhibit Map Z,,,.. ,47 GREENWAY EASEMENT OREGON MAY 7. 1969 IN LOT 1 , BURNHAM TRACT DONALD 9 1 HGLLY NE 1 /4 SEC. 2, T.2S., R. 1 W., W.M. City of Tigao"d, Washington County EXPIRES 6/30/97 Oregon Job No. 2441GW EXHIBIT B • • BIKE PATH EASEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A strip of land , 15 feet in width, for bike path purposes, being a portion of that certain Bargain and Sale Deed recorded March 19 , 1993 by Recorder' s Fee No. 93017744, situated in the Northeast one-quarter (NE 1/4 ) of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, more particularly described as follows : Beginning at a point on the southeasterly right of way line of SW Main Street , 60 feet wide, said point bears South 57°00'00" West, (South 57°54' 00" West, Deed) 426.73 feet, more or less, and South 33°00 ' 00" East, 30.00 feet from the most northerly corner of Lot 1 , Burnham Tract, a recorded subdivision; thence along the following courses and distances to wit: South 01°22' 00" West, 19.73 feet, South 46°18' 00" East, 26.78 feet, South 7.6°56' 00" East , 11.63 feet, South �2°07' 00" East , 23.75 feet, South 55°00' 00" East, 38.49 feet, South 44'36' 00" East , 11.57 feet, South 40°45' 00" East, 24 .02 feet, South 31°30' 00" East, 30.32 Feet, South 34°30' 00" East, 46.40 feet, more or less, to a point on the southeasterly line of said Lot 1; thence along said southeasterly line South 63°54' 00" West, 15.16 feet; thence along the following courses and distances to wit: North 34°30 ' 00" West , 44 .58 feet, North 31°30' 00" West, 29.50 feet, North 40'45' 00" West , 22.30 feet , _ North 44° 36 ' 00" West , 9. 70 feet , North 55° 00 ' 00" West , 37.50 feet, North 52°07 ' 00" West , 23.50 feet , North 56° 56"00" West , 12 .40 feet , North 46°18 ' 00" West , 34 .80 feet, North 01 °22 ' 00" East , 16.10 feet , to the southeasterly right of way line of said SW Main Street; thence along said right of way line, North 57°00' 00" East , 18. 17 feet to the Point of Beginning . Containing therein 3 , 473 square feet . t . el0 ---------------- (S 57'54'00"W DEED) �"- - _ N 57.00'00"E J 140.00' w Main S . 426.73: - r ` MOST NORTHERLY s• 11 _ I CORNER LOT 1 \ _1 �� 288.73' S -- BURNHAM TRACT c----_J—t-- N 57°00'00"E l8 77, I P.O.B. 288.87' N 01.22'00"E N I�I 16.10' LA y � /- ••S 01•22'00"W 19.73' N 58 It cn O r� O N 48.18'00"W �� "S 48.18'00"E 26.78' NI Jo_ S •.5 ' 0" ' 00 O / o 0 fh F- N 56•56'00"W 12.40' --1 D / • f 0 — O'� S 52•07'00"E 23.75' N ap �n = L7 N 52•07'00'W to /\ Bike Path Fee No. l .� //V- Easement 93017744 N N 55•00'00"W ' •' c S 55•00'00"E 38.49' 37.30' �z, SCALE: 1" 60' N 44•36'00'W / OCT. 11, 1995 9.70' /V S 44.38'00"E 11.5T 1.5T ., r..... to N 40•45'00"W— �-•S 40•45'00"E 24.02' SURVEYOR: 22.30' "9 / V i w Jim Weddle and Assoc. , Inc. N31.30'00'W o — / ° 1750 SW Sky IIns Blvd. 29.50' — o o /1' s 31 30 00"E 30.32' o Portland,I and, Or. 97221 '� o ( 503 ) 292-8083 N 34•30•OO"W — ca ti jI a °- ( 503 ) 292-0938 FAX ri 44.58' Z CD 1--S 34•30'00"E 48.40'CD tc 1 REGISTERED /1 261.99' PROFESSIONAL 15.16' S 63°54'00"W 332.70' LAND SURVEYOR Exhibit Map „1--7„,„,e".„,/,/, , ,, OREGON / BIKE PATH EASEMENT DONAL H. HOLLY IN LOT 1 , BURNHAM TRACT 1 NE 1 /4 SEC. 2, T.2S. , R. 1 W., W. M. City of Tigard, Washington County EXPIRES 6/30/97 Oregon Job No. 2441 ex • _ December 3, 1998 Dolan and Company, LLC CITY OF TIGARD Attention: Dan Dolan 1919 NW 19th Avenue OREGON Portland, OR 97209-1735 RE: A-Boy Store Proposed Freestanding Sign at 15550 SW Main Street Dear Mr. Dolan: This letter is in response to your recent inquiry into the construction of a freestanding sign in a location outside of the existing pedestrian/bicycle pathway easement. Provided the sign complies with Uniform Building Code, the Development Code, and any other related construction standards, the City can issue a Building Permit for construction of it. However, the Central Business District allows only one (1) freestanding sign for commercial uses within a "shopping plaza." A shopping plaza is defined as a single premise with between 2 and 7 tenants. Section 18.780.130(G)(3) states that the single permitted freestanding sign must take into consideration the need to identify tenants within the "shopping plaza." The Development Code further specifies a maximum sign height restriction of 20 feet with a maximum sign copy area of 70 square feet per face. Alternatively, the proposed sign could be attached to or built as an extension of the face of the adjoining building elevation as a wall sign. The Central Business District allows up to 15% of each building elevation to have wall signage. Based on the proposed size of the sign, it appears that the affected elevation could accommodate the proposed sign and other A-Boy store signage. You can also apply for a Sign Code Adjustment. The fee for this application is presently $780 but is proposed to be reduced to $545. This type of application is reviewed by the Director. Upon receipt of a complete application, this review would take approximately 2-3 months. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171 x317. Sincerely, 71/1a4/ Mark Roberts Associate Planner, AICP is\curpin\markr\letters\dolan.doc c: Bill Monahan, Jim Hendryx, Dick Bewersdorff, SDR 98-0003 Land use file, 1998 Planning correspondence file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 RETURN RECORDED DOCUMENT TO: STATE OF OREGON 1 Cr.1'tSALL RECORDS DEPARTMENT, ounty of Washington SS i'1TyOFTTGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd. I, Jerry ant�r, -Wr,r of Assess- ment and Tigard,OR 97223 . n an• io County Clerk for <: . *q r-• -rtify that the wit it rum , '. x , w- ceived and re!6rftecf 1k . . ,404 ;. 1( _ f oaRl. of said CORPORATION county.. * iI ,r., .911 * rt File No gp-, .- o •I irector of SW axation Ex- s. , r,, _.ti Ierk , Doc : 99049044 Rect: 230188 21.00 EASEMENT 04/21/1999 11:24:50am (BIKEWAY AND PEDESTRIAN WAY-) Dn(0-An a 0 S r„ i/1r1 faA4 y , L L-C hereinafter called the Grantors, grant and convey unto the City of Tigard a perpetual easement over, across, and under the land and real property described in the attached Exhibit "A" for a bicycle way and pedestrian way, which may be used by pedestrians and non-motorized mechanical means of transportation, such as bicycles and for no other purposes. The Grantee shall have the right to place, construct, operate, replace, maintain, inspect, reconstruct, install necessary improvements, and in connection therewith may remove any trees, shrubs, or brush necessary or convenient to accomplish said purposes. THE TRUE CONSIDERATION for this conveyance is $ 0.00 . However, the actual consideration consists of or includes other property or value given or promised which is the whole consideration. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD that this easement does not convey any right, title, or interest except those expressly stated in this easement, nor otherwise prevent Grantors from the full use and dominion thereover; provided, however, that such use shall not interfere with the uses and purposes of the intent of the easement. IN CONSIDERATION of the premises, Grantee agrees that if said Grantee, its successors or assigns should cause said easement to be vacated, the right of the Grantee in the above-described easement will be forfeited and shall immediately revert to the Grantors,their successors,and assigns in the case of such event. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above-described and granted premises unto said Grantee, its successors, and assigns forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand on this /ii GO day of / l GIYcJ,1 , 19 ? ? , -,D).10_*k ()AAA Cum/I cypt y U.-C ■,,,itz'fiVil-e-?---'`V:-Dif44i-1 Name of Corporation Signature Address Title- 7_02zz/ tori 1614A__() 6 9 72.0 2, Signature Title STATE OF OREGON ) s, County of W.. . This instrument was acknowledged before me on iL/KC4 if /9q y (date)by -WC f7e/. PP . / /C fit G1- (name(s)of person(s))as X7'1 6 -J 1 C( -Y-- (type of authority,e.g.,officer,trustee,etc) of j7 O/fit // Cpl L rP F 1,,C!/1�7 (.`. L-L ._(name of partypn^behalf of whom ins• ment was executed). 4-Gig 41, A , ... '..._ `^, .,� OFFICIAL SEAL •ry's Signature CYNTHIA R.FELTON *...." f.' NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON My Commission Expires: A/lll �e::?-- ,J , COMMISSION NO.063119 MY COM�AISSION EXPIRES MARCH 24,2001 t.. . Accepted on behalf of the City of Tigard this 2-1" day of F' , 19 19 . 0/1.1. e. Ci6ngineer C\ENMPCa-FORM161KPD-CO DOT I� 2 EXHIBIT A. PAGE l pF A-BOY, Tigard April 2, 1998 Job#2730 SIDEWALK DEDICATION A tract of land in the Northeast Quarter of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, being a portion of that tract of land described in the Warranty Deed from Harold S. Boehi to John T. Dolan recorded May 5, 1982 as Document. Fee No. 82011414, Washington County Deed Records, being a portion of Lot 1, "BURNHAM TRACT", a duly recorded subdivision in said Washington County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the most Westerly corner of Lot 1 of said"BURNHAM TRACT", being on the centerline of S.W. Main Street; Thence along the southwesterly line of said Lot 1, South 49°30'00" East, 31.30 feet to the Southerly right-of-way line of said S.W. Main Street, 60 feet wide, and the True Point of Beginning of this description; Thence along said Southerly right-of-way line North 57°04'28" East, 327.85 feet to the Northeasterly line of said tract per Document. Fee 82011414; Thence along said Northeasterly line South 33°1T45" East, 4.93 feet; Thence leaving said Northeasterly line South 57°04'28"West, 252.43 feet; Thence South 55°00'12" West, 43.25 feet; Thence South 57°04'28" West, 30.31 feet to the Southwesterly line of said tract; Thence along said Southwesterly line North 49°30'00" West, 6.78 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing therein 1,694 square feet. EXHIBIT TO ACCOMPANY A LEGAL DESCRIPTION I Surveyor: FOR DAN DOLAN — A—BOY SUPPLY CO. _ Weddle & Assoc., Inc. 1750 SW Skyline Blvd. A PORTION OF LOT 1 "BURNHAM TRACT" ' Suite 105 IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 2 '`f. Sb Portland, OR 97221-2544 �® (503) 292-8083 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN ,���,. 1-888-222-8083 CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON �S• .c. Fax: (503) 292-0938 SCALE 1" = 60' REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL S.W. MAIN STREET NORTHWESTERLY LINE LOT 1 LAND SURVEYOR 'BURNHAM TRACT' N 5.7°04'28" E 476.59'_ _ _ •, �/ ---\ ' . 336.59' ; OREGON ` (. JANUARY 21. 1997 N 57°04'28" E 327.85' �uumnnnnnnununnnnumunumm nmIunnmm�unnummmhnnnu 1 C.R. PELSER 6.78' _ - 2801 Z N 57°04'28" E 252.43' 4.93' EXPIRES DECEMBER 31,1998 A> S 55°00'12" W `Do 43.25' SIDEWALK DEDICATION ° W N 57°04'28" E o r Z 30.31' -lo i >. D >< (-A.. (ii - 0, 0 2 _ { ' ` . . d'p ■ rr1ED W ` �N O LA alb —' J SOUTHWESTERLY LINE LOT 1 r,-�-- , p \v� • "BURNHAM TRACT" ,,,{ t� T W 49°27'54„ E177.01' m I N O N 156.93' (P-P- \'2 " r O o in d r rn 1 W O °_o 1 1 4. 5 150. 332.90 !:).-' \8 S 44°14'00" W S 63°54'00" W 128.27' 10.00' 10.00' \vtat,3 178.94S 45°466'00" E l SOUTHEASTERLY LINE LOT 1 543.70, \ "BURNHAM TRACT" . Job No. 98-2730EXB