The URL can be used to link to this page

SDR1996-00016 SDR96 - 00016 HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL NOTICE OF DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 96-0016 411 CITY OF TIGARD HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL SECTION I: APPLICATION SUMMARY CASES: FILE NAME: HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL Site Development Review SDR 96-0016 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Site Development Review approval to allow the construction of a three (3) building, 148 unit, Homestead Village Hotel. APPLICANT: Homestead Village OWNER: FIC Holding Company Steve Tangney 4600 Wilshire Boulevard 47775 Fremont Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90010 Freemont, CA 94538 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: C-P (Professional Office). ZONING DESIGNATION: C-P (Professional Commercial). LOCATION: (WCTM 2S1 01DA, Tax Lots 400, 500, 600, and 700.) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.64, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106. 18.108, 18.114, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, and 18.164. SECTION II: DECISION: Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEUFARMERS. PAGE 1 • 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 public water and sanitary sewer connections and any other work in the right-of-way (ROW). The applicant will need to submit five (5) sets of the proposed public improvement plans 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. This permit shall be obtained by the applicant prior to issuance of the building permits. 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 construction documents and financial assurance for the public improvements. 3. Building permits will not be issued, and construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Department has reviewed and approved the public improvement plans and a street opening permit or construction compliance agreement has been executed. A 100 percent performance assurance or letter of commitment, a developer-engineer agreement, the payment of a permit fee, and a sign installation/streetlight fee are required. 4_ The applicant should provide an emergency-only access to SW 70th Avenue. A locking gate should be placed at the emergency access with a "Knox Lock" system. The gate and lock system should be approved by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue prior to issuance of the building permit. 5. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall obtain an emergency access easement from the adjacent property owners to the north. This easement would cover the 30-foot gap that exists between the southern terminus of the 70th Avenue ROW and the north boundary of this site. 6. The applicant shall obtain a permit from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's public improvement permit. 7. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall coordinate with ODOT with respect to the storm drainage disposal from this site. 8. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant's design engineer shall submit documentation, for review by the City (Brian Rager) and ODOT, of the downstream capacity of any existing storm facility impacted by the proposed development. The design engineer must perform an analysis of the drainage system downstream of the development to a point in the drainage system where the proposed development site constitutes 10 percent or less of the total tributary drainage volume, but in no event less than 1/4 mile. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 2 9. If the capacity of any downstream public storm conveyance system or culvert is surpassed during the 25-year design storm event due directly to the development, the developer shall correct the capacity problem or construct an on-site detention facility. 10. If the projected increase in surface water runoff which will leave a proposed development will cause or contribute to damage from flooding to existing buildings or dwellings, the downstream stormwater system shall be enlarged to relieve the identified flooding condition prior to development or the developer must construct an on-site detention facility. } 11. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-47. Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 12. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994. 13. Prior to issuance of the building permit, a permit shall be obtained by the applicant from the US Army Corps of Engineers and/or Division of State Lands, (Authority: Section 404, Clean Water Act, and ORS 541.605 to 641.695). A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department by the applicant. 14. The applicant shall provide a full 25-foot buffer around the wetland boundary. The encroachment for the north drive aisle will be acceptable to the City provided that, the applicant widens the buffer in other areas to compensate for the encroachment. 15. The 25-foot undisturbed buffer shall be shown on the construction plans. The sensitive area boundary and/or buffer shall be staked in the field throughout the construction process in order to protect the sensitive area. 16. Revised site and landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the Planning Division, Staff Contact: Will D'Andrea, Planning Department (639-4171). The revised plans shall include the following: A. six disabled parking spaces B. ten bicycle parking spaces C. 40 foot paved driveway onto SW 68th Avenue D. walkway from the office to SW 68th Avenue E. location of the driveway outside of the wetland area, and details of the retaining wall and its proximity to the wetland area. If the revised plans show the retaining wall to be within the wetland, a Sensitive Lands Review will be required as well as permits from the Division of State Lands and US Army Corps of Engineers F. written solid waste hauler approval of facility location and equipment compatibility NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 3 G. a mitigation plan shall be submitted that provides mitigation of 1,542 caliper inches. 17. Plans approved by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. 18. Compliance with tree preservation measures as specified in the arborist report. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 19. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements. 20. All site improvement shall be installed as approved, per the revised site plan. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III: BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: No development applications were found to have been filed with the City of Tigard. Vicinity Information: The subject property is located north of Highway 217, south of SW Hampton Street, east of SW 72nd Avenue, and west of SW 68th Avenue. Properties to the north, south and east are zoned C-P (Professional Commercial). Property to the north and south are developed with commercial (office) uses. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site consists of approximately 4.63 acres, is presently vacant, and contains a number of mature trees. There is a forested ravine, with moderate to steep slopes, that bisects the site. A wetland delineation has determined that there are approximately .31 acres of wetlands within the narrow channelized bottom of the drainage swale and occasional low shelves. The applicant is proposing to construct a three (3) building, 148 unit extended stay hotel. Access to the proposal will be provided from SW 68th Avenue. One of the buildings is proposed on the west side of the ravine and wetland area. To access this building, the applicant is proposing a bridge crossing over the ravine and wetland area. The bridge will span the wetland area so there will be no impact to the wetland area. A second access drive is located just north of the wetland area and ravine. The roadway is proposed to be between the property line and the top of the bank. A retaining wall will be necessary to NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEUFARMERS. PAGE 4 I . 'support this driveway and this retaining wall will encroach within the 25-foot buffer, but will not impact the wetland area. SECTION IV: APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Use Classification: The applicant is proposing to build a hotel. This use is classified in Code Section 18.42 (Use Classifications) as Transient Lodging. Code Section 18.64.030 lists Transient Lodging as a permitted use in the C-P zone. Dimensional Requirements: Section 18.64.050 states that the minimum lot area is 6,000 square feet and the average minimum lot width is 50 feet for parcels in the C-P zoning district. The site is approximately 4.63 acres and has a width of approximately 160 feet, thereby, exceeding the required minimum lot size and width requirement. Developments within the C-P zone are required to provide a minimum of 15% landscaping. The applicant is proposing approximately 92,700 square feet, or 46% of the site for landscaping. Setbacks: Section 18.64.050 states that there no front, side, or rear yard setback is required except 20 feet shall be required where the C-P zone abuts a residential zoning district. The maximum building heights is 45 feet. Setbacks are not applicable as the site does not abut a residential zone. The applicant is proposing a building height of 30 feet, well under the maximum 45 feet allowed. 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 Chapters 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.120, and 18.164. The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapters 18.80 (Planned Developments), 18.84 (Sensitive Lands), 18.92 (Density Computations), 18.94 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations) or 18.98 (Building Height Limitations: Exceptions), or 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) 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. These other standards are addressed immediately below. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of 18.120.180.3 (Exterior Elevations), 18.120.180.5 (Privacy and Noise), 18.120.180.6 (Private Outdoor Areas: Residential Use), 18.120.180.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Residential Use), 18.120.180.8 (100-year floodplain), 18.120.180.9 (Demarcation of Spaces), and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEUFARMERS. PAGE 5 •Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Section 18.120.180.2 states that buildings shall be located to preserve existing trees, topography, and natural drainage and that trees having a six (6) inch caliper or greater, shall be preserved or replaced by new plantings of equal character. There are a number of mature trees on the property. Given the location of the building, parking area, and accessway, as well as the grading required to accommodate this proposal, a number of the existing trees will be removed. An arborist report has been submitted that addresses preservation of trees on the property. In accordance with Section 18.150, trees greater than 12-inch caliper will be mitigated. The plan will also include new parking lot and street trees. Buffering. Screening and Compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.120.108.4(A) states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses. This criteria is not applicable as this proposal does not abut a use that requires buffering in accordance with the Buffer Matrix (18.100.130). Section 18.120.108.4(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. As indicated on the site plan, parking and storage areas shall be screened from adjoining properties. Crime Prevention and Safety: Section 18.120.108.10 requires that exterior lighting levels be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime and shall be placed in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the applicant's lighting plan and has no comments or objections to the plan, thereby, satisfying this criteria. Landscaping Plan: Section 18.100.015 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. 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). The applicants statement states that street trees will not be planted along SW 68th Avenue due to the quantity and sizes of existing trees. These trees are located between the sidewalk and the future parking area curb line, roughly 25 feet from the property line. The trees include oaks, ash, alder and redwood and range in caliper size up to 24 inches. Staff has conducted a site visit and concurs with the applicants proposal to preserve the existing trees as street trees. 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) 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 NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEUFARMERS. PAGE 6 from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. As indicated on the site plan, screening has been provided in accordance with this section. 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. As indicated on the site plan, vision clearance will be provided in accordance with this section. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.106.030.(C)(29) requires a minimum of one (1) parking space for each room plus one (1) space for each two (2) employees and one (1) space per 200 square feet of seating area for banquet/meeting rooms. The plan provides for 148 rooms, therefore, 148 parking spaces shall be required. There are no banquet/meeting rooms indicated on the plans. The applicant has provided 153 spaces, based on one space per room, plus one for every two employees. The provision of 153 spaces satisfies this section. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Section 18.106.020(M) became effective on January 26, 1992. All parking areas shall be provided with the required numbers and sizes of disabled person parking spaces as specified by applicable State of Oregon and federal standards. All disabled person parking spaces shall be signed and marked on the pavement as required by these standards. This section requires 6 disabled parking spaces if 151 to 200 parking spaces are provided. The plan shows the provision of five (5) disabled parking spaces. A revised plan shall be submitted that provides for six (6) disabled parking spaces in accordance with this section. 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. Ten (10) bicycle parking spaces will be required for this development. The plan notes that ten bicycle parking spaces are provided, although the plan does not indicate the location of those spaces. A revised plan shall be submitted which shows the location of the ten bicycle parking spaces. Off-Street Loading spaces: Section 18.106.080 requires that every commercial or industrial use having floor area of 10,000 square feet or more, shall have at least one (1) off-street loading space on site. As indicated on the site plan, a loading area is provided in accordance with this section. Access: Section 18.108.080 requires that commercial and industrial uses which require more than 100 parking spaces provide two (2) accesses with a minimum width of 30 feet and a minimum pavement width of 24 feet or one (1) access with a minimum width of 50 feet and a minimum pavement width of 40 feet The preliminary plan shows the provision of two access drives on SW 68th Avenue and SW 70th Avenue. However, the NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 7 . subject property does not have direct frontage onto SW 70th Avenue. There is approximately 30 feet separating SW 70th Avenue and the subject property, due to the vacation of SW Irving Street (Ord. 73-2) in 1973. The applicant has explored the possibility of vacating SW 70th Avenue and utilizing this street as a private driveway. The property owners abutting SW 70th Avenue were not interested in vacating the street, nor were they interested in granting the subject property an easement to access SW 70th Avenue. The applicant, therefore, modified the application in a letter dated June 28, 1996, such that only one access will be provided. That access will be from SW 68th Avenue_ The plan will no longer provide an access to SW 70th Avenue. The access onto SW 68th Avenue is thirty (30) feet wide. Since only one (1) access is provided, the required width is fifty (50) feet with forty (40) feet of pavement. A revised plan shall be submitted which provides for a driveway in accordance with this standard. Internally, access is provided to building C via two access driveways. The southern driveway will cross the ravine and wetland area. The proposed bridge will span the ravine and will not impact the wetlands. The northern driveway is proposed to be located at the top of the bank and not impact the wetland area in any way. A retaining wall will be constructed to support the driveway, but this wall will be outside of the wetland area. The proposed plans show that the driveway is encroaching within the wetland area. The applicant has stated that the plan as drawn, is not what is intended. A revised set of plans shall be submitted that shows the driveway outside of the wetland area and shows in more detail, the retaining wall and its proximity to the wetland area. If the revised plans show the retaining wall to be within the wetland, a Sensitive Lands Review will be required as well as permits from the Division of State Lands and US Army Corps of Engineers. 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. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access-driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum six (6) inch vertical separation (curbed), or a minimum three (3) foot horizontal separation; except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four (4) feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards. The proposed site plan shows the provision of one walkway connection to SW 68th Avenue from building B. The proposed location of this walkway requires the removal of a couple of trees. The motel office is located in building A. A walkway should be extended from the office entrance to SW 68th Avenue and should be located to preserve the existing trees along SW 68th Avenue. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage: Section 18.116 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard, Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign- Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 8 with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The plans show the provision of trash enclosures. The applicant shall provide a written sign-off from the hauler regarding these locations. Tree Removal: Section 18.150.025 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. This section requires a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal for trees over 12 inches in caliper. The applicant has provided a report and plan that identifies all existing trees greater than six (6) inches in caliper. The inventory identified 273 trees greater than 12-inch caliper, for a total of 3,703 caliper inches. The aroborist has identified twenty-nine trees, totalling 492 caliper inches, which are considered hazardous and will not be counted in the inventory for mitigation calculations. The total number of trees greater than 12 inch caliper used for mitigation purposes is therefore 244 trees, for a total of 3,211 caliper inches. The proposed plan will be removing 209 trees greater than 12 inch caliper. Since the applicant is retaining less than 25 percent of the 244 existing trees, Section 18.150.025(B)(2)(a) requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D of no net loss of trees. The applicant shall, therefore, provide a mitigation plan that provides for no net loss of trees in accordance with this section. The plan shall demonstrate mitigation of 1,542 caliper inches. This mitigation is in addition to the required minimum landscaping, street trees, and parking lot trees. Signs: Section 18.114.130(D) lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C-P Zone. All signs shall conform to the provisions listed in this code section. All signs shall be approved through the Sign Permit process as administered by the Development Services Technicians. PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS: Sections 18.164.030(E)(1)(a) (Streets), 18.164.090 (Sanitary Sewer), and 18.164.100 (Storm Drains) shall be satisfied as specified below: STREETS: This site lies adjacent to SW 68th Parkway which is classified as a major collector street and is fully improved adjacent to this site. No additional improvements or right-of-way (ROW) dedications are required. The applicant submitted a traffic analysis, entitled "Homestead Village Transportation Impact Analysis", dated June 1996, by Mackenzie Engineering, Inc. This report analyzed major intersections in the vicinity of this site to determine if the proposed project would create an adverse impact. Specifically, the intersections studied were: Hampton Street/SW 72nd Avenue, Hampton Street/SW 70th Avenue, Hampton Street/SW 68th Parkway and SW 68th Parkway/Site access. The study also considered five-year traffic growth in the area. The analysis indicates that all intersections are expected to operate at NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEUFARMERS. PAGE 9 a level of service (LOS) "C" or better with development of the site, which is acceptable. No off-site improvements are recommended to mitigate the traffic impact from this development. SW 70th Avenue, south of Hampton Street, is a partially improved public street with a 23- foot roadway width inside a 30-foot wide ROW. The roadway is curbed on both sides and has a sidewalk on the east side only. This street presently terminates just north of the north boundary of this site and experiences very little traffic. It serves two parking areas on either side of the street for two office buildings. Several years ago, the City vacated a 30-foot ROW for SW Irving Street, which was an east/west street at the south end of 70th Avenue. The City determined that Irving Street was no longer needed as a public street. When the City vacated the ROW, a 30-foot "gap" between the south terminus of 70th Avenue ROW and the north boundary of this site resulted. Staff has discussed whether or not SW 70th Avenue should be extended further to the south. The City's Transportation Plan does not call for the roadway to extend further south, and it appears this site can develop with adequate access from SW 68th Parkway. Therefore, Staff does not see a public need for 70th to be extended. There was a question raised by Staff as to what should be done, if anything, with the south end of 70th Avenue. In other words, should a turn-around (cul-de-sac bulb) be added to officially terminate the public street or should it be left alone? In addition, Staff questioned the future need for this street. At present, the street has the appearance of a drive aisle between two parking areas. At the south end, vehicles may enter either parking area and can turn around within the parking lots. When Staff visited this site, it was noted that much of the parking areas were unused and the street did not appear to experience much traffic. The applicant explored several options for access into this site, from a full access at the end of 70th Avenue to no access at all. The applicant argued that creating a cul-de-sac bulb at the end of 70th Avenue would be impractical and unnecessary based on the low usage of the roadway. Also, they argued that the subject site would plan would not be possible if the bulb were required. As a solution, the applicant proposed that the ROW for 70th Avenue be vacated and if they needed access to the north, they could negotiate an access easement from the property owners. City Staff would support a vacation of the ROW, but indicated the adjacent property owners should support it. Upon discussing the option with the adjacent property owners, the applicant found that the owners were not supportive of the vacation at this time because they did not want to acquire additional property which would raise their property taxes. The current proposal from the applicant is to eliminate any access from SW 70th Avenue. Although the plans Staff reviewed show a potential access to 70th, the applicant submitted a supplementary letter indicating that they do not want to take access from that location. After considerable, analysis, Staff determined that a cul-de-sac bulb at the end of 70th Avenue is not warranted for the following reasons: 1. 70th Avenue experiences very little traffic now, and will not likely experience increased traffic in the future. 2. 70th Avenue is not built to full-width City standards and would necessitate additional ROW to be dedicated from adjacent parcels in order to be widened. This is not likely to happen since the adjacent parcels are fully developed and are the only parcels that currently use the street. 3. Staff is in favor of vacating the ROW. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEUFARMERS. PAGE 10 4. The applicant is not proposing access to 70th Avenue and would have to acquire ROW from the adjacent properties in order to build the cul-de-sac bulb (because of the 30-foot gap between the end of the ROW and the north property line of this site). Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVF&R) submitted comments indicating that an emergency access should be provided at the end of 70th Avenue. The Uniform Fire Code states that for a project such as this, there should be two accesses available for emergency equipment. TVF&R stated that the applicant could simply provide a gate at the end of 70th Avenue with a "Knox Lock" system that will be accessible only by emergency personnel. In order to achieve this access, the applicant will need to acquire an easement from the adjacent property owners over the 30 feet of land between the south terminus of 70th Avenue and the north boundary of this site to allow emergency access. Staff supports this recommendation and has included an appropriate condition. In summary, Staff supports the applicant's site plan and does not recommend any further improvements on SW 70th Avenue. However, the applicant should provide an emergency-only access at the end of 70th Avenue and provide a locking gate with a "Knox Lock" system. WATER: There is an existing public water line in SW 68th Parkway that the applicant proposes to tie into for service to this development. This site lies within the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. Any connections to public water lines shall be shown on the public improvement plans for the City and shall be permitted by TVWD. SANITARY SEWER: This site will be served from two locations. The southern portion of the site will be served from an existing public line in SW 68th Parkway. The northern portion will be served from an existing public line in SW 70th Avenue. Both existing lines have capacity to serve this development. STORM DRAINAGE: Storm water from this site will be directed through two on-site water quality facilities and into an existing drainageway that flows in a southeasterly direction across the site. This drainageway is also a delineated wetland, which will be discussed in the Grading and Erosion Control section of this report. The applicant submitted preliminary storm drainage calculations which indicate the additional runoff from this site will not adversely impact the immediate pipe system downstream from this site. However, the USA design standards for storm drainage, which the City adopted, requires the developer to perform a complete downstream analysis to determine if the development will need to provide on-site detention. In addition, the drainage system from this site eventually flows into the Highway 217 drainage system, which is under ODOT jurisdiction. ODOT will need to review the final storm drainage calculations for this project and determine if on-site detention is required by their criteria. The applicant will be required to coordinate with ODOT and the City with respect to this issue prior to issuance of the building permit. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 11 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 require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of R&O 91-47. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of the building permit. As stated in the previous section, the applicant proposes to construct two on-site water quality facilities on this site. Extended dry detention ponds are proposed. The preliminary storm calculations indicate the area provided for the ponds should be adequate to serve the entire site. GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL: USA R&O 91-47 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 R&O 91-47, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City As was stated previously, there is a delineated wetland on this site. The applicant is proposing to construct a bridge structure across the wetland to allow full access to the site. Staff does not oppose this proposal provided the applicant obtains any necessary permits from Division of State Lands or the Corps of Engineers. The plan also shows potential work next to the wetland at the north end for the northernmost drive aisle. However, the applicant has stated that they plan to stay clear of the wetland itself, but will be proposing work within the 25-foot buffer required by R&O 91-47. There are other areas on the site plan that indicate some work within the 25-foot buffer. R&O 91-47 allows certain encroachments within the 25-foot buffer, such as road crossings, provided the buffer is widened in other areas to compensate. Staff and USA would concur that the proposed encroachment at the north end for the drive aisle would be acceptable, but the applicant must widen the buffer in other areas to provide an equivalent 25-foot buffer. As far as the other proposed encroachments (plan shows that the trash enclosure area would encroach), Staff is opposed to allowing them. Therefore, the plan should be revised to show only the encroachment needed for the north drive aisle. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 12 1 SECTION V: AGENCY COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division, City of Tigard Police Department, and City of Tigard Maintenance Services Department have reviewed this application and have offered no comments or objections. SECTION VI AGENCY COMMENTS Unified Sewerage Agency has reviewed the application and has the following comments: I. Wetlands 1. A Division of State Lands Permit is required prior to any work in the existing wetland. 2. On site, wetland mitigation is needed. 3. A 25-foot protective corridor is required between the final wetland and the impact of the development (road crossings may be allowed without the buffer). 4. If the buffer area is disturbed, it must be returned to a natural-like condition, and planted with native Oregon vegetation. II. Water Quality/Water Quantity 1. A detailed hydraulic and hydrological analysis of the basin and downstream storm conveyance should be done. The development is responsible for mitigating any downstream impacts caused by the increase of flows from the site. Mitigation may be removing the constriction or on-site detention as determined by the City. 2. Construction of water quality facilities is required to treat the runoff. The facility is not to be located in the wetland or the protective corridor, except as allowed in R&O 91-47/91-75. III. Storm Sewer 1. On site public storm sewer, existing or proposed, should be centered in a 15 foot wide easement. 2. Public storm sewer, if required, must be installed in accordance with the City adopted R&O 91-47 as it is amended by R&O 91-75. IV. Sanitary Sewer 1. On-site public sanitary sewer, existing or proposed, should be centered in a 15-foot wide public sanitary sewer easement. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 13 1 1 Division of State Lands states that based upon a site plan submitted by the City along with a copy of the wetland report, there are no plans for fill or excavation in the creek/wetland area. Therefore, no removal-fill permit will be required for site development. 3 IOregon Department of Transportation states that ODOT is presently in the preliminary 1 phase of reconstructing the interchange at Highway 217 and 1-5. Based on current plans a small portion of right-of-way (ROW) may need to be acquired along the northern boundary of 217 between the two interchanges. The section of land has not yet been determined. To minimize potential impact to the business from possible ROW acquisition we recommend the applicant mail a set of plans to Salem that illustrate clearly the property lines of the project, especially along Highway 217. The applicant should remain in contact with Salem, so that each can mutually inform the other on any issues that arise and the progress of their respective developments. The person in Salem to contact is Kathy Frye. Her address and phone number is: ODOT, 355 Capital, Salem, OR 97310; (503) 986-3757. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed the request and has offered the following comments: Plans are not approved. Please address the following items and re-submit plans for review and approval. Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all-weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 50,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.2). Please provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. Please provide documentation from a registered engineer that the finished construction is in accordance with the approved plans or the requirements of the Fire Code. Bridges shall be designed, inspected, and final construction approved by a registered engineer. The bridge shall be designed in accordance with the American Association of Highway and Transportation Officials "Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges." The bridge shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry 50,000 pounds. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.5). Where fire apparatus access roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. (UFC Sec. 902.2.4). Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - TOW AWAY ZONE, ORS 98.810" and shall be installed with a clear space above ground level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have black or red letters and border on a white background. (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.(1)(2) & (3)). Fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted yellow and marked `NO PARKING FIRE LANE" at each 25 feet. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.2). I ! NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 14 The minimum number of fire hydrants for a building shall be based on the required fire flow prior to giving any credits for fire protection systems. There shall not be less than one (1) fire hydrant for the first 2,000 gallons per minute (GPM) required fire flow and one (1) additional fire hydrant for each 1,000 GPM or portion thereof over 2,000 GPM. Fire hydrants shall be evenly spaced around the building and their locations shall be approved by the Chief. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1). No portion of the exterior of a commercial building shall be located more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant when measured in an approved manner around the outside of the building and along an approved fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1). Fire hydrants shall not be located more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec 903.4.2.4). A Fire hydrant shall be located within 70 feet of a fire department connection (FDC). Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.5). FDC locations shall be as approved by the Chief. (1996 Oregon Structural Specialty Code, Sec. 904.1.1). Fire department connections shall not be located on the building that is being protected. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.5). The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available form the Fire Marshal's office. (UFC Sec. 903.3). Tualatin Valley Water District states that the applicant shall provide easements for existing water lines to TVWD that are suitable for recording. PGE has reviewed this application and has offered no comments or objections. SECTION VII: PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEUFARMERS. PAGE 15 I • Final'Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON SEPTEMBER 11, 1996 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code that provides that a written appeal must be filed with the City Recorder within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 3:30 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 11, 1996. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. August 29. 1996 PREPARED BY: William D'Andrea DATE Assistant Planner tc/e,eCs. . ' .∎/-`+ .04 /u R August 29. 1996 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdorff DATE Planning Manager I\CURPLMwiIrSDR96-16 dec NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEUFARMERS. PAGE 16 .....,. r___.-- ] . p a S. lell m ' I�. � r r431 rn T m j m S.W. IRVING ST. (Vacated , . - r--''o po 0.0 V _ I - El 4, •, __ likelz, kk-- - , _ _ si ..... ...,:,,1 _ /s,....-7.- ::: : , . M \\ li \ .. ...N.t \\,41::::, .. (/) \ ‘ % . 0 0 4 N\ _ . 1 0 . pi ii,.4.1..• , 11„,,..,... ) �.. m \ .,, 0.,,,. \‘‘,00,,:47„.. !MIMI s,, Alt,i,\\,s. . •,.‘j, Ilr■■;.■plr■.iLhtV\ . •. . m 1 1 ® ..,,, ,,,.:.___ cr,Tfit, a "V 'r_ \ , . ‘;•,,:ss,...‘ T \ 11)°.• D Z b ` •�Al ��\wall • � � o D °\ o�o ! \ -� � 7 ,, '...44.4 '4, i • .44 1 4 0°8 , \k.'' Ni *V ... ' ■i, cr) \ I k \ if st,t4pArii 5, =i OFF-SITE 1/O •`•4i A. ��, O • O OISE SOURC ,�� / 0. \ '1, HIGHWAY 217) ��;`� .� �,� .JP, , ..._.. st \\7t( • • 7TH '' '\�l Z %...4• \\ , ° \), pli\ • WO, rig* .ii -k + 1 (v-i‘v ,\,...,.. •, ,4111 i CD m 4 t ' ' \ ,Ire•✓' OW 7 :10 '/ 4\\o le.. . .. Ai I 1\ 11 ' . . 9 61,j. j., ....- o. N. . , 7 I c‘i. - ., .., \ ...z.::„.,,, ,.... --11."'" 0\ 11 G ,‘ ,,... „ ; ....., ,/ „ ,, . ,,,,\ , ..... ,, , s, \\.: v\ `, I J�, s o CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DEPT. :A ST ST 4-9 Sr S LL-L- [4) SUBJECT ~ PARCELS- CL RR iF gg 5 r» SDR 96-0016 vicinity 'Horrm~ V"~11 Howl i . J Q 141; " 611 hbippfh fillgglINII ; 41 nc4 o a a 8 � 41+1 g ° �k:/' 31! id gill,,',' • , . \, . ....._ a to 1 Pomo li it him < rionxiatm.....4 1" ST Pl* qa#1111I alli IN Ems -IE, at examitas IPPI n II 0 II. imisin p. in , .. 111111 8 a3 0 a) [41 SUBJECT E PARCELS--"1 IL E Co T. IIIII :11 Zf IMO II lallir 9RI3-L4\ ' i= Ulm" • 1-1 IWO.' illi . __1 4 5 iiii0 Vicinity nn,I, A SUR 96-0016 L.,.\ Homestead Village Horel REQUEST FOR COMMENTS MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: August 29,1996 TO: Will D'Andrea, Planning Division FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer RE: SDR 96-0016, Homestead Village Hotel Description: The request is for approval to allow the construction of a three building, 148-unit hotel, located north of Highway 217, south of SW Hampton Street, east of SW 72nd Avenue and west of and adjacent to SW 68th Parkway. (WCTM 2S1 1 DA, Tax Lots 400, 500, 600 and 700). Findings: 1. Streets: This site lies adjacent to SW 68th Parkway which is classified as a major collector street and is fully improved adjacent to this site. No additional improvements or right-of-way (ROW) dedications are required. The applicant submitted a traffic analysis, entitled "Homestead Village Transportation Impact Analysis", dated June 1996, by Mackenzie Engineering, Inc. This report analyzed major intersections in the vicinity of this site to determine if the proposed project would create an adverse impact. Specifically, the intersections studied were: Hampton Street/SW 72nd Avenue, Hampton Street/SW 70th Avenue, Hampton Street/SW 68th Parkway and SW 68th Parkway/Site access. The study also considered five-year traffic growth in the area. The analysis indicates that all intersections are expected to operate at a level of service (LOS) "C" or better with development of the site, which is acceptable. No off-site improvements are recommended to mitigate the traffic impact from this development. SW 70th Avenue, south of Hampton Street, is a partially improved public street with a 23-foot roadway width inside a 30-foot wide ROW. The roadway is curbed on both sides and has a sidewalk on the east side only. This street presently terminates just north of the north boundary of this ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 96-0016 Homestead Village Hotel PAGE 1 site and experiences very little traffic. It serves two parking areas on either side of the street for two office buildings. Several years ago, the City vacated a 30-foot ROW for SW Irving Street, which was an east/west street at the south end of 70th Avenue. The City determined that Irving Street was no longer needed as a public street. When the City vacated the ROW, a 30-foot "gap" between the south terminus of 70th Avenue ROW and the north boundary of this site resulted. Staff has discussed whether or not SW 70th Avenue should be extended further to the south. The City's Transportation Plan does not call for the roadway to extend further south, and it appears this site can develop with adequate access from SW 68th Parkway. Therefore, Staff does not see a public need for 70th to be extended. There was a question raised by Staff as to what should be done, if anything, with the south end of 70th Avenue. In other words, should a turn-around (cul-de-sac bulb) be added to officially terminate the public street or should it be left alone? In addition, Staff questioned the future need for this street. At present, the street has the appearance of a drive aisle between two parking areas. At the south end, vehicles may enter either parking area and can turn around within the parking lots. When Staff visited this site, it was noted that much of the parking areas were unused and the street did not appear to experience much traffic. The applicant explored several options for access into this site, from a full access at the end of 70th Avenue to no access at all. The applicant argued that creating a cul-de-sac bulb at the end of 70th Avenue would be impractical and unnecessary based on the low usage of the roadway. Also, they argued that the subject site would plan would not be possible if the bulb were required. As a solution, the applicant proposed that the ROW for 70th Avenue be vacated and if they needed access to the north, they could negotiate an access easement from the property owners. City Staff would support a vacation of the ROW, but indicated the adjacent property owners should support it. Upon discussing the option with the adjacent property owners, the applicant found that the owners were not supportive of the vacation at this time because they did not want to acquire additional property which would raise their property taxes. The current proposal from the applicant is to eliminate any access from SW 70th Avenue. Although the plans Staff reviewed show a potential access to 70th, the applicant submitted a supplementary letter indicating that they do not want to take access from that location. After considerable, analysis, Staff determined that a cul-de-sac bulb at the end of 70th Avenue is not warranted for the following reasons: 1. 70th Avenue experiences very little traffic now, and will not likely experience increased traffic in the future. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 96-0016 Homestead Village Hotel PAGE 2 2. 70th Avenue is not built to full-width City standards and would necessitate additional ROW to be dedicated from adjacent parcels in order to be widened. This is not likely to happen since the adjacent parcels are fully developed and are the only parcels that currently use the street. 3. Staff is in favor of vacating the ROW. 4. The applicant is not proposing access to 70th Avenue and would have to acquire ROW from the adjacent properties in order to build the cul-de-sac bulb (because of the 30-foot gap between the end of the ROW and the north property line of this site). Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVF&R) submitted comments indicating that an emergency access should be provided at the end of 70th Avenue. The Uniform Fire Code states that for a project such as this, there should be two accesses available for emergency equipment. TVF&R stated that the applicant could simply provide a gate at the end of 70th Avenue with a "Knox Lock" system that will be accessible only by emergency personnel. In order to achieve this access, the applicant will need to acquire an easement from the adjacent property owners over the 30 feet of land between the south terminus of 70th Avenue and the north boundary of this site to allow emergency access. Staff supports this recommendation and has included an appropriate condition. In summary, Staff supports the applicant's site plan and does not recommend any further improvements on SW 70th Avenue. However, the applicant should provide an emergency-only access at the end of 70th Avenue and provide a locking gate with a "Knox Lock" system. 2. Water: There is an existing public water line in SW 68th Parkway that the applicant proposes to tie into for service to this development. This site lies within the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. Any connections to public water lines shall be shown on the public improvement plans for the City and shall be permitted by TVWD. 3. Sanitary Sewer: This site will be served from two locations. The southern portion of the site will be served from an existing public line in SW 68th Parkway. The northern portion will be served from an existing public line in SW 70th Avenue. Both existing lines have capacity to serve this development. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 96-0016 Homestead Village Hotel PAGE 3 4. Storm Drainage: Storm water from this site will be directed through two on-site water quality facilities and into an existing drainageway that flows in a southeasterly direction across the site. This drainageway is also a delineated wetland, which will be discussed in the Grading and Erosion Control section of this report. The applicant submitted preliminary storm drainage calculations which indicate the additional runoff from this site will not adversely impact the immediate pipe system downstream from this site. However, the USA design standards for storm drainage, which the City adopted, requires the developer to perform a complete downstream analysis to determine if the development will need to provide on-site detention. In addition, the drainage system from this site eventually flows into the Highway 217 drainage system, which is under ODOT jurisdiction. ODOT will need to review the final storm drainage calculations for this project and determine if on-site detention is required by their criteria. The applicant will be required to coordinate with ODOT and the City with respect to this issue prior to issuance of the building permit. 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 require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of R&O 91-47. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of the building permit. As stated in the previous section, the applicant proposes to construct two on-site water quality facilities on this site. Extended dry detention ponds are proposed. The preliminary storm calculations indicate the area provided for the ponds should be adequate to serve the entire site. 6. Grading and Erosion Control: USA R&O 91-47 also regulates erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 96-0016 Homestead Village Hotel PAGE 4 system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per R&O 91- 47, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City As was stated previously, there is a delineated wetland on this site. The applicant is proposing to construct a bridge structure across the wetland to allow full access to the site. Staff does not oppose this proposal provided the applicant obtains any necessary permits from Division of State Lands or the Corps of Engineers. The plan also shows potential work next to the wetland at the north end for the northernmost drive aisle. However, the applicant has stated that they plan to stay clear of the wetland itself, but will be proposing work within the 25-foot buffer required by R&O 91-47. There are other areas on the site plan that indicate some work within the 25-foot buffer. R&O 91-47 allows certain encroachments within the 25-foot buffer, such as road crossings, provided the buffer is widened in other areas to compensate. Staff and USA would concur that the proposed encroachment at the north end for the drive aisle would be acceptable, but the applicant must widen the buffer in other areas to provide an equivalent 25-foot buffer. As far as the other proposed encroachments (plan shows that the trash enclosure area would encroach), Staff is opposed to allowing them. Therefore, the plan should be revised to show only the encroachment needed for the north drive aisle. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE 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 public water and sanitary sewer connections and any other work in the ROW. The applicant will need to submit five (5) sets of the proposed public improvement plans 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. This permit shall be obtained by the applicant prior to issuance of the building permits. 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 ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 96-0016 Homestead Village Hotel PAGE 5 executing the construction documents and financial assurance for the public improvements. 3. Building permits will not be issued and construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Department has reviewed and approved the public improvement plans and a street opening permit or construction compliance agreement has been executed. A 100 percent performance assurance or letter of commitment, a developer-engineer agreement, the payment of a permit fee and a sign installation/streetlight fee are required. 4. The applicant should provide an emergency-only access to SW 70th Avenue. A locking gate should be placed at the emergency access with a "Knox Lock" system. The gate and lock system should be approved by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue prior to issuance of the building permit. 5. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall obtain an emergency access easement from the adjacent property owners to the north. This easement would cover the 30-foot gap that exists between the southern terminus of the 70th Avenue ROW and the north boundary of this site. 6. The applicant shall obtain a permit from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's public improvement permit. 7. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall coordinate with ODOT with respect to the storm drainage disposal from this site. 8. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant's design engineer shall submit documentation, for review by the City (Brian Rager) and ODOT, of the downstream capacity of any existing storm facility impacted by the proposed development. The design engineer must perform an analysis of the drainage system downstream of the development to a point in the drainage system where the proposed development site constitutes 10 percent or less of the total tributary drainage volume, but in no event less than 1/4 mile. 9. If the capacity of any downstream public storm conveyance system or culvert is surpassed during the 25-year design storm event due directly to the development, the developer shall correct the capacity problem or construct an on-site detention facility. 10. If the projected increase in surface water runoff which will leave a proposed development will cause or contribute to damage from flooding to existing ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 96-0016 Homestead Village Hotel PAGE 6 buildings or dwellings, the downstream stormwater system shall be enlarged to relieve the identified flooding condition prior to development or the developer must construct an on-site detention facility. 11. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-47. Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 12. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994. 13. Prior to issuance of the building permit, a permit shall be obtained by the applicant from the US Army Corps of Engineers and/or Division of State Lands, (Authority: Section 404, Clean Water Act, and ORS 541.605 to 641.695). A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department by the applicant. 14. The applicant shall provide a full 25-foot buffer around the wetland boundary. The encroachment for the north drive aisle will be acceptable to the City provided the applicant widens the buffer in other areas to compensate for the encroachment. 15. The 25-foot undisturbed buffer shall be shown on the construction plans. The sensitive area boundary and/or buffer shall be staked in the field throughout the construction process in order to protect the sensitive area. APPROVED: Greg Berry, Acting City Engineer is\eng\brianr\sdr96-16.bdr ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR 96-0016 Homestead Village Hotel PAGE 7 Oregon July 10, 1996 DSL Dan Cary SRI/SHAPIRO 1650 N.W. Front Ave., Ste. 302 DIVISION OF Portland, OR 97209 STATE LANDS STATE LAND BOARD Re: Wetland Delineation for Gerding/Edlen Development Company JOHN A. KITZHABER Homestead Village Hotel, Tigard Governor (SRI- #7965016; DSL #- Det.#96-0303; Tigard# SDR 96-0016) PHIL KEISLING Secretary of State JIM HILL State Treasurer Dear Dan: 775 Summer Street NE Salem,OR 97310-1337 I have reviewed your wetland delineation report for the above project site and concur (503) 378-3805 with your conclusions. All jurisdictional wetlands are in and along the creek corridor, FAX (503) 378-4844 TTY (503) 378-4615 as mapped in figure 4 of your report. Based upon a site plan submitted by the city along with a copy of your report,there are no plans for fill or excavation in the creek/wetland area. Therefore, no removal-fill permit will be required for site development. Thank you for your report. Sincerely, �"A,' GnnALTC , Janet C: Morlan, PWS Wetlands Program Leader c: William D'Andrea, City of Tigard Bill Parks, DSL 4' CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: July 3. 1996 ;,/ e k Tr 5 TO: Oregon Division of State Lands - Administrative Offices FROM: City of Tigard Planning Department STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andreal'I rx31 )vLs Phone: (503)639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 96-0016 ➢ HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL A request for Site Development Review approval to allow the construction of a three (3) building, 148 unit, Homestead Village Hotel. LOCATION: North of Highway 217, south of SW Hampton Street, east of SW 72nd Avenue and west of SW 68th Parkway (WCTM 2S1 1DA, Tax Lots 400, 500, 600 and 700). ZONE: C-P (Professional Commercial). The C-P zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance and real estate services, business support services and transient lodging, among others. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.64, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Monday - July 15, 1996. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Department, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. / Written comments provided below: ` \ _ - ` Va ve.o del ow a Qvov�A weV\a�� eVoi∎Qam�\ 4wed �� S2Z 1 S1�c: Crp moros\ �s sv,\, avo r cktrec - u.>&ajv 'sw.Paccks Yeorre RelmnvA—F:k1 Xm�k- (Pkase provide theta-owing information) Name of Person(s) Commenting: M `Y��7C C- \' SOY n 1 Phone Number(s): 503-37g-380S" -ex\-- a • SDR 96-0016 HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL PROPOSAUREOUEST FOR COMMENTS vP 1N '[ Vq� P 7 e`(%< TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE . < I 1 `> FIRE PREVENTION `' , �` 4755 S.W.Griffith Drive . P.O. Box 4755 . Beaverton,OR 97076 . (503)526-2469 . FAX 526-2538 fi&RESG Li;' r1 0WC 0 C C 0 M D B V pOTI 0TU 0 D 0 S DWI DKC • Jurisdiction File Number: ,C, -CD/ (c, DateV7,-7‘) Project Na J . {- r—V.aa ✓1 U < < (� Project Address: TVF&R File Number.g L`' (Whenever referring to this project please include the TVF&R File Number) Project approved Project not approved-Please address items checked below and re-submit plans for review and approval to the: %TVF&R Fire Marshal's Office 0 Planning Department having jurisdiction for routing to the TVF&R Fire Marshal's Office Project conditionally approved subject to correction of items checked below. 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROMJUILDING AND TURNAROUNDS: Access roads shall be within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. An approved turnaround is required if the remaining distance to an approved intersecting roadway, as measured along the fire apparatus access road,is greater than 150 feet. (UFC Sec. 902.2.1) 2)FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD EXCEPTION FOR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the requirements for fire apparatus access may be modified as approved by the Chief.(UFC Sec.902.2.1 Exception 1) 3)ADDITIONAL ACCESS ROADS: Where there are 20 or more dwellings, an approved second fire apparatus access roadway must be provided to a city/county roadway or access easement.(UFC Sec.902.2.2) 4) It •: t: S ; •: 1 . 11 1. . •11 it . t: • • Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet(15 feet for not more than two dwelling units), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches.(UFC Sec.902.2.2.1) X5) SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES; Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all-weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 50,000 pounds live load(gross vehicle weight).(UFC Sec.902.2.2.2) \ Please provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. Please provide documentation from a registered engineer that the finished construction is in accordance with the approved plans or the requirements of the Fire Code. 6) TURNING RADIUS; The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall not be less than 25 feet and 45 feet respectfully,as measured from the same center point. (UFC Sec.902.2.2.3) 7) DEAD END: Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. Diagrams of approved turnarounds are available from the fire district.(UFC Sec.902.2.2.4) X8)BRIDGES: Bridges shall be designed, inspected and final construction approved by a registered engineer. The bridge shall be designed in accordance with the American Association of Highway and Transportation Officials "Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. " The bridge shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry 50,000 pounds. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.5) 9) GRADE; Fire apparatus access roadway grades shall not exceed an average grade of 10 percent with a maximum grade of 15 percent for lengths of no more than 200 feet. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.6). Intersections and turnarounds shall be level (maximum 5%) with the exception of crowning for water run-off. 2c10) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus access roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. (UFC Sec. 902.2.4) Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - TOW AWAY ZONE, ORS 98.810" and shall be installed with a clear space above ground 'evel of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have black or red letters and border on a white background.(UFC Sec. 901.4.5.(1)(2)&(3)) "Working"Smoke Detectors Save Lives • X/ II)PAINTED CURBS: Fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted yellow and marked"NO PARKING FIRE LANE"at each 25 feet. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high.(UFC Sec. 901.4.5.2) 12)COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS-MINIMUM NUMBER OF FIRE HYDRANTS: The minimum number of fire hydrants for a building shall be based on the required fire flow prior to giving any credits for fire protection systems. There shall not be less than one (1) fire hydrant for the first 2,000 gallons per minute(GPM) required fire flow and one (1) additional fire hydrant for each 1,000 GPM or portion thereof over 2,000 GPM. Fire hydrants shall be evenly spaced around the building and their locations shall be approved by the Chief.(UFC Sec.903.42.1) X 13) COMMERCIAL B lI .DIN :S - E HYD ANTS• No portion of the exterior of a commercial building shall be located more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant when measured in an approved manner around the outside of the building and along an approved fire appatatus access roadway.(UFC Sec.903.4.2.1) 14) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS - FIRE HYDRANTS: Fire hydrants for single family dwellings and duplexes shall be placed at each intersection. Intermediate fire hydrants are required if any portion of a structure exceeds 500 feet from a hydrant as measured in an approved manner around the outside of the structure and along approved fire apparatus access roadways. Placement of additional fire hydrants shall be as approved by the Chief.(UFC Sec.903.4.2.2) XIS) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall not be located more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway.(UFC Sec. 903.4.2.4) ,y_16) FIRE HYDRANT / FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 70 feet of a fire department connection(FDC). Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec.903.4.2.5) FDC locations shall be as approved by the Chief. (1996 Oregon Structural Specialty Code, Sec. 904.1.1) 17)FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONS ON BUILDINGS: Fire department connections shall not be located on the building that is being protected. (UFC Sec.903.4.2.5) X18) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS -REQUIREDYIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute(GPM)or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's office.(UFC Sec.903.3) 19)SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS-REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single family dwellings and duplexes shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the structure(s)are 3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be determined according to UFC Appendix Table A-III-A-1. (UFC Appendix III-A,Sec.5) 20) RURAL BUILDINGS -REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: Required fire flow for rural buildings shall be calculated in accordance with National Fire Protection Association Standard 1231. Please contact the Fire Marshal's office for special help and other requirements that will apply.(UFC Sec.903.3) 21) ACCESS AND FIREFIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any other construction on the site or subdivision. (UFC Sec. 8704) _ 22) KNOX BOX: A Knox Box for building access is required for this building. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an application and instructions regarding installation and placement. 23)REQUIRED INSPECTIONS: Please contact the Fire Marshal's office at the appropriate times for inspection of the following: 24) 25) 26) c__ I 14'. fx Plan Reviewer Signature Title RECEIVED PLANNING Rif I JUL 1 5 996 CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: July 3, 1996 TO: Tualatin Valley Water District Administrative Offices !V!; % FROM: City of Tigard Planning Department STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea (x315) Phone: (503)639-4171 Fax: (503)684-7297 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 96-0016 ➢ HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL A request for Site Development Review approval to allow the construction of a three (3) building, 148 unit, Homestead Village Hotel. LOCATION: North of Highway 217, south of SW Hampton Street, east of SW 72nd Avenue and west of SW 68th Parkway (WCTM 2S1 1DA, Tax Lots 400, 500, 600 and 700). ZONE: C-P (Professional Commercial). The C-P zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance and real estate services, business support services and transient lodging, among others. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.64, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposatinIhemeaFauto e, If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK ByLlylonday - July 15, 1996_,- ou may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. f youiare uiiab to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Department, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. i Please refer to the enclosed letter. V Written comments provided below: <=`>td' 7 +`, i x a.` I-- IJ C (P cise provide the following information) Name of Person(s) Commenting: r � Phone Number(s): SDR 96-0016 / HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL PROPOSAUREQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS RECEIVED PLANNING DATE: July 3, 1996 JUL 12 j9% TO: Brian Moore, PGE FROM: City of Tigard Planning Department STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea (x315) Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503)684-7297 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 96-0016 ➢ HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL 41/4' A request for Site Development Review approval to allow the construction of a three (3) building, 148 unit.II Homestead Village Hotel. LOCATION: North of Highway 217, south of SW Hampton Street, east of SW 72nd Avenue and west of SW 68th Parkway (WCTM 2S1 1DA, Tax Lots 400, 500, 600 and 700). ZONE: C-P (Professional Commercial). The C-P zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance and real estate services, business support services and transient lodging, among others. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.64, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Monday - July 15. 1996. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Department, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact _ of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: ((Cease provide the foct,ning infonnation) Name of Person(s) Commenting: Phone Number(s): SDR 96-0016 HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL PROPOSAL/REQUEST FOR COMMENTS RECEIVED PLANNING vAJUL 121,9 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY MEMORANDUM Date: July 8, 1996 To: William D'Andrea, Planner Cit of Tigar From: t* ker, USA Plan Review Supervisor Subject: Homestead Village Hotel MLP 96-0016 Please consider the following comments when writing your conditions of approval . I . WETLANDS 1 . A Division of State Lands Permit is required prior to any work in the existing wetland. 2 . On site, wetland mitigation is needed. 3 . A 25-foot protective corridor is required between the final wetland and the impact of the development (road crossings may be allowed without the buffer) . 4 . If the buffer area is disturbed, it must be returned to a natural-like condition, and planted with native Oregon vegetation. II . WATER QUALITY/WATER QUANTITY 1 . A detailed hydraulic and hydrological analysis of the basin and downstream storm conveyance should be done. The development is responsible for mitigating any downstream impacts caused by the increase of flows from the site. Mitigation may be removing the constriction or on-site detention as determined by the City. 2 . Construction of water quality facilities is required to treat the runoff. The facility is not to be located in the wetland or the protective corridor, except as allowed in Resolution and Order 91-47/91-75 . V 155 North First Avenue,Suite 270, MS 10 Phone:503/648-8621 Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 FAX:503/640-3525 • William D'Andrea July 8, 1996 Page 2 III . STORM SEWER 1 . On-site public storm sewer, existing or proposed, should be centered in a 15-foot wide easement. 2 . Public storm sewer, if required, must be installed in accordance with the City adopted Resolution and Order 91-47 as it is amended by R&O 91-75 . IV. SANITARY SEWER 1 . On-site public sanitary sewer, existing or proposed, should be centered in a 15-foot wide public sanitary sewer easement. RECEIVED PLANNINI JUL 1 J '9 i•% J' `II! CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: July 3. 1996 TO: Operations "Acting" Property Manager FROM: City of Tigard Planning Department STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea (x315) Phone: (503)639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 96-0016 ➢ HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL A request for Site Development Review approval to allow the construction of a three (3) building, 148 unit, Homestead Village Hotel. LOCATION: North of Highway 217, south of SW Hampton Street, east of SW 72nd Avenue and west of SW 68th Parkway (WCTM 2S1 1DA, Tax Lots 400, 500, 600 and 700). ZONE: C-P (Professional Commercial). The C-P zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance and real estate services, business support services and transient lodging, among others. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.64, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Monday - July 15, 1996. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Department, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: 4 �► (Please provide thefol[owing information) Name of Person(s) Commenting: Phone Number(s): SDR 96-0016 HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL PROPOSAUREQUEST FOR COMMENTS ,\PA\° - RECEIVED PLANNIN osk JUL 0 91. , -11!► CI OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: July 3, 1996 TO: Kelley Jennings, Tigard Police Dept. Crime Prevention Officer FROM: City of Tigard Planning Department STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea (x315) Phone: (503)639-4171 Fax: (503)684-7297 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 96-0016 ➢ HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL Q A request for Site Development Review approval to allow the construction of a three (3) building, 148 unit, Homestead Village Hotel. LOCATION: North of Highway 217, south of SW Hampton Street, east of SW 72nd Avenue and west of SW 68th Parkway (WCTM 2S1 1 DA, Tax Lots 400, 500, 600 and 700). ZONE: C-P (Professional Commercial). The C-P zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance and real estate services, business support services and transient lodging, among others. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.64, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Monday - July 15, 1996. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Department, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: 4 '► (cPhase provide the follawinginformation) Name of Person(s) Commenting: co.,- IPhone Number(s): 3c, tai 4111 SDR 96-0016 HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL PROPOSAL/REQUEST FOR COMMENTS F _'IVED PLANNING .J U L 0 8 1996 Al CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: July 3, 1996 TO: David Scott, Building Official FROM: City of Tigard Planning Department STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea (x315) Phone: (503)639-4171 Fax: (503)684-7297 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 96-0016 ➢ HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL 1A request for Site Development Review approval to allow the construction of a three (3) building, 148 unit, Homestead Village Hotel. LOCATION: North of Highway 217, south of SW Hampton Street, east of SW 72nd Avenue and west of SW 68th Parkway (WCTM 2S1 1 DA, Tax Lots 400, 500, 600 and 700). ZONE: C-P (Professional Commercial). The C-P zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance and real estate services, business support services and transient lodging, among others. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.64, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Monday - July 15, 1996. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Department, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: (Pkase provide the following information) Name of Person(s) Commenting: Phone Number(s): 9 v� SDR 96-0016 HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL PROPOSAL/REQUEST FOR COMMENTS • RECEIVED ptpNNl' - NuG 07 WEI Oreg On August 6, 1996 DEPARTMENT OF City of Tigard Planning Department TRANSPORTATION City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Region Tigard, OR 97223 Attn: William D'Andrea FILE CODE: ?LA_ _T�� Subject: Homestead Village Hotel, (SDR) 96-0016 Thank you for providing ODOT the opportunity to comment on Homestead Village Hotel proposal. The proposed development is located adjacent to the northern boundary of Highway 217, between the 72nd street and Interstate 5 interchange. ODOT is presently in the preliminary phase of reconstructing the interchange at Highway 217 and 1-5. Based on current plans a small portion of right-of-way (ROW) may need to be acquired along the northern boundary of 217 between the two interchanges. The section of land has not yet been determined. To minimize potential impact to the business from possible ROW acquisition we recommend the applicant mail a set of plans to Salem that illustrate clearly the property lines of the project, especially along Highway 217. The applicant should remain in contact with Salem, so that each can mutually inform the other on any issues that arise and the progress of their respective developments. The person in Salem to contact is Kathy Frye. Her address and phone number is: ODOT, 355 Capital, Salem, OR 97310; (503)-986-3757. If you have any questions regarding my comments please call me at 731-8232. Laurie Nicholson, Senior Planner ODOT Development Review cc: Marty Jensvold, Region 1 Traffic Bob Doran, District 2A Assistant District Manager o F '1 • 123 NW Flanders Portland,OR 97209-4037 (503) 731-8200 Form 734-1850(11/94) ,Nin �a3) 731-8259 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED CIVIL• STRUCTURAL • TRANSPORTATION 0690 S.W.BANCROFT STREET•P.O.BOX 69039 PORTLAND,OREGON 97201-0039•(503)224-9560•FAX(503)228-1285 RECORD OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION PROJECT NAME: Homestead Village Traffic DATE OF CALL: 8/8/96 PROJECT#: 196226 TIME: noon PERSON: Will D'Andrea PHONE#: 639-4171 COMPANY: City of Tigard SUBJECT: ............�.:::::� ... '': :: :. ... ::::':•:..•.'ti:iii:•:?•'•n<•' • REMARKS: The City of Tigard received comments from Laurie Nicholson(Oregon Department of Transportation)on the Homestead Village project. ODOT is planning improvements on Highway 217,between Interstate 5 and SW 72nd Avenue,which may require some additional right-of-way along the highway frontage with this site. ODOT does not know how much right-of-way,if any,would be needed at this time. Will was told that ODOT needs at least a couple of months to review this section of right-of-way,if they were under the gun to provide an estimate. As ODOT requested,plans will be sent to Kathy Frye,at ODOT,by MNWR. Will recommended that Homestead Village work with ODOT to prepare a site plan that could accommodate the construction project. A decision from Tigard staff on the site development review for Homestead Village is expected later this month. They also cannot make any conditions relating to ODOT without knowing specifics of the project and right-of-way needs. There are three options available: One option would be for the City to issue a decision,and then make an amendment,if needed,once the right-of-way determination is made. The amendment can only be made within a certain time period. A second option would be to ask for a delay in the decision until ODOT determines the right- of-needs. A waiver of the 120-day rule would be necessary. A third option would be for development to proceed without regard to possible ODOT needs. This is the least desirable option,as it may require ODOT to purchase part of the development at a higher cost and reduce the feasibility of Homestead Village. Every effort has been made to accurately record this conversation. If any errors or omissions are noted,please provide written response within five(5)days of receipt. Brent Ahrend BA/kc c: Will D'Andrea-City of Tigard Steve Tangney-Homestead Village Inc. Matt Dolan-MNWR Laurie Nicholson-ODOT Region 1 Kathy Frye-ODOT F:\W PDATA196-08\96226108RTC2.KC Sent by: MACKENZIE 5032281285; 08109/° 1 :33PM;je #609;Page 2/2 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED CIVIL • STRUCTURAL • TRANSPORTATION 0690 SW_BANCROFT STREET•P.O.BOX 69039 PORTLAND.OREGON 97701-.039•003)224-9560•FAX(503)221-1285 RECORD OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION PROJECT NAME: Homestead Village Traffic DATE OF CALL: 8/8/96 PROJECT #: 196226 TIME: noon PERSON: Will D'Andrea PHONE#: 639-4171 COMPANY: City of Tigard ed aa..a»ew: Y �, �:':o•A•S.w•..:,o.w,•x S.x �v �,�" .r<a.<..x.:L'::S:.s::fsS,.S f' :R:RMx: �•R bb:e %%%JJ0 s:oR:a.R tl ;KiY w� f 3�' }�}}ff�:jj�� o:«o.•J;a`�i .wa:�~eroaaa��:•.Y.V,a<o.L.a.o•e:ao-x xa•x.x•�s�a<�e� ��s�.N�•�i�i�: �"1?r»rt w�,�y y', ;c J'x '$8.s'3 x••e«a � ^k^. ::T, �.•w.a«.•w�#wJw,wavRR•wJJJxaeew•n%%a%.x.4-a o..•e:�.axmxiwa:e ro-w.e.x.�wi. 3$ V �:9 aJ:pp,.4t¢ '7kJkxxox}t<KOxftcac•»iwvlol9w•xe3eetlxar Ke , 0. ] } � '� iA 4-J sex x•x•.�StY� Jx«« x a•• wx x�a•xdRikitiq��dt%•fe�ttb+OisY f tl•§A•4NVk 4R•Wr�tfi��w x� •� s �'�sP�°•e,�"��''�: REMARKS: The City of Tigard received comments from Laurie Nicholson(Oregon Department of Transportation)on the Homestead Village project. ODOT is planning improvements on Highway 217,between Interstate 5 and SW 72nd Avenue,which may require some additional right-of-way along the highway frontage with this site. ODOT does not know haw much right-of-way, if any,would be needed at this time. Will was told that ODOT would-/M t iEET Fet LeAS-T i coo pie 0E-/V1or-)TN S ?o Re%)tEtk, 7).#s SE_c•rjo,✓ of t,,4H(TOF WADI lF TNey w L c1-O x- -r C+cJf ' � Ti2ou/Der_ V-1 EsnktiTF As ODOT requested,plans will be sent to Kathy Frye,at ODOT,by MNWR Will recommended that Homestead Village work with ODOT to prepare a site plan that could accommodate the construction project. A decision from Tigard staff on the site development review for Homestead Village is wed later this month. They also can not make any conditions relating to ODOT without knowing specifics of the project and right-of-way needs. There are three options available: One option would be for the City to issue a decision,and then make an amendment,if needed,once the right-of-way determination is made. The amendment can only be made within a certain time period, . A second option would be to ask for a delay in the decision until ODOT determines the right-of-needs- A third option would be for development to proceed without No 0. regard to possible ODOT needs. This is the least desirable option,as it may require ODOT to purchase part of the pF ■I'c"'N development at a higher cost and reduce the feasibility of Homestead Village. ' y\e. r 1, efort ha eem e o this conversation. If an errors or omissions are noted,please c� p r o response within accurately el days record h Brent Ahrend BA/kc c: Will D'Andrea- City of Tigard Steve Tangney-Homestead Village Inc. Matt Dolan-MNWR Laurie Nicholson-ODOT Region 1 Kathy Frye- ODOT Post-ir Fax Note /J 7671 Date Date q JC? Ipages� To gEA� 4 / f/'D From Will D. Co./Dept.✓ Co. .-f4 nn Phone# Phone# co _ Fax# 7 G� /ZS-6 Fax# 5032281285; 08/09/96 1 :33PM;Je #609;Page 2/2 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED CIVIL • STRUCTURAL • TRANSPORTATION 0690 S.W.BA.\CROFT STREET•P.O.BOX 69039 PORTLAND,OREGON 97 01.0039•(503)2:4-9S60•FAX(503)2:8-1285 RECORD OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION PROJECT NAME: Homestead Village Traffic DATE OF CALL: 84/96 PROJECT #: 196226 TLME: noon PERSON: Will D'Andrea PHONE#: 639-4171 COMPANY: City of Tigard ` hF' ° i ;;$«.,« 'Svw.i.ohV.., s ....� } ro S Aso N r 6. .w\ w«� .k ►b. +kkwMit�MMMlwlidbtBYw s a-ax aw�t�+�.A�.e�W � �'S'^`rv" 'Y R�\4:q• REMARKS: The City of Tigard received ccmmcnts from Lainic Nicholson(Oregon Departmoat of Transportation)on the Homestead Village project ODOT is planning improvements on Highway 217,between Interstate S and SW 72nd Avenue,which may require some additional right-of-way along the highway frontage with this site. ODOT does not know how much right-of-way,if any,would be needed at this time. Will was told that ODOT would know in two months. As ODOT requested,plans will be seat to Kathy Frye,at ODOT,by MNWR Will recommended that Homestead Village work with ODOT to prepare a site plan that could accommodate the construction project. A decision from Tigard staff on the site development review for Homestead Village is a later this month_ City staff cannot delay a decision to wait for ODOT to determine how much right-of-way is needed for the highway improvements. They also can not make any conditions relating to ODOT without knowing specifics of the project and right-of-way needs. There are three options available: One option would be for the City to issue a decision,and then make an amendment, if needed, once the right-of-way determination is made. The amendment can only be made within a certain time period,and at the request of the developer. A second option would be to ask for a delay in the decision until ODOT determines the right-of-needs. A third option would Ix for development to proceed without regard to possible ODOT nerds. This is the least desirable option,as it may require ODOT to purchase part of the development at a higher cost and reduce the feasibility of Homestead Village. Every Mort has been etude to accurately record this conversation_ If any errors or omissions are noted,please provide written respell-Ise within five(5) days of receipt Brent Ahrend BA/kc c: Will D'Andrea-City of Tigard Steve Tangney-Homestead Village Inc. Matt Dot=-MNWR Laurie Nicholson-ODOT Region 1 Kathy Frye- ODOT 08/09/96 15:02 $`503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD Ij001 ***************************************** *** ACTIVITY MANAGEMENT REPORT TX *** ***************************************** ACTY# MODE CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE T. PAGES RESULT *7716 TX G3 503 756 7833 08/09 09:23 01'23 3 OK *7717 TX G3 810 643 6225 SSOE 08/09 09:26 01'24 3 OK *7718 TX G3 08/09 09:28 01'22 3 OK *7721 TX G3 503 620 4315 Furrer & Scott 08/09 09:47 00'40 1 OK *7724 TX G3 503+274+2616 08/09 10:31 02'35 4 OK *7729 TX G3 620 3433 TIGARD TIMES 08/09 10:56 00'50 1 OK *7730 TX G3 503 222 5358 DAILY JRNL COMRC 08/09 11:01 00'45 1 OK *7734 TX G3 620 3433 TIGARD TIMES 08/09 11:17 02'18 3 OK *7740 TX G3 503 620 2086 NICOLI ENG. ,Inc. 08/09 11:51 01'04 2 OK *7743 TX G3 503 684 0954 CARLSON TESTING 08/09 12:37 00'50 1 OK *7745 TX G3 5032440417 08/09 13:04 01'18 2 OK *7747 TX G3 503 620 2086 NICOLI ENG. ,Inc. 08/09 13:12 02'11 4 OK *7750 TX G3 08/09 13:36 00'41 1 OK *7753 TX G3 360 260 2075 08/09 13:44 04'06 8 OK *7755 TX G3 5033459587 08/09 13:53 01'26 3 OK *7758 B'CAST G3 5907654 BOB ROHLF 08/09 13:57 00'50 1 OK *7758 B'CAST G3 503 620 5963 KEN SCHECKLA 08/09 13:59 00'48 1 OK *7758 B'CAST G3 6208759 PAUL HUNT 08/09 14:01 00'47 1 OK *7758 B'CAST G3 503 620 2086 NICOLI ENG. , Inc. 08/09 14:02 00'44 1 OK *7759 TX G3 5036422802 08/09 14:06 00'41 1 OK *7758 B'CAST G3 5035901240 BRIAN MOORE 08/09 14:07 00'49 1 OK *7761 TX G3 08/09 14:09 00'37 1 OK 7765 TX 15413832773 08/09 14:38 00'00 0 NG 0 #018 7768 TX G3 2473 08/09 14:41 00'49 1 OK 7769 TX G3 503 6t /0 ***************************************** *** ACTIVITY MANAGEMENT REPORT RX *** ***************************************** ACTY# MODE CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE T. PAGES RESULT *7715 AUTO RX G3 08/09 09:20 01'50 3 OK *7719 AUTO RX G3 5036394999 SIGN COMPANY 08/09 09:42 00'44 1 OK *7722 AUTO RX G3 503 655 0530 08/09 09:59 08'01 21 OK *7725 AUTO RX G3 08/09 10:35 01'05 2 OK *7731 AUTO RX G3 503 693 4412 08/09 11:06 01'03 2 OK *7732 AUTO RX G3 08/09 11:07 01'24 2 OK *7733 AUTO RX G3 5035260775 08/09 11:10 03'06 5 OK *7739 AUTO RX G3 08/09 11:21 01'51 3 OK *7741 AUTO RX G3 503 693 4412 08/09 11:57 02'09 4 OK *7742 AUTO RX G3 503 640 4840 08/09 12:15 01'14 2 OK *7749 AUTO RX G3 503 968 6078 08/09 13:30 00'50 2 OK *7751 AUTO RX G3 5032281285 08/09 13:37 01'20 2 OK *7754 AUTO RX G3 503 620 2086 NICOLI ENG. , Inc. 08/09 13:49 02'43 5 OK 7763 AUTO RX G3 503 245 2298 08/09 14:25 01'35 3 OK 7767 AUTO RX G3 08/09 14:39 01'23 2 OK Sent by: MACKENZIE 5032281285; 08/12/" 8:52AM;J #842;Page 1 /2 • MACKENZIE/SAITO & ASSOCIATES,P.C. Architecture • Planning • Interior Design 503/224-9570 • FAX 5031228-1285 MACKENZIE ENGINEER LNG INCORPORATED Civil • Structural • Transportation 503/224-9560 • FAX 503/228-1285 0690 S.W. Bancroft Street P.O. Box 69039 Portland,Oregon 97201-0039 FAX COVER SHEET Date: 4j I Z , I n4 Project Number: I?62ZC Company: 01 1t,6.4 l Attention: £i�t 1J ve& FAX: &Sti .7LT7 fL Project Name: ri 4 1.4114/e- T f r� «— Description: % 5ec ?ewe/ Te.(e.rLaI4e_. Co`tfe*5"-4141" From: 7 eA Pliteepti Comments or Special Instruction: 54eve, Tallow( — cy .t) 1,41. 610) 6s41 4eC cc by FAX to: I444-4"-DoLA — Xi/1 FAX: 2.-'13-- 8353 Total Number of Pages (including this cover sheet): 2 If you did not receive all pages, please call our Records Department. ORIGINAL WILL /WILL NOT FOLLOW BY MAIL. CONFINE TIAL TY NOTICE:The irdonrodon contained in this facsimile transmission is mrfiderhiai and is inlander'only for the use ci the Individual Q entity rtartitd ehoue_!the reader dthis meestge is not the intended recipient.this sense as noUkation that any reading,disclosure.copying,distribution,or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of Ws tarnmw+awtton is strictly prohibited_ ■this transmission was received in error.Immediately notify is at 503224-9670 to arrange for return of the original facsimile. Internal Use Only: File Sender WP Department Sent by: MACKENZIE 5032281285; 08/12/''"' 8:52AM;jetrax #642;Page 2/2 • • MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED CIVIL• STRUCTURAL • TRANSPORTATION 0690 S.W.BANCROFT STREET•P.O.BOX 69039 PORTLAND,OREGON 97201-0039•(503)224-9560•FAX(503)228-1285 RECORD OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION PROJECT NAME: Homestead Village Traffic DATE OF CALL: 8/8/96 PROJECT#: 196226 TIME: noon PERSON: Will D'Andrea PHONE#: 639-4171 COMPANY: City of Tigard • �.r..}�.i. 6.O.O.d.d.M4.<.:-0.4:4•Y.pi,r,.1•%.`Kl<:d>i4-{.::d.J.�.4.<[.:5:..).d;...v:o....ow+\....T.dv....w;4.:.v? � { :;• s � :`«`w �°x^<., ... • , d««J e.. <.s x4-:J»Y� -03�aF ats .....g.Id w +fir ,��•-"' .:s'c�»°«a.�.a.sr,.r J`�`x«a.r«�a�:a.w:-•�htYre,. A..J<aYK�muds ,<,.�F (('E:r:a.d.e%assns&xrc�w SUB.IECI' FLk + 44Jgv•?•d.d b^Y<-0H 9? .<-0•W S..Y:MC:vY:Mh '. dY' SR• Y < <+Y'<•,O.N.{Cdx<i6.i o'4.3 xi.ve v:.:Y..K.f 4'}:n.y n!t+Kn 9�9�r:t J�.•Oh .4 4..L.it W.JY <31<OtM�.4 pc, 6W.a0Y. AW OJ�t6IX.y:YeM?.w 4-:.j:d:O:i.x.v.x..:bOiJ<i CJ „i?'b}. �.: e:3:n ::didAt�..< :<.� .fST .'.S'' 4:!S..' }FS•s<.��:.:i.Y %..Y:<7. w .x. • v Y ::...J...4-,.<..•:< ....:.,:.d.,+-0.i.'Y.<.tt:4.JY.:J:J.s..a>Y...Y0.+n.Y�.>.t.::Y i 0.<a.•<+:�','d+� ..rS�.::1.:............... ...... .. o.43:Y REMARKS: The City of Tigard received comments from Laurie Nicholson (Oregon Department of Transportation)on the Homestead Village project. ODOT is planning improvements on Highway 217,between Interstate 5 and SW 72nd Avenue,which may require sonic additional right-of-way along the highway frontage with this site. ODOT does not know how much right-of-way,if any,would be needed at this time Will was told that ODOT needs at least a couple of months to review this section of right-of--way,if they were under the gun to provide an estimate. r! • -_ ./..) I As ODOT requested,plans will be sent to Kathy Frye,at ODOT,by MNWR Will recommended that Homestead Village work with ODOT to prepare a site plan that could accommodate the construction project. A decision from Tigard staff on the site development review for Homestead Village is expected later this month. They also cannot make any conditions relating to ODOT without knowing specifics of the project and right-of-way needs. There are three options available: One option would be for the City to issue a decision, and then make an amendment, if needed,once the right-of-way determination is made. The amendment can only be made within a certain time period. A second option would be to ask fora delay in the decision until ODOT detennines the right- of-needs. A waiver of the 120-day rule would be necessary. A third option would be for development to proceed without regard to possible ODOT needs. This is the least desirable option,as it may require ODOT to purchase part of the development at a higher cost and reduce the feasibility of Homestead Village. Every effort has been made to accurately record this conversation. If any errors or omissions are noted,please provide written response within five(5)days of receipt. Brent Ahrend BA/kc c: Will D'Andrea-City of Tigard Steve Tangney- Homestead Village Inc. Matt Dolan - MNWR Laurie Nicholson -ODOT Region 1 Kathy Frye-ODOT • CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: July 3. 1996 TO: Per Attached FROM: City of Tigard Planning Department STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea (x315) Phone: (503)639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 RE: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 96-0016 ➢ HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL A request for Site Development Review approval to allow the construction of a three (3) building, 148 unit, Homestead Village Hotel. LOCATION: North of Highway 217, south of SW Hampton Street, east of SW 72nd Avenue and west of SW 68th Parkway (WCTM 2S1 1 DA, Tax Lots 400, 500, 600 and 700). ZONE: C-P (Professional Commercial). The C-P zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance and real estate services, business support services and transient lodging, among others. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.64, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Monday - July 15. 1996. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Department, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: 4 ■► (Pkase provide the fo flowing information) Name of Person(s) Commenting: Phone Number(s): SDR 96-0016 HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL PROPOSAL/REQUEST FOR COMMENTS F"QUEST FOR COMME PIC- at(e'—601 ,n �f NC ION,LIST FOR LAND USE&DEVELOPMENT APPLIC S 4-1011i .�OtC� V I 11 Y J bb ll._ CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS (circle one) _CIT Area: (W) (S) (E) (C) ® Placed for review in Library CIT Book LI CITY DEPARTMENTS %BLDG.DEPT./David Scott,Wilding Official ✓POLICE DEPT./Kelley Jennings,Crime Prevention Officer `OPERATIONS/. -sCLTCer,Monr scv,,. CITY ADMIN./Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder ENG.DEPT./Brian Roger,Development Review Engneer _COM.DEV.DEPT./D.S.T:S ADV.PLNG./Nadine Smith, Planning SOperveor _WATER DEPT./Michael Miller,operations Mgr./operations MMA Box SPECIAL DISTRICTS i%IRE MARSHALL =�GNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY ‘,:4UALATIN VALLEY WATER DIST. Gene Birchell SWM Program/Lee Walker PO Box 745 Wa.County Fire District 155 N.First Street Beaverton,OR 97075 (pick-up box) Hillsboro,OR 97124 AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS WA.CO.DEPT.OF LAND USE&TRANSP. METRO AREA BOUNDARY COMMISSION _METRO-GREENSPACES 150 N.First Avenue 800 NE Oregon St.#16,Suite 540 Mel Huie (CPA's/ZOA's) Hillsboro,OR 97124 Portland,OR 97232-2109 600 NE Grand Avenue Portland,OR 97232-2736 _Brent Curtis(CPA's) , 1TE HIGHWAY DIVISION _Jim Tice(IGA'S) Sam Hunaidi —METRO _Mike Borreson(Engineer) PO Box 25412 Mary Weber _Scott King(CPA's) Portland,OR 97225-0412 600 NE Grand Avenue _Tom Harry(Current Planning App's) Portland,OR 97232-2736 Lynn Bailey(Current Planning App's) _OREGON DLCD(CPA's/ZOA's) 1 175 Court Street,N.E. C/ODOT/REGION 1 _CITY OF BEAVERTON Salem,OR 97310-0590 Laurie Nicholson/Trans.Planning Larry Conrad,Senior Planner 123 N.W.Flanders PO Box 4755 _CITY OF PORTLAND Portland,OR 97209-4037 1 120 SW 5th , _CITY OF BEAVERTON Portland,OR 97204 '_ODOT/REGION 1,DISTRICT 2-A Mike Matteucci,Neighborhood Coordinator Bob Schmidt/Engineering Coord. PO Box 4755 _CITY OF DURHAM 2131 SW Scholls/PO Box 25412 Beaverton,OR 97076 Planning Director Portland,OR 97225 Beaverton,OR 97076 City Manager PO Box 23483 _CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO CITY OF TUALATIN Tigard,OR 97281-3483 City Manager PO Box 369 PO Box 369 Tualatin,OR 97062 _4OTHERrt• Lake Oswego,OR 97034 _CITY OF KING CITY City Manager 15300 SW 116th King City,OR 97224 SPECIAL AGENCIES GENERAL TELEPHONE ELECTRIC y_PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC _COLUMBIA CABLE CO. Elaine Self,Engineering Brian Moore Crair Eyestone PO Box 23416 14655 SW Old Scholls Ferry Rd. 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Tigard,OR 97281-3416 Beaverton,OR 97007 Beaverton,OR 97005 W NATURAL GAS CO. Phone:($03)721•241+ _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS _TRI-MET TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT Scott Palmer Fax:(503)721.2502 Jason Hewitt Kim Knox,Project Planner 220 NW Second Avenue Twin Oaks Technology Center 710 NE Holladay Street Portland,OR 97209-3991 1815 NW 169th Place S-6020 Portland,OR 97232 Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 _TCI CABLEVISION OF OREGON _US WEST COMMUNICATIONS _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO. Linda Peterson Pete Nelson Clifford C.Cabe,Const.Engineer 3500 SW Bond Street 421 SW Oak Street 5424 SE McLoughlin Portland,OR 97201 Portland,OR 97204 Portland,OR 97202 STATE AGENCIES FEDERAL AGENCIES / _AERONAUTICS DIVISION(ODOT) b DIVISION OF STATE LANDS _US POSTAL SERVICE _COMMERCE DEPT.-M.H. PARK _FISH&WILDLIFE Randy Hammock,Growth Cord. _PUC _DOGAMI Cedar Mill Station _DEPT.OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY _U.S.ARMY CORPS.OF ENGINEERS Portland,OR 97229-9998 OTHER n:\loon\patty\mastersvtcnotic.m,t rtaMITC I NELSON I WELBORN I REIMANN I PARTNE MNWRIP To: Pot9 Date: ,--)7. 1'19(o Cd � rte Plna40i0 1 Project Num er: SCI OQ3 j 3j Project Name: -ft... 0 9-7 1 1 Regarding: PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY AT (503) 225-0822 IF THERE ARE ANY PROBLEMS RECEIVING THIS TRANSMISSION We Are Sending: These Are Transmitted: Copied To: Attached ❑ For Your Info/File ❑ Facsimile As Requested Number of Pages Including Cover ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ ❑ Copies Description 1 22_ ''x u " - ,y„ C‘. b 9t.) J 11"x 17" S({ II _r1- -,.1 (6 •(o.4e) — Comments: Signed l' -tA..( , PLANNERS ENGINEERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 233 SW FRONT AVE. I PORTLAND I OREGON I 97204 I 1:1'503.225 0822 I FAX 503.273.8353 I N I r....--'4° (1 i et4 ulatRO we � q , � _... a�r.r $rta aMC lIVpO�(VAiCAi�) ' +`_:� .1....s MIME /At 1 kJ- Ri x' s�i 1f 10 0 0 w.wr sl WWII ® -c" -/ -5 - — - o tam` .ate�e • _ •lyy� �t ` , r^ a CC na.1I.11.nw1 aalwr.11 6: en 11111111101011 Wall ':. v\ , 0 1 1`' � .. '-z1 ��*_ , ,_ a� •M wx T. minim ': \\\ \ O /` `\,,; ,'� �11 41� 0 4 0 'i _ _J O``\� _�, ( aril- Lwow se we �\` \ l `t�\,\�♦ �,(� \ 111.�I ` r • 1101 Mt MUD 0 OUR sasim.re 4.}T : : _1I o \ ■ 4,4•Alp. 9 ;4„. . ,,,,,...., ..,.-,,T • , , rim%.10, 104' lip , /0 / '1'1'. e 4fs'b',. • . :egt-1°, ® 14*,&‘\‘‘‘ ...l'e.'-:' ' I '*i „,-./ . ) ; . ''',..\\':‘, \ ' ' . tO ii 1.==ma awe w . ' • ' (T -' A 12k .'\xs,. ,, ,,,,,,„\:,..,N, '' '''..-. -:, '•,, ,\■k„,..,;& \iviiii? • — , \ / ' q I '• ,, ii / \ \ V- tV,:,,!":`-,.--- i.;\ r, ,,,,, . •., ,, iiii3O„,., , .„.,, , .:•,,,,:.,-,--:,,y :,t, - SIM,,,..;,.',\ s ,. .,, ty. ,444-, .!1,.\, ,, ,-",.)." \\ 4. , ,1, 8000.9 \ 1 161=1 `\` �`\ \` t X40• / \ iPPI. : 0` O �—, if.,,„. 11.001A% it \ \\ ti;i5--,', \\ \ „.... ..,A \. \ j /✓/�\��j�_�� IA: t . - 0 �J r. '2.4(= / T L ,--- J N MVWRIP k fieti, ENGINEERS \\ ,.� 1 -- STREET/YARD LIGHT PLANERS ARCHITECTS 233 SW FRONT s�nieiHC, ( y1YO�M 1 j �� j d tRFE PORTLAND. OR I 3 t ; I 1 L 1 - -- STREET SNGN 97204 5031225 0822 STORM DRAIN MANHOLE g er � B.W. IRVNG 8T.(VACATED) j ,� �'�U ) o� SANITARY_ a �► 1_ _ '_- '- j -- _ ' ---- Z t .{\ \ a.. 7SC �^ a \ -- _- © 7, ------ —--- - STORM DRAIN:IT\ ' `.T,,+`\\ \ __ - 'mac---- - ------- • RR RRIGATION VAL1E \'\ \\... 1 Q �, `\,\ i # \ +. `• \ I O w MATER METER �t '0 \\ \\\\ \ L \ �� Yfa I • r � • /E' eIMY MATER VALVE a. 12/31/96 \ ` '.n CATCH BASH" \\ - - fiRE HYDRANT./ o - -- o • O mkt_ SANITARY SEw R LINE\\\\ -�Y \ •\` `\ ',' ,•4 A \ / fF�2S7.0 • FOUND AS NOTED ELECTRICAL RISER \\ \\ 6•\\ !,, FF-235"5 \\\ `.\\\ `y\�0 _ , \ 11 , 0 - STORM DRAIN LNE(47 +\ \ .t.-\ • \`\\\ � .�"-- D'w MATERLNE(a")„,10;114: \\.,' \ U' y , ∎ TOE OF FILL/TOP OF CUT 111 N \ 1n / VIII'f ,e% ,l ;\\. _ WMNC fili I EASING DRAINAGE PATTERN \ • • \ --A\\\1 '\ A \Q - 1,%� EE 0 Q Q \ 0 a \\\ ' i',iL• 0 iL.� I'\� On i HasE scull I AVI AY 21l \ .\ �� \, ; LOT AREA 4-0.3 ACRES /� • S � \\\\\ •'�', \\ I F7tOPOSED BUIDINKi AREA: 39.200 Sf • \,\\ \ s•''','''"--......_'' - /, PROPOSED PARKING AREA 69.800 SF ' • \ \\\ \ \��`1' PROPOSED LANDSCAPE AREA 92700 SF \\ l ', \ \ PROPOSED BICYCLE PARgNC SPACE: 10 9PACES ` \ /' ” 'i ....\\.\\\\\\\, P 1. - N PROPOSED STANDARD PA/80TMa SPACES: 141 SPACES .,. •\ © �_ + \\\\ ,� I FF�236.0 d PROPOSED COMPACT PARIONG SPACES: 7 SPACES„, •\ , �' ��/ r I A PROPOSED HANDICAPPED PARIaNG SPACES 5 SPACES(1 VAN SPACE) 1 / \ 4• ` \� \\\'\�\\ * „ W TOTAL PROPOSED PARpNG SPACES: 153 SPACES 1\‘,..\\,,, ., \.\ \,\,, ,,,,„,,,,,... _ \ \\\ . . \� a#a L \ti �� ` ` ii, / `\\,11'1 \^ c , . 1 it A • IiifM 7 \ \`\ '4 I`_ ' �' N:\‘,\ ..".? 1 J J \ 1 4 J''\ \ ''” ti, 4111 , 1 MOM MI I x- X003 „...„ 00•007■ ` \ �yi.�ti _ _ \\ 1 6/6/96 ARD \�\ \\ * "� \ I M. DOLAN itt4.\ \„ v 4 r �I •� �l �_- o I allif MU \ -----"100k \ - ...---__ ,,‘. 7 -`\ ' \ C C UN MN CO.2 A , , City of Tigard.Oregon AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say: that I am an Administrative Specialist II for The City of Tigard, Oregon. Ei That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED ❑) PUBLIC HEARING FOR: (c+rdc box above,if•pp/lc•w•t {cnedc appropriate box below} (Enter Public Hearing Date above) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard City Council lit That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED ❑) D DECISION FOR: (Chuck bat abate./.p�c•bla) City of Tigard Planning Director That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED ❑) FINAL ORDER FOR: ta•ack box••a.,r+vi•c•bt•! {check appropriate box below} ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard City Council That I served OTHER NOTICE OF FOR: A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICE(S) of which i .ttached, marked Exhibit "A", was pAed to each n d pers n(s) at the addre s(s) shown on the ..:.. -. attache. lists , marked Exhibit , .. e :ry of j_ 199 , and deposited in the United :tates M. on th _��i& da of �" j/f-d{i 199 fi,, postage prepaid. :If - / _.,d,MITA / Prep- • Notice Air Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the day of 1� ∎r .. , 19 __. ��. OFFICIAL SEAL n i �rr.'r a DIANE M JELDERKS NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON 16.(cri n∎,'„� COMMISSION NO.046142 tC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07.1999 NOTARY PUBLIC ii F 0'E N My Commission Ex.• e"1. q 7 Z17FILEINFO.flic j iii,41/.' ,,4 ../& CASE NO(S): 59k 91� TYPE OF NOTICE&DATE: y NOTICE OF DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 96-0016 -ill • CITY OF TIOARD HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL SECTION I: APPLICATION SUMMARY CASES: FILE NAME: HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL Site Development Review SDR 96-0016 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Site Development Review approval to allow the construction of a three (3) building, 148 unit, Homestead Village Hotel. APPLICANT: Homestead Village OWNER: FIC Holding Company Steve Tangney 4600 Wilshire Boulevard 47775 Fremont Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90010 Freemont, CA 94538 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: C-P (Professional Office). ZONING DESIGNATION: C-P (Professional Commercial). LOCATION: (WCTM 2S1 01 DA, Tax Lots 400, 500, 600, and 700.) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.64, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106. 18.108, 18.114, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, and 18.164. SECTION II: DECISION: Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 1 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 public water and sanitary sewer connections and any other work in the right-of-way (ROW). The applicant will need to submit five (5) sets of the proposed public improvement plans 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. This permit shall be obtained by the applicant prior to issuance of the building permits. 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 construction documents and financial assurance for the public improvements. 3. Building permits will not be issued, and construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Department has reviewed and approved the public improvement plans and a street opening permit or construction compliance agreement has been executed. A 100 percent performance assurance or letter of commitment, a developer-engineer agreement, the payment of a permit fee, and a sign installation/streetlight fee are required. 4. The applicant should provide an emergency-only access to SW 70th Avenue. A locking gate should be placed at the emergency access with a "Knox Lock" system. The gate and lock system should be approved by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue prior to issuance of the building permit. 5. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall obtain an emergency access easement from the adjacent property owners to the north. This easement would cover the 30-foot gap that exists between the southern terminus of the 70th Avenue ROW and the north boundary of this site. 6. The applicant shall obtain a permit from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's public improvement permit. 7. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall coordinate with ODOT with respect to the storm drainage disposal from this site. 8. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant's design engineer shall submit documentation, for review by the City (Brian Rager) and ODOT, of the downstream capacity of any existing storm facility impacted by the proposed development. The design engineer must perform an analysis of the drainage system downstream of the development to a point in the drainage system where the proposed development site constitutes 10 percent or less of the total tributary drainage volume, but in no event less than 1/4 mile. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS PAGE 2 9. If the capacity of any downstream public storm conveyance system or culvert is surpassed during the 25-year design storm event due directly to the development, the developer shall correct the capacity problem or construct an on-site detention facility. 10. If the projected increase in surface water runoff which will leave a proposed development will cause or contribute to damage from flooding to existing buildings or dwellings, the downstream stormwater system shall be enlarged to relieve the identified flooding condition prior to development or the developer must construct an on-site detention facility. 11. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-47. Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 12. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994. 13. Prior to issuance of the building permit, a permit shall be obtained by the applicant from the US Army Corps of Engineers and/or Division of State Lands, (Authority: Section 404, Clean Water Act, and ORS 541.605 to 641.695). A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department by the applicant. 14. The applicant shall provide a full 25-foot buffer around the wetland boundary. The encroachment for the north drive aisle will be acceptable to the City provided that, the applicant widens the buffer in other areas to compensate for the encroachment. 15. The 25-foot undisturbed buffer shall be shown on the construction plans. The sensitive area boundary and/or buffer shall be staked in the field throughout the construction process in order to protect the sensitive area. 16. Revised site and landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the Planning Division, Staff Contact: Will D'Andrea, Planning Department (639-4171). The revised plans shall include the following: A. six disabled parking spaces B. ten bicycle parking spaces C. 40 foot paved driveway onto SW 68th Avenue D. walkway from the office to SW 68th Avenue E. location of the driveway outside of the wetland area, and details of the retaining wall and its proximity to the wetland area. If the revised plans show the retaining wall to be within the wetland, a Sensitive Lands Review will be required as well as permits from the Division of State Lands and US Army Corps of Engineers F. written solid waste hauler approval of facility location and equipment compatibility NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEUFARMERS. PAGE 3 G. a mitigation plan shall be submitted that provides mitigation of 1,542 caliper • inches. 17. Plans approved by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. 18. Compliance with tree preservation measures as specified in the arborist report. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 19. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements. 20. All site improvement shall be installed as approved, per the revised site plan. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III: BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: No development applications were found to have been filed with the City of Tigard. Vicinity Information: The subject property is located north of Highway 217, south of SW Hampton Street, east of SW 72nd Avenue, and west of SW 68th Avenue. Properties to the north, south and east are zoned C-P (Professional Commercial). Property to the north and south are developed with commercial (office) uses. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site consists of approximately 4.63 acres, is presently vacant, and contains a number of mature trees. There is a forested ravine, with moderate to steep slopes, that bisects the site. A wetland delineation has determined that there are approximately .31 acres of wetlands within the narrow channelized bottom of the drainage swale and occasional low shelves. The applicant is proposing to construct a three (3) building, 148 unit extended stay hotel. Access to the proposal will be provided from SW 68th Avenue. One of the buildings is proposed on the west side of the ravine and wetland area. To access this building, the applicant is proposing a bridge crossing over the ravine and wetland area. The bridge will span the wetland area so there will be no impact to the wetland area. A second access drive is located just north of the wetland area and ravine. The roadway is proposed to be between the property line and the top of the bank. A retaining wall will be necessary to NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 4 support this driveway and this retaining wall will encroach within the 25-foot buffer, but will not impact the wetland area. SECTION IV: APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Use Classification: The applicant is proposing to build a hotel. This use is classified in Code Section 18.42 (Use Classifications) as Transient Lodging. Code Section 18.64.030 lists Transient Lodging as a permitted use in the C-P zone. Dimensional Requirements: Section 18.64.050 states that the minimum lot area is 6,000 square feet and the average minimum lot width is 50 feet for parcels in the C-P zoning district. The site is approximately 4.63 acres and has a width of approximately 160 feet, thereby, exceeding the required minimum lot size and width requirement. Developments within the C-P zone are required to provide a minimum of 15% landscaping. The applicant is proposing approximately 92,700 square feet, or 46% of the site for landscaping. Setbacks: Section 18.64.050 states that there no front, side, or rear yard setback is required except 20 feet shall be required where the C-P zone abuts a residential zoning district. The maximum building heights is 45 feet. Setbacks are not applicable as the site does not abut a residential zone. The applicant is proposing a building height of 30 feet, well under the maximum 45 feet allowed. 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 Chapters 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.120, and 18.164. The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapters 18.80 (Planned Developments), 18.84 (Sensitive Lands), 18.92 (Density Computations), 18.94 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations) or 18.98 (Building Height Limitations: Exceptions), or 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) 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. These other standards are addressed immediately below. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of 18.120.180.3 (Exterior Elevations), 18.120.180.5 (Privacy and Noise), 18.120.180.6 (Private Outdoor Areas: Residential Use), 18.120.180.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Residential Use), 18.120.180.8 (100-year floodplain), 18.120.180.9 (Demarcation of Spaces), and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 5 Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Section 18.120.180.2 states that buildings shall be located to preserve existing trees, topography, and natural drainage and that trees having a six (6) inch caliper or greater, shall be preserved or replaced by new plantings of equal character. There are a number of mature trees on the property. Given the location of the building, parking area, and accessway, as well as the grading required to accommodate this proposal, a number of the existing trees will be removed. An arborist report has been submitted that addresses preservation of trees on the property. In accordance with Section 18.150, trees greater than 12-inch caliper will be mitigated. The plan will also include new parking lot and street trees. Buffering, Screening and Compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.120.108.4(A) states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses. This criteria is not applicable as this proposal does not abut a use that requires buffering in accordance with the Buffer Matrix (18.100.130). Section 18.120.108.4(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. As indicated on the site plan, parking and storage areas shall be screened from adjoining properties. Crime Prevention and Safety: Section 18.120.108.10 requires that exterior lighting levels be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime and shall be placed in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the applicant's lighting plan and has no comments or objections to the plan, thereby, satisfying this criteria. Landscaping Plan: Section 18.100.015 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. 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). The applicants statement states that street trees will not be planted along SW 68th Avenue due to the quantity and sizes of existing trees. These trees are located between the sidewalk and the future parking area curb line, roughly 25 feet from the property line. The trees include oaks, ash, alder and redwood and range in caliper size up to 24 inches. Staff has conducted a site visit and concurs with the applicants proposal to preserve the existing trees as street trees. 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) 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 NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEUFARMERS. PAGE 6 from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curd. As indicated on the site plan, screening has been provided in accordance with this section. 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. As indicated on the site plan, vision clearance will be provided in accordance with this section. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.106.030.(C)(29) requires a minimum of one (1) parking space for each room plus one (1) space for each two (2) employees and one (1) space per 200 square feet of seating area for banquet/meeting rooms. The plan provides for 148 rooms, therefore, 148 parking spaces shall be required. There are no banquet/meeting rooms indicated on the plans. The applicant has provided 153 spaces, based on one space per room, plus one for every two employees. The provision of 153 spaces satisfies this section. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Section 18.106.020(M) became effective on January 26, 1992. All parking areas shall be provided with the required numbers and sizes of disabled person parking spaces as specified by applicable State of Oregon and federal standards. All disabled person parking spaces shall be signed and marked on the pavement as required by these standards. This section requires 6 disabled parking spaces if 151 to 200 parking spaces are provided. The plan shows the provision of five (5) disabled parking spaces. A revised plan shall be submitted that provides for six (6) disabled parking spaces in accordance with this section. 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. Ten (10) bicycle parking spaces will be required for this development. The plan notes that ten bicycle parking spaces are provided, although the plan does not indicate the location of those spaces. A revised plan shall be submitted which shows the location of the ten bicycle parking spaces. Off-Street Loading spaces: Section 18.106.080 requires that every commercial or industrial use having floor area of 10,000 square feet or more, shall have at least one (1) off-street loading space on site. As indicated on the site plan, a loading area is provided in accordance with this section. Access: Section 18.108.080 requires that commercial and industrial uses which require more than 100 parking spaces provide two (2) accesses with a minimum width of 30 feet and a minimum pavement width of 24 feet or one (1) access with a minimum width of 50 feet and a minimum pavement width of 40 feet. The preliminary plan shows the provision of two access drives on SW 68th Avenue and SW 70th Avenue. However, the NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 7 subject property does not have direct frontage onto SW 10th Avenue. There is approximately 30 feet separating SW 70th Avenue and the subject property, due to the vacation of SW Irving Street (Ord. 73-2) in 1973. The applicant has explored the possibility of vacating SW 70th Avenue and utilizing this street as a private driveway. The property owners abutting SW 70th Avenue were not interested in vacating the street, nor were they interested in granting the subject property an easement to access SW 70th Avenue. The applicant, therefore, modified the application in a letter dated June 28, 1996, such that only one access will be provided. That access will be from SW 68th Avenue. The plan will no longer provide an access to SW 70th Avenue. The access onto SW 68th Avenue is thirty (30) feet wide. Since only one (1) access is provided, the required width is fifty (50) feet with forty (40) feet of pavement. A revised plan shall be submitted which provides for a driveway in accordance with this standard. Internally, access is provided to building C via two access driveways. The southern driveway will cross the ravine and wetland area. The proposed bridge will span the ravine and will not impact the wetlands. The northern driveway is proposed to be located at the top of the bank and not impact the wetland area in any way. A retaining wall will be constructed to support the driveway, but this wall will be outside of the wetland area. The proposed plans show that the driveway is encroaching within the wetland area. The applicant has stated that the plan as drawn, is not what is intended. A revised set of plans shall be submitted that shows the driveway outside of the wetland area and shows in more detail, the retaining wall and its proximity to the wetland area. If the revised plans show the retaining wall to be within the wetland, a Sensitive Lands Review will be required as well as permits from the Division of State Lands and US Army Corps of Engineers. 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. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access-driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum six (6) inch vertical separation (curbed), or a minimum three (3) foot horizontal separation; except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four (4) feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards. The proposed site plan shows the provision of one walkway connection to SW 68th Avenue from building B. The proposed location of this walkway requires the removal of a couple of trees. The motel office is located in building A. A walkway should be extended from the office entrance to SW 68th Avenue and should be located to preserve the existing trees along SW 68th Avenue. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage: Section 18.116 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard, Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign- Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 8 with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The plans show the provision of trash enclosures. The applicant shall provide a written sign-off from the hauler regarding these locations. Tree Removal: Section 18.150.025 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. This section requires a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal for trees over 12 inches in caliper. The applicant has provided a report and plan that identifies all existing trees greater than six (6) inches in caliper. The inventory identified 273 trees greater than 12-inch caliper, for a total of 3,703 caliper inches. The aroborist has identified twenty-nine trees, totalling 492 caliper inches, which are considered hazardous and will not be counted in the inventory for mitigation calculations. The total number of trees greater than 12 inch caliper used for mitigation purposes is therefore 244 trees, for a total of 3,211 caliper inches. The proposed plan will be removing 209 trees greater than 12 inch caliper. Since the applicant is retaining less than 25 percent of the 244 existing trees, Section 18.150.025(B)(2)(a) requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D of no net loss of trees. The applicant shall, therefore, provide a mitigation plan that provides for no net loss of trees in accordance with this section. The plan shall demonstrate mitigation of 1,542 caliper inches. This mitigation is in addition to the required minimum landscaping, street trees, and parking lot trees. Signs: Section 18.114.130(D) lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C-P Zone. All signs shall conform to the provisions listed in this code section. All signs shall be approved through the Sign Permit process as administered by the Development Services Technicians. PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS: Sections 18.164.030(E)(1)(a) (Streets), 18.164.090 (Sanitary Sewer), and 18.164.100 (Storm Drains) shall be satisfied as specified below: STREETS: This site lies adjacent to SW 68th Parkway which is classified as a major collector street and is fully improved adjacent to this site. No additional improvements or right-of-way (ROW) dedications are required. The applicant submitted a traffic analysis, entitled "Homestead Village Transportation Impact Analysis", dated June 1996, by Mackenzie Engineering, Inc. This report analyzed major intersections in the vicinity of this site to determine if the proposed project would create an adverse impact. Specifically, the intersections studied were: Hampton Street/SW 72nd Avenue, Hampton Street/SW 70th Avenue, Hampton Street/SW 68th Parkway and SW 68th Parkway/Site access. The study also considered five-year traffic growth in the area. The analysis indicates that all intersections are expected to operate at NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTELFARMERS. PAGE 9 a level of service (LOS) "C" or better with development of the site, which is acceptable. No off-site improvements are recommended to mitigate the traffic impact from this development. SW 70th Avenue, south of Hampton Street, is a partially improved public street with a 23- foot roadway width inside a 30-foot wide ROW. The roadway is curbed on both sides and has a sidewalk on the east side only. This street presently terminates just north of the north boundary of this site and experiences very little traffic. It serves two parking areas on either side of the street for two office buildings. Several years ago, the City vacated a 30-foot ROW for SW Irving Street, which was an east/west street at the south end of 70th Avenue. The City determined that Irving Street was no longer needed as a public street. When the City vacated the ROW, a 30-foot "gap" between the south terminus of 70th Avenue ROW and the north boundary of this site resulted. Staff has discussed whether or not SW 70th Avenue should be extended further to the south. The City's Transportation Plan does not call for the roadway to extend further south, and it appears this site can develop with adequate access from SW 68th Parkway. Therefore, Staff does not see a public need for 70th to be extended. There was a question raised by Staff as to what should be done, if anything, with the south end of 70th Avenue. In other words, should a turn-around (cul-de-sac bulb) be added to officially terminate the public street or should it be left alone? In addition, Staff questioned the future need for this street. At present, the street has the appearance of a drive aisle between two parking areas. At the south end, vehicles may enter either parking area and can turn around within the parking lots. When Staff visited this site, it was noted that much of the parking areas were unused and the street did not appear to experience much traffic. The applicant explored several options for access into this site, from a full access at the end of 70th Avenue to no access at all. The applicant argued that creating a cul-de-sac bulb at the end of 70th Avenue would be impractical and unnecessary based on the low usage of the roadway. Also, they argued that the subject site would plan would not be possible if the bulb were required. As a solution, the applicant proposed that the ROW for 70th Avenue be vacated and if they needed access to the north, they could negotiate an access easement from the property owners. City Staff would support a vacation of the ROW, but indicated the adjacent property owners should support it. Upon discussing the option with the adjacent property owners, the applicant found that the owners were not supportive of the vacation at this time because they did not want to acquire additional property which would raise their property taxes. The current proposal from the applicant is to eliminate any access from SW 70th Avenue. Although the plans Staff reviewed show a potential access to 70th, the applicant submitted a supplementary letter indicating that they do not want to take access from that location. After considerable, analysis, Staff determined that a cul-de-sac bulb at the end of 70th Avenue is not warranted for the following reasons: 1. 70th Avenue experiences very little traffic now, and will not likely experience increased traffic in the future. 2. 70th Avenue is not built to full-width City standards and would necessitate additional ROW to be dedicated from adjacent parcels in order to be widened. This is not likely to happen since the adjacent parcels are fully developed and are the only parcels that currently use the street. 3. Staff is in favor of vacating the ROW. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEUFARMERS. PAGE 10 4. The applicant is not proposing access to 70th Avenue dnd would have to acquire ROW from the adjacent properties in order to build the cul-de-sac bulb (because of the 30-foot gap between the end of the ROW and the north property line of this site). Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVF&R) submitted comments indicating that an emergency access should be provided at the end of 70th Avenue. The Uniform Fire Code states that for a project such as this, there should be two accesses available for emergency equipment. TVF&R stated that the applicant could simply provide a gate at the end of 70th Avenue with a "Knox Lock" system that will be accessible only by emergency personnel. In order to achieve this access, the applicant will need to acquire an easement from the adjacent property owners over the 30 feet of land between the south terminus of 70th Avenue and the north boundary of this site to allow emergency access. Staff supports this recommendation and has included an appropriate condition. In summary, Staff supports the applicant's site plan and does not recommend any further improvements on SW 70th Avenue. However, the applicant should provide an emergency-only access at the end of 70th Avenue and provide a locking gate with a "Knox Lock" system. WATER: There is an existing public water line in SW 68th Parkway that the applicant proposes to tie into for service to this development. This site lies within the Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) service area. Any connections to public water lines shall be shown on the public improvement plans for the City and shall be permitted by TVWD. SANITARY SEWER: This site will be served from two locations. The southern portion of the site will be served from an existing public line in SW 68th Parkway. The northern portion will be served from an existing public line in SW 70th Avenue. Both existing lines have capacity to serve this development. STORM DRAINAGE: Storm water from this site will be directed through two on-site water quality facilities and into an existing drainageway that flows in a southeasterly direction across the site. This drainageway is also a delineated wetland, which will be discussed in the Grading and Erosion Control section of this report. The applicant submitted preliminary storm drainage calculations which indicate the additional runoff from this site will not adversely impact the immediate pipe system downstream from this site. However, the USA design standards for storm drainage, which the City adopted, requires the developer to perform a complete downstream analysis to determine if the development will need to provide on-site detention. In addition, the drainage system from this site eventually flows into the Highway 217 drainage system, which is under ODOT jurisdiction. ODOT will need to review the final storm drainage calculations for this project and determine if on-site detention is required by their criteria. The applicant will be required to coordinate with ODOT and the City with respect to this issue prior to issuance of the building permit. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTELJFARMERS. PAGE 11 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 require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of R&O 91-47. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of the building permit. As stated in the previous section, the applicant proposes to construct two on-site water quality facilities on this site. Extended dry detention ponds are proposed. The preliminary storm calculations indicate the area provided for the ponds should be adequate to serve the entire site. GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL: USA R&O 91-47 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 R&O 91-47, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City As was stated previously, there is a delineated wetland on this site. The applicant is proposing to construct a bridge structure across the wetland to allow full access to the site. Staff does not oppose this proposal provided the applicant obtains any necessary permits from Division of State Lands or the Corps of Engineers. The plan also shows potential work next to the wetland at the north end for the northernmost drive aisle. However, the applicant has stated that they plan to stay clear of the wetland itself, but will be proposing work within the 25-foot buffer required by R&O 91-47. There are other areas on the site plan that indicate some work within the 25-foot buffer. R&O 91-47 allows certain encroachments within the 25-foot buffer, such as road crossings, provided the buffer is widened in other areas to compensate. Staff and USA would concur that the proposed encroachment at the north end for the drive aisle would be acceptable, but the applicant must widen the buffer in other areas to provide an equivalent 25-foot buffer. As far as the other proposed encroachments (plan shows that the trash enclosure area would encroach), Staff is opposed to allowing them. Therefore, the plan should be revised to show only the encroachment needed for the north drive aisle. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 12 SECTION V: AGENCY COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division, City of Tigard Police Department, and City of Tigard Maintenance Services Department have reviewed this application and have offered no comments or objections. SECTION VI AGENCY COMMENTS Unified Sewerage Agency has reviewed the application and has the following comments: I. Wetlands 1 . A Division of State Lands Permit is required prior to any work in the existing wetland. 2. On site, wetland mitigation is needed. 3. A 25-foot protective corridor is required between the final wetland and the impact of the development (road crossings may be allowed without the buffer). 4. If the buffer area is disturbed, it must be returned to a natural-like condition, and planted with native Oregon vegetation. II. Water Quality/Water Quantity 1. A detailed hydraulic and hydrological analysis of the basin and downstream storm conveyance should be done. The development is responsible for mitigating any downstream impacts caused by the increase of flows from the site. Mitigation may be removing the constriction or on-site detention as determined by the City. 2. Construction of water quality facilities is required to treat the runoff. The facility is not to be located in the wetland or the protective corridor, except as allowed in R&O 91-47/91-75. III. Storm Sewer 1. On site public storm sewer, existing or proposed, should be centered in a 15 foot wide easement. 2. Public storm sewer, if required, must be installed in accordance with the City adopted R&O 91-47 as it is amended by R&O 91-75. IV. Sanitary Sewer 1. On-site public sanitary sewer, existing or proposed, should be centered in a 15-foot wide public sanitary sewer easement. NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 13 Division of State Lands states that based upon a site plan suomitted by the City along • with a copy of the wetland report, there are no plans for fill or excavation in the creek/wetland area. Therefore, no removal-fill permit will be required for site development. Oregon Department of Transportation states that ODOT is presently in the preliminary phase of reconstructing the interchange at Highway 217 and 1-5. Based on current plans a small portion of right-of-way (ROW) may need to be acquired along the northern boundary of 217 between the two interchanges. The section of land has not yet been determined. To minimize potential impact to the business from possible ROW acquisition we recommend the applicant mail a set of plans to Salem that illustrate clearly the property lines of the project, especially along Highway 217. The applicant should remain in contact with Salem, so that each can mutually inform the other on any issues that arise and the progress of their respective developments. The person in Salem to contact is Kathy Frye. Her address and phone number is: ODOT, 355 Capital, Salem, OR 97310; (503) 986-3757. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed the request and has offered the following comments: Plans are not approved. Please address the following items and re-submit plans for review and approval. Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all-weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 50,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.2). Please provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. Please provide documentation from a registered engineer that the finished construction is in accordance with the approved plans or the requirements of the Fire Code. Bridges shall be designed, inspected, and final construction approved by a registered engineer. The bridge shall be designed in accordance with the American Association of Highway and Transportation Officials "Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges." The bridge shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry 50,000 pounds. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.5). Where fire apparatus access roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. (UFC Sec. 902.2.4). Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - TOW AWAY ZONE, ORS 98.810" and shall be installed with a clear space above ground level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have black or red letters and border on a white background. (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.(1)(2) & (3)). Fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted yellow and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" at each 25 feet. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.2). NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTELJFARMERS. PAGE 14 The minimum number of fire hydrants for a building shall be .,ased on the required fire : flow prior to giving any credits for fire protection systems. There shall not be less than one (1) fire hydrant for the first 2,000 gallons per minute (GPM) required fire flow and one (1) additional fire hydrant for each 1,000 GPM or portion thereof over 2,000 GPM. Fire hydrants shall be evenly spaced around the building and their locations shall be approved by the Chief. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1). No portion of the exterior of a commercial building shall be located more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant when measured in an approved manner around the outside of the building and along an approved fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1). Fire hydrants shall not be located more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec 903.4.2.4). A Fire hydrant shall be located within 70 feet of a fire department connection (FDC). Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.5). FDC locations shall be as approved by the Chief. (1996 Oregon Structural Specialty Code, Sec. 904.1.1). Fire department connections shall not be located on the building that is being protected. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.5). The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available form the Fire Marshal's office. (UFC Sec. 903.3). Tualatin Valley Water District states that the applicant shall provide easements for existing water lines to TVWD that are suitable for recording. PGE has reviewed this application and has offered no comments or objections. SECTION VII: PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 15 Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON SEPTEMBER 11, 1996 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code that provides that a written appeal must be filed with the City Recorder within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 3:30 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 11, 1996. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. % _.4 August 29, 1996 PREPARED BY: William D'Andrea DATE Assistant Planner 4/e.e4 ..... 41,n , August 29, 1996 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdorff DATE Planning Manager I:ICURPLN1w,IRSDR96-16 dec NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 96-0016-HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL/FARMERS. PAGE 16 I 14 i I tI r— I il Z3 [ ...4 I m I + c L i , M T m S.W. IRVING ST. (Vacated ri % 'o�O 0 o -^ /� r. To \\ \,,,,, Qn Vic, L�J - o •. \\\ . 0 0 4 io VA: _ . 1 II . r-ii � i_ of m \ \ \ 0 N'zi7!"'"*"--'214/!}• • ir 9 ,i ,, - 110-1/1 m ._ - ,., telf ,L1 , "--i o \\ 0\ ' Li 0 • `V.,s '• a IF \ , • • \\ 6'■ \ ‘* N‘ .% Ot k, • \, Illrffai Ifil 111VIAA al 411)...... . , \\‘`,°°°\'°: 1 # .le os-f•-•P#- t•-.1".: .■4111° \N ‘.:\t7'°� • ° .,� ,•��. N ►, �� / 094 a)co OFF SITE ��0 r 1 Gi ',! 406, \ ® r • ` OOISE SOURC 1 -0 Z HIGHWAY 217) /� ) �, +, j�� D c , .--0 ..(.1.4=.111,1. ..A.'. 4,,.V. ,„,...414. . , i...... . :(1?") \ '''\■4(---- . • .7:1,,,, .00•0•00.1" ..), oil \A P'''N'ik • o `. 1 = ��' . CIO 0 \ 1.! u.„,... s4•\ sN q\,,,,,,N\s,,...r ` CAD cr m � ' , a,. ' 4\;\ i .:\ ,:)i ': sl-:-;ii: \,' , 1'', ...i, '' ... ::Th, 'VA . \ \::r \\\, \V. ; -0 1 t,3 '\ . t \ 1 ��l o •1 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DEPT . AA\ 11111111 12140 . 1410010froc, 041, L4NO / 1 orc "v = 1 11 3 1 Ili g i ; 3 1 L____J tiLi I 1! 4, IN lia Mal Ri F-7 11111111111.■ w PI . RONNE iii ijiL in ! , Ira Nooskillm, RAN" INI;w1momil I' illaillillia - i " ils Milli g ST 111111 1111R11111111 1111 I ‘= III 1011111 MN CC5 ' 1116.711111 ... IN•F-'----H min 8 IIIIII: SU�IEC, 1 .III , ii ....EN 44„, PIIRCEIS-->- � C cu NE ....... Er. • In 1 mommi 1.6„ Imp ..n • mil IIII il cu 1.11 0111111. • cm 11111.111 •ill WM" _1_- 1 NEB iih.. 'uII,i - i 51 Ili ' N . . .. . \ a. I it V Vicinity Map A SDR 96-0016 Homestead Village Hotel 00 (47 t¢oTY 1X S-+-&24 ( i/r l 4 2S101DA-02200 2S1010A-00700 EXJ 1 )' FIG HOLDING CO F I G HOLDING CO REAL'ESTATE ACCTG REAL ESTATE ACCTG ATTN RUBY COURTLAND ATTN:RUBY CO 4680 WILSHIRE BLVD 4680 W1L BLVD LOS. NGELES,CA 90010 L GELES,CA 90010 2S101DA-00600 2S1010A-00500 FIG HOLDING CO FIG HOLDING CO REAL ESTATE AC REAL ESTATE AC ATTN.RU URTLAND ATTN:RUB URTLAND 468 SHIRE BLVD 4680 SHIRE BLVD L ANGELES.CA 90010 L ANGELES,CA 90010 2S101DA-00400 2S101DA-00300 F I G HOLDING CO F I G HOLDING CO REAL ESTATE ACCT REAL ESTATE AC ATTN'RUBY C LAND ATTN:RUB URTLAND 4680 WI E BLVD 468 SHIRE BLVD L NGELES,CA 90010 LOS ANGELES,CA 90010 2S101DA-00200 2S101AC-01600 F I G HOLDING CO NEIMEYER,JOHN REAL ESTATE ACCT COMMERCE PLAZA ATTN RUBY TLAND PO BOX 661 4680 IRE BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97207 L ANGELES,CA 90010 2S101A0-03500 2S101AD-03400 PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES LP PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES LP 15115 SW SEQUOIA PKWY#200-WMI 15115 SW SE #�1C 200-WMI PORTLAND.OR 97224 FiG D,OR 97224 2S101AD-03200 2S101DA-01900 PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCI SHEARER 8 SONS INC 15115 SW KWY#200-VVMI 7000 SW VARNS ST LAND,OR 97224 T1GARD,OR 97223 2S101AD-03100 STEVE TANGNEY HOMESTEAD VILLAGE WESTON INVESTMENT CO 47775 FREMONT BOULEVARD 2154 NE BROADV:AY PORTLAND.OR 37232 FREMONT CA 94538 F•I. . HOLDING CO. 4600 WILSHIRE BLVD. LOS ANGELES CA 90010 1 COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE(503)684-0360 Notice TT 8 614 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising RECEIVED •City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet Notice SE.P 03 1996 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit CITY OEuGAR_D_ •Accounts Payable • SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SDR)96-0016 >HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL< The Director has approved, subject to conditions, a request for Site Development Review approval to allow the construction of a three (3) AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION building, 148 unit, Homestead Village Hotel. LOCATION: North of Highway 217, south of S.W. Hampton Street, east of S.W. 72nd Avenue STATE OF OREGON, ) and west of S.W. 68th Parkway. (WCTM 2S1 1DA,Tax Lots 400, 500, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )SS. 600 and 700). ZONE: C-P(Professional Commercial). The C-P zone al- lows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, 1, Kathy Snyder professional and administrative services,financial, insurance and real es- being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising tate services, business support services and transient lodging, among Director, or his principal clerk, of the Tigard—Tualatin Times others. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Develop- a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 ment Code Chapters 18.64, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, and 193.020; published at Ti gard in the 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164. aforesaid county and state; that the /n� 1CJ � SDR96-001 h Homestead Village Hotel I� �`-- a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the � �r. '� I entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and MILLI .!n consecutive in the following issues: •:L August 29, 1996 :�.~• um--, . 1 , 1 i i --,, iccd_i{ , ■Subscribed and sworn to b re me this 29th day of August , 1c O 11 I. %14]SUBJECT �y\ • �'u `. PARCELS- -1\1\ III Notary Pu c fo Oregon J 1 My Commission Expires: 1 AFFIDAVIT ■ ll ■ � i � ■■ - ■ U N ri■lill ab... ive-mum_ vim= : -!„, , \ _ - r The adopted finding of facts,decision, and statement of conditions can be obtained from the Planning Department,Tigard Civic Center, 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. The decision shall be final on September 11, 1996.Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.290(A)and Section 18.32.370 of the Com- munity Development Code,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 3:30 P.M.,September 11, 1996. TT8614—Publish August 29, 1996. , 1 :;.: 0 4 —'III GONZAGA ST 111 i . 11, ,, NN a 1 , ? , , .... 2' 101AG01600 ism 1101AD-03500 1. .Ir 2S11 . ,c rsi 1 25101x• 11.11 C 2510'DA 1150101 DA-00411 '.101 DA-1 it.;1111 DA 00211 C 2S 11DA-00700 _.► ST I 0,_ _____j "IP . IN 101DA-1 900 . a Fl R LP DI zs1o1DA-ozzao _ „glom �..-1 ‘,...„ P I Illikk. .1..• ,•__ 0 D SPNDBURG I f I ST vicinity Map SDR 96-0016 Notification Map r CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD, 13125 SW Hall, • Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503) 639-4171 FOR STAFF USE ONLY CASE NO. %�g6- D-6 /(:, OTHER CASE NO'S: RECEIPT NO. 9 _) 3 C U APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY: DATE: 0670(096 1. GENERAL INFORMATION Application elements submitted: PROPERTY ADDRESS/LOCATION SW 68th Parkway , (A) Application form (1) ✓ Tigard , or . Northwest of the I -5/217 Interfchange (B) Owner' s signature/written TAX MAP AND TAX LOT NO. 2S 1 authorization Tax Lots 400 , 500 , 600 f ____(C) Title transfer instrument (1) -' SITE SIZE 4 . 63 AC PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER* F,I,C, Holding Co . (E) Plot plan (pre-app checklist)(0 p ADDRESS 4600 Wilshire Blvd PHONE (F) Applicant's statement CITY Los Angeles CA ZIP 90010 g (pre-app checklist) APPLICANT* Homestead Village (G) List of property owners and ADDRESS 47775 Fremont Blvd . PHONE510-661 -4049 addresses within 250 feet (1) CITY Fremont CA ZIP 94538 (H) Filing fee ($ ) *When the owner and the applicant are different (I) Construction Cost Estimate .- people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a leasee .n 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. COMP. PLAN/ZONE DESIGNATION: 2. PROPOSAL SUMMARY The owners of record of the subject property request site development review approval to N.P.O. Number: allow Development of a 148 unit Homestead Village Hotel . Approval Date: Final Approval Date: Planning Engineering 0524P/13P Rev'd 5/87 • 3. List any variance, conditional use, sensitive lands, or ocher land use actions to be considered as part of this application: Sensitive Lands : Site includes Wetlands • 4. 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. 5. 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 6th day of June 19 96 SIGNATURES of each owner (eg. husband and wife) of the subject property. // _a0010 /QL ,Dt-17 /1yEivr /1Z4WAGEie A/ /11e57 i) V L A . (KSL:pn/0524P) i CITY OF TIGARD PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION FILE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 96-0016 FILE TITLE: HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY APPLICANT: Homestead Village OWNER: F I C Holding Company Steve Tangney 4600 Wilshire Boulevard 47775 Fremont Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90010 Fremont, CA 94538 (543) 661-4049 (503) 661-4049 �( 4 REQUEST: A request for Site Development Review approval to allow the construction of a three (3) building, 148 unit, Homestead Village Hotel. LOCATION: North of Highway 217, south of SW Hampton Street, east of SW 72nd Avenue and west of SW 68th Parkway (WCTM 2S1 1 DA, Tax Lots 400, 500, 600 and 700). ZONE: C-P (Professional Commercial). The C-P zone allows public agency and administrative services, public support facilities, professional and administrative services, financial, insurance and real estate services, business support services and transient lodging, among others. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.64, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164. CIT: East CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request PHONE NUMBER: (503) DECISION MAKING BODY X STAFF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 CITY COUNCIL DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 RELATIVE COMPONENTS AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION X VICINITY MAP LANDSCAPING PLAN X NARRATIVE X X ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SITE PLAN X OTHER STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea (503) 639-4171 x315 SCR 96-0016 HOMESTEAD VILLAGE HOTEL PROPOSAUREQUEST FOR COMMENTS ��_ , SDK 616.. c>i6 A Homestead *, Villaile "%' , OMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED II, Announces the relocation of its Office C(—. , to 22290 Foothill Boulevard Hayward,California 94541 A 1,4. Telephone(510)583-2000 Facsimile(510)727-2670 ?., l'1,, 0 Ili _ .__._ (76.41) June 17, 1996 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Steve Tang ney Homestead Village 47775 Fremont Boulevard Freemont, CA 94538 Re: Notice of Incomplete Submittal Dear Mr. Tangney: The Planning Division has conducted a preliminary review of SDR 96-0016, an application for Site Development Review, and have found that certain application materials were not provided with the submittal. The Planning Division is unable to consider the application complete and continue processing the application pending submission of the following items and plan notes: 1.) Explanation of plans for SW 70th Avenue. The proposed plan shows SW 70th Avenue connecting directly into a one-way, private access roadway. As discussed in the pre-application conference, a terminus must be provided for a public street. ? Furthermore, the right-of-way for SW 70th Avenue currently does not abut the subject properties proposed for development. Please provide additional explanation of how the private roadway will connect with the public right-of-way. The City will require property owner permission from the intervening property between your driveway and the public right-of-way for any proposed alternative. Two alternatives being; dedication of public right-of-way, or vacation of SW 70th Avenue and the granting of a private access easement. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171. Sincerely, 61a—'D William D'Andrea Assistant Planner i:\cu rpin\will\sd r96-16.Itr c. SDR 96-0016 land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 a Cushman&Wakefield of Oregon, Inc. 200 SW Market Street, Suite 200 RECEIVED PLANNING =HYMN & Portland, OR 97201-5730 WAKEFIELD® Tel: (503) 279-1700 JUN 2 1 1996 Improving your place Fax: (503) 279 17990 in the world. June 20, 1996 Joe Weston Weston D- -lopment Co. 2154 " . Broadway, Suite 200 Po • d, OR 97232 Re: S.W. 70th Avenue Dear Joe: Thank you for you for your patience and cooperation regarding the matters pertaining to S.W. 70th Avenue. As I indicated in our brief telephone conversation, Will D'Andrea,assistant planner, city of Tigard, has proposed to Homestead Village, Inc.,the city's willingness to vacate S.W. 70th Avenue. It is my understanding that the reasons for this are as follows: • 70th Avenue is currently a sub-standard street with regards to its size and is generally considered single-purpose inasmuch as it currently provides access only to your parking lot and to the Farmers' site. • Homestead Village, Inc.'s site plan on the approximate 1.85-acre site adjacent to S.W. 70th Avenue precludes the ability to construct a cul-de-sac which would meet the city's code requirements. Assuming the lack of interest on the part of yourself or John Niemeyer in gaining ownership of this street through a vacation process, Homestead Village,Inc. is prepared to take full responsibility for 70th Avenue. As such, upon obtaining a street vacation, Homestead will grant easements to you and to Mr.Niemeyer and will assume full responsibility for the maintenance of S.W. 70th Avenue. At your request, Will D'Andrea can be reached at the city of Tigard. His phone number is 639-4171. John Niemeyer's phone number is 244-7470. Additionally,I have enclosed a copy of a letter dated June 17, 1996 from Homestead Village, Inc. stating that they will not require signage on either your property or Mr.Niemeyer's property. lilt 1 Independent Members 1 Cushman&Wakefield Worldwidew Royal LePage C&W/GCt Healey&Baker C&W/SEMCO Mackenzie Hill Marlin Land Argentina Canada Czech Republic Great Britain Israel The Netherlands Russia Sweden Austria Channel Islands Denmark Greece Italy Northern Ireland Singapore Switzerland Belgium Chile Finland Hong Kong Japan Poland South Africa Turkey Brazil China France Hungary Malaysia Portugal Spain United States Germany Ireland Mexico Cushman & Wakefield of Oregon, Inc. Joe Weston Page 2 June 20, 1996 Should you have any questions with regards to this matter,please do not hesitate to contact me at 279-1722. Sinc ely, �cott R. Madsen Director an\SRM\C062001.DOC Enclosure c: Lawrence H. Gilmour Steven M. Tangney Mark C. Edlen Joseph DeJager /,'/ Will d'Andrea 'Y 06/28/96 FRI 12:51 FAX 51066 4066 HOMESTEAD FREMONT IJ002 1 • • • ∎)Dir4 Homestead Village® Incmpmnted June 28, 1996 VIA FACSIMILE Mr. Will D' Andrea Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Homestead Village- 70th Avenue Dear Will, On Tuesday, June 25th, 1996 I met with both of the land owners abutting 70th Avenue west of Hamden Avenue. At the meeting, it was concluded that neither party is interested in vacating 70th Avenue at this time. Therefore, Homestead Village will longer access SW 70th Avenue as a secondary access. The only access will be from 68th Street. The basic site plan for the Homestead Village will remain the same, except our driveway will no longer connect to 70th Avenue. I propose to landscape the strip of land between the two roads. Please call if you wish to treat this area differently. Based on our phone conversation of this date,this is the only information you require to continue with the design review. Please call me at 510-661-4049 if there is anything further you require. Sincerely, HOMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED Steven M. Tangney Development Manager cc: Matt Dolan-MNWR Partnership John Nelson - MNWR Partnership Art May- Homestead Village 47775 Fremont Boulevard•Fremont,California 94538•(510)656-1900 W MSA/MEI 503 228 1285 06/06/96' 4• "OM ,J Job 796 Page 1 MACKENZIE/SAITO & ASSOCIATES, P.C. Architecture • Planning • Interior Design 503/224-9570 • FAX 503/228-1285 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Civil • Structural • Transportation 503/224-9560 • FAX 503/228-1285 0690 S.W. Bancroft Street P.O. Box 69039 Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 FAX COVER SHEET Date: .374-4- 9916 Project Number: I g6226 Company: Cr o.c -7 oerl Attention: Lid D' c.. FAX: 6t- 7217 Project Name: 4%1.I %4'44 V1 i1° - -1.ed Description: Trt>41r, S 4-vii From: bvtrAst' 0e.1 Comments or Special Instruction: fi;J Le1J �yi(S C4 u tier a ao LI+'4 lac SZ 0, feat,. cot vs by FAX to: FAX: Total Number of Pages (including this cover sheet):, 1 J If you did not receive all pages, please call our Records Department. ORIGINAL WILL X MILL NOT FOLLOW BY MAIL. CO FR]ENTIAUTY NOTICE:The information contained in this facsimile t at mission le confidertial and is Itardrd only for the usu of the irdMduil or artily=nod store. If the reader of Ina message is not the intended recipient.this serves as notification that any reading,disclosure,copping,distribution,or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this communication is strictly prohibited. I this transmission was received in-nor,immediately noIlly us at 3p3/221-967O to arrange for return of the original facsimile. Internal Use Only: File Sender WP Lisparment FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON TEi_ :503-663-1129 Jun 12 -96 15 :33 No .006 P .01 TkEE From the Desk of John Flood: 5D-k 9lY -DO PRUETT INCORPORATED Fax Cover Sheet Attention: Will D'Andrea Faxed to: 684-7297 Date: 6-12 96 Comments: Home office: 663-7923 Dear Mr.D' Andrea, Here is a copy of the final draft of the Tree Protection and Tree Preservation Plan for Homestead Village. I am having some soft ware problems that will not allow me to access the tree inventory in my PC. I will begin to load the information from my notes 6-13-96. Respectfully Submitted John J. Flood k July 1996 ellY OF Steve T OREGON Homestead C'�11/ 4 2'??5 Fremont ad Village Freenignt, 4538 yard Re. SDP 96 4538 �Q16 Dear Mr. Tangne This le Y.. letter is � ° inform you 96-0016)that at yO Ur application fOr Sit � 1Opment Ree� e (S© rs C° d ed °amP ete e d has been accepted d°Y the Planning DePartnen/f you have any ue ns °°ncem1 9th. information, please feel f free to contact m questions concerning 639Si ncereJY, ,, / UViiliam D, Assistant p ndne Planner r icu rAlniwilltsa 16.1p C. SDR 96-0016 land Use me 13125 SW Ho// givd T 9ard OR 9223 (503) 639-4171 roc) (603) 684-2772 • FARMERS FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP OF COMPANIES - FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE FIRE INSURANCE EXCHANGE 4680 WILSHIRE BLVD TRUCK INSURANCE EXCHANGE 2ND FLOOR MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY LOS ANGELES,CA 90010 FARMERS NEW WORLD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY r n r i t I r PH#: (213)932-3201 FAX: (213)964-8094 May 14, 1996 MAY 2 0 1996 ■ h1A2819 96 Mr. Will D'Andrea PLANNER City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: A PORTION OF TAX LOTS 400, 500, 600 & 700 2S1 1 DA, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON Dear Mr. D'Andrea: PTR Homestead Village Incorporated is hereby authorized to submit for and obtain at its sole cost and expense such permits and approvals that are required by the City of Tigard for its Homestead Village project located on the above referenced parcels. Such applications, permits or approvals may include, but are not necessarily limited to Design Review and Site Development Permit and related activities. Respectively submitted, F.I.G. HOLDING COMPANY ir,(41/4.kfaz.4, II Lawrence H. Gilmour Real Property Manager LHG/pm c: Mark Edlen, Gerding Investment Company M:1IN V EST\LARRY\LWILL RECEIVED MAY 3 0 1996 AMERICA CAN DEPEND ON FARMERS • 7/ TICOR TITLE Y 5„� 12 7 I 1 1/ FORM N•. U3—WAUANi1 LIID. -INSURANCE Mu � u. Co .• •ri�r .0... Ul 1967/10 41°. N KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That RICHARD 0 . SCHULTZ AND . ... .. ` ANNE M. SCHULTZ . husband and wife , and OUS O. SCHULTZ .. hereinafter called the grantor, for the consideration hereinafter stated, to grantor paid by F.. I. G.. '11 LDING COMPANY.,...a..Ca.Bfarnia..cor.poration . , 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, sit- uated in the County of Washington . and State of Oregon, described as follows, to-wit: • The East one-half of Lot 8, VARNS ACRES, Washington County, Oregon • X'' 1 .a� r.' ..• 1 To Have and to Hold the same unto the said grantee and grantee's 7btvxs, successors and assigns forever. And said cantor hereby covenants to and with said grantee and grantee's7chre-x, successors And assigns, that grantor is lawfully seized in lee simple of the above granted premises, free from all encumbrances except : Limited Access Restrictions as recorded September 30, 1937 in Book 167 , page 608, Washington Oounty, Oregon , and also subject Y' to 1967-68 taxes and thst grantor will warrcnt and forever defend the above granted premises and every part and parcel thereof against the law- -' ful claims end 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 i 22 ,800 . 00 -.., *ieR'X9t7t7X)(ktxx cintx ichcarfticcrx=mix Cut XX QCktdxs.crttaux):)ltrxayx bit)Cm)lJtxgsxohhxmLx;o ifix§exxlizza:)f.1lc tTrP�rRttixdoxicle.t xai ?f1257EJU%x+)g5k .tx In construing this decd and where the context so requires, the singular includes the plural. WITNESS grantor's hand this . day of February , 19 69 c 14 RICHARD G. SCHULTZ A NE M. SCHULT GUS 0. SCHULTZ t� . I cLtA 11 , 19c4.. STATE OF OREGON, County of CG GC��-`-. GC�J ss [�' Personally appeared the above named . . Richard .G.Schultz, Anne M. Schultz ,• .c(c - red Us',,0.Schultz . .•trod•acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their ;voluntary act and deed. ') ', Before me: (OFFICIAL SEAM„` • Notary ublic for Oregon , l7 D ;`� 1 V �' - / 2 My commission expires .. � ' .... ,•... NoTI-1ti. ...,.... b.kv.,( 1i•• ....►.1, 6n. o•••, .o•111661•. .)..Id b. e.,.,.d. s.. Chow.. 462. ••■•• I•... 19e7. ...,.,.,.aa by ,w• 1967 sr.,,., s...,.,. . . • . 1 STATE OF WASHINGTON, ss. What Com County of • On this day personally appeared before me Gus 0. Schultz • to me known te .bidhs tiplyyidual. described in and who executed the within and foregoing Instrument, and acknowledged thact ..-x-it .,it,-.:. , . ed the same as his free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purReticA.VArtin oLYnt.tcritcd. CIVEN:Atief).roz 4o.d--lin lot_ seal this 6 th day of March , is 6 i...._. : -,..,-.--. • r, , --.; ;4'5::—: C--- ' '', .'-' 1,'. •, W-e---7A2 j 4110' .. .. '' ; c-‘i, Notary Public ' and for t e late of . Abelian, /emu 3112. , w1.10•hieNtroPIIPOOISIOAL residing at Bell ingham IP WARRANTY DEED STATE OF OREGON County of Washington Gus 0. I.Donald W.Mason.Director ol Assessment TO and Taxation and Ex-Officio RecOrder of Con- F. I. C. HOLDING COMPANY, a California corporation AFTER RICOPIDINO RETURN TO 1 FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP t•DO on klicono;no the within instru 4680 Wilshire Boulevard . : - s-- -.:• s i:'....-%:;'.•. ..:V.L.' *.ia'1-...ttg,4c.. $1:!:-.C. 1.IZTT..A.t .e ... . Yi1TYf;CYf,.. —,C7rr-orr'•-,,a:r-r'r -s -^.,... ,..,.�c..e......rer,.v�wxp 2025 • LTATI O► ORR00a `�' County of War Nryten RKOROtNO REQUESTED IT j le "'t..1 .A r NgA INDEXED 1.z 0 f(OLI?ING CQMPANY IMeo.,R o o““T.t1......Or.c.o a m....* nd t `■•l a• .! "1'' for Ie d nI s-0n“.Ro.wd . “ " w ..l.,nr,. i, �wl W.dttJ. 1::. :'- WHIN RECORD'S, MAIL TO tM Cao. N r.00d t •w""th.".n/ T."441 t S . EARLY, MASLACH, FORAM d_VAS� N. ._.._......_.._._._r__ r�� , +�y•! --A-Et-in. : Kenna th }i, Wevha jr .f W Ceume _ 1 ,...to , 11660 Wklehi.re Blvd, wtttw�r.p Pond ..r.maw t q�lnr,4 Z Calir. R001R TMOA 41 N.Ow.,,.,a1 1.: SPACE A•OVC TN' Awards R a lf,nm 1 •• s. I lull 2 z . yh• AFFIX I.R.S. t_ IN TIIIS SPACE '.' PACE tl�' s. Corporation Grant Deed ',,; T N1e TORN Au...NON[o■Y Ti TLC IN.u.ANCI AND Tttu.T CO trCANY Q Ci. FOR A VaUARLE CONSIDERATION,rrcetpt of which is hereby acknowledged, ;ti` FARMERS UNnERWRITERS ASSOCIATION1 ' a torpor,lion organized under the laws of the stale of Nevada t " hereby GRANTS to • a', F.I.O. HOLDING Ca.PANY, a Corporation, ik.t 1 the following described reel property in the ..e- county of Washington state of faittoodxx Oregon: . . 1. Lot 4. VARNS ACRES, Washington County, Oregon, EXCEPTING THEREFROM • those tracts conveyed to the State of Oregon, by and through its State Highway Commission by deed recorded September 15, 1965, in Book 569, page N. 115. and by deed recorded June 22, 1966, in Book 605, page 399, Records of fr Washington County, Oregon. 2. Lot 5, VARNS ACRES, Washington County, Oregon, EXCEPTING THEREFROM that ' portion conveyed to State of Oregon, by and through its State Highway Commission by deed recorded June 19, 1966, in Book 608, page 350, Reoordo of Washington County. '.f, 3. Lot 6. YARNS ACRES, Washington County, Oregon, EXCEPT that portion on, by and through its State Highway t • Couunieaiotl by deed recorded in Book 550, page 242, Deed Records of Washington County. 7 4. ;.11 of that portion of the North one-half of the Southeast quarter of r;, the Southeast quarter of Section 1, TOWn&h1p 2 South, Rene 1 Wcst, L. Willamette Meridian, which ].lea northeasterly of the Eeaveron-Til5ni.1 • Highway and westerly of the Baldock Freeway as said highway and freeway have been relocated in Suit No. 27-048 (final judguert entered December 30, 1965 in the Circuit Court for Washington County, Oregon). In Witness Whereof,said corporation bu caused its corporate name and res! to be Axed hereto and thil;. . ' ._, Y��_President and ABQ caIItc_Secretary �` `'�• iruuutntal to!,e executed by;u '� •�• tberrunto dc'y authorized. • Dated: January 27, 1969• t•,~'sa TATE OF CAUFOAhIA FARMS•' a eE• run m:• ASSOCIATION • .As. + MTY or LOS ANGELES S ./ r :me Lan uary. ?7 1969 I,eferr ra II.undo- By - — - Y Vice Fred. •t arr rs... a to..d for raid t;...tr anti Sate,per.....lhf '.•'tom R t.J. R 0 DY e,».a r�C.• •0 . Yic4rrvoldrnt.6 4 ! -. - < - ; KY Y}nY17 t..••tou.•t•+bt n)' / Xaa1B rotary •. . < - taIIt._snerttar7.r t6.Cerpor.Jon that rrrrvt.rl the _ t....oh.. who•...evt•+l the IO f if.luer:r et o.bris.11.4 II.Carpa.tfan tt.rrin.....d and 1 e an.Mderd to►.•h.t Mel Cora rs Uon nr•et.•d the.f I.In ln.try - CC -' •";.,..--...a...b..u...r a rwd.tioa rf It.b^_•d c!di:r tr,T y. F r r I ESS.tr Law]and alder...L Title Order No. rya •i f I)___ '11. Escrow or loan No. r — - : 4 µy N2 . ft{ta d No bald C.vny and Stet. 1W 1: 1965 •I- a 20 26 Oolf SON IlKo::+,h; WiJ•.Ifstar IT !�i D �'.. �•�_,,:•••. ,141' EXEC T.I.O. •HOLDING COMPANY I w.q- Thw.••••••.Or.na rr*wooer•••d {rms.,.and{.[Nfig.w.•.ea•,Cow,••••••• non.see w.oo.oao wort_to Poo rood..,••••,.do Prow.... •n erI•T.^•,t•.. al" F.w.v....w, d worm.,......e....d.N..on.bd YANA. NA ACH FORAN & VMS. 1■a•« ye nowt. itt'n _ Xenne,th_i._techeler r. __.__....._....__— • _... :• ,p attire Blvd. •'..w`°""'Y ..t.:elea Calif. •S•'{mum nnr.�nor hand and rood.erltwf •DGC• TwprISSEr.Drama of •PAC{ A•OVL THIl rl.eoeo.•IIretw.r efri {Es Zl 2.26 Pfy:'4.9 °•°",. • Arra LR.S. { IN THIS SPACE • Corporation Grant Deed T•,•IOww rV.■,••..O•Y TITLE.N•V.ANC.•po T•uaT Co...... FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION,receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, TRUCK UNDERWRITERS ASSOCIATION. a corporation organised under the laws of the.tae of Call form a, hereby GRANTS to P.I e 0. HOLDING COMPANY, a Corporation, the following described real property in the Oregon: county of Washington gm.cOMMEMEM 1. Lot 7, YARN'S ACRES, except that portion conveyed to the State of Oregon for highway purposes. 2. The West one-half of Lot 8, VARtaajl�$.F.S��, 3. All that part of Lot 11, VARN'S ACRES, which lies Northeasterly of the Beaverton-Tigard Highway ae said highway has been re-located. • • • • — P," •.1...' • I In Witness Whereof,said corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed hereto and this inotrument to be rooroied by its V1 C1__Pre•ident and Assistant Secretary thereunto duly authorised. Dated: JanuarY 27. 1969 STATE OF CALIFORNIA it goat ca.T:a.. ASSOCIATION touNTY of Ll)C ANO LES ss. I e. Ianuat9 27. 1959. ber...e as<..de.. By •o f•'iwcaed.•Nw.r,P.•tk I...d for nod C.n.sy sad S..,,,prn..J1y Vice President C •,,Ant,td R. w R u.b Y k.... 7 u E" s.rbr rl.. ViCePr..:de.L and X X �a0.10/ ^() y 6, HARRY t3oY,O ►....awel.be By d' VV O____Anal etant.$e�TS...].f ll•.arpoe•lies thei e.e<..•ed,he , •ee eta reary L i . duet lutr. L►a..-es so re n.be th.pr,,.n•who e.re..rd the n. r Wu L..a,.s..,.. be►JI.1 J.C•rpe..hen J,.,,...lard and +•E w La..l.dard r r..,L,re►C..pr.., .sated.acrid...,I,.. c -Now,par.....,.Os b7J..s or•re..la.•.•rl iu b.•rd•1 d.reet•r. • WITNESS.y►.ad.ad.66.1 soul • - Title Order No. 'f tewal GG• yrw--• cad Suu Escrow or Loan No. N....7 Pet,,I.sad L ..id C..ny._8v% w Ce'vousion Ltpirn kg 18,1%! ea9K 734 PIZ.427 . .- ..96 -..... ...t „. El, KNOW ALL MIN d)' TN£Sf. PRESENTS. Thor herern•h.n called IM(n•ntto,lo. the cun•d.tai,ul lereinalr•r stated. • to tr•..tnr pan,/e,• T. 1. C. N.....:•:!.s C.':A::', a (d crT•ie ccr;cratier., ,heretnail•r called lb./r•nter• 1 do•• herein (,ant.law gain. cell••d enact unto the raid ([ante• and st•nt•%s ;writ: u.ere•.or• and••••tn.• that certain ..•' c terir.aill,the renen,ent••her.dn•rnenr•and Appurtenances,(hereunto belonging or•ppertaininl.lit• waled in IM Counts o! iteZhitrttsl and Sr.,,of Oregon.described••hairnet, so-wait: Lot 30, 173::5 i,CTJZ, in ',:h�hir.•rton County, Crerori, Except that tertian cesa'ii.cc in deed to Stele of Greren t1• and the'uf r its State i:iffaley Ca-:ission recorded itt-ril l', 3S.Ct, ic. 3-•co). 59C-, I-arc 40L, iced '`.eeerd:, 1 a'tc Except taut ycrticn oeac'ibec as follta.•s: i berintin; at the EL earner of laic Lot 10, thence is alcnr thr 5 line thereof 6C feet; thence i• ;,rr 221el with the L linc of said Set 143.1,4 ;, Sect; thence 1,' parallel with the I. :tine cf said Lot 7C" feet tc the i' 1 • line thereof; thence 1. 371.23 feet to the :S: corner of said Let; thence • i 330 feet to the 1I cm-nor cf said lct; thence S (35.07 feet to the I' • place of Del-im . I. ntsi Ci 7'C`: Access rastrictie-_ set fcr h it tees recorded April )4, • ISCC, in hook 59C, Tape ICE, kashinpton County Teed records. il • To Ha,,and to Hold the same unto rite said grantee and(rant..'• heirs.socre••or• and ',sign. lorerrn And said grantor hereby ro,rnwnt• rn and with said (r•nt.•e and gr•nter•,/wits.rucer•.or.and•••i(ns, that w• grantor n laiullr toted in lee simple of the lobos.. (r•nted premse h o is. e. from all encumbrances SAYE iv.L: • EY.0-J7 those incurreo L-v t—ar•;ec su s,ecuen; to C.cto:,er 1, 15L1. • and that pantos will warrant and lore,.,delend the above granted pram • •nd e.try parr and parcel thereof •gain•[ the lawful claims and demand•of all person• whd�orn.e• ' ern.steps those elainun(under the shale described encumbrances. J i. • The true and actual con•ider•tron paid lot chi. transfer,stared in term.of dollars.is I /,,It a'How•rtet, tee actual crsn,deratrnn consist• of or include• ether property or [aloe (iten or peornivd which is r._.. cnn•idnwr ion(indicate wdnch).z • in con•tru,n( this deed and Maher.. ii4 miters so require.. the singular inched., the pluu!. . 11'/TNESS (cantor's hand this i,p der of .5c,^tenIser 19 fl . STATE OF OREGON, County o/ kL5:.i:r t= -• ) as. pct t. SD .19 bB . Pe,wnaill appeared the above named ,. • f cr'ence i.t'ier, Zr. urn.-re-ied ::ido:, •and acknowledged the lore(an(instrument to b her s •nr•,r art and deed. • • . Before me: (Orr■ca,t_ SLSL) Nor Public for Oregon J /1! I I My com a m, •on ea pine 2 roar—rr -.....�..r.a...r C..a.•....rat....sane r e..... Ye t..• ran a..--r.-•,.•....•••••••••e.,»r I..a., ••■•••• • WARRANTY DEED! Cs--' *( I Cw.n., to waN..p,an t'O I. Ripe• Thr...a.M. p..rr,p el rtrrb0,\ F. 1. C. hO.. J C CO!'11-:^'.... .I "'°• .;•...a ache 11•r,.a.w t..l l•-0•1•t.r•. twaler et C •••t.' • ..ceps.[ to wad roan,.. Or 1.•••S. ■••r.[, . ... I el,. ,IV .ill., Ow..•yens e' a•np wan .tea..! end ..te.ere as bee. el•its e.a. ! No. wrtt•atCO•ei.L•ta V..70 bare• at s.d C•.nry -`-"..... ........ .. F.I.G. Holding Company I w,...,,, w„ hand end ■eel •11.•rd 4660 Wilshire Blvd. j r•GCC lu •sste+, Donee •t e R.rsh 8 Il.tr.a.a L Los Angeles, Calif. 900101 )\tten: Frank W. Sekela ! Anal +1 , • 36�F, jt r...,, 1. r •• . a. f • 3/ '1✓ %■- L „ r/c 03%-d - s.777G. del • • . . ploer,4.ut—wuuwn are. _l—._._t• •_•••.••• •• •.-t•'='---- it i KNOiV ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, Thar . _.. DANIEL W. GAY.AND DORIS C.3 ......C...GAY, .husband and wife, . ......... Jra... ., hereinafter called the gre^tor,for the consideration hereinafter stated, ':.:ti` to grantor paid by .... F.. . I,...O.....NOLDINO...COMFANX,...a,..0 all fornia corporation .... •-•.N.''•' r. , hereinafter called the grantee, P a does hereby grunt, bargain,sell and convey unto the said grantee and grantee's heir., successors and assigns, that A'�S` . $-. 1 certain real property, with the tenements,hereditament'and appurtenances thereunto belonging or appertaining,sit- . ;....,.• uated in the County of . .Wa8hl.ngton_ and State of Oregon,described as follows,to-wit: � .' 1.? r•r. .'1.....••4- Lot 9, VARNS ACRES, Washington County, Oregon : fir li.w,u= • ytT.,.y: ' 7'N�. • • i '' "�. "7-..--.. r uucWrUrswr .00om4Rtear/ r:n•::•.• n ^• .iiwur'.;44.1,.. 4 0•a.n`�' y. v 1.•. To Hari.no'r..w. the same unto the said grantee and grantee's Aeisa,successors and assigns toter.•,'. �' 1 •4k.z0•: And said grantor beret y covenants to and with said grantee and gronfee'.)Ottltt;successor'and•assigns, that • rt-:'4;� v ( grantor is lawfully seized in Ise s:..-rile of the above granted premises,tree from alt encumbrances i .' CI ,. - CC �y and that Cti`s*7 :t?' r,,.r.� grantor will warrant and fo defend the above granted premises and every part and p.,reel thereof against the law• �.:: ru!Claims and demands d all persons whomsoever,except those chiming under the above described encumbrarloes. �,1>y .•. The fr..r wad actual consideration paid for this frsnaler, stared in terms o1 dollars, is $32,800.GG /';.. ;'. x9fi xrxatilelt el7111X0PAX.COxatkxne antxacxdxvniidocdnlzxdrxX71rnoavrxruxxadl:GVW=xrocxt�mama***irkx x <r.t'`-' x7 1, xx.aumxrlmecico rdtare rcati ',Tlx'x In construing this deed and where the ntext so requires, the singular include.• the plural. ( , .'. WITNESS,fear tar's hand this /7 day of February_ l 19 9 .. 1 ,:.::;.;!.:....•', 1........1:.".:•* .1 /.ate (... : DANIEL GAY / DORIS C. GAY / ` 7h STATE VFAREGON, County of ML)//(/✓c'r-r'hl ) as. February /7. . , /969 t•, • Persorta)lf• appeared the above named ...Daniel W.Gay.and Doris C. Gay _ . ... ..... .`' f.. and,eckno,ifedged the lorego'''ng instrument to be their , voluntary act and deed. r,..;±• • 1 I Before rue: it� et 172/i 4 .. ` (Ornr ist. SruL) Notary ublic for econ My/ mmission expires . )77•s'/7, 4; /972,-- 0•;" ,.n'' U..lr.,i.-U M I.w.1.I..O...r•,41.O•.e••l..•.1•.r,w.,, d.d�M 1557 4+.41,...1r._. I I --•�•• 0•011-15..1.0•+..t»0•.•..r..w.:.1.t7.r,.r.rr 1�/ WARRANT Dom. D STATE OF ORE�,ON ' r�v •�.1 Nr t/'. (.� •. ,f 11.1 I . ...1/ �'D 1/. X co.w.lr of WolA:nuron f t.•.:•1 ,t l,. ... ... ._. .. • - v 51i 1, Raeef Thomson, DIr,ctor of RKerds • '��?.. i T.I•r Ekcrlons and E.•Oif,cso Recorder o:Con• "'� r L ..vv-- /11 9 ,eo.,ore r.r. veyonees for said eow+ty, do hereby cunt', fr"}.....�' II • /.�.l..G, //(I �'r✓q (�11�/l/ .�... shot rho wilh+n tesrrvrn.nt or writing ..es (rte. / J re..cee.o.,.e received :old recerdrd In book of records �•!, .ti,i;w. : I r.coca.. No. «............ .�.... .................. -...C_._.—. 1Ie•.•.... n! sold Ci..r� ....—._.._._ Y!..4 i�T`t.' reCOnDINO et•U..r TO yam. h• I Kr.r. C. /!U`/n - W,Iness eery hand end seal of Ii.ed. !•, �i^"�: .1 ,IL tnl7 N/ '}"'r' ROGER TMOMSSEN, Director or ';'•i / ( b / Reeads & ENC1raw �L•?'`' : 4t So.WIr)hlec_A l'. . ,CDsaNyft� tc fl ' 3 :--"-�. 881 u F r `' ' l[� _ eon 881 M E G38_ -f. -- -r;:, err �. i AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) )ss. City of Tigard ) 1, Steven M . Tangney , being duly swom, depose and say that on May 16 , 1996 , 1996 I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the attached list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at (or near) S . W . 68th Parkway, northwest of I -5/217 interchange . Tigard OR a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at Irvington . CA with postage prepaid thereon. Signature 1 e presence of a Notary Public) • (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETEJNOTARIZE) Subscribed and swo ffirmed before me on the day of , 19_. NOTARY ' . :LIC OF OREGON My Commission - pires: (Applicant. please complete information below for proper placement with proposed proje •NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Name of ApplicanciOwner. Address or General Location of Subject Property: I Subject Property Tax Mapis)and Lot T(s): J h'Joginbatty inastersaafhnad.nut CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT No 5907 4 f!!!!! !!!^l1�111 ill./!!!!!!!!�l�r/f.1!!l!!ll././!!!!!!.�!!!!!�!!!J1.�./!!!!! State of 011 r-r) ID 0 NCounty of A\CAMeCka. Q n/�nn N N . On rna�./ l b `"I-q efore me, A. ' lit t ',I IL. BATE NAM:,TITLE OF OFFICER-E.G.,"JANE D• ,NOTARY PUBLIC" g personally appeared ,S-even l v'cAr n o fl(�/j�/)f(-A.) 1, NAME(S)OF SIGNER) 1 0 personally known to me - OR - I I proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are 0 subscribed to the within instrument and ac- g knowledged to me that he/she/they executed N 0 the same in his/her/their authorized t\ 0 capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their Kalys.wvERy signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), 8 °` t Commission. � 81 or the entity upon behalf of which the a R ;'' Notary Pubic—Cdbmb ' AlaenedaCaxllyy person(s) acted, executed the instrument. k My Comm.Expires Jan 21,20 ti 0 WITNESS my hand and official seal. 0 -� 1, thLewj o G TURE OF NOTARY 0 V `1 ((( o OPTIONAL 1 kl Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent 1 fraudulent reattachment of this form. 0 CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT o 4NDIVIDUAL 0 H CORPORATE OFFICER I C Ar �� / 1 1 \cu\ `^ 11 l 1 V l U 1( 0 TITLE(S) TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT 5 I I PARTNER(S) n LIMITED I t 0 11 — GENERAL l0 l0 ATTORNEY-IN-FACT NUMBER OF PAGES 1l 1` 0 TRUSTEE(S) 0 0 GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR I I OTHER: C)b` I e- ✓(-� o DATE OF DOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: 0 0 (\ NAME OF PERSON(S)OR ENTITY(IES) I0 1 SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE 111 ✓!!!l!!!,IJ!!!!!l!!!!!././ill.!!!!�!l!J!J!!!!!.!f!!!!!!!!/!!!/'!!l!!!!!!!!!!!.f J ©1993 NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION•8236 Remmet Ave.,P.O.Box 7184•Canoga Park,CA 91309-7184 1 HOMESTEAD VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MAY 30TH, 1996 ATTENDEES: 1. \J eE WESTOA/ 2. MRCLK- ei D L4.ry D 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. OT/16/96 THU 16:08 FAX 5106614066 HOMESTEAD FREMONT a002 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE WITHIN SEVEN(7)CALENDAR DAYS OF THE SIGN POSTING,RETURN THIS AW IDAVIT TO :.:, City of TSigard Planing Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard' Tigard,OR 97223 I, ,'I/,fl77j LJ i 21.1/ , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed affecting the land located at (state tbe approximate location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) 6, t1 - 6 ,�/ np .✓ .uc,4.1. 7 , and did on the JC, ry day of c�',■=, Y 19 .personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a o rzunnc-c-'P (17.17},)7- /21zJlr W c✓ application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at 5v u o c -4,4447P 7v,--1 /)) 5 ) C.57 z'A) /nr r1 ✓'t/ (state location you posted notice on property) Signature the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and swom/affirmed before me on the 2-012-\ day of I - , 191. - - OVA sAai. "' CCJir10.4Er.AI,��; o?,c,e7 NOTARY PUBLI O' OREA N My Commission Expo' -s: ti (Applicant,please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) r-NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: ,re?/r7Z-sTizz•4✓� TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: ir'K7A-3n/ ,,/j sr-AvY /.607-61-- Name of Applicant/Owner: Address or General Location of Subject Property: I LSubject P-onem Tax Map(s)and Lot T(s): � h:9ogimpattorwler affpoatmsi • 400 1-Iome5tead Village® Incorporated May 16, 1996 Weston Investment Company 2134 N.E. Broadway Street Portland, Oregon 97232 RE: Homestead Village Dear Interested Party: Homestead Village Incorporated is representing the owner of a 4.6 acre property located at S.W. 68th Parkway, northwest of the 1-5/217 interchange, Tigard, Oregon. We are considering proposing a 148 room extended stay hotel requiring site development review at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Thursday, May 30, 1996 Tigard City Hall Town Hall Room 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 7:00 P.M. Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call either John Nelson at 503-225-0822 or me at 510-661-4049 if you have any questions. Sincerely, HOMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED Steven M. Tangney Development Manager 47775 Fremont Boulevard-Fremont,California 94538-(510)656-1900 Homestead Village® Incorporated May 16, 1996 Pacific Realty Associates L.P. 15115 S.W. Sequoia Parkway, Suite 200-WM Portland, Oregon 97224 RE: Homestead Village Dear Interested Party: Homestead Village Incorporated is representing the owner of a 4.6 acre property located at S.W. 68th Parkway, northwest of the 1-5/217 interchange, Tigard, Oregon. We are considering proposing a 148 room extended stay hotel requiring site development review at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Thursday, May 30, 1996 Tigard City Hall Town Hall Room 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 7:00 P.M. Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call either John Nelson at 503-225-0822 or me at 510-661-4049 if you have any questions. Sincerely, HOMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED Steven M. Tangney Development Manager 47775 Fremont Boulevard-Fremont.California 94538•(510)656-1900 Homestead Village® Incorporated May 16, 1996 Oregon Department of Transportation 417 Transportation Building Salem, Oregon 97310 RE: Homestead Village Dear Interested Party: Homestead Village Incorporated is representing the owner of a 4.6 acre property located at S.W. 68th Parkway, northwest of the I-5/217 interchange, Tigard, Oregon. We are considering proposing a 148 room extended stay hotel requiring site development review at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Thursday, May 30, 1996 Tigard City Hall Town Hall Room 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 7:00 P.M. Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call either John Nelson at 503-225-0822 or me at 510-661-4049 if you have any questions. Sincerely, HOMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED Steven M. Tangney Development Manager 47775 Fremont Boulevard•Fremont,California 94538•(510)656-1900 0130 Homestead Village® Incorporated May 16, 1996 Craig Hopkins 7430 S W. Varns Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Homestead Village Dear Interested Party: Homestead Village Incorporated is representing the owner of a 4.6 acre property located at S.W. 68th Parkway, northwest of the I-5/217 interchange, Tigard, Oregon. We are considering proposing a 148 room extended stay hotel requiring site development review at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Thursday, May 30, 1996 Tigard City Hall Town Hall Room 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 7:00 P.M. Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call either John Nelson at 503-225-0822 or me at 510-661-4049 if you have any questions. Sincerely, HOMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED Steven M. Tangney Development Manager 47775 Fremont Boulevard•Fremont.California 94538 (510)656-1900 Homestead Vi llage® Incorporated May 16, 1996 Mark F. Mahon 11310 S.W. 91st Court Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Homestead Village Dear Interested Party. Homestead Village Incorporated is representing the owner of a 4.6 acre property located at S.W. 68th Parkway, northwest of the I-5/217 interchange, Tigard, Oregon. We are considering proposing a 148 room extended stay hotel requiring site development review at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Thursday, May 30, 1996 Tigard City Hall Town Hall Room 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 7:00 P.M. Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call either John Nelson at 503-225-0822 or me at 510-661-4049 if you have any questions. Sincerely, HOMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED Steven M. Tan ey Development Manager 47775 Fremont Boulevard•Fremont,California 94538-(510)656-1900 OP* Homestead Village® Incorporated May 16, 1996 Mr. Joel Stevens 9660 S.W. Ventura Court Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Homestead Village Dear Interested Party: Homestead Village Incorporated is representing the owner of a 4.6 acre property located at S W. 68th Parkway, northwest of the I-5/217 interchange, Tigard, Oregon. We are considering proposing a 148 room extended stay hotel requiring site development review at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Thursday, May 30, 1996 Tigard City Hall Town Hall Room 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 7:00 P.M. Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call either John Nelson at 503-225-0822 or me at 510-661-4049 if you have any questions. Sincerely, HOMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED Steven M. Tangney Development Manager 47775 Fremont Boulevard•Fremont,California 94538•(510)656-1900 411C/it• Homestead Village® Incorporated May 16, 1996 Pat Wyden 8122 S.W. Spruce Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Homestead Village Dear Interested Party: Homestead Village Incorporated is representing the owner of a 4.6 acre property located at S.W. 68th Parkway, northwest of the I-5/217 interchange, Tigard, Oregon. We are considering proposing a 148 room extended stay hotel requiring site development review at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Thursday, May 30, 1996 Tigard City Hall Town Hall Room 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 7:00 P.M. Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call either John Nelson at 503-225-0822 or me at 510-661-4049 if you have any questions. Sincerely, HOMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED Steven M. Tangney Development Manager 47775 Fremont Boulevard'Fremont,California 94538•(510)656-1900 • Homestead Village® Incorporated May 16, 1996 Mr. John Neimeyer P.U. Box 661 Portland, Oregon 97207 RE: Homestead Village Dear Interested Party: Homestead Village Incorporated is representing the owner of a 4.6 acre property located at S.W. 68th Parkway, northwest of the I-5/217 interchange, Tigard, Oregon. We are considering proposing a 148 room extended stay hotel requiring site development review at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Thursday, May 30, 1996 Tigard City Hall Town Hall Room 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 7:00 P.M. Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call either John Nelson at 503-225-0822 or me at 510-661-4049 if you have any questions. Sincerely, HOMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED // //%i* Steven M. Tangney Development Manager 47775 Fremont Boulevard•Fremont,California 94538•(510)656-1900 MEETING NOTICE Homestead Village i s proposing a site development review for a 148 room extended stay hotel at this location . Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, the applicants would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: THURSDAY, MAY 30, 1996 7:00 P.M. TIGARD CITY HALL TOWN HALL ROOM 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223 PROJECT DEVELOPER CONTACT: John Nelson 503-225-0822 Steven M. Tangney 510-661-4049 Please note: This is an informal meeting on the preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. 4 Homestead Village Roofing Elks Prestique II Sablewood Building Trim Color Sherwin Williams White #SW2123 Doors Glidden Blue Heron #50BB 13/104 Windows, Railings and Gutters White Prefinished - Aluminum Building Body Color Sherwin Williams Dorian Gray #30YY 45/018 Proposes I ✓e. Standard Statement Supporting the Application for Development Review for Homestead Village Prepared by MNWR/p for Homestead Village, Inc. June 6,1996 The applicant intends to construct an "extended-stay" hotel in three separate, two- story buildings and a total of 148-units. The site is 4.63 acres in size and will have ((� access from SW 68th Avenue (south of SW Hampton ear Farmers Insurance). J� Secondary access will be provided at SW 70th Avenue. The site is undeveloped, 1.� Lmostly forested and is bifurcated by a wetland (Tract B, 0. 9 ac.). The wetland has been delineated and is indicated on the exhibits which accompany this application. A Pre-Application Conference was held on May 9, 1996. A neighborhood meeting was held at the Tigard City Hall on May 30, 1996. The development plan complies with the applicable Sections of the City of Tigard, Oregon Community Development Code as follows: 18.100 Landscaping and Screening Landscape improvements will consist of a combination of the following four types. 1 ) Newly landscaped areas will be made up of lawn, ground covers and trees. The plant palette will include evergreen and deciduous materials, and many will provide seasonal color variations. These areas make up roughly 35% of the total pervious surface on the site. 2) Existing understory will be thinned and cleared of dead materials, however the general make-up of these areas will be maintained. These areas are found under scattered grouping of ash, alder and oak and total roughly 15% of the total pervious surface of the site. 3) The wetland area and wetland buffer area comprise roughly 35% of the site's pervious surface. These areas will not be disturbed except for these actions: a) a dumping area will be removed and planted with native materials. This area totals about 5000 square feet and consists of lawn clippings, shrubbery clippings and woody material. b) removal of dead materials that may endanger patrons of the hotel and pruning of existing trees to improve health and structural integrity. Some understory will be removed along the top of the embankment (upland) to improve security and visual access to the wetland. A 25-foot buffer has been imposed around the wetland (see "Additional Comments"). 4) Tree mitigation areas are set aside for planting trees that will make up for the loss of existing trees that have to be removed for the development of the site. This area makes up about 15% of the pervious surface. All improvements to the site will be maintained by the owner, Homestead Village, Inc. An automatic irrigation system will be installed in the newly landscaped areas. Quick coupler valves will be installed for periodic water supply in the understory areas. 18.100.030 Street Trees Trees will not be planted along SW 68th Avenue due to the quantity and sizes of existing trees. These trees are located between the sidewalk and the future parking area curb line, roughly 25-feet from the property line. The trees include oaks, ash, alder and redwood and range in caliper size up to 24-inches. 18.106 Off-Street Parking and Loading A total of 153-parking spaces will be provided on the site for the 148 rental units and staff. These will be made up of standard, compact and handicap stalls and are shown on the site plan. The total number of spaces is based on the following calculation: 1 :room plus 1 :2 employees. All of the spaces are located directly adjacent to the rental units and in all cases are within 200-feet of the units for which the spaces will serve. One loading space is also provided. All of the stalls exceed the minimum dimensional requirements of the City of Tigard. Access to the site is provided at SW 68th Avenue. All parking areas will be landscaped in accordance with Section 18.100. Special attention has been given to existing trees and the parking plan has been adjusted to safeguard important specimens. All paved surfaces have been designed to direct storm water into catch basins without ponding. Lighting is provided, (see lighting plan). The cut-off angle is reduced to illuminate only the driving and parking surface. 18.108 Access, Egress and Circulation Access is provided at SW 68th Avenue, and two-way circulation is provided in a loop around two buildings and a dead-end driveway to the third building. Driveways are designed to meet City standard dimensions for width and turning radius and are located within 50-feet of building entrances. Walkways connect building entrances with parking and driveways and on to the public street. An additional walkway provides pedestrian circulation through the undeveloped portion of the site. The development meets all ADA requirements including uninterrupted access between the surrounding streets and buildings; between the parking and buildings; and, between the adjacent sites. 18.116 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage, etc. Solid waste and recyclables will be temporarily stored in two locations as shown on the site plan. This area will be enclosed by a masonry wall and will be gated. The area is accessible by service equipment, service personnel and patrons at all hours. The design of the enclosure is consistent with Section 18.116.060 C., Design Standards. The hotel does not contain a restaurant. 18.120 Site Development Review A Pre-Application Conference was held on May 9, 1996. A neighborhood meeting was held May 30th, 1996. The Application for Development Review was submitted on Thursday, June 6, 1996. The relevant development factors include: •The project will be built in a single phase. •No modifications to approved plans, to existing developments or exceptions are requested. •Adjacent streets do not have public transit. •Landscaping exceeds the 15% minimum. •One identification sign is provided at the main entrance on SW 68th Ave. and one building mounted sign is provided oriented to Hwy 217. Both signs will comply with Section 18.114 of the code. 18.120.13 - Grading Plan - Item (3.) asks for a statement from a P.E. regarding slope stabilization. There is a potential for small areas with slope stabilization problems on the site. The geotechnical report is not complete at this time. The slope stabilization problems are most likely associated with the ravine located on the site. All areas identified with slope stabilization problems will be avoided or mitigated in accordance with recommendations from the Geotechnical Engineer and made satisfactory to the City of Tigard. 18.164 Street and Utility Improvement Standards All public and private services are adequate as to location, size, design and timing of construction. The documents provided with this application clearly support this statement. Surface drainage and on-site storage is adequate as designed to accommodate the required storm events and is coordinated with adjoining properties. All utilities are placed underground. Safe and efficient circulation for patrons, service and public safety vehicles has been addressed in the site plan. The site has the appropriate level of landscaping to screen and conceal parking and service functions; will be adequately illuminated; is surfaced with the appropriate all-weather material; and is planned in an efficient and attractive manner. 18.164.05 - Easements The existing easements are depicted on the Existing Conditions Plan. Additional easements are not anticipated in the development of the site. Should additional easements be required, they will be created in such a fashion to be made satisfactory to the City of Tigard. 18.164.07 - Sidewalks There is an existing public sidewalk along SW 68th and there should be no need for additional public sidewalks for this development. Access is provided from the public sidewalk to the site. 18.164.09 - Sanitary Building C will be served by the existing manhole located in SW 70th. The existing manhole is of adequate depth to serve the proposed building. Buildings A & B are to be served by an existing manhole located at the SE corner of the site. The inverts represented on the ALTA survey provided by Westlake Consultants indicates adequate depth to serve these buildings. 18.164.100 - Storm The storm system will be designed in accordance with the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) standards, Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC), and the City of Tigard. There are two water quality, "Extended Dry Detention", ponds depicted on the plans. These ponds are sized in accordance with the guidelines established by USA. Both ponds will discharge into the existing drainage system. The existing drainage system adequately conveys the existing flows with no future upstream development available. The existing drainage system will adequately convey the proposed development (and upstream) flows with no downstream impacts as related to current conditions. 18.164.1 10 - Bikeways There are no bikeways apparent along SW 68th. Therefore, this section is not applicable. 18.164.120 - Utilities All utilities are available to the site. All utilities will be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Tigard standards. Additional Concerns: Tree Inventory and Mitigation Plan Refer to Tree Inventory and Removal Plan for statistical summary of existing trees; trees to be removed; and trees to be replaced. 25' Wetland Buffer A 25' wetland buffer is shown on the plans. There are several places where the proposed development encroaches on the buffer. These encroachments are a result of an effort to minimize the overall impacts of the development on the surrounding environment. An effort was made to save as much of the existing tree stand as possible. Also, a "bridge" is proposed to span the wetlands and reduce the impacts to the wetland buffer. Lot Line Adjustment The lot line adjustment is represented on the drawings. Other Agency Permits Once the construction documents are sufficiently complete, the Department of State Lands and Army Corp. of Engineers will be contacted with respect to any impacts on the wetland and address any permit requirements. The project will be designed to eliminate any direct disturbance to the wetland. MNG:19502 n:\datakjohn\homestea\bdr.696 r4SUBJECT 1157-(4d (Vi 1-4'9a-,- BY /-17 DATE NNWRIP pvIeL1n.1/JA t/ rpm_,n cY/C4v1. PROJECT NO. / O03 SHT _Of _ -1- , ; I : • :1 ! i 1 I I t ; , 1 1 { j H ! ill ' I :_ . . . 1 ! - + L- I , . . . fink . ; . d t ICI ° t,,__I , r-i--. i -1-!---i-, ;-- - --i- !--, ,-T .--4'. t--I. . . . i , :, 1 i i : . : 1 .. , ', Y ■••ji,ti4. . 02'0',...,„„.,, 1,,;44, 1 ' ',' ......L _,,, W , ,,-- , 41-it - -,:,,4' ' ,. ., ittlis '. LH - • 1�I •• C i 1.,1r• 7iLI/S {T i +tl 1 1-4; ' 1 t 1 1 1. { , • , , • ' • r• • ,• 1, 1 ',- I.{ _-, ' •. +'.- I { t ----�+ { I ;-t 1-._ f ; ; ' j.-I { 1- H. - -- . 1 . . 1 . . . , -t _, _ , ._t. .i : ...,. 1 1 i t ! I • • I .,`_" ' • - .r tr 1 ../I , . .. I I—. 1- 1 .4 t ..I : , ,_ --■ SO4I77 ©'5, 7 C' 041 }' . �i .a f e„,•,3 ; o l q .5 :: • -, y3 (.,eiT)- . :r,..._- -.-a.. . :ras, 4 024/44a 76 • At sr zc.6- _ Aicc 4:4 14 Y' . . : , . : . • I. ' : 27 z z, O ge _ : -: l-: Z.- Oc Pam �C. (577 e. . • i . • 2- 3.6I q • ql z2.r96 • • • 0,0 L4u S rn /h CL1u1rii r = q 4' C.if @ 0• Q -- ,g, 62 . Cr-LS • >> 1 BZ .2-A./C441.4-5R 7b U in..1.4r t Cr v'3c.ry 1 € /-V f, Q 2 //, 7 G e,`s `-,--"› /3 * OI" 171.rc4.a t 63,1.-/r2f gJi%o.!/ Tc., 1"YSTE w G,/GC. ,Jn7- /-sf .•1,t,,,,-.5,c (<4e,G y 614<Jfc 004!!3 —T. 77/c/1.7 I?J/1iC7 S >15r" d.1 /14/3L4' ,-t, :....'4/r/ 1--net /L /10i-QJ A.7-t-y u rr# .Ja .41e(-04) 6:.A.4,0.+t a .g,rs /VOT£: /744 wide ..46-Js Alr%i,'f..e' eao(J£iiZs./C2' / wl. Sj-L>ii.... w.aYC/L. MITCHELL I NELSON I WELBORN I REIMANN I PARTNERSHIP PLANNERS ENGINEERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 233 SW FRONT AVE. I PORTLAND 1 OREGON 1 97204 1 W 503.225.0822 I FAX:503.273.8353 2�Y2 z)6/Z:,,,,L 1 S . C. S . TYPE-1A RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION ENTER: FREQ (YEAR) , DURATION (HOUR) , PRECIP (INCHES) 25, 24 , 3 . 9 ******************** S .C.S . TYPE-1A DISTRIBUTION ******************** ********* 25-YEAR 24-HOUR STORM **** 3 . 90" TOTAL PRECIP. ********* ENTER: A(PERV) , CN (PERV) , A(IMPERV) , CN (IMPERV) , TC FOR BASIN NO. 1 4 . 63 , 86 , 0, 98 , 30 DATA PRINT-OUT: AREA(ACRES) PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS TC (MINUTES) A CN A CN 4 . 6 4 . 6 86 . 0 . 0 98 . 0 30 . 0 PEAK-Q (CFS) T-PEAK(HRS) VOL (CU-FT) 7 . 83 41018 ENTER [d: ] [path] filename [ .ext] FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: as Y2- Posr p:\matt\hyd\sci26p.hyd SPECIFY: C - CONTINUE, N - NEWSTORM, P - PRINT, S - STOP C ENTER: A(PERV) , CN(PERV) , A(IMPERV) , CN(IMPERV) , TC FOR BASIN NO. 2 2 . 13 , 86, 2 . 5, 98, 10 DATA PRINT-OUT: AREA(ACRES) PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS TC (MINUTES) A CN A CN 4 . 6 2 . 1 86 . 0 2 . 5 98 . 0 10 . 0 PEAK-Q (CFS) T-PEAK(HRS) VOL (CU-FT) 3 . 61 7 . 83 52224 ENTER [d: ] [path] filename [ .ext] FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: p:\matt\hyd\sci25pd.hyd SPECIFY: C - CONTINUE, N - NEWSTORM, P - PRINT, S - STOP s SEWER PIPES Enter up to 10 pipes . Enter <Return> only for flowrate and diameter to end. FLOWRATE DIAMETER FRICTION SLOPE VELOCITY (CFS) (IN) (FT-1/6) (%) (FPS) 8 . 32 24 . 00 0 . 0250 0 . 50 2 . 65 11 . 76 24 . 00 0 . 0250 1 . 00 3 . 74 Geo Engineers EARS June 5, 1996 L V Consulting Engineers and Geoscientists Offices in Washington, Oregon and Alaska PTR Homestead Village, Inc. 125 Lincoln Avenue Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 Attention: Ms. Karen Scanland Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Results Proposed Homestead Village Extended Stay Hotel Tigard, Oregon File No. 5195-001-36 INTRODUCTION This letter has been prepared at the request of Mr. Steve Tangney of PTR Homestead Village, Inc., and summarizes the initial results of our geotechnical explorations for the proposed Homestead Village Extended Stay Hotel project. The site is located southwest of the Southwest 68th Parkway and Southwest 66th Avenue intersection in Tigard, Oregon. The site includes two parcels (approximately 1.4 and 4.6 acres) separated by a relatively deep drainage ravine. Site development will include three two-story structures. The structures will be of wood construction. Accordingly, we estimate the foundation loads will be relatively light, with column footing loads less than 90 kips and continuous wall footing loads less than 4 kips per lineal foot. A grading plan has not been developed; however, we understand that minimal site grading will be required to achieve final grade. BACKGROUND GeoEngineers completed subsurface explorations at the site in January 1996 for Gerding/Edlen Investment Company. Our scope of work was limited to one boring at each of the parcels. Test pit explorations were completed on June 4 and 5, 1996 to supplement the existing subsurface information developed during our January 1996 explorations. GeoEngineers, Inc. 7504 SW Bridgeport Road Portland, OR 9722-4 Telephone (503) 624-9274 - Fax (503)620-5940 PTR Homestead Village, -. June 5, 1996 Page 2 SITE CONDITIONS SITE CONDITIONS The ground surface slopes gently down toward a northwest-southeast trending drainage ravine. The slopes down into the drainage ravine are relatively steep with areas of prior landslide activity. Relatively thick vegetation consisting of up to 2-foot-diameter trees with dense undergrowth exists at both parcels. In addition, numerous logs and other forest "litter" exist at the ground surface. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Generally, subsurface conditions consist of silt underlain by basalt rock. Surficial conditions generally consist of approximately 4 to 12 inches of topsoil containing shrub and tree roots. The silt is medium stiff to very stiff silt with varying amounts of fine sand and extends to basalt rock which was encountered at depths varying between approximate 30 and 35 feet. The first 1 to 5 feet of silt above the basalt rock consists of severely weathered basalt. In general, the basalt is moderately hard and varies between vesicular and nonvesicular material. Moisture content determinations of select soil samples from the January 1996 explorations varied from 29 to 47 percent and the dry unit weight determinations of the material varied between 85 and 96 pcf (pounds per cubic foot). Consolidation testing completed on selected relatively undisturbed samples indicate a moderate to relatively high degree of overconsolidation. Slight ground water seepage was observed in the test pit explorations at depths varying between approximate 9 and 10 feet. PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of our explorations and analysis, the subsurface conditions observed at the site are suitable for support of the proposed structures on shallow foundations. All footings should be founded on undisturbed medium stiff to very stiff silt or on structural fill underlain by undisturbed medium stiff to very stiff silt. Site vegetation of consists of relatively thick vegetation, including up to 2-foot-diameter trees along with dense undergrowth grasses, shrubs and forest litter. All trees, logs, brush and forest litter should be removed in the building and paved areas. In addition, root balls should be grubbed out to the depth of the roots. The existing topsoil should be stripped and removed from the site in all proposed building and pavement areas and for a 5-foot margin around such areas. Based on our explorations, the depth of stripping will vary between 4 and 12 inches, although greater stripping depths may be required to remove localized zones of loose or organic soil. For estimating purposes, an average stripping depth of 9 inches appears reasonable, with the actual stripping depth based on field observations at the time of construction. G e o E n g i nee r s File No.5195-001-36-2130 PTR Homestead Village, June 5, 1996 Page 3 Ground water is likely deeper than 5 feet in the vicinity of the site. We understand that limited cuts will be required at the site. Assuming cuts are less than approximately 5 feet, it is our opinion that control of a ground water level will not be a design consideration for this project, although some perched ground water may be encountered during construction. • O ► We currently are completing the laboratory testing and should complete the analysis and preparation of our report within the next 2 to 3 weeks. We trust this information meets your needs at this time. If you or other members of the design team have any questions, please call. Yours very truly, GeoEngineers, Inc. ot).cf cu.LANCASJZ1- George Saunders, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer 77).. Scott V. Mills, P.E. Principal GPS:SVM:hsm Document ID: 519500I1.pre cc: Mr. Steve Tangney PTR Homestead Village, Inc. Mr. John Nelson Mitchell/Nelson/Welborn/Reimann Partnership Copyright© 1996 GeoEngineers,Inc., All rights reserved G e o E n g i n e e r s File No. 5195-001-36-2130 TE «. . RYqqq,,,••• 71- -.-` • � �E2j: - - • A' . '_-__,_----- •.-w1'- _!•r r.Y_. �� Q y Ma9r. s 4 ;. ` �`..., {,' e/ Z9 AM X73 : : D ;�-- ; ..: )' _..,..}i 0' " 1 H 0?I 3 S E N .. ::� -` .- '---"`..-7"-; zi --L-- x- �"'x w �d�•:r r'._ .7. VACATING- DEDICATEIS+=VROPENND-PORTI . • -OF-"S W.4:IRVI• 7$p TT• !:,:- STREET IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, WASHIL TON COUNTY. OREGON. • '4fft] ,•:-, �; �` ` • V--1.17 THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: • :4 ' � =: Section 1: The Council finds that a resolution was adopted by the • . .��' Council on November 27, .1972, pursuant to chapter 271. 130 ��ti�, i`_ I • ; whereby the 7Coun�.il-.:initiated vacation proceedings with respect _ j. '.. : '-Thereinafter •describeddedicated unopened portion -of a public �z ,:: �ttiat i lic hea f 7 iaa ttie" walled Tto-'be held on '- � i r - - _ - 1 ti�r r 1 : o! a �hearingjvras!given as -re fired 'try''',`1._ D"--r‘ A °'•`7x:s �.. ' • .z? ..., o fi•3r� r.;,1'+r:•,_, _..- :,. .,:.is Ewan ,. :SCI r r i a •�O11itf.C1}1 .: - . ma- y - g:_-ue -: :46.3.44.:-.4:. :_._.._.._ . ^ : : _ -_ .c•' % ' _ .77--------on- :- The-COunc 1:far '=�' ' Trd fitraabTc lieacing as ' _S-:.` -_ - Y... s�" rp- - - . �,.a,.4«.-,thereii called o`b `held,-au ld iegu l ar ly held- _ d`, e .atthe-re g ular Council meeting on January 8, 1973 at which time .� --:and place the Council afforded all interested •' -�. p persons an opportunity rg .,: -to._be heard for or against the proposed vacation of said lands, and . the Council further considered all objections theretO:Th Section 3: The Council further finds that a majority of the owners t ' .,. , of the area affected by said proposed vacation, computed • PL, on the basis provided in Chapter 271. 080 ORS, did not object thereto . . in writing and that all owners affected thereby did, _ in .fact, 'favor the vacation of said area; and the Council finds that said vacating will not substantially affect the market value of any abutting property. Section 4: The Council further finds that the public interest will not be prejudiced by the vacation of the hereinafter described lands and that said lands are not useful as part of the public street or road system of the City of Tigard and that it is in the public interest that said vacation be approved. Section 5: The Council further finds that the City recording officer has filed in her office a certificate showing that all A city liens and taxes have been paid on the lands proposed to be vacated. Section 6 : The Council finds that the area proposed to be vacated A. may be subject to easement (s) for sewer lines, water } lines, electrical or telephone or other utility uses now present or installed thereon, and such pre-existing easement (s) rights should be preserved. Section 7: Subject to pre-existing easement rights, if any, for sewer, water, telephone, electrical or other utility purposes now present on the hereinafter described lands which rights are hereby expressedly excepted from the legal effect of this ordinance, the following described portion of dedicated, unopened street be, and the same is, hereby vacated and the rights of the general public therein and thereto for street and road purposes are hereby annulled and held for naught: That portion of roadway situated in Section 1, Township _ m'e 2 South, Range 1 West, Willatte Meridian, Washington County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: 4 . • _ ORDINANCE No. 73- ) _ . . _ , .:fir, ; •..*"- .7-1:4-.•-- 0.-.'4:- -. �.,:: :;a.:....e..:W:iivw"..... — �.�...:07.... - .war- ----'w'.t•�_— ••i• —... F _ w . . s- .. • _ , • - i ..t..*•-f.,. • - - - - --- -, f44 .• .•,` ‘ tia ,- - - A strip of land (now known as S.W. IRVING STREET; old - . .- 9:- .1 '4 NINTH STREET) lying parallel to, along the North side and , .-. within thirty (30) feet, when measured 'at right angles,.:0E % -= ', the South line of WEST PORTLAND HEIGHTS, a subdivision . 1L-"-Ik ..,1 - - of record in said County. EXCEPTING, that portion thereof- 14-'j --,,--.4-1-- lying Easterly of a Southerly extension of the East _ . -,:,-,..Z.,44:Q6;A• boundary line of Block 37 of said subdivision. _ . . . _ • . .-. Section 8: That the City Recorder be, and she is, hereby authorized and directed to have a certified copy of this ordinance • • filed for record with the following Washington County departments: I . . . _ i 1. Department of Records and Elections . • 1 2. Department of Revenue and Taxation-Attn: Assessor • 1 3. Department of Public Works-Attn: County Surveyor all as required by Chapter 271. 150 ORS. , . Section 9: This ordinance shall be effective on and after the 31st day after its enactment by the City Council, and approval • by the Mayor. • • • PASSED: By unanimous vote of all Council members present, _....... , . after being read three times by number and title only, this • . 22nd day of January , 1973. - / 4( i Recorder - City o 1-Tigard • • APPROVED: By the Mayor, this 22nd day of Janulrv , 1973. i — _ _ i ,- . • .- . ..._ / -e' "7- J c4 /54--- ..'; , - _ __ Mayor - City of Tigard STATE OF OREGON ) • ) City of Tigard ) I , DORIS HARTIG, Hereby certify that I am the duly appointed, qualified, and acting Recorder of the City of Tigard, • Oregon. I further certify that I have compared the herewith copy of Ordinance No. 73-2 of the City of Tigard with the original in my possession as custodian of the official records . of the City of Tigard, and that the herewith copy is a correct transcript of the whole of Ordinance No. 73-2. ,. ....., t IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and the c -:---:- ..Vgal--o.ff,tbe City of Tigard this 29 day of January 1973. .. . ..-0,4; ..■:. • • ,- . r•d , -- ,..:11'-71.',22:-.514.$,.." . . --• v";-: ..-- ._-____. 4...........JO.- 4 ft ". 4 , ..., . _ / —-.-e..■ ...1 i:CI ••8 Z. ' .'.. A"a._ . . --,-, 1.,-, A • / .......- I":44,$--. City REcor• -r --, s: ,,,....,.-..„- ,,- " _, '--;- "-..- , ;k::.1,'"-. ••:.--,•zt-' '...N.• .,, -- ---..-.:.-- *..4it-,: •1--- - " ;.-_ :'.-...'"044..i\r-3:,-°, -;• _,-' . • • -,?-•••N:-:-t- -,r7...L- , --- - ---- •-e° •'-c-L---) ---____ . .. _ _ . . -7- - • , ORDINANCE No. 73- j . . Page 2 — .,. . . • . . rs--_-_,--...7--- --•-.--. 7 : " " ^"" -- . .. . , ... . 1. , . . , • '1.- ) "''-IPT.4". ".". , , ! • I": ''-,1..,;'. : - ' . . - " f . ! ' . . • • . - . . ., ..- ..,..-.....-- . .■ ... . 4.1. . . . . ,.7. .,f•.4.4tiliaorte--F•.:;„-..-;"" ''... _„.... ,-.41r4.7.71"_I .:::-.- . , "r• . . :'' ' / -",7,"'"`"1-17-.--..."-,... - -. _ : _.:,-......t.......::-.a. - .: - _ ! - ."- ' :1-■'''--4._,- *Fri-:1.i". 1.'• ."' ,_ 7•71 .4."::: LA:--.. ' -• --.'-t•-.-1--'-7--1" •;-:',:t.477-277.- -7.-:7-7Ak-,t,--v.-V-yt :-d,-*,--77-`-W- _,_:•,- .'---'4'r -tIrr-.-"=--'' •- - ' • -- L. f'.1•:-- .." -Z-,r''': -'-,"-P-ir----,":" . , "PO_4egt, .t. ---, .--• -::7*,.. - `:-.- -:-____, --:,z3 ""--":___. 7.4Z-1--"- *- ,A.' . _.--2_ - -- -- --..-,_-_-:,...,..---_:- . - •:. , -77;-1.77-1-7.---;-,-44.--,---_,....-7•:',,— ----- =-=. _ :-:-_•_ =_-_-!".:"_-•=:--- ' :--''..:4'.1-7,-=';- -- . rt.,--r-.-A'---47--_--- '..,- --"7-..---:;..,'-'_ ..-:. -' ';t'1,41;:.‘tr‘::::7!2;-.:1;•.;•."'V'-:147.Velattiiiigilfe**CPME .7--::.;?::"'-:"4":".. 7-.."' w;' - '','l'.- .- . ' - i -. ' . '- r-r `..- "'''I'','sf.-'..ie%1-• -,•-• ...-'• sr,-,.4,4.- 1,-' '', -"'""'.4.jr:,..-.. . . .r...,...,..-.,,,:'":. ," . :-..:Ci.t.1"7"*,:'-- - .- - '--.": " ,•, — . . . . ... _ . . .. __ . .. . • . , _ _........... ...e-7...-0 . • • .''''' *.•:-..1-.1.41-'- fc,.-.• -. .' 4:-.4,- -'- 1 .. . ••f.....i•a • ••;•,,, .-,...--..:....21,,-•-t...:„..... ,.......:...... . l'''..-,'...*Irr. - ' 4$12115* .•..•Aiiigi' .dit" ''', ,..k.tC.O. aka, . ,._ -,•. ;:',... ;.; . st. ,•••••4•-•,40.1 . s ---_- -r...7-_,,,:.- ....;.,,_, _', _-.41, .!7";;;;;:_t:',.." :-.-=.7,;.4..::::-.:-.7.:' ,--. ,-ii,.:-..--.-_,., •-,_.A.:•,•-•2.e.4 -:. " "''....-":,--,, ---1 ,_ , .40.•••-. -,•,..,-...,...-3*:',. =1:4%.7 - gii-7,F-: ''''!-‘--.'"'"66.. IIIP ._.; -A.-W. 'EP .4a"rr*A.le." i "I•t- $'•11.4t-lz. .-=.: . L' ' _ . - . ... ,--... 1 ... . • :''..•• , .. . . •:-!'5' 4"- V) Z e, .... r"! , .rPri ,....". . .. . . . _ ; II - • Si,.. ..; ' ' -..„ ._. ,• . ---,........ ,..., _. - ... ._. / . .-. ..... . ......... ..—.... „ .‘. "Z. 7::-...7.::--- - . -. 0 • i -- • ... . . . _.. ... V, -4 111 e-t ti. •. ' t • I < litialifitillail% I,- . .41. r - , 1 , , / , . . .• ith 4 r" • . ' ... 1 , . • i. • 7 4 i . . 4 41 toll i 1 'i 1, ..., 1 1 / . la 4 .1 z 4 IA 1 •• 5 ... i ••- <I S. W. ..------9004 -:: ----- :•:- _ • N r i.._ _ 0 > x .::. .,1_,.._. 73 .. . _ _ _ _ . 114 _417 Z A• .., • 4. •' • (I) • r. •• 'Fq — t S T .. _ ...• la - :•4.6.1 ; IP • 1 .... 1 1: .1 -jr-E, ....--••■••■•••-•■••■••••-.W I,1 ir A I S W ••:, 1 ci. .1 c. t in , z .1 76 it ••• - 1 e3 .......m....... I . I, n 1 ■ -c.... •-.1. T ,, ) 4+ •*. ; S k) t ti:: .- .e a: ..s■ ..• •••. Z. •.5 (1) _., - --a4.-- • ' 1 . (al. 1. ----t— - - .. T.) to• P 0 : . • . 33 )°S 0 .... v., z •:. __ ...-.. .... .. ••••• • •••• t-t • • IT1 k • 7-- C rn -. S W:A.i....r, vitt- . • —-, -• i s, W4 -• +- (....• ',1 a i 0 Cr) i -' • '.•.4 • . , ..i -------------------- I dB •• • l''' S W •.* • t' Ar..•' -. . I 2 ••• 11,a _ .. v . . .• r V ■ _ ri 71 • A%•40 wl. 1 1 - „,.„,- .. -r. . , . , .., .... - ... ..•• t 1,0, c`• - i r A • . !.. A'..• . ....• •••• .." ii 1.r.m_ ....• .."'' ".....-- --•-• ...1.-. .'- ...- lk H• B A L D ° C K .. .. . . . . - .:-.10-.• • . ,dt,-,. .. - ... . - • . . -•, ...*:. IA ._ 11---' .. .• itie p...••. . . • nabot_ .. '-;'`• 11.• 4. ' T. '. . - . • ' . ..• . .,.. , .e.;0111•• 111.`"Mr1"1 . .. . . - .11 ' -a'. • e•• ....• s. ..- .1 . • 'p*t••!Or , -44 •'• .f. . . -- 5,- . • • ..) tltdr 4...•;• ', • • • i 4 • • 4 . . • I '"'. • 1.•'1`1 .'" '-. • - -. i.. •••••• - '' i. .- •.- .- 15,1-1"- . . .- . k4 -. ,-. :• •I!'• • . ... , cc er - .• . , .s, ...6... -.. tj. ,i...: .. :; -;1%.f.,•-:. .i: % .'• • ' ''.... ' . . . .. . Ai!' 1• v. , . 1 • •,.. ; ,ci,•:,:y.- • . -. • .; : • • • - . a , ••• - • ..., .. ...... . • . . • „•5. ;de ...A1:*4.1. A' 4'. ts• ' • , .d• .., •••' . ••••_'''• •• .' • . . a 1,, . .....„; . o .,. • ' . . • , ... • • '" '• :4.'Cr: •Z' . ..• 0 • •• 4.' .# ' . 4°). .1. •••• ' . ',..4 e...t.Q•e••• • • : _, jr . ...4. ,... , . , • ,;.n. k . .... , L:ik4t .‘-• L, • , ....-.• ,L. %. .,, .LL . L.: . . ...• r 1, :. • • *r• ; -4,-,•t_ . ,,,r.....1......:-.. 4 .t.VI:4'4 s• • ..". '•4°r ,s . . A.-144•011 • • • .• .4... , STATE OF OREGON ss dee.,-..--44 . „.I—..- • I, Roger Thomssen, Director of Records ___. and Elections and Ex-Officio Recorder of Con- . veyonces for said count tdo thereby certify that the within instrurnen o writing Ordinance 73-2 , rweixed and recorded in book of records was it ii i A...4 i riag. it1iaid cou—nry----------.----------- is - WitnesS:my hand and seal affixed. - --.--•-..t..,„,.-...,...- -.. . ROGER .... .. : - - - ..• - • • Records & Elections' . 1...; -.. _ THOMSSEN Director of _ . _ ._._ ._ _. , . ....,4.,..,.... . .. . . 912 pA • , .,......, . i•.,_.„,„ ... .. . ..a • . Boas -- GM, NAI 8 10 4011173 , .......... ._. •- . ••• -'i,,.. • s. - , - . - • . op-. •--- . ffitiogi .-w,torrpaimpury...Rtporr-s-r.'NW ..41orlafwiraMimpingtimiqpiquipsvmpoimepnowiraummor .. ..._. . . .. ..__ - ......— .- • HOMESTEAD VILLAGE TIGARD, OREGON TREE INVENTORY TREE PROTECTION and TREE PRESERVATION PLAN PREPARED FOR: MR. STEVEN TENGLEY HOMESTEAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 47775 FREMONT BLVD. FREMONT, CALIFORNIA 94538 PREPARED BY: PRUETT INCORPORATED O dwatis mum-times? CONSULTING ARBORIST 5550 SW ROSEWOOD LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON 97035 T ' d 800. 0N £0: 9i 96`ZZ unc 6ZTT-i99-HS:131 N093210 fOHNId21 NNA1.d FLYNN RR.INBOW OREGON TE' '503-663-1129 Jun 1 ) ,96 15 :34 No .006 P .02 Part 1 GENERAL 1.01 DESCRIPTION: A. General requirements: Preservation and protection of existing trees considered to be appropriate for preservation by the Project Consulting Arborist. 1. Provided all contractors, utilities, engineers and architects, involved with the Homestead Village Project, with a copy of the Tree Protection and Tree Preservation Plan. Contractors, engineers and architects, not yet involved with Homestead Village, will be provided a copy of the Tree Protection and Tree Preservation Plan, as part of the information contained within the conditions, and contingencies portion within the invitation to bid package. 2. All Contractors, utilities, engineers and architects shall sign the Certificate of Acknowledgment, contained within the Tree Protection and Tree Preservation Plan. Signatures shall indicate that they have read, and will comply with, the terms contained within the Homestead Village Tree Protection and Tree Preservation Plan. B. Definitions: 1. Qualified Consulting Arborist: A professional in the field of arboriculture who provides professional consultation about trees regarding damage, diseases and care and their value. 2. Project Consulting Arborist: Person responsible for, but not limited too, providing following: a) Creating an inventory of the trees located on site, identifying preservable trees. b) Drafting the Tree Protection and Tree Preservation Specifications. c) Site enforcement of the Tree Protection and Tree Preservation Specifications. I FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON Try_:503-663-1129 Jun 12 ,96 15 :34 No .006 P .03 d) Responsible for all other issues regarding existing trees six inches in diameter and larger and all new trees to be installed, located on the grounds of the proposed Homestead Village construction project, Tigard, Oregon. e) Responsible for weekly inspections of the trees within the Tree Protection Zones , and recording weekly observations in inspection log. Obsersvations and recommendations will be provided to the property owner in memo form on a weekly basis. 3. Contractor: Anyone providing services to Homestead Village construction project , Tigard, Oregon. Examples: Not Limited To The Following: 1. Contractors and types of construction related activities most commonly responsible for the Construction Related Trauma. Construction Related Trauma, leads to the biological decline and structural failure, in both the short term, within three years, and long term, over three years and often more than ten years. a. Vegetation Removal and or Timber Harvest Contractor. b. Grading and Site Clearing Contractors. c. Underground Utility Contractors. d. Public Utility Crews. e. Concrete and Asphalt Contractors. f. General Contractors. g. Landscape Contractors. h. Geological and Soil Sampling Contractors and Engineers. 2. Construction Related Trauma: Negative impact to trees, caused by the change in the growing environment. Examples: Not Limited To The Following: a. Root zone damage. b. Mechanical wounds to trunks and or buttress roots. c. Soil contamination.. d. Grade changes. 2 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON '-L :503-663-1129 Jun 12 .96 15 :34 No .006 P .04 4. Qualified Tree Care Contractor: Tree Care Contractor, registered with the State of Oregon, carrying appropriate Liability Insurance and Workman's Compensation Insurance. Shall be able to have Insurance Carrier issue current Proof of Insurance Certificates. Shall employ ISA Certified Arborists, who have demonstrated an ability to perform arboricultural procedures safely and professionally. 5. Safety: Tree Care Contractors shall be required to work in safe fashion. Safe work procedures shall be a priority above all else. a) Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Code, OAR 437 Division 2, Sub Division R, Tree and Shrub Services ( 437-02-301-311 ), will be strictly observed. Tree Care Contractors, in violation of the above referenced Oregon OSHA procedures and safe work practices, risk the immediate termination of their contract. b) Projects Consulting Arborist shall be responsible for all issues regarding on site performance of the Tree Care Contractor. 1.02 PROJECT CONDITIONS: A. Retain a Qualified Consulting Arbor B. Make every effort to protect and preserve all trees on site indicated to remain. C. Develop a Tree Protection And Tree Preservation Plan, contingent upon the following 1. This Consulting Arborist being retained for on site supervision of the Tree Protection and Tree Preservation Plan, until the completion of this project. 2. This Consulting Arborist being retained to perform all Post Construction Tree Inspections as described within this report. 3. Meet or surpass professional standards, as deemed appropriate, by the Project Consulting Arborist, for the protection and preservation of trees. 3 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON '^I_ :503-663-1129 Jun 12 96 15 :36 No .006 P .05 4. Meet or surpass professional standards, as deemed appropriate, by the Project Consulting Arborist, for the protection and preservation of trees located within Designated Wetland Areas. 3. The following steps will be taken for any construction related and or non construction related activity within the Tree Protection Zone for the duration of the project. a) The Project Consulting Arborist shall be notified five working days prior to work within the Tree Protection Zone. There shall be no activity within the Tree Protection Zone, without the prior approval of the Projects Consulting Arborist. b) Accidental Encroachment into the Tree Protection Zone shall be halted and immediately reported to the on site construction superintendent, and to the Project Consulting Arborist. Work within the Tree Protection Zone shall resume until approved and supervised by Project Consulting Arborist. c) Any work performed within the Tree Protection Zone,, not previously authorized by the Projects Consulting Arborist, including Accidental Encroachment, will result in the activation of the Tree Damage, Penalties and Compensation Specifications, listed in Part 4. D. Provided Tree Protection Fencing, for all trees designated to be preserved. Trees will be fenced at or outside the trees dripline, or at a distance equal to one and one half feet for every diameter inch of tree or trees in question. Exact location for the Tree Protection zone fencing to be determined by the Project Consulting Arborist. 1. This fencing will consist of temporary sections of eight foot long by six foot high, chain link fence. The vertical post sections of chain link fence. shall be installed in pre cast concrete blocks heavy enough to support the weight of each of the eight foot by six foot sections. 4 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON TrL :503-663-1129 Jun 12.96 15:37 No .006 P .06 2. Two, four foot lengths of three eighths inch diameter rebar or the equivalent shall be driven into the ground at two diagonally opposing corners of the pre cast concrete blocks. The pre cast concrete blocks, shall be securely tied to the and individual sections of fence with heavy bailing wire or the equivalent. 3. Four inch wide yellow Tree Protection Tape, shall be installed securely, at the top of the chain link fencing, so it may be read from the outside of the fenced tree preservation area. 4. Fencing may be located within the dripline only when the Projects Consulting Arborist, has excavated or overseen qualified personnel, in the excavation of a trench the length of the Tree Protection Fencing where inside the Dripline of trees designated to be preserved. Tree roots larger than 1" in diameter, exposed by the trenching shall be pruned appropriately. 5. Tree protection Fencing Shall be installed prior to commencement of the clearing, demolition work and or any other on site pre construction work.. The Tree Protection Fencing shall remain installed until completion of the project or at the direction of the Projects Consulting Arborist. Survey work to determine building hardscape locations will be exempted. The removal of brush and or trees less than six inches in diameter necessary to facilitate the survey work, shall be performed by a qualified tree care contractor, acceptable to the Project Consulting Arborist. The General Contractor shall be required to maintain the Tree Protection Fencing for he duration of the project. E. Protect all trees from stockpiling, material storage, vehicle parking and driving within the dripline. Material storage and stockpiling areas, as well as, vehicle parking areas and vehicle access routes shall all be approved by the Projects Consulting Arborist, prior to project start date. F. Protect the root systems of all trees from: 1. Dumping construction debris or refuse. 2. Chemically injurious materials and liquids. (Paints thinners, cleaning solutions and any or all petroleum products ). 5 • FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON -^1_ :503-663-1129 Jun 12 96 15 :37 No .006 P .07 3. Noxious materials in solution caused by run-off and spillage during mixing and placement of construction materials, and stored materials. 4. Continual pudding of water. G. Restrict vehicular and foot traffic to prevent compaction of soil within the root zones of the trees to be preserved. H. Mulch areas within the Tree Protection Zones as directed by the Projects Consulting Arborist. Part IIPRODUCTS 2.01 MATERIALS: A. As indicated and required elsewhere in this specification section and as may be recommended by the Projects Consulting Arborist. Part Ill EXECUTION 3.01 GENERAL: A. Protect root systems of all trees to remain from damage due to noxious materials in solution caused by run-off and spillage during mixing and placement of construction materials and drainage from stored materials. B. Protect all trees to remain from flooding, erosion, excessive wetting and drying resulting from de-watering and other operations. C. Protect all trees to remain against cutting, breaking and skinning of roots and branches, skinning and bruising of bark. D. Do not allow burning of debris under and or adjacent to trees to remain. E. Where directed by the Projects Consulting Arborist, extend the pruning operations to restore the natural shape of the tree. 6 ' FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON 'L:503-663-1129 Jun 12-96 15 :37 No .006 P .08 F. Cut branches and roots with sharp pruning instruments and do not break, chop and mutilate. G. Install Supplemental irrigation systems, or irrigate trees which are to remain as directed by the Consulting Arborist to maintain their health during the course of the project. Maintain a water schedule and document. I. Pruning , crown and root, and all other therapeutic and remedial tree care: All therapeutic and or remedial Tree Care will be performed by a ISA Certified Arborist, employed by a Qualified Tree Care Contractor, under the direction of the Project Consulting Arborist. 1. Work included, but not limited to, root pruning, crown pruning, cabling, bracing and or guying and root zone therapy, shall be performed by a ISA Certified Arborist, to ANSI A 300 Standards and or National Arborists Standards and familiar with, and able to perform techniques outlined in the ISA Pruning Guidelines. Safe work practices as described and required in the Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Code, OAR 437, Division 2 Sub Division R. will be strictly observed. 2. Pest control and deep root fertilization shall be performed by a Pest Control Applicator with a current Oregon State, Commercial Pest Control Applicators Licensee employed by a Qualified Tree Care Contractor. 1. The Project Consulting Arborist has the authority to issue an immediate stop work order to the Tree Removal Contractor and or the Therapeutic and Remedial Care Contractor, should work be performed in an inappropriate, unsafe or unlawful fashion. The Project Consulting Arborist has the authority to issue an immediate stop work order to all other contractors working on the Homestead Village ,Tigard , Oregon project, when in violation of the specifications within this plan regarding, ` working within the Tree Protection Zone'. 2. Pruning shall be limited to the removal of dead or damaged limbs, and or limbs that need to be removed for vehicle or building clearance. 7 ' FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON '-x_ :503-663-1129 Jun 1° 96 15 :39 No .006 P .09 3. Removal of live tissue shall be restricted for three to five years post construction, unless otherwise directed and or approved by the Project Consulting Arborist. 4. All tree work shall be performed at the direction of the Projects Consulting Arborist. 3.02 EXCAVATION AROUND TREES: A. Excavate within the Tree Protection Zone only where Indicated acceptable to the Project Consulting Arborist and under the direct supervision of the Project Consulting Arborist. B. Excavate around tree roots within the drip line of the tree only under the direction of the Project Consulting Arborist. C. When trenching is required within the drip line of a tree designated to be preserved, tunnel under and around roots by hand digging or by using self guiding tunneling equipment. Do not cut main lateral roots. Cut smaller roots ( less than one inch in diameter)only if acceptable to the Project Consulting Arborist, and only if they interfere with installation of new work. D. Where excavation for new construction is required within the drip line of trees, hand excavate to minimize damage to the root system. Use narrow tine spading forks to comb through the soil and expose roots. Relocate roots one inch in diameter and larger, in back fill areas whenever possible by carefully bending, without breaking. E. Roots larger than one half inch in diameter that can not be relocated shall be pruned six to twelve inches beyond the excavation or to an larger lateral root. Roots damaged by the excavation shall be exposed by hand or hydraulic excavation and pruned a minimum of one foot behind the damage, or as appropriate and directed by the Project Consulting Arborist. F. Root pruning shall be performed by a ISA Certified Arborist under the approval supervision and or direction of the Project Consulting Arborist. 8 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON '"'_ :503-663-1129 Jun 12 96 15 :39 No .006 P . 10 G. Exposed roots shall not be allowed to dry out before permanent back fill is placed; Provide temporary earth cover, pack with peat moss or 4 layers of untreated burlap and keep moist by periodically spraying with water. Provide temporary support and protect all roots from damage until permanently relocated and covered with back fill. Install supplemental irrigation if appropriate.. Water puddle final back fill to eliminate voids and air pockets around the roots. All work as directed by the Project Consulting Arborist 3.03 GRADING AND FILLING AROUND TREES A. Maintain existing grade within fenced tree preservation area of trees unless otherwise indicated or acceptable to the Projects Consulting Arborist. B. Lowering Grades: Where the existing grade is above new finish grade shown around trees, carefully hand excavate within drip line to the new grade under the direction of the Projects Consulting Arborist. 1. Roots I' in diameter and larger, exposed by excavation shall be pruned as appropriate, by a ISA Certified Arborist, under the supervision and or direction of the Project Consulting Arborist to approximately 3" below elevation of new finish grade. Roots that have been pruned and that will remain exposed for any reason shall be protected as described in section 3.02 G. Immediately upon the completion of grade lowering and root pruning, four to six inches of coarse landscape mulch shall be applied to the excavated area as directed by the Project Consulting Arborist. Irrigate if appropriate, at the direction of the Project Consulting Arborist. C. Raising Grades: Grade fills are to avoided, if unavoidable, an aeration system will be designed by the Projects Consulting Arborist and approved by the Project Engineer. The aeration system will be installed at the direction of the Projects Consulting Arborist, by qualified personnel. 3.04 HARDSCAPE INSTALLATION WITHIN TREE PROTECTION ZONES: A. Electrical conduit and irrigation main lines should be run under walkways, within stone or concrete sub base, and should not cut 9 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON '-'_ :503-663-1129 Jun 12 q6 15:39 No .006 P . 11 into native soil within the Tree Protection Zone. Lateral electrical lines to individual lights, should be installed as close to the soil surface as possible with short runs from main conduit. B. Electrical fixtures, housing, and irrigation valves must be installed with care to avoid cutting roots. Digging must be minimal with excess dirt removed from the Tree Preservation Area. Do not cuts roots greater than 1" in diameter without the approval of the Project Consulting Arborist. Roots greater than 1"in diameter exposed during excavation must be cut squarely at the edge of the excavation with a sharp saw or appropriate pruning tool. C. Install walkways as close to grade as possible, to minimize excavation into the soil where large roots and areas of high root density exist. Back fill with loose dirt to the minimum depth necessary to achieve a natural look. Mulch if appropriate, as directed by the Projects Consulting Arborist. D. Walkways that are located within the Designated Wetland Area, shall consist of a gravel sub base, with compacted decomposed granite, or a similar material. Projects Consulting Arborist to review and approve the plans for any such walkways. 3.05 LANDSCAPE INSTALLATIONS WITHIN TREE PROTECTION ZONES: A. The Landscape Architect and Landscape Contractor must be supplied with and review a copy of the Homestead Village as well as sign a Certificate of Recognition prior to final design and prior to the Landscape Installation. B. All landscape plans must be reviewed by the Projects Consulting Arborist prior to installation. C. Landscaping within the tree protection zones should be minimal. Plant material should be similar to existing native species, requiring only minimal supplemental irrigation to become established. Plant material, shall not be installed within ten feet of any tree designated for preservation, without the prior approval by the Project Consulting Arborist. 1 0 FLYNN RAINBOIJ OREGON TrM_ :503-663-1129 Jun 12 g6 15 :42 No .006 P . 12 D. Where possible, landscape plant material will down sized to avoid digging large holes. Space planted material away from active roots of native trees. If tree roots 1" in diameter or larger are encountered in digging, move the hole slightly to avoid cutting roots. Roots one in diameter and larger, injured during landscape installation, will be repaired as previously mentioned. E. Irrigation within the Tree Protection Zone shall be limited to Drip Irrigation consisting of flexible poly pipe and appropriate drip emitters. Installation shall be on grade or in shallow trenches, six inches or less, without cutting roots and covered with four to six inches of coarse landscape mulch. Irrigation will not be installed within ten feet of the trunk and or buttress roots of all trees designated to be preserved. F. Replacement Trees to be installed for the Tree Mitigation Plan shall measure 2" in caliper, six inches above grade. The height shall be appropriate for the species. Root Balls shall be inspected for defects. Projects Consulting Arborist, shall reserves the right to reject trees, with any type of defect. G. Final Tree Mitigation Species List and number of replacements trees to be installed on site and planting instructions to be provided with the final version of the Landscape Design. 3.06 REPAIR AND REMOVAL OF TREES: A. Engage a ISA Certified Arborist, employed by A Qualified Tree Care Contractor acceptable to the Project Consulting Arborist, to perform tree repair work. Trees damaged by construction operations shall be repaired in a manner acceptable to the Project Consulting Arborist. Tree injuries when accidental encroachment occurs, will be reported to the Project Consulting Arborist no later than the end of the day of each occurrence. Repairs will be made promptly after damage occurs. This is intended to prevent the progressive deterioration of the damaged portion of the trees. Project Consulting Arborist will determine if occurrence will require the activation of Part 4, TREE DAMAGE, PENALTIES AND COMPENSATION. 11 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON T''. :503-663-1129 Jun 1') q6 15:42 No .006 P . 13 B. Remove dead and or damaged trees which are determined to be beyond restoration, that would, due to poor structure, and or biological decline, pose an Unacceptable Risk Potential to site workers, the public, and or public or private. Part 4 TREE DAMAGE, PENALTIES AND COMPENSATION: 4.01 PARTIAL INJURY TO TREE: A. Contractors responsible for damage to any tree designated to be preserved shall pay, to the tree owner, the monetary value of any damaged trees and or trees that die as the direct result of any type of construction related injury or trauma. Trees that have been injured as described above will be repaired or removed at the expense of the responsible party, contractor, or agency responsible for the damage. Trees that have been injured and left on site that die within in a period of five years from the project completion date, shall be evaluated to determine the actual cause of death. Evaluations will be made during the post construction inspections. B. Value of trees will be determined by the Projects Consulting Arborist, in accordance with the formula set forth in the Eighth Edition of the"Guide for Plant Appraisal", authored by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers. C. Any wound or infliction to a preserved tree constitutes a partial injury violation. D. Partial injuries include, but are not limited to: Broken or bruised bark or cambium. Cutting off branches or removing parts of trees. Broken branches. Cutting of root or filling over roots. Soil compaction with tree preservation areas. 12 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON Trl_ :503-663-1129 Jun 12 A6 15 :44 No .006 P . 14 Toxic run-off entering tree preservation areas. E. Partial injury to a tree will be determined as a percentage of the total tree, by the Projects Consulting Arborist. Example: The percentage of broken limbs compared to the total crown prior to injury. The percentage of damaged roots compared to the root system prior to injury. The percentage of damaged bark compared to the circumference of the tree. F. Penalties will be assessed by determining the value of the tree before injury and calculating the percentage injury to the tree. The fine will equal the dollar value of the associated reduction in overall tree value. Example: A tree valued at $5,000 sustains damage where 20% of limbs are broken. The penalty is 20%of$5,000 or $1,000. A Tree valued at $10,000 has 30%of its preserved roots damage by a concrete spill and 10%of its trunk damaged by a wound. The penalty is 40% (30%roots plus 10%trunk) of$ 10,000 or $4,000. G. In addition to the loss in value, the penalty will include the cost to the owner to have the damage appraised by the consulting Arborist, plus the cost to repair the damage to the tree. 4.02 FATAL INJURY OR DESTRUCTION OF TREE: A. Any wound or injury as determined by the Projects Consulting Arborist which results in the immediate or eventual death of a tree constitutes a fatal injury. 13 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON T-'. :503-663-1129 Jun 12 A6 15 :48 No .007 P .01 B. Typically, when a partial injury equals or exceeds 50%, the resulting injury is considered fatal. This may vary according to species, condition, or site factors and remains at the judgment of the Project Consulting Arborist. C. A fatal injury will result in a fine equaling the full value of the tree before injury, as determined by the previously mentioned C.T.L.A. guide for plant Appraisals, being assessed to the responsible party or parties. D. Examples of average values calculated from the guide and relative to the site are as follows. Actual values for specific trees will vary according to size, species, condition, and location. 10" dia $ 900.00. 15" dia $ 2,000.00. 20" dia $ 3,500.00 30" dia $ 8,000.00 40" dia $15,000.00 E. In addition to the value of the tree, the penalty will include the cost to have the damage appraised by the Consulting Arborist, plus the cost to remove and haul the damaged tree and stump. Part 5 POST-CONSTRUCTION TREE CARE/INSPECTIONS: 5.01 PRUNING AND STRUCTURAL SUPPORT: A. All trees remaining within the project limits shall be pruned in accordance with the ANSI A 300 Pruning Standards and National Arborist Standards. Performed by a ISA Certified Arborist, familiar with and able to perform the techniques within the new ISA Pruning Guidelines. 1. In general pruning will be limited to the removal of dead or damaged limbs, as well as, limbs that need to be removed for vehicle or building clearance. Removal of live tissue shall be restricted for five years post construction unless directed and or approved by the Project Consulting Arborist. 14 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON Tri_ :5O3-663-1129 Jun 17 96 15 :49 No .007 P .O2 B. Structural support(cabling)may be required on specific trees, as identified by the Project Consulting Arborist. This work will be performed by a ISA Certified Arborist in accordance with National Arborists Associations standards pertaining to the Cabling and Bracing of Trees. C. Post Construction, Tree Inspections, shall be performed by the Project Consulting Arborist, on all trees remaining on the property of Homestead Village for a period of five years post construction. Inspections shall begin 90 days post construction completion date. All remedial care recommendations, must be completed within 60 days of the inspection date. All costs generated and related to, the tree inspections, as well as, costs of any remedial care performed, shall be the responsibility of the current owner. Future owners of the property shall be responsible for the any expenses or related costs, within the five year period post construction completion, as mentioned previously. Current owner shall notify, in writing, any potential new owners prior to the sale of the property, of the terms within this document. New owners, of the site and property currently known as Homestead Village, shall comply with all of the terms within this document. Post Construction Inspections are intended to monitor the overall biological and structural integrity of individual trees within Tree Protection Zones. Biological decline, often associated with construction trauma, can lead to an increased likelihood tree failures. Post Construction Inspections are, in purpose , intended to reduce the potential for such failures and detect trees that pose an Unacceptable Risk Potential . Early detection of reversible conditions will also insure the longevity of the trees preserved on the Homestead Village Site 5.02 MULCHING: A. Tree Protection Zones are to be mulched with 4" to 6" of coarse landscape mulch, as directed by the Project Consulting Arborist. 1. Mulch will help to retain soil moisture, to buffer the soil surface from temperature extremes, prevent soil compaction and to add organic matter. 15 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON Tri_ :503-663-1129 Jun 17 96 15 :50 No .007 P .03 a) Mulch is to be spread by hand, at the direction of the Project Consulting Arborist 5.03 FERTILIZATION AND ROOT STIMULANTS: A. All trees remaining are to be fertilized using the deep root pressure injection method according to National Arborist Association Standards or as directed by the Project Consulting Arborist. B. A balanced formula with 100% organic nitrogen source, phosphorous, potassium, and necessary trace elements will be applied based on a rate formula approved by the Projects Consulting Arborist. C. An organic root stimulant is to be incorporated into the fertilization mix and applied with fertilization. D. All fertilization needs to be determined by Projects Consulting Arborist. 5.04 SOIL AERATION: A. Soil within the Tree Protection Zones are to be aerated using Vertical Mulching Techniques to reduce compaction and improve soil oxygen levels and moisture percolation as appropriate. Needs and techniques to be determined by the Project Consulting Arborist. 5.05 APPROVED TREE CARE PROVIDER: A. All post-construction remedial tree care will be done by a Qualified Tree Care Contractor. All tree care will be done under the direct supervision of the Project Consulting Arborist. PART 6 SIGNAGE A. Prior to initial site clearing and grading, signs shall be erected at all entries to the project. The intention of this is to inform all contractors working on the project, as well as, the public, that Tree Protection and Tree Preservation measures are in effect during the construction and site development. 16 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON TrI. :503-663-1129 Jun 12 q6 15:50 No .007 P .04 B. Signs shall be no less than 4'X 8' in size and be prepared in a professional manner acceptable to the Projects Consulting Arborist. Sign language will be supplied and approved by the Projects Consulting Arborist. PART 7 WHEN TO CALL THE ARBORIST: 7.01 CALL THE ARBORIST A MINIMUM OF TEN WORKING DAYS, PRIOR TO THE FOLLOWING: 1. Pre-construction meetings. 2. Tree Protection fence installation 3. Field staking of building locations, hard surface locations and limits. Roadway center lines, curbs and pathways. 4 Review of pruning requirements for clearance. 5 Review of final landscape and hardscape plan. 6 Question or problems concerning underground utilities. 7 If any damage to trees or root system occur. 8 Any time there is a request to go within the tree protection zone. 9 Any time there is any question regarding tree issue 10 Any time it is required in these specifications. 17 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON TrI. :503-663-1129 Jun 12 -96 15 :51 No .007 P .05 SPECIAL TREE PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS, FOR TREE REMOVAL CONTRACTOR. The owner is committed to preserving and protecting any and all viable trees on the project know as Homestead Village. To ensure that this goal is reached the following special Preservation and Protection requirements shall be observed by the Tree Removal Contractor, in addition to the regular Tree Preservation and Protection Specifications, for this project. 1. All tree protection fencing shall be in place and approved by the Project Consulting Arborist, prior to any tree removal. 2. The Projects Consulting Arborist shall be on site to review the Tree Preservation and Protection Specifications and Requirements and answer any questions the tree removal contractor or the contractor's employees may have, prior to the start of this operation. 3. The tree removal contractor shall submit a written plan to the Project Consulting Arborist, adequately describing removal techniques to be used, to avoid damaging trees within the Tree Protection Zone. The tree removal contractor shall have adequate supervision of field personnel on site, during the entire operation, to insure compliance with these requirements. 4. The tree removal contractor shall be required to take whatever steps are required to protect all trees to be preserved. 5. The tree removal contractor shall be responsible for the immediately repair of any inadvertent damage to the tree protection fencing and immediately notify the owner and the Projects Consulting Arborist. 6. Under no circumstances will equipment or people be allowed behind tree protection fencing without the approval of the Projects Consulting Arborist. 7. The tree removal contractor shall be directed by the Projects Consulting Arborist in the removal of any stump(s) that are in close proximity of trees to be preserved.. 18 Jun 12 96 15 :51 No .007 P .06 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON T'I. :503-663-1129 8. Clearing of understory plants and debris within the tree preservation zones, will be done by hand and only under the direction of the Projects Consulting Arborist. 9. The Project Consulting Arborist shall monitor tree removal progress to assure compliance with these requirements. 10.The Consulting Arborist shall inspect the site immediately after the tree removal is completed to determine compliance with these requirements. 19 FLYNN RRINB O(1 OREGON '' :503-663-1129 Jun 1246 15:52 Nc d0? P CONTRACTOR I N C RA/1 A T j O N.Prior to the start°fan a site Nome tVillage je m e ht Co d °r a tall ion will provide t o d in the am'nlstrdtiOn�f�°mesteaVill age Tree Pr°techan and pree Preservation aid The , d messes, phone Zbets um cOntractors in oed with the addresses,pro j ect. d ng then names u Chu gePersonnel,rp nsible for the sroa of their contractual obligations, will be wy thin the C n act ors 2} A detailed schedule/t i utl e and/or chart for th e rop osed site cnhco construction project st n fomeStead Village, will b e provided proacts C°sul bOri Working days development to im site work. TProjects Consulting will be notified minun1 of five working daYs �n advance of changes Prevr°us1Y scheduled work 3} authorized contractors representatives, will meet with the Projects C°sW tb gtbar Sn Site!d CERTIFICATE RECOGNITION ACCEPTANCE, to��wor ee site, agreeing cam ��ththe pecircati o f the No�lea d Village, T Protectii n and Tree Preservation 20 FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON TEI '503-663-1129 Jun 1 ' 96 15 :53 No .007 P .08 I have performed a Visual Tree Inspection of the trees six inches in caliper and larger on the site of the proposed Homestead Village. I have also met with Will De Andrea, of the City of Tigard regarding the project. In my 5-21-96 meeting with Mr. De Andrea , I asked if the DBH, Diameter at Breast Height, measurement would be acceptable, and then was given permission to use the measurement. The DBH measurement location, is six inches up trunk, from the forty eight inches above grade that the Tigards Tree Ordinance specifies. I have spent several days on site inventorying the trees and have become familiar with the trees and the topography of the site. I know the shape of the site, the Wetland Area and Tree Preservation Issues, created several design challenges for you and your fine. I believe the limitations created by these restrictions have been overcome by the fine work you and your firm did developing the current Preliminary Site Plan. Tree Summary: The proposed Preliminary Site Plan, requires the removal of a large portion of the total trees on site. The trees we have chosen to preserve will result in a excellent example of Tree Preservation on a naturally wooded site. I will prepare a Tree Replacment Plan, to be included in the final Tree Inventory/ Tree Protection and Preservation Plan. 1. Total trees on site, six inches in diameter or larger. 438 Total number of trees preserved on site. 175 Total number of total trees removed. 263 2. Total number trees on site, twelve inches diameter or Iarger. 273 FLYNN R,q 0(1,1 OREGON 7'1 s°3_663`i Jun 12 96 15:56 No.008 P.02 Total D'811 inches 4. total inches s of trees twelve me °tat DgII inches.trees removed hes and larger 37 S Total numb °n site} twelve inc 03 Risk during Potential, to bees°n site held larger 2 t 434 GOn t ial, an d life and or private pose after completion an Vi 1 Twenty trees, to rrva?°tPublic Unacceptable diameter?pose an Unacceptable an the Pr°J ecP open, inches , to ce the site trees Ptabl Risk of t are to beet ve inches and a subtracted k proposed homestead 6 Total considered inched n ter, to 1 attain the total . urn°h there 1 Dg inches o f Tree�ePlacn1e he total D H inches of Zbbe subtracts the Hard trees Mitigation Plan.es that the installation Ghes,subtracted of the m the total D an site is 44" Dan 8 ar °f utilities ° ��inches°f��3 ater and hl bees to be rernoved 2034" Tree :zeter ' �build• O faG �atslit lt Mitigation Plan height measuring 1 » 1 recommend I, ght Ire inc 2 for the epa that a Basel' l�DBH inches be considered Native meat trees, caliper 1542 d f°r 8 A trees, to n t e�, to en u, availability The total 7�1� two farreplacm��tilability measurement of 2,,be used planting a RePlac °inch caliper Oregon state planted locations,sie. m$ ech'litig trees, need to s species and Planting P Planted total to the d and exact number will ids removal tree removal nature of bees to bcntrfY, val°fall trees ic n count may of(construction x rnches increase as the projects such GBH�d larg project, develops.this, the will be recorded. 23 Trees FLYNN RAINBOW OREGON Tr-' :503-663-1129 Jun If 15 :55 No .008 P .01 larger than twelve inches DBH, will be added to the total trees to be installed. The trees adjacent to the buildings will require special attention as the site work progress. Trees, considered by Project Consulting Arborist to have little or no chance of survival , that are not identified in the Tree Inventory and current Tree Protection and Tree Preservation Plan will be removed. Trees measuring twelve inches DBH and larger will be added to the total DBH inches in the Tree Replacment Mitigation and Replanting Plan. Hazard Tree Definitions: The City of Tigard's definition of hazardous tree: The Tigard Development Code states that, trees posing an IMMEDIATE HAZARD to the public and or to private property are exempted from the total caliper inches used for tree replacment mitigation purposes, if twelve inches in diameter or larger. The International Society ofArboricultures A Photographic Guide To The Evaluation Of Hazard Trees In Urban Areas, has become a professional arboricultural standard, for evaluating Hazard Trees in Urban Areas. This publication takes into consideration, the future site development in relationship to a tree with a defect an or an environment that would contribute to its potential to failure. The International Society of Arborkultures A Photographic Guide To The Evaluation Of Hazard Trees In Urban Areas defines a Hazard Tree as the following: Trees are hazardous when the failure of one or more of their parts results in properly damage and/or personal injury or death. All tree; have the potential to fail. When identifying Hazardous Trees, a Tree Risk Assessment as outlined, but not limited to the following excerpt from the International Society of Arboricultures A Photographic Guide To The Evaluation Of Hazard Trees In Urban Areas. Tree Risk Assessment involves three components: 24 L. yN RR I NB QREGON T�,. :503,663^112 9 Jun 1, q6 15:5? N0 008 P 1 '03 2, A tree with 3 An Ito a potent al to 1 person r1111ent th tl fail. the T ge°�°blest that c0ntribute to uld be iuJured or jai/ure By definition, tree and a t a ha .d darn result a''get. Unless situation Risk4- risk arse Ssmearget is Present ? :?enceo ases A T :RiskA :8: ite a g both a defective that er a ua�s ssment Go r r`he 'Oren,• 'g fai ��dQUS. q a 2. ,q obbability o f$failure. ntalnS four factors eseuOe° O�irrej al f C� target of irn ' regarding the tree Qrk¢''`� ir,�hensc�e of the target. °r trees,th The ok,. �' Eyvlucrlioxrss biolog�e ! 1ng trees O- Q`arat 7 Potential� l�rgerruehtral appropç ate for reel j� r�'Qn,Qre• 2"Dg rees preservation Qs) loge are ldent-fed N, loc that pose due t Trees Located West f°Il°ws aced°n the site f naeeeptab Sher ere Id# species St Of The Wetland the propose Risk Peci 89 Dail', d Area; holm. OAK Defect 180 42 184 OAI{ co 139 AS1I 16 split dominant t ttiaks.e O 149 SIC 18 Nell nd above S'adCteV4 ouches 129 108 1I 12 Declining Hazardous Ali 174 OAK as I p3 ASIj 14 north�ning with 18 1144 ASH 14 t As Ymn�etri�l cenoPY development. 98 2 Asti 22 bead west. °Pment and tank lean to ilk 94 ASH 38 the dominant trunks ASH 14 P00r stru� roots with acute angle crotches Co dominant tank dw th8 decay large basal wounds on acute angle crotches with inclu 25 tided bark. • CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION AND ACCEPTANCE OF HOMESTEAD VILLAGE TREE PRESERVATION SPECIFICATIONS HOMESTEAD VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION I have reviewed the Tree Preservation and Protection Specifications with the Projects Consulting Arborist. I understand the intent of the specifications and agree to comply with the restrictions as they apply to the construction of the Proposed Homestead Village, Tigard, Oregon. HVDC REPRESENTATIVE TITLE SIGNATURE DATE PRUETT INC. _ REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE DATE b0' d 800. 0N 2.S:ST 96' T un f 6Zi i-£99-£0S: l31 NO9380 PIOBNIa21 NNA1J CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION AND ACCEPTANCE OF HOMESTEAD VILLAGE TREE PRESERVATION SPECIFICATIONS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT I have reviewed the Tree Preservation and Protection Specifications. I understand the intent of the specifications and agree to comply with the restrictions as they apply to the landscape design. I understand and shall comply to the restrictions set forth in the Tree Protection and Tree Preservation Plan. MNWR/P REPRESENTATIVE TITLE SIGNATURE DATE PRUETT INC. REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE DATE S0' d 800. 0N 8S:ST 96' ZT uric 6ZIT-299-20S: 131 N093210 P1OHNIti21 NNA1J CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION AND ACCEPTANCE OF HOMESTEAD VILLAGE TREE PRESERVATION SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL CONTRACTOR I have reviewed the Tree Preservation and Protection Specifications with the developer and Projects Consulting Arborist. I understand the intent of the specifications and agree to comply with the restrictions as they apply to the work done one the site by representatives of my company. I will explain these restrictions to employees of my company or any subcontractors I hire before they begin work to make sure they understand and comply to the restrictions set forth. GENERAL CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE TITLE SIGNATURE DATE OWNER REPRESENTATIVE TITLE SIGNATURE DATE 90' d 800. 0N 6S: Si 96' ZI unf 6ZII-i99-cOS: 131 N093210 fOf3NIti21 NNA1J CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION AND ACCEPTANCE OF HOMESTEAD VILLAGE TREE PRESERVATION SPECIFICATIONS SUB-CONTRACTORS I have reviewed the Tree Preservation and Protection Specifications with the General Contractor. I understand the intent of the specifications and agree to comply with the restrictions as they apply to the work done one the site by representatives of my company. 1 will explain these restrictions to employees of my company or any subcontractors I hire before they begin work to make sure they understand and comply to the restrictions set forth. GENERAL CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE TITLE SIGNATURE DATE SUB CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE TITLE SIGNATURE DATE Z0' d 800. 0N 6S:ST 96' ZT unt 6ZI T-F99-SOS: 131 N093210 MOHNIH21 NNA1J CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION AND ACCEPTANCE OF HOMESTEAD VILLAGE SPECIAL TREE PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR TREE REMOVAL CONTRACTOR I have reviewed the Special Tree Preservation and Protection Requirements for the Tree Removal Contractor. I understand the intent of the requirements and agree to comply with the restrictions. I will explain these restrictions and the Tree Damage and Penalties restrictions that are part of the regular Tree Preservation and Protection Specifications for this project. Before they begin work to make sure they understand and comply with the requirements. COMPANY REPRESENTATIVE TITLE SIGNATURE DATE OWNER REPRESENTATIVE TITLE SIGNATURE DATE 80' d 800. 0N 6S: ST 96' T unf 6ZT T-c99-cOS: 131 N093210 moeNiu8 NNA1J AND ACCEPTANCE OF HOMESTEAD VILLAGE SPECIAL TREE PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR TREE REMOVAL CONTRACTOR I have reviewed the Special Tree Preservation and Protection Requirements for the Tree Removal Contractor. I understand the intent of the requirements and agree to comply with the restrictions. I will explain these restrictions and the Tree Damage and Penalties restrictions that are part of the regular Tree Preservation and Protection Specifications for this project. Before they begin work to make sure they understand and comply with the requirements. COMPANY REPRESENTATIVE TITLE SIGNATURE DATE OWNER REPRESENTATIVE TITLE SIGNATURE DATE 60'd 800. 0N T0: 9T 96'ZT un f 6ZTT-c99-£0S: 131 NO93210 fOHNItId NNA1J Assumptions and Limiting Conditions Pruett Incorporated P.O. Box 1967 Lake Oswego, OR 1. Any legal description provided to the consultant/appraiser is assumed to be correct. Any title and ownership's to any property are assumed to be good. No responsibility is assumed for matter legal in character. 2. It is assumed that any property/project is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances, statutes or other government regulations. 3. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. all data has been verified insofar as possible: however, the consultant/appraiser can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided. 4. The consultant/appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made including payment of an additional fee for such service. 5. Loss of alteration of any part of this report invalids the entire report. 6. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publications or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior written consent of the consultant/appraiser. 7. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall be used for any purpose by anyone but the person to whom it is addressed, without the written consent of the consultant/appraiser: nor shall it be conveyed by anyone, including client, to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media, without written consent of the consultant/appraiser. 8. This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant/appraiser and the consultant/appraiser's fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported. OZ ' d 800. 0N 10:91 96' T unf 6211-i99-£OS: 131 N093d0 f1OHNIUd NNA3d 9. Sketches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessary to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys. 10. Unless expressed otherwise: 1) information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflect the condition of those items at the time of inspection; and 2) the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible components without dissection, excavation, or probing. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the plants or property in question may not arise in the future 11 ' d 800. 0N TO: 9T 96` ZI unf 6Z1T-i99-NS:131 N093210 fOENId21 NNA13 HOMESTEAD VILLAGE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS TIGARD, OREGON June 1996 MEI Project Number 196226 • PREPARED FOR: Homestead Village Incorporated PREPARED BY: #ItJ541.; Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated L t , 0690 S.W. Bancroft Street \<;\;.&4 tic. y� P.O. Sox 69039 h 4'1 �, << Portiaod, Oregon 97241-0039 Phone(503) 224-9560 Fax(503)223-1235 P:.WPDA I'A:SPr CZIT T96226106TS1-KC.BTA TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I. INTRODUCTION II. EXISTING CONDITIONS III. BACKGROUND AND IN-PROCESS TRAFFIC V. SAFETY REVIEW - ACCIDENT ANALYSIS - SIGHT DISTANCE ANALYSIS VI. TRIP GENERATION VII. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT VIII. WARRANT ANALYSIS - SIGNAL WARRANTS - TURN LANE WARRANTS IX. INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS X. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMEENDATIONS XI. APPENDIX F:IWPDATA1 SPECS\TS196226106TS 1-KC.BTA LIST OF FIGURES 1 VICINITY MAP 2 SITE PLAN 3 EXISTING TRAFFIC 4 BACKGROUND GROWTH 5 IN-PROCESS TRAFFIC 6 BASE TRAFFIC 7A TRIP ASSIGNMENT- SCENARIO I 7B TRIP ASSIGNMENT- SCENARIO II 8A COMBINED TRAFFIC - SCENARIO I 8B COMBINED TRAFFIC - SCENARIO II F:IWPDATAISPECSITSI96226I06TS 1-KC.BTA L INTRODUCTION The proposed Homestead Village hotel is located in Tigard near the intersection of SW 68th Parkway and Hampton Road. The approximately 4.60 acre site is bounded on the east by SW 68th Parkway and Highway 217 on the east. A parking lot is located adjacent to the south of the site and office buildings are located to the north. Additionally, SW 70th Avenue currently extends to the site and is being considered as either a second access or fire access only. The site is located near both Highway 217 and Interstate 5, with interchanges easily accessible. Figure 1 presents the site vicinity map. Homestead Village will consist of 148 extended stay hotel units in three buildings. Access to the site is proposed at SW 68th Parkway, approximately 680 feet south of Hampton Road. A second access is being considered at the existing termination of SW 70th Avenue. If the second access is not provided, SW 70th Avenue would be a fire access only. The site is zoned for commercial use and is currently undeveloped. The proposed Homestead Village site plan is presented in Figure 2. The study area of this traffic impact analysis, as confirmed by City of Tigard staff, is generally along Hampton Street between SW 68th and 72nd Avenues. The intersections analyzed include the following: Hampton Street/SW 72nd Avenue Hampton Street/SW 70th Avenue Hampton Street/SW 68th Parkway SW 68th Avenue/Site access City staff has requested that traffic conditions in five years in 2001 be reviewed for this analysis. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS Intersection turning movement counts were conducted by MEI staff at the study area intersections in May 1996. In addition traffic counts were obtained for the intersections of Hampton Street with SW 72nd Avenue and SW 68th Parkway from 1994 and 1995 for determining the historical growth rates. The current traffic volumes are presented in Figure 3 for both the AM and PM peak hours. The following is a summary of the roadway classifications and descriptions in the study area: SW 72nd Avenue 2/3 lane Major Collector 35 mph Hampton Street 3 lane Major Collector 35 mph SW 68th Parkway 2 lane Major Collector 40 mph SW 70th Avenue 2 lane Local Street 25 mph F:\WPDATA\SPECS\TS\96226\06TS I-KC.BTA SW 72nd Avenue generally consists of two travel lanes with turn lanes at the intersection with Hampton Street. A sidewalk is provided on the west side of the road south of the Hampton Street intersection. No sidewalks are provided north of Hampton Street. Hampton Street is a three lane roadway with a continuous left turn lane between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 70th Avenue. Channelized left turn lanes are provided at SW 68th Parkway, 70th Avenue westbound and 69th Avenue eastbound. Sidewalks are provided along both sides of the roadway. Hampton Street is generally 44 feet wide, with bus pullouts east of SW 70th Avenue increasing the road width at that location to 60 feet. SW 70th Avenue is a two lane curbed road with a sidewalk on the east side only. The road width is approximately 23.5 feet. Currently, SW 70th Avenue is stubbed at the proposed site, and has two driveways accesses. South of Hampton Street, SW 68th Parkway is a two lane roadway with medians. Each travel lane is approximately 23 feet wide. Median openings are provided at two existing driveway locations and at the proposed site access. The median opening is 34 feet wide at the proposed driveway. Sidewalks are provided along the west side of SW 68th Parkway, including along the site frontage. ODOT is planning improvements to the Interstate 5 and Highway 217 interchange. These improvements include widening the SW 72nd Avenue overpass from two to five lanes and realigning Hunziker Road to cross Highway 217 and intersect SW 72nd Avenue at Hampton Street. Construction dates have not yet been determined, but it is likely the improvements will not be completed prior to the 2001 analysis year. No other improvements are currently scheduled in the study area. III. BACKGROUND AND IN-PROCESS TRAFFIC IN-PROCESS TRAFFIC In-process traffic is traffic which will be generated by projects which have been approved through the City land use approval process, but which were not generating full-buildout traffic volumes at the time of the traffic counts. City of Tigard staff indicated several projects which will add traffic to the study area intersections. Most of these projects are small office uses which would only add small amounts of traffic to the study area intersections. These volumes are accounted for in the background growth rates. One major project in the area which has approval, but is not yet constructed is the Tri-County center proposed for the southwest corner of Dartmouth Street at SW 72nd Avenue. According to the traffic study, Tri-County shopping center traffic will only impact SW 72nd Avenue at Hampton Street. Trip assignments for the Tri-County shopping center are shown in Figure 5 for the AM and PM peak hours. F:WPDATAI.SPECS\TS\96226\06TS 1-KC.BTA BACKGROUND TRAFFIC A review of recent traffic counts for the intersections of Hampton Street with SW 72nd Avenue and SW 68th Parkway indicate a growth rate of approximately 5% per year. It should be noted however, that traffic volumes counted in May 1996 at the Hampton Street intersection with SW 72nd Avenue are lower than those from June 1994 for the same time period. It appears that traffic volumes decreased after 1994 in the vicinity of the site. This may be due to the extension of Dartmouth east to SW 68th Parkway and construction of the new SW 72nd Avenue intersection with Highway 99. Both of these improvements provided additional access to the Tigard triangle area. Five years of traffic growth at this 5% rate were applied to all study area intersections to reflect conditions in 2001. Figure 4 illustrates this growth for the AM and PM peak hours. Base year 2001 traffic volumes without development of the site are presented in Figure 6. These volumes include existing, background, and in-process traffic. IV. PEDESTRIAN ACCESS AND TRANSIT Sidewalks are currently provided along both sides of Hampton Street between SW 72nd Avenue and SW 68th Parkway. SW 68th Parkway has sidewalks on the west side of the street, including along the site frontage. Sidewalks are provided on SW 72nd Avenue only on the west side of the road south of the Hampton Street intersection. SW 70th Avenue has a sidewalk only on the east side of the street. No additional sidewalks are planned with this development. The existing sidewalk network provides areas for pedestrians separated from vehicular traffic, and provides a route from the site to bus stops located on Hampton Street. Transit service to the area is provided by Tri-Met route 78. Bus stops with shelters are located on both sides of Hampton Street just east of SW 70th Avenue, well within walking distance from the proposed Homestead Village. Route 78 travels between downtown Lake Oswego and Beaverton with stops at Portland Community College, the Tigard Transit Center, and Washington Square. Connections can be made to other bus routes at all five locations. VI. TRIP GENERATION The character of the proposed Homestead Village extended stay hotel is different from standard or business hotels in that customers stay for longer periods. This results in less intensive traffic volumes added to the surrounding street system. F:IWPDATA\SPECS\TS196226106TS 1-KC.BTA Trip generation estimates for the proposed 148 unit Homestead Village were prepared using rates observed at existing Homestead Village sites. The rates were prepared by Barton Ashman from surveys conducted at four sites in Texas. The surveys indicate that the peak hour of the sites is actually between 6:00 and 7:00 pm. The trip rate for the peak hour of the roadways was estimated by using each site's highest hour trip rate between 4:00 and 6:00 pm and 7:00 and 9:00 am. These rates were then averaged to obtain the peak hour of adjacent street rates used for this analysis. A copy of the Barton Ashman survey is included in the appendix. The distribution of entering and exiting trips was only provided for one site. It indicated a morning distribution of 62% entering and 38% exiting, and an evening distribution of 55% entering and 45% exiting. Trip generation rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, Fifth Edition were compared to the Barton Ashman study. Following is a summary of trip generation characteristics for the proposed Homestead Village and standard and business hotels based upon ITE rates. Trip Generation Comparison AM Peak PM Peak Land Use Code ADT Enter Exit Enter Exit Homestead Village -- 761 33 20 32 26 Hotel 310 1243 51 34 60 51 Business Hotel 312 1076 51 35 55 37 For purposes of this analysis, all trips generated by this development are assumed to be automobile trips. Some transit use may be anticipated. The nearest bus stop is located on Hampton Street just east of SW 70th Avenue. F:\WPDATA\SPECS\TS\96226\06TS1-KC.BTA VII. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT DISTRIBUTION Scenario I reviews conditions if only the SW 68th Parkway access is provided. The SW 70th Avenue connections would be limited to a fire access. A second access to SW 70th Avenue is included in Scenario II. Approximately 40 % of the site traffic is anticipated to use the SW 70th Avenue access if it is provided. Trip distribution for Homestead Village traffic is based upon evaluation of existing traffic patterns at the study area intersections. Approximately 45% of site traffic will travel north towards the Interstate 5 interchange along SW 68th Parkway, 45% to the south along SW 72nd Avenue, and 10% to the north on SW 72nd Avenue. Figures 7A and 7B present the trip distribution and the corresponding trip assignments for scenarios I and H, respectively. Figures 8A and 8B present the anticipated 2001 traffic volumes with full development of the site with access scenarios I and II, respectively. These volumes include 2001 base traffic plus site trip assignments. VIII. WARRANT ANALYSIS Peak hour traffic signal warrants presented in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices were reviewed for the volumes anticipated at the intersection of Hampton Street with SW 68th Parkway. The 2001 traffic volumes with development of the site are well below the threshold volumes for requiring signalization. Left turn lanes are not anticipated to be warranted at the site access on SW 68th Parkway due to the low number of vehicles arriving from the south and the low traffic volumes on SW 68th Parkway. A left turn lane currently is provided on Hampton Street for left turns to SW 70th Avenue. I.X. INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Intersection capacity calculations were conducted utilizing the methodologies presented in the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209. HCS software was used to prepare the capacity and level of service calculations. Copies of the calculations are included in the Appendix. The concept of Level of Service has been developed by traffic engineers to allow a qualitative measure of an intersection's operation. A level of service "A" is representative of generally free-flowing conditions while a level of service "F" is representative of excessive delays. F:\WPDATASPECS\TS\96226\06TS1-KC.BTA Evaluation of signalized intersection capacity and operation utilizes two criteria standardized in the transportation engineering industry. The first measure of operational acceptability for roadways and intersections is the ratio of traffic volume to capacity of the roadway or intersection. This ratio is referred to as the volume-to-capacity ratio (V/C). The second measure of operation is described by a term called "Level of Service" (LOS). Level of Service is a graded measure of operation ranging from a level "A" for unimpeded free flow, to a level "F" representing congestion, gridlock, and excessive travel delay. A level of service "D" is generally considered acceptable for intersection approaches. Level of service for a signalized intersection is based upon average delay incurred by all vehicles utilizing the intersection during the peak 15 minutes of the design hour. The intersection of SW 72nd Avenue and SW Hampton Street is a signalized intersection. Unsignalized intersections are evaluated on the delay experienced by each lane or lane group and the total intersection average, similarly to signalized intersections. This delay corresponds to the lane or lane group's reserve capacity, which is a measure of the capacity of a movement which is unused. Because major street traffic is nearly unimpeded, the intersection average does not always reflect the delays experienced by side street traffic. For this reason, the lane or lane group that experiences the highest delay will be reported for the intersection as a whole, along with the corresponding level of service. All-way stop controlled intersections also are evaluated on the delay experienced by each approach. The delay corresponds to the approach reserve capacity. This methodology works well for intersections with a single lane and even distribution of traffic on each approach and where heavy turning volumes are not present. When multiple lanes are provided on each approach, the majority of traffic is on two or three approaches, or heavy turning volumes are experienced, the methodology begins to break down. When this occurs, a manual survey of existing delays is recommended. The intersection of SW 68th Parkway and SW Hampton Street is an all-way stop controlled intersection. The capacity calculations address existing 1996 traffic conditions, 2001 base conditions without development of the site and 2001 combined traffic after full occupancy of the proposed Homestead Village. Figures 8A and 8B illustrate the 2001 combined traffic volumes for the two scenarios, respectively. Combined traffic is a combination of existing 1995 traffic volumes, background growth (5% for five years), in-process traffic, and site generated traffic. The table below summarizes the capacity and level of service calculations for all four conditions. F:\WPDATA\SPECS\TS\96226\06TS1-KC.BTA 1 Intersection Capacity and Level of Service 1 INTERSECTION TIME 1996 2001 2001 2001 EXISTING BASE COMBINED I COMBINED II A SW 72nd Ave/ AM 0.442-8.3-B 0.554-8.8-B 0.579-9.1-B 0.579-9.1-B SW Hampton St PM 0.525-13.3-B 0.814-16.7-C 0.823-17.0-C 0.823-17.0-C SW 70th Ave/ AM 689-5.2-B 597-6.0-B 576-6.3-B 515-7.0-B B SW Hampton St p PM 531-6.8-B 420-8.6-B 404-8.9-B 430-8.4-B SW 68th Pkwy/ AM 5.2-B 8.0-B 8.0-B 8.2-B C SW Hampton St p PM 6.9-B 11.9-C 13.1-C 13.6-C SW 68th Pkwy/ AM n/a n/a 839-4.3-A 848-4.2-A D Access PM n/a n/a 811-4.4-A 833-4.3-A Unsignalized: Reserve Capacity-Highest Approach Delay (sec) -Level of Service All-way Stop Controlled: Average Delay (sec) -Level of Service Signalized: Volume to Capacity Ratio - Average Delay (sec) - Level of Service The intersection of Hampton Street with SW 68th Parkway is operating with four-way stop control. Left turn lanes are provided on Hampton Street. SW 68th Parkway is striped for a single lane approach in both directions. The predominant traffic movements are eastbound to northbound an southbound to westbound. These two turning movements are complimentary in that they can occur simultaneously. Often when a large percentage of turning movements occur at an all-way stop intersection, the capacity methodologies break down. This is the case for Hampton at SW 68th Parkway which resulted in the southbound approach having higher demand than capacity. Field observations indicated that all the approaches at this intersection operate with little delay. The intersection capacity calculations were adjusting by adding a southbound right turn lane to the input geometry. This has the effect of modeling the right turn as an overlap, or simultaneous movement as the eastbound left turn. The capacity results for this adjustment are presented in the table above which more accurately models the existing intersection operation and estimates future conditions. The right turn does not need to be added to the southbound approach of SW 68th Parkway. The intersection is currently operating and will continue to operate in 2001 at acceptable levels of service with the existing lane configuration. Intersection capacity would only improve slightly with the right turn lane, but on street parking would be lost. F:\WPDATA\SPECS\TS196226\06TS 1-KC.BTA All the study area intersections are expected to continue operating at acceptable levels of service with the addition of background, in-process, and site generated traffic. Although the intersection of Hampton Street with SW 72nd Avenue is anticipated to operate at levels of service"C" queue spill back from the Highway 217 off ramp may cause congestion at the intersection during peak hours. The Hunziker overpass and connection to SW 72nd Avenue opposite Hampton is planned as part of the Interstate 5 and Highway 217 interchange improvements. The timing and configuration of this project are not yet known, so only the existing lane configuration was assumed. X. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Development of the proposed Homestead Village extended stay hotel can be accommodated with the existing transportation network in the study area. All the intersections are expected to be operating at a level of service"C" or better with development of the site in 2001. Sidewalks are provided along the site frontage and study area roads which allow pedestrian travel separated from vehicles, and provides access to bus stops on Hampton from the site. No off-site improvements are recommended to mitigate traffic impact of the 148 unit extended stay hotel. MEI's analysis indicates that both scenarios with only a SW 68th Parkway access and a second SW 70th Avenue access can be accommodated. The difference in the study area intersection operation between the two scenarios is negligible. F:\WPDATA\SPECS\TS\96226\06TS1-KC.BTA XL APPENDIX Figures Traffic Count Summaries Trip Generation Warrant Analysis Capacity Calculations Queuing Calculations F:\WPDATA\SPECS\TS\96226\06TS 1-KC.BTA FIGURES 0 a- 99 c cp x- N zs Atlanta St Haines Rd a N Sep, � Ra Qh e.'OU th ± a >, a a a Herrlosa V s > > s a_ <-C 217 Bdveland St a1 s s' s s.0 1-. n .O -- Gonzaga St '0 `0' 'O — Hampton St _ 5 _c 0 Fly�2/�Pr n Varns St Z II SITE K.I FIGURE 1 DRAWN BY: EAH VICINITY MAP CHECKED BY: BTA HOMESTEAD VILLAGE DATE: JUNE 1996 JOB NUMBER:196226 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED SHEET OF Civil • Structural • Transportation -- 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1995 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 OOTEMP \H:\PROJECTS\196226\TRAFFIC\226nG01 EAH 06/06/96 14:13 1:1.00 1 1 ——— '— ' —_ .. _ �- - ---_-__-'-_-----__ _-___---_'--__'_ -'-- --_- _' '- -- -__----__-______ r- ` ,..1.______ 4.14.4 1 m si. 1 id re NNW \! ''. i ...N . #. _ 4, ,,,,,,,„ ,.,.H.,i.,,:,,,,,,:,4 1 ,L., i _ iii , " , i '‘ I.". . — -.---',A,--A. a \_‘,.° i__ _ _,, N_..*-• ,_L- --I _• • /41-- ...-.P.-1_-.._ ....:=1101 - --- r j: .-" ,-'-.. ,,., ', ‘ \ ‘-`. \% 0 t s.. )7:z:to:lir, 0,4*,, ... %, . q:‘, . ' !..: •. •\.,,,x,-N-, , 41 1 a \% \ 6\ \ r ix t \\`,,,,,•-„y. `3 ..1= . t...am 0 0 0 8 js ...■.`ce,,,i-1;.:\'' itirs... . ...., aga il etlil• ', 1,P,It "I ! ° . ,...: s.',■4‘.7,• ;':,:..t '20! mim .. im.. . 1141) - ;:: • . 1 1 0 ii I i 9 4 .. 9o, c-- - ‘1,1:gir ...4.. \\41111' ric, ‘•,..: ........ ... ..„...,:.:„ ..v: w .. Alf: , 4, i 0,;,. i .: . ,.. \ \et \lifi – • • ,_,.44.?...• N. ..\ F .. ire 3 --. -.\,‘: .,..:,:k1.7.-;. I.,. ,,... . 0 \ ...•\ . .41.' t–' 1 \''.1......•:W.:'''‘. \...1 . j \0/ IV t ..00( .1 '..!:.12,...:-.. , ,c4 ,_,..., I._ 2 .\: .*N , I,I, ( .,,..,.....„ .4, FIGURE �� --U� �K ��^ �� DRAWN BY: EAH SITE CHECKED 8Y� B�A — — � HOMESTEAD VILLAGE DATE: JUNE 1996 JOB NUMBER:198226 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED SHEET OF Civil • Structural • Transportation �--�— 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 6903e ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING ponATco pvrt|onu, Oregon 97201-0039 1995 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)22e-1285 ' - 0 >, CU > x Q 0_ S: : +' CT co D `D CU > Hampton St • C B � C cu .ice D c0 PO a rn c0 N M N sf N 0 Nl l 11 ' 11 A M 8 115 "- 13 316 — 163 71-1- f— 5 1 }f 144 28tiR �r 3 59tiR • !� 3 ti� O N /o © O © v r) O/ O r\ N N (s) tn all (o N � N 1L 11 ij P M 33 222—' 52 �' / 226--► �rf— 337 20---0- f �— 79 f 1 I f 351 6~ l ! � 0 9~ 1 I �f 0 � 1 I ® r7 c0 © O © M) If) O O 0) FIGURE 3 DRAWN BY: EAH 1996 EXISTING TRAFFIC CHECKED BY: BTA HOMESTEAD VILLAGE DATE: JUNE 1996 JOB NUMBER:196226 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED SHEET OF Civil • Structural • Transportation -- 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1995 All RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 _ e•tor VAPROJECTS\:wtn>•OI►wlavaoe £M a/a/n 14113 1:1 AO r 1 >, cu a0 x Q ID- _C S -1-> -P CO �D �D (1) Q Hampton St Vill 1 cc M � ^ v N 1 11L 11 `� 2 29— `` 3 A V 79---► 4.— 41 18— 1 } I �� 36 8tiR �.r 1 15�. 1 I �� 1 � 1 I AO NOO) © 0 0 © O N c0 c0 M st r'7 tD a 1L 11 � i1 P V 8 56— 13 ,e f !! 57— — 84 5—►RR f f— 20 t I l � 88 3ti1 I 0 2~ 1 I �f 0 � I O 0 d © N'1 O © 0) 0 O N rn FIGURE 4 DRAWN BY: EAH BACKGROUND GROWTH - 5 YR • 5%/YR CHECKED BY: BTA HOMESTEAD VILLAGE DATE: JUNE 1996 JOB NUMBER:196226 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED SHEET OF Civil • Structural • Transportation -- 0690 S. W. B6ncroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 © 1995 MACKENZIE RIG TS ENGINEERING RESERVED INCORPORATED Phone: (503)224-95601 •OF 9 FAX: (503)228-1285 00f[W \It\r00XCR\1Nl20\71WTC 2201000 W. 06/00/fs 1&:16 1:1.00 , f —. — _ co 99 aJ Atlanta St Flames Rd (.1 P SSPh Qr, TRI— ��,oUth st COUNTY CENTER 'S a, > >, Q 3 !ti N Hermosa W a_ > > s a a a 217 B�veland St 4 4- CO N Gonzaga St -Hampton S- s H4n2'kPr ` r` rt to Varns S. AM i rr co co 0 N PM ir� 0 N FIGURE 5 DRAWN BY: EAH IN—PROCESS TRAFFIC CHECKED BY: BTA HOMESTEAD VILLAGE DATE: JUNE 1996 JOB NUMBER:196226 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED SHEET OF Civil • Structural • Transportation - . 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1995 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 00TEMP \H:\PROJECTS\196226\TRAFFIC\226FIG05 EAH 06/06/96 14:17 1:1.00 I — 0 Q) A > Q Y 11 S O- --' `D a) \D aJ Q Hampton St . B C 0 D Il O 0) • N M re) AN 10 144- ' �� 395 204 89---0- .- i r - 180 36�! r r 4 74 6 1 ti ti Oa � � 0 \ irr 4 i TO (41 ) © LA NI- 0 O QI co co N N "1- O (0 OD N i7 N P I" 278— – 65 283 f— 421 25-- ir - 439 — 0 11— 90 r sir ~ i O CD N © f\ 0 © (er c10 O D O FIGURE 6 DRAWN BY: EAH 2001 BASE TRAFFIC CHECKED BY: BTA DATE: JUNE 1996 HOMESTEAD VILLAGE JOB NUMBER:196226 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED SHEET OF Civil • Structural • Transportation —— ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 1995 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 aortw ADAVAIOJ(CT\1911221ATINTIC,u1110011 LAN WWI* iais I1.ro 0 N >' Q X CL S } 5/10 I GN ! (5/10) Co `O CU 40/50 1 > Hampton St j (45/45) •75 lB S C Cu • N (50/45) 1 1 55/40 11 N In M l 11 \ i1 A M (1) (20)-' 20� -- (11) —• O © © v�' O re) to CN 1 " 1 ! \ 1l 2 (26)—' 1 P N 16-4- (14) -- i t - 12 ~b rA 16- , i r - ~b I O Pei © O FIGURE 7A DRAWN BY: EAH TRIP ASSIGNMENT - SCENARIO I CHECKED BY: BTA HOMESTEAD VILLAGE DATE: JUNE 1996 JOB NUMBER:196226 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED SHEET OF Civil • Structural • Transportation —— 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1995 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 DUMP \µV110.1(CTAINantwsw.luu47a WI WW1. +u• I:1.00 , I 0 QW >, Q - CL S 5/10 I C (5/10) �0 00 i `D 0.1 40/50 1 > Hampton St 1 (45/45) o N . N 1 (50/45)1 55/40 N I) O 0 N 1 11 \ i1 U (1) 10� (3)-' •- (12)-• A (6) . Ir 3 - (10) s 10—„. 1 i r 3 10� 1 Ir J A 1 I to r7 M a) i � 11L / 1 2 (4)—' `, (16)—' V P 6 (8) .--- 1 rr 12 10�\ �� 3 6~ 1 I �� 1 I O r ® co v O a0 o-o- o FIGURE 7B DRAWN BY: EAH TRIP ASSIGNMENT - SCENARIO II CHECKED BY: BTA HOMESTEAD VILLAGE DATE: JUNE 1996 JOB NUMBER:196226 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED SHEET OF Civil •• Structural •• Transportation -- 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1995 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 ooTrw VI:\ROAMS\IN326VNKrl4\7311tIO711 IAN a/a/n Isar I:I.00 I I —_— 0 N A > 3 Q CL S - S O1 A-'■D CO qD Cu > Hampton St c A � 1-1 C CD VI''' 3 O c0 co CO r7 M I\ N c0 In PO M 1 \ i1 \ i1 A M 11 144—" "— 16 20-- 415---► — 215 89 • — 6 — 190 36ti A— 4 94— ,— 4 0ti it r qtr 1 ® O © O © IO M O O O Or L11 CD f0 CO N nl C M M co N 1 •11L PI P M '— 43 278-' 65 26—" 299 �— 435 25—► 99 1 t,— 451 9~� r� 0 27~� i r� 0 °~� 1 O CO N © n O © tD 00 O O I FIGURE 8A DRAWN BY: EAH 2001 COMBINED TRAFFIC-SCENARIO I CHECKED BY: BTA HOMESTEAD VILLAGE DATE: JUNE 1996 JOB NUMBER:196226 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED SHEET OF Civil • Structural • Transportation -- 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1995 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 oorcv VtArlroxcrAtunnr•urc's,maw LAN a/a/u rue r:r.•e ■ I 0 (1) >' > Q Q_ S +' S+, D CO \D 0-i > Hampton St •c cu A -� B C o N - N VIII __, O O) u7 c0 O M N N (O M N M 1- ! L i1 ‘A i 1 — 11 147-'' 16 12J• A V 45--► 210 89-0- 6 r 190 46— f 7 84ti 4 0—s I \ r qtr v\ t A 10 CD ® c0 M © 0 0 O 0 0) co Cs! N 1L 11L 11 P V 43 282—'' '- 65 16—" 289---0- -4— 421 25-- 99 �� 451 19�� 3 17�� t �� 0 Oti� I 7—A- c0 N © N © 1C c^0 0 O 0 FIGURE 8B DRAWN BY: EAH 2001 COMBINED TRAFFIC-SCENARIO II CHECKED BY: BTA HOMESTEAD VILLAGE. DATE: JUNE 1996 JOB NUMBER:196226 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED SHEET OF Civil • Structural • Transportation —— 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1995 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 •mcw \MIMEXCTS\+••rn\+•l>c\amcw IAN a/aM I4:2 I:Im i I ——— TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARIES on 19.3° jog 10:45- /� x:15 �Iro 3J- (00• J!/ 7:3o Pi) e;`4;) 333 RIGHT THRU LEFT `s ,220 i . ka,.... 8,,. pF ` 4.333 • 1—j L.._ c C7 E3 v —J STACK N STACK E • J 3 N ct = D T = =` r l/1 _ YtPTCAJ ST. \ / N r 1- STACK STACK ) _"") 1 1 r . LEFT THRU RIGHT DATE: 5/.29910 TIME PERIOD: 7.3c,(0 0 Am\ t) ) I _ TO: $' ?O NO TH PM El 0270 Kv COUNTED BY: &LVE_S_ CZ �!/ 244 CHECKED BY: FAA/ DATE: 5730196 JOB NUMBER: f9l#Z21,g_ MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Civil • Structural • Transportation 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACKEN2,E ENC;NEER:NC INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1996 ALL RIGHTS RESc /ED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 I' 3!y r,,l �;3v D�a K�/ i :ys 9Iv :co �` 5 s./S 3s 5:30 312- �y� ) 1. 5:`�' 3/7 1.,:oo P,. = PP 3 - 1/• 39S RIGHT THRU LEFT . J I le,_ ,,„.) ,.. -, 0 \/__,LII-j STACK N STACK re J \Ik0 --) m / r7 ,)`, tx F. ` me = t— t- i lictiktpfzr Si l \ 1. tv STACK �e STACK r _, 3s1 W J LEFT THRU RIGHT DATE: 5/g9V 9& At I %,, TIME PERIOD: / 30 359 I �Y TO: 5 AM ❑ NORTH PM IA COUNTED BY: `IOC C L 1/ Oy cry' CHECKEDA It JOB NUMBER! /qal& MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Civil • Structural • Transportation 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACICENZIE ENG;NEERING INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1996 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 1:o0 8to 7:fs 135 7:3o 90 7:Ls' l30 511 $ °, 1511 6: 1 5 118 $'. 30 pt+F: —Sli- =o'BZ RIGHT THRU LEFT L} I •• I 51,1 (-_______ ,..) L w 0 J STACK STACK Fe —1 1�V _IS NQ141A +i M5 z cc = D.- 511 . �---i_ 11,03 gi4--/-v Sw +Prom sT 1 2 STACK �1 STACK rmni LL. 3 _---.) c, w -441) I r IrT LEFT THRU RIGHT DATE: 572-32% A( 1 ____---- TIME PERIOD: "1-.75-`� TO: 8 :/S.--AM im NORTH PM ❑ p°e 1-+-✓ COUNTED BY: AC, CHECKED BY: EA H DATE: JOB NUMBER: /9/6,ZZ4 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Civil • Structural • Transportation 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1996 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 1QO l '7- Los- lob ,/30 x32. y:ys 1l 873 s:oo 1c4 s: s y:30 /0j 5-:y 5- to:00 RIGHT THRU LEFT prrF ° -5 93 0.73 J Ile._ Li •iqc. ____-- LI—si LI— ------- W 0 J STACK STACK oc J \ 3IW .,+° Nis 6:9 ,2 7e e° Z Z _ ,. -= 3 3 —7— cA sw 1-fr nI PTO Ni Si - d - , = STACK STACK U' G l~i CI W -.41 1 r J LEFT THRU RIGHT DATE: 5123/qG )\( 1_, ______—_____ -13— TIME PERIOD: 4:3o TO: 8:30 AM ❑ NORTH PM, ono COUNTED BY: AK- CHECKED BY: CA-14 DATE: 5/2y/9r! JOB NUMBER: (g0,2c, MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Civil • Structural • Transportation _ 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1996 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 6:3c ”-- b:yS 3 3 7e y-✓ 7..,0 q� 9: +5 7:30 �7c L4 7:4� 13c1 ( -4. 3 L4- L-I- 29 .2.:00 1s-5:Li 8. tc 8:3o 135 RIGHT THRU LEFT p,.-P : Sf9 - p. Q,2 I Li � fS9 T 3 k.,.... -- STACK --, STACK EE 1 3 v) N o_Lomi 44 p15 07, f 7 � I 0 ` , �� =cc 5— Sw 1-kk ipron1 s i c 00 L, �j ._ STACK STACK 3 J I s 11)0 F u= ° W —4111) 1 r J LEFT THRU RIGHT DATE: 5723/gio TIME PERIOD: 7 iS 3 TO: _.55— f�J AM NO TH PM ❑ 14 . 370 14V COUNTED BY: /kG CHECKED BY: L H DATE: JOB NUVBER: ( L,2u MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Civil • Structural • Transportation —— 0690 S. W. Bancroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1996 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 11:`11'4:/c 13 4 ?j o7° f- y ,30 131 N:qs �� 5:co I 2,C3 6;13 515 IV- 5'.30 l41 (e i a/ 5:`i5 L :av 115 RIGHT THRU LEFT I 3— l..... ,1 c,_ k....._ 2._2z ,...,L--) , 00 0 „..._ 2 —' STACK STACK 22 1 VI c Jv o!4u { MS .70 = c01- 3 q Z.3j 70 7_6 cc F- �1 S VJ `l 1‘1 r'' E6 NJ SI I I— STACK 77 STACK L -a- _1.-I.) W --41 I cm-- J LEFT THRU RIGHT DATE: -5723/46" j\l( TIME PERIOD: '/1:3o-6— AM ❑ q �� TO: .5-:34) ' NORTH PM p COUNTED BY: AC CHECKED BY DATE: JOB NUMBER: j9&22L MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Civil • Structural • Transportation 0690 S. W. Bcncroft Street • P.O. Box 69039 ©MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 1996 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Phone: (503)224-9560 • FAX: (503)228-1285 _ I I _ TRIP GENERATION HOMESTEAD VILLAGE TRIP GENERATION EM-I 6/96 Location Units Average Rate*Unit AM Peak AM Rate* PM Peak PM Rate* AM AM PM PM TWT Rate TWT Rate Unit TWT Rate Unit %IN %OUT % IN %OUT Dallas 133 4.98 662.34 0.364 48.412 0.367 48.811 62 38 55 45 Stafford 133 4.87 647.71 0.318 42.294 0.386 51.338 N. Arlington 152 5.51 837.52 0.331 50.312 0.409 62.168 Houston 133 5.16 686.28 0.418 55.594 0.413 54.929 Total 551 2833.85 196.612 217.246 Weighted Average Rate = 5.143 Weighted AM Peak Rate = 0.357 Weighted PM Peak Rate = 0.394 Location Units Rate ADT AM Enter AM Exit PM Enter PM Exit Tigard 148 5.14 761 33 _ 20 32 26 ATTACHMENT C HOMESTEAD VILLAGE SURVEYS FROM BARTON ASCHMAN • • O t/Z '3wd 568 tZ94 90Z 30MV11I3 'iv103d9 K z.sam 05.5; (3.11.) 96 . tZ 'AVX Z :3Jyd EL4Z :01 968294 90Z :N10kld 9661 99:9I 2/90 05/21 15:55 1996 FROM: 206 4621895 TO: 2473 PAGE: 3 MAY. 21 96 (TUE) 15:50 WESTERN 6?EC:AL FINANCE 206 4621895 ?ACE. 5/10 F • nng $ I MU' 3 N N ►y N j ca -r � � ivoo 0 � 5 § 05riA5 tV WWNL4C3 WW .Q O O p p p p 05121 15:55 1996 FROM: 206 4621895 TO: 2473 PAGE: 4 MAY. 21 ' 96 (T.:E) :5:50 WES 7E35 SPECIAL r:NAtiCE 206 462:695 PAGE. 4/10 • 1.-4 N -a .s .�a ^a �1..,.r g iggl§ g;gg151glilli1 = — = i .ggom w(� 10— x . 23 ....,.,. N N -+.+ ri.a s -� .� `g Q-4A' f.na� � 3ia�� r;;�. � -• A�od � eoN .f. ww'a• oa CM O o.i cf+,m'4 olio N iu'ao is i) 6 i`,w 0m min im o .s.:ca S 1 N ; m o z •.■ N .r1 N N} N N .►.r � ..a.a, �a ∎lr. I Z NDrco —!m;-+ c .s -.IA'.A• A W WiDN'mmIWyr... N0. �. Q oiUW4AWINN6242c :t. 01O!CfmOfi1,-Linkn)f k, ..a j2 . v.--- m o ,I bi •li.) INin vaDaiiop.. . tC„ enhnEnmintoi5.,oai.j.6 i Emi Z ..oit�gggWNmN � + —b i + + NNN a .iw —,p� —, 0FD # wNcd ++wrm 10, '4.01;0 0V' "lb 1I.C71NCs.41. �Ito VaoVCdcniN1610,1 1 Pi �NI. ! m Z 50178, iD;ApprPv .N► ...iA.cn .di7OVroNN # r m 00;wwwwClCit ! ) fym,k)10I -.,w Q 1 1 Q it "4 y .r !it1f .�► i► NT��+ 1111�� N11��11 .i tQ1AA .< w co bDrO,i Lallb.g0VeAI4. N Ibf.1inlirt6tViVGDVIV 4 Jr GO r tw i. I) wi.;inGD -4CA � is) 'co awiC0NDmk LA.fst00a hp :th % '%a li St p� 5 W �l ..a � N N ,� ( ID NOD � C0N - i wtii;wcriwoo:ac� WONWCt� b,404► :Avim :.► m:;iia,-+ Via:ii►sc.+►mLa1ci ' ii 4 [ ! P j �8 gg ES ytAtittER 1 tS:12Nt� pNE;tg11a► a -! 0 i. A. -Ai potN � NODL,rokm i - e NEW= it 0000PQopco _000��ppo��oppooaaopp000c r pC7 � r � atingggg o gdeiciOcici 2 Nc+ivi cri ch to • ft' 44P27.3gclg N � c+7t13e� �Ojtpp�iN � to G 8LI- 2 It4o0000 Q foocid • me aR c'p �p O opr� S O p3 CS1 N M N g3 g ji It -1 "1 ": 01 01 • = r- hI 04544 C :/5 aCvi 569:Z94 90Z 3CNVNI.1 Af=A?R T5=5: (3::.) 96 . TZ 'AV S :3CVd EL4Z :01 S89tZ94 90Z :AnA 96EL 99:9L LZ/SO eer�' mNr�y 1��1yyCtOODC0te�pp� rl� CO �0y1 0 VplCD O CgOCCC� MC� � Q Oft jgig * AgchX7 § C O O v G O O C C C O C O O O d C O C C C C C O ZL Lip KIC lA 0 ] i —o .—.vlcoi. NMchs.--Ir Ni 1.41 Qu,~ r• n�+"-c'w4ccy�ICQpory` �JI� Q'c*7tY � c7gle cNi e+i'c*aCV � N to � '�' r? NrWI C o § q,. O E g, g 0� g rfm O !`'Nl1b (� 4100 Q1rQtpN �0i ` r`fN !' W0W � NiN � � lNm � C r• � J � ci;c7 N � 1er� tlC { srtt* 07Nto I' ¢. ' > g0 W g °° c LE IL d ,.... .... - Q- � :N I CA 4i :71:41; *1.1; ::" f A 4 1tr N g y'iQ� �3 � CK� g 7: :N El g �„�j Nc9NNNc) Q C4w, Ni' � " N0lr- ri V? D Li 01 a ° $ gi§ § g0. fill§ §!& Eii RIll§ �'SN $'� .- rrrir1trr• r� NNcV -I bl r OI/9 '3`JVd 569:Z9 ' 9CL 33NV?i:3 ZV:03C3 :IE3_37i T5:5; tan_) 96 . TL -A.V'ft 9 :30Vd ELtiZ :01 S692917 90Z :IcHd 9661 9S:9L 2/90 Wilg6mG 2 o ovoo c � � chchaic�iri co o pm= LL cyulcoomm ao m un cid cri ri vq00000 1cococc to m "' ocloorio 0 t idoddaQ Nopococrti pillgor14 >- ggig hogg OL/L '3DVd 568:69, 90Z 30NYNII 'IYI03d9 Nh'L S M LS.SL (3R:.) 96 . i6 AYY{ L : Vd EL2 101 S68129b 90? 9661 9g:5L 2/SO ti 6666O000Ogccooc6QCOOCO cc: C Q G 5 i IPir ' 1 a < g r., 1 _,. i imil=1.1.. el LLLL � �l pprO:"tI�iNI�Ip» COpr�i cs �Ce) 4pCDliiQNil p 01 � C Qi C7 4 i -17 1 . ^i:oil t. ,e!co }. 0* o •r'a241 v- Ch r.ipl1-;v� C0il� m!"m1jN ;cq Q(co oil' gib ad 2 Alm anq ,� p} ad died r: (NJ'ad a . � N .I. m i� gle,u, Cl t LA, mr '7 N CA f 6 z 1 � 4, i r I 1 Q g 22 218 210E 8'8 § g § $ § $ Sj V. rrrr;e: rrCyN CViV J cc 1 #.I S i i , 0 1— • 0:/9 'swvd 569:L9, 90L 3:-Nvx:_ ?v: 3ds :ie=_S2M L_ 5: (3111) 96 . t .A.N11 9 :3DVd £LV? :01 969129'2 90Z :'nQad 9661 L9:91 2/90 I 41-4214 N op c g * 41rieriW P. 2 , rtehr� r� O O O a O C O s 1- � dl ao e2 `- e1 2 stf� � N o gvia64c*iao U3 A {A IFFFERa f�C C1 g ; N cl oO erl C! • L&. 40 ti Qagv. e: v, cReo o ir- V- SgMg ea t- T T I- cs ii 5 a ti 2 SI g . . liSAiNSTZ _ 5 il TiM :: eDekNeel aReq . • gazr .5. 55v • .. :. R mak gai = t ill OS •Itt I ()I/6 3Cv;: 5.69IL94 90Z 30NVNI3 'IvioadS NE3LS M ES'S I (afli.) 96 . IL Arft 8 :30Vd ELtZ :01 5681294 90Z :1108) 9661 L9:9L 12(50 1n -, e�e��pp77W�p '•' OCtqA� �j C� ppppmCCCbCCtOc+� r- t+7 t�1y7r (pr t� M ggCO NV 04". nemccNoil: V Ner- T cdood6dodod000006o6 .6666e6 al . 1 H t t.loir oaoormtii m'corTmi w .• - r d I rW C �D qr i 40"- a i g! aPz: iMM O r V) C5 oIOJN,V7 V) GD rlirl olt.'f-Ic 'r 00 11 UAit*1 021q2 N 11 d a .� McAtne�3N { co 6 III .c M ffilig 1 .1 w N'O'NIt*f .- ..tp t.. f-. P-c'it �eleciapit. .r .r. � N icju! o . m r —1 csirve1,mmmmvmloimitm—Trmt o 141 IP I „.r ' rrr+rrr N 40 I . 1 _ _ , . . i _15 . _ . . 0i/OI '3Ovd 569:297 90Z 30NvN:. iv:03,19 Nli3_93K 65 c: (3:1:.1 96 . jZ ',tv'rc 0L :30Vd ELtZ :01 968LZ97 90? :V408 966L 89:91 LZ/90 ITE TRIP GENERATION RATES ITE LAND USE VAR RATE ADT AM AM PM PM CODE Enter Exit Enter Exit 310 Hotel Occ Rooms 148 1243 51 34 60 51 312 Business Hotel Occ Rooms 148 1076 51 35 55 37 320 Motel Occ Rooms 148 1488 34 58 47 37 WARRANT ANALYSIS SW 4IP < JAS/ /$W I-1AmP7r 3 ST FIGURE 4-5. PEAK HOUR VOLUME WARRANT I 600 2 OR MORE LANES Et 2 OR MORE LANES I-- 0 500 I I I I I I I w Q 2 OR MORE LANES Et 1 LANE fr 400 I I I I F- 0_ 1 LANE Et 1 LANE 0 w 300 -.1,1441111 me_ D 200 �---~ > 100 = 400 ti8 494 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH *NOTE: 150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE. CAPACITY CALCULATIONS EXISTING TRAFFIC HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4 06-06-1996 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4 06-06-1996 Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Streets: (E-W) SW HAMPTON STREET (N-S) SW 72ND AVENUE Streets: (E-WI SW HAMPTON STREET (N-S) SW 72ND AVENUE Analyst: BAH File Name: A96EAM.HC9 Analyst: EAH File Name: A96EPM.HC9 Area Type: Other 6-5-96 AM PEAK Area Type: Other 6-5-96 PM PEAK Comment: 1996 EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS - AM PEAK Comment: 1996 EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS - PM PEAK Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound 1 Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I T R I T R I L T R No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Volumes 144 8 211 360 31 326 Volumes 351 33 359 1761 22 462 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0112.0 12.0 RTOR Vole 0 0 0 RTOR Vole 0 01 0 Lost Time 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Lost Time 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 Signal Operations Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ES Left NB Left BB Left NB Left Thru Thru • Thru Thru • Right Right • Right Right • Peds Peds • Peds Peds • WB Left • SB Left • WB Left • SB Left • Thru Thru • • Thru Thru • • Right • Right Right • Right Peds • Peds Peds • Peds NB Right EH Right NB Right EB Right SB Right WB Right SB Right WB Right Green 22.OA Green 5.OA 61.OA Green 41.OA Green 7.OA 40.OA Yellow/AR 4.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 4.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 4.0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #5 #6 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS Mvmts Cap Plow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS WB L 407 1770 0.437 0.230 21.8 C 21.7 C WB L 751 1787 0.525 0.420 14.5 B 14.2 B R 364 1583 0.027 0.230 19.3 C R 672 1599 0.055 0.420 11.1 B NB T 1155 1863 0.225 0.620 5.4 B 6.2 B NB T 771 1881 0.523 0.410 14.8 B 14.2 B R 981 1583 0.452 0.620 6.7 B R 656 1599 0.302 0.410 12.9 B SB L 106 1770 0.358 0.060 30.1 D 5.8 B SB L 144 1805 0.173 0.080 27.8 D 11.4 B T 1323 1863 0.304 0.710 3.5 A T 988 1900 0.525 0.520 10.7 B Intersection Delay • 8.3 sec/veh Intersection LOS . B Intersection Delay . 13.3 sec/veh Intersection LOS . 8 Lost Time/Cycle, L • 9.0 sec Critical v/c(x) . 0.442 Lost Time/Cycle, L . 6.0 sec Critical v/c(x) • 0.525 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 RCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 Pile Name B96EAM.HCO File Name B96EPM.HC0 Streets: (N-S) SW 70TH AVENUE (8-W) SW HAMPTON ST Streets: (N-S) SW 70TH AVENUE (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Major Street Direction.... EW Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst RAH Analyst BAH Date of Analysis 6/6/96 Date of Analysis 6/5/96 Other Information B96EAM - 1996 EXISTING COUNTS - AM PEAX Other Information B96EPM - 1996 EXISTING COUNTS - PM PEAX Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R . L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 0 1. 0 1 1 0 0. 0. 0 0 0 0 No. Lanes 0 1. 0 1 1 0 0. 0. 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Stop/Yield N N Volumes 316 28 3 163 1 1 Volumes 226 6 1 337 4 1 PHF .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 PHF .73 .73 .73 .71 .71 .73 Grade 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC's (4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 NC's (4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (5) 0 0 0 0 0 0 CV's (5) 2 2 5 5 0 0 CV's (4) 3 3 2 2 0 0 PCB's 1.02 1.02 1.05 1.05 1.1 1.1 PCB's 1.03 1.03 1.02 1.02 1.1 1.1 Adjustment Factors Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 229 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 330 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1060 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 942 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1060 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 942 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB Step 2: LT from Major Street WE EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 232 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 344 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1329 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1175 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1329 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1175 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 567 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 496 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 497 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 547 Major LT, Minor TH Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 1.00 Impedance Factor: 1.00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1.00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1.00 Capacity Adjustment Factor Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1.00 due to Impeding Movements 1.00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 497 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 545 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh)pcph) Delay LOS By App NB L 1 545 > > NB L 6 497 > > > 691 5.2 > B 5.2 538 6.8 B 6.8 NB R 1 942 > > > NB R 1 1060 > > > WB L 4 1175 3.1 A 0.1 WE L 1 1329 2.7 A 0.0 Intersection Delay = 0.0 Intersection Delay = 0.1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 File Name C96EAM2.HC0 Pile Name C96EPM2.HCO Streets: (N-S) SW 68TH PKWY (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Streets: (N-S) SW 68TH PRIM (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Analyst RAH Analyst EAH Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Other Information C96EAM2 - 1996 EXISTING - AM PEAK Other Information C96EPM2 - 1996 EXISTING COUNTS - PM PEAK All-way Stop-controlled Intersection All-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 1. 0 1 1< 0 Oa 1. 0 Oa 1 1 No. Lanes 1 1< 0 1 1< 0 Oa l< 0 0. 1 1 Volumes 115 71 59 3 5 13 4 3 0 29 44 173 Volumes 222 20 9 0 79 52 37 54 0 13 16 171 PHF .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 PHF .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 Grade 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CV's (%) 2 2 2 1 1 1 14 14 14 3 3 3 CV's (t) 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 3 PCE's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1 1 1 PCE's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet EE WB NB SB EB WB NB SB LT Plow Rate 140 4 5 35 LT Flow Rate 331 0 55 19 RT Flow Rate 72 16 0 211 RT Flow Rate 13 78 0 255 Approach Plow Rate 299 26 9 300 Approach Flow Rate 374 196 136 298 Proportion LT 0.47 0.15 0.56 0.12 Proportion LT 0.89 0.00 0.40 0.06 Proportion RT 0.24 0.62 0.00 0.70 Proportion RT 0.03 0.40 0.00 0.86 Opposing Approach Plow Rate 26 299 300 9 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 196 374 298 136 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 309 309 325 325 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 434 434 570 570 Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0.47 0.04 0.01 0.47 Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0.37 0.20 0.14 0.30 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0.04 0.47 0.47 0.01 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0.20 0.37 0.30 0.14 Lanes on Subject Approach 2 2 1 2 Lanes on Subject Approach 2 2 1 2 Lanes on Opposing Approach 2 2 2 1 Lanes on Opposing Approach 2 2 2 1 LT, Opposing Approach 4 140 35 5 LT, Opposing Approach 0 331 19 55 RT, Opposing Approach 16 72 211 0 RT, Opposing Approach 78 13 255 0 LT, Conflicting Approaches 40 40 144 144 LT, Conflicting Approaches 74 74 331 331 RT, Conflicting Approaches 211 211 88 88 RT, Conflicting Approaches 255 255 91 91 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0.15 0.47 0.12 0.56 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0.00 0.89 0.06 0.40 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0.62 0.24 0.70 0.00 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0.40 0.03 0.86 0.00 Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0.13 0.13 0.44 0.44 Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0.17 0.17 0.58 0.58 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0.68 0.68 0.27 0.27 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0.59 0.59 0.16 0.16 Approach Capacity 943 645 399 565 Approach Capacity 914 523 369 444 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary Approach Approach V/C Average Approach Approach V/C Average Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS BB 299 943 0.32 3.3 A EB 374 914 0.41 4.7 A WB 26 645 0.04 1.2 A WB 196 523 0.38 4.2 A NB 9 399 0.02 1.1 A NB 136 369 0.37 4.1 A SE 300 565 0.53 7.5 B SB 298 444 0.67 12.8 C Intersection Delay - 5.20 Intersection Delay - 6.93 Level of Service (Intersection) - B Level of Service (Intersection) • B CAPACITY CALCULATIONS 2001 BASE TRAFFIC HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4 06-06-1996 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4 06-06-1996 Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Streets: (E-W) SW HAMPTON STREET (N-S) SW 72ND AVENUE Streets: (E-W) SW HAMPTON STREET (N-S) SW 72ND AVENUE Analyst: BAH File Name: AOIBAM.HC9 Analyst: BAH File Name: AOIBPM.HC9 Area Type: Other 6-5-96 AM PEAR Area Type: Other 6-5-96 PM PEAK Comment: 2001 BASE TRAFFIC COUNTS - AM PEAK Comment: 2001 BASE TRAFFIC COUNTS - PM PEAK Eastbound Westbound Northbound 1 Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound 1 Southbound L T R L T R L T R I L T R L T R L T R L T R 1 L T R No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Volumes 180 10 350 4501 39 470 Volumes 439 41 699 2201 28 828 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0112.0 12.0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0112.0 12.0 RTOR Vole 0 01 0 RTOR VO1s 0 01 0 Lost Time 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 Lost Time 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Signal Operations Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left NB Left EB Left NB Left Thru Thru • Thru Thru • Right Right • Right Right • Peds Peds • Peds Peds • NB Left • SB Left • NB Left • SB Left • Thru Thru • • Thru Thru • • Right • Right Right • Right Peds • Peds Peds • Peds NB Right BB Right NB Right ES Right SB Right NB Right SB Right WB Right Green 21.0A Green 6.0A 61.0A Green 33.OA Green 5.0A 50.0A Yellow/AR 4.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 4.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 4.0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: *1 *5 *6 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: 41 *5 *6 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS NB L 389 1770 0.570 0.220 24.0 C 23.7 C NB L 608 1787 0.811 0.340 25.1 D 24.2 C R 348 1583 0.034 0.220 19.8 C R 544 1599 0.085 0.340 14.5 - B NB T 1155 1863 0.374 0.620 6.2 B 7.1 B NB T 959 1881 0.818 0.510 17.3 C 15.4 C R 981 1583 0.567 0.620 7.8 B R 815 1599 0.303 0.510 9.2 B SB L 124 1770 0.387 0.070 29.7 D 5.8 B SB L 108 1805 0.286 0.060 29.5 D 14.0 B T 1341 1863 0.432 0.720 3.8 A T 1140 1900 0.816 0.600 13.4 B Intersection Delay . 8.8 sec/veh Intersection LOS . B Intersection Delay . 16.7 sec/veh Intersection LOS • C Lost Time/Cycle, L . 9.0 sec Critical v/c(x) . 0.554 Lost Time/Cycle, L . 6.0 sec Critical v/c(x) - 0.814 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 File Name B01BAM.HCO File Name BOIBPM.HCO Streets: (N-S) SW 70TH AVENUE (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Streets: (N-S) SW 70TH AVENUE (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Major Street Direction.... BW Major Street DirectionSW Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst EAH Analyst EAH Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Other Information BO1BAM - 2001 BASE COUNTS - AM PEAK Other Information BO1BPM - 2001 BASE COUNTS - PM PEAK Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 0 lc 0 1 1 0 Oa 0< 0 0 0 0 No. Lanes 0 la 0 1 1 0 Os O< 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Stop/Yield N N Volumes 395 36 4 204 1 1 Volumes 283 9 1 421 7 1 PHF .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 PHF .73 .73 .73 .71 .73 .73 Grade 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC's (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 MC's (k) 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (k) 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's Cl) 0 0 0 0 0 0 CV's Cl) 2 2 5 5 0 0 CV's (k) 3 3 2 2 0 0 PCB's 1.02 1.02 1.05 1.05 1.1 1.1 PCB's 1.03 1.03 1.02 1.02 1.1 1.1 Adjustment Factors Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road • 6.50 3.40 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Plows: (vph) 413 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 288 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 855 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 989 Movement Capacity: )pcph) 855 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 989 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 431 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 292 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1068 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1244 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1068 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1244 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 621 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 710 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 463 Potential Capacity: )pcph) 411 Major LT, Minor TH Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 1.00 Impedance Factor: 1.00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1.00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1.00 Capacity Adjustment Factor Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1.00 due to Impeding Movements 1.00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 461 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 411 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App NB L 1 461 a a a NB L 11 411 a a a 599 6.0 B 6.0 432 8.6 B 8.6 NB R 1 855 s a a NB R 1 989 e a a WB L 5 1068 3.4 A 0.1 WB L 1 1244 2.9 A 0.0 Intersection Delay = 0.0 Intersection Delay - 0.1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 File Name CO1BAM2.HCO File Name CO1BPM2.HCO Streets: (N-S) SW 68TH PKWY (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Streets: (N-S) SW 68TH PRKWY (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Analyst RAH Analyst BAH Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Other Information COIBAM2 - 2001 BASE COUNTS - AM PEAK Other Information CO1BPM2 - 2001 BASE COUNTS - PM PEAK All-way Stop-controlled Intersection All-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 1 le 0 1 Ic 0 0> le 0 0> 1 1 No. Lanes 1 le 0 1 lc 0 0> 1e 0 0> 1 1 Volumes 144 89 74 4 6 16 5 4 0 36 55 216 Volumes 278 25 11 0 99 65 46 68 0 16 20 214 PHF .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 PHP .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 Grade 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CV's (t) 2 2 2 1 1 1 14 14 14 3 3 3 CV's (t) 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 3 PCE's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1 1 1 PCE's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet BB MB NB SB EB WB NB SB LT Flow Rate 176 5 6 44 LT Flow Rate 415 0 69 24 RT Plow Rate 90 20 0 263 RT Plow Rate 16 97 0 319 Approach Plow Rate 375 32 11 374 Approach Flow Rate 468 245 170 373 Proportion LT 0.47 0.16 0.55 0.12 Proportion LT 0.89 0.00 0.41 0.06 Proportion RT 0.24 0.63 0.00 0.70 Proportion RT 0.03 0.40 0.00 0.86 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 32 375 374 11 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 245 468 373 170 Conflicting Approaches Plow Rate 385 385 407 407 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 543 543 713 713 Proportion, Subject Approach Plow Rate 0.47 0.04 0.01 0.47 Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0.37 0.20 0.14 0.30 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0.04 0.47 0.47 0.01 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0.20 0.37 0.30 0.14 Lanes on Subject Approach 2 2 1 2 Lanes on Subject Approach 2 2 1 2 Lanes on Opposing Approach 2 2 2 1 Lanes on Opposing Approach 2 2 2 1 LT, Opposing Approach 5 176 44 6 LT, Opposing Approach 0 415 24 69 RT, Opposing Approach 20 90 263 0 RT, Opposing Approach 97 16 319 0 LT, Conflicting Approaches 50 50 181 181 LT, Conflicting Approaches 93 93 415 415 RT, Conflicting Approaches 263 263 110 110 RI, Conflicting Approaches 319 319 113 113 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0.16 0.47 0.12 0.55 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0.00 0.89 0.06 0.41 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0.63 0.24 0.70 0.00 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0.40 0.03 0.86 0.00 Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0.13 0.13 0.44 0.44 Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0.17 0.17 0.58 0.58 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0.68 0.68 0.27 0.27 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0.59 0.59 0.16 0.16 Approach Capacity 946 645 397 566 Approach Capacity 913 522 368 443 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary Approach Approach V/C Average Approach Approach V/C Average Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS EB 375 946 0.40 4.5 A EB 468 913 0.51 7.0 B NB 32 645 0.05 1.2 A WB 245 522 0.47 6.0 B NB 11 397 0.03 1.1 A NB 170 368 0.46 5.8 B SB 374 566 0.66 12.3 C SB 373 443 0.84 24.5 D Intersection Delay . 8.02 Intersection Delay . 11.85 Level of Service (Intersection) . B Level of Service (Intersection) • C CAPACITY CALCULATIONS 2001 COMBINED TRAFFIC SCENARIO I ECM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4 06-06-1996 ECM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4 06-06-1996 Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Streets: (E-W) SW HAMPTON STREET (N-S) SW 72ND AVENUE Streets: (E-W) SW HAMPTON STREET (N-S) SW 72ND AVENUE Analyst: BAH File Name: AOICAM.HC9 Analyst: EAH Pile Name: AO1CPM.HC9 Area Type: Other 6-5-96 AM PEAK Area Type: Other 6-5-96 PM PEAK Comment: 2001 COMBINED TRAFFIC COUNTS - AM PEAK Comment: 2001 COMBINED TRAFFIC COUNTS - PM PEAK Eastbound Westbound Northbound 1 Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R I T A L T R I L T R L T R L T R L T R I T R No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 Volumes 190 11 350 4681 41 470 Volumes 451 43 699 233 31 828 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0112.0 12.0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 RTOR Vole 0 01 0 RTOR Vols 0 0 0 Lost Time 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 Lost Time 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Signal Operations Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ES Left NB Left EH Left NB Left Thru Thru • Thru Thru • Right Right Right Right • Peds Peds • Peds Peds • NB Left • SB Left • WB Left • SB Left • Thru Thru • • Thru Thru • • Right • Right Right • Right Peds • Peds Peds • Peds NB Right ES Right NB Right ES Right SB Right WB Right SB Right WB Right Green 22.OA Green 5.0A 61.OA Green 33.OA Green 5.OA 50.OA Yellow/AR 4.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 4.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 4.0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: 61 85 i6 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: 81 85 86 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS WB L 407 1770 0.577 0.230 23.6 C 23.3 C WB L 608 1787 0.834 0.340 26.5 D 25.4 D R 364 1583 0.038 0.230 19.3 C R 544 1599 0.088 0.340 14.5 B NB T 1155 1863 0.374 0.620 6.2 B 7.2 B NB T 959 1881 0.818 0.510 17.3 C 15.3 C R 981 1583 0.589 0.620 8.0 B R 815 1599 0.321 0.510 9.4 B SB L 106 1770 0.480 0.060 32.0 D 6.4 B SB L 108 1805 0.323 0.060 29.7 D 14.0 B T 1323 1863 0.438 0.710 4.1 A T 1140 1900 0.816 0.600 13.4 B Intersection Delay • 9.1 sec/veh Intersection LOS • B Intersection Delay • 17.0 sec/veh Intersection LOS • C Lost Time/Cycle, L • 9.0 sec Critical v/c(x) • 0.579 Lost Time/Cycle, L • 6.0 sec Critical v/c(x) • 0.823 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 Pile Name BOICAMI.HCO File Name BO1CPMI.HCO Streets: (N-S) SW 70TH AVENUE (B-W) SW HAMPTON ST Streets: (N-S) SW 70TH AVENUE (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Major Street Direction.... SW Major Street DirectionEN Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst RAH Analyst RAH Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Other Information BOICAMI - 2001 COMBINED AM PEAK - SCENARIO I Other Information BO1CPMI - 2001 COMBINED PM PEAK - SCENARIO I Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 0 la 0 1 1 0 Oa 0< 0 0 0 0 No. Lanes 0 l< 0 1 1 0 Oa 0< 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Stop/Yield N N Volumes 415 36 4 215 1 1 Volumes 299 9 1 435 7 1 PHF .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 PHF .73 .73 .73 .73 .73 .73 Grade 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's It) 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (9) 0 0 0 0 0 0 CV's (t) 2 2 5 5 0 0 CV's (t) 3 3 2 2 0 0 PCE's 1 1 1 1 1.1 1.1 PCE's 1 1 1 1 1.1 1.1 Adjustment Factors Adjustment Factors a Vehicle Critical Follow-up Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Step 1: AT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 433 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 304 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 835 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 971 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 835 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 971 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major Street WB BB Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 451 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 308 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1045 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1223 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1045 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1223 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 652 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 740 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 444 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 395 Major LT, Minor TH Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 1.00 Impedance Factor: 1.00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1.00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1.00 Capacity Adjustment Factor Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1.00 due to Impeding Movements 1.00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 442 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 395 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App NB L 1 442 a a a NB L 11 395 a a 578 6.3 B 6.3 416 8.9 B 8.9 NB R 1 835 a a a NB R 1 971 a a a WB L 5 1045 3.5 A 0.1 WB L 1 1223 2.9 A 0.0 Intersection Delay - 0.0 Intersection Delay = 0.1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 Pile Name CO1CAM2I.HCO File Name CO1CPM2I.HCO Streets: (N-S) SW 68TH PKWY (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Streets: IN-S) SW 68TH PRKWY (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Analyst RAH Analyst EAH Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Other Information COICAM2I - 2001 COMBINED AM PEAK - SCENARIO I Other Information CO1CPM2I - 2001 COMBINED PM PEAK - SCENARIO I All-way Stop-controlled Intersection All-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R I T R I T R I T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 1c 0 1 1c 0 Oa 1< 0 Oa 1 1 No. Lanes 1 lc 0 1 lc 0 0a le 0 Oa 1 1 Volumes 144 89 94 4 6 16 16 13 1 36 68 216 Volumes 278 25 27 0 99 65 60 80 0 16 36 214 PHF .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 PHP .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 Grade 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC's (4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MC's (4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CV's (4) 2 2 2 0 0 0 14 14 14 3 3 3 CV's (4) 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 3 PCE's 1 1 1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1 1 1 PCE's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet BB WB NB SB EH WB NB SB LT Flow Rate 176 5 20 44 LT Flow Rate 415 0 90 24 RT Plow Rate 115 20 1 263 RT Plow Rate 40 97 0 319 Approach Plow Rate 400 32 37 390 Approach Plow Rate 492 245 209 397 Proportion LT 0.44 0.16 0.54 0.11 Proportion LT 0.84 0.00 0.43 0.06 Proportion RT 0.29 0.63 0.03 0.67 Proportion AT 0.08 0.40 0.00 0.80 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 32 400 390 37 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 245 492 397 209 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 427 427 432 432 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 606 606 737 737 Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0.47 0.04 0.04 0.45 Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0.37 0.18 0.16 0.30 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0.04 0.47 0.45 0.04 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0.18 0.37 0.30 0.16 Lanes on Subject Approach 2 2 1 2 Lanes on Subject Approach 2 2 1 2 Lanes on Opposing Approach 2 2 2 1 Lanes on Opposing Approach 2 2 2 1 LT, Opposing Approach 5 176 44 20 LT, Opposing Approach 0 415 24 90 RT, Opposing Approach 20 115 263 1 RT, Opposing Approach 97 40 319 0 LT, Conflicting Approaches 64 64 181 181 LT, Conflicting Approaches 114 114 415 415 RT, Conflicting Approaches 264 264 135 135 RT, Conflicting Approaches 319 319 137 137 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0.16 0.44 0.11 0.54 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0.00 0.84 0.06 0.43 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0.63 0.29 0.67 0.03 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0.40 0.08 0.80 0.00 Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0.15 0.15 0.42 0.42 Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0.19 0.19 0.56 0.56 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0.62 0.62 0.31 0.31 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0.53 0.53 0.19 0.19 Approach Capacity 910 629 430 595 Approach Capacity 875 504 392 462 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary Approach Approach V/C Average Approach Approach V/C Average Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS Movement Plow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS EH 400 910 0.44 5.3 B EB 492 875 0.56 8.5 B WB 32 629 0.05 1.2 A WB 245 504 0.49 6.4 B NB 37 430 0.09 1.4 A NB 209 392 0.53 7.6 B SB 390 595 0.65 12.0 C SB 397 462 0.86 26.2 D Intersection Delay . 8.05 Intersection Delay . 13.18 Level of Service (Intersection) - B Level of Service (Intersection) . C Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 File Name D01CAMI.HCO Pile Name D01CPMI.HCO Streets: (N-S) SW 68TH PRKWY (S-H) ACCESS Streets: (N-S) SW 68TH PRKWY (E-W) ACCESS Major Street Direction.... NS Major Street DirectionNS Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst RAH Analyst RAH Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Other Information DO1CAMI - 2001 COMBINED AM PEAK-SCENARIO I Other Information DO1CPMI - 2001 COMBINED PM PEAK-SCENARIO I Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0> 1 0 0 1. 0 0> 0< 0 0 0 0 No. Lanes 0> 1 0 0 1. 0 0> O. 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Stop/Yield N N Volumes 0 9 133 33 20 1 Volumes 0 114 31 32 26 0 PHP .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 PHP .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 Grade 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 CV's (t) 14 14 9 9 0 0 CV's (t) 1 1 0 0 0 0 PCB's 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 PCB's 1 1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 Adjustment Factors Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Maneuver Gap (tg) Time Itf) Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB BB Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB ER Conflicting Plows: (vph) 150 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 47 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1162 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1311 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1162 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1311 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major Street SB NB Step 2: LT from Major Street SB NB Conflicting Plows: (vph) 166 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 63 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1429 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1600 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1429 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1600 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 TN Saturation Plow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 PT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 of Queue-free State: 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor Street WB ER Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 158 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 161 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 858 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 854 Major LT, Minor TH Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 1.00 Impedance Factor: 1.00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1.00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1.00 Capacity Adjustment Factor Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1.00 due to Impeding Movements 1.00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 858 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 854 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary F1owRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay P1owRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App EB L 26 858 > > > EB L 43 854 > 854 > 4.4 > A 866 4.3 A 4.3 EB R 1 1162 > > > Intersection Delay = 0.6 Intersection Delay . 0.5 CAPACITY CALCULATIONS 2001 COMBINED TRAFFIC SCENARIO II ECM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4 06-06-1996 HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Version 2.4 06-06-1996 Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated Streets: (E-W) SW HAMPTON STREET (N-S) SW 72ND AVENUE Streets: (E-W) SW HAMPTON STREET (N-S) SW 72ND AVENUE Analyst: BAH Pile Name: AOICAM.HC9 Analyst: BAH File Name: A01CPM.HC9 Area Type: Other 6-5-96 AM PEAK Area Type: Other 6-5-96 PM PEAK Comment: 2001 COMBINED TRAFFIC COUNTS - AM PEAK Comment: 2001 COMBINED TRAFFIC COUNTS - PM PEAK Eastbound Westbound Northbound 1 Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound 1 Southbound L T R L T R L T R I L T R L T R L T R L T R 1 L T R No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 No. Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Volumes 190 11 350 4681 41 470 Volumes 451 43 699 2331 31 828 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0112.0 12.0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0112.0 12.0 RTOR Vole 0 01 0 RTOR Vole 0 01 0 Lost Time 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 Lost Time 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.0013.00 3.00 Signal Operations Signal Operations Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 BB Left NB Left EH Left NB Left Thru Thru • Thru Thru Right Right • Right Right • Peds Peds • Peds Peds • WE Left • SB Left • WE Left • SB Left • Thou Thru • • Thru Thru • • Right • Right Right • Right Peds • Peds Peds • Peds NB Right EB Right NB Right EH Right SB Right WE Right SB Right WE Right Green 22.OA Green 5.OA 61.OA Green 33.OA Green 5.OA 50.OA Yellow/AR 4.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 4.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 Yellow/AR 4.0 4.0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: R1 85 86 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: 81 R5 K6 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/C Approach: Mvmts Cap Plow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS NB L 407 1770 0.577 0.230 23.6 C 23.3 C WE L 608 1787 0.834 0.340 26.5 D 25.4 0 R 364 1583 0.038 0.230 19.3 C R 544 1599 0.088 0.340 14.5 B NB T 1155 1863 0.374 0.620 6.2 B 7.2 B NB T 959 1881 0.818 0.510 17.3 C 15.3 C R 981 1583 0.589 0.620 8.0 B R 815 1599 0.321 0.510 9.4 B SB L 106 1770 0.480 0.060 32.0 D 6.4 B SB L 108 1805 0.323 0.060 29.7 D 14.0 B T 1323 1863 0.438 0.710 4.1 A T 1140 1900 0.816 0.600 13.4 B Intersection Delay - 9.1 sec/veh Intersection LOS - B Intersection Delay - 17.0 sec/veh Intersection LOS • C Lost Time/Cycle, L • 9.0 sec Critical v/c(x) • 0.579 Lost Time/Cycle, L • 6.0 sec Critical v/c(x) - 0.823 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 File Name BO1CAM.HCO File Name BOICPM.HCO Streets: (N-S) SW 70TH AVENUE (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Streets: (N-S) SW 70TH AVENUE (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Major Street Direction.... EW Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst RAH Analyst RAH Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Other Information BO1CAM - 2001 COMBINED AM PEAK-SCENARIO II Other Information BO1CPM - 2001 COMBINED PM PEAK-SCENARIO II Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1< 0 1 1 0 0> Oc 0 0 0 0 No. Lanes 0 lc 0 1 1 0 Os oc 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Stop/Yield N N Volumes 405 46 7 210 6 3 Volumes 289 19 3 421 15 4 PHF .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 PHF .73 .73 .73 .73 .73 .73 Grade 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 CV's (%) 2 2 5 5 0 0 CV's (%) 3 3 2 2 0 • 0 PCB's 1 1 1 1 1.1 1.1 PCE's 1 1 1 1 1.1 1.1 Adjustment Factors Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 428 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 298 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 840 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 978 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 840 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 978 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Prob. of Queue-free State: 0.99 Step 2: LT from Major Street WB BB Step 2: LT from Major Street WB ES Conflicting Flows: (vph) 451 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 308 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1045 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1223 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1045 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1223 Prob. of Queue-free State: 0.99 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 645 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 722 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 448 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 404 Major LT, Minor TH Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.99 Impedance Factor: 1.00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.99 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1.00 Capacity Adjustment Factor Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.99 due to Impeding Movements 1.00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 444 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 403 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App NB L 8 444 > > > NB L 23 403 > > 527 7.0 B 7.0 459 8.4 > B 8.4 NB R 4 840 > > > NB R 6 978 > > > WB L 9 1045 3.5 A 0.1 WB L 4 1223 3.0 A 0.0 Intersection Delay - 0.1 Intersection Delay - 0.2 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 File Name COICAM2.HCO File Name COICPM2.HC0 Streets: (N-S) SW 68TH PKWY (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Streets: (N-S) SW 68TH PRKWY (E-W) SW HAMPTON ST Analyst SAN Analyst EAH Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Other Information CO1CAM2 - 2001 COMBINED AM PEAK - SCENARIO II Other Information CO1CPM2 - 2001 COMBINED PM PEAK - SCENARIO II All-way Stop-controlled Intersection All-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 1 1. 0 1 lc 0 0> lc 0 0> 1 1 No. Lanes 1 lc 0 1 1c 0 0, lc 0 0, 1 1 Volumes 147 89 84 4 6 16 11 10 0 36 65 219 Volumes 282 25 17 0 99 65 57 76 0 16 33 217 PHF .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 PHF .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 Grade 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MC's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (t) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (i) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CV's (t) 2 2 2 0 0 0 14 14 14 3 3 3 CV's (%) 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 3 PCE's 1 1 1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1 1 1 PCE's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis Worksheet EB WS NB SB EB WE NB SB LT Flow Rate 179 5 13 44 LT Plow Rate 421 0 85 24 AT Flow Rate 102 20 0 267 RT Flow Rate 25 97 0 324 Approach Flow Rate 390 32 25 390 ,Approach Flow Rate 483 245 198 397 Proportion LT 0.46 0.16 0.52 0.11 Proportion LT 0.87 0.00 0.43 0.06 Proportion RT 0.26 0.63 0.00 0.68 Proportion AT 0.05 0.40 0.00 0.82 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 32 390 390 25 Opposing Approach Plow Rate 245 483 397 198 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 415 415 422 422 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 595 595 728 728 Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0.47 0.04 0.03 0.47 Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0.37 0.19 0.15 0.30 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0.04 0.47 0.47 0.03 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0.19 0.37 0.30 0.15 Lanes on Subject Approach 2 2 1 2 Lanes on Subject Approach 2 2 1 2 Lanes on Opposing Approach 2 2 2 1 Lanes on Opposing Approach 2 2 2 1 LT, Opposing Approach 5 179 44 13 LT, Opposing Approach 0 421 24 85 RT, Opposing Approach 20 102 267 0 AT, Opposing Approach 97 25 324 0 LT, Conflicting Approaches 57 57 184 184 LT, Conflicting Approaches 109 109 421 421 RT, Conflicting Approaches 267 267 122 122 RT, Conflicting Approaches 324 324 122 122 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0.16 0.46 0.11 0.52 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0.00 0.87 0.06 0.43 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0.63 0.26 0.68 0.00 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0.40 0.05 0.82 0.00 Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0.14 0.14 0.44 0.44 Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0.18 0.18 0.58 0.58 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0.64 0.64 0.29 0.29 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0.54 0.54 0.17 0.17 Approach Capacity 923 631 415 587 Approach Capacity 882 498 382 453 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary Approach Approach V/C Average Approach Approach V/C Average Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS Movement Plow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS BB 390 923 0.42 5.0 A 813 483 882 0.55 8.0 B NB 32 631 0.05 1.2 A WB 245 498 0.49 6.5 B NB 25 415 0.06 1.3 A NB 198 382 0.52 7.2 B SB 390 587 0.66 12.5 C SB 397 453 0.88 28.0 D Intersection Delay . 8.23 Intersection Delay - 13.59 Level of Service (Intersection) . B Level of Service (Intersection) . C Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 File Name DOICAM.HCO File Name DO1CPM.HCO Streets: (N-S) SW 68TH PRKWY (E-W) ACCESS Streets: (N-S) SW 68TH PRKWY (E-W) ACCESS Major Street Direction.... NS Major Street DirectionNS Length of Time Analyzed... 60 (min) Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst RAH Analyst EAR Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Date of Analysis 6/4/96 Other Information DO1CAM - 2001 COMBINED COUNTS AM PEAK - Other Information DO1CPM - 2001 COMBINED PM PEAK-SCENARIO II SCENARIO II Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R L T R ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ No. Lanes Oa 1 0 0 1< 0 Oa 0< 0 0 0 0 No. Lanes 0a 1 0 0 1< 0 Oa 0< 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Stop/Yield N N Volumes 0 9 133 20 12 0 Volumes 1 114 31 19 16 0 PHF .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 .82 PHF .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 .67 Grade 0 0 0 0 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC's (4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 MC's (5) 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (5) 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV's (5) 0 0 0 0 0 0 CV's (5) 14 14 9 9 0 0 CV's (5) 1 1 0 0 0 0 PCB's 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 PCH's 1 1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 Adjustment Factors Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Left Turn Major Road 5.00 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 Left Turn Minor Road 6.50 3.40 WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB BB Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EH Conflicting Flows: (vph) 143 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 40 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1172 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1321 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1172 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1321 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major Street SB NB Step 2: LT from Major Street SB NB Conflicting Plows: (vph) 153 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 50 Potential Capacity: (peph) 1449 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1623 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1449 Movement Capacity: (peph) 1623 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-free State: 1.00 of Queue-free State: 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor Street WB BB Step 4: LT from Minor Street WB HB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 152 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 156 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 865 Potential Capacity: )pcph) 860 Major LT, Minor TH Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 1.00 Impedance Factor: 1.00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1.00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1.00 Capacity Adjustment Factor Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1.00 due to Impeding Movements 1.00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 865 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 859 Intersection Performance Summary Intersection Performance Summary FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay F1owRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App BB L 26 859 a 859 a 4.3 a A EB L 17 865 a 865 a 4.2 a A NB L 1 1623 2.2 A 0.0 Intersection Delay . 0.3 Intersection Delay . 0.4 QUEUING CALCULATIONS EXIST irJ6 48 LT Art : 1144 ,— 2.2 ) A I sur2j •�5 ' = 11 - 1 (3140/ 00) ( loo JJ PVt : 35- 1 ( 1— �H x 1•5- rZsl = 2 ( / � au BA-5E WB LT Ark: ?o' x 1•Sx2S ' 3 114el 3(0 Pr►t : 439 � i — Y 1. sxzs' = 30(01 ,3(, too CQmB1NED - ScENk ioI A10 n WB LT AIX : 190 (I _ 22 ) ) 1.5-X25 _ iS1 3 la /do/ arn: _ysi - ) X i sn2s = 315 /0 QUEL 11' CKLcJL Troy fS — WB LE-Fr fv4 BY EA+I 'I Ski 1+11-6P-Pr� ST iStA1 �2�� A-/E DATE 10`Lii'V 1- MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED JOB NO. qt,Z?�1 CIVIL • STRUCTURAL • TRANSPORTATION SHT. OF 0690 S.W.BANCROFT STREET • P.O.BOX 69039 PORTLAND,OREGON 97201-0039 • (503)224-9560 • FAX(503)228-1285 1995 ALL MACKENZIE GH SI RESERVED INCORPORATED Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Proposed Development Site next to the Farmers Insurance Group Campus in Washington County, Oregon Prepared for Mark Edlen Gerding/Edlen Development Company 2525 S.W. 1st Avenue, Suite 201 Portland, Oregon 97201 Prepared by Dan Cary Fred Small SRI/SHAPIRO, Inc. 1650 N.W. Front Avenue, Suite 302 Portland, Oregon 97209 SRI/SHAPIRO Project #7965016 May 28, 1996 1.0 INTRODUCTION SRI/SHAPIRO, Inc, entered into a contract with Gerding/Edlen Development Company to confirm and redelineate the wetland boundary of Site 6 (Farmers Insurance Group) previously delineated by Scientific Resources, Inc. (SRI) in 1992 for the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). The SRI wetland delineation was not submitted to the appropriate agencies; therefore, the boundaries were not reviewed for concurrence. The 1992 study included eight sites along several miles of freeway near the intersection of Interstate 5 (I-5) and Highway 217. Site 6 is located northwest of the intersection of I-5 and Highway 217, and southwest of S.W. 68th Place, in Washington County, Oregon(Township 2S, Range 1W, Section 1; Figure 1). The site contains an office building, several parking lots, and a forested ravine that bisects the site. 2.0 METHODOLOGY AND SOURCE MATERIALS 2.1 The Federal Manual The primary source document used in SRI/SHAPIRO's investigation was the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1 (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). This manual is currently recognized by both the Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) for delineation of wetlands within Oregon. The 1987 manual provides technical criteria, field indicators, and recommended procedures to be used in determining whether an area is a jurisdictional wetland. The manual requires three technical criteria in undisturbed situations before areas can be considered wetland under federal or state jurisdiction. These criteria are hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and wetland hydrology. Hydric soils are those that have formed exclusively under wet conditions (soils that characteristically have high water tables, are ponded or frequently flooded, or are otherwise saturated for extended periods during the growing season). Hydrophytic vegetation consists of those plant species that have adapted to growing in substrates that are periodically deficient of oxygen due to saturated soil conditions. Five basic groups of vegetation are recognized based on their frequency of occurrence in wetlands. These categories, referred to as the "wetland indicator status," are as follows: obligate wetland plants (OBL) are estimated to occur almost exclusively in wetlands (>99%); facultative wetland (FACW) plants are estimated to occur 67-99% of the time in wetlands; facultative (FAC) plants occur equally in wetlands and non- wetlands (34-66%); and facultative upland (FACU) plants usually occur in non- wetlands (67-99%). If a species is not assigned to one of the four groups described above it is assumed to be an obligate upland (UPL) plant, which is estimated to occur almost exclusively in non-wetlands (>99%). In addition, plants designated "NI" have Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Proposed Development Site next to the Farmer.. Insurance Group Campus in Washington County, Oregon Page 1 1 rth4jj4!![� all r �'� /fibrte—�' 709,1-1 'sts' . sg.--ikr.,7-1110 001081 mogul im-yrei Et 1 if i,„,g,r_i____,._--:500,,,J.6-- rtif_at-An—k.:,,-,‹ ,(10,40L.,„,,E maim ki. MII/116 -1 lalf■I ijo, r•nnirse-,,--00.,..„-----„,-),---#00,426--,,--- -------- ' --- zerj-ery ‘,1! \ , ._ '_Ada___Ar A..e.-/. . - -- I'ArnEfittits4TilatiL. iri'_.10prfi"- i"--"'-' 'mferm /Il -x.650'• .•rerltsraiwp7 Xr �� i ) i " r-I try-a�--- � l �.ouj aisigt l:h 1 tr1 > fir• / i / �1,• : .Mg.4e--W- ,•:- 4,,r.— ,-- ,„,..--• 1.—,.-7,-;-7 . 4,D' ; v --,,,'. ;'• f ( -C. - \\ 0 6'4', ' _ON),,a" . angl :lk l ' p° da -1(. . ., �' 211*\‘‘0011k -404_,,t0e -1EMAkk-IIMEN 1: 1 1 ( ss�� / � y � 4c4i1a i . A 411.,..41--c. . , , _Li-•.,), 1- - ,,,, 1 1 1 1 :. ...o*.;i3,4.-...-„,----, 1 'i - -t. .,..., > \• ,-1,1m, gim wv, / \OR:OVA/6k h\-.'-.k I ,i,/ ,•,„ ., I N'•- '511‘i's• . ) IV .1D\A\14( ,\'414177. ,.:...,,,,1 )(I -,-------•-t-___4- 101 t, ili,__1 ';C..■:•°,.(;t N( r''''' '‘ i fri N'- ••• : 1 1 It L-116 I I. . 1 ' I\'\ ka:%.,_ /.7-." ..�� S C _ t.��iI.l k��\ 1 ,.. 1 AM •T FARM I IE,... 3,9,, ,�O �...I O ��` $ . • � �y`y.�� Hwy 217/1-5_�i RPO N6 11,2_• •.. \i,.I• i lt• s•V -■••:--) • --- %I/„V-9.411) ( Project Site -,4"-K -N \I.,,,'"•_:..•A ---—_ .J ,. )2.. ....0 Q.... .._....‘---:71". •,• I ___■:#. •Lvytif 1 ■....,....-- \ N... ------) I , .;� 4. 6 .1 /.or -��1 — � I - / 1 !.,: - -- _ •:Boni jl[r 1— . t .: / 1- . , -. ,_,_•• '' . ••• it Autp- ire.- ° 0, r„____. / .••r.2"."4.411 t _ �(.MpI, + �i I'. : 8148 1'r, ' • 8• iz" Iz \ (iil :aiI-, 1.., •A ._ n�Lr%�j= ,�Jt o .. ` ."�.._.. � 1�r�ipA��RK 1_ TT £b: • 1 IN'' o.• w /IL /...1 I to N��_. :';vk. •• ' I (( fir' ailP �� r, 4 `F/RWOOU 1' :r____,........_4°°_. yN '�I 1 ' I \ rill' i (��- I moo. -, 4. ...�•w igh Sc ! II . ♦ . •o� I.1d,e, � \ ( ' y i4'---' I'', •••• • . ) -__A '----_,,,,ylk''' ici:s"'I., ': '84 4. 1 *■%, __.. .___"- - j _.400. --r..c.tq �' ) i1 IC . • o. ' e________-r/-x •i �/ '4.y l 2.. i� Y',--_ - e� •' :. . •. 1iF n , i -[- -Ir. .1.r. .fi@'p t� .aam.., �l �'�■ 9e. .1 : .:::::::1 ii'"!-OF. 7965016 5/28/96 Location and general topography of the Highway 217/I-5 project in FIGURE Tigard, Oregon (U.S.G.S. Beaverton and Lake Oswego, Oregon, 7.5- minute quadrangles, 1:24000, 1961, photorevised 1984). .SRI/SHAPI RO I N C O R P O R A T E D not yet received a wetland indicator status, but are probably not obligate upland. An asterisk (*) preceding a regional indicator from the 1993 Supplement to National List of Plant Species that Occur In Wetlands:Northwest (Region 9) identifies a tentative assignment based on either limited information or conflicting reviews. The asterisk is intended to encourage submission of additional field review information. The 1987 manual defines wetland hydrology as saturation within a major portion of the root zone (usually above 12 inches), typically for at least 12.5% of the growing season. The wetland hydrology criterion can be met, however, if saturation within the major portion of the root zone is present for only 5% of the growing season, depending on the wetland status of the plant community. The growing season for any given site or location is determined from U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) data and information. 2.2 Field Methodology Prior to beginning field work, available information and data were compiled and reviewed. This included a review of soil series boundaries, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic quadrangle, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) map. These efforts were made to • develop a preliminary indication of where potential wetland may exist and to facilitate on-site gathering of data. Observations of soils, vegetation, and hydrology were made using the "Routine Onsite" method of the delineation manual. One-foot-diameter soil pits were excavated to a depth of 18 inches in selected locations. The soil profiles were examined for hydric soils and wetland hydrology field indicators. In addition, a visual percent-cover estimate of the dominant species of the plant community for a 30-foot-radius area was performed using soil pit locations as a center of reference. Data were recorded in the field and subsequently transferred to standard wetland delineation data sheets (included in the appendix of this report). Data were collected for representative sampling locations; however, numerous soil pits were excavated between these data points to verify changes in the three parameters. 3.0 PRESENT SITE CHARACTERISTICS 3.1 Topography The ravine has moderate to steep side slopes with a few small intermittent side channels feeding into it. Side slopes are irregular, following gentle meanders in the stream course. At one location, an old road bed leads into and across the ravine, creating a low berm perpendicular to the channel. Elevations range from approximately 194 feet NGVD in the bottom of the ravine to 230 feet NGVD at the adjacent parking area. Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Proposed Development Site next to the Farmers. Insurance Group Campus in Washington County, Oregon Page 2 3.2 Hydrology The hydrology is dominated by the stream channel, which appears to have intermittent flow, depending on rainfall conditions. In late summer, saturated soils were present in the bottom of the ravine according to the 1992 study, indicating that inundation is likely during periods of significant stormwater runoff. At the time of the site visit in May 1996, the stream channel was inundated by 6 to 8 inches of water. Heavy rainfall had occurred over the previous 24 hours. Oxidized rhizospheres and saturated soils also were present on several low terraces next to the channel. 3.3 Soils Three soil types (mapped as two soil units) are mapped by the SCS for the site (SCS, 1982; Figure 2). These include Aloha silt loam (mapping unit 1) and Cornelius and Kinton silt loams, 2-7 percent slopes (mapping unit 11B). Aloha silt loam is mapped in the northern portion of the site, and Cornelius and Kinton silt loams, 2-7 percent slopes, are mapped in the southern portion of the site. The Cornelius and Kinton silt loams are mapped as an undifferentiated group consisting of about 50 to 65 percent Cornelius soils and 25 to 35 percent Kinton soils. None of the soils mapped on the site are listed as hydric by the SCS (1989). Aloha is a somewhat poorly-drained, fine-silty, mixed, mesic Aquic Xerochrept soil that formed in alluvium or lacustrine silt on broad valley terraces. In a representative profile, it is dark brown (10YR 3/3) silt loam from 0 to 8 inches; dark brown (10YR 4/3) silt loam, with common, medium, faint, dark grayish brown and dark brown (10YR 4/2, 5/3 and 7.5YR 3/2) mottles from 8 to 15 inches; and dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4 silt loam), with common, fine, faint dark grayish brown, brown, and dark brown (10YR 4/2, 5/3 and 7.5YR 3/2) mottles from 15 to 22 inches. Permeability is moderately slow, runoff is slow, and erosion hazard is slight. Cornelius is a deep, moderately well drained, fine-silty, mixed, mesic Aquic Haploxeralf soil on rolling uplands that formed in silty materials. In a representative profile, the surface layer is very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) silt loam from 0 to 4 inches; dark brown (10YR 3/3) silt loam from 4 to 9 inches; brown (10YR 4/3) silt loam from 9 to. 16 inches; and dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) silty clay loam from 16 to 34 inches. Permeability is moderate. Runoff is slow to moderate, and erosion hazard is slight to moderate. Kinton is a moderately well drained, fine-silty, mixed, mesic Typic Fragiaquept soil that formed in silty material over fine-silty, old alluvium of mixed origin on uplands. In a representative profile, it is very dark brown (10YR 2/2) silt loam from 0 to 3 inches; dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/4) silt loam from 3 to 10 inches; and brown (10YR 4/3) silt loam from 10 to 21 inches. Permeability is slow. Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Proposed Development Site next to the Farmers Insurance Group Campus in Washington County, Oregon Page 3 ••- - '• '-'. 2-t. ,-, ;li:' mr.z,"----- - - - 1.• '' 1 IS .,'`. •,'Wilr.4..::.'..;,t el-rf-';';''.":":''''''..- •), ,;..':,•'''1 E -ts, ,-V.'"kt•- .-.,..', ,71, f:ri:. w,-----' -.. ;...yr. a",.- --.. i-e/ 4.1:11,•••4.‘-;;;410./0.", ..:Z.r.,0s,,t,--;:i.i.:-,,,-; ,. ,,. ,,,,,,'„zip.'',.•#N4 ;;..."21r....".,."-'. ".'. t••4•7 "iir - (.V -.... . ' i - 1'.1p,1'," ::'.1, ''''".--...'...1.1 . V.4-'. . : It: )••••- •- .%. 1".ier.,..:.••;''"ei# - ,.‘n' r.tf, '..Ast ,i, - 2 '. .,. ., 4, 'ft• jo.,4 p ;:.1tv,i,/ I ikEIV4 '-f ‘.; :. ler2/..,;.:: ; .01% : 2.;'•4:,...!,"1.,q1,,,...; --... '..., 2:e'4. -• ,,ii ,- . i.. .I .4"...e.: a•e:2 / ,;„..: .',N -,'I ' Cr-'..... ..r4'..1.....)*" . . - . i : 1 Nr4 ;.i - , f- , it. re,'.11', .:::-t:t.; .'..,..Aave, . .: -„as- .. .-- ,"` . " Eit. i a 1 ..1 i4.,,e.v. i 54 ' s11•+4"-•;4.::i.A;be• .?:ill /1.44.V.... , ,4*: z-o, -c-•. ..!....".■.--,t, ,N,-,v•t.-.4.--.C4:4-,*.:. efe k.f. 1,.,. -..-airvt._- ,4J . ,' . r A•.•• -1',0e1.1,.......i •••I A.' '.. ' . .g •'04' . _Ad..4':-.C.• ' ..... , • • ,.... .. s: 1. , ..7.,_ , •rig te.I,: •itpl•- •.. k 3..4-.•'si • :N. ;; ••■.-trow.l'.tr 0.t"..•s,,..o'„,,:',„,•„•ty -,. • "•,* 4.,...,...-. ._I .. .,_., .......v. ,k .,.....:a.•1■'`., '• ' ..•-rfe :. --' '...,,0„..i10-1"11ba., int,* .- , l'!:: r....• ..-4. 4 c.. • ..**tk:, , '.. -tp-tt., e,...g , - ..„... --: "..- ligo.itt21.,..,r ow ..t.. t •,:olo.-.0. g „. ... . , . , • , , ,.. if•- , .. . . ..,... 440000. :.-it--„,. , 3- - -.... , ,..1.,. .. ..,, .c,• 4..., :.:' •I•,:,, ditaliglii.v r . .os..,"<yz,l, . •_•,'''' -. I. .,-: ;,2P. ' 4...,•%•-_, ,--).,z: •'. , .-tt. ,,2"-'1;, '. ........7' ...,:ri. -,■,' • fsi• r,'417'. # ' SIP&- - ii'S e1 Z l'''•1.:'.',..4." -• #.'.' ...---. P - .', -,:•:' , :•,t,',' -•:.— 41-','-';,.4.- - , "*- N11 *' ' v.. .4. , , ,, .::-.„,,..,-.,. . , ,,.... .,..,,,-,•_. „tik.t.-4-;;,421,', ; ; - -i '..;'•::'..,-;-,;-' #0000070 '",,,,N, •.• ,s. of.,.,,Lw • ,,...11,..,1,1-,,,;,..i.;tr,,t,,,..--,:-)It,',?-4,77-`4‘,1;‘,76L: .7,-i*.:^..r.li °-$6,,i,peir. ..-ro, ik;•:2:1'1i-a '4,;," $ i `,: .6. ... ..--4-•,.. • AWN. ,t.. .. viliANN. 0_•,...-....•;.•;.,;,0.1"....1•;-Ift,-,‘-1x,Ar...4.541' rib,,,,:tk.,' :•■-,4; I ir,IT.5 ! ,.. .'ti'. .....,.. • .....1.x.„.' " 111.Y....A:- `‘.4 -... ' - An% ".. .,. .,1,0".,,i,...,..g-A,.. • . ;..1-r..-4-.=.1,......,-. -- . v wilt 7 . .• * ... ..,:t4, ettip.137._C, __-1, 1 *4 •1:•T 1.. ttell• ...1,, ,:v: ., 1, , . '1E. .-:.,-,......,,2 „...-1-f * ,-.,.> - „it;-:-.., vm-:r.t..,t,:/:;f.,A.: ,... . 1...zkiiiii,- ,., og- 4.'.1%.,X•Vg36h .7:1'-.".-4-"-- •,.•..cHt- •il•/ .. 1441**--' 1/411/4 4*... .i,%••4.4111.k...fi-,11.1r4-4, ;.-•-•-, '4-I''d • AI .WT.''.■: - '• f., '• ' kirlre'j•••irt,,;eg-r*S1/ '';VP-F r. a '''.I • 'Si N.....lreV. . W NA"t:*40.. 4-?.--74111"''r.'...J ••:,..1 1 1:".1,:r.k.`X. ,,, : ;k,'- ‘...44.4,r4,. -/v7:: ,,,,,r,,, l'',...-.-.41.4, ,.i '.1 ,t--45A-. 1:.1-',N- 1?-'4':- •.i',2 •Z'-!.•;.,;',...;,'S - l':.;`. - i.-4'" •. - ;,,,p:'.,.L1-,-,,.>" =, -7 - °zt•Sar.:e.- .. A1/.4irk-i; ••• ' F •r:', '")1k.',..qi- ti.atrowill.1.1.:4 44,4.t 1.'. . .' "•!-.... -.,'.??, ...i ".}-' 1.-1-.1 , •'..r- P.- IV.1:1. -.4'7,-4vt.. 44. '9- ,: '..P4 ;la,NV, 4.--‘ ' r'•:101. fel I '' - ' .2 kt rl',: .- 'It;;;.?4; .1,,.-.' ' ,- '*:',..,■!$-_:.;:'.1,,..:...," -.N.ki. 4 re k,:,-,,,,,- r 1', 1'.-' 't-ri eh.•-‘ ', .1-' A-::ie .1 "0.•.- /. 'rfiT,..V4;,,, ?OA,' -7- " 1744;.-.':7' I")-,„:: '--‘W=k.:' $ :,,,.. • •'‘.• VII.- .. 4,11:11.7..V.4t--• i. ,T.3..4.-.:'• .". :it, .1.; " . ' ' 4-A::,.,.,...A.,4,4A-..1,,,,, ,....1-e.,7.1.'_(•- -... ,• il.,,F. .e., - • . - , -fi..., .,,,, N1/4‘.„:,.....46., •_..2.,1;-. . .,..? 4 . '.,;1.<1(.1%;...t*Wt:?arli ..,....,037,,:-.1:::%;c:fp,:%64: ....,.1.,.,-;.1".*:i:::•. :''' 4.4 tic. ,11, ,,eixo• ...!::t,:txc.r,,-r-..,gr1.- -----.-i::',4.1--.4, .c, 3, . ., .„. " .--4641 ..:. --. ....,:-. .. 1 t -. ,.s. . ,- ;47.11`.` . •;',..),p6'" .■,..- lit\IN"- . 1.1:6!*. `;- ti -:--"'"*;,,y2-11:,- -'2,A,./ b•,„,y-Arat....k. -w„,0_111+4, , •._,* ; CIV% . / , :''.;;'r --'7 '''' - 11; '''..; -:lire" l',?..:Is Ilthq- 7,1•Xj;'"4`.-:•--S:Z:P.i .," ' -''''01`...r..'''' V-• A ../. . . itA,VIVACJ:- ' '.•',,ct45.. .44 ..64 '.:f. .4...t. :'4. I AX. 1 atW4:r44.fttraP:Ar:' • g';‘,..!--;.,-.:.).>•;-:-.T.-..ez".•,1=i .;,•-•t-,,,Y,-(4,P -k L.la'. i 5 144:Zv'- - iciii;,t,:-:':',W4,4f4e. .''it; '4:•::tv IA I',Ir. :lb* 0—, , ..:.4--:,,v," .1/4/3-.11e.c.i ..v. :-i..--..--11..... ', r,i-, ..,,, V. 2 ttl-.4'.;-.":---1-.7.:::%0`..'vs/'1%f;* . .•.-- ,....,,,,4,,J, Ir. ,,,, . .. „t-k..,..-0-,- - - , ....,„.,,,,,. ...... ..,....,, ,;., ,, ,..4,-,.::F.,:„. .._,...,, -,411, r , v- -04 'f":4' ..wkil:fe7la's'' Hwy 217/1-5 •= -...-- --'-'',.. -_•• I'..1 l'rst,..-i il,* n;-:<••:.:,.:,-..14,..,3- ,.., ., :?, ..:it.. $40,-„ir-4 1 Jo . - s dv, .4_:-ti :ri,-.„-,,:-- ...11:-:- - .4'1' N- --'4''''',.1.--4:---- - ••''''-' -'4 =7" • 'f4aid,iii"7,';•',":::-. -#4-17...-V.-:::..f,'",,' Project Site ,-.:;;,,..-4.,--....,--.•:„; si, , 4 T31.0414F . , ,- 0-r ..;.#.t' ., ...--.W' \ 4t- ,, ,..,‘ si..., • ,,,,_... ,, , . .,N\f&N . .. it.,-, -s.".,4:.;‹,;.-',„;.t.:.:,:zle".;:x..P.: ".'-; , v■;4'. ' ...,.4.,t,.t"'", \ . "t,•i,. t. . "-. S\--JI "t“t% 'V 4- -4r. . -... e i •••••,,.., ...., ....E.,. 4,..,,,,,, ....,...,,, .,:. .„.... • .,t .0,...,:- * 0,01,',. . 4.--A-'.i.-‘1,c„,e-, -, •.-,•-.. --.---.,...,,,-.,,. 1!,.`- • ,,i,.;•=.,,,,•,.-..,, r.03..4-4, .'.-,L-0'-.1143.-'' - : ' '.4rj '+;-`''-7':.:•X‘s,NWS44.....‘N" -1"-'in 'll?..r-4-..:-Irii, ' 11: 1.!..2:•441 /,.4,i9,1‘1 714., Et! ---s‘-:.'-_:-„I-'...-, ■ XV,I,?,,T,tifo- ''. x: „, ',-.:1, 11 i'f:; ..106,410.P1-%.T.''...-,1W.-..---rt-.".r-It• \ ..tk...*•••• 7 ::t.:-...c. ily 1...1*- - ---;:4( - It...,..*, ,1,1311:14:4:-Ti:.,:t.:".,4 _za..,,...jor, j.i4.:... li i : .--'.. v .. ---e[4.>3:I.j.2.:;--:.:1.,4_1„ ."'",r—:: .1.41,- .--:•6r ,t--"s" • ,..z„.,... ..,,,.,... .,,/14,... . ,,,1 ,--141,,,%.,-.4 '''. . drco., -i'<•,--. -i. k....Y.:.‹.:,*),;1-1",x-v-:‘--..,.: -. 1104p. .-•-c-..., NO yr ott AVV.t..Sko. . I., , #I, ",,.....4grcrif 1 rm„,L.p.....b....;... . ,,&..,...;-4i...„..;...„..e„.!r•.);S„•.• , nr*, - - 441 ci'i..1 lit',0:44A-4 . 7'41 )... • ,-..-4.c-11 I.t.te. 'rt.,714:grivrows --'...,..,%. ,.4=;,--4.7.7..%--::-,---T,-k. .,11:r.. . 04 0 ,,,.,_1 4,,,i-i‘:,-.._ ,, ....-- k, -,-1/4,, , _ivfv.-Iiv., „.0.10_,Iii;ii,-,905,•=.x-7i.-7.75g.t.tu..:-:-.0---,:ri--Ift, 7', •I'• .,5‹,114, -A,!.14;•. -.41"/::-•, .$:-i-P-;Ii''''''''‘Vtelt? ,,t \KO)Zi.,.:-#41e ----1' ' 41.:Y 441Z""t. .Z,S3'1411.la:111;14:tv 7tan't-ON,,,V,V,It. ill „, .. ...4. a......;.six1.9 .12./1C . .0..42;kr 101■/:,4'-$1. 17 .•...lier.,.. .-e'r.:-"C- 1,- .• , ...,.„. • ,,--„„"„,,k., *i.2. ,,...- ,:it.„, :gt.t•;:s_,-,11.i4,41,,. .. ...-...,tio- ,o,..--4 t,.-----..,,,..- ,,,.-...:,,_-:,...,. ,..-..-:,..454.-11,;..4,--,.,,-4, , zrrAit. r-r-• --': i 7-7:000iliiit• ;1*-114:i.,,..;44.t.:L.:;4, i .f-t-Af .: :7._---.T.,..'1,--;."-,.. -7 - c.7-5i,:,..: .t,...,5„,..xie, .... .11?i• • ,,,t::. i#:,.1,e4th ct4 \0#‘1!%,*”-At, t,,,_..... .,41`....R.a ,.-i ifi•;,.,'V!')kits',,c:--1.1:1,1 .2.1,-.41,--7;;21....'-tri..„....,...72 .........:1141:..V I.' t.. ' .. V. --; - .7.r.m.ifri,,. 7, ' -,',--"- • 14 = -^--x-- ..,v-',...r.,.--6'er1/4,-.,:nt-'47.;•;-‘43,-A--,::',M.1:-___%:71.;.-,r,44‘.....,. , -.:-.2 t. . .t..i.(...,•,,Pni,, • ..4 „....,..4 ....-,ti,x,„-,;,....,-....._-.41.,itt.e, ..,polivrosx..40,evz:•-:,..k...i • ‘,..i.,tcji-40,-. 44,itas,-,4•11-:'4,•-;,--' ! t›, ) -' i'd "I, ." :_:;..1,11V IA Us 1.,.% Vrtliefatitt I., 1.14•.***'..2;-•"} :44,'"•A.0): i': -- ;.•e•:.1.0ti 1 ri„ . -- . . t. ,..,.,• ...i.,.., ._s ,..,<:11 TztiMy4,•W• •411".'1 -'W XV-..;,•2,-"7",iNit V■7..e. 4.'-'!"?-74-.k• k.' 4;. ' - , 41 -•,,'' ..1 . . .i 1,-•• ,I.r.:,- ,14.,elt 1.. :;-..-vt...%;„„1,1 .....1:,) "..I '" ,-."-- ...-.:',.v•v-0-0 NL-1 As -fr: •.-.114.611'-'-.1,' . \ 1 .?.-....i..:.V..:1-i...)v 1-r,,,,.A•z*.,:i.": .,„0.-exAl t..4,....V.,..--"syrs-4-1,.-, is... : - ,(.- -1,;',..i.evt....t-.- rig- ......L-n-...A.'... ,..._•,,%:: ..q Z F.11.--c fr;.....,..1:),- .;ip.:.4 iburi: ).c,feil., .-).;-----%.•-.• , &.•ri`.•::'-:.*:a 47X.}.11*.*4`.1.,-'. .., •.,.' .• S■•.# : *Sr,' .Y:.$ ..,,Air-.11%--. .: 1`,'-2c.0 4.id.T.1.er.. . 'tv.%.• *• *%;:•",, .*.'" 1,4".&,-;„.',Ai. . . .01i0.), • • . ',,,,S 4,-.4.;• i :,..tit4 :1...%.L..''■1 '..t-:•i'.:•.:,-;,', '!tail . %Ail?"4ST 1 . k..,. ,,T.„,-...,vill.... N., r,r." .,'V A'.1.1' .:4-#. - *.k..4W lk', . #, *.,A i:'1•%, •t? 4;.:4.• 1,. ir . f "' •Ili 1....174...-.." f h Ir.S';', ..st, 41 "N4".*$.,..1' •-.... .-.:L/1.4 ."...1rour:.'.1Ni•-.4-:::rc'N;. v 4'...ti, ;V -. .., ,I : ' *1.,'Itt. 1.•.• . 4 0 W.::...f''. :::: t.4;): ,t' 1 . '. Of -....:-1,-2,-...., li.:;„.?;,.: .-tr,)S.14..Ar„a4f,:... --Q. !.., - t.....4.- < .4".4;6:.1,-,....5- I V->:",--:::-iiii,ifte--:: "11.1"1 -,t ' , •.:ofaztV :.iii PYWI- 'Ittit.Vkv:,v7scti...iil. • -,T.,:t. • --.,.... --.,....r...„ ,,,---„isec. sx. , 1,..r-i...-:„.:,-. ,,:c..,,-,:ito .!.,-A, . ei ..-,F„..7,,g-',.■ 1 ttvt...ire' c.v..-•••.•:0,---*T;Al.; 0:',„i..,*: -1",... ,.. .-,v4,,,,..1,,,,,„ at ..---,:. 4 'I A ....•..4'11). ,t ,IV:., -. St,r S ••,,,'. ...! 14R:r... ''•••X, 1...1.,tfr•,:r:TOL"-, 4', ,.„;• .. •■• .•- - ; ..1. ; ','..., ' ....c,„ ikeo.,;. $7,4•••::;1.. ',v...gr:',,--........: ..." :...4 wit.- (.1.4 . , '. ....-A",: • lry.t.1,, - A14\401044,r' -- -r 'it,igig$3?;--? "1-''i/k,4 ti a-- y,-,:14.! - .,..i.:'- •.:- , .,. .r1 -itit.,01...--,--• ,,,0:4- , ..-.-.....-, ) ,,,,,,,op: , • . .,•,,.... .- ... ..,,, ....-.„. , ..- t • i- ,.;;iy, $914 1.,,, . zktiort, =Ay -,./.,-4....r-,_ . - --.1, ....„.• . ,, ..r&s...i-0...„, - ..,,• •,,,,A.r.,,,,... .: ,.,...1 ly....• i ••.,‘,. • ,./ „i-.., _ A f",_$....., ,.;i ....-... 1,4 filii .Ai i.• :.• ',..,,.. ••••• .' :114,Y __a...0g"a -V.17,, ■::,yk,,,'.. ...." • ' -. ■A ' 1 4,,.4111.;! ?;‘s,' ;...,:;,-L4.... i--". e• • ■'' . :. 0, •'• . j•t L• .. 1.. . 0$‘141"„ i 4\ 4...-22Aft•A r 4 P...' '4,.. 'It''...t,. 414;402. if ..S. • • •%'......,..41,4 ' •:: f .41: I ','-'—,--• j I 6 :■■,.N4.„.:".. -....i.e...-s.,' ..':-1....Asi..,..t..,_:,,,, •.2- t-. --,_ likg'i..,.- .,- ,_,,, ), 'Ar. Fru I ,,..--. ,r-„, ..-Av...... --,, ...e. ,..:. L.- _ .... :4, it,„ . . . 1:e.," '. 0.i .1 t , A 7965016 5/28/96 Soil mapping units for the Highway 2 1 7/1-5 project i n Tigard..Oregon. FIGURE , (Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey c veyof County Area,Washington C 1:20000, 1982: Soil Survey of Clackamas Oregon, 1:20000, 2 1985). 411r SRI/St.-1API RO ....... ! ... ‘. .. i: I, I., I: \ T E D Sampling in and adjacent to the channel revealed a variety of soil matrix colors ranging from black (7.5YR 2/0) to dark greenish gray (5GY 4/1) to very dark gray (7.5YR 3/1, 10YR 3/1), often with mottles. Adjacent upsiope soils had a dark brown (10YR 3/3) matrix without mottles. 3.4 Vegetation A full tree canopy composed primarily of red alder (Alnus rubra; FAC) and bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum; FACU) dominates the ravine. Occasional Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii; *FACU) also are present on the side slopes. The shrub/sapling layer includes species such as vine maple (Acer circinatum; FAC-), hazelnut (Corylus cornuta; FACU), and western thimbleberry (Rubus parviflorus; FAC-). Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor; FACU), California blackberry (Rubus ursinus; FACU), and English ivy (Hedera helix; UPL) represent the woody vine layer. Herbaceous species include lady fern (Athyrium felix femina; FAC), youth-on-age (Tolmiea menziesii; *FAC), swordfern (Polystichum munitum; FACU), and field horsetail (Equisetum arvense; FAC). 4.0 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS The USFWS, as part of the NWI program, has not mapped wetland within the project area (USFWS, 1982; Figure 3). The NWI maps were generated primarily on the basis of interpretation of color infrared aerial photographs (scale of 1:58000), with selected "ground truthing" only conducted to confirm the interpretations. SRI/SHAPIRO's field investigation of hydric soils, wetland hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation, however, has determined that potentially jurisdictional, approximately 0.31 acre in size, wetland occurs in the drainage swale that bisects the site (Figure 4). The potentially jurisdictional wetland is restricted to the narrow channelized bottom of the drainage swale and occasional low shelves. The shelves experience some saturation from side slope seeps and during periods of high stormwater runoff. The wetland boundary changed only slightly in two places from the boundary delineated by SRI in 1992. Off-site, upsiope development probably has influenced runoff frequency and duration in the swale. It should be noted that wetland boundaries determined by SRI/SHAPIRO do not become jurisdictional until the COE and DSL review and approve the wetland boundaries. Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Proposed Development Site next to the Farmers- Insurance Group Campus in Washington County, Oregon Page 4 1 -, _ ..•,. :........---...---1) .- ry .0,3 in •:.:•V lie ----)11•14-ilfreol trio..4 .4.. •. .-?4, -..14,„ ii,tf(fit_ _ , ..-__—_-.,,, .-.4. kit •...11.c•1...:,..,„:-r-.-4. , ...B.: -4. 2 . ••, _ - !!�� •.6,':.• ,--g'-,, - ,�;z..;r•. �'; - !mss•;' ' rte-, — l'-' `- . •• • "44: 4 �kot,! • •=ter r �`.A.1:i:a Rfi .!v .-. :tea, • .j '! III :• - (�i tTf t9S,7 • ` air f•P.�f - ." . • `fib , Li:tip-i=ce�t i�.5� ...+I , Ii�.JA '/a,e f • ._ti � yr - EM( • ` i11C '� � f� / / a m7, .:,.....,.,.,.‘°---- 4V 4..t:;•r4-1 - - 1 l'4N71:741.j.,1. - ..: "W I):: .'." i▪ t;/./ '-,i- wA----,-,•-Pm•Irret.-- --,,,u ,c i- �? ; • - !li'M ,• , ,,, a .,N.:,,, �-- ', • V i••• • _. • .F. ' •.a. .1 • \ ,. 7 7, 11 ((t �` i,•'4'4--.7.:-:�• -E, • .. Z00 ry• M, M-� IA▪ \ •ems'. . a, `a-- 4-.----t`- 'S .a\`- ,-• ''�'� - _, , •`.-,•.�,a .-^ ;\ • - _-\• 4• � • I 6 3 • ' sue \41...--.-- a•. �., .• :w7. rA w t _ . L.,7 R"'74-s- R ss \ '' ., j!' :POW/ IA z I ? 1• _ +a• •e 1. V• p� •,,t��I• I,�".. C IT 1' \RyK j ,- 4: 1,1•1\4 lid =• `.. p \ - \ l{ 'Ai 1 ti.••t 1 ti \ 'Trace ..y .:- -4 ...• •:1_ 11 _ 1 __ 4----`; --•:ew▪aq{.:'.yr'\' y �` 50 �' \ —1 '1 a` , ➢ ` •y,. —_ ' a •I sposas• •�,r \ ''•.:•',' / r i, -yy •` __ ME QOSE T ' • t-! PO!•K \ IY• �.'� L �� ' ,,�,,��//��J �{•r 7 "' '� c �•,- '4 `. Hwy 217/I-5 "' FARM' yp •'�y'•.1)FQ1. ' , F\,�. C .. - 0' ,J r a�' • Project Site -,,,-3 r .4.1:::1-•;.---. • \ ��` ,1 i. y J.,-�-. y‘ - • h : I PE M .1-O \' � , •./', -I i► Pi t .• � 5NC ' GILE •'9P It , — ,4A".,vAi• :'/;- � pr�I 1_ •_m-/ �- - w•QC+•d -. f y _-___ ;� –tt ,' !r ' • "! ! :.NO' ... • 4�.• QlY�- :•�)• y a -7;a▪ -T' '^• �. _.r.-PARK•• c. 1.• P�WK Nr - `I ' f . z y ,4 It •'-r'-- .t • y I • Z00 J.. ••V-} ''"12 P y,• - 5' - �__---5 • 1- --K3oW i_ N , le.ter ' ,� '2 ft•' •4 s I"aj 1•--'' ••' • . • . 12 0: ...' . . ,ri-- -,. ,..n 217 tic: I� -4- ' -s.• - e RQ4D ..�-• �- -gip •-r .•a'^, rilik' - Ay•,K:I}4 •I:DF�I1��••� '. ..i. '. t, ••• •p lY' ... .u.7ti. -/ "�• �''"� !?•• • . rho,s..h. J ,- -• /'>� i POW s ix •. laI 1 • i •.w;'i •• 1 • '. ‘,..-4111. �'�'��,'er Zx ��. ;f Coo$•• _- 1' ' c •7965016 5/28/96 National Wetlands Inventory designations for the Highway 217/I-5 FIGURE project in Tigard, Oregon (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Beaverton and Lake Oswego, Oregon, 7.5-minute quadrangles, 1:24000, based on 1981 color infrared aerial photography). WSRI/SI-1APIRO I N C O R 1 R A T E D 5.0 REFERENCES • Reed, Porter B., Jr., 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). Prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, St. Petersburg, Florida. NERC-88/18.37. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report 4-87-1. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, 1982. Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, 1989. Oregon Hydric Soils of the Washington County Area. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory maps (Beaverton and Lake Oswego, Oregon, 1:24000, 1981 CIR photography overlain on USGS quads). U.S. Geological Survey topographic quadrangle maps (Beaverton and Lake Oswego, Oregon, 1:24000, 7.5 minute maps, 1961, photorevised 1984). Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Proposed Development Site next to the Farmers Insurance Group Campus in Washington County, Oregon Page 5 wow slemet tmontzt Appendix Wetland Delineation Data Sheets • WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM S R I S H A P I R O Routine Onsite Method Applicant: GERDING/EDLEN DEVELOPMENT CO . Project #: 7965016-01 Date: 05/17/96 county: WASHINGTON State: OR Township: 2S Range: 1W Section: 1 investigator: DRS/FES/DEC sample site: 1 ( 6-26 ) Soils Mapped Series and Phase: ALOHA SILT LOAM On Hydric Soils List: NO Drainage class: SOMEWHAT POORLY DRAINED Matrix Color: 5GY 4/1 Mottles: NO Hydric soil Criteria met: YES Comment: ALSO MAPPED: CORNELIUS AND KINTON SILT LOAMS , 2-7% SLOPES Hydrology Inundated: YES Depth: 6 " Saturated Soils: YES Depth to Water Table: 5 Active Oxidized Rhizospheres Present: YES Wetland Hydrology Criteria met: YES Comment: Vegetation Type Dominant Species FWS Status Stratum Overall Herb ATHYRIUM FILIX-FEMINA FAC 50% Herb SOLANCIM DULCAMARA FAC+ 30% 100% Percentage of dominant (>= 20'.) species that are FAC. FACW or OSL: 100% Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met: YES Comment: • Determination : Wetland Comment= CONFIRMED ORIGINAL WETLAND DEL . DATA FORM ON 9/3/92 BY DRS/FES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM S R I S H A P I R O Routine Onsite Method Applicant: GERDING/EDLEN DEVELOPMENT CO . Project #: 7965016-02 Date: 05/17/96 County: WASHINGTON State: OR Township: 25 Range: 1W Se..tion: 1 Investigator: DRS/FES/DEC sample Site: 2 ( 6-27 ) Soils Mapped Series and Phase: ALOHA SILT LOAM On Hydric Soils List: NO Drainage Class: SOMEWHAT POORLY DRAINED Matrix Color: 10YR 3/3 Mottles: NO Hydric Soil Criteria met: NO Comment: ALSO MAPPED: CORNELIUS AND KINTON SILT LOAMS , 2-7% SLOPES Hydrology Inundated: NO Depth: " Saturated Soils: NO Depth to Water Table: > 18 Active Oxidized Rhizospheres Present: NO Wetland Hydrology Criteria met: NO Comment: Vegetation Type Dominant Species FWS Status Stratum Overall Tree ACER MACROPHYLLUM FACU 100% 25% Sapling/Shrub ACER CIRCINATUM FAC- 60% Sapling/Shrub RUBUS PARVIFLORUS FAC- 30% 20% Herb POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM FACU 500 Herb TELLIMA GRANDIFLORA UPL 30% 45% Woody Vine RUBUS DISCOLOR FACU 50% Woody Vine RUBUS VITIFOLIUS FACU 50% 10% Percentage of dominant (>= 20:) species that are FAC, FACW or OBI_: 0% Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met: NO Comment: Determination : Non-Wetland comment: CONFIRMED ORIGINAL WETLAND DEL . DATA FORM ON 9/3/92 BY DRS/FES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM S R I/S H A P I R O Routine Onsite Method Applicant: GERDING/EDLEN DEVELOPMENT CO . Project 4: 7965016-03 Date: 05/17/96 County: WASHINGTON state: OR Township: 2S Range: 1W section: 1 Investigator: DRS/FES/DEC sample site: 3 ( 6-28 ) Soils Mapped Series and Phase: ALOHA SILT LOAM On Hydric Soils List: NO Drainage Class: SOMEWHAT POORLY DRAINED Matrix Color: 10YR 3/1 Mottles: YES Mottle Color: SYR 3/4 Hydric Soil Criteria met: YES Comment: ALSO MAPPED: CORNELIUS AND KINTON SILT LOAMS , 2-7% SLOPES Hydrology Inundated: YES Depth: 6 " saturated Soils: YES Depth to Water Table: 0 Active Oxidized Rhizospheres Present: NO Wetland Hydrology Criteria met: YES cormient: INUN . 2 ' WIDE , FLOWING WATER; BOTTOM OF CHANNEL- CONTIGUOUS FLOW Vegetation Type Dominant Species FWS Status Stratum Overall Tree ALNUS RUBRA FAC 100% 50% Sapling/Shrub FRAXINLIS LATIFOLIA FACW 90% 20% Herb ATHYRIUM FILIX-FEMINA FAC 80% 30% Percentage of dominant (>= 20:) species that are FAC, FACW or OBL: 100% Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met: YES Comment: Determination : Wetland comment: CONFIRMED ORIGINAL WETLAND DEL . DATA FORM ON 9/3/92 BY DRS/FES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM S R I/S H A D I R O Routine Onsite Method Applicant: GERDING/EDLEN DEVELOPMENT CO . Project #: 7965016-04 Date: 05/17/96 County: WASHINGTON State: OR Township: 2S Range: 1W Section: 1 Investigator: DRS/FES/DEC sample Site: 4 ( 6-29 ) Soils Mapped Series and Phase: ALOHA SILT LOAM on Hydric Soils List: NO Drainage Class: SOMEWHAT POORLY DRAINED Matrix Color: 10YR 4/3 Mottles: NO Hydric Soil Criteria met: NO Comment: ALSO MAPPED= CORNELIUS AND KINTON SILT LOAMS , 2-7% SLOPES Hydrology Inundated: NO Depth: Saturated Soils: NO Depth to Water Table: >18 Active Oxidized Rhizospheres Present: NO Wetland Hydrology Criteria met: NO Comment: Vegetation Type Dominant Species FWS Status Stratum Overall Tree ALNUS RUBRA FAC 90% 30% Sapling/Shrub ACER CIRCINATUM FAC- 85% 40% Herb POL YSTICHUM MUNITUM FACU 70% 10% Woody Vine RUBUS DISCOLOR FACU 50% Woody Vine RUBUS VI TIFOL IUS FACU 50% 20% Percentage of dominant (>= 20:) species that are FAC, FACW or OBL: 20% Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met: NO Comment: Determination : Non-Wetland Comment: CONFIRMED ORIGINAL WETLAND DEL . DATA FORM ON 9/3/92 BY DRS/FES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM S R I S H A P I R O Routine Onsite Method Applicant: GERDING/EDLEN DEVELOPMENT CO . Project t: 7965016-05 Date: 05/17/96 county: WASHINGTON State: OR Township: 2S Range: 1W Section: 1 Investigator: DRS/FES/DEC Sample Site: 5 ( 6-30 ) Soils Mapped Series and Phase: ALOHA SILT LOAM On Hydric Soils List: NO Drainage Class: SOMEWHAT POORLY DRAINED Matrix Color: 7 .5YR 2/0 Mottles: YES Mottle Color: 7 .5YR 3/3 Hydric Soil Criteria met: YES comment: ALSO MAPPED: CORNELIUS AND KINTON SILT LOAMS , 2-7% SLOPES Hydrology Inundated: NO Depth: Saturated Soils: YES Depth to Water Table: 7 Active Oxidized Rhizospheres Present: NO Wetland Hydrology Criteria met: YES Comment: LOW SHELF NEXT TO CREEK Vegetation Type Dominant Species FWS Status Stratum Overall Herb ATHYRIUM FILIX-FEMINA FAC 40% Herb TOLMIEA MENZIESII *FAC 40% 100% Percentage of dominant (>= 20:) species that are FAC, FACW or OBL: 100% Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met: YES Comment: Determination : Wetland Comment: CONFIRMED ORIGINAL WETLAND DEL . DATA FORM ON 9/3/92 BY DRS/FES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM S R I S H A P I R Routine Onsite Method Applicant: GERDING/EDLEN DEVELOPMENT CO . Project t: 7965016-06 Date: 05/17/96 county: WASHINGTON state: OR Township: 2S Range: 1W Section: 1 Investigator: DRS/FES/DEC sample Site: 6 ( 6-31 ) Soils Mapped Series and Phase: ALOHA SILT LOAM On Hydric Soils List: NO Drainage Class: SOMEWHAT POORLY DRAINED Matrix Color: 10YR 3/3 Mottles: NO Hydric Soil Criteria met: NO comment: ALSO MAPPED: CORNELIUS AND KINTON SILT LOAMS , 2-7% SLOPES Hydrology Inundated: NO Depth: Saturated Soils: NO Depth to Water Table: > 18 Active Oxidized Rhizospheres Present: NO Wetland Hydrology Criteria met: NO Comment: Vegetation 1 1 1 Type Dominant Species FWS Status Stratum I Overall Tree ACER MACROPHYLL UM FACU 80% 55% Sapling/Shrub ACER CIRCINATUM FAC- 30% Sapling/Shrub CRA TAEGUS MONOGYNA *FACU+ 30% Sapling/Shrub OEMLERIA CERASIFORMIS FACU 20% 40% Herb EQUISETUM ARVENSE FAC 40% Herb POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM FACU 60% 5% Percentage of dominant (>= 20%) species that are FAC, FACW or OBL: 17% Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met: NO Comment: Determination : Non-Wetland Comment: CONFIRMED ORIGINAL WETLAND DEL . DATA FORM ON 9/3/92 BY DRS/FES • ( ' WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM SRI/SHAPIRO I RO Routine Onsite Method Applicant: GERDING/EDLEN DEVELOPMENT CO . Project t: 7965016-07 Date: 05/17/96 county: WASHINGTON State: OR Township: 2S Range: 1W Section: 1 Investigator: DRS/FES/DEC sample site: 7 ( 6-32 ) Soils Mapped Series and Phase: ALOHA SILT LOAM On Hydric Soils List: Ng) Drainage Class: SOMEWHAT POORLY DRAINED Matrix color: 10YR 3/1 Mottles: YES Mottle color: 7 .5YR 4/4 Hydric Soil Criteria met: YES comment: ALSO MAPPED: CORNELIUS AND KINTON SILT LOAMS , 2-7% SLOPES Hydrology Inundated: YES Depth: .5" Saturated Soils: YES Depth to Water Table: 0 Active Oxidized Rhizospheres Present: YES Wetland Hydrology Criteria met: YES comment: INUNDATED 6" WIDE , SMALL SIDE DRAINAGE Vegetation Type Dominant Species FWS Status Stratum Overall Herb ATHYRIUM FILIX-FEMINA FAC 20% Herb CAREX DEWEYANA *FACU 30% Herb TOLMIEA MENZIESII *FAC 30% 100% Percentage of dominant (>= 20%) species that are FAC, FACW or OCL: 67% Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met: YES Comment: Determination : Wetland comment: CONFIRMED ORIGINAL WETLAND DEL . DATA FORM ON 9/3/92 BY DRS/FES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM S R I/S H A D I R Routine onsite Method Applicant: GERDING/EDLEN DEVELOPMENT CO . Project $: 7965016-08 Date: 05/17/96 county: WASHINGTON State: OR Township: 2S Range: 1W section: 1 Investigator: DRS/FES/DEC Sarrple Site: 8 ( 6-33 ) Soils Mapped Series and Phase: ALOHA SILT LOAM On Hydric Soils List: NO Drainage Class: SOMEWHAT POORLY DRAINED Matrix Color: 10YR 3/3 Mottles: NO Hydric Soil Criteria met: NO Comment: ALSO MAPPED: CORNELIUS AND KINTON SILT LOAMS , 2-7% SLOPES Hydrology Inundated: NO Depth: Saturated Soils: NO Depth to Water Table: > 18 Active Oxidized Rhizospheres Present: NO Wetland Hydrology Criteria met: NO Comment: Vegetation Type I Dominant Species FWS Status I Stratum 1 I Overall Tree ACER MACROPHYLLLJM FACU 80% 45%• Sapling/Shrub COR YLUS CORNUTA FACU 40% Sapling/Shrub THUJA PLICATA FAC 60% 40% Herb POL YSTICHUM MUNITUM FACU 30% Herb TELLIMA GRANDIFLORA UPL 60% 10% Woody Vine RUBLJS VITIFOLIUS FACU 100% 5% Percentage of dominant (>= 20%) species that are FAC, FACW or CCL: 17% Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met: NO Comment: Determination : Non-Wetland Comment: CONFIRMED ORIGINAL WETLAND DEL . DATA FORM ON 9/3/92 BY DRS/FES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM S R I HAP I R O Routine Onsite Method Applicant: GERDING/EDLEN DEVELOPMENT CO . Project #: 7965016-09 Date: 05/17/96 County: WASHINGTON state: OR Township: 25 Range: 1W section: 1 Investigator: DRS/FES/DEC Sample Site: 9 ( 6-34 ) Soils Mapped Series and Phase: ALOHA SILT LOAM On Hydric Soils List: NO Drainage class: SOMEWHAT POORLY DRAINED Matrix color: 7 .5YR 4/1 Mottles: YES Mottle color: 7 .5YR 4/6 Hydric Soil Criteria met: YES comment: ALSO MAPPED: CORNELIUS AND KINTON SILT LOAMS , 2-7% SLOPES Hydrology Inundated: NO Depth: Saturated Soils: NO Depth to Water Table: > 18 Active Oxidized Rhizospheres Present: NO Wetland Hydrology Criteria met: NO Comment: Vegetation o I Type Dominant Species FWS Status Stratum I Overall Tree AL NUS RUBRA FAC 80% 30% Sapling/Shrub ACER CIRCINATUM FAC- 70% Sapling/Shrub CORYLUS CORNUTA FACU 20% 20% Herb ATHYRIUM FILIX-FEMINA FAC 60% Herb EDUISETUM ARVENSE FAC 20% 10% Woody Vine HEDERA HELIX UPL 50% Woody Vine RUBUS DISCOLOR FACU 50% 40% Percentage of dominant (>= 20:) species that are FAC, FACW or ce&: 43% Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met: NO Comment: Determination : Non-Wetland comment: CONFIRMED ORIGINAL WETLAND DEL . DATA FORM ON 9/3/92 BY DRS/FES l WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM S R I/S H A P I R O Routine Onsite Method Applicant: GERDING/EDLEN DEVELOPMENT CO . Project 4: 7965016-10 Date: 05/17/96 County: WASHINGTON State: OR Township: 2S Range: 1W Section: 1 Investigator: DRS/FES/DEC sample site: 10 ( 6-35 ) Soils Mapped Series and Phase: ALOHA SILT LOAM On Hydric Soils List: NO Drainage Class: SOMEWHAT POORLY DRAINED Matrix Color: 7 .5YR 4/1 Mottles: YES Mottle Color: 7 .5YR 4/6 Hydric Soil Criteria met: YES Comment: ALSO MAPPED: CORNELIUS AND KINTON SILT LOAMS , 2-7% SLOPES Hydrology Inundated: NO Depth: Saturated Soils: YES Depth to Water Table: 15 Active Oxidized Rhizospheres Present: NO Wetland Hydrology Criteria met: YES Comment: WITHIN 2 ' OF CHANNEL Vegetation Type Dominant Species FWS Status Stratum Overall Herb EQUISETUM ARVENSE FAC 40% Herb GLYCERIA ELATA FACW+ 60% 40% Woody Vine HEDERA HELIX UPL 50% Woody Vine RUBUS DISCOLOR FACU 50% 60% Percentage of dominant ().= 20:) species that are FAC, FACW or OBL: 50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met: NO Comment: Determination : Non-Wetland Comment: CONFIRMED ORIGINAL WETLAND DEL . DATA FORM ON 9/3/92 BY DRS/FES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM S R I/S H A P I R O Routine Onsite Method Applicant: GERDING/EDLEN DEVELOPMENT CO . Project 4: 7965016-11 Date: 05/17/96 County: WASHINGTON State: OR Township: 25 Range: 1W Section: 1 Investigator: DRS/FES/DEC sample Site: 11 ( 6-36 ) Soils Mapped Series and Phase: ALOHA SILT LOAM On Hydric Soils List: NO Drainage Class: SOMEWHAT POORLY DRAINED Matrix Color: 7 .5YR 3/1 Mottles: YES Mottle Color: SYR 4/4 Hydric Soil Criteria met: YES Comment: ALSO MAPPED: CORNELIUS & KINTON SILT LOAMS , 2-7% SLOPES , H2S ODOR Hydrology Inundated: YES Depth: 8 " Saturated Soils: YES Depth to Water Table: 0 Active Oxidized Rhizospheres Present: NO Wetland Hydrology Criteria met: YES Comment: IN CHANNEL BOTTOM , INUNDATED 3 ' WIDE , FLOWING WATER Vegetation Type Dominant Species FWS Status Stratum Overall Percentage of dominant (>= 20:) species that are FAC, FACW or OBL: 0% Hydrophytic Vegetation Criteria met: NO Comment: VEGETATION MINIMAL IN CHANNEL Determination: Wetland Comment: CONFIRMED ORIGINAL WETLAND DEL . DATA FORM ON 9/3/92 BY DRS/FES J CITY OF TIGARD CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES NON-RESIDENTIAL DATE: y/30/ 9!v STAFF: Lth// Oifiva4 APP!ICANT: AGENT: :7576-1/4i0 Tiftilr/VEy 51v-Coco/ - L401-14 Phor : (_ ) Phone: ( 1 510- 454.- ictoe I-tom ESTegp ✓N/446 PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS: TAX MAPITAX LOT: X61 / Df1 ycr, X00 cco, ?en NECESSARY APPLICATION(S): 5/7i Devezappaor XEV,ei 1 /&2fIAJt /03--d.sT4e, ) PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: EtAlniNCT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING DESIGNATION: (�— � Hc-ret ff/.w+/T7 .D ()se A/ CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT FACILITATOR: TEAM AREA: PHONE: fen) ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size:a.tWsq. ft. Average lot width:5° ft. Maximum building height: 115- ft. Setbacks: front ft. side ft. rear ft. corner ft. from street. Maximum site coverage: 495% Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: /5- °'o (Refer to Code Section 18. 611 ) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 8 NON Resiaential am■:at:®n P'anr■ng Ge;artment Se:tae Post.it"routing request pad 7664 ROUTING - REQUEST Please READ To HANDLE 1\4312 V Aa+o APPROVE and y' LII FORWARD I RETURN I I KEEP OR DISCARD ("/A1:3 C#2-' I I REVIEW WITH ME PL ) Date 1- From a r ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREME Minimum lot frontage: 25 feet ess lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a p ition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15 foot wide ac -ss easement. The depth of all lots s : I not exceed 2=f, times the average width, unless the parcel is less than 1 times the minim lot size of the applicable zoning district. (Refer to Code Section 18.164.060 Lots) SPECIAL SETBACKS Tf • Streets: �� feet from the centerline of �/_Di9 • Established ar feet from ➢ Lower intensity zo • feet, along the site's boundary. ➢ Flag lot: 10 foot side ya setback. (Refer to Code Section and 18.96) SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS Building Heig t xcep ions - Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided: ➢ 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 '/2 (half) of the building's height; and ➢ The structure will not abut a residential zone district. (Refer to Code Section 18.98.020) • PARKING AND ACCESS --r7 Required parking for this type of use: / At) piqs 1 - Zen layE.E5 P-afkirrg-shown o bAN40 -r'/M€ i,hxr CMS l : Zc'o S 5647.JC, Secondary use required parking: Parking shown on preliminary plan(s): /51 SJIC 5 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 ft. 8 inches X 18 ft. • Compact parking space dimensions: 8 ft. X 15 ft. (Refer to Code Section 18.106.020) 7 ➢ 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. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8 NON-Residential applicanon:Planning Department Section Bicycle racks are required for multi-family, commercial and industrial developments. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Bicycle parking spaces shall be provided on the basis of one space for every fifteen (15) required vehicular parking spaces. Minimum number of accesses: Z // Minimum access width: O/ /5O Minimum pavement width: Zy' /go- All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuingas: (Refer to Code Section 18.106 and 18.108) WALKWAY REQUIREM�NIS' Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. (Refer to Code Section 18.108.050) éRREQUIREMENTS Every commercial or In ustrial 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 18.106.070-090) EAR VISION AREA —The Ci 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 18.102) BUFFERING AND SCREENING In order to increase privacy and to either duce or eliminate adverse noise or visual impacts between adjacent developments, especially bet een 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 occu ed by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance b een 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 on be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buf r area materials and sizes may be found in the Community Development Code. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.100) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 8 NON Residential applicationiPlanning Oe;attment Section The required buffer widths which are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: ft. along north boundary. ft. along east boundary. ft. along south boundary. ft. along west boundary. In addition, sight obscuring screening is required along TRe9,9e -1eC3Clirv( E.Nc,/cSae4S LANDSCAPING treet trees are required for all developments fronting on a public or private street as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of-way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A minimum of one (1) tree for every seven (7) parking spaces must be planted in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised planters. For detailed information on design requirements for parking areas and accesses. (Refer to Code Chapters 18.100, 18.106 and 18.108) IG ■S Sign permits must be obtained prior to installation of any sign in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for review before the Hearings Officer. (Refer to Code Section 18.114) SENSITIVE LANDS The Code provides regulations for lands which are potentially unsuitable for development due to areas within the 100-year floodplain, natural drainageways, wetland areas, on slopes in excess of 25 percent, or on unstable ground. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre-application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely i• - if -n • 'v- . • .n. .-i .. n.. i- i - r- ••n i.ili .f h- ...li .2 ' r-• m-- in• h- •-fi • '• if -n i iv- . • m .- I-.rl i •i -. .a .I.n ii -. '- development application. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8 NON-Residential apphca ioniPlanning Department Section Chapter 18.84 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands • areas. Residential development is prohibited within floodplains. In most cases, dedication of 100- year floodplain areas to the City for park and open space areas is required as a condition of the approval of a development application. (Refer to Code Section 18.84) LTREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS A tree pan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, major partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. The tree plan shall include the following: Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement . guidelines of Section 18.150.070.D. according to the following standards: > Retainage of less than 25 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; > Retainage of from 25 to 50 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires 18.150.070.D; Z13 --t" M rtYa415o Retainage of from 50 to 75 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 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 Code Section 18.150.025) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 8 NON Residential application/Planning Department Section MITIGATION Replacement of a tree shall take place according to the following guidelines: A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. In lieu of tree replacement under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. (Refer to Code Section 18.150.070 (D) l NARRATTh 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 18.80 18.92 v- 18.100 cV 18.108 18.120 _ 18.150 18.84 _ 18.96 18.102 18.114 18.130 _ 18.160 18.88 _ 18.98 r/ 18.106 y 18.116 _ 18.134 _ 18.162 I" 18.164 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING_) The applicant snotify all property owners within 250 feet and the appropriate CIT Facilitator and the members of any land use subcommittee(s) of their proposal. A minimum of 2 weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 8 NON-Residential apphcanon1Planning Department Section RECYCLI_C� Applicant should contact franchise hauler for review and approval of site servicing compatibility with • Pride Disposal's vehicles. CONTACT PERSON: Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal at (503) 625-6177. (Refer to Code Section 18.116) ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: CL) ?5r bcE2 FP_Opt u)ET( D `b13ot\VC%1E}N . I�E'(,�fit FC714J66 OF DetCX�F, a) LOT e---/;0L EM © � JA)uE—7 „e j /Mlri 6ortic>J `plea..) 114-6? MAAt OQQ t–c cTf g-c—fI A 5i(IAc ADD 5e'1) Wfftr--/Si-t4 f) W tTH-F ? -TAtt k TkCMW --W4/. JAi 40 C er (MpovetnG Ft.-AM - PAM it 1551-4.E1) o e Face/,5m - L (c ioJesrn tJ 11÷E—PE � 51-t PROCEDURE ---'—Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All applications must be accepted by a Planning Division staff member of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications submitted after 4:30 P.M. on Thursday will be batched for processing with the following week's applications. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other days, CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 8 NON Residential aDpirptron;Planninq Department Section Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8,5 by 11 inches. One 8-5 inch by 11 inch 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,s_eriod follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard f/4/►//Y/N6►- Cc-14M1551o4' . 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 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. Additional pre-application conference(s) is/are required if an application(s) is/are to be submitted more than six months following this pre-application conference, unless the additional conference(s) is deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division. PREPARED BY: U/A!/ ii/Nl9- CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION PHONE: (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 n:tlogin'pattvtmasters‘.preapp-c.mst (Engineering Section: masters\preapp-c.engt CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 8 NDN.Residennal apphcatwn,Plammng Department Secnon 2-S I t DA # , boo 'Goo • City of Tigard, Oregon PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ENGINEERING SECTION PUBLIC FACILITIES The purpose of the pre-application conference is to: (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: c. B . (1.) -70-4 to Roo/ Rr€ou.i So'• f . (2.) to feet from centerline. (3.) to feet from centerline. Street improvements: (1.) 'FAA—A-- street improvements will be necessary a#a —o* A' -. street improvements will be necessary along RA,Di iS 04 6 (3.) Street improvements shall include `4L feet Gf -.e• effie t fr m en er line, 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, streetlights, and a two year streetlighting fee. (4) -r-Af - c -f f�,wit CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 3 Engineering Department Section In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the street 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 formed to improve: (1.) (2.) Pedestrianways/bikeways: Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) B inch line which is located in At r> N5R'CN a= srce . The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to -r t-�[� �t'=G . aF were, AT r++ �..�� —1634 Ax—, t , iv 22-5. 90 �. Water Supply: The /c ig \Jno..e-( Water District - Phone:(503) 249'SW provides public water service in the area of this site. The District should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (Contact: Gene Birchill, (503) 526-2469) provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circul.,tion systems. the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Other Agency Permits: • DSt-- ceRTs fine AL- F t`Dge (K,LSIVAL114,1 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Note.] Page 2 of 3 Engmee rng Department Section Storm sewer improvements: PP-a/1 ce 1312-Alt.SA$S ANNWAt- 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 ir)-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 $180.00. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. • L A- WA-T6t- 42UPrt.,t a LI r . TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES 1 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. STREET OPENING PERMIT No work shall be performed within a public right-of-way, or shall commence, until the applicant has obtained a street opening permit from the Engineering Department. FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONS All projects that require a grading plan also require that the applicant shall submit a typical floor plan for each lot. This floor plan shall indicate the elevations of the four corners of that plan along with elevations at the corner of each lot. PREPARED BY:_ ENGINEERING DEPA TMENT Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 h\login\patty\preaop.eng (Master section:preapp-r.mst) April 23.1996 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 3 Engineering Department Section • CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT � , APPLICATION CHECKLIST ' 4 ' 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: 6t/// ,D AtiD/? 9 Date: - 30-96) IAPPUCATION & RELATED DOCUMENTS) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE / MARKED ITEMS A) Application form (1 copy) rte' B) Owner's signature/written authorization C) Title transfer instrument/or grant deed >r D) Applicant's statement No. of Copies /S E) Filing Fee $ SEE 5CHEQ04.: SITE-SPECIFIC MAP(S)/PLAN(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE / MARKED ITEMS A) Site Information showing: No. of Copies 1 1 . Vicinity map to 2. Site size & dimensions r� 3. Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10%) (� 4. Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds CET 5. Locations of natural hazard areas including: (a) Floodplain areas ❑ (b) Slopes in excess of 25°0 (c) Unstable ground (d) Areas with high seasonal water table (e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential R- (1) Areas having severely weak foundation soils G 6. Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Map Inventory including: C (a) Wildlife habitats (b) Wetlands r� 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-,.vat's a B) Site Development . Indicating: No. of Copies 6' • 1 . The proposed site and surrounding properties t 2. Contour line intervals t� 3. The location, dimensions and names of all: (a) Existing & platted streets & other public ways and easements on the site and on adjoining properties p7 (b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site p/ (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 pi (b) Parking and circulation areas (c) Loading and services area (d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation (e) Outdoor common areas re. • (f) Above ground utilities 1;1/ 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 Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions 7. Sanitary sewer facilities 8. The location areas to be landscaped F 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 rni 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements /�❑o C) Grading Plan Indicating: • No. of Copies !/ D 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 p 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 Er (c) That all problems will be mitigated and How they will be mitigated a "•v •_SE i? C+.-;C'/LIST PAGE ' Cr 5 D) Architectural Draw-+es Indicating: No. of Copies The site developm 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 ❑ 4. Location, type, size and species of existing and proposed plant materials za-- 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 sign. G) Traffic Generation Estimate: ❑ H) Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Map Indicating: No. of Copies /F--- 1 . The owner of the subject parcel ❑ 2. The owner's authorized agent 3. The map scale (20,50,100 or 200 feet= i) inch north arrow and date ❑ 4. Description of parcel location and boundaries 5. Location, width and names of streets, easements and other public ways within and adjacent to the parcel 6. Location of all permanent buildings on and within 25 feet of all property lines 7. Location and width of all water courses ❑ 3. Location of any trees within 6" or greater caliper at 4 feet above around level 9. All slopes greater than 25% 10. Location of existing utilities and utility easements m/ 1 1 . For major land partition which creates a public street: (a) The proposed right-of-way location and 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 efficient future and division where applicable _.,vim _SE ip01..G':CN./;:57 RACE 3 CF 5 I) Subdivision Prelim4aary Plat Map and Data Indicating: No. of Copies 1. Scale equaling 0,50,100 or 200 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per sheet ❑ 2. The proposed na - of the subdivision ❑ 3. Vicinity map showi g property's relationship to arterial and collector streets ❑ 4. Names, addresses an. telephone numbers of the owner, developer, engineer, surveyer an. designer (as applicable) ❑ 5. Date of application ❑ 6. Boundary lines of tract ,o be subdivided ❑ 7. Names of adjacent subd vision or names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of un-si bdivided land ❑ 8. Contour lines related to a City-established benchmark at 2-foot intervals for 0-10% grades greater t ,an 10% ❑ 9. The purpose, location, typ- and size of all the following (within and adjacent to the proposed su division): (a) Public and private righ, •f-'Nays and easements (b) Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines ❑ (c) Domestic water mains i cluding fire hydrants ❑ (d) Major power telephone t ansmission lines (30,000 volts or greater) ❑ • (e) Watercourses ❑ (f) Deed reservations for park., open spaces, pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ 10. Approximate plan and profiles o proposed sanitary and storm sewers - with grades and pipe sizes indica ed on the plans ❑ 11 . Plan of the proposed water distrib tion system, showing pipe sizes and the location of valves and fire hyd ants ❑ 12. Approximate centerline profiles sh',wing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a re_. onable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision ❑ 13. Scaled cross sections of proposed st eet right-of-way(s) c 14. The location of all areas subject to i i undation or storm water overflow 15. Location, width & direction of flow .f all water courses & drainage-ways C 16. The proposed lot configurations, app oximate lot dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be u- d for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such lots. ❑ 17. The location of all trees with a diame er 6 inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level, and the lo .tion of proposed tree plantings 18. The existing uses of the property, incl ding the location of all structures and the present uses of the structures, •nc 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 outcrcC.ings, wetlands & marsh areas 21 . if any or the foregoing information cannot , acticaoty be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application _n.\7 L'CT ?A.CZ 4 CF 5 I) Solar Access Ca lcui tions: K) Other Information No. of Copies • '-r.lcs:r.'earri•rnastersq-ck!ig.rrtst May 23. 7995 APDL:C.4.7;oN, RACE 5 C.,F 5 Homestead Village® Incorporated April22, 1996 Mr. Will D'Andrea Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Pre-Application Conference Request Homestead Village Extended Stay Hotel Dear Will: As a follow-up to our recent phone conversation, please schedule a pre-application conference for the proposed Homestead Village Extended Stay Hotel to be located on SW 68th Avenue. The project will consist of 146 guest rooms and an office/lobby. Buildings are two story, wood frame and stucco with pitched roofs. This site is flat with the exception of a small ravine which carries water only during periods of rainfall. The ravine has been classified as a Type III Wetland in a 1992 study. The site contains a mix of mature trees consisting of about 80% oak and 10% fir and 10% other species. We are interested in preserving as many trees as practical for our development. I am interested in obtaining information on the available utilities and drainage criteria as it relates to the ravine and the development process and overall schedule. Please schedule a pre-application conference for your earliest convenience. If you need any additional information, please call me at 510-661-4049 . Thank you. Very truly yours, HOMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED Steven M. Tangney Development Manager Enclosures 47775 Fremont Boulevard•Fremont.California 94538•(510)656-1900 ! .,.e .. E _ 1 -;--- . ! y � - i`^' ^�"y1$. .., i44 C. fa�.. .•..s ./ : i i4 Al, i. . ;I is . w a � i/'kJ ?: t+ +x- _ *11114.7� ..Y .fiz yt.Y:._ v .la ' ■ • SCALE = 100 SEE MAio SEE MAP 1 2$ I IAD -ZS 7 l DA 2S 1 IAC I i ......",.......v., n5w ii ic77,., ..iiii,,,,,a . ., ... .,— - f "..0.44,1,A. .i).24 ii ' . x.2,0)7//01 41.420)24•4456,•.•04 6.w,v, iiiiii iii,iii ii In„iiii)ii i.:X;;.1.,i/.0.,,i u.,. . .rill...,.•,.. ,., ,r, �”�" i., `s°+� 'r` 330 330 3 • 191.3 I ' S 119° 54' 11 IS I I 600 500 400 300 200 100 2.�2.4c- 235�4c I38,4c. I I 74Ac ,� 2.04Ac .334Ac. I I a • I tz! I I I Q I I i I • : � I i- in - 700 I I I i 11 2.044c. t10'\ 9 gyp° 8 W 7 I L W a o \ o Y. 1 \ M f - I f \f , , �� r,, ., • 0 3 1 \ . mss ' f In l i • I R.5022 Id I '''''-'1" –: '.: 2 \ I ir 7 V° 0 1 0 . / \ V /r I , -- "Vc'. I \ �Ai y,a Re8 I it \ I I I �c�E s�2 278.39 / I I IF y ::: -;--1'..,'-.. PARKWAY 279.25 23 81 tot • 4I s S.. _ I I I ��O M 89° 26 4S" E I • 330 _ _ �_ — — _ —330 _ _ _ — — _ � _ — — — _ _ 3310 _ _ _ _ _ _ 4.114. L�_ .� •W�� _ — 206.60 M1007/1 81f C.RE@86 t VARNS STREET 1 Al 125 ._,� ... t30 110.08 , _ _ — _ _ — — 330 — — — _ — _ _ — — 330— — — — — — — — _ _ _ — _3 — _ _ _ _ — — — — —Fa N e e. I I I 1 . _ 1000 900 I G�x 2200 I - *- .57.4c I./7 Ac. _ //.124c. I I �� 9 �'L I ' ' J 1\1 D. 150 C `� /G' I W."_ r 89.08 �` O I I FIR 37. • •6�.�/ 1900 `goo I'' I 1 1_.. , R LOOP o r I i PI -7„"'t; 1200 LA=32 36 I W - . 2 _r� Iw . :1 AI ' 1 , Z I 11011�I I / 0 N ro°0 � I o ,LO 0 OD R9 0 o p 0 GG T 72ND AVE o°ollD 11 ❑ I' ° 0 0o O'/�� o o ' sw-IC*NAve o .__ �9'g9 N 9� m P ,. tcb<0 <:> (17 r r) ao _ __g ID \� db P J p O 0 00.040.Oop,:0 °o Q 00,,00= ' c c� C a �. o o l� P 4� Cr „n°oryoo°oo DI'° (a oom°o°ol�a CI o De.= \, o= (f aArar no of� ' e 41 eood ° o Oo Q-f9 0,9 KRUSE OAKS DR / L. 0 (/ C , N in ■ f • 1■••.1 ` J ' ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS CITY OF TIGARD OREGON January 24, 1997 Tom Dack Homestead Village, Inc. 22290 Foothill Blvd. Hayward, OR 94541 RE: Plans Check Number: 1-91C This letter is to confirm receipt of your building plans which have routed to the plans examiner. As a reminder, the associated land use case(s) is/are: SDR96-0016 Please be aware you are responsible for satisfying the conditions of the land use case(s) and must submit plans directly to the appropriate staff person(s) indicated on your final order. Your building plans are not routed to the planning or engineering departments; you must satisfy the land use permit conditions independent of the building permit plans review process. After the building plans review process has been completed, your building permit will not be issued without approval from the engineering and planning departments. If you have any questions regarding this notice, please feel free to telephone me and I will be happy to explain further. 1:etVIAL ikQ PIA/6W L-� Bonnie Mulhearn Development Services Technician cc: Building file cc: Planning Department cc: Engineering Department I:IDSTS\BUPLUC.DOT 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 .F744 I February 14, 1997 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Tom Dack Homestead Village Inc 22290 Foothill Blvd Hayward, CA 94541 RF: P'ano i.,heck Number: 2-29C This letter is to confirm receipt of your building plans which have routed to the plans examiner. As a reminder, the associated land use case(s) is/are: SDR96-0016 Please be aware you are responsible for satisfying the conditions of the land use case(s) and must submit plans directly to the appropriate staff person(s) indicated on your final order. Your building plans are not routed to the planning or engineering departments: you must satisfy the land use permit conditions independent of the building permit plans review process. After the building plans review process has been completed, your building permit will not be issued without approval from the engineering and planning departments. If you have any questions regarding this notice, please feel free to telephone me and I will be happy to explain further. aa/v\A-A---\ki Debbie Adamski Development Services Technician cc: Building file cc: Planning Department cc: Engineering Department I:\DSTS\BUPLUC.DOT 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 -- February 21, 1997 CITY OF TIGARD Richard D. Boyle OREGON Mitchell Nelson 233 SW Naito Parkway Portland, OR 97204 Re: Homestead Village Dear Mr. Boyle: This letter is to inform you of the remaining conditions of approval related to SDR 96-0016 (Homestead Village) which pertain to the Planning Division. The following conditions remain outstanding: Condition #14: The applicant shall provide a full 25-foot buffer around the wetland boundary. The encroachment for the north drive aisle will be acceptable to the City provided that, the applicant widens the buffer in other areas to compensate for the encroachment. [No parking area or trash enclosure is allowed within the 25-foot buffer.] Condition #15: The 25-foot undisturbed buffer shall be shown on the construction plans. The sensitive area boundary and/or buffer shall be staked in the field throughout the construction process in order to protect the sensitive area. [Revise plan per Condition 14.] Condition #16: Revised site and landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the Planning Division, Staff Contact: Will D'Andrea, Planning Department (639-4171). The revised plans shall include the following: A. six (6) disabled parking spaces; B. ten (10) bicycle parking spaces; C. 40-foot paved driveway onto SW 68th Avenue; D. walkway from the office to SW 68th Avenue; [Should not require the removal of trees] 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 - -- E. location of the driveway outside of the wetland area, and details of the retaining wall and its proximity to the wetland area. If the revised plans show the retaining wall to be within the wetland, a Sensitive Lands Review will be required as well as • permits from the Division of State Lands and US Army Corps of Engineers; [Satisfied] F. written solid waste hauler approval of facility location and equipment compatibility; and G. a mitigation plan shall be submitted that provides mitigation of 1,542 caliper inches. Condition #17: Plans approved by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. Condition #18: Compliance with tree preservation measures as specified in the arborist report. [Letter from the arborist required] The City is unable to issue building permits until these conditions are satisfied. These are Planning Division conditions only, other Department conditions may also need to be satisfied. For a complete list of outstanding conditions, please contact a Development Services Technician at the City of Tigard at 503-639-4171, x304. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at 503-639-4171. Sincerely, William D'Andrea Assistant Planner is\curpin\wiIRsdr96-16.con c. SDR 96-0016 land use file Steve Tangney, Homestead Village icile-nuslieed t'/W 7 �%N V �' '-�1 n 4<,,<% TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE C4_,■<' FIRE PREVENTION ,t `' � , 4755 S.W.Griffith Drive . P.O.Box 4755 . Beaverton,OR 97076. (503)526-2469 . FAX 526-2538 u ,RF&RESGJ March 25, 1997 RECEIVED PLANNING APR 0 2 1997 CITY OF TIGARD Richard Boyle Mitchell Nelson 233 SW Naito Parkway Portland, OR 97204 RE: Homestead Village File: 983-96 Dear Mr. Boyle: This is a Fire and Life Safety Plan Review and is based on the 1991 editions of the Uniform Fire Code (UFC) and those sections of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) and Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC) specifically referencing the fire department, and other local ordinances and regulations. Plans for the above noted project are not approved. Please address the following items and resubmit plans to this office for review and approval. DEAD END ROADS: Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. Diagrams of approved turnarounds ar available from the fire district. IUFC Sec. 902.2.2.4) Emergency access to be provided as discussed. BRIDGES: Bridges shall be designed, inspected and final construction approved by a registered engineer. The bridge shall be designed in accordance with the American association of Highway and Transportation Officials "Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges." The bridge shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry 50,000 pounds. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.5) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus access roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. (UFC Sec. 902.2.4) Signs shall read "NO PARKING -FIRE LANE -TOW AWAY ZONE, ORS 98.810" and shall be installed with a clear space above ground level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have black or red letters and border on a white background. (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.(1) (2) (3)) "Working"Smoke Detectors Save Lives PAINTED CURBS: Fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted yellow and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" at each 25 feet. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.2) Sincerely, N,4 Gene Birchill Deputy Fire Marshal GB/jn cc: Will D'Andrea Tigard Planning Dept. Jim Funk Tigard Building Dept. J I \ C 0 R PRUET' i P O R X I I D 405.0."1101: iL',--,.7,/,,i_.I ;1 1 10\A1, CART: 01 TR115, SHRUBS & TURF SIAi I 141; + 5550 SW ROSEWOOD • LAKE OSWEGO,OREGON 97035 May 19, 1997 Mr. Will D'Andrea Associate Planner Community Development Dept. 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mr. D'Andrea, This letter is to verify that I have reviewed the plans submitted by Mitchell Nelson for the Homestead Village project in Tigard, Oregon. I find them to be in accordance with the Tree Preservation and Protection Plan that Pruett, Inc. drew up for the project. We have begun to supervise the tree preservation fencing and appropriate signage as per the TPPP and both should be completed and verified by May 28, 1997. These must be complete before any clearing can begin. Respectfully submitted, Steve Hillinger Pruett, Inc. Serving the Northwest Since 1935 1,K(\I\(. 1,1\ 1H10\ • I A\1)>( \PF I)I\ 1H10\ • PI \\1 110V1 ' • , , , v • f ,,111'\II \ I < ,' '" ' I'ORI LAND (103)635-3916•(206)693-0088 VANCOUVER FAX (503) 635-1524 1,C F A X T R A N S M I T T A L E.OrcYarrl RA. DATE 6 -2c q 7 :Ipa 2000 igIewood,Co soiii TIME :1)3/770.5600 .73/770-l349 FAX TRANSMITTED TO /10,46., 7 40 l /u- APT1"N•' 7 �ff�i TRANSMITTED FROM J/' 1 y NUMBER OF PAGES BEING TRANSMITTED def (INCLUDING THIS PAGE) ORIGINAL DOCUMENT TO: REMAIN WITH CLC ❑ FOLLOW VIA: El U.S.MAIL ❑ OVERNIGHT ❑ SECOND DAY REMARKS a« �M W Lc� PFAfNO, 40/ Sa r A/ /6 ,-5.1-ft6w.v 72'e PO/¢-- ming +neer.ng -.ite cture tsc3pt Axhitttturt ' :Surveying IF YOU OD NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE ABOVE PAGES. PLEASE CALL(303) 770-5800. GRID II' I' 5'-6 I/2' 5'-61/2' *RID + '. _ aRID 7_,,I. - Li_ ,_ AQI ' W rr- -.�. ' EQUAL SPAcIN ' 5 NANIORAJL BR.4 -TS '� PER RAIL (TYpICAL) ■ I EDGE OF -S WALKWAY -4 .L. L' BICYCLE RACK 51r21.*-"r3' 4'-0' 113 4'-m' 3 •^51/2' II 39 \ , II' S -5' q 5'-5' v 1m'-1m' • • GRID 0 FIRST FLOOR STAIR PLAN SCALE.1/4' - l'-p' 1 1 WOOD E iek �" ® ® ,arT RE: STR,ICTUR<1 in STAIR'-1 WS' .A�'I'l /� I/1' SLOPE '1 r--NAND RAIL IF +�•=' - !BEYOND .! I �� I 1 Z 3� 0 �� lT .4.2y ail, I+ :ci m t- \ PORTLAND GEM ii .... 11.---,---- - - f-------- --- - r 41 `t ! •� it, . Ali PLASTER SYSTE 0 di i 2 k' ( Ain P Ihi ) ' ' 4'-m' Q __,..:iii iIII II' i'-m' ,,i!i . T -!AND RAIL �►lBEI'OND) v 1 �� PORTLAND CEMENT PLASTER SYSTEM II BICYCLE RACK 1 N -.?: ) $ ,_— — - • =1 (I-=(1.1=1.11-=�"1:1. -111-I 11=1 (1 1. .1'1'1=11 — - = • III- _ _ _ .yI-I III-III=1I I_ 415-11.P111----1 i I I I--1111_11 l 11;,I 11 . .1 I l=i 11=111=1 I .-4-.d .1---1 _ I-111=111=1 1 . irr ; =III p : ._I 1_1 11— ' , 1I,;11 I � I l; a M--±r7- I II c—► I f_I I "• • 1=111F--‘ —,III 111=i =1f= 4 ° • —III, I11 I I L ._I ---I I �=1 �- I I��I ,1- +-1 11 STAIR SECTION .i>.,.i - i 1 6 6U ' Racks & Class 11 -- I(• n •s tt t - - -- _✓ 1 .•~ • � tom •- - - C : L UX190•IBGSF - ;4 - - - L,-: + i •[• " ":' The 'U' Rack provides economical, secure bicycle parking With the addition of cabling to the lean bar, the 'U' Rack I• ft.. ... ^ for apartments, retail outlets, office malls, or other meets Class Il specifications by allowing the biker ' •Une - I. ';`al settings where appearance is important, but economy Is and both wheels to be locked with one padlock. I /4 a consideration. r. f'} The'U •Rack is offered in an in-ground or surface-mount unit E • - ' The 'U• Rack Is offered in two different sizes, and can be shipped U.P.S. : 7 at. 2-3/8' 0.D. (2" pipe)and 1.90-0.D.(1-1/2' pipe) structural 'd -F'_tr steel tubing. The 'U' Rack allows the use of"U-type" locks f,,='s • . and two-point contact when the bike Is resting against it. The lean bars add additional support by keeping the front ..i.''= , wheel from turning. • K1.: '?'� .' 'U' RACK ORDER INFORMATION: ,r- 2.3/8" OD Steel 1.90" OD Steel Vii. Item No. Length (mm) Description (Capacity) Item No. Length (mm) :" i atT4r71 59)'°`a',T,A. .1 74,Bike_s).r :.= `_1;••••••:.. r:•, U) 7-7o; b8—z—: 1 i4i:.. UX238 30'(762) 30' U'Rack(2 Bikes) UXI90 30'(762) 1 `U231 "•'22 x•33• •T '-wl e n Aa 2'�1 ) S;s S QW 4)'r;:,= UUX238-1B 30'(762) 30"'U'Rack with lean Bar(2 Bikes) UX190-U1 30'(762) O ,1`/ ••Si,tT 440'-1PRa with cart Bran! obi WPM '. 'UX 90__ , 0'{71 : < i . f Standard Height:34"(864mm) • Add Suffixes For Add Suffixes For Installation Method Finish/Material (-IC)-In Ground Standard) (-G)-Hot-Dipped Galvanized After Fabrication (-SF)-Surface Flange Mount (•P1-TGIC Polyester Powder Coat . Other installation options are available upon request See Page 8 for color selection. (-51-Stainless Steel i SPACE REQUIREMENTS F . . - .:.... . . -1.4 ,.. It ., - i . ,:4._:� h _ = '.,'.+ U238' as iSJ ''' MP 90 .n ... . 05/27/97 10:07 $503 625 6179 PRIDE DISPOSAL a1001/003 DISPOSAL COMPANY P.C). Box 1120 Shell wi,c)(1. Oil 9'/I411 (SO3)625-6171 TELEPHONE: 001) tt':1 t,I /I FAX II (511'1) 05••h179 FAX i:lIVER tiIII:Er DATE:: S— z7— T7 TO: � 0' 77a%«ri Pr '1'K1,E19Il)NE: / !/1! `7 VAX NUMBER: 6qq ! 2-g 7 A'IilNTII)N; h ( 4 W K vimm: WE ARE SENT INI I'A[:1•::; I I i l t;i.I 1 i[j i i i '1'1 1 1;; I'A►:I•:) , I V Yt[IH In[ pltlq kE EI VI: Al,l. UI' THESE I'At;l';:i, I'1.1':A:;P: CAI A, II;; AS al<1N A 1'tISS; 1 111.1:- fIIAIJI: Oofô °5 1 � � 1 ec 145 A.LeAc w I'[u[lu.I.•it IIHIn. . X05/27/97 10:07 $503 625 6179 PRIDE DISPOSAL 1002/003 MAY-23-1997 13:55 F MITCHELL NELSON GAP. TO 6256179 P.01 • • • • FAX TRANSMITTAL CHELL DATE G/23 f 1 PAGE , 1 OF 2 ELSON • I I To: IAN°usE W ; i S�I DlM R.wNwL ErIGINEIBUNG FAX Nv0.. Ce.2 5 CQ 1 7 �( ►po,Ec • M.044GENE347- l FROM: l,�v f,d W Q JV d DEvELOPP N1 SerncES , i J S f na'Y1Sf �h 1"�OM Q-s - 1/l fI4 & Tr• c • l 13 HARD COPY TO FOLLOW U NO HARD COPY TO FOLLOW • • 3SNNa , , Potxwi.T , PcRn.A+n 6-S4, C 0 c y eQ f- C „ou.,,. !• • •31225.0622 T ks� • FAx .oar 1 3$3S3 • .r•Ci.COr • • • THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP rNCOVOIU►TED . 05/27/97 10:07 ''503 625 6179 PRIDE DISPOSAL 1J003i003 • MAY-23-1997 13:56 F MITCHELL NELSON GRP. TO 6256179 P.O2• 'iI�lio'�i ''ibtiilisiklMiiii si q �\�'y�" j. ..1 a >i ail„ 4" a 2 ,a,,;r; j.��riieii�Iii kllillw�arh i.!slr. I a1 •' 1 i 1 It § ,1 =j 1 I. s liei;iii ig pis t1ll i iil: 5 3 ;1141110 al;! ? w ■il� ■al i∎ L y Q Ai £ '!!!!1j- yt!!!1M l,i'lair: 1 I lh II! ° R ; .1irisiiihrr:r:Na.li�e�lr�Y:r�lrr:� 1,-• ! � li 1"!119!111111tr!.1711.711 7 r 0 1 A.: EX k ; l' ; 1 Iiillps ill 111 1 I a if 4 1 ; wR IfRt�a�)~s ■ara i_'iil w�aa� L C �'1 �, 1 1:-7�' 11-�`;_a 'a -f , F AYR: R •kilikidilliitirii�li�irr�rbbiIkrl T~^� IFIII II ! ' , \� :,4 . e. - , 1 . - . 11 , . 1 , . .. , , :. .. . „oz.,\ .. . .4, \ .... ....,- %.,..,,,,, .4 • , . : ,,,� 1F y + .I/ ' I .„A ` Y ei I. . . .� S"f∎\`'''•� • plc( , f~tto, "s '''' V'' . " ''''' `/‘!* * s,„‘..),,,t1i:\:is.\ ...g. 1.4' Nk.' -"' 1'. '-'), - lilk,• '' / i: -- i ' ..,, k,,X.'....'.., ...'7,741.41/"'i.'':•.,e•elf: ..1,N4,04A104'VL:1',:s.N.,,,:,,,..:::,..;1,:sfssis .,."••47,*s.4.4,4::::N'S.,,;;,...,..(c.4.2\ e., ;;71..ii- 7.1.'"?.. ...%4:4:::',.i.s .:''''.s:S..1.'''' "1" 1 m ! .� dry . / 4 N M ervry \ '$ IF'.0 rr ,I M .n. �.+ \�'�` •�'+q t� `�'t'� ' f ..ate \i . ..- f-i'" a.;�z•'-. T e'' �, till?. ,V,3 �,� •�' �. ,fir s, a-� �� _L■ �'�• I n ,.....„. ,:. • .; • .,.. .1-r. i 1' G , .4 r irt ill ' ? 4 ia I 1 ; . , ,,INI. , it.U4•V :k,-,-,:-''' '[,, .....dj".. .:.....:. .../. ti,, ii 0.-• 7/1 • — - i • 1 : ° 'IP' '''' e...* .40 ' 1... . ,_ m M4,r,. , .. ____,Z k,ii'0 11: ',li',• ',t t ... ; .4 m • I ID--Al 4 • NIL . IA - ill A\ ‘ I ,•I„ n^ it - .... Vii.. - ICI 111 �I� , ¢ �1 1 .its;$: ° � -r. ^ al i 1s'n lxi . �\\\ ' 7(''` "7y�'��.;74.,.\j �k . .\e y 4„,4„,,„,, .,yc �r� -• w '"\ice rw � t"\.,.y/ `' , `.� . , P w � � \ � t1:..y4• .i.`x '1,+' � ` 1X' 05/27/1997 20:20 5036351524 PRUETT INC PAGE 02 • • r"PRUE Tt I N C O R P O R A T E D ■ 5550 Std'ROSEWOOD • LAKE OSWEGO,OREGON 97035 May. 19, 1997 Mr. Will D'Andrea Associate Planner • Community Development Dept. 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mr. D'Andrea, This letter is to verify that I have reviewed the plans submitted by Mitchell Nelson for the Homestead Village project in Tigard, . Oregon. I find them to be in accordance with the Tree ' Preservation and Protection Plan that Pruett, Inc. drew up for the project. , We have begun to supervise the tree preservation fencing and appropriate signage as per the TPPP and both should be completed and verified by May 28, 1997. These must be complete before any • clearing can begin. Respectfully submitted, ii»s Steve Hillinger Pruett, Inc. Serving the Northwest Since 1935 • 'OR ILAND 003)635-3916. 206)693-0088 vA!COU veil V FAX(503)635-1524 A _ 05/27 97 10:03,. _ 'Q503. 625 5 7V 4 PRIDE DISPUb�• MiuuL/uu3 y r k �. i sr :;,..it-s„5::i IY~ f t h �.y i�f� +t ��rggq???•�jjK , <, g - %�•, _ t ,:-, •'Z'T{ 1 'loi r-::7!';' ::,-�G Nlh1^. 1 t' . 't�.. f _L +i 4,'� M✓ t f• 4,r• y < �,''''''','„1, P,e'u1G Yf?�it' '1 ' ' VI',, ~ 1 t'•�M. ^-t• { • 4? ,.. s 6d L ,f i '1 • 'k vj- J}'- I ' f- b� i :Y �V V .4. ' f � � RF ,,�. t i,air y i 444 _i, 3• i 'c- 4'. '`ItA• ,..,,, ' t,4i-. ; . '' .. ;-,r(' ,,..• ,•. p - 1,, „:`1 ,A.,.,_ w ,;. • ., ; vr., _ DISPOSAL COMPANY 1.,',_ P.O. Dent f211 Shill wt g I, C)1(117140 (5113)625-6177 ' I AMMO ThLEI'UoNK: ('O i) irzl••b 1 /1 FAX I (50.1) h2S- h 119 FAx I:IYdiai sill::: DATE: ^p " F-7 TO: • Da..,J.L Ci. VV e.b -e.I.'— FAX NUMBER:.. ,.73 S35 3 ' AT I'I:N'I'!I)N: mM: . KKI WE AKI $M.NIIIN{. 1•A.:I•::i ( 1111:I.1,1111Ui '1'III3 1'4I:M.) - IF Y1111 INI Iuir KE:CKI vi- ALL tir• Tm•.i 1•Ata... • I.1-1•:A:;t: r:A,.,. 11, A:I :it tio A "I'IIA111= 11111! Lo., s GPI ura+ Pl. ir P oo . it Y' /46 Z44... SLLijilt I f M kL-4bS \'''rt..11...„....k.. tejo_t4 j 4"142-1-1,1 1'.18.I4r.1..n I(*I::.trn:y.rl►..)Itltiwr, a 04 , ,( a.81T� ` IDE'{DISPOSAL:'? ,e 7.- ; , 4003/003 ., t i�l I �- 1+�s�!yx T�a.r'et` `rSt�.�1.g7 t -' .',4y ,� '$Y�,aai�'•`a�■��rT„rR .fi •nlwa, •.�_ �•t�r'rf9e�� '�.,�1•` •f 1.�a 3 , ~r ' jr,k • f•a 1 e1'1 os -i rii� i9 1 � • 1 _� al :riji s 1 ii. _ ..----„ 1]aa77aaai- 'y a 5, ii 't----- it ''rrrtllittsst. �`E '.,: r 111E11117i s _:)1js! A 7 a alfiiA.!s!f' _ yy2�N ,: ti.�«` � %:,.,k fs w=�'e R R i -4 ,r`, t• ".P• 4 i.. .'ice a:.s• {,. = fµ_ rs � F= ss M *L. �, ka - 'iiFF ' ?,.°;' gg ! ! 1 aS tt .::: a • 1 1 i lc ; 41; ; iii.ji-1 I 'I I: I I' I "."”. '- . ' S i ..'!'‘......i;". at I.• I 111?(, I ,- di tiNt,.Nklkifkkkki3IIlitilkI ._ ;,iiim1ii:! 1 • c • . +' ..',.,• .. Y as t .i, } t 2- .,*',f _'.. ,.. ... ,.., , •. . .:,'4' - .., (+'Y'3 Y r ir' .. - f� / ^I' .x 9 ��V � , IN'!`'..". % 1$4\ cbI . i -'-'"'i• � try•, ". - •:t:A r.•'-?S' •.`{f4 '� • .. vie *`f r *`� `�," r:.i `�\ 511 1�q 4 :q : a, : {"1 ' r • t - • 't• '� .ex+ -rPLTSi •- r,' r i -4 'IA K *"r• 4'41W.. -"ti :� .,'p;s -.Jam' - ' : ' - 1.... . .....; ktisd . „•• •- ,... 'i' A-t4it.......i........,- . , ...s■-•;',...;:-. S. .wi .I d �TF tiR•+� 1 ,r.• .:i:''' . ,4,pi,...-...K'f� „ ,,t,,•••,'t4 ..^ ., , ,.. t_•v \may` �r `,',•^'{ 1 tl, . N,,•:„t. a �� fi” `., 1 >};: r y1�-r [[ r : s ,,4.4 7upe ,.., 4. , >\e.^ 1,.., 2.�•�\Of, �A'v.Er •-4 y �� !!f _ •'k 'F&C. S " :•k yta p4.TT .lt. { .4'aa`•4 a. '- X, •l, 5'4 ttK � ,\ . _14, - : 'i, . i I r{• J," [ r^ rf�+ � _ia a Y ;i ire: �N 2a ,,�� " 1 t,� L t ,., ..., ... '1/44.'''s,'1 NtZ*. ....,‘, .%, .,„•V, . -1.....,e.. .,,,_ Nor- _It, ... ,.- . _ .-: _P 4-.' ta 1.N..1.?,1%\44&..414.,‘t.:.s.;440k4N. t7 .'s -4,0.-4 f. .-.:. ,. ''..s.1, ,Aiilv -- -' sr' :--,4 ' frli • talk 0 6 `,Z. i• \i'Y 1\::Y.•-"� �-w• a ,.1f 44` =' -,"#'0`'- _ t a�,Ti. �.• a; _Sr; ? a >, . .ti ,�y4� r-i� c „,,;„,,,,,s,a:y� -: + f • > si: r �' 11 °_ '•`,' �. f. Q , J°'yfi�s? � "f'.C'. � , g s1 1 —I 11'--'r lC.� . i,s„,•,,,,,,„,•- `p F , .�� I�, 3;.r. ; ; _-, i 171 ,itlt IN . .:1.4,),,i'lls...,f,.. kls,.., .‘N,Ii,4 er .L*. ..::...• ,,.. .:.- ....e.ic,, -. ):- ' . ' t * .w�q .- - 'k.::,,* 44:4: s �L v �.\{.1 1.t.. -,.- I . 1 ,.. ., .\ -., -,• !,00# Iii ,..,„ .,.. ,,i,--,- .. : ,... 4 . •.,. i kt C M^ ~j v -i 1 Liles L t I1.11.11A 0-111 ' AN'. .-,,, ...1,90....-IU. n .: ..-.. ''''' L8144,444-- . . Imi ' !•e.4.'4•i{. • • • .1 " '-"...v. \,, 4,'+a►`. �1,„0.:„..1„ .-” e, Sf • vr,tiMay 29, 1997 MITCHELL NELSON Will D'Andrea City of Tigard, Planning Division 1 3125 SW Hall Blvd. LAND USE Tigard, Oregon 97223 PLANNING ENGINEERING Re: Homestead Village—Tigard SDR 96-00 16 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Dear Mr. D'Andrea: PROJECT MANAGEMENT Please accept the attached submittal package for your review and approval. The following is in DEVELOPMENT response to the to your letter dated February 2 I, 1997, pertaining to conditions of approval SERVICES that remain outstanding. Condition #14: The parking area and trash enclosures were moved outside of the 25-foot buffer area. Condition #15: 233 SW NAITO The 25-foot buffer is shown on the revised construction plans and a staking note has been PARKWAY added. PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 Condition #I 6: A. Six disabled parking spaces are on the revised construction plans. TEL B. Ten bicycle parking spaces will be provided in the stairwells of the buildings. The 503/225-0822 Site Dimension Plan calls this out in a note. FAX C. The plans have been revised to show a 40-foot paved driveway onto SW 68th 503/273-8353 Avenue. WWW.MNGI.COM D. The revised plans shown the walkway from the office to SW 68th Avenue. Does not require the removal of trees. E. Previously satisfied as per your letter. F. Written approval from solid waste is attached. G. The mitigation plan and letter is attached for your approval. Condition #17: Plans have been submitted,for approval,to Gene Birchill of Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. Condition #18: Letter from arborist is attached. THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED iIf you have any question,comments,or need additional information please call me at any time. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. MITCHELL The Mitchell Nelson Group Inc. NELSON Richard D. Boyle LAND USE Civil Project Designer PLANNING ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE cc: Tom Dack, Homestead Village Inc. ARCHITECTURE Matt Dolan, Manager Engineering Services, The Mitchell Nelson Group Inc. PROJECT Project File: 1 9502 MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 233 SW NAITo PARKWAY PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 TEL 503/225-0822 FAx 503/273-8353 WWW.MNGI.COM THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM Date: May 30, 1997 MITCHELL NELSON To: Mr.Will D'Andrea City of Tigard, Planning Department 12125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 LAND USE PLANNING From: Richard D. Boyle, Civil Project Designer Catherine j. Firth,ALSA, Landscape Architect ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE Project: Homestead Village -Tigard ARCHITECTURE Number: SDR 96-0016, 19502 PROJECT Re: Tree Mitigation Plan MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Condition #16 G. of the Conditions of Approval related to SDR 96—00 16 states that a tree mitigation plan shall be submitted that provides mitigation of 1,542 caliper inches. As per our conversation on Friday, May23, 1 997, credit shall be given for each caliper inch of parking lot tree in excess of the 2"caliper required by the City of Tigard Development Code. Credit for each caliper inch shall also be given for trees planted outside of the parking area. The basis for credit shall be the cost of materials and installation with the following break down. 233 SW NAITo PARKWAY Tree Mitigation Requirement is 1,542 caliper inches. PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 Credit Determination: TEL Parking Area Trees: 503/225-0822 City of Tigard Code requires 2 inch caliper trees therefore credit shall be given for parking area trees in excess of 2 caliper inches as follows; FAX 503/273-8353 Thirteen three caliper inch trees have a credit value of 13 caliper inches. WWW.MNGI.COM Ten two and one half caliper inch trees have a credit value of 5 caliper inches. Credit for Parking Area Trees is 18 caliper inches. Additional Landscape Trees: Landscape trees in addition to those required for the parking lot as shown on the revised landscape plan total 152 trees with an average diameter of 2 caliper inches. (85 trees in road buffer mitigation area and 67 trees dispersed throughout the site.) Credit for additional Landscape Trees is 304 caliper inches. Total Credit: 18 caliper inches + 304 caliper inches = 322 caliper inches THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED T.,‘„ The outstanding tree mitigation requirement is the total mitigation requirement less credits. I,542 caliper inches—322 caliper inches = 1,220 caliper inches Homestead Village Incorporated proposes to submit the balance of the tree mitigation requirement MITCHELL in monetary form as shown in the table below. NELSON Caliper Inch Cost of Materials and Mitigation Requirement, 1,220 Installation Caliper Inches 3/4 $45.00 $81,333.33 LAND USE Therefore, upon your approval, Homestead Village Incorporated proposes to submit to the City of PLANNING Tigard the balance of the tree mitigation requirement in the monetary form of$81,333.33. ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE Thank you for your assistance in this matter. ARCHITECTURE PROJECT MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 233 SW NAITO cc: Tom Dack, Homestead Village Incorporated PARKWAY Matt Dolan, Manager Engineering Services, The Mitchell Nelson Group Inc. PORTLAND, Project File: 19502 OREGON 97204 TEL 503/225-0822 FAX 503/273-8353 WWW.MNGI.COM THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED 7 1 � � RECEIVED PLANNING 1 I N C O R P O R A T E D JUN O 4 1997 PROPI.S5I \-AL C, \RI OI 15I1S, SHRUBS & IL RI SIS(I! 193; 5550 SW ROSEWOOD • LAKE OSWEGO,OREGON 97035 CRY OFTIGARD May 29, 1997 Mr. Will D'Andrea Associate Planner Community Development Dept. 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Homestead Village Dear Mr. D'Andrea, This letter is to verify that the tree preservation fencing and appropriate signage as per the TPPP have been completed and verified as of May 29, 1997 for the Homestead Village project in Tigard, Oregon. I will be monitoring the site clearing as necessary when it begins to assure further compliance. Respectfully submitted, c::: „VA Steve Hillinger Pruett, Inc. Serving the Northwest Since 1935 1'ORI LAND (503)635-3916•(2U6)693-U0N8 SANCUS S ER FAX (503)635-1524 June 4, 1997 Richard D. Boyle �► Mitchell Nelson 233 SW Naito Parkway CITY OF TIGARD Portland, OR 97204 OREGON Re: Homestead Village Outstanding Conditions of Approval Dear Mr. Boyle: This letter is to inform you of the remaining conditions of approval related to Site Development Review (SDR) 96-0016, Homestead Village, which pertain to the Planning • Division. The following conditions remain outstanding: Condition #16: Revised site and landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the Planning Division, Staff Contact: Will D'Andrea, Planning Division (503-639-4171). The revised plans shall include the following: G. a mitigation plan shall be submitted that provides mitigation of 1,542 caliper inches. [Mitigation payment of$81,333.33 per May 30, 1997 letter.] Condition #17 Plans approved by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. Condition #18: Compliance with tree preservation measures as specified in the arborist report. [Letter from the arborist stating the protection measures have been installed is required] The City is unable to issue building permits until these conditions are satisfied. These are Planning Division conditions only, other Department conditions may also need to be satisfied. For a complete list of outstanding conditions, please contact a Development Services Technician at the City of Tigard at 503-639-4171, x304. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at 503-639-4171. Sincerely, kdittb • William D'Andrea Associate Planner, AICP Ocurpin\wil\sdr96-16.cn2 13125 SWHall BIvSd 7igard,00P 4722 b3je e4171T r an ad Villa se HOMESTEAD VILLAGE INCORPORATED 06/13/97 VENDOR TI0114 CHECK: 14574 GL Account # Invoice # Inv.Date Co-Pro P.O. # Amount to Pay 1051-200-230 960016 06/09/97 07-LKO 81, 333 . 33 TOTAL 81 , 333 . 33 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON June 24, 1997 Steve Tangney Homestead Village 47775 Fremont Boulevard Freemont, CA 94538 Re: SDR 96-0016 Dear Mr. Tangney: This letter is to inform you that tree cutting may begin in conjunction with the approved Site Development Review (SDR 96-0016). If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171. Sincerely, William D'Andrea Associate Planner, AICP is\curpin\will\sd r96-16.113 c. SDR 96-0016 land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON SETTING THE STANDARD FOR SERVICE EXCELLENCE Facsimile To: —7- /c-t `DACK Company: Phone: Fax: 50 - - zco---1C From: (,), // 7)/AAh eE 4 Company: City of Tigard Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 Date: o l z5 I of ~-7 Pages including this page: COMMENTS: v-c It-ct Cam . City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 PLEASE DELIVER THIS FAX IMMEDIATELY ** 06/25/97 08:05 12503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD RI 001 *************************** *** ACTIVITY REPORT *** *************************** TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. 0406 CONNECTION TEL 510 727 2670 CONNECTION ID START TIME 06/25 08:04 USAGE TIME 00'52 PAGES 2 RESULT OK CITY OF TIGARD OREGON SETTING THE STANDARD-FOR SERVICE EXCELLENCE Facsimile To: 7DAC � Company: Phone: Fax: S)Q - rl —I zC41,—"1c, From: GO/ // ?`1AAM,eE- -- Company: City of Tigard Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 Date: �ZS °t�7 Pages including this page: COMMENTS: . C��'rvcC CoPy ,'�,-- , >-<) DESIGN NUMBER 971970R3 CITY OF TIGARD I� WK ORDER Approved-- I NUMBER `AI►P roved t 1 g6-0°,l0') ✓ C Iflditionally App 6'.3" `� SHT 3 OF 3 l DATE 4/29/97 F( r only the work as de cribed in: C I a 9�', �+ CLIENT HOMESTEAD VILLAGE -KNIT NO. J , ', G .e `� ADDRESS Sz Letter to: Follow I 0 (Do SW 68TH PKWY @ HWY. 217•e Attach �-'-- d a • d CITY i STATE TIGARD, OR. 1 ' ` D•te: Id� �� 9 SALES Ey: is LL 1,L i t' a U O REP. WF O o O �� DESIGNER T SCHULTZ ♦ T ac. o u" u, Ob i - - ' r) Chandler 11P111. o i Signs Horne5tead tQflU�Iome te�c1 THIS DESIGN IS THE PROPERTY OF CHANDLER SIGNS,INC- 0 ALL RIGHTS TO ITS USE FOR REPRODUCTION ARE RESERVED _ j r 1 nage BY CHANDLER SIGNS.INC.,DALLAS,TEXAS On 1 Village M APPROVED BY DATE WEEKLY STUDIOS SALES (1, 00 WEEKLY STUDIOS V DIOS ART DEPT. 'HOMESTEAD VILLAGE'COPY&REGISTRATION MARK SHOW-THRU WHITE ESTIMATING - 'WEEKLY STUDIOS'COPY SHOW-THRU WHITE ENGINEERING 'FLORAL ICON•-•SHO•THRU FLORAL PATTERN ON 3M 3630-236 TURQUOISE DIAMOND -} ^5• ; • 'BACKGROUND' 3M 830.157 SULTAN BLUE CLIENT • • j •``f� • • FILLER AND RETAINERS ARE PAINTED DuPONT(5000 IMRON!HV-280 BLUE . LANDLORD . • •• • :4• . . 4 .L• REVISIONS • 1, • ' • • '4• �•. • ' • • '• 1. • ✓ l✓d A l r l I. MONUMENT ELEVATION "B" 30.0 SQ. FT (1) ONE REQUIRED 1/2"=T'-0" A...,BILL OF MATERIALS LARGE A/FLEX FRAME L ABC EXTRUDED D/F ALUMINUM CABINET WITH G.E. #S-100 WHITE LEXAN FACES INSIDE- FLAT FACES IN HV/DF52/FSM FORMED FACES IN ALL LARGER SIGNS PROCESS FINISH PER STD. LOGO COLORS INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED WITH HIGH OUTPUT 800 MA FLUORESCENT LAMPS FABRICATED .063 ALUMINUM SUPPORT COVER TEXTURED FINISH TO SIMULATE BUILDING COLOR 8" ADDRESS NUMERALS F-C-O ALUMINUM PAINT DISTRIBUTION OF PRINTS DuPONT (IMRON 5000) HV-280 BLUE MASTER ❑ FILE ❑ HEAT TRANS. ❑ ELECTRICAL❑ PLEX ❑ AWN.ASMBLY0 SERVICE ❑ PAINT ❑ INSTALL ❑ CUSTOM ❑ VINYL ❑ ❑ ALUMINUM❑ NEON ❑ ❑ CHNL.LTR. ❑ SCREEN❑ ❑ ASSEMBLY ❑ AWNING 0 CAD ❑ CAM ❑ TOTAL T 811# ‘,.. T 1-4-- • .• . . 24.0' 13 . ... _ . . ' 't I— 8.6' El 1 ..1_ 1-1 34.0' ---1 . . r- I ' (-::-- ---74,-i----- - --- 25.7' • . i 91 :': - . 18.0' _ : .,.• ig -\--,,C5 • -. ' , CI 72.0' •...--.—..- 53.0 ....• .._1, •.'4:_r . - H ‘D(GO KOT • i . .., Nor 13E_ 1-ki . , I 23.5' 2 11 f —1 1 8.0' — 50' VAS-VA-L=— 9 ) .• ij ' .cLEA-gm1/4-r-C DING 'A' TRi A-06LE .E. = 237.0' 10 g .,, , 19.0' 1 8.9'1 . 7211/41 , 1 j---4.1 : visit nillit I 82.3 ' 68.00' 2 Ei Nffilipl, . .;:-..1- \- ..17-,-.7-1-7, R.O.W. PIM( ' -- -. N Li, .II • 1— —I , • 4 .. , El C l''tel--7_---: ' _LI • L / ,..-•7 —1 i .6 Mr . .., - C2 Ell ' sAwcuT - T —1 r"-- 9.8' 2.5' 'RADIUS .-- r-- 34.D' '''----1 TYPICAL • - ,.,. 7:;! NI- - - 6 i'`..1 • 1' tr`e ig REMOVE EXISTING SIDWALK 1 8.1 i'-'-', AT NEAREST JOIN TO • 21.0' "1...0.. iI I 1'■1 ---- NE\W C\4 CONSTRUCTIO . . i 3 ,..... 1 \L , ••• • :2„,...._ • -., '::-,.. ig . 16 .t-:-..• *1---;•• - ' ' ■ 3_1= 24.0' \ oe -,,,,.. ••;.• I '— 5.0 Typ. 1 co ... ?.::: •:• 6 isr ... :: . . .• ; .. i- - El 1 • - • \ ' 38 9 _" 111 5. C .- BUILDING B .,.. F.F.E. = 236.0' i. ,::,. -- • - ..... .. I . ' e •!-:.. ... ... .. .• T • le •e.. -.. I 9.",- ' 1 0 t -•.:?... ,', 24.0' . . ../li 9 54*9' a •.• 11 (of .,t,, ., .•1, .... . garaft, 1 8 -... :. 1 .0 -4. ILL ....- ..t. " 1 • 1 . : .17fl , tt,,) - I; ,0011..Adllit, 1 U ,. .,. 7 _-i."5.` \...-- . , . • o 1,51 1 2.7 foul at 2'-1" 2-0" 2.4. (1) 120v, 20a CIRCI c. -"Q 4--", INSTALL PRIMARYi'l _N Ir� U.L. LABELS RE o n. -. __ --- _ -^.`} - 6"radius corium's INSTALL sIGNA�>;P w I Nr , : I 12' 1 0 w Q t — . _ .. _--y AOC tltin4 A flexframa tab'rot w/ r A s a 2Y.";tldo AI3G flat retailers bull: -I IL I t 4.---Wald rp.noof dlec6n iio iswitcli'' ' - • o C4 ._.._._. _... -••-...._-•--_ u.� 4"klah w r leap x.063 alum:Pam reveal w/1"f(1" -._..._ •r::.:�^:—_:• ;. seta l this p9•) z —. alum.tuba rtmb�ellloltnrent(eee r. O ai • N .0 r63 alum.fay.baen wl 1" eq.alum.tube frame J Y. • — Cabinnt 8 bale ellp over supports . - r•• . -:•_ -----------(2)'f5.3Px3"a3/Ir6"_oteal-tubaauppoma CI ,,t "- - 9"dla, x36 deep concrete/clourdotIono Lanlpinq/Era rn InR Data il Wor-fr nl3Cto�oAbinnL- F�� r-1�� v� �o cn r) L = c .a., X NY c/ -r- • '7 . s, 5 . s I ..Jo�_k —. °° 5. k 3 t L °Y�"s�,Alum.Cube o L X5.3 f- 1S. f, _ yl . 4 s FT � -„-� �x�- x 3' n n .Ge3 Mom. 1tano 1.7k w r flT k a Y. 3U = / •6(56 574 / ,�. t: el-, - C� Q'O"`�- I G Ziec Engineers, Inc. 12-luS-96 ZTec Enginers, Inc. 9 � 1. Directions to use the charts and graphs 2. Deterrine the wind load for the sign ht. Is it 80,90 or 100 MPH wind speed? WIND LOAD FORCES, PSF Exposure C sign ht. 80 MPH 90MPH 100 MPH 0' c ht.< 15' 24.34 °' 30.87 49.82 15' < ht. < 20' 25.94 32.91 51.97 20' <ht.<25 27.32 34.65 53.76 3. Calculate the face area of the sign tires center of sign Maient : bththt.(centerline)*Wind Load(psf) 4. WITH THE MOMENTS CALCULATED GO TO THE TABLES AND SELECT THE FOLLOWING: POLE SIZE, FOOTING SIZE DESIGN EXAMPLE Wind design Factors Let : L = 10 ft. P : Ce*Cgtitgs b : 5 ft. where Ce = ht. : 15 ft. Exposure Exposure Exposure ht. B C D Calulate the face area * ht. : b * L t ht. 0'-15' 0.62 1.06 1.39 S t 10 * 15 : 750 FT. " 3. 20' 0.67 1.13 1.45 25' 0.72 1.19 1.5 Wind force per square foot 30' 0.76 1.23 1.54 80 NPH , wind :one : 28.5 psf Cq : 1.4 for signs !cunt : face area * ht.* wind force qs (80 rph) : 16.4 psf qs (100 rph) 750 * 28.5 : 21375 ft. lbs. qs (90 sph) : 20.8 psf or 21375/1000 : 21.375 kip ft. P(80rph) : 28.5 PSF Select fror the tables the pole required P(90 iph) : 35.8 PSF Go to the tables with the mount of 21.38 k-ft., on the appropriate chart and select the footing size for the appropraite rind exposure. Choose 3'x5'x6.5' deep or 5'xS'x4' deep is another possibility. lien Engineers, i::. _. .__ .. . 4 6. Design Table - 80 iph wind, Exposure C, Sign Height < 25 ft. Moaent OT Footing size Face Area !oient Section Pipe size Twall Width Length Depth /1.5 z h k-ft in"3 Dia.(in.) in. ft. ft. ft. k-ft. 10 0.29 0.13 3 0.216 1.5 1.5 2 0.337 20 0.57 0.26 3 0.216 1.5 1.5 3.5 0.591 30 0.86 0.40 3 0.216 2 .2 2.5 1.000 40 1.14 0.53 3 0.216 2 2 3 1.200 SO 1.43 0.66 3 0.216 2 2 3.5 1.400 60 1.71 0.79 3 0.216 2 4 1.5 2.400 70 2.00 0.92 3 0.216 2 3 3 2.700 80 2.28 1.05 3 0.216 2 4 2.5 4.000 90 2.57 1.19 3 0.216 2 4 2 3.200 100 2.86 1.32 3 0.216 2 4 2.5 4.000 200 5.71 2.64 4 0.237 2 4 4 6.400 300 8.57 3.95 5 0.258 3 4 4 9.600 400 11.42 5.27 5 0.258 3 4 5 12.000 500 14.28 6.59 6 0.28 3 4 6 14.400 _, 600 17.14 7.91 6 0.28 3 5 5 18.750 700 19.99 9.23 8 0.322 3 5 5.5 20.625 800 22.85 10.55 8 0.322 3 S 6.5 24.375 900 25.70 11.86 8 0.322 3 6 5 27.000 1000 28.56 13.18 8 0.322 3 6 5.5 29.100 1100 31.42 14.50 8 0.322 3 6 6 32.400 1200 34.27 15.82 8 0.322 3 6 6.5 35.100 1300 37.13 17.14 10 0.365 4 + 8 3 38.400 1400 39.98 18.45 10 0.365 4 8 3.5 44.800 1500 42.84 19.77 10 0.365 4 8 3.5 44.800 1600 45.70 21.09 10 0.365 4 8 4 51.200 1700 48.55 22.41 10 0.365 4 8 4 51.200 1800 51.41 23.73 10 0.365 4 8 4.5 57.600 1900 54.26 25.04 10 0.365 4 8 4.5 57.600 2000 57.12 26.36 10 0.365 4 8 5 64.000 2100 59.98 27.68 10 0.365 4 8 5 64.000 2200 62.83 29.00 10 0.365 4 8 5.5 70.400 2300 65.69 30.32 12 0.375 4 9 4.5 12.900 2400 68.54 31.64 12 0.375 4 9 4.5 72.900 2500 71.40 32.95 12 0.375 4 9 5 81.000 2600 74.26 34.27 12 0.375 4 9 5 81.000 2700 77.11 35.59 12 0.375 4 9 5 81.000 2800 79.97 36.91 12 0.375 4 9 5.5 89.100 2900 82.82 38.23 12 0.375 4 9 5.5 89.100 3000 85.68 39.54 12 0.375 4 9 5.5 89.100 3100 88.54 40.86 12 0.375 4 9 5.5 89.100 3200 91.39 42.18 12 0.375 4 9 6 97.200 3300 94.25 43.50 12 0.375 4 9 6 97.200 3400 97.10 44.82 14 0.375 5 10 4 100.000 3500 99.96 46.14 14 0.375 5 10 4.5 112.500 3600 102.82 47.45 14 0.375 5 10 4.5 112.500 3700 105.67 48.17 14 0.375 5 10 4.25 106.250 3800 108.53 50.09 14 0.375 5 10 4.5 112.500 3900 111.38 51.41 14 0.375 5 10 4.75 118.750 4000 114.24 52.73 14 0.375 5 10 4.75 118.750 4100 117.10 54.04 16 0.375 6 10 4 120.000 4200 119.95 55.36 16 0.375 6 10 4.25 127.500 4300 122.81 56.68 16 0.375 6 10 4.25 127.500 4400 125.66 58.00 16 0.375 6 10 4.5 135.000 4500 128.52 59.32 16 0.375 6 10 4.5 135.000 4600 131.38 60.64 16 0.375 6 10 4.5 135.000 4700 134.23 61.95 16 0.375 6 10 4.5 135.000 /, i MEMORANDUM Date: February 20, 1998 MITCHELL NELSON To: Tom Dack Homestead Village Incorporated Fax No.: I-510-727-2670 LAND USE PLANNING From: Catherine J. Firth, Project Landscape Architect ENGINEERING Project: Homestead Village, Extended Stay Hotel,Tigard LANDSCAPE Number: 19502 ARCHITECTURE Re: Tree Mitigation —Total Caliper Inches PROJECT MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT Tom- SERVICES The following is a summary of the caliper inches planted on the Tigard site as part of the landscape and tree mitigation plan. In our memo of May 30, 1997, we proposed planting 322 caliper inches to mitigate the unavoidable tree removal on the site. AREA CALIPER INCHES TOTAL MITIGATION CREDIT 233 SW NAITO Parking lot(required) 36 18 PARKWAY Landscape 142 142 PORTLAND, Buffer/Wetland 72 72 OREGON 97204 Total 232 TEL 503/225-0822 Additional ornamentals 1 0/27/97 39 39 FAX Native trees deleted (-39) (-39) 503/273-8353 Additional ornamentals 2/12/98 28 28 Current Total 260 WWW.MNGI.COM Additional ornamentals and natives 62 62 2/25/98 Total at finish 322 aii cpr gi s' . 441/uv ✓ 414. '6 All of the ornamental trees have bet n Installed RI the landscape, parking, streetscape areas. The native trees have been installed in the wetland, buffer, and perimeter areas. We have reserved a portion of the mitigation inches(62")to be selected and installed once the majority of the landscape is complete. This will allow us to determine where the remaining"holes" are in both the landscape and the buffer/wetland areas and select the most appropriate material and size for each area. I hope this is useful in recording your efforts to comply with the intent, as well as the letter, of Tigard's tree preservation codes. Please contact me if you need further information. THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED m MEMORANDUM DATE: March 10, 1998 MITCHELL TO: MR. TOM DACK NELSON HOMESTEAD VILLAGE 22290 FOOTHILL BLVD. HAYWARD, CA 94541 510-583-2008 LAND USE PLANNING FROM: Catherine J. Firth - Project Landscape Architect ENGINEERING RE: Homestead Village—Tigard—Additional Plant Materials LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Based on our walk-through of the project site March 4th, I am proposing the addition of the following plant materials to augment those already installed. I am forwarding this memo to Cedar PROJECT Landscape for their bid for the purchase and installation of the following plants. These trees should MANAGEMENT meet the total caliper inches required by the City of Tigard to release your cash bond. If you have DEVELOPMENT questions or concerns regarding these additions, please call me at 225-0822. SERVICES I. Please add the following plant materials to the plant list. They will be located in the field by the Landscape Architect. Caliper inch totals are for tree mitigation if required by the City of Tigard. 233 SW NAITO I ea. SEQUOIA Sequoiadendron giganteum 10-12' HT. 3" PARKWAY PORTLAND. 2 ea. KOREAN DOGWOOD Comus kousa 7-8' HT 5" OREGON 97204 TEL 6 ea. WESTERN RED CEDAR Thuja plicata 7-8' HT. 15" 503/225-0822 1 ea. COLORADO BLUE SPRUCE Picea pungens'Glauca' 7-8' HT. 2.5" FAX 503/273-8353 I ea. JAPANESE FLOWERING CRABAPPLE Malus floribunda 2 1/2" CAL. 2.5" www.mNa.com W.MNGI.COM 3 ea. THUNDERCLOUD PLUM Prunus cerasifera'Thundercloud'I-1/2"CAL. 4.5" 8 ea. DOUGLAS FIR Psuedotsuga menziesii 7-8' HT. 16" I ea. JAQUEMONTI BIRCH Betula jaquemontii 3"CAL. 3" 6 ea. VINE MAPLE Acer circinnatum—forest—grown, multi-trunked 6' HT. 18" 3 ea. RHODODENDRON 'Sappho' 36-42" HT. 0" TOTAL CALIPER INCHES 69.5" cc: Cedar Landscape-Raphael Joe E.Woods.Inc.—Dan Hart \\NTSERVER d 4Pr jests\19500(Homestead VilagerI9502(fgardrpocunents\Add pta ts3.do THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM DATE: February 12, 1998 TO: MR. TOM DACK HOMESTEAD VILLAGE 22290 FOOTHILL BLVD. HAYWARD, CA 94541 510-583-2008 FROM: Catherine J. Firth - Project Landscape Architect RE: Homestead Village—Tigard—Additional Plant Materials Based on our walk-through of the project site yesterday, I am proposing the addition of the following plant materials to augment those already installed. I am forwarding this memo to Cedar Landscape for their bid for the purchase and installation of the following plants. If you have questions or concerns regarding these additions, please call me at 225-0822. 1. Please add the following plant materials to the plant list. They will be located in the field by the Landscape Architect. Caliper inch totals are for tree mitigation if required by the City of Tigard. 3 ea. SEQUOIA Sequoiadendron giganteum I 0-12' HT. 12" 3 ea. AUSTRIAN PINE Pinus nigra 12' HT. 6" 4 ea. KOREAN DOGWOOD Comus kousa 7-8' HT 10" 12 ea. PACIFIC WAX MYRTLE Mynca califomica 4-5' HT. 40 ea. DAVID VIBURNUM 2 gal. 100 ea. BEARBERRY COTONEASTER I gal. 100 ea. WESTERN SWORD FERN I gal. 100 ea. SALAL I gal. TOTAL CALIPER INCHES 28" 2. Please provide and install 100 stepping stones as directed in the field by the Landscape Architect. cc: Cedar Landscape-Raphael Joe E.Woods,Inc.—Dan Hart E'tProjects119500(Harvested vikger 19502 Ner ly∎Dco rnents\Add plents2.doc MEMORANDUM DATE: October 27, 1997 MITCHELL TO: MR. TOM DACK NELSON HOMESTEAD VILLAGE 22290 FOOTHILL BLVD. HAYWARD, CA 94541 510-583-2008 LAND USE PLANNING FROM: Catherine J. Firth - Project Landscape Architect ENGINEERING RE: Homestead Village—Tigard—Additional Plant Materials LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Mitchell Nelson has issued revised Landscape and Irrigation Plans: Revision 3 / I0-22-97. Joe E. Woods has been given three blue line sets for distribution to its subcontractors. This memo should PROJECT accompany those drawings and be considered as part of the same bid revision. MANAGEMENT y DEVELOPMENT Any questions regarding the revision should be directed to Catherine Firth at 225-0822. SERVICES I. Please add the following plant materials to the Revision 3 plant list. They will be located in the field by the Landscape Architect. I ea. JAPANESE MAPLE Acer palmatum 3"CAL. 3" 233 SW NAITO PARKWAY I I ea. AUSTRIAN PINE Pinus nigra 12' HT. 22" PORTLAND. OREGON 97204 I ea. SEQUOIA Sequoia giganteum 12' HT. 3" TEL 503/225-0822 2 ea. RED SUNSET MAPLE Acer rubrum'Red Sunset' 3"CAL. 6" FAX 503/273-8353 2 ea. JAPANESE FLOWERING CRABAPPLE Malus floribunda 2 1/2" CAL. 5" WWW.MNGI.COM TOTAL CALIPER INCHES 39" 2. Reduce Forest Mitigation Caliper inches by 39. Provide a total of 33 caliper inches for mitigation. 3. Clarification of plant list on Sheet L!: The first tree listed is a RED SUNSET MAPLE Acer rubrum 'Red Sunset' 3" CAL. Spacing as shown. cc: Joe E.Woods,Inc.—Dan Hart N\nrrsERs/ErkddikprojectA I 9500 0-lamstead Wage)\19502(T ged)Documente■Add plants.doc THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED FEB-24-1998 16 20 FROM MITCHELL NELSON GRP. TO 96847297 P.01 F A X T R A N S M I T T A L tTCNELL DATE: �'�` 98 f PAGE / OF NELSON To: /Wz � ( 2) Vtd ?9, LAND USE PLANNING 1 ENGINEERING - - LANDSCAPE FAx# 1�/e �- 7Z 97 CHITECTURE �/ I PROJECT FROM: -lel TM - • 94/4-• Z/54 EMENT U DEVELOPMENT RE: Y0 � w //L 46( • te•Apez SERVICES ❑ HARD COPY TO FOLLOW NO HARD COPY TO FOLLOW i �/ 1 23.3'SW NAITO A/G . '01 , PARKWAY PORTLAND, A rINGHED 11E Fis' eo 4/ O OREGON 97204 L TEL / V S/p/�( YO� yr /4/® 593/225-0822 'w/ /�� FAX Mir 7 T Al / .1 G4 770A/ //� C016-3 503/273-8353 WWVMNGLCOM /U' 4r 14016 1 I wA6 . / w Conte Cr nir (91WCW 4& &Pint , e-rag ACC 4A0,,/6 4 C4S,1 ,/ p./,1? PiNt 774C •CE"M A I^/,D C* or nee THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED 1 FEB-24-1998 16 21 FROM MITCHELL NELSON GRP. TO 9684729? P.02 • i, MEMORANDUM • Date: February 20, 1998 HITCHEL.L N E LS O N To: Tom Dack . Homestead Village Incorporated • Fax No.: 1-510-727-2670 LAND USE PLANNING From: Catherine J. Firth, Project Landscape Architect ENGINEERING Project Homestead Village, Extended Stay Hotel, Tigard LANDSCAPE Number. 19502 ARCHITECTURE Re: Tree Mitigation—Totah Caliper Inches PROJECT i MANAGEMENT t DEVELOPMENT Tom- SERVICES The following is a summary of the caliper inches planted on the Tigard site as part of the landscape and tree mitigation plan. In our memo of May 30, 1997, we proposed planting 322 caliper inches to mrtigate the unavoidable tree removal;on the site. AREA CALIPER INCHES TOTAL MITIGATION CREDIT 7.33 SAN NArro Parking lot(required) 36 18 PARKWAY l 42 142 Landscape PORTLAND. Buffer/Wetland 72 72 QRl IoN 97204 Total 232 TEL • i0i/225-0822 Additional ornamentals l0/27/97 39 39 FAX Native trees deleted (-39) (-39) • 50J1 273-8353 Additional ornamentals 2/12/98 28 28 Current Total 260 W.VW,MNGI.COM Additional ornamentals and natives 62 62 2/25/98 Total at finish 322 All of the ornamental trees have been installed in the landscape, parking, streetscape areas. The native trees have been installed in the wetland, buffer, and perimeter areas. We have reserved a portion of the mitigation inches(62")to be selected and installed once the majority of the landscape is complete. This will allow us to determine where the remaining"holes" are in both the landscape and the buffer/wetland areas and select the most appropriate material and size for each area. I hope this is useful in recording your efforts to comply with the intent, as well as the letter, of 1 Tigard's tree preservation codes. Please contact me if you need further information. THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INC9RPORATED TOTAL P.02 • i'iC•x. Ey. MEMORANDUM Date: May 30, 1997 MITCHELL NELSON To: Mr. Will D'Andrea City of Tigard, Planning Department 1 2125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 LAND USE PLANNING From: Richard D. Boyle, Civil Project Designer Catherine J. Firth,ALSA, Landscape Architect ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE Project: Homestead Village -Tigard ARCHITECTURE Number: SDR 96-0016, 19502 PROJECT Re: Tree Mitigation Plan MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Condition #16 G. of the Conditions of Approval related to SDR 96-.0016 states that a tree mitigation plan shall be submitted that provides mitigation of I,542 caliper inches. As per our conversation on Friday, May23, 1997, credit shall be given for each caliper inch of parking lot tree in excess of the 2"caliper required by the City of Tigard Development Code. Credit for each caliper inch shall also be given for trees planted outside of the parking area. The basis for credit shall be the cost of materials and installation with the following break down. 233 SW NAITO PARKWAY Tree Mitigation Requirement is I,542 caliper inches. PORTLAND. OREGON 97204 Credit Determination: TEL Parking Area Trees: 503/ 225-0822 City of Tigard Code requires 2 inch caliper trees therefore credit shall be given for parking area trees in excess of 2 caliper inches as follows; FAX 503/273-8353 Thirteen three caliper inch trees have a credit value of 13 caliper inches. `NwW.MNGI.COM Ten two and one half caliper inch trees have a credit value of 5 caliper inches. Credit for Parking Area Trees is 18 caliper inches. Additional Landscape Trees: Landscape trees in addition to those required for the parking lot as shown on the revised landscape plan total 152 trees with an average diameter of 2 caliper inches. (85 trees in road buffer mitigation area and 67 trees dispersed throughout the site.) Credit for additional Landscape Trees is 304 caliper inches. Total Credit: 18 caliper inches + 304 caliper inches = 322 caliper inches THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED priA The outstanding tree mitigation requirement is the total mitigation requirement less credits. I,542 caliper inches—322 caliper inches = I ,220 caliper inches Homestead Village Incorporated proposes to submit the balance of the tree mitigation requirement MITCHELL in monetary form as shown in the table below. NELSON Caliper Inch Cost of Materials and Mitigation Requirement, 1,220 Installation Caliper Inches 3/4 $45.00 $81,333.33 LAND USE Therefore, upon your approval, Homestead Village Incorporated proposes to submit to the City of PLANNING Tigard the balance of the tree mitigation requirement in the monetary form of$81,333.33. ENGINEERING Thank you for your assistance in this matter. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PROJECT MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 233 SW NAITO cc: Tom Dack, Homestead Village Incorporated PARKWAY Matt Dolan, Manager Engineering Services, The Mitchell Nelson Group Inc. PORTLAND. Project File: 19502 OREGON 97204 TEL 503/225-0822 FAX 503/273-8353 VVWW.MNGI.COM THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED , -...•••• o. - •.••••..•,• •••••••-or...a—F-INCIFT-1-1-1-1-UrICUL. rir-L. UIN UrKI-• IU 15107272b70103 N. ' 1 ' PittNie TABLE A ., : • ••-,„„,...., • • ...s . /-3\ ..,.. , ...„• ,, •• ,. ..• ...., ,.., ... •: „. ...,: : do.„ 11:4.• Ci LL A4 GRI Po -;".A.g i !. ,vi.4-a-.1. - ■■ o lief*,,, ,;:td .' . 4 1,74 • ' e. IVY AVIV ! a INF.4 ..-.4 .. . At. ..... . ...:. . ... ove• .. ' 1 . t),,.... •! • . --.-.r.-.•- Ail . . • Nt.k. . .k I •.. ..3, 1:4 • f.- ■ ..'4: .70 • ,S • ' lit. .- . , "EP: "fi' ' • ' ' . . BUILDING °B" •.: .0494 ..,.: .. --• - .t. • • 1 .... . i .• .../ii 1. lk, .., ; ., ...... •:-. .,;?,A.... ! , talk-- (r: ,: t• r . f r. ■Ifilf- i - : !, • . , 1 4 .. . N.-, -.Iry ,....1.-....ti ..., _„............,:o ..... . ,_. ,.,. ,,. .r! I Iiiril ■ -'. • C .!.A.1,1,41 0:.:1:.:. . 1. fillik- • . k. !Pit . • .••, :.\ t.t■ •• • VII . :It 4 0 ,.. "Jr IIILVff.-. ' f.',;cil - .1 .4 w ' , 't• v...:, 0:. !I:4 *:. :- .* :it.>tria;7 , ■-' .:• \ ' .0 o:. ...-,r) , 3 ■,:: 6e41/ ' . ' IA. : 40111 . '-'\ ilk e .' • • • l'u- t 010 I•' • /Voirl ' ..*,1, I , I . i ! \ TO •-,: „ . i •44— 0,,..-Ago ,:11.0,040 . i ' \ '4 • -. ' .. 11.,'. 4f4)C.r illie-v" , \\ I s,;0 •_ . I \IAA:v , , ...,-.... .... ... ■,.......o.,.,.. ...vio. ,,.._ \ , ,. \ •1 . , ... , 'v v • 6E.E. r>..,*, :. Wiff.`T''w : • ,- • L : .z- • •, • • :- 0 .- \ \• r Li \ MITIGATION • .. c...., , . \ „, \ ‘, ••Niko . i , . \ i . . , ' .1. .. , •. . .. .ow, : 410 •.,. • • .”. ...0. dompieb. ,::„.„..,...• - , • - ' V- :'- ••••• _Ai\' *. .. •.. - ie., 111111- ' . • 111$111). i BF /' it- ,.'''....- ''4 • t 01111111' ......„.. ...... . 1 4 :‘.,--: -. ..•.-.., • ,,,,..... ..,. ,•:"._ _....„— I -......, •/---' • , _____ \ ,. ,,. . ipp...k 1,, ‘ AREA • :.-,i rIAOSE8 OF OROVIDE API,MGW • EXIbT1.6, — - WILL REMAIN Ab(--4. =T MITICIATION ("' 814ALLI. BE PL ..,,,--6, tirole. -.- :i• UNDEROTORY. , — --- ..11.0•11. I ,,1 • 9 1 • t i E . i . f 1 I i I • I I I . I ? I I I i . .I I , CR1461-IED GRAvEL FrNE6 . 1 ' I COMPACTED GAD 1 ` GRAVEL - 3/4" MINUS r I I , PINION ' n _tr1. a:� •i, -. V- '�?;;l , GRADE I • ;Al�i w ♦ w♦a♦iii`''4'4'4♦i♦ ►'�♦ !a♦�i�♦; -1 -11 1-'-r r I-- I I —"Ti=--,I=1-7 1 11=1.11- 1 • COMPACTED We-GRADE ' 1 I j , f • I I 1 '" '. ; : 0 SECTION AT Ni caveisi P,4 T,4-; I11 in 10001• I I • I. 7 t ` 2z3 1 THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP S.W. � '^'Ty'• ND, qR. 9'204 PHONE 603 226 0622 FAX: 503 273 6333 , ri . AT HOh1Egv L: P�4� +4 DETAIL VILLAGE, TIG ARD mod �LL 4'It: 1/7/98 . PRO.! �t 1950 DRAWN �.. WN BY: CJF REVISION: DATE TOTAL P.04 • . rraLETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To: MR.WILL D'ANDREA Date: April 10, 1998 MITCHELL CITY OF TIGARD, PLANNING DIVISION NELSON 1 3 125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 Project Homestead Village —Tigard FROM: CATHERINE J. FIRTH - PROJECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PROJECT NO.: 19502 LAND USE PLANNING TRANSMITTING: VIA: FOR YOUR: ENGINEERING ATTACHED ❑ MAIL ❑ REVIEW& COMMENT LANDSCAPE ✓ MESSENGER ✓ INFORMATION/FILE ARCHITECTURE ❑ SEPARATE COVER ❑ FED Ex ❑ USE PROJECT MANAGEMENT COPIES DATED DESCRIPTION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES I 4-I 0-98 HOMESTEAD VILLAGE, TIGARD PLANTING PLAN REVISED TO SHOW AREAS OF TREE PLANTING TO FULFILL MI I IGA 1 ION REQUIREMENTS 10-27-97 ADDITIONAL PLANT MATERIALS 233 SW NAITO I 2-12-98 ADDITIONAL PLANT MATERIALS PARKWAY PORTLAND, I 3-10-98 ADDITIONAL PLANT MATERIALS OREGON 97204 I 2-20-98 TREE MITIGATION- TOTAL CALIPER INCHES TEL 503/225-0822 FAX 503/273-8353 WWW.MNGI.COM REFER TO ATTACHED MEMOS FOR SIZE, TYPE, AND QUANTITY OF MITIGATION PLANTING. PLEASE CONFIRM YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLANTING AND MITIGATION AS INSTALLED BY SENDING A LETTER OF CONFIRMATION TO THE OWNER, OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE, TOM DACK. AS WE DISCUSSED, THERE IS A BOND BEING HELD BY THE CITY UNTIL YOUR ACCEPTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT ME IF YOU NEED ANYTHING FURTHER. DISTRIBUTION: TOM DACK- HOMESTEAD VILLAGE \\NTSERVER\data\Projects\19500(Homestead Village)\19502(Tigard)\Correspondence\Tigard trans.doc THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED i MEMORANDUM Date: February 20, 1998 MITCHELL NELSON To: Tom Dack Homestead Village Incorporated Fax No.: I-510-727-2670 LAND USE PLANNING From: Catherine J. Firth, Project Landscape Architect ENGINEERING Project: Homestead Village, Extended Stay Hotel, Tigard LANDSCAPE Number: 19502 ARCHITECTURE Re: Tree Mitigation - Total Caliper Inches PROJECT MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT Torn- SERVICES The following is a summary of the caliper inches planted on the Tigard site as part of the landscape and tree mitigation plan. In our memo of May 30, 1997, we proposed planting 322 caliper inches to mitigate the unavoidable tree removal on the site. AREA CALIPER INCHES TOTAL MITIGATION CREDIT 233 SW NAITO Parking lot(required) 36 18 PARKWAY Landscape 142 142 PORTLAND, Buffer/Wetland 72 72 OREGON 97204 Total 232 TEL 503/225-0822 Additional ornamentals 1 0/27/97 39 39 FAX Native trees deleted (-39) (-39) 503/273-8353 Additional ornamentals 2/12/98 28 28 Current Total 260 WWW.MNGI.COM Additional ornamentals and natives 62 62 2/25/98 Total at finish 322 All of the ornamental trees have been installed in the landscape, parking, streetscape areas. The native trees have been installed in the wetland, buffer, and perimeter areas. We have reserved a portion of the mitigation inches(62")to be selected and installed once the majority of the landscape is complete. This will allow us to determine where the remaining"holes"are in both the landscape and the buffer/wetland areas and select the most appropriate material and size for each area. I hope this is useful in recording your efforts to comply with the intent, as well as the letter, of Tigard's tree preservation codes. Please contact me if you need further information. THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM DATE: March 10, 1998 MITCHELL TO: MR. TOM DACK • NELSON HOMESTEAD VILLAGE 22290 FOOTHILL BLVD. HAYWARD, CA 94541 510-583-2008 LAND USE PLANNING FROM: Catherine J. Firth -Project Landscape Architect ENGINEERING RE: Homestead Village—Tigard—Additional Plant Materials LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Based on our walk-through of the project site March 4th, I am proposing the addition of the following plant materials to augment those already installed. I am forwarding this memo to Cedar PROJECT Landscape for their bid for the purchase and installation of the following plants. These trees should MANAGEMENT Pe P g P meet the total caliper inches required by the Cit),+of Tigard to release your cash bond. If you have DEVELOPMENT questions or concerns regarding these additions, please call me at 225-0822. SERVICES I. Please add the following plant materials to the plant list. They will be located in the field by the Landscape Architect. Caliper inch totals are for tree mitigation if required by the City of Tigard. 233 SW NAITO I ea. SEQUOIA Sequoiadendron giganteum I 0-12' HT. 3" PARKWAY PORTLAND. 2 ea. KOREAN DOGWOOD Comus kousa 7-8' HT 5" OREGON 97204 TEL 6 ea. WESTERN RED CEDAR Thuja plicata 7-8' HT. 15" 503/225-0822 I ea. COLORADO BLUE SPRUCE Picea pungens 'Glauca' 7-8' HT. 2.5" FAX 503/273-8353 1 ea. JAPANESE FLOWERING CRABAPPLE Malus floribunda2 'h" CAL. 2.5" WWWMNGI.COM 3 ea. THUNDERCLOUD PLUM Prunus cerasifera'Thundercloud'I-I/2"CAL. 4.5" 8 ea. DOUGLAS FIR Psuedotsuga menziesii 7-8' HT. 16" I ea. JAQUEMONTI BIRCH Betula jaquemontii 3" CAL. 3" 6 ea. VINE MAPLE Acer circinnatum—forest—grown, multi-trunked 6' HT. 18" 3 ea. RHODODENDRON'Sappho' 36-42" HT. 0" TOTAL CALIPER INCHES 69.5" cc: Cedar Landscape-Raphael Joe E.Woods,Inc.—Dan Hart \\NTSE(NERRdata\Projeas\I 9500 stead Villagej+19502(Tgard)\Doc r,t\Add pants3.d« THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED • MEMORANDUM DATE: February 12, 1998 TO: MR. TOM DACK HOMESTEAD VILLAGE 22290 FOOTHILL BLVD. HAYWARD, CA 94541 510-583-2008 FROM: Catherine J. Firth- Project Landscape Architect RE: Homestead Village—Tigard—Additional Plant Materials Based on our walk-through of the project site yesterday, I am proposing the addition of the following plant materials to augment those already installed. I am forwarding this memo to Cedar Landscape for their bid for the purchase and installation of the following plants. If you have questions or concerns regarding these additions, please call me at 225-0822. 1. Please add the following plant materials to the plant list. They will be located in the field by the Landscape Architect. Caliper inch totals are for tree mitigation if required by the City of Tigard. 3 ea. SEQUOIA Sequoiadendron giganteum 10-12' HT. 12" 3 ea. AUSTRIAN PINE Pinus nigra 12' HT. 6" 4 ea. KOREAN DOGWOOD Comus kousa 7-8' HT 10" 12 ea. PACIFIC WAX MYRTLE Myrica califomica 4-5' HT. 40 ea. DAVID VIBURNUM 2 gal. 100 ea. BEARBERRY COTONEASTER I gal. 100 ea. WESTERN SWORD FERN I gal. 100 ea. SALAL 1 gal. TOTAL CALIPER INCHES 28" 2. Please provide and install 100 stepping stones as directed in the field by the Landscape Architect. cc: Cedar Landscape-Raphael Joe E.Woods,Inc.—Dan Hart EAPrciects 19500(H«nestmd Vii+e]s 19502(r 000,rtnts+gdd plants2.doc • // MEMORANDUM DATE: October 27, 1 997 MITCHELL TO: MR. TOM DACK NELSON HOMESTEAD VILLAGE 22290 FOOTHILL BLVD. HAYWARD, CA 94541 510-583-2008 LAND USE PLANNING FROM: Catherine J. Firth -Project Landscape Architect ENGINEERING RE: Homestead Village—Tigard—Additional Plant Materials LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Mitchell Nelson has issued revised Landscape and Irrigation Plans: Revision 3 / 10-22-97. Joe E. Woods has been given three blue line sets for distribution to its subcontractors. This memo should PROJECT accompany those drawings and be considered as part of the same bid revision. MANAGEMENT y DEVELOPMENT Any questions regarding the revision should be directed to Catherine Firth at 225-0822. SERVICES 1. Please add the following plant materials to the Revision 3 plant list. They will be located in the field by the Landscape Architect. I ea. JAPANESE MAPLE Acer palmatum 3"CAL. 3" 233 SW NAITO PARKWAY I I ea. AUSTRIAN PINE Pinus nigra I2' HT. 22" PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 I ea. SEQUOIA Sequoia giganteum 12' HT. 3" TEL 503/225-0822 2 ea. RED SUNSET MAPLE Acer rubrum'Red Sunset' 3" CAL. 6" FAX 2 ea. JAPANESE FLOWERING CRABAPPLE Malus floribunda 2 'h"CAL. 5" 503/273-8353 WvvWMNGLCOM TOTAL CALIPER INCHES 39" 2. Reduce Forest Mitigation Caliper inches by 39. Provide a total of 33 caliper inches for mitigation. 3. Clarification of plant list on Sheet LI: The first tree listed is a RED SUNSET MAPLE Acer rubrum 'Red Sunset' 3" CAL. Spacing as shown. cc: Joe E.Woods,Inc.—Dan Hart \\NTSERVER\data\Prc eos\19500(Homestead Viagey9502(Tgatr Docwnents\Add piants.doc THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP INCORPORATED