Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
SUB2005-00023
SUB2005 - 00023 SOLERA SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2005-00023 SOLERA SUBDIVISION T I GARD 120 DAYS =5/20/2006 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: SOLERA SUBDIVISION CASE NOS.: Subdivision(SUB) SUB2005-00023 Adjustment AR) VAR2005-00094 Variance VAR2005-00095 Variance VAR2005-00096 Variance VAR2005-00097 Variance VAR2005-00098 REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of an 11-lot subdivision on 1.07 acres. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes. Lot sizes within the development are proposed to be between 2,441 and 3,471 square feet (3,065 square feet on average). An access and egress adjustment to the street spacing requirement along SW Greenburg Road, an arterial, from 600 to 240 feet between the existing-95th Avenue and the proposed SW 96th Avenue is requested. In addition, the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive R 4.5 zone on the east) for proposed lots 1 through 4. APPLICANT: Palmer&Associates OWNERS: Max Moini and Attn: Al Jeck Mohammed-Hossein Tavakoli Sheraji 9600 SW Oak Street,Suite 230 2946 NW 11t Avenue Tigard,OR 97223 Camas,WA 98607 COMP.PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATION: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. LOCATION: 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road;WCTM 1S135CA,Tax Lots 2300 and 2302. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.370, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby.given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the preliminary subdivision request subject to certain conditions of approval,APPROVED the adjustment to the street spacing standard and to the driveway locations within the area of influence with Greenburg Road, and DENIED the variances to reduce the rear yard setback to the adjacent R4.5 zoned property to the east o:the site. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section VI of this Decision. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 1 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION THE APPLICANT SHALL CONSTRUCT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLANS SUBMITTED EXCEPT AS MODIFIED BY THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY ONSITE IMPROVEMENTS,INCLUDING GRADING,EXCAVATION AND/OR FILL ACTIVITIES): The applicant shall pre are a cover letter and submit it, along with any supportin documents and/or plans that address the followingrequirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: Gary Pagenstecher(503-639-4171, EXT 2434). The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 1. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall submit a final tree protection plan that clearly depicts the proposed tree protection measures,and includes the following notations: • The applicant shall notify the City Arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. • If it is necessary to enter the tree protection zone at any time with equipment (trucks bulldozers, etc.) the project arborist and City Arborist must be notified before any entry occurs. Before entering the TPZ, the project arborist and City Arborist shall determine the method by which entry can occur,along with any additional tree protection measures. • The project arborist shall provide the City Arborist with bi-weekly reports through and including building construction on the conditions and activities related to tree protection measures and activities. 2. Prior to any site work,the applicant shall show the driveway locations for anyproposed lots located within 150 feet of the intersection of SW Greenburg Road and SW 96th Avenue shall be located as far north from Greenburg Road as possible. 3. Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide the City staff with a revised layout for lots 1-4 including an illustration of proposed building envelopes that satisfy the dimensional requirements of TDC Table 18.5 0.2 for the R-12 Zoning District. The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERINGyDEPARTMENT, ATTN: KIM MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 4. Prior to commencing onsite improvements, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover street improvements and any other work in the public right-of-way. Eight (8) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department.Eight these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Buildi Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public-Facility-Improvement (P rmit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards,which are available at Qty Tall and the City's web page (www.citigard.or.us). 5. The PH permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example,specify if the entity is a corporation,limited partnership, LLC,etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 6. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City.Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. All construction vehicle parking shall-be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application,and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. 7. The applicant shall provide signage at the entrance of each shared flag lot driveway or private street that lists the addresses that are served by the given driveway or street. NOTICE OF DEQSION PAGE 2 OF 26 SUB200S00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION 8. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of Greenburg Road to increase the right-of-way to 50 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 9. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit, which indicate that they will construct a half-street improvement along the frontage of Greenburg Road. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section for a 5 lane Arterial street from curb to centerline equal to 36 feet,• B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond-the site frontage; C concrete curb,or curb and gutter as needed; D. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey surface and/or subsurface runoff; E. 8 foot concrete sidewalk with a 5 foot planter strip; F. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements; G. street striping; H streetlight layout by applicant's engineer,to be approved by City Engineer; I. underground utilities; street signs (if applicable); driveway apron(if applicable); and L. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Greenburg Road in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 10. The applicant's Public Facili ty Improvement permit construction drawings shall indicate that full width street improvements, including traffic control devices, mailbox clusters, concrete sidewalks, driveway aprons, curbs, asphaltic concrete pavement;sanitary sewers,storm drainage,street trees,streetlights, and underground utilities shall be installed within the interior subdivision streets. Improvements shall be revised to provide parking on one side,with supporting traffic data submitted, and a 5 foot planter strip between the curb and sidewalk along 96th Avenue and will be constructed to local street standards. 11. The proposed ROW for Greenview Drive shall be 50 feet,except at the corner,where the ROW must be the Was on County Eyebrow Corner, Standard Drawing M-405.5. The applicant's PH plan submittal shall clearly nsion all aspects of the selected eyebrow corner(inside radius,outside radius and centerline radius). 12. A profile of Greenburg Road shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 13. No lot within this development shall be permitted to access directly onto Greenburg Road. All driveways within 150 feet of the intersection of SW Greenburg and SW Greenview must be placed as far north from Greenburg Road as possible. 14. The applicant's construction drawings shall show that the pavement and rock section for the proposed private street(s)shall meet the City's public street standard for a local residential street. 15. Sanitary sewer and storm drainage details shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PH) permit plans. 16. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection and fire hydrants prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility Improvement permit. 17. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering-Department(Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the PH permit. 18. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PH) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Manning Manual, February2003 edition." NGflCE OF DECISION PAGE 3 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION 19. The applicant shall obtain a 1200-C General Permit issued by the City of Tigard pursuant to ORS 468.740 and the Federal Clean Water Act. 20. The applicant's plans shall be revised to provide a temporary hammerhead turnaround in a tract. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT: The applicant shall pre are a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the followingrequirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: Gary Pagenstecher(503-639-4171, EXT 2434). The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 21. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall provide City staff with a revised lot configuration that demonstrates compliance with TDC Section 18.430.020D. 22. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the plat stating that vehicular access from SW Greenburg Road to individual lots shall not be allowed. 23. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall provide City staff with a landscape plan showing that the buffer landscape materials and width along the north and west boundary of the subject property will meet the requirements of Chapter 18.745. The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that that the followin requirements to the ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, ATTN: KIM MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 24. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the plat stating that vehicular access from SW Greenburg Road to individual lots shall not be allowed. 25. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings .of the public m rovements as follows: 1) 3 mil myfar,2) a diskette of the as-builts in"DWG" format,if available;otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable, and 3) the as-built drawings shall be tied to the City's GPS network The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates,referenced to NAD 83 (91). 26. Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall pay the addressing fee. (STAFF CONTACT: Bethany Stewart, Engineering). 27. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system (GPS).geodetic control network(GC 22). These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey. By random traverse using conventional surveying methods. 28. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: A. Submit for City review four (4) paper copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon,and necessary data or narrative. B. Attach a check in the amount of the current final plat review fee (Contact Planning/Engineering Permit Technicians,at(503) 639-4171,ext.2421). C The final plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05) Washington County and by the City of Tigard. D. The right-of-way dedication for Greenburg Road shall be made on the final plat. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 4 OF 26 SUB2005-00023--SOLERA SUBDIVISION E. NOTE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive notice from the Engineering Department indicating that the City has reviewed the final plat and submitted comments to the applicant's surveyor. F. After the City and County have reviewed the finalplat, submit two mylar copies of the final plat for City Engineer s gnature (for partitions), or City Engineer and Community Development Director signatures (for subdivisions). 29. Prior to approval of the final plat,the applicant shall prepare Conditions,Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) 1 for this project,to be recorded with the final plat,that clearly lays out a maintenance plan and agreement for the proposed pnvate street(s). The CC&R's shall obligate the pnvate property owners within the subdivision to create a homeowner's association to ensure regulation of maintenance for the street(s). The applicant shall submit a copy of the (L&R's to the Engineenng Department (Kim McMillan) prior to approval of the final Plat- 30. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant's engineer shall provide final sight distance certification for the intersections of Greenburg Road/Greenview Dnve and Greenview Drive/Greenview Court. 31. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall place a note on the plat that prohibits direct access onto Greenburg Road from any lot. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, ATTN: KIM MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXM� 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 32. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a "photomylar" copy of the recorded final plat. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; THIS IS NOT AN EXCLUSIVE LIST: 18.430.080 Improvement Agreement: Before City approval is certified on the final plat, and before approved construction plans are issued by the City, the developer shall: 1. Execute and file an agreement with the City Engineer specifying the period within which all required improvements and repairs shall be completed; and 2. Include in the agreement provisions that if such work is not completed within the period specified,the City may complete the work and recover the full cost and expenses from the developer. The agreement shall stipulate improvement fees and deposits as may be required to be paid and may also provide for the construction of the improvements in stages and for the extension of time under specific conditions therein stated in the contract. 18.430.090 Bond: As required by Section 18.430.080,the subdivider shall file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one of the following: 1. An irrevocable letter of credit executed by a financial institution authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon; 2. A surety bond executed by a surety company authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon which remains in force until the surety company is notified by the City in writing that it maybe terminated; or 3. Cash. The subdivider shall furnish to the City Engineer an itemized improvement estimate, certified by a registered civil engineer,to assist the City Engineer in calculating the amount of the performance assurance. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 5 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION The subdivider shall not cause termination of nor allow expiration of said guarantee without having first secured written authorization from the City. 18.430.100 Filing and Recording: Within 60 days of the City review and approval,the applicant shall submit the final plat to the County for signatures of County officials as required by ORS Chapter 92. Upon final recording with the County,the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 18.430.070 Final PlatAAppplication Submission Requirements: Three copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. The subdivision plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05),Washington County,and by the City of Tigard. STREET CENTERLINE MONUMENTATION SHALL BE PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: Centerline Monumentation In accordance with Oregon Revised Statutes 92.060, subsection (2), the centerline of all street and roadway rights-of- way shall be monumented before the City accepts a street improvement. The following centerline monuments shall be set: 1. All centerline-centerline intersection points; 2. All cul-de-sac center points;and 3. Curve points,beginning and ending points (PCs and PT's). All centerline monuments shall be set during the first lift of pavement. Monument Boxes Required Monument boxes conforming to City standards will be required around all centerline intersection points, cul-de-sac center points,and curve points. The tops of all monument boxes shall be set to finished pavement grade. 18.810 Street&Utility Improvement Standards: 18.810.120 Utilities All utility lines including, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related flies shall be placed underground, except for surface-mounted transformers, surface-mounted connection boxes, and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction,high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above. 18.810.130 Cash or Bond Required All improvements installed by the subdivider shall be guaranteed as to workmanship and material for a period of one year following acceptance by the City. Such guarantee shall be secured by cash deposit or bond in the amount of the value of the improvements as set by the City Engineer. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.810.180. 18.810.150 Installation Prerequisite No land division improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the plans therefore have been approved by the City,permit fee paid and permit issued. 18.810.180 Notice to City Required Work shall not begin unti..the City has been notified in advance. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 6 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • If work is discontinued for any reason,it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. 18.810.200 Engineer's Certification The land divider's engineer shall provide written certification of a form provided by the City that all improvements workmanship and materials are in accord with current and standard engineering and construction practices, and are of high grade, prior to the City acceptance of the subdivision's improvements or any portion thereof for operation and maintenance. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: Staff conducted a search of City records and found no other land-use cases associated with the parcels of the subdivision. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is zoned R-12 and is bordered by an R-4.5 zone on the'east. As a result of this zone, there is a 30-foot setback along this border. The applicant is requesting tt vary this setback to 15 feet,the standard rear yard setback in the R 12 and R-4.5 zone. The site sits between SW 95 Avenue,the unimproved right of wa of SW 97th Court. S W 95�Avenue and SW 98th Avenue are street intersections located on the opposite side of SW Greenburg Road.SW 95 Avenue and the proposed SW 96th Avenue are approximately,305 feet apart from centerline to centerline, and the distance between the proposed SW 96th Avenue and SW 97' Court centerlines is approximately 180 feet apart. Greenburg Road is an arterial street which requires 600 foot spacing between driveways and streets. There are no other streets that front the subject property. As a result, the applicant has requested an adjustment to the street spacing standards. All structures on the site will be removed as a part of this development. Vicinity Information: The proposed development is on the north side of SW Greenburg Road, south of SW North Dakota, east of SW 97"Court and west of SW 95th Avenue. SECTION IV. COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET Notices were sent to adjacent property owners within 500 feet of the subject site boundaries. Neighborhood comments received during the public comment period for this development are provided in their entirety within the record and summarized below. City staff responses to the neighborhood comments are listed below the summarized comment. A letter was received from Margaret Davis,who lives directly west of the site,and John Drennan,who lives directly across the street from the project site. Mrs. Davis and Mr. Drennan are concerned that construction of the proposed street in it's proposed location would be detrimental to a row of trees on Mrs. Davis' property that her husband planted seventy years ago. Response: The applicant has provided an arborist report from Walt Knapp, a certified arborist that has been involved in this region for several years and is recognized as an arborist with a good understanding of tree issues within the Metro area. Mr. Knapp indicates in his report that construction of the access road proposed along the west property line could adversely impact the trees planted on the adjacent property line. Mr. Knapp makes recommendations for constructing the street in the least intrusive manner. The recommendations that Mr. Knapp makes will be imposed on the construction of the street provided they are approved by the City Engineer. Similar construction methods have been imposed in other subdivisions in the City of Tigard, and have proved successful, and there is no evidence to,suggest that the recommendations provided by Mr. Knapp would not be equally successful. The City Arbonst has requested bi-weekly.reports concerning the integrity of the tree protection measures and their condition during construction. Conditions will be imposed on the development to ensure that his request is followed. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 7 OF 26 SUB200500023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION A letter was received from Maria Juliana Picon,who lives directly east of the site. Mrs. Picon is concerned that her access is being taken away by the proposed development. According to Mrs. Picon, she has been accessing her property through the parking lot that is currently located on the subject site, and has not utilized her existing access onto SW Greenburg Road for several years. Mrs. Picon, would like to ensure that this access remains open to her for her safety, or that the developer make provisions on her property so that she may pull out onto SW Greenburg without having to back into the right-of-way. Response: It would be the City's preference to have Mrs. Picon access through an adjacent property so that the curb cut onto SW Greenburg Road from her property could be eliminated;unfortunately,the Qty does not possess the power to enforce private agreements, and there does not appear to be any recorded easement affording Mrs. Picon the right to access through this property Mrs. Picon makes the point that Adverse Possession may protect her "rights" to access the property through the subject site. This is a civil matter that must be either worked out between the two parties,or resolved by a court of law. A letter was received from Jesse Emory of 11280 SW 94th Avenue in which Mr. Emory objects to the development on several points, including neighborhood character, traffic, decreased property values, noise, reduced lot sizes, privacy,fire truck access, and inadequate landscaping. Response: Mr. Emory's points are noted and are considered in many of the existing standards of the Tigard Development Code. City staff, and the appropriate review agencies have reviewed each of these concerns against the applicable regulations, and aside from property values, neighborhood character, and aesthetics, which are dynamic in nature and not defined nor regulated by the Tigard Development Code, have made recommendations which have been incorporated into this decision. Mr Emory's letter does not cite any specific deficiencies which are regulated by the Tigard Development Code. A traffic report, and an arborist report have been submitted on behalf of the developer, and those agencies with expertise in the respective fields have had the opportunity to comment on those reports. Staff has reviewed the application for compliance with the Tigard Development Code (TDC), and where there are inconsistencies, has imposed conditions on the development to ensure that the development adheres to the applicable review criterion. The variances to the rear yard setbacks have been denied in this case. An e-mail was received from Mrs. Kathryn Grigorieff. Mrs. Grigorieff was writing to object to the request for reduced rear yard setbacks within the proposal. Response: The variances requested to the rear yard setbacks within this proposal are denied by this decision. The applicant will be required to satisfy the required setbacks as prescribed within the TDC. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA The following summarizes the criteria applicable to this decision in the order in which they are addressed: A. Variances and Adjustments - 18.370 18.370.020.Adjustments B. Subdivision Standards - 18.430 18.430.020 Subdivision C. . .licable Develo.mentCode Sections 18.510 ' -sidential zoning . tricts 18.705 Access,Egress and Circulation) 18.715 I ensity) 18.745 . dscaping and screening 18.765 Off-street parking and loading requirements) 18.790 ree removal) 18.795 ision clearance) E. Street and Uti ity Improvement- 18.810 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards) F. Impact Study(18.390) NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 8 OF 26 SUB2005.00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A-VARIANCES AND ADJUSTMENTS An access and egress adjustment to the street spacing requirement along SW Greenburg Road,an arterial,from 600 to 240 feet between the existing 95th Avenue and the proposed SW 96'Avenue is requested. In addition,the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet(setback from more restrictive R-4.5 zone on the east)for proposed lots 1 through 4. Variances and Adjustments (Chapter 18.370). The applicant has requested a variance on proposed lots 1-4 to reduce the special 30 foot setback between the R-4.5 zone and the R-12 zone to 15 feet,per table 18.510.2. Section 18.370.010(C)(3) states, "The Director shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny an application for a subdivision variance subject to the criteria set forth in Section 18.370.010.C. Section 18.370.010(C) lists the following approval criteria: a. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title,to any other applicable policies and standards,and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; b. There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; c. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land; d. Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title; and e.The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The purpose of the required setback is to provide greater separation between medium and low density zones, to help buffer the impacts of higher density development on lower density properties. This is particularly important in situations where higher density developments are proposed against existing single-family homes. In this case, the applicant has proposed attached single family homes adjacent to detached single-family homes. The applicant contends that City regulations, and the location of the large trees located along the west property edge has forced the location of the street and thereby imposed the need for a variance on the proposed lots. Further, the applicant indicates that the requested variance allows the property to be developed to appropriate densities for the underlying zone, at standard lot sizes for the underlying zones, and in a manner that will reserve the existing conditions and privacy of neighboring properties. To-mitigate for the impacts of the reduced rear yard, the applicant has proposed additional landscaping and screening along the rear yards of proposed lots 1-4. When designing a subdivision, a typical applicant will try to maintain a higher economic return by maximizing the density on a piece of property, but there is no evidence in the record to suggest that the standard to be varied deprives the applicant of reasonable economic use of the land, and it could easily be argued that the design of this subdivision creates the hardship. An adjacent property owner has objected to the setback variances. Adjacent property has the right to be protected according to the standards and rely on that protection which in this case is a 30 foot setback While the lot being. developed establishes challenges and layout issues to meet density requirements, the applicant has control of the type of product being developed and the hardship is directly related to the number of units proposed. A revised layout can be designed to meet the standards where variances would not be necessary. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 9 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION FINDINGS: In this case the minimum density for the proposed development is eight units. The applicant has proposed eleven units. The language in section (G)(2) above is very specific in that does not allow the consideration of self-imposed hardships. TThhe ro osed development could be redesigned to protect the trees on the western property, satisfy the minimum density and the dimensional standards of the R-12 zone including the 30 foot setback to properties within the adjacent R4.5 Zoning District. Therefore the case made by the applicant in support of the variances cannot be supported by staff and are hereby denied. CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide the City staff with a revised layout for lots 1-4 includ ng_an illustration Of proposed building_ that satisfy the dimensional requirements of T7 C Table 183102 for the-R-12 Zoning District . Adjustment to access and egress standards (Chapter 18.705). The applicant has requested an adjustment to the street spacing standard of 18.705.030.I-L3, which states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial is 600 feet. The applicant requests this adjustment as there is not enough frontage on the subject site to meet the 600 foot spacing standard for SW Greenburg Road, an arterial street. The pattern of development in the area necessitates that the future street be extended north, generally along the western edge of the property to connect to North Dakota Street. The applicant has provided a future street plan that will accommodate future redevelopment of adjacent parcels to the north, but cannot relocate the street in any direction without having to request the proposed adjustment. The proposed alignment is a reasonable alternative that satisfies the intent of the TDCstandards as they apply to connectivity. a. In all zoning districts where access and egress drives cannot be readily designed to conform to Code standards within a particular parcel, access with an adjoining property shall be considered. If access in conjunction with another parcel cannot reasonably be achieved, the Director may grant an adjustment to the access requirements of Chapter 18.705 through a Type II procedure, subject to the following approval criteria: The 600-foot street spacing standard cannot be met since there is less than 1200 feet between the two existing streets along Greenburg on either side of the proposed development. In fact, there is approximately 575 feet between these two streets. To not grant this particular adjustment would mean the property could not be developed further since neither streets or driveways could meet the standard. (1) It is not possible to share access; The creation of this subdivision necessitates that the lots be served by a public street. The classification of SW Greenburg as an arterial prevents any of the lots within the proposed subdivision from directly accessing this street. Existing development separates the property from any other public streets. The creation of a public street is necessary, as it is not possible to share access. In light of this, the street alignment is designed to allow shared access with an extension of this public street. (2) There are no other alternative access points on the street in question or from another street; Because of the parent parcel's width and location along SW Greenburg Road there are no alternative access points on the street in question that would not require an adjustment to this standard. (3) The access separation requirements cannot be met; As previously addressed,with the existing streets on either side of this project, there is no ability to meet the access separation requirements. (4) The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access; The applicant's request is to place an additional street within the 600 foot s acing distance of two other streets. By requiring all lots to take access from this street,this minimizes the degree of the adjustment to the extent practical. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 10 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION (5) The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access; and The applicant has provided a Preliminary Intersection Sight Distance Certification from Jeff Vanderdasson registered professional engineer with Alpha Community Development that indicates that the minimum required sight distance of 350 feet is exceeded in each direction from the proposed development. This section of SW Greenburg Road is also provided with a left turn lane refuge to improve safety conditions at this location. Approval of this adjustment will result in safe access to the site. (6)The visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 will be met. The applicant has shown vision clearance triangles on the site plan, and structures will be reviewed at the time of building permit submittal to ensure that no encroachments into these areas. FINDING: The criteria for granting an adjustment to the street spacing standards have been met. B - SUBDIVISION GENERAL PROVISIONS: Future Re-Division. When subdividing tracts into large lots, the Approval Authority shall require that the lots be of such size and shape as to facilitate future re-division in accordance with the requirements of the zoning district and this title. The minimum lot size for the R-12 zoning district is 3,050 square feet. The largest vacant lot will be 3,471 square feet. None of the proposed lots are large enough to divide any further.This criterion is satisfied. Lot Size Averaging: Section 18.430.020.D states Lot size may be averaged to allow lots less than the minimum lot size allowed in the underlying zoning district as long as the average lot area for all lots is not less than allowed by the underlying zoning district. No lot created under this provision shall be less than 80% of the minimum lot size allowed in the underlying zoning district. The applicant has proposed to exercise this standard by averaging the lot sizes. The minimum lot size for the R-12 zone is 3,050 square feet; therefore,the minimum lot size that would be allowed through averaging is 2,440 square feet. As proposed, all proposed lots satisfy this standard. However the proposed lots will likely be reconfigured between preliminary and final plat approval due to the denial of the four variances requested to the rear yard setback. Therefore it will be necessary for the applicant to demonstrate compliance with this standard with submittal of the final plat. FINDING The proposed lots range in size from 2,441 to 3,471 square feet in size. The development has an average lot size of 3,065 square feet under the provisions of 18.430.020(D). However, due to the denial of the variances requested to the rear d setback, it will be necessary to reconfirm that the proposed development satisfies this standard during final plat review. CONDITION: Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall provide City staff with a revised lot configuration that demonstrates compliance with WC Section 18.430.020.D. Phased Development The Approval Authority may approve a time schedule for developing a subdivision in phases, but in no case shall the actual construction time period for any phase be greater than two years without reapplying for a preliminary plat; The criteria for approving a phased site development review proposal are: a.)The public facilities shall be scheduled to be constructed in conjunction with or prior to each phase to ensure provision of public facilities prior to building occupancy;b The development and occupancy of any phase shall not be dependent on the use of temporary public facilities: For purposes of this subsection, a temporary public facility is an interim facility not constructed to the applicable City or district standard; and The phased development shall not result in requiting the City or other property owners to construct public facilities that were required as a part of the approval of the preliminary plat. The application for phased development approval shall be reviewed concurrently with the preliminary plat application and the decision may be.appealed in the same manner as the preliminary plat. The applicant has not proposed a phased development;therefore,this standard does not apply. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 11 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION C- SUBDIVISION APPROVAL CRITERIA Approval Standards - Preliminary Plat: The proposed preliminary plat complies with the applicable zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations. Compliance with the specific regulations and standards of the zoning ordinance will be addressed in greater detail later in this decision. The proposed plat name must not be duplicative and must otherwise satisfy the provisions of ORS Chapter 92. The applicant has provided signed documentation dated 10-10-2005 that the proposed subdivision name, "Solera" has been reserved with Washington County,thus insuring that the name is not duplicative.This criterion is satisfied. The streets and roads are laid out so as to conform to the plats of subdivisions and maps of major partitions i or subdivisions already approved for adjoining property as to width,general direction and in all other respects unless the City deternunes it is in the public interest to modify the street or road pattern. Street layout is discussed in more detail,and conditioned if necessary,under the Street and Utility standards section of this decision. An explanation has been provided for all common improvements. The applicant has provided an explanation for all common improvements as required and, therefore, satisfied this criterion. Specific derails of the proposed improvements are discussed later in this decision under the Street and Utility Improvement Standards Section 18.810. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the proposal has met or can be conditioned to satisfy the preliminary plat approval standards for subdivisions. D- APPLICABLE TIGARD DEVELOMENT CODE SECTIONS Residential Zoning Districts (18.510) Lists the description of the residential Zoning District. The site is located in the R-12:Medium-Density residential zoning district. The R-12 zoning district has the following dimensional requirements: TABLE 18.510.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES STANDARD R-12 Minimum Lot Size 3,050 sq.ft. Detached unit Duplexes-Attached unit Average Minimum Lot Width None Maximum Lot Coverage 80%[1] Minimum Setbacks Front yard 15 ft. Side facing street on corner&through lots 10 ft. Side yard 5 ft. Rear yard 15 ft. Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district 30 ft.* Distance between property line and front of garage 20 ft. Maximum Height 35 ft. Minimum Landscape Requirement 20% [1] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious areas. *An adjustment has been requested for this standard to reduce it to 15 feet. NOTICE OF DEQSION PAGE 12 OF 26 SUB2005-00023—SOLERA SUBDIVISION The proposed lots range in size from 2 441 square feet to 3,471 square feet and average 3,180 square feet. The applicant has requested for variances to tcie 30 foot special setback from the R-4.5 zone on the west that were denied previously in this decision_ A condition has been imposed on the development to ensure that the standard is satisfied in the final plat submittal. Exhibit 4 of the applicant's plan submittal shows proposed building envelopes that demonstrate compliance with front,side,and aside from proposed lots 1-4,rear yard setbacks called for in DC Table 18.510.2. Compliance with building height and minimum landscape requirements are verified prior to the issuance of building.permits. There is no evidence in the record to suggest that the dimensional standards of the R-12 zone cannot be satisfied FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the residential zoning district dimensional standards are satisfied. Access,Egress and Circulation(18.705): Chapter 18.705 establishes standards and regulations for safe and efficient vehicle access and egress on a site and for general circulation within the site. Table 18.705.1 states that the minimum vehicular access and egress for single-family dwelling units on individual lots shall be one, 10-foot paved driveway within a 15-foot-wide accessway. The minimum access width for 3-6 dwelling units is 20 feet with 20 feet of pavement. The access and egress into the site itself is discussed later in this decision under the Street and Utility Standards section of this decision (18.810). Access to individual lots will be reviewed for compliance during the building permit phase. Access plan requirements. No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and appproved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement Scaled site plans have been submitted that indicate how the requirements of access,egress, and circulation are to be met. Joint access. Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or parcels of land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title, provided: Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; and Copies of the deeds,easements, leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the City. No joint access is proposed. Public street access. All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.030I shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. Based on the plans submitted, all of the proposed lots will take access from SW 96th Avenue. This criterion is satisfied. Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT,Washington County,the City and AASHTO. The applicant's engineer has submitted Preliminary Sight Distance certification for the proposed intersection with Green-burg Road. The engineer states that the posted speed is 35 mph and that available sight distance is over 350 feet in each direction. The applicant's engineer must provide a final sight distance certification for the intersection prior to final plat approval. FINDING: The applicant has provided preliminary Sight Distance Certification as required for the preliminary plat approval; however, final Sight Distance Certification must be completed to ensure that the proposed intersection is safe in compliance with TDC Section 18.705.030.H.1 NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 13 OF 26 SUS 2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage,the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. There are six lots located within 150 feet of the intersection of SW 96th Avenue and Greenburg Road. An reconfigured lots proposed to satisfy the rear yard setbacks that were discussed previously in this narrative will still be located within-150 feet due to the shape of the lot. Therefore any ppr�oposed driveways for the reconfigured lots must be located as far north from Greenburg_Road possible. The driveway locations for any lots within the 150 foot area of influence of the intersection of SW 96th Avenue and SW Greenburg Road shall be shown on the PFI application submittal. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. Within 600 feet of the proposed street there are four streets and approximately 15 individual driveways. It is apparent that there are no locations along Greenburg Road that the applicant could propose that would meet this spacing standard. The applicant has requested an adjustment which has been approved previously in this narrative. Curb cuts: Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N: Concrete curbs, curb cuts, wheelchair bicycle ramps and driveway approaches shall be constructed in accordance with standards specified' in this chapter and Section 15.04.080: Concrete curbs and driveway approaches are required; except where no sidewalk is planned, an asphalt approach may be constructed with City Engineer approval and Asphalt and concrete driveway approaches to the property line shall be built to City configuration standards. No driveway approach shall be less than five feet from the side property line projected except in cul-de- sacs, without approval and written permission of the city. The end slopes may encroach within the five foot restricted area. No portion of any driveway approach, including the end slopes, shall be located closer than thirty feet to an intersection street right-of-way line. Commercial or service drives shall not be more than thirty feet in width and if located on the same lot frontage shall be separated by a minimum length of curb of thirty feet. Each residential driveway shall be not more than twenty-six feet in width including end slopes, and if more than one driveway is to be constructed to serve the same lot, the frontage spacing between such driveways shall be not less than thirty feet measured along the curb line. Joint access driveways shall conform to the appropriate width standard for commercial or residential type usage. Driveways and curb cuts will be reviewed for compliance during the building permit phase. Direct individual access to arterial or collector streets from single-family dwellings and duplex lots shall be discouraged. Direct access to major collector or arterial streets shall be considered only if there is no practical alternative way to access the site. Currently, lot 1 is the only lot with frontage on an arterial street. A plat note will be required restricting vehicular access directly onto SW Greenburg. In no case shall the design of the service drive or drives require or facilitate the backward movement or other maneuvering of a vehicle within a street, other than an alley. Single-family and duplex dwellings are exempt from this requirement. The proposed subdivision is for attached single-family homes. Therefore,this standard does not apply. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 14 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION Minimum access requirements for residential use: Vehicular access and egress for single-family, duplex or attached single-family dwelling units on individual lots and multi:family residential uses shall not be less than as provided m Table 18.705.1 and Table 18.705.2; The width of driveways serving individual lots will be reviewed at the time of build' permit application. Based on the proposed site plan,compliance with this standard is feasible. Therefore,this standard is met. Vehicular access to multi-family structures shall be brought to within 50 feet of the ground floor entrance or the ground floor landing of a stairway, ramp, or elevator leading to the dwelling units; No multi-family structures are proposed with this application. Therefore,this standard does not apply. Private residential access drives shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code; The driveways serving individual lots will be reviewed at the time of building permit application. Based on the proposed site plan,compliance with this standard is feasible. Therefore,this standard is met. Section 18.705.030.H.4 states that Access Drives in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus by one of the follllowing: a circular, paved surface having a minimum turn radius measured from center point to outside edge of 35 feet or a hammerhead-configured, paved surface with each leg of the hammerhead having a minimum depth of 40 feet and a minimum width of 20 feet. The maximum cross slope of a required turnaround is 5%. Currently there are no access drives in excess of 150 feet in length. This criterion is not applicable to this proposaL FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the Access,Egress and Circulation standards have not been satisfied. CONDITIONS: • Final sight distance certification for the intersections of SW 96th Avenue and Greenburg Road shall be submitted to the Engineering Division prior to final plat approvaL • Prior to any site work, the applicant shall show the driveway locations for any proposed lots located within 150 feet of the intersection of SW Greenburg Road and SW 96th Avenue shall be located as far north from Greenburg Road as possible. • Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the plat stating that vehicular access from SW Greenburg Road to individual lots shall not be allowed. Density Computations and Limitations (18.715): Chapter 18.715 implements the Comprehensive Plan by establishing the criteria for determining the number of dwelling units permitted. The number of allowable dwelling nits is based on the net development area. The net area is the remaining.parcel area after exclusion of sensitive lands and land dedicated for public roads or parks. The net area is then divided by the minimum lot size permitted by the zoning district to determine the number of dwelling units that may be developed on a site. Based on the formulas in Chapter 18.715 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code,the maximum and minimum number of units permitted on the site are based on the net developable area. The net developable area is the gross site area,subtracting sensitive land areas,land dedicated for public parks and public rights-of-way,land for private streets,and if an existing dwelling unit is to remain,the area ofpthe lot on which that unit is situated. Of the total gross site area (1.07 acres or 46,609 square feet), 13,029 square feet is subtracted for night-of-way dedications on SW Greenburg and SW 96th Avenue. There are no public parks or sensitive areas within the project. Therefore,the net developable area is 33,580 square feet. The net area divided by the minimum lot size in the R-12 zone 3,050 s.f.) yields the maximum number of units, in this case 11. The minimum number of lots is based on 80% of the maximum,or 8. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 15 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION The applicant has proposed 11 lots in this subdivision, and will likely lose one or two lots in the lot reconfiguration resulting from denial of the variance. However, even if the applicant is able to reconfigure the lots, demonstrate compliance with the required rear yard setback, and maintain 1I lots, the proposal will remain in compliance with the minimum and maximum density requirements. Therefore,this section is satisfied. FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the density standards have been satisfied. Landscaping and Scre ening(18.745): Chapter 18.745 contains landscaping provisions for new development. Section 18.745.100 requires that street trees be planted in conjunction with all development that fronts a street or driveway more than 100 feet long. A proposed planting list must be submitted for review by the Director since certain trees can damage utilities, streets and sidewalks or cause personal injury. Section 18.745.040.0 contains specific standards for spacing of street trees as follows: • Small or narrow stature trees (under 25 feet tall and less than 16 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 20 feet a art; • Medium sized trees (25 feet to 40 feet tall, 16 feet to 35 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart;and • Large trees (over 40 feet tall and more than 35 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 40 feet apart; The applicant indicates in the narrative that street trees along for the public streets will be provided in compliance with this chapter and provides a street tree plan in Exhibit 9 for.proposed lots on the east side of proposed SW 96th Avenue. Street trees }or the west side of SW 96th Avenue will be planted with redevelopment of the adjacent westerly property. The applicants plan includes the provision of 2-inch caliper Cagle Pear trees on the east side of the street, and the spacing of the trees satisfies the minimum spacing for small trees as required in Section 18.745.040 of the Tigard Development Code.This standard is satisfied. Section 18.745.050 contains the provisions and requirements for buffering and screening. The Buffering and Screening Matrix(Table 18.745.1) requires a minimum eight foot buffer between existing single- family and proposed attached single-tamily developments proposing more than 5 units. With the minimum number of units required for this development this standard is applicable. The applicant has proposed a six-foot wood or vinyl fence, and a mixture of trees and shrubs along the border between the uses along the east property, but not the north where there is at least one single-family detached unit that requires buffering. Buffering, but not screening is required when dissimilar uses are separated by a street. In this instance, properties located to the south will be separated from the development by SW Greenburg Road and properties located to the east will be separated by SW 9 Avenue. The proposed development does not satisdythe minimum buffering requirements as required by Section 18.745.050 FINDING: The proposed development does not provide the required buffering and screening required along the north property line. Also, the proposed planting scheme does not include the provision o TIC Section 18.745.050(B)(4)(b). CONDITION: Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall provide City staff with a landscape plan showing that the buffer landscape materials and width along the north and west boundary of the subject property will meet the requirements of Chapter 18.T45. Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements (18.765): Chapter 18.765, Table 18.765.2 requires that single-family attached residences be provided with the same number of required off-street parking spaces as a Multi-family dwelling. Multi-family dwelling parking requirements are based on the number of bedrooms and require up to 1.75 parking spaces for each three- bedroom dwelling unit. The applicant is proposing two parking spaces per unit. One space will be located within an attached garage, and a second space wi l be provided within the driveway. Compliance with this standard will be enforced duruigAllies building permit review process. The TIC requires 20 feet from the property line to the face of a garage. standard will insure that at least one car can park off of the street, outside of any garage. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 16 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION FINDING: Because each individual home will be reviewed for compliance with this standard during the building permit phase and it is feasible that this standard will be met by providing driveways and garages,this standard has been satisfied. Tree Removal(18.790): Chapter 18.790 requires mitigation of trees over 12" diameter at breast height(dbh) removed as part of the development of the site. The applicant's tree removal plan indicates the trees on the property that are to remain and those proposed for removal. There are a total of 13 trees (greater than 6" diameter on the property) Of these trees none are greater than 12 inches in diameter. All trees on the site are proposed to be removed, but because there are no trees over 12-inches in diameter, no mitigation is required. The City Arborist,the project arborist, and some neighbors of the project have expressed concern for the protection of the trees located on the property just west of this site. FINDING: The TDC requires that all trees that are 12-inches or greater that could be adversely affected by construction of the project be protected during construction. The project arborist has made several recommendations to help ensure the long term viability of the large trees located on the property located directly west of this property. It is unrealistic to imagine that these trees will not be affected by construction of the proposed street and any excavation on the site; therefore, it is conditioned below that the applicant/developer diligently maintain all recommended tree rotection measures � the course of construction and that the project arborist provide the City Arborist with bi- y reports on the condition of the proposed tree_protection measures. Final tree protection must be reviewed and signed off by the City of Tigard Arborist. To ensure the longterm viability of the large trees located on the property directly west of the project site, additional conditions are warranted. CONDITIONS: • Prior to any site work, the applicant shall submit a final tree rotection plan that clearly depicts the proposed tree protection measures,and includes the following notations: • The applicant shall notify the City Arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. • If it is necessary to enter the tree protection zone at any time with equipment (trucks, bulldozers, etc.) the project arborist and City Arborist must be notified before any entry occurs. Before entering the TPZ, the project arborist and City Arborist shall determine the method by which entry can occur,along with any additional tree protection measures. • The project arborist shall provide the City Arborist with bi-weekly reports through and including building construction on the conditions and activities related to tree protection measures and activities. Vision Clearance (18.795): Chapter 18.795 applies to all development and requires that clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways and at the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A visual clearance area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, signs, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height. The applicant has illustrated the vision clearance area on several sheets as required. While there is no reason to believe that there will be any obstructions within the vision clearance areas, the applicants Street Tree plan shows a street tree in the vision clearance area. Since the tree will be two-inches in caliper at the time of planting, it will most likely not obstruct the vision clearance area. Nevertheless, the applicant must maintain the vegetation in accordance with the standards of 18.795. This standard is satisfied. FINDING: Because no structures are currently proposed in the vision clearance area and all future buildings will be reviewed for compliance during the building permit phase,this standard has been satisfied. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 17 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOE FRA SUBDIVISION E -STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS(SECTION 18.810): Street And Utility Improvements Standards Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets,sewers,and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030(E) requires an Arterial street to have a 100- foot right-of-way width and a 72-foot paved section. Local residential streets shall have a minimum right-of- way width of 54 feet with a 32 foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking,sidewalks and bikeways,underground utilities,street lighting,storm drainage,and street trees. 'This site lies adjacent to SW Greenburg Road,which is classified as an Arterial on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present,there is approximately 30-35 feet of ROW from centerline according to the most recent tax assessors map. The applicant should dedicate the additional ROW to provide 50 Let from centerline. SW Greenburg Road is currently partially improved. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct the half-street improvements. The applicant has_proposed to construct 96th Avenue as a local"skinny" street with a 50 foot ROW. The applicant should dedicate adequate ROW to provide for the half-street improvements and a minimum of 24 feet of paving. The applicant has proposed to construct 28 feet of paving from curb to curb. This will only provide parking on one side, as limited by the current fire code. The fire code allows parking on one side with a minimum of 26 feet paved. The applicant shall provide a revised section,with supporting trip data for review with their PH permit submittal. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030(F) states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer,the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length. The applicant has submitted a future street plan showing how the proposed public street can be extended to the west and then north to SW North Dakota. They also indicate how adjoirung property might be divided for development. Several options were included to show potential future development of ad ouung parcels. While the proposed road will result in an "S" curve, considering the other impacts to adjoining parcels and trees on the site, the proposed future street plan is adequate to meet this criterion. The applicant's plan does not provide for a temporary hammerhead turnout as required by 18.810.030.F2.c. The applicant has based this design decision on input from TVFR, but this standard was not intended to be limited to emergency vehicles. Therefore,the applicant shall revise the plans to provide a temporary hammerhead turnaround in a tract. Cul-de-sacs: 18.810.030.K states that a cul-de-sac shall be no more than 200 feet long, shall not provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units, and shall only be used when environmental or topographical constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards in this code preclude street extension and through circulation: NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 18 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • All cul-de-sacs shall terminate with a turnaround. Use of turnaround configurations other than circular,shall be approved by the City Engineer,and • The length of the cul-de-sac shall be measured along the centerline of the roadway from the near side of the intersecting street to the farthest point of the cul-de-sac. • If a cul-de-sac is more than 300 feet long, a lighted direct pathway to an adjacent street may be required to be provided and dedicated to the City. There are no cul-de-sacs proposed by this development. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre- existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15% for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints,the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. The future street connection will provide circulation through this site and eventually provide a connection between Greenburg Road,an Arterial,and North Dakota Street,a Neighborhood Route,thereby meeting this criterion. Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street(except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer. The proposed street grades do not exceed 6% thereby meeting this criterion. The applicant must submit a profile of Greenburg Road,extending 300 feet beyond the frontage in each direction,with their PFI application submittal. Access to Arterials and Major Collectors: Section 18.810.030.Q states that where a development abuts or is traversed by an existing,or proposed arterial or major collector street, the development design shall provide adequate protection for residential properties and shall separate residential access and through traffic or if separation is not feasible, the design shall minimize the traffic conflicts. The design shall include any of the following: • A parallel access street along the arterial or major collector, • Lots of suitable depth abutting the arterial or major collector to provide adequate buffering with frontage along another street; • Screen planting at the rear or side property line to be contained in a non-access reservation along the arterial or major collector, or • Other treatment suitable to meet the objectives of this subsection; • If a lot has access to two streets with objectives classifications, primary access should be from the lower classification street. None of the proposed lots will be allowed direct access onto Greenburg Road. All driveways shall be located as far north from Greenburg Road as possible. Private Streets: Section 18.810.030.T states that design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer. The City.shall require legal assurances for the continued maintenance of private streets, such as a recorded maintenance agreement. Private streets serving more than six dwelling units are permitted only within planned developments, mobile home parks, and multi-family residential developments. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 19 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION There are no private streets proposed within this development. This criterion is not applicable to the proposed development. Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length,width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 2,000 feet measured along the right-of-way line except • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre- existing development or • For blocks adjacent to arterial streets,limited access highways,major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. SW Greenburg Road is an arterial street,and therefore this standard is not applicable. Nevertheless the subdivision creates a public street that is intended to be extended with future development to the north and'east which will ultimately create a block approximately 2,100 feet in length. Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections onpublic easements or right-of- ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns,or strict adherence to other standards in the code. The applicants proposed street will provide a connection along SW Greenburg Road that is 150 feet from the edge of SW 97t Avenue and 260 feet from the edge of SW 95th Avenue. Eventually this street will provide a through connection to SW North Dakota Street. Therefore,this criterion is satisfied. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. The minimum lot size of the R-12 zoning district is 3,050 sgiAre feet. None of the lots exceed 13 times the minimum lot size(4,575 sf). Therefore,this standard does not apply. Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c applies,which requires a parcel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded access easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit,the frontage shall be at least 15 feet. All of the proposed lots have at least 25 feet of frontage onto a public street. The applicant will likely be required to reconfigure the lots due to the denial of the variances and all new lots will be required to provide 25 feet of frontage onto a public or private lot in compliance with this standard. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. The applicant's plans indicate that sidewalks will be constructed along SW Greenburg and along the east side of the new public road being constructed as part of a 3/ street improvement in support of the project. The plans show the sidewalk on 96th Avenue as curb-tight without a planter strip as required by 18.810.070.0 The applicant's plans shall be revised to provide a 5 foot planter strip between the curb and the sidewalk Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 20 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projectedby the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant's plans show the extension of the public sanitary sewer from a manhole in Greenburg Road. The plan shows the public line extended to the north property line, within the proposed SW 96th Avenue right-of-way. The applicant's plans also show the extension of the public sewer in Greenburg Road to the east end of their frontage. This criterion can be satisfied. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no upstream drainage ways that impact this development. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions brave been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Waterrvices in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of ur1 ervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek,the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant has proposed to construct an underground detention system in order to meet this requirement. Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. Greenburg Road is a designated bicycle facility and striping is in place.This criterion is satisfied. Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.0 states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. The bikeway is already improved. Therefore,this standard does not apply. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 21 OF 26 SUB200S00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer,shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections ihall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority deternunes that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above- ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public tight-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are no overhead utilities along the project frontage. This standard is not applicable to the proposed development. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Public Water System: Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) provides service in this area. The applicant has shown an extension of the public water in Greenburg Road into the site, within the proposed public ROW. The applicant shall obtain approval from TVWD for the public water line and fire hydrants prior to construction. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management(SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition,a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition,the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant's engineer has provided preliminary storm drainage calculations for Stormwater Management catch basin filters. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate 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, cleating, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb one or more acres of land. A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface a of all lots,and show that they be graded to insure that surface drainage is directed to the street or a public storm • e system approved by the Engineenng Department. For situations where the back portions of lots drain away from a street and toward adjacent lots, appropnate private storm drainage lines shall be provided to sufficiently contain and convey runoff from each lot. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 22 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SCLERA SUBDIVISION Since the site is over an acre in size,An NPDES 1200-C permit will be required. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary(USB). The existing house will need to be issued a new address as will each of the newly created lots. An addressing fee in the amount of$50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to approval of the final plat. For this project,the addressing fee will be $50 per lot. The developer will also be required to provide signage at the entrance of each shared driveway that lists the addresses that are served by the given driveway. This assist emergency services personnel to more easily find a particular home. Survey Requirements: The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates 83 91)] on two monuments with a tie to the C..ity's global positioning system(GPS) geodetic control network(GC 22). a monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by. • GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey. • By random traverse using conventional surveying methods. In addition, the applicant's as-built drawings shall be tied to the GPS network The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes,catch basins,water valves,hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coor id natees, referenced to NAD 83 (91). F- IMPACT STUDY Section 18.390.050 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study, to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.050 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. The internal street within the subdivision is needed to allow the subdivision to develop and the need for streets is created by the subdivision. Because the need for the internal street is created by the development,the impact of the development is directly proportional to the cost of dedication and construction of the internal streets. Therefore, no proportionality analysis is needed for the internal street improvements, and they are not factored into the mitigated costs for the Qty's transportation system. External street improvements are required to offset the general contribution of traffic impacts (vehicular, pedestrian, etc.) generated from the development and to systematically bring substandard systems into conformance. These half-street frontage improvements are required to be roughly proportional to the impacts resulting from development of the property. Upon completion of this development, the future builders of the residences will be required to pay TIF's of approximately$28,510 ($2,851 x 10 single-family dwelling units). Any required street improvements to certain collector or higher volume streets and the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) are mitigation measures that are required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 23 OF 26 SUB2005-0 0 02 3-SOLERA SUBDIVISION Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $89 093 ($28,510 divided by.32). The difference between the TIF paid and the full impact,is considered an unmitigated impact. Less mitigated costs The applicant is required to dedicate an additional 14-feet of right-of-way along the project's 126.5 feet of frontage on SW Greenburg Road (1,771 s.f). In addition, the applicant is responsible for improving this frontage with 1/2 street improvements. The approximate value of residenrialfy zoned property for right of way purposes is $3.00 per square foot. The approximate value of'/ street improvements is$200 perlineal foot. Estimate of Unmitigated Impacts Full Impact TIF-0.32= $89,093 Less TIF Assessment 10 lots x$2,851= $28,510 Less ROW value 1771 s.f..x$3= $5,313 Less 1 street improvement value 1,771 If.x$200=. $25,120 Estimated Value of Remaining Unmitigated Impacts $30,150 FINDING: Using the above cost factors it can be determined that the value of the remaining unmitigated impacts exceeds the costs of'the conditions imposed and, therefore, the conditions are roughly proportional and justified. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Operations Utility Manager has reviewed the proposal,but offered no comments: The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has objection to it. The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed the proposal,but offered no comments: The City of Tigard Forester has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: There appears to be large trees on the Neighboring property to the west of the project site. These trees must be protected during construction. The project arbonst will have to prescribe tree protection measures and agree to biweekly reports concerning those measures and their condition. SW 96`h Avenue will have an adverse affect on these trees belonging to the neighbor. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Clean Water Services of Washington County has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: There do not appear to be any fatal flaws sanitary sewer and storm sewer are rovided to each lot,water quality and water quantity provided. City will need to approve the calculations and forward a set of final plans for CWS "Official Sign off" authorizing storm water connection permit issuance. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval: 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUILDING 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. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 24 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • 2) DEAD END ROADS: Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. The proposed design will require a fire apparatus turn-around(see Item #3 for exception) 3) 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 approvedpbythe fire code official. 4) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire a aratus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (12 feet for up to two dwe units and accessory buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. ere fire apparatus roadways are less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are more than 28 feet wide but less than 32 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more,parking is not restricted. 5) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed driving surface, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Roads 26 feet wide orless shall be posted on both sides as a fire lane. Roads more than 26 feet wide to 32 feet wide shall be posted on one side as a fire lane. Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE" and shall be installed with a clear space above grade level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have red letters on a white reflective background. 6) 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 75,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weighty.-You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. 7) TURNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall be not less than 28 feet and 48 feet respectively,measured from the same center point. 8) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single family dwellings and duplexes served by a municipal water supply shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the structure(s) is (are) 3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be determined according to IFC Appendix B. 9) FIRE HYDRANTS - ONE- AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS & ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: Where a portion of a structure is more than 600 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the structure(s), on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. A minimum of one fire hydrant shall be located on the same side of Greenburg Rd. as the proposed project. 10) FIRE HYDRANT NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION: The minimum number and distribution of fire hydrants available to a building shall not be less than that listed in Appendix C,Table C 105.1. Considerations for placing fire hydrants may be as follows: • Existing hydrants in the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants as approved. Hydrants that are up to 600 feet away from the nearest point of a subject building that is protected- rotected with fire sprinlders may contribute to the required number of hydrants. . Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants unless approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highways or freeways shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Heavily traveled collector streets only as approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the fire code official. 11) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 25 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION 12) REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access road way that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline,and place the reflectors accordingly 13) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. SECTION IX PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owners of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 4,2006 AND EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 19, 2006 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. eaF e Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the 'Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten C10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was maled. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any arty during the appeal al hearing,subject to any addition rules of procedure that maybe adopted-from time to time by the appellate-body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON APRIL 18,2006. estions: If ycni have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, Oregon at(503) 639-4171. PREPARED BY: Brad Kilby,Consultant 6_ Iii J V, April 4,2006 APPROVED BY: Ric . • B dorff DATE Planning r ager NOTICE.OF DECISION PAGE 26 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION I N CITY of TIGARD © O =lop=©=/ GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM OHO= ==t=== VICINITY 0000 == o 0 0 0_4 0 0 0 0 o°°°° >w Q W SUB2005-00023 = . - Q 04 - - 0 VAR2005-00094 Q 0' - VAR2005-00095 .o 1111 lid NORTH- DAKOTA VAR2005-00096 di ji VAR2005-00097 1111 1„1 II VAR2005-00098 IIII UM� arm_ 11//> 1 SOLERA SUBDIVISION art" 10A 11 1111-1 1111i1i .ter F"_ E 1"' �.: ■IUIII ■ FB�Rn 111 in -� Tigard Np Map W IIII Z c'RF' N Q Ne4/Rc _ _ 0 100 200 300 400 Feet 1".261 feet CT _ LEWIS LN .---, C`1' .ill . I City of Tigard co '' Information on this map is for general location only and should be vaned with the Development Services Division. SW PI T� 13125 SW Tigard, Hall Blvd PI ST �/���/� /� C �\ I7'CTQQ E L/1 /ww 639-4171 ,� htlp:IM'AM'.Cl.tlgafd.Or.U3 Community Development Plot date:Jan 31,2006;C:\magic1MAGIC03.APR .., T.. 1 IL 4100 A I •' \\\\\\.'` 11.08041 0804 I \`, ,\ \ j n3 I n,, . ,DO' I ri_IL 2100 I 1 , , 1 C 1 , I 10 s' I ]6.5'T. ' I 11 1 r so.D 1 • R�/W RI C/� R•P.-_���- _..J. __-y.._..---.__� PUNK FLAKIER 6!' . 1 ' ' � -x6: STRIP VA 111 1 I , +l EAKDEAW6 15.5' i ---If7d' (.0 M1, SIDEwKx tl l I 7.0/6 0 _ 1 I __ 1 _...._ y 1 • NTH AVENUE f-...__�.._--.._-.- T=��17]T—r .........._._...__--�-- f NOT TO SCALE i- I 7 ;b , • k i I � . 7A6 6P 1 11.24001 ' I 7,RO6 M I `A 30.0' RI ---- I _ .,....._......__...-_.... IL 22RO • p0.3' ]`"`- -- ' L__4_32 s 11' i _� s �z.ox I ' E r.....-- rte'- 176A'—_-�.. 9DEwM/f / li 3 ' I i 1 i6.r i 1 j I 1 . - SW OREENBURO RD . I i NAl'STRt(1 Ix6.EROW FOOL APTION REWKRED 3.3'10 73.0' ri PROPOSED POUR(RDW , t p 1 I 1 ' r I 14 I 1 7,44'4'F' d n 2304 I n 2303 I Nor TO SCALE 1 - - ' 1 67.0' , 6•6 ---...*•---.....„......, 2.565 ' I LEOEND ; [----.....-----—. ----■-•.] . • -'--, -` - ..'K~_— u I IL I -PRMOSED Rlfl+f-Jf-war• . r„_ 1 —. WON - I ------EXISTING RIDHI-DE-9000 -•-,,,,�_-• `~••- - + IAIR.d( 'I -,..__ `.-. I 1 EXISTI± PROPOSED CURB -.ice. i -`"-+._ . -PROPOSED CENYEMINC v SIN--.--... OR�y b ..• •- .......�M �.�. I $ .............�.[tl51w..C[NIEM INk . I ++`.-�__ p` - --�-.`a----.....J I. =..�PROPOSED PROPERTY UNE RN " 1 ) EMISiwt,PRI)PERTY INC I I ----•-1 '+�M -. PROPOSED BOUNDARY LINE• --t. .mss•M1 "`..-... y .... UPI .., CI D TY OF TIGARD I SUB2005-00023/VAR2005-00094, 95, 96, 97 & 98 s PLAN N TIGARL) SOLERA SUBDIVISION (Map is not to scale) Site Address: Building Division Transmittal Letter City of Tigard DATE RECEIVED: TO: RECEIVED DEPT: BUILDING DIVISION FEB 4 2006 FROM: J°/f/V JRE, ,vqA _ OFTIGARD AIEERING COMPANY: PHONE NO.: S--)3 —6 3q— S 7qz ( By: RE: c1c/l/6vi24— (Case number, site address, etc.) (Project name or subdivision name and lot number) ATTACHED ARE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: Copies: I Description: I Copies: I Description: Additional set(s) of plans. Revisions: Cross section(s) and details. Wall bracing and/or lateral analysis. Floor/roof framing. Basement and retaining walls. Beam calculations. Engineer's calculations. Other (explain): REMARKS: FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Routed to Permit Technician: Date: Initials: Fees Due: ❑ Yes 1 ❑ No Fee Description: Amount Due: $ $ Special Instructions: Reprint Permit (per PE): ❑ Yes I ❑ No ❑ Done Applicant Notified: Date: Initials: 1:Building\Forms\LetterTransmittal.doc 01/17/06 The trees, the trees, the trees. That is what this proposed development is all about. The developer would like to place 11 residences on approximately one acre of land. The real issue here is the trees and their treatment in regard to said development. The trees in question are not even on the development site. The trees are on the property to the west, the Davis property. The developer wants the city to give permission to destroy a beautiful stand of trees in order for the completion of the proposed street. The fate of these trees is in the hands of the City of Tigard. There are many different uses in the R-12 zone. The developer has tried to place 10 single family detached houses on the property but the setbacks required for single family detached residences were too land consuming for the project. There are now 11 residences proposed in the current development. Both of these developments required that the trees on the Davis property be destroyed when the street is completed. The proposed development won't have to do the destroying of these beautiful trees, they would have their development finished and would move on but the death warrant would be signed and the trees fate would be sealed. The trees are not on the development site but would have to be destroyed when any type of land use action was proposed for the Davis property. There is a better location for the street, and that is to place the street entirely on the project site to better serve properties to the north and at the same time preserve a valuable Tigard assert. The 11 residences proposed require the City of Tigard to grant a number of variances so that the development can proceed. Without some of these variances the developer would have to try a different kind of project in the R-12 zone in order to realize their goal of 11 living units on the property. This is entirely possible with a different type of residential structure or structures that do not require the setbacks that the proposed project requires. . The proposed street could be placed on the project site and the trees on the Davis property could stay for all the residents of the City of Tigard to enjoy as they drive down Greenburg Road. The real trade off here is whether an extra living unit for the developer is worth the elimination of these large trees which all the residents of Tigard do enjoy. The location of the proposed street should be a City of Tigard decision and not the most expedient location for the developer. The street should be placed entirely on the development site so that the northern portion of the street has the least impact on the properties to the north, and also the Davis property. The City should say what the eventual termination of the proposed street will be. If the street is to go all the way to North Dakota street, as the City has said, then City should say so and identify the intersection with North Dakota St. If the street were to be placed entirely on the development site the street would align better with properties to the north. Who at the City of Tigard is going to rule that the trees on the next door neighbor's property must be destroyed so that the developer can build the proposed project?Who is looking out for the citizens of Tigard on this issue? If the residents of Tigard had their choice of whether to allow this development or a different type of residential development on the site, still allowing the 11 living units the developer wants, but saving the trees, I'm sure the vote would come down on the side of the decision to save the trees. Mrs. Davis has had an arborist look at the trees and I believe the arborist for the City has confirmed that this is not an ordinary bunch of trees. There is an old redwood and a very rare cedar tree among the trees in question. The trees are certainly an asset to the City of Tigard and should be preserved. There are many different uses available in the R-12 zone. The proposed development is asking the City to grant variances that will require the trees to be destroyed when the street is completed. The developer has other options that do not require the death and destruction of these trees and those options should be explored with the City. The Davis family planted some of these trees and has been a good steward for their preservation for about 70 years. It seems very shortsighted of the City of Tigard to sign onto a project that diminishes the City of Tigard just so that a developer can have his way with trees that are not even on the development site, and the placement of a City of Tigard street that is not in the optimal location. More thought should be given to ways to preserve the trees and to explore ways for the developer to realize his 11 residential units in a way that does not diminish the City of Tigard. I am a nearby landowner and a concerned citizen of Tigard. Respectively submitted, John W. Drennan ,moo nv y l4- 2000 Gary Pagenstecher-Solera Subdivision Pa•e 1 From: Kathryn <kathryng @wincofoods.com> To: <garyp @tigard-or.gov> Date: 2/14/2006 12:47:44 PM Subject: Solera Subdivision Good Morning Gary, I am writing in regarding the proposed pending land use application. I am the owner of 11343 SW 95th Ave. and believe that I am one of the closest houses to the property line. The idea of having the setbacks reduced from 30 ft to 15 ft does not sit well with me. rim assuming that a 3,000 sq. ft. lot will more than likely require a 2-story home, which in that case I will not only have neighbors looking down on my very private flag lot on a cul-de-sac, but now they will be even closer. The idea of reducing setbacks is outrageous. Those setbacks are in place for a reason, we should be allowed some amount of privacy. If the applicant is seeking approval, they absolutely DO NOT have approval from me. Thank you for allowing all involved to share. I look forward to seeing a copy of the full decision. Kathryn Grigorieff 11343 SW 95th Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 r Margaret Davis 11470 SW Greenburg Rd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 May 3, 2005 Morgan Tracy Associate Planner Planning Division, City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Morgan Tracy, I am writing this letter to register my strong objection to some aspects of the proposed Greenburg Road Heights Subdivision(GRHS) to the east side of my property. When I went to the neighborhood meeting organized by the developer, the main topic of discussion was the location of the proposed new street and its connection to Greenburg Road, an arterial road. I am aware of the constraints preventing the proposed new road from meeting the required 600 ft. street spacing requirements. The developer is requesting a variance from that 600 ft. spacing standard. The city should grant only the minimum variance so that the proposed development has access to a public street, thus placing the new street as close to the 600 ft. separation rule as possible. There is no need for the city to allow the maximum variance from that standard. This means that the new proposed street should be on the western side of the development. There are many significant reasons why the City should grant only the minimum variance to the 600 ft. street spacing requirement. If, as the city has stated, this newly created road will eventually connect to North Dakota St. to the north, it just seems logical to seek the safest, most direct route that has the least adverse effect on the properties to be served by this new street. The developer has provided two "future roadways" on his"conceptual development" of the surrounding properties. Neither of these "future roadway designs" is representative of the street that would be designed if the street engineer had a clean sheet of paper to start with. In essence, the City has a clean sheet of paper and can determine the shape of the"future roadway". By granting only the minimum variance to the 600 ft. standard, the new road would be on the western edge of the GRHS development. This would allow for a straight street that would not have the sharp turns as it approaches Greenburg Rd. and would eliminate the need for the second variance having to do with streets. The property directly west of the proposed GRHS, is my property, tax lot 2400. The proposed "future roadway", goes right through my house, meaning that, if I ever want to do any development of my property, I will have to tear down my house. There is no need for a"future roadway" to bisect my property, destroy my house and go to the western part of my property before it turns to the north. There is a much cleaner and safer alternative to the street proposed by GRHS. If the minimum variance were granted so that the developer put the access road on the western side of his property, the large trees my husband planted years ago would not have to be removed to the degree that the developer has stated. If the developer is allowed the maximum variance the city could possibly grant, then at the end of the"stub street", future development would have to take down many large trees; in fact, one of the largest trees on my property would be located in "future roadway" right of way and would have to me removed, along with my house. In conclusion, the proposed street that is going to serve the GRHS as well as other properties should be the safest, most direct route with no sharp turns as this new road approaches the arterial Greenburg Rd. The new road should access Greenburg Rd. on the GRHS western edge. The proposed new street requires that for any development of my property, my home will have to be torn down. This is not good planning when a safer more direct route for the new street is possible that does not impact my property in such a harsh manner with total disregard to my home. Why does the GRHS road have to go to the western side of my property when it can go straight from Greenburg Rd along the western side of GRHS to serve property to the west and north? The developer doesn't show a"future roadway" or"conceptual development" with the roadway on the western edge of his property going straight back to the back of GRHS. I think if a plan were drawn with this option it would produce a much cleaner more direct path for vehicular traffic and my home would not be in the path of"future roadways". Thank you for your time and attention. Sincerely, Margaret Davis jd February 13, 2006 Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Gary, We are concerned that our neighborhood, the neighborhood that exists between SW Greenberg, Highway 217, and North of highway 99 is getting carved up into town homes, apartment complexes, and misdirected development with little or no regards for landscaping, quality of life for existing homeowners, and developments which are compromising our land values due to issues affecting privacy and policies which prefer maximum density as opposed to existing neighborhood lot sizes, street orientation,and single family homes. The proposed development at 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road,Tax Lots 2300 and 2302 is an exact case in point. The largest source of angst for this community is the noise and pollution generated from Highway 217, Greenberg Road, and Highway 99. Killing trees and ignoring landscaping,lot sizes, and existing patterns of homes only aggravates the noise and air pollution issues this neighborhood already faces. The issue of reducing required setbacks is also troubling. The rear setback reduction will not allow for adequate landscaping to mitigate visual privacy to existing residences or help with current air pollution problems. This will additionally reduce the quality of life for both existing residents and the proposed residences. Additional concerns include Fire truck access, aesthetics (what's this mass of houses pushed into a small area going to look like? Will this development be as ugly as that currently located at the "Esau Street" development where no regards for orientation to street (new house with front door 10 feet off of Greenburg-a very busy road and not much of a street) and maximum density development replacing existing established single family houses with adequate landscaping. There should be no adjustments on behalf of increasing density for these sites. Let any mitigation occur at the expense of decreasing the number of units/sites developed in favor of additional landscaping and reduced impact on surrounding homes and property values. We are concerned about increasing the amount of traffic on Greenberg as well. There are already plenty of cars using Greenberg and to introduce more cars on this road compromises the safety of pedestrians and area residents as well. We oppose any adjustments to lot size, street standards, and the building of "attached town homes" or apartments in what is a predominantly a single family neighborhood. This type of development is reducing our standard of living,value of our homes,and killing any sort of "Character" of the neighborhood which we bought into. The developers of these parcels are not adversely affected because typically their houses are in other areas as well. As our planner and working on behalf of our interests please see to it that the existing neighborhood concerns and patterns of building are taken into account before compromising the neighborhoods interests. Sincerely, Em/4467t- Jesse Architect, AIA 503.224.9656 Work Phone 11280 SW 94th Avenue, Tigard Oregon 97223 Cc Matt Stein, City of Tigard Forester ✓ I Lc ,,9evt.c6i Ai 2 , 2006, /tie �Le.L x.- ' / 1 , o �i . � ,I ) ‘C- - e_.06 11414 r '12- 61/f, -Zsv 7#?,LZ /Sa4" ire t Ze a-1212.6y-a-e.Va-e-06 '14-611-E44A" ,Qaer7,L,C -6; /61Z-deo( tidC)-8,14(11- 0 VaAlet-k- te& 4 / I 4 •Z( C2Y44- ZICJ&I-Y- ge-4C7 A-6 Zg622i 2X42> �C-a�- � g PI J Ate . d "ea. y czezrtocle ./aLl mivrcz,t_e_rac.B-07,teezet 5'03— W732 �� Maria Juliana Picon February 12, 2006 11500 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, OR 97223 Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner )NI1:133NIoN31 1NN`.1 Planning Division QOqi i@�l1� City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard SuuG �� Tigard, OR 97223 03N3O38 RE: SUBDIVISION 2005-00023 FILE NAME: SOLERA SUBDIVISION This is in regards to the easement and right of way for the property situated at 11500 SW Greenburg Road, Tigard OR. I, Maria Juliana Picon, find myself in the position of having the only safe access to my home being taken away from me. The roadway that runs along the side of my home which has been there for many years and has given me safe access and egress to and from my home is now by the planning commission's determinations being taken away from me to allow for the new development that is planned for the property next door to me. The driveway that is on the west side of my property has not been used in so many years, it is unsafe. To leave the property one would have to back out onto Greenburg Road at a point that is almost a blind curve. It would be an accident waiting to happen on a daily basis. I am not ready to be a victim of either an auto accident or of assault, and this new situation would leave me as a target for both. I am happy with the new development coming in, just not with the access to my home being taken from me. I offer the following three solutions to you which I would find acceptable: 1. You may buy me out for a reasonable amount after an appraisal is obtained. RECEIVED FEB 12 2006 OITY OF TIGARD tNG ti 0, 2. You may provide me with an access road off of the new road you are proposing to build. 3. You may create a safe asphalt driveway for me that will extend to the back of my property, with space to turnaround for a forward exit onto Greenburg Road, with electric gate, for safety. See attached drawing. According to Oregon Real Estate Law, Item IV. ADVERSE POSSESSION Item C, #1. Actual possession: possessor actually uses or occupies land as if owner, e.g., building on, living in, planting trees, grazing. Item C, #5, sub d. Continuous possession need not be by the same person during period. Awaiting a favorable and timely reply, I remain: Cordially yours, Maria Juliana Picon /2/06 , . y, ' N 89'57 35„ W • . r.,C6 j I . • . V IP) • --• . 14;■ '07 ' 1 IL 2304 1 . . Ite ec tic 41-ti LO CV 1 -CV SD Nouse i • , c, . 1,,\, . '•, 8' PUE I , . 5' PUBLIC I SIDEWALK , t4 1 I AIP■I ? i I'■ i . . i • ri...... .----- ..... ......._ .i. -----7„ •• -..- . • • • ,...,,,,, ., . ,... ..,.:..:...:::.:,.,•,. .,:l•".,..,,• ..;:, ',.. :,:±,. ...;.•‘:.:;.!...:; ;;;..:.!: . ,..,,..,-..,. ,,,::: ,‘.,,,,,.::..:..:....,,..•:•;::,,,:•!..,,:. ..,„:..,,,,,...--...., .....:..r.,.,:, .;..:.• ,... ... A:4; I.:-..s.,•.. .;.',.•,,f,-..., .-..;.,:: ; 41i- -al ha March 7, 2006 p COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Dick Bewersdorf City of Tigard, Planning Department RECEIVED PLANNING 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 MAR 1 0 2006 RE: Solera Subdivision - 2005-00023 Response to citizen comments CITY OF TIGARD Dear Dick: Thank you for forwarding the "comment letters" associated with the referenced project file for our review and response. Our staff has telephoned, e-mailed, or personally met with each of the citizens who commented on the proposed project. I include copies of the written correspondence for your benefit. I completely understand the citizen concern regarding the proposed change in the specific neighborhood of this project—since the R-12 zoning abuts an R-4.5 zoning district with existing development patterns. I also respect the adjacent property owner's desire to preserve the large healthy trees along our shared property line. As you recall, the latest design changes for this project— in particular the realignment of the new public street and a commitment to build the full street section - are in direct response to the citizen comments to ultimately protect the trees and respect the neighboring development to the greatest degree. The requested variance to the large setback between the two zoning districts is reflected only on lots 1 through 4. This setback reduction is adjacent to only one neighboring lot— that of Maria Julia Picon at 11500 SW Greenburg Road. The application narrative and materials explain in great detail the need/justification for the variance—and the proposed mitigation in the form of significant landscaping and a fence. As further support for the reduction of the significant setback between the two zoning districts (for lots 1 through 4) I cite the following section of the Tigard Development Code. The preservation of the trees on our shared boundary with Mrs. Davis clearly falls within the scope of this E development code section. 0 Chapter 18.370 VARIANCES AND ADJUSTMENTS 18.370.020 Adjustments C. Special adjustments. 9. Adjustments to setbacks to reduce tree removal(Chapter 18.790). By means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030, the Director may grant a modification from applicable setback requirements of this Code for the purpose of preserving a tree or trees on the site of proposed development. Such modification may reduce the required setback by up to 50%, but shall not be more than is necessary for the preservation of trees on the site. The setback modification described in this section shall supersede any special setback requirements or exceptions set out elsewhere in this title, including but not limited to Chapter 18.730, except Section 18.730.040. Co Plaza West,Suite 230,9600 SW Oak,Portland,Oregon 97223 ___ [T] 503-452-8003 [F] 503-452-8043 March 7, 2006— Page 2 of 2 Dick Bewersdorf Solera Subdivision - 2005-00023 Response to citizen comments Although not stated in the application narrative, it was intended that the buildings on all eleven lots would be a maximum of two stories tall — respecting the existing neighborhood while meeting the intent and density requirements of the R-12 district. Absent approval of the variance/adjustment to the large required setback between the two zoning districts on lots 1 through 4, the small building envelope — approximately 30 feet deep —will require that the dwelling units be 3 stories tail to achieve the necessary living spaces. Three story dwelling units would appear to aggravate rather than mitigate the concerns regarding personal privacy for immediate neighbors. The developer will commit to a maximum two story unit (or maximum building height) through a "condition of approval" in conjunction with an approval of the requested variance. The developer of this project is extremely sensitive to the future "quality of life" for both the surrounding neighbors and for the new residents of these proposed eleven lots. • It is because of this sensitivity the developer redesigned the project to carry the responsibility for long term tree protection, a full street improvement and additional ROW dedication as a part of this development. • It is because of this desire to create a livable neighborhood that the increased landscaping and fencing was included in the mitigation for the setback variance/adjustment. • It is because the developer understands the potential impact of three story townhomes that a two story design solution is envisioned. In order to achieve a sensible balance between the two disparate zoning districts, and to gently introduce the more dense development to the community, granting the reduction in the setback buffer between the two zoning districts on lots 1 through 4 through approval of the variance/adjustment is the best land use design solution — and it is a decision supported throughout the Tigard Development Cede. Thank you. r�rol Kirsten Van Loo, Planner Alpha Community Development Cc: File Solera LLC SOLERA, LLC March 7, 2006 Margaret McDonald Davis 11470 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Solera subdivision Dear Mrs. Davis: This letter is just a follow up to our meeting of February 22, 2006, at which time Judith Farmer and I met with you and John Drennan in your home. At that meeting, we presented to you our revised subdivision plan, and I believe were able to answer the questions that you and John had about the new design. In our first meeting last year, in your correspondence to the City of Tigard, and again in our recent meeting,your primary expressed concern is for the health and preservation of the large trees on your property. Our original street design, in which we proposed only a partial street to be built on our property, would have required the removal of your trees when, if ever, your property were developed.This design was changed soon after our neighborhood meeting last fall, in response to John's and your concerns for the trees as well as our own arborist's assessment of the natural value of these unique tree specimens. We were remiss in not bringing this design change to your attention sooner. As you now know, the new design places the entire road on our property, with the curb and pavement coming no closer than five feet to the property line. At this distance from the trees, and by following the advice and supervision of our arborist, we can build a street that provides little impact and risk to your trees and their root systems. Moving the street to accommodate your trees is a small inconvenience and cost compared to the years of enjoyment that the citizens of Tigard will gain from this effort. We sincerely appreciate your and John's involvement for bringing this important issue to our attention. Best regards, SO IN; Alli -r M.Jec for Pal 4 ssociates,Member cc: John Drennan 4 �iMJ,GV ,�,l t� Page 1 of 1 v p u , , Al Jeck I U fie From: Al Jeck 4/140/0 Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 3:59 PM To: kwhygee @gmail.com Subject: Site plans for Solera subdivision Attachments: Solera_site_plan_2pages.pdf Kathy, Attached are two plans for the Solera subdivision. One shows just the lot layout. The other shows the maximum building area as an overlay on each lot. This building area is defined based on the required setbacks from the property line. The setback variance is being requested for lots 1-4 only. Please review this material and call me with any questions. My phone number is 503.452.8003. Sincerely, Al Jeck Alpha Community Development, Inc. 3/7/2006 SOLERA, LLC al h a P COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT February 17, 2006 Maria Juliana Picon Hand-Delivered 11500 SW Greenberg Road Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Ms Picon: This letter is a follow up to our meeting in the Alpha Community Development offices several weeks ago. At that time you expressed concern that the Solera subdivision project would create a situation where you would have no alternative to backing onto Greenberg Road when exiting your property. Currently, you are able to access your home through the use of the parking lot on our property at 11494 SW Greenburg Road. You are correct that this parking lot will be eliminated upon development of the subdivision. At the time of our meeting, we proposed to create a turnaround for your driveway, to be located entirely on your property. Two alternative designs are shown on the attached exhibits. For either design, we are proposing a gravel surface and will complete construction of the turnaround for you prior to closing off access to the parking lot. There will be no cost to you for this work. Please review the attached exhibits and call me to discuss. I can be reached at my office at 503.452.8003. I look forward to speaking with you soon. Sincerely, SOL allrLL -- Alli -r M. Jec For Palm- : Associates, Member E (n Plaza West,Suite 230,9600 5W Oak,Portland,Oregon 97223 --—� [T] 503-452-8003 [F] 503-452-8043 1 / EX. SHED X x EX. HOUSE \ ' EX. CEDAR FENCE E E 0. EX. TREE 4 EXISTING 12' 1 WIDE DRIVEWAY ie,-- o I Ji N I I RELOCATE nj ° FENCE I; _________� _ EX. CHAIN - X ] LINK FENCE w - w j1 rn N GR� __ __ Z ENB R --- 0 G RD 0 ,_ -.3 x w o SCALE $ 20 0 10 20 ao „,,,,,,,„ c c c c 0 1 IN = 20 FT E. 3 DRAWN BY: JDH -DATE: 02/17/0E / i REVIEWED BY: AFC :DATE:02/17/CE co ,- I h PROJECT NC,: 858 001 /.: v a �, o SCALE- 1 2., COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ..--- SCLERA ) \ / 1 /' RELOCATED EX. SHED i / PROPOSED 12' WIDE DRIVEWAY I f I I I I EX. HOUSE ' EX. CEDAF FENCE 1 EXISTING 12' WIDE DRIVEWAY "0'. I 1 EX. TREE—/ o I EX. CHAIN O _ CN I LINK FENCE o _� x w (Jf - ID 1 m x w SCALE ci 0 20 0 10 20 40 oo In co 0, c c 1 IN = 20 FT O E i DRAWN BY: JDH DATE: 02/17/C:� o REVIEWED BY: AFC DATE:02/17/0C ■ 358.00, F :. alpha Lo co PROJECT NO.: r o SCALE: i = 20 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT L zSCLERA / \ / JALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESC • SOUTH DIVISION COMMUNITY SERVICES • OPERATION° • FIRE PREVENTION Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue February 16, 2006 Gary Pegenstecher, Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Solera Subdivision Dear Gary, Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed site plan surrounding the above named development project. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval: 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUILDING 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. 2) DEAD END ROADS: Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. The proposed design will require a fire apparatus turn-around(see Item #3 for exception) 3) 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 fire code official. 4) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (12 feet for up to two dwelling units and accessory buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. Where fire apparatus roadways are less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are more than 28 feet wide but less than 32 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more, parking is not restricted. 5) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed driving surface, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Roads 26 feet wide or less shall be posted on both sides as a fire lane. Roads more than 26 feet wide to 32 feet wide shall be posted on one side as a fire lane. Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE" and shall be installed with a clear space above grade level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have red letters on a white reflective background. 6) 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 75,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. 7) TURNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall be not less than 28 feet and 48 feet respectively, measured from the same center point. 7401 SW Washo Court,Suite 101 •Tualatin, Oregon 97062•Tel.(503)612-7000•Fax(503)612-7003•www.tvfr.com • 8j SINGLE FAMILY DW' NGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The m im available fire flow for single family dwellings duplexes served by a municipal water su, , .y shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the structure(s) is (are) 3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be determined according to IFC Appendix B. 9) FIRE HYDRANTS —ONE-AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS & ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: Where a portion of a structure is more than 600 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the structure(s), on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. A minimum of one fire hydrant shall be located on the same side of Greenburg Rd. as the proposed project. 10) FIRE HYDRANT NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION: The minimum number and distribution of fire hydrants available to a building shall not be less than that listed in Appendix C, Table C 105.1. Considerations for placing fire hydrants may be as follows: • Existing hydrants in the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants as approved. Hydrants that are up to 600 feet away from the nearest point of a subject building that is protected with fire sprinklers may contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants unless approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highways or freeways shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Heavily traveled collector streets only as approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the fire code official. 11) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. 12) REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access road way that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly 13) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. Please contact me at (503) 612-7010 with any additional questions. Sincerely, Eric T . McMullen Eric T. McMullen Deputy Fire Marshal Page 2 of 2 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development ShapingA Better Community DATE: January 31,2006 TO: Rob Murchison,Public Works Project Engineer FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner(x2434) Phone: [503)639-4171/Fax: (503)684-7291 SUBDIVISION[SUB)2005-00023/ADJUSTMENT[VAR)2005-00093 8 94/VARIANCE[VAR)2005-00095,96,97 8 98 SOLERA SUBDIVISION REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of an 11-lot subdivision on 1 .07 acres. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes. Lot sizes within the development are proposed to be between 2,441 and 3,471 square feet (3,065 square feet on average). An access and egress adjustment to the street spq ing requirement along SW Green19urg Road, an arterial, from 600 to 240 feet between the existing 95 Avenue and the proposed SW 96 Avenue is requested. Access and egress adjustments for the driveways for proposed Lots 1 though 5, which are within the 150-foot influence area of an intersection with Greenburg Road, are also requested. In addition, the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive R-4.5 zone on the east) for proposed lots 1 through 4. LOCATION: 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S135CA, Tax Lots 2300 and 2302. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.370, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials 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: FEBRUARY 14, 2006. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: �m j'y\ ls4.c.r ftge y /.44p.-42L - //s-/r) Ay ex r5 4 .r///). -fir- 40 ,4 z2 aid/d)eIG-1-/z3 14«s s:44,). '.. �s Z."-, I, --5 L 7, 44>��-,�• ?-) / 17 / aic) 7:2 4_, pt $T °IC Name & Phone Number of Person Commenting: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS v o 1G CITY Community DeveCopment ShapingA(Better Community DATE: January 31,2006 TO: Jim Wolf,Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner(x24341 Phone: (5031639-4171/Fax: (503)684-7297 SUBDIVISION(SUB)2005-00023/ADJUSTMENT(VAR)2005-00093 a 94/VARIANCE(VAR)2005-00095,96,97 a 98 SOLERA SUBDIVISION REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of an 11-lot subdivision on 1 .07 acres. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes. Lot sizes within the development are proposed to be between 2,441 and 3,471 square feet (3,065 square feet on average). An access and egress adjustment to the street spacing requirement along SW Greenhurg Road, an arterial, from 600 to 240 feet between the existing 95 Avenue and the proposed SW 96 Avenue is requested. Access and egress adjustments for the driveways for proposed Lots 1 though 5, which are within the 150-foot influence area of an intersection with Greenburg Road, are also requested. In addition, the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive R-4.5 zone on the east) for proposed lots 1 through 4. LOCATION: 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S135CA, Tax Lots 2300 and 2302. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.370, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials 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: FEBRUARY 14, 2006. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: Name & Phone Number of Person Commenting: 6 Vv0* --�1a .ago REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community DATE: January 31,2006 TO: Matt Stine,Urban Forester/Public Works Annex FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner(x2434) Phone: (503)639-4171/Fax: (503)684-7297 SUBDIVISION(SUB)2005-00023/ADJUSTMENT[VAR)2005-00093 a 94/VARIANCE[VAR)2005-00095,96,97&98 SOLERA SUBDIVISION REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of an 11-lot subdivision on 1 .07 acres. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes. Lot sizes within the development are proposed to be between 2,441 and 3,471 square feet (3,065 square feet on average). An access and egress adjustment to the street spacing requirement along SW Greenfhurg Road, an arterial, from 600 to 240 feet between the existing 95 Avenue and the proposed SW 96 Avenue is requested. Access and egress adjustments for the driveways for proposed Lots 1 though 5, which are within the 150-foot influence area of an intersection with Greenburg Road, are also requested. In addition, the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive R-4.5 zone on the east) for proposed lots 1 through 4. LOCATION: 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S135CA, Tax Lots 2300 and 2302. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.370, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials 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: FEBRUARY 14, 2006. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: -lea= A4 P Ees it, at: I E IRE F5 OA) 11+E /IJiid H -Bo train PREP&Rrr 7D rlf E wpAr oF `r-N-E f Rarer .s rE . rfEsE rfeEES M1,15 r A e 4 RO rEc1- b LlLIIJ(,r co NSTie u C i JON , f ROTEC r 4Ie.156 le 1.0 i All L i- 41ft1: fa PP.ESct i.r 71 PtOTEcrio,J MtAsL,& E 70 -; 31- WFE.LY rEPoRrs roAkLzkA1/N4 7tosb MEAsa~ t Y#E , le zaA/L/17O,V. (.5(j, 4A-,C A-Dv astv Afcr arJsFEs 3EI.DAIGIA16 in flf A I(H-Eokl / Name & Phone Number of Person Commenting: JA . /V) c 5771//� 2/ 4 40, REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OFTIGARD Community Development ShapingA Better Community DATE: January 31,2006 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner[x24341 Phone: (503)639-4171/Fax: [5031 684-7297 SUBDIVISION(SUB)2005-00023/ADJUSTMENT(VAR)2005-00093&94NARIANCE(VAR)2005-00095,96,97&98 ➢ SOLERA SUBDIVISION REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of an 11-lot subdivision on 1.07 acres. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes. Lot sizes within the development are proposed to be between 2,441 and 3,471 square feet (3,065 square feet on average). An access and egress adjustment to the street sppacing requirement along SW Greenhurg Road, an arterial, from 600 to 240 feet between the existing 95 Avenue and the proposed SW 96 Avenue is requested. Access and egress adjustments for the driveways for proposed Lots 1 though 5, which are within the 150-foot influence area of an intersection with Greenburg Road, are also requested. In addition, the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive R-4.5 zone on the east) for proposed lots 1 through 4. LOCATION: 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S135CA, Tax Lots 2300 and 2302. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.370, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials 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: FEBRUARY 14, 2006. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: Name& Phone Number of Person Commenting: ',TY OF TIGARD REQUEST FC :OMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FILE NOS.: �'' ��Z3 FILE NAME: elri--2-�, CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS 14-DAY PENDING APPLICATION NOTICE TO INTERESTED PARTIES OF AREA: ['Central ❑East ['South ['West CITY OFFICES _LONG RANGE PLANNING/Barbara Shields,Planning Mgr. _COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./Planning-Engineering Techs. _POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer _BUILDING DIVISION/Gary Lampella,Building Official ENGINEERING DEPT./Kim McMillan,Dvlpmnt.Review Engineer_PUBLIC WORKS/Matt Stine,Urban Forester _CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder _PUBLIC WORKS/Rob Murchison,Project Engineer PLANNER—POST PROJECT SITE IF A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM-10 BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING! SPECIAL DISTRICTS _ TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.*_ TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE t _ TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT* _ CLEANWATER SERVICES+r Planning Manager Fire Marshall Administrative Office Lee Walker/SWM Program 15707 SW Walker Road Washington County Fire District PO Box 745 155 N.First Avenue Beaverton,OR 97006 (place in pick-up box) Beaverton,OR 97075 Hillsboro,OR 97124 LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS CITY OF BEAVERTON * _ CITY OF TUALATIN * _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE _OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS _ Planning Manager Planning Manager 3406 Cherry Avenue NE Melinda Wood(WLUN Form Required) Steven Sparks,Dev Svcs Manager 18880 SW Martinazzi Avenue Salem,OR 97303 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100 — PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 Salem,OR 97301-1279 Beaverton,OR 97076 _ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING * _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street NE CITY OF DURHAM * 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 — City Manager Portland,OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 PO Box 23483 _ Bob Knight,Data Resource Center(zCA) _US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. Durham,OR 97281-3483 _ Paulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP. Kathryn Harris(raps&CWS Letter Only) _ Mel Huie,Greenspaces Coordinator(CPArzoA) Larry French(comp.Plan AmendmentsOnly) Routing CENWP-OP-G —CITY OF KING CITY * _ Jennifer Budhabhatti,Regional Planner(Wetlands) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 PO Box 2946 City Manager _ C.D.Manager,Growth Management Services Salem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 97208-2946 15300 SW 116th Avenue King City,OR 97224 WASHINGTON COUNTY OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY(Powertines in Area) _OR.DEPT OF AVIATION(Monopoie Towers) Dept.of Land Use&Transp. Bonneville Power Administration Tom Highland,Planning 155 N. First Avenue CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO * Routing TTRC–Attn: Renae Ferrera 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13 — Planning Director PO Box 3621 Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro,OR 97124 PO Box 369 Portland,OR 97208-3621 _Steve Conway(General Apps.) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 _Gregg Leion(CPA) OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY(DEQ) ODOT,REGION 1 * _Brent Curtis(CPA) _CITY OF PORTLAND (Notify for Wetlands and Potential Environmental Impacts) _Grant Robinson,Development Review Coordinator _Doria Mateja(zcA)Ms 14 Planning Bureau Director Regional Administrator _Carl Torland, Right-of-Way Section(vaoanons) _Sr.Cartographer iccr,rzc.,Ms,. 1900 SW 4th Avenue,Suite 4100 2020 SW Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders _Jim Nims,seneyor,zeA,MS,S Portland,OR 97201 Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 _WA.CO.CONSOL.COMM.AGNCY _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A* _ODOT,RAIL DIVISION _STATE HISTORIC Dave Austin(wcccA)-sir"ieo„ow-rov.r,■ Sam Hunaidi,Assistant District Manager (Notify if 000T RJR-Hwy.Crossing is Only Access to Land) PRESERVATION OFFICE PO Box 6375 6000 SW Raab Road Dave Lanning,Sr Crossing Safety Specialist (Notify if Property Has HD Overlay) Beaverton,OR 97007-0375 Portland,OR 97221 555-13th Street,NE,Suite 3 1115 Commercial Street, NE Salem,OR 97301-4179 Salem,OR 97301-1012 L UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES _PORTLAND WESTERN RJR,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE R/R,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Burlington Northern/Santa Fe R/R Predecessor) Bruce Carswell, President&General Manager 1200 Howard Drive SE Albany,OR 97322-3336 _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS —COMCAST CABLE CORP. TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C. Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer(Annexations only) Randy Bice (see m..fix A,,.c,nr,o (If Project is Within Z Mile of a Transit Route) 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Ben Baldwin, Project Planner Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 710 NE Holladay Street Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 Portland,OR 97232 _PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC _NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY _VERIZON _QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Ken Gutierrez,Svc Design Consultant Scott Palmer, Engineering Coord. David Bryant, Engineering Florence Mott,Eng. ROW Mgr. 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue OR 030533/PO Box 1100 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd, Rm 110 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Beaverton,OR 97075-1100 Portland,OR 97219 TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J_BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 _COMCAST CABLE CORP. _COMCAST CABLE COMMUNIC. Teri Brady,Administrative Offices Jan Youngquist, Demographics Alex Silantiev,5„M.pr,r Are.Cont., Diana Carpenter,A,,.E,rr,rm+a e0W) 6960 SW Sandburg Street 16550 SW Merlo Road 9605 SW Nimbus Avenue,Bldg. 12 10831 SW Cascade Avenue Tigard,OR 97223-8039 Beaverton,OR 97006-5152 Beaverton,OR 97008 Tigard,OR 97223-4203 * INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/ALL CITY PROJECTS (Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify). h:\patty\masters\Request For Comments Notification List.doc (UPDATED: 18-Nov-05) (Also update:is\curoln\setuo\labels\annexation utilities and franchises.doc when uodatina this document) MAILING RECORDS I 1111 - AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING 14 . TIGARD I, Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Senior Administrative Specia1stfor the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: iChe, Appro,naie Bowl Below', El NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SUB2005-00023/VAR2005-00094, 95, 96, 97 & 98 SOLERA SUBDIVISION ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No'Name Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit"A", and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B", and by reference made a part hereof, on April 4,20067 and deposited in the United States Mail on April 4,2006, postage prepaid. • . a-Pit zdi DID / (Person that Prepay d of ST.A`JE OE OREGON ) County of'Was Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the i day of , 2006. ' A OFFICIAL SEAL r-� ,.�. r SUE ROSS `, NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON `"`� COMMISSION NO.375152 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DEC.1,2007 NOTARY'/ LIC OF(MO f a _r —0-1 My Commis ion Expires. EXHIBIT.. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2005-00023 s SOLERA SUBDIVISION 120 DAYS = 5/20/2006 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: SOLERA SUBDIVISION CASE NOS.: Subdivision(SUB) SUB2005-00023 Adjustment (VAR) VAR2005-00094 Variance AR VAR2005-00095 Variance AR VAR2005-00096 Variance AR VAR2005-00097 Variance AR VAR2005-00098 REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of an 11-lot subdivision on 1.07 acres. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes. Lot sizes within the development are proposed to be between 2,441 and 3,471 square feet (3,065 square feet on average). An access and egress adjustment to the street spacing requirement along SW Greenburg Road, an arterial, from 600 to 240 feet between the existing 95 Avenue and the proposed SW 96th Avenue is requested. In addition, the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive R-4.5 zone on the east) for proposed lots 1 through 4. APPLICANT: Palmer&Associates OWNERS: Max Moini and Attn: Al Jeck Mohammed-Hossein Tavakoli-Sheraji 9600 SW Oak Street,Suite 230 2946 NW 11th Avenue Tigard,OR 97223 Camas,WA 98607 COMP. PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATION: R-12: Medium Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. LOCATION: 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road;WCTM 1S135CA,Tax Lots 2300 and 2302. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.370, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the preliminary subdivision request subject to certain conditions of approval, APPROVED the adjustment to the street spacing standard and to the driveway locations within the area of influence with Greenburg Road, and DENIED the variances to reduce the rear yard setback to the adjacent R4.5 zoned property to the east of the site. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section VI of this Decision. NOTICE OF DEQSION PAGE 1 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION THE APPLICANT SHALL CONSTRUCT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLANS SUBMITTED EXCEPT AS MODIFIED BY THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY ONSITE IMPROVEMENTS,INCLUDING GRADING,EXCAVATION AND/OR FILL ACTIVITIES): The applicant shall pre are a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the followin requirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: Gary Pagenstecher (503-639-4171, EXT 2434). The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 1. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall submit a final tree protection plan that clearly depicts the proposed tree protection measures, and includes the following notations: • The applicant shall notify the City Arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. • If it is necessary to enter the tree protection zone at any time with equipment (trucks bulldozers, etc.) the project arborist and City Arborist must be notified before any entry occurs. Before entering the TPZ, the project arborist and City Arborist shall determine the method by which entry can occur, along with any additional tree protection measures. • The project arborist shall provide the City Arborist with bi-weekly reports through and including building construction on the conditions and activities related to tree protection measures and activities. 2. Prior to any site work,the applicant shall show the driveway locations for any proposed lots located within 150 feet of the intersection of SW Greenburg Road and SW 96th Avenue shall be located as far north from Greenburg Road as possible. 3. Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide the City staff with a revised layout for lots 1-4 including an illustration of proposed building envelopes that satisfy the dimensional requirements of TDC Table 18.510.2 for the R-12 Zoning District. The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, ATTN: KIM MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 4. Prior to commencing onsite improvements, a Public Facility Improvement FI) permit is required for this project to cover street improvements and any other work in the public right-of-way. Eight (8) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineenng Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards,which are available at Cary Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tigard.or.us). 5. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example,specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC,etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 6. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City.Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application,and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. 7. The applicant shall provide signage at the entrance of each shared flag lot driveway or private street that lists the addresses that are served byfhe given driveway or street. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 2 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION 8. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of Greenburg Road to increase the right-of-way to 50 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing nght-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 9. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit, which indicate that they will construct a half-street improvement along the frontage of Greenburg Road. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section for a 5 lane Arterial street from curb to centerline equal to 36 feet. B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond-the site frontage; C: concrete curb,or curb and gutter as needed; D. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey surface and/or subsurface runoff; E. 8 foot concrete sidewalk with a 5 foot planter strip; F. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements; G. street striping; FL streetlight layout by applicant's engineer,to be approved by City Engineer, I. underground utilities; street signs (if applicable); driveway apron(if applicable); and L. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Greenberg Road in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 10. The applicant's Public Facility Improvement permit construction drawings shall indicate that full width street improvements, including traffic control devices, mailbox clusters, concrete sidewalks, driveway aprons, curbs, asphaltic concrete pavement,sanitary sewers, storm drainage, street trees, streetlights, and underground utilities shall be installed within the interior subdivision streets. Improvements shall be revised to provide parking on one side,with supporting traffic data submitted, and a 5 foot planter strip between the curb and sidewalk along 96th Avenue and will be constructed to local street standards. 11. The proposed ROW for Greenview Drive shall be 50 feet, except at the corner, where the ROW must be the Washington County Eyebrow Corner, Standard Drawing M-405.5. The applicant's PH plan submittal shall clearly dimension all aspects of the selected eyebrow corner(inside radius,outside radius and centerline radius). 12. A profile of Greenburg Road shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 13. No lot within this development shall be permitted to access directly onto Greenburg Road. All driveways within 150 feet of the intersection of SW Greenburg and SW Greenview must be placed as far north from Greenburg Road as possible. 14. The applicant's construction drawings shall show that the pavement and rock section for the proposed private street(s) shall meet the City's public street standard for a local residential street. 15. Sanitary sewer and storm drainage details shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans. 16. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection and fire hydrants prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility Improvement permit. 17. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Enginn eeng-DDepartment (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the PFI permit. 18. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, February 2003 edition." NOTICE.OF DECISION PAGE 3 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION 19. The applicant shall obtain a 1200-C General Permit issued by the City of Tigard pursuant to ORS 468.740 and the Federal Clean Water Act. 20. The applicant's plans shall be revised to provide a temporary hammerhead turnaround in a tract. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT: The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the followingrequirements to the CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION, ATTN: Gary Pagenstecher (503-639-4171, EXT 2434). The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 21. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall provide City staff with a revised lot configuration that demonstrates compliance with TDC Section 18.430.020.D. 22. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the plat stating that vehicular access from SW Greenburg Road to individual lots shall not be allowed. 23. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall provide City staff with a landscape plan showing that the buffer landscape materials and width along the north and west boundary of the subject property will meet the requirements of Chapter 18.745. The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, along with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the following requirements to the ENGINEERING yDEPARTMENT, ATTN: KIM MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 24. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the plat stating that vehicular access from SW Greenburg Road to individual lots shall not be allowed. 25. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings of the public im�pro�ovements as follows: 1) 3 mil mylar,2) a diskette of the as-builts in"DWG" format,if available; otherwise "L)XF" will be acceptable, and 3) the as-built drawings shall be tied to the City's GPS network. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates,referenced to NAD 83 (91). 26. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall pay the addressing fee. (STAFF CONTACT: Bethany Stewart, Engineering). 27. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system (GPS).geodetic control network(GC 22). These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to gnd measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by: GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey. By random traverse using conventional surveying methods. 28. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: A. Submit for City review four (4) paper copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon and necessary data or narrative. B. Attach a check in die amount of the current final plat review fee (Contact Planning/Engineering Permit Technicians,at(503) 639-4171,ext.2421). C� The final plat and d.ata or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05),Washington County and by the City of Tigard. D. The right-of-way dedication for Greenburg Road shall be made on the final plat. NOTICE.OF DEQSION PAGE 4 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • E. NOTE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive notice from the Engineering-Department indicating that the City has reviewed the final plat and submitted comments to the applicant's surveyor. F. After the City and County have reviewed the final plat, submit two mylar copies of the final plat for City Engineer signature (for partitions), or City Engineer and Community Development Director signatures (for subdivisions). 29. Prior to approval of the final plat,the applicant shall prepare Conditions,Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) for this project,to be recorded with the final plat,that clearly lays out a maintenance plan and agreement for the proposed private street(s). The CC&R's shall obligate the private property owners within the subdivision to create a homeowner's association to ensure regulation of maintenance for the street(s). The applicant shall submit a copy of the CC&R's to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) prior to approval of the final plat. 30. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant's engineer shall provide final sight distance certification for the intersections of Greenberg Road/Greenview Drive and Greenview Drive/Greenview Court. 31. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall place a note on the plat that prohibits direct access onto Greenburg Road from any lot. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: The applicant shall prepare a cover letter and submit it, aloe with any supporting documents and/or plans that address the followin requirements to the ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, ATTN: KIM MCMILLAN 503-639-4171, EXT 2642. The cover letter shall clearly identify where in the submittal the required information is found: 32. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a "photomylar" copy of the recorded final plat. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; THIS IS NOT AN EXCLUSIVE LIST: 18.430.080 Improvement reement: Before City approval is certified on the final plat, and before approved construction plans are issued by the City, the developer shall: 1. Execute and file an agreement with the City Engineer specifying the period within which all required improvements and repairs shall be completed; and 2. Include in the agreement provisions that if such work is not completed within the period specified,the City may complete the work and recover the full cost and expenses from the developer. The agreement shall stipulate improvement fees and deposits as may be required to be paid and may also provide for the construction of the improvements in stages and for the extension of time under specrlic conditions therein stated in the contract. 18.430.090 Bond: As required by Section 18.430.080,the subdivider shall file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one of the following: 1. An irrevocable letter of credit executed by a financial institution authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon; 2. A surety bond executed by a surety company authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon which remains in force until the surety company is notified by the City in writing that it may be terminated; or 3. Cash. The subdivider shall furnish to the City Engineer an itemized improvement estimate, certified by a registered civil engineer,to assist the City Engineer in calculating the amount of the performance assurance. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 5 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • The subdivider shall not cause termination of nor allow expiration of said guarantee without having first secured written authorization from the City. 18.430.100 Filing and Recording: Within 60 days of the City review and approval,the applicant shall submit the final plat to the County for signatures of County officials as required by ORS Chapter 92. Upon final recording with the County,the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 18.430.070 Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: Three copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. The subdivision plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05),Washington County,and by the City of Tigard. STREET CENTERLINE MONUMENTATION SHALL BE PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: Centerline Monumentation In accordance with Oregon Revised Statutes 92.060, subsection (2), the centerline of all street and roadway rights-of- way shall be monumented before the City accepts a street improvement. The following centerline monuments shall be set: 1. All centerline-centerline intersection points; 2. All cul-de-sac center points;and 3. Curve points,beginning and ending points (PC's and PT's). All centerline monuments shall be set during the first lift of pavement. Monument Boxes Required Monument boxes conforming to City standards will be required around all centerline intersection points, cul-de-sac center points,and curve points. The tops of all monument boxes shall be set to finished pavement grade. 18.810 Street&Utility Improvement Standards: 18.810.120 Utilities All utility lines including, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface-mounted transformers, surface-mounted connection boxes, and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction,high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above. 18.810.130 Cash or Bond Required All improvements installed by the subdivider shall be guaranteed as to workmanship and material for a period of one year following acceptance by the City. Such guarantee shall be secured by cash deposit or bond in the amount of the value of the improvements as set by the City Engineer. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.810.180. 18.810.150 Installation Prerequisite No land division improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the plans therefore have been approved by the City,permit fee paid and permit issued. 18.810.180 Notice to City Required Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 6 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • If work is discontinued for any reason,it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. 18.810.200 Engineer's Certification The land divider's engineer shall provide written certification of a form provided by the City that all improvements workmanship and materials are in accord with current and standard engineering and construction practices, and are of high grade, prior to the City acceptance of the subdivision's improvements or any portion thereof for operation and maintenance. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: Staff conducted a search of City records and found no other land-use cases associated with the parcels of the subdivision. Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is zoned R-12 and is bordered by an R-4.5 zone on the east. As a result of this zone, there is a 30-foot setback along this border. The applicant is requesting to vary this setback to 15 feet,the standard rear yard setback in the R-12 and R 4.5 zones. The site sits between SW 95th Avenue,the unimproved right of way of SW 97"' Court. SW 95th Avenue and SW 98th Avenue are street intersections located on the opposite side of SW Greenburg Road.SW 95th Avenue and the proposed SW 96th Avenue are approximately.305 feet apart from centerline to centerline, and the distance between the proposed SW 96`'' Avenue and SW 97"' Court centerlines is approximately 180 feet apart. Greenburg Road is an artenal street which requires 600 foot spacing between driveways and streets. There are no other streets that front the subject property. As a result, the applicant has requested an adjustment to the street spacing standards. All structures on the site will be removed as a part of this development. Vicinity Information: The proposed development is on the north side of SW Greenburg Road, south of SW North Dakota, east of SW 97th Court and west of SW 95th Avenue. SECTION IV. COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET Notices were sent to adjacent property owners within 500 feet of the subject site boundaries. Neighborhood comments received during the public comment period for this development are provided in their entirety within the record and summarized below. City staff responses to the neighborhood comments are listed below the summarized comment. A letter was received from Margaret Davis,who lives directly west of the site, and John Drennan,who lives directly across the street from the project site. Mrs. Davis and Mr. Drennan are concerned that construction of the proposed street in it's proposed location would be detrimental to a row of trees on Mrs. Davis' property that her husband planted seventy years ago. Response: The applicant has provided an arborist report from Walt Knapp, a certified arborist that has been involved in this region for several years and is recognized as an arborist with a good understanding of tree issues within the Metro area. Mr. Knapp indicates in his report that construction of the access road proposed along the west property line could adversely impact the trees planted on the adjacent property line. Mr. Knapp makes recommendations for constructing the street in the least intrusive manner. The recommendations that Mr. Knapp makes will be imposed on the construction of the street provided they are approved by the City Engineer. Similar construction methods have been imposed in other subdivisions in the City of-TI Tigard, and have proved successful, and there is no evidence to suggest that the recommendations provided by Mr. Knapp would not be equally successful. The City Arborist has requested bi-weekly reports concerning the integrity of the tree protection measures and their condition during construction. Conditions will be imposed on the development to ensure that his request is followed. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 7 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • A letter was received from Maria Juliana Picon,who lives directly east of the site. Mrs. Picon is concerned that her access is being taken away by the proposed development. According to Mrs. Picon, she has been accessing her property through the parking lot that is currently located on the subject site, and has not utilized her existing access onto SW Greenburg Road for several years. Mrs. Picon, would like to ensure that this access remains open to her for her safety, or that the developer make provisions on her property so that she may pull out onto SW Greenburg without having to back into the nght-of-way. Response: It would be the City's preference to have Mrs. Picon access through an adjacent property so that the curb cut onto SW Greenburg Road from her property could be eliminated; unfortunately, the City does not possess the power to enforce private agreements, and there does not appear to be any recorded easement affording Mrs. Picon the right to access through this property. Mrs. Picon makes the point that Adverse Possession may protect her "rights" to access the property through the subject site. This is a civil matter that must be either worked out between the two parties, or resolved by a court of law. A letter was received from Jesse Emory of 11280 SW 94th Avenue in which Mr. Emory objects to the development on several points, including, neighborhood character, traffic, decreased property values, noise, reduced lot sizes, privacy,fire truck access, and inadequate landscaping. Response: Mr. Emory's points are noted and are considered in many of the existing standards of the Tigard Development Code. city staff, and the appropriate review agencies have reviewed each of these concerns against the applicable regulations, and aside from property values, neighborhood character, and aesthetics, which are dynamic in nature and not defined nor regulated by the Tigard Development Code, have made recommendations which have been incorporated into this decision. Mr Emory's letter does not cite any specific deficiencies which are regulated by the Tigard Development Code. A traffic report, and an arborist report have been submitted on behalf of the developer, and those agencies with expertise in the respective fields have had the opportunity to comment on those reports. Staff has reviewed the application for compliance with the Tigard Development Code (TDC), and where there are inconsistencies, has imposed conditions on the development to ensure that the development adheres to the applicable review criterion. The variances to the rear yard setbacks have been denied in this case. An e-mail was received from Mrs. Kathryn Grigorieff. Mrs. Grigorieff was writing to object to the request for reduced rear yard setbacks within the proposal. Response: The variances requested to the rear yard setbacks within this proposal are denied by this decision. The applicant will be required to satisfy the required setbacks as prescribed within the TDC. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA The following summarizes the criteria applicable to this decision in the order in which they are addressed: A. Variances and Adjustments - 18.370 18.370.020 Adjustments B. Subdivision Standards - 18.430 18.430.020 Subdivision C. • • licable Develo•ment Code Sections 18.510 ' •si•ential zoning districts) 18.705 Access,Egress and Circulation) 18.715 Density) 18.745 andscaping and screening) 18.765 Off-street parking and loading requirements) 18.790 ree removal) 18.795 ision clearance) E. Street and Uti ity Improvement- 18.810 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards) F. Impact Study(18.390) NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 8 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A- VARIANCES AND ADJUSTMENTS An access and egress adjustment to the street spacing requirement along SW Greenburg Road,an arterial,from 600 to 240 feet between the existing 95th Avenue and the proposed SW 96`h Avenue is requested. In addition the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive R-4.5 zone on the east) for proposed lots 1 through 4. Variances and Adjustments (Chapter 18.370). The applicant has requested a variance on proposed lots 1-4 to reduce the special 30 foot setback between the R-4.5 zone and the R-12 zone to 15 feet,per table 18.510.2. Section 18.370.010(C)(3) states, "The Director shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny an application for a subdivision variance subject to the criteria set forth in Section 18.370.010.C. Section 18.370.010(C) lists the following approval criteria: a. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; b. There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; c. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land; d. Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title; and e.The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The ppuiirpose of the required setback is to provide greater separation between medium and low density zones, to help buffer the impacts of higher density development on lower density properties. This is particularly important in situations where higher density developments are proposed against existing single-family homes. In this case, the applicant has proposed attached single family homes adjacent to detached single-family homes. The applicant contends that City regulations,and the location of the large trees located along the west property edge has forced the location of the street and thereby imposed the need for a variance on the proposed lots. Further, the applicant indicates that the requested variance allows the property to be developed to appropriate densities for the underlying zone, at standard lot sizes for the underlying zones, and in a manner that will preserve the existing conditions and privacy f neighboring properties. To mitigate for the impacts of the reduced rear yard, the applicant has proposed additional landscaping and screening along the rear yards of proposed lots 1-4. When designing a subdivision, a typical applicant will try to maintain a higher economic return by maximizing the density on a piece of property, but there is no evidence in the record to suggest that the standard to be varied deprives the applicant of reasonable economic use of the land, and it could easily be argued that the design of this subdivision creates the hardship. An adjacent property owner has objected to the setback variances. Adjacent property has the right to be protected according to the standards and rely on that protection which in this case is a 30 foot setback. While the lot being. establishes challenges and layout issues to meet density requirements, the applicant has control of the type of product being developed and the hardship is directly related to the number of units proposed. A revised layout can be designed to meet the standards where variances would not be necessary. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 9 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • FINDINGS: In this case the minimum density for the proposed development is eight units. The applicant has proposed eleven units. The language in section (Q(2) above is very specific in that does not allow the consideration of self-imposed hardships. The proposed development could be redesigned to protect the trees on the western property, satisfy the minimum density and the dimensional standards of the R-12 zone including the 30 foot setback to properties within the adjacent R4.5 Zoning District. Therefore the case made by the applicant in support of the variances cannot be supported by staff and are hiereby denied. CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide the City staff with a revised layout for lots 1-4 includingg an illustration of proposed building envelopes that satisfy the dimensional requirements of TDC-Table 18.510.2 for the-R-12 Zoning District. Adjustment to access and egress standards (Chapter 18.705). The applicant has requested an adjustment to the street spacin g standard of 18.705.030.H.3, which states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an artenal is 600 feet. The applicant requests this adjustment as there is not enough frontage on the subject site to meet the 600 foot spacing standard for SW Greenburg Road, an arterial street. The pattern of development in the area necessitates that the future street be extended north, generally along the western edge of the property to connect to North Dakota Street. The applicant has provided a future street plan that will accommodate future redevelopment of adjacent parcels to the north, but cannot relocate the street in any direction without having to request the proposed adjustment. The proposed alignment is a reasonable alternative that satisfies the intent of the TDC standards as they apply to connectivity. a. In all zoning districts where access and egress drives cannot be readily designed to conform to Code standards within a particular parcel, access with an adjoining property shall be considered. If access in conjunction with another parcel cannot reasonably be achieved, the Director may grant an adjustment to the access requirements of Chapter 18.705 through a Type II procedure, subject to the following approval criteria: The 600-foot street spacing standard cannot be met since there is less than 1200 feet between the two existing streets along Greenberg on either side of the proposed development. In fact, there is approximately 575 feet between these two streets. To not grant this particular adjustment would mean the property could not be developed further since neither streets or driveways could meet the standard. (1) It is not possible to share access; The creation of this subdivision necessitates that the lots be served by a public street. The classification of SW Greenburg as an arterial prevents any of the lots within the proposed subdivision from directly accessing this street. Existing development separates the property from any other public streets. The creation of a public street is necessary, as it is not possible to share access. In light of this, the street alignment is designed to allow shared access with an extension of this public street. (2) There are no other alternative access points on the street in question or from another street; Because of the parent parcel's width and location along SW Greenbiirg Road there are no alternative access points on the street in question that would not require an adjustment to this standard (3) The access separation requirements cannot be met; As previously addressed, with the existing streets on either side of this project,there is no ability to meet the access separation requirements. (4) The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access; The applicant's request is to place an additional street within the 600 foot spacing distance of two other streets. By requiring all lots to take access from this street,this inini sizes the degree ofthe adjustment to the extent practical. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 10 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION (5) The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access; and The applicant has provided a Preliminary Intersection Sight Distance Certification from Jeff Vanderdasson registered professional engineer with Alpha Community Development that indicates that the minimum regpirecd sight distance of 350 feet is exceeded in each direction from the proposed development. This section of SW Greenburg Road is also provided with a left turn lane refuge to improve safety conditions at this location. Approval of this adjustment will result in safe access to the site. (6) The visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 will be met. The applicant has shown vision clearance triangles on the site plan, and structures will be reviewed at the time of building permit submittal to ensure that no encroachments into these areas. FINDING: The criteria for granting an adjustment to the street spacing standards have been met. B - SUBDIVISION GENERAL PROVISIONS: Future Re-Division. When subdividing tracts into large lots, the Approval Authority shall require that the lots be of such size and shape as to facilitate future re-division in accordance with the requirements of the zoning district and this title. The minimum lot size for the R-12 zoning district is 3,050 square feet. The largest vacant lot will be 3,471 square feet. None of the proposed lots are large enough to divide any further. This criterion is satisfied. Lot Size Averaging: Section 18.430.020.D states Lot size may be averaged to allow lots less than the minimum lot size allowed in the underlying zoning district as long as the average lot area for all lots is not less than allowed by the underlying zoning district. No lot created under this provision shall be less than 80% of the minimum lot size allowed in the underlying zoning district. The applicant has proposed to exercise this standard by averaging the lot sizes. The minimum lot size for the R-12 zone is 3,050 square feet; therefore, the minimum lot size that would be allowed through averaging is 2,440 square feet. As pro osed, all proposed lots satisfy this standard. However the proposed lots will likely be reconfigured between preliminary and final plat approval due to the denial of the four variances requested to the rear yard setback Therefore it will be necessary for the applicant to demonstrate compliance with this standard with submittal of the final plat. FINDING The proposed lots range in size from 2,441 to 3,471 square feet in size. The development has an average Tot size of 3,065 square feet under the provisions of 18.430.020(D). However, due to the denial-of the variances requested to the rear d setback, it will be necessary to reconfirm that the proposed development satisfies this standard during final plat review. CONDITION: Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall provide City staff with a revised lot configuration that demonstrates compliance with WC Section 18.430.020.D. Phased Development: The Approval Authority may approve a time schedule for developing a subdivision in phases, but in no case shall the actual construction time period for any phase be greater than two years without reapplying for a preliminary plat; The criteria for approving a phased site development review proposal are: a. Te public facilities shall be scheduled to be constructed in conjunction with or prior to each phase to ensure provision of public facilities prior to building occupancy;b.) The development and occupancy of any phase shall not be dependent on the use of temporary public facilities: For purposes of this subsection, a temporary public facility is an interim facility not constructed to the applicable City or district standard; and The phased development shall not result in requiring the City or other property owners to construct public facilities that were required as a part of the approval of the preliminary plat. The application for phased development approval shall be reviewed concurrently with the preliminary plat application and the decision may be appealed in the same manner as the preliminary plat. The applicant has not proposed a phased development;therefore,this standard does not apply. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 11 OF 26 SUB200S-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION C- SUBDIVISION APPROVAL CRITERIA Approval Standards - Preliminary Plat: The proposed preliminary plat complies with the applicable zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations. Compliance with the specific regulations and standards of the zoning ordinance will be addressed in greater detail later in this decision. The proposed plat name must not be duplicative and must otherwise satisfy the provisions of ORS Chapter 92. The applicant has provided signed documentation dated 10-10-2005 that the proposed subdivision name, "Solera" has been reserved with Washington County,thus insuring that the name is not duplicative. This criterion is satisfied. The streets and roads are laid out so as to conform to the plats of subdivisions and maps of major partitions or subdivisions already approved for adjoining property as to width, general direction and in all other respects unless the City determines it is in the public interest to modify the street or road pattern. Street layout is discussed in more detail, and conditioned if necessary, under the Street and Utility standards section of this decision. An explanation has been provided for all common improvements. The applicant has provided an explanation for all common improvements as required and, therefore, satisfied this criterion. Specific details of the proposed improvements are discussed later in this decision under the Street and Utility Improvement Standards Section 18.810. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the proposal has met or can be conditioned to satisfy the preliminary plat approval standards for subdivisions. D- APPLICABLE TIGARD DEVELOMENT CODE SECTIONS Residential Zoning Districts (18.510) Lists the description of the residential Zoning District. The site is located in the R-12: Medium-Density residential zoning district. The R-12 zoning district has the following dimensional requirements: TABLE 18.510.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES STANDARD R-12 Minimum Lot Size 3,050 sq.ft. Detached unit Duplexes- Attached unit Average Minimum Lot Width None Maximum Lot Coverage 80%[1] Minimum Setbacks Front yard 15 ft. Side facing street on corner&through lots 10 ft. Side yard 5 ft. Rear yard 15 ft. Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district 30 ft." Distance between property line and front of garage 20 ft. Maximum Height 35 ft. Minimum Landscape Requirement 20% [1] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious areas. "An adjustment has been requested for this standard to reduce it to 15 feet. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 12 OF 26 SUB2005-00023—SOLERA SUBDIVISION The proposed lots range in size from 2,441 square feet to 3,471 square feet and average 3,180 square feet. The applicant has requested for variances to the 30 foot special setback from the R-4.5 zone on the west that were denied previously in this decision. A condition has been imposed on the development to ensure that the standard is satisfied in the final plat submittal. Exhibit 4 of the applicant's plan submittal shows proposed building envelopes that demonstrate compliance with front, side, and aside from proposed lots 1-4, rear yard setbacks called for in'1UC Table 18.510.2. Compliance with building height and minimum landscape requirements are verified prior to the issuance of building permits. There is no evidence in the record to suggest that the dimensional standards of the R-12 zone cannot be satisfied. FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the residential zoning district dimensional standards are satisfied. Access,Egress and Circulation(18.705): Chapter 18.705 establishes standards and regulations for safe and efficient vehicle access and egress on a site and for general circulation within the site. Table 18.705.1 states that the minimum vehicular access and egress for single-family dwelling units on individual lots shall be one, 10-foot paved driveway within a 15-foot-wide accessway. The minimum access width for 3-6 dwelling units is 20 feet with 20 feet of pavement. The access and egress into the site itself is discussed later in this decision under the Street and Utility Standards section of this decision (18.810). Access to individual lots will be reviewed for compliance during the building permit phase. Access plan requirements. No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and approved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement. Scaled site plans have been submitted that indicate how the requirements of access, egress, and circulation are to be met. Joint access. Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or parcels of land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title, provided: Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; and Copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the City. No joint access is proposed. Public street access. All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.0301 shall connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis. Based on the plans submitted, all of the proposed lots will take access from SW 96th Avenue. This criterion is satisfied. Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO. The applicant's engineer has submitted Preliminary Sight Distance certification for the proposed intersection with Greenburg Road. The engineer states that the posted speed is 35 mph and that available sight distance is over 350 feet in each direction. The applicant's engineer must provide a final sight distance certification for the intersection prior to final plat approval. FINDING: The applicant has provided preliminary Sight Distance Certification as required for the preliminary plat approval; however, final Sight Distance Certification must be completed to ensure that the proposed intersection is safe in compliance with TDC Section 18.705.030.H.1 NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 13 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. There are six lots located within 150 feet of the intersection of SW 96th Avenue and Greenburg Road. Any reconfigured lots proposed to satisfy the rear yard setbacks that were discussed previously in this narrative will still be located within 150 feet due to the shape of the lot. Therefore any proposed driveways for the reconfigured lots must be located as far north from Greenburg Road as possible. The driveway locations for any lots within the 150 foot area of influence of the intersection of SW 96th Avenue and SW Greenburg Road shall be shown on the PFI application submittal. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. Within 600 feet of the proposed street there are four streets and approximately 15 individual driveways. It is apparent that there are no locations along Greenburg Road that the applicant could propose that would meet this spacing standard. The applicant has requested an adjustment which has been approved previously in this narrative. Curb cuts: Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N: Concrete curbs, curb cuts, wheelchair, bicycle ramps and driveway approaches shall be constructed in accordance with standards specified in this chapter and Section 15.04.080: Concrete curbs and driveway approaches are required; except where no sidewalk is planned, an asphalt approach may be constructed with City Engineer approval and Asphalt and concrete driveway approaches to the property line shall be built to City configuration standards. No driveway approach shall be less than five feet from the side property line projected except in cul-de- sacs, without approval and written permission of the city. The end slopes may encroach within the five foot restricted area. No portion of any driveway approach, including the end slopes, shall be located closer than thirty feet to an intersection street right-of-way line. Commercial or service drives shall not be more than thirty feet in width and if located on the same lot frontage shall be separated by a minimum length of curb of thirty feet. Each residential driveway shall be not more than twenty-six feet in width including end slopes, and if more than one driveway is to be constructed to serve the same lot, the frontage spacing between such driveways shall be not less than thirty feet measured along the curb line. Joint access driveways shall conform to the appropriate width standard for commercial or residential type usage. Driveways and curb cuts will be reviewed for compliance during the building permit phase. Direct individual access to arterial or collector streets from single-family dwellings and duplex lots shall be discouraged. Direct access to major collector or arterial streets shall be considered only if there is no practical alternative way to access the site. Currently, lot 1 is the only lot with frontage on an arterial street. A plat note will be required restricting vehicular access directly onto SW Greenburg. In no case shall the design of the service drive or drives require or facilitate the backward movement or other maneuvering of a vehicle within a street, other than an alley. Single-family and duplex dwellings are exempt from this requirement. The proposed subdivision is for attached single-family homes. Therefore,this standard does not apply. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 14 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION Minimum access requirements for residential use: Vehicular access and egress for single-family, duplex or attached single-family dwelling units on individual lots and multi-family residential uses shall not be less than as provided in Table 18.705.1 and Table 18.705.2; The width of driveways serving individual lots will be reviewed at the time of building permit application. Based on the proposed site plan,compliance with this standard is feasible. Therefore,this standard is met. Vehicular access to multi-family structures shall be brought to within 50 feet of the ground floor entrance or the ground floor landing of a stairway, ramp, or elevator leading to the dwelling units; No multi-family structures are proposed with this application. Therefore,this standard does not apply. Private residential access drives shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code; The driveways serving individual lots will be reviewed at the time of building permit application. Based on the proposed site plan,compliance with this standard is feasible. Therefore,this standard is met. Section 18.705.030.H.4 states that Access Drives in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus by one of the following: a circular, paved surface having a minimum turn radius measured from center point to outside edge of 35 feet or a hammerhead-configured, paved surface with each leg of the hammerhead having a minimum depth of 40 feet and a minimum width of 20 feet. The maximum cross slope of a required turnaround is 5%. Currently there are no access drives in excess of 150 feet in length. This criterion is not applicable to this proposal. FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the Access,Egress and Circulation standards have not been satisfied. CONDITIONS: • Final sight distance certification for the intersections of SW 96th Avenue and Greenburg Road shall be submitted to the Engineering Division prior to final plat approval. • Prior to any site work, the applicant shall show the driveway locations for any proposed lots located within 150 feet of the intersection of SW Greenburg Road and SW 96th Avenue shall be located as far north from Greenburg Road as possible. • Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the plat stating that vehicular access from SW Greenburg Road to individual lots shall not be allowed. Density Computations and Limitations (18.715): Chapter 18.715 implements the Comprehensive Plan by establishing the criteria for determining the number of dwelling units permitted. The number of allowable dwelling nits is based on the net development area. The net area is the remaining parcel area after exclusion of sensitive lands and land dedicated for public roads or parks. The net area is then divided by the minimum lot size permitted by the zoning district to determine the number of dwelling units that maybe developed on a site. Based on the formulas in Chapter 18.715 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code, the maximum and minimum number of units permitted on the site are based on the net developable area. The net developable area is the gross site area, subtracting sensitive land areas, land dedicated for public parks and public rights-of-way,land for private streets, and if an existing dwelling unit is to remain,the area ofpthe lot on which that unit is situated. Of the total gross site area (1.07 acres or 46,609 square feet), 13,029 square feet is subtracted for right-of-way dedications on SW Greenburg and SW 96`i'Avenue. There are no public parks or sensitive areas within the project. Therefore,the net developable area is 33,580 square feet. The net area divided by the minimum lot size in the R-12 zone (3,050 s.f) yields the maximum number of units, in this case 11. The minimum number of lots is based on 80% of the maximum, or 8. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 15 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • The applicant has proposed 11 lots in this subdivision, and will likely lose one or two lots in the lot reconfiguration resulting from denial of the variance. However, even if the applicant is able to reconfigure the lots, demonstrate compliance with the required rear yard setback, and maintain 11 lots, the proposal will remain in compliance with the minimum and maximum density requirements. Therefore,this section is satisfied. FINDING: Based on the analysis above,the density standards have been satisfied. Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Chapter 18.745 contains landscaping provisions for new development. Section 18.745.100 requires that street trees be planted in conjunction with all development that fronts a street or driveway more than 100 feet long. A proposed planting list must be submitted for review by the Director since certain trees can damage utilities, streets and sidewalks or cause personal injury. Section 18.745.040.0 contains specific standards for spacing of street trees as follows: • Small or narrow stature trees (under 25 feet tall and less than 16 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 20 feet apart; • Medium sized trees (25}feet to 40 feet tall, 16 feet to 35 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart;and • Large trees (over 40 feet tall and more than 35 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 40 feet apart; The applicant indicates in the narrative that street trees along for the public streets will be provided in compliance with t us chapter and provides a street tree plan in Exhibit 9 for proposed lots on the east side of proposed SW 96th Avenue. Street trees -for the west side of SW 96th Avenue will be planted with redevelopment of the adjacent westerly property. The applicants plan includes the provision of 2-inch caliper Gallery Pear trees on the east side of the street, and the spacing of the trees satisfies the minimum spacing for small trees as required in Section 18.745.040 of the Tigard Development Code. This standard is satisfied. Section 18.745.050 contains the provisions and requirements for buffering and screening. The Buffering and Screening Matrix Table 18.745.1) requires a minimum eight foot buffer between existing single- family and proposed attached single-family developments proposing more than 5 units. With the minimum number of units required for this development this standard is applicable. The applicant has proposed a six-foot wood or vinyl fence, and a mixture of trees and shrubs along the border between the uses along the east property, but not the north where there is at least one single-family detached unit that requires buffering. Buffering, but not screening is required when dissimilar uses are separated by a street. In this instance, properties located to the south will be separated from the development by SW Greenburg Road and properties located to the east will be separated by SW 96`h Avenue. The proposed development does not satisfy the minimum buffering requirements as required by Section 18.745.050 FINDING: The proposed development does not provide the required buffering and screening required along the north property line. Also, the proposed planting scheme does not include the provision of '1'DC Section 18.745.050(B)(4)(b). CONDITION: Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall provide City staff with a landscape plan showing that the buffer landscape materials and width along the north and west boundary of the subject property will meet the requirements of Chapter 18745. Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements (18.765): Chapter 18.765, Table 18.765.2 requires that single-family attached residences be provided with the same number of required off-street parking spaces as a Multi-family dwelling. Multi-family dwelling parking requirements are based on the number of bedrooms and require up to 1.75 parking spaces for each three- bedroom dwelling unit. The applicant is proposing two parking spaces per unit. One space will be located within an attached garage, and a second space will be provided within the driveway. Compliance with this standard will be enforced during the building permit review process. The TDC requires 20 feet from the property line to the face of a garage. Ibis standard will insure that at least one car can park off of the street, outside of any garage. NOTICE OF DEQSION PAGE 16 OF 26 SUB2005-00023--SOLERA SUBDIVISION • FINDING: Because each individual home will be reviewed for compliance with this standard during the building permit phase and it is feasible that this standard will be met by providing driveways and garages,this standard has been satisfied. Tree Removal (18.790): Chapter 18.790 requires mitigation of trees over 12" diameter at breast height(dbh) removed as part of the development of the site. The applicant's tree removal plan indicates the trees on the property that are to remain and those proposed for removal. There are a total of 13 trees (greater than 6" diameter on the property). Of these trees none are greater than 12 inches in diameter. All trees on the site are proposed to be removed, but because there are no trees over 12-inches in diameter, no mitigation is required. The City Arborist,the project arborist, and some neighbors of the project have expressed concern for the protection of the trees located on the property just west of this site. FINDING: The TDC requires that all trees that are 12-inches or greater that could be adversely affected by construction of the project be protected during construction. The project arborist has made several recommendations to help ensure the long term viability of the large trees located on the property located directly west of this property. It is unrealistic to imagine that these trees will not be affected by construction of the proposed street and any excavation on the site; therefore, it is conditioned below that the applicant/developer diligently maintain all recommended tree protection measures during the course of construction and that the project arborist provide the City Arborist with bi- weekly reports on the condition of the proposed tree protection measures. Final tree protection must be reviewed and signed off by the City of Tigard Arborist. To ensure the long term viability of the large trees located on the property directly west of the project site, additional conditions are warranted. CONDITIONS: • Prior to any site work, the applicant shall submit a final tree rotection plan that clearly depicts the proposed tree protection measures, and includes the following notations: • The applicant shall notify the City Arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. • If it is necessary to enter the tree protection zone at any time with equipment (trucks, bulldozers, etc.) the project arborist and City Arborist must be notified before any entry occurs. Before entering the TPZ, the project arborist and City Arborist shall determine the method by which entry can occur, along with any additional tree protection measures. • The project arborist shall provide the City Arborist with bi-weekly reports through and including building.construction on the conditions and activities related to tree protection measures and activities. Vision Clearance (18.795): Chapter 18.795 applies to all development and requires that clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways and at the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A visual clearance area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, signs, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height. The applicant has illustrated the vision clearance area on several sheets as required. While there is no reason to believe that there will be any obstructions within the vision clearance areas, the applicants Street Tree plan shows a street tree in the vision clearance area. Since the tree will be two-inches in caliper at the time of planting, it will most likely not obstruct the vision clearance area. Nevertheless, the applicant must maintain the vegetation in accordance with the standards of 18.795. This standard is satisfied. FINDING: Because no structures are currently proposed in the vision clearance area and all future buildings will be reviewed for compliance during the building permit phase,this standard has been satisfied NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 17 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • E - STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS(SECTION 18.810): Street And Utility Improvements Standards Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets,sewers,and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030(E) requires an Arterial street to have a 100- foot right-of-way width and a 72-foot paved section. Local residential streets shall have a minimum right-of- way width of 54 feet with a 32 foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways,underground utilities, street lighting,storm drainage,and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Greenburg Road,which is classified as an Arterial on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 30-35 feet of ROW from centerline according to the most recent tax assessor s map. The applicant should dedicate the additional ROW to provide 50 feet from centerline. SW Greenburg Road is currently partially improved. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct the halt-street improvements. The applicant has proposed to construct 96th Avenue as a local "skinny" street with a 50 foot ROW. The applicant should dedicate adequate ROW to provide for the half-street improvements and a minimum of 24 feet of paving. The applicant has proposed to construct 28 feet of paving from curb to curb. This will only provide parking on one side, as limited by the current fire code. The fire code grows parking on one side with a minimum of 26 feet paved. The applicant shall provide a revised section,with supporting trip data for review with their PFI permit submittal. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030(F) states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length. The applicant has submitted a future street plan showing how the.proposed public street can be extended to the west and then north to SW North Dakota. They also indicate how adjoining property might be divided for development. Several options were included to show potential future development of adjoining parcels. While the proposed road will result in an "S" curve, considering the other impacts to adjoining parcels and trees on the site, the proposed future street plan is adequate to meet this criterion. The applicant's plan does not provide for a temporary hammerhead turnout as required by 18.810.030.F.2.c. The applicant has based this design decision on input from TVFR, but this standard was not intended to be limited to emergency vehicles. Therefore,the applicant shall revise the plans to provide a temporary hammerhead turnaround in a tract. Cul-de-sacs: 18.810.030.K states that a cul-de-sac shall be no more than 200 feet long, shall not provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units, and shall only be used when environmental or topographical constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards in this code precude street extension and through circulation: NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 18 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • All cul-de-sacs shall terminate with a turnaround. Use of turnaround configurations other than circular,shall be approved by the City Engineer, and • The length of the cul-de-sac shall be measured along the centerline of the roadway from the near side of the intersecting street to the farthest point of the cul-de-sac. • If a cul-de-sac is more than 300 feet long, a lighted direct pathway to an adjacent street may be required to be provided and dedicated to the City. There are no cul-de-sacs proposed by this development. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre- existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15°/o for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. The future street connection will provide circulation through this site and eventually provide a connection between Greenburg Road,an Arterial,and North Dakota Street,a Neighborhood Route,thereby meeting this criterion. Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street(except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer. The proposed street grades do not exceed 6% thereby meeting this criterion. The applicant must submit a profile of Greenburg Road, extending 300 feet beyond the frontage in each direction,with their PFI application submittal. Access to Arterials and Major Collectors: Section 18.810.030.Q states that where a development abuts or is traversed by an existing or proposed arterial or major collector street, the development design shall provide adequate protection for residential properties and shall separate residential access and through traffic or if separation is not feasible, the design shall minimize the traffic conflicts. The design shall include any of the following: • A parallel access street along the arterial or major collector, • Lots of suitable depth abutting the arterial or major collector to provide adequate buffering with frontage along another street; • Screen planting at the rear or side property line to be contained in a non-access reservation along the arterial or major collector or • Other treatment suitable to meet the objectives of this subsection; • If a lot has access to two streets with different classifications, primary access should be from the lower classification street. None of the proposed lots will be allowed direct access onto Greenburg Road. All driveways shall be located as far north from Greenburg Road as possible. Private Streets: Section 18.810.030.T states that design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer. The City shall require legal assurances for the continued maintenance of private streets, such as a recorded maintenance agreement. Private streets serving more than six dwelling units are permitted only within planned developments, mobile home dwelling and multi-family residential developments. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 19 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION There are no private streets proposed within this development. This criterion is not applicable to the proposed development. Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard- to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 2,000 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre- existing development or • For blocks adjacent to arterial streets,limited access highways,major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. SW Greenbury,Road is an arterial street, and therefore this standard is not applicable. Nevertheless,the subdivision creates a public street that is intended to be extended with future development to the north and east which will ultimately create a block approximately 2,100 feet in length. Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of- ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in the code. The applicants proposed street will provide a connection along SW Greenburg Road that is 150 feet from the edge of SW-97`x' Avenue and 260 feet from the edge of SW 95th Avenue. Eventually this street will provide a through connection to SW North Dakota Street. Therefore,this criterion is satisfied. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. The minimum lot size of the R-12 zoning district is 3,050 square feet. None of the lots exceed 1.5 times the minimum lot size (4,575 sf). Therefore,this standard does not apply. Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c applies, which requires a parcel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded access easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit,the frontage shall be at least 15 feet. All of the proposed lots have at least 25 feet of frontage onto a public street. The applicant will likely be required to reconfigure the lots due to the denial of the variances and all new lots will be required to provide 25 feet of frontage onto a public or private lot in compliance with this standard. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. The applicant's plans indicate that sidewalks will be constructed along SW Greenburg and along the east side of the new public road being constructed as part of a 3/4 street improvement in support of the project. The plans show the sidewalk on 96th Avenue as curb-tight without a planter strip as required by 18.810.070.0. The applicant's plans shall be revised to provide a 5 foot planter strip between the curb and the sidewalk. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. NOTICE OF DEQSION PAGE 20 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projectedby the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant's plans show the extension of the public sanitary sewer from a manhole in Greenburg Road. The plan shows the public line extended to the north property line, within the proposed SW 96th Avenue right-of-way. The applicant's plans also show the extension of the public sewer in Greenburg Road to the east end of their frontage. This criterion can be satisfied. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no upstream drainage ways that impact this development. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions-have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water-Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek,the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant has proposed to construct an underground detention system in order to meet this requirement. Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. Greenburg Road is a designated bicycle facility and striping is in place. This criterion is satisfied. Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.0 states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. The bikeway is already improved. Therefore,this standard does not apply. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 21 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above- ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are no overhead utilities along the project frontage. This standard is not applicable to the proposed development. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Public Water System: Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) provides service in this area. The applicant has shown an extension of the public water in Greenburg Road into the site, within the proposed public ROW. The applicant shall obtain approval from TVWD for the public water line and fire hydrants prior to construction. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management(SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition,the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant's engineer has provided preliminary storm drainage calculations for Stormwater Management catch basin filters. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate 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 CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb one or more acres of land. A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of all lots, and show that theyw�be graded to insure that surface drainage is directed to the street or a public storm drainage system approved by the Engineering Department. For situations where the back portions of lots drain away from a street and toward adjacent lots, appropriate private storm drainage lines shall be provided to sufficiently contain and convey runoff from each lot. NOTICE OF DEQSION PAGE 22 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • Since the site is over an acre in size,An NPDES 1200-C permit will be required. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). The existing house will need to be issued a new address as will each of the newly created lots. An addressing fee in the amount of$50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to approval of the final plat. For this project, the addressing fee will be $50 per lot. The developer will also be required to provide signage at the entrance of each shared driveway that lists the addresses that are served by the given driveway. This will assist emergency services personnel to more easily find a particular home. Survey Requirements: The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates AD 83 (91)] on two monuments with a tie to the City's global positioning system(GPS) geodetic control network(GC 22). These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by. • GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey. • By random traverse using conventional surveying methods. In addition, the applicant's as-built drawings shall be tied to the GPS network. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes,catch basins,water valves,hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAIL 83 (91). F - IMPACT STUDY Section 18.390.050 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.050 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public . The internal street within the subdivision is needed to allow the subdivision to develop and the need for streets is created by the subdivision. Because the need for the internal street is created by the development,the impact of the development is directly proportional to the cost of dedication and construction of the internal streets. Therefore, no proportionality analysis is needed for the internal street improvements, and they are not factored into the mitigated costs for the City's transportation system. External street improvements are required to offset the general contribution of traffic impacts (vehicular, pedestrian, etc.)_ generated from the development and to systematically bring substandard systems into conformance. These half-street frontage improvements are required to be roughly proportional to the impacts resulting from development of the property. Upon completion of this development, the future builders o} the residences will be required to pay TIF's of approximately$28,510 ($2,851 x 10 single-family dwelling units). Any required street improvements to certain collector or higher volume streets and the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) are mitigation measures that are required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 23 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION • Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $89 093 ($28,510 divided by.32). The difference between the TIF paid and the full impact,is considered an unmitigated impact. Less mitigated costs The applicant is required to dedicate an additional 14-feet of right-of-way along the project's 126.5 feet of frontage on SW Greenburg Road (1,771 s.f). In addition, the applicant is responsible for unproving this frontage with / street improvements. The approximate value of residentially zoned property for right of way purposes is $3.00 per square foot. The approximate value of i/ street improvements is $200 perlineal foot. Estimate of Unmitigated Impacts Full Impact TIF=0.32= $89,093 Less 11F'Assessment 10 lots x$2,851= $28,510 Less ROW value 1771 s.f.x$3= $5,313 Less i/ street improvement value 1,7711.f.x$200=. $25,120 Estimated Value of Remaining Unmitigated Impacts $30,150 FINDING: Using the above cost factors, it can be determined that the value of the remaining unmitigated impacts exceeds the costs of the conditions imposed and, therefore, the conditions are roughly proportional and justified. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Operations Utility Manager has reviewed the proposal,but offered no comments: The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has objection to it. The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed the proposal, but offered no comments: The City of Tigard Forester has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: There appears to be large trees on the Neighboring property to the west of the project site. These trees must be protected during construction. The project arborist will have to prescribe tree protection measures and agree to bi-weekly reports concerning those measures and their condition. SW 96`x'Avenue will have an adverse affect on these trees belonging to the neighbor. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Clean Water Services of Washington County has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: There do not appear to be any fatal flaws sanitary sewer and storm sewer are rovided to each lot,water quality and water quantity provided. City will need to approve the calculations and forward a set of final plans for CWS "Official Sign off" authorizing storm water connection permit issuance. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval: 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUILDING 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. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 24 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION 2) DEAD END ROADS: Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. The proposed design will require a fire apparatus turn-around(see Item #3 for exception) 3) 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 approvedby the fire code official. 4) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (12 feet for up to two dwelling units and accessory buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. ere fire apparatus roadways are less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are more than 28 feet wide but less than 32 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more,parking is not restricted. 5) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed driving surface, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Roads 26 feet wide or less shall be posted on both sides as a fire lane. Roads more than 26 feet wide to 32 feet wide shall be posted on one side as a fire lane. Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE" and shall be installed with a clear space above grade level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have red letters on a white reflective background. 6) 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 75,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weighty.-You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. 7) TURNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall be not less than 28 feet and 48 feet respectively, measured from the same center point. 8) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single family dwellings and duplexes served by a municipal water supply shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the structure(s) is (are) 3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be determined according to IFC Appendix B. 9) FIRE HYDRANTS — ONE- AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS & ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: Where a portion of a structure is more than 600 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the structure(s), on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. A minimum of one fire hydrant shall be located on the same side of Greenburg Rd. as the proposed project. 10) FIRE HYDRANT NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION: The minimum number and distribution of fire hydrants available to a building shall not be less than that listed in Appendix C,Table C 105.1. Considerations for placing fire hydrants may be as follows: • Existing hydrants in the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants as approved. Hydrants that are up to 600 feet away from the nearest point of a subject building that is protected-with fire sprinklers may contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants unless approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highways or freeways shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Heavily traveled collector streets only as approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the fire code official. 11) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 25 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION 12) REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access road way that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly 13) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. SECTION IX. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owners of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 4, 2006 AND EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 19, 2006 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing,subject to any additional Hiles of procedure that may be adopted.from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON APRIL 18, 2006. estions: 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. PREPARED BY: Brad Kilby, Consultant A •eW ' ���_1 April 4,2006 APPROVED BY: Ric ar• Bra' dorff DATE Planning . ager NOTICE OF DECISION PAGE 26 OF 26 SUB2005-00023-SOLERA SUBDIVISION CITY of TIGARD _O_p 0 ifil I=1 CI 0O°pO GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM 0 0 0 0 VIONITY MAID 0 0 0 0 0 le°00°00 ° W 10* Q u SUB2005-00023 a Mb 0 �' ix VAR2005-00094 ° — VAR2005-00095 NORTH DAKOTA VAR2005-00096 VAR2005-00097 1111, II VAR2005-00098 / I - �_ �w SOLERA SUBDIVISION IIIL> 011 \\\ **/ ■ aPE'R J4pi 0) /IV. N : r 1 TL 4100 " \\\\\,,,, . 11.3800 \\_\ ...k.\%•\------31 : ! ....__........... . . 1 [ : . .• : IL ' : I • '''.,\:\ \ ‘\ ; • : . i 4000 500 3900 II„ R1T "Is' . : ; •i , RAY R/W C/I. 21_12.fltA1 I . I FUTURE PLANiER , • : - .. --rar- . STRIP WIN : I MEANDERiNG 15.5' . I i MB 11 . . .. SIDEWAu< 0.5' •-•-• , 1,, 1 .• . , - ;;•,!.1W; . 1--—a,3.—i --I. 1 : JAI i 10 3,034 SF I rl 11.2100 . kr*, 1 . "1:' siDEWALX / 16,4'',C,, :4' ,,,,,,,,A1 1 .4..''',. SW SOTH AVENUE $I1t:,•:, , 1 7 3,065 lz,,--,4 i - L.____, • . NOT TO SCALE ! , '. .1 i.,:;.'•': ' , 123.2' I L.21 :Affil ;`,1 www, N, f.,... ... . . _ .. .., • f 4 r V I • . ' 411.3? 4 1 , 1.O.i4S7 I ; OM' b i i :s ; : 7....,, „:21 '4; 1 3,378 SF 1.....:,_____I IL 2200 Avg,, , ,- CA. R/W I t ; IL 2400 '? ,,.,....•;', .: l.,T i 1 6 ,409 s, ,4 : 05-.r--- 1• k.,,_ '4,N•';'•:`'''.! "1 ' • .?'-''• .:,: ....117.0. ' -I .• : ■ • Fk:,WA: -',4■ i 3 40 S' i I- i • 1--<,--- rER ,..,,,,,':-:.1.1! 4 3,‘;, .• 13'-d 1 50.1;'5. ' SIDEWALK / OM -: – - . ..., 1;,'__,. .• • , yot.A. , , ..... 139.5 .16. .,0 ,,,,, SW GREENBURG RD , 4544 OF ' HALF STREET wIDENS FRON APPROX.10 2.-.13.3'TO 23.0' i i ! I 4'• ,4,;4 - BOB'1 ,c'' 15'ROW DEDICATION REQUIRED NOT TO SCALE !','k.t ....I .: 2 1 11.2303 : 1 : "r. : 1 g i : 2,441 r ig IL 23.04 I • r---............,..,,/- t----' ------- I I . .:''.:4 :.: 1 e2.0. !- -I .• :-.--....i., -'-''------•-----:::----'"- --..... ,„:,, ' i.; ;r\ 1 : , -- 40. ..;- ------- -..---,------.-------:2::-----iiii1:;'; ---25!:F.-____ F . 0000 LEGEND , IL 2301 -- — PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY sDEWALK - •. fat$74- , Elan,.RIGHT-OF-WAY -41 PROPOSED CURB -..........,....... , ....._ ..•. '- R ___—PROnSED CENTERLINE my ,,,, • - ---...EXISTING GENTERLINE _...-----_.•.. a vv°Re , g . EP:Of:TONS:0PR:0:TRYTYL.LIENE ` ..,...._. -..■. ...PROPOSED BOUNDARY LINE ,. i •I I 11111 Al CITY OF TIGARD I SUB2005-00023/VAR2005-00094, 95, 96, 97 & 98 errm Pa..am N SOLERA SUBDIVISION TIGAI:D (Map is not to scale) ..1.1.,.. • EXHIBIT .. :Palmer&Associates .Attn:Al Jeck SUB2005-00023/VAR2005-00094, 95, 96, 97&98 9600 SW Oak Street,Suite 230 SOLERA SUBDIVISION Tigard, OR 97223 Max Moini and Mohammed-Hossein Tavakoli-Sheraji 2946 NW 11th Avenue Camas,WA 98607 Maria Juliana Picon 11500 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, OR 97223 Margaret MacDonald Davis 11470 SW Greenberg Road Tigard, OR 97223 Jesse Emory Architect,AIA 11280 SW 94th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Kathryn Grigorieff 11343 SW 95th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 John W. Drennan PO Box 23603 Tigard, OR 97281 A AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING : _ TIGARD I, Patricia L.Gunsford being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Senior Administrative SpeciaCst for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: {Check Appropriate Box(s)Below} © NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SUB2005-00023/VAR2005-00094, 95, 96, 97 & 98 — SOLERA SUBDIVISION ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit"A", and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"R", and by reference made a part hereof, on April 4,2006,and deposited in the United States Mail on Apr114,2006, postage prepaid. - - Algie-7 (Person that Pre..red 'otice) STATE OF OcGOW ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) ..� Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 7 day of 410AAL , 2006. r OFi (;IARLOSSES AL SI jE `r'i CO AR P ON I 3 al LiC./0 MYCOM? SSV:_"- ''F_SDEC.1,2007 NOTARY IC OF OREGON My Com on Expires: 102—1`0 1 EXHIBITA__. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2005-00023 = SOLERA SUBDIVISION 120 DAYS = 5/20/2006 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: SOLERA SUBDIVISION CASE NOS.: Subdivision(SUB) SUB2005-00023 Adjustment (VAR) VAR2005-00094 Vanance AR VAR2005-00095 Variance AR VAR2005-00096 Variance AR VAR2005-00097 Variance AR VAR2005-00098 REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of an 11-lot subdivision on 1.07 acres. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes. Lot sizes within the development are proposed to be between 2,441 and 3,471 square feet (3,065 square feet on average). An access and egress adjustment to the street spacing requirement along SW Greenburg Road, an arterial, from 600 e 0 to 240 feet between the existing-35 Avenue and the proposed SW 96''' Avenue is requested. In addition, the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive 1 -4.5 zone on the east) for proposed lots 1 through 4. APPLICANT: Palmer&Associates OWNERS: Max Moini and Attu: Aleck Mohammed-Hossein Tavakoli-Sheraji 9600 SW Oak Street,Suite 230 2946 NW 11th Avenue Tigard,OR 97223 Camas,WA 98607 COMP. PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATION: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square-feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. LOCATION: 11490 and 11494 SW Greenberg Road;WCTM 1S135CA,Tax Lots 2300 and 2302. APPLICABLE RE VIE W CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.370, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the preliminary subdivision request subject to certain conditions of approval, APPROVED the adjustment to the street spacing standard and to the driveway locations within the area of influence with Greenburg Road, and DENIED the variances to reduce the rear yard setback to the adjacent R4.5 zoned property to the east of the site. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at City Hall. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (25C) per page,or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. 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 Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 4, 2006 AND EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 19, 2006 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. A�De—al: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten C10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant,the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues,properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing,subject to any additional rules of procedure that maybe adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON APRIL 18, 2006. estions: For er information please contact the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. WEINNINNE ' 111101WIT MAP IL, ,i a SUB2005-00023- __ _ YAR2005-00094 Ida — —� r- YAR2005-00095 -T-- I YAR2005-00096 DAKOTA ii!I! II'p= =1=1 YAR2005-00098 SOLERA SUBDIVISION■ . TIN \ � ' !~I���� _.40ivrti.,; Au a R. 1, e .- A '; III Oveutee mu min ■1111. 4 II IN nO la 0 Oa FM . cit4 Ak 1/111k4 IMAIMI* IS , rilill i MINESED1111: City of Tigard i �\\\; I ■ ....i I R.- 1 1 I I t'\1\ i 1taa0 1 lal! i Yi , Lb r� aam I 1 !4i 1 j 1 1 I,!. 1777— '=1-- - - 11 I x,,,1 i , ,-N_=1- t;i1;E!7: / FH , 12 4 I __ _ I i�_ w tax j —1.211 _ ., .�... —� CITY iGARD I SUB2005-00023/VAR2005-00094,95,96.97&98 N SOLERA SUBDIVISION (Map Is not to scale) 1S135CA-03700 1S135DB-06500 EXHIBIT AASVE SANDRA J AND DAVID J CHRISTOPHER BASIL R AND 11309 SW 95TH AVE BELINDA L TIGARD,OR 97223 9460 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD,OR 97223 IS135CA-09000 1S135CA-08700 ACOSTA ADILIA CONACHAN JIM 11455 SW ESAU PL 11420 SW ESAU PL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CD-00100 1S135DB-07000 ALVARADO MARTA M TRUSTEE DALTON DANNY E&SHIRLEY J 11525 SW 95TH AVE 11305 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-03200 1S135DB-10000 ARENDES CARINE E& DAVIS BARBARA J ARENDES SHARON L 9405 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 9524 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135DB-05400 1S135CA-02400 BALES MARY ELIZABETH& DAVIS MARGARET M TRUSTEE TERRY VERN 11470 SW GREENBURG RD 11390 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-05700 1S135CA-01700 BARNEY CHARLES R&CATHY L DAVIS STEVE&BARBARA 11450 SW 95TH AVE 11300 SW 97TH CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-00307 1S135CD-03700 BEACON HILL PARTNERS LLC DAW LAWRENCE D 7831 SE LAKE RD#200 DAISY L PORTLAND,OR 97267 11605 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-00301 1S135DC-03000 BUYS FRANCES E DEGROOD AL MNIRGINIA E 9645 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST TIGARD,OR 97223 BY AL MNIRGINIA E DEGROOD TRS 22730 SW CHAPMAN RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 1Si35CA-00100 1S1350B-05602 BYRUM ALBERT G III DICKSON DONALD K&CAROL A 11165 SW 95TH AVE PO BOX 219028 PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97225 1 S 135CA-01900 15135C D-01702 CARROLL SONDRA DOBLIE JUDY K 11330 SW 97TH CT 11640 SW 98TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-01500 1 S135DB-06300 DORSETT R CRAIG&SHARON MARIE ENDICOTT MICHAEL R& 11550 SW 98TH MELISSA J TIGARD,OR 97223 11270 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135C D-02900 1 35CA-091 DOTSON JASON B/SUE D ESA ATES OWNERS OF 9570 SW LEWIS LANE LO 1 TIGARD,OR 97223 0 1S135CD-00202 1S135DB-06600 DRENNAN DAVID&JOAN ESTES ALICE L PO BOX 23603 9430 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CD-09000 1 135CA-042 DRENNAN DAVID A&JOAN F G LOPMENT INC PO BOX 23603 TIGARD,OR 97281 135CD-0910 1 S135CD-00300 DR A AVID A&JOAN FISER MARK A&BEVERLY J PO 03 1690 MCLEAN BLVD ARD,OR 7281 EUGENE,OR 97405 135C0-09200 1S135DC-03100 DR NAN VID A&JOAN FITZGERALD MEGHAN M&JUSTIN M PO B 3603 11545 SW GREENBURG RD RD,0 7281 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-05100 1S135CA-00303 EATON DICK B&LINDA L GILLINGHAM TERRY L AND 9625 SW LEWIS LN SHARON A TIGARD,OR 97223 9605 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-03601 1 S135CA-03900 EATON RICHARD B&LINDA L GRIGORIEFF KATHRYN Y 9625 SW LEWIS LN 11343 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-07300 1S135DB-05300 EMORY JESSE B& HARDT FREDERICK W III AND LEIGH A GLORIA J 11280 SW 94TH AVE 11420 SW 94TH PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CD-01600 1S135CD-00205 EMPKIE ROBERT L JR HASTING THOMAS D 6315 SW 198TH AVE SHARON M ALOHA,OR 97007 9555 SW LEWIS LA TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-03800 1S135CA-03100 HASTING THOMAS D&SHARON M JAMES FRED C 9555 SW LEWIS LN 9545 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-05601 15135CA-01800 HERNANDEZ ABRAHAM VERDE& JAUCH ROGER P HERNANDEZ OSCAR VERDE JAUCH BRENT H 11385 SW 94TH AVE 10648 SW 41ST AVENUE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97219 1 S 135CA-03400 1 S135CD-03500 HERNANDEZ JOSE R& JOY DANIEL J JURADO MARIA S& 9655 SW LEWIS LN HERNANDEZ-J MAURILIO TIGARD,OR 97223 11253 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135CA-01901 1S13508-05800 HERNANDEZ SUANNY& KELLY DENIS M&SHELLEY R HERNANDEZ NOHEMY& 11445 SW 94TH AVE LORENZO-CARMONA LUIS TIGARD,OR 97223 9640 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD,OR 97223 18135CA-00104 1S135CA-08900 HORST JACQUELINE L KHAN MUSTAFA K& 9565 SW NORTH DAKOTA LOVELY REHANA S TIGARD,OR 97223 11435 SW ESAU PL TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-06100 1S1350 B-07100 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF KING DOUGLAS A WASHINGTON COUNTY 11320 SW 94TH AVE 111 NE LINCOLN ST#200-L PORTLAND,OR 97223 HILLSBORO,OR 97124 1 350B-06200 1 S135CD-03400 HO NG AU RITY OF KNEELAND JAMES H&DEBORAH L WASHI N COUNTY 9690 SW LEWIS LN 111 LIN N ST#200-L TIGARD,OR 97223 LSBORO,O 97124 1S135CA-03000 1S135CA-01902 HOWLAND JOHN P KOCIEMBA DIANE E 9568 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST PO BOX 231021 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DC-03001 1S135DB-05504 HUANG JIA-HWAY KREISBERG LOUIS&ELIZABETH J 1910 SE TALTON AVE 11350 SW 95TH AVE VANCOUVER,WA 98683 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S13508-05200 1S135CD-03100 JAKOVICH JOHN D&MARY LOU KURTZ GAREY L 11450 SW 94TH 4929 SE TENINO DR TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97206 1 S135DB-06800 1 S135CD-00500 LACY JON R AND JANELLE A MAHAR MARYLOU 11265 SW 94TH PO BOX 1064 TIGARD,OR 97223 NEWBERG,OR 97132 1 S135CA-08300 1 S135CA-04100 LAMET DANIEL G& MANDERA ZACHARIAH& LAMET V&VERNA DETWEILER JEANIFFER 11355 SW 97TH CT 11355 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CD-00790 1S135CD-03000 LAMM FAMILY TRUST MCDONALD RYAN&SHAY 11520 SW 98TH AVE 9580 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135DB-05901 1 S135CD-08900 LANG GIANG KIEU& MEADOWS KEITH&LINDA LANG LE& 11500 SW 98TH AVE TRAN HOI PORTLAND,OR 97224 11475 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-06900 1S135CA-00305 LE JONATHAN H& MEARS SEANA&MICHELLE NGUYEN THERESA T 9635 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 11285 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135CA-04300 1S135CA-02303 LEE PAUL TRUSTEE MICKEL TOM 0&JUDITH A 2206 NE 45TH 10261 SW STUART CT PORTLAND,OR 97213 TIGARD,OR 97224 1S135CD-00201 1S135CA-03500 LEWIS DAVID E&MARSHA E MIJATOVIC RELJA&DUSANKA FAMILY TRUST 11275 SW 95TH AVE 9575 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 15135CD-00200 18135CA-02300 LEWIS DAVID E&MARSHA E TRS MOINI MAX M& 9575 SW LEWIS LN TAVAKOLI-SHERAJI MOHAMAD-HOSSEIN PORTLAND,OR 97223 2946 NW 11TH AVE CAMAS,WA 98607 1S1350B-06400 135CA-02302 LEWIS MARY R MOI AX & 11250 SW 95TH TAVAK ERAJI MOHAMAD-HOSSEIN TIGARD,OR 97223 294 W 11T VE MAS,WA 98607 1 S 135C D-03600 1 S135CA-03600 LEWIS SEAN M&JANEL K MORADO SEBASTIAN& 9595 SW LEWIS LN LUZ MARIA TIGARD,OR 97223 11289 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135C D-03300 1 S 135C D-08800 ORR KAREN&LYNART SATTERLUND SCOTT C&CYNTHIA K 9660 SW LEWIS LN PO BOX 230269 TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97281 1S135CA-02301 1S135CA-02100 PETERSON GEORGIA V SCHARBROUGH KARLA KIM 11487 SW 95TH AVE 11375 SW 95TH TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-02304 1S13508-05510 PICON-UZCATEGUI MARIA JULIANA SCOFIELD DOUGLAS J&EVELYN J 11500 SW GREENBURG RD 11340 SW 94TH TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135C 0-00101 1 S 135CA-04000 PRICE ELWIN C & JENNIFER D SKAGERBERG BRET F 11555 SW 95TH AVE 11345 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135DB-06700 1S135CA-08400 PRICE JURREL L&SHERRY M SLIMICK DANIEL&MARY 11245 SW 94TH AVE 11345 SW 97TH CT PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-02800 1S135CA-03800 RAMIREZ JENNIFER& SPADY PATRICIA J ACOSTA TERESA& 11321 SW 95TH AVE CHAVEZ ALFREDO G TIGARD,OR 97223 9550 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135 C D-00600 1 S 135 D B-06000 REED KATHLEEN M STEVENSON BRYAN P& 11435 SW GREENBURG RD SUMMER L TIGARD, OR 97223 654 WILSHIRE CT NEWBERG,OR 97132 1 S135CA-08500 1S135CD-03200 ROMAN SOFIA STEWARD SAMUEL A&LINDA K 11460 SW ESAU PL 9630 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-07200 1S135CA-01300 RUSSELL BRENT A/SHANNON R TABB JAMES R 11300 SW 94TH AVE 11400 SW GREENBURG RD PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-10100 1S135CA-02900 SALQUENETTII BONNIE&JEREMY TAYLOR GEORGENE 11160 SW 95TH AVE 9580 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 135DC-0300 1S135DB-05900 TIG D OF WILLIAMS CHRIST&DANIELLE L 131 HALL BLVD 11550 SW GREENBURG RD GARD,0 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 15135CD-00700 18135DC-03200 TORLAND DORIS WINTERS JOHN W 11425 SW GREENBURG RD 11590 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DC-03300 1S135DB-05600 TRAPP WARREN L HELEN W WINTHER STEPHEN&TERESA 11640 SW 95TH AVE 11400 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-07400 1S135CA-01703 TRUAIR RYAN R&TONYA G WONG EDWARD YEE&BIN YOU 11260 SW 94TH AVE 138 DANEFIELD PL TIGARD,OR 97224 MORAGE,CA 94556 1S135CA-08600 35CA-0170 TRUJILLO FELIPE V WO ARD YEE&BIN YOU 11440 SW ESAU PL 13 N LD PL TIGARD,OR 97223 RAGE,CA 94556 1S135CD-01701 1 5CA-01 VEZEY CHERYL ANN WON WARD YEE&BIN YOU PO BOX 230299 138 ANE PL TIGARD,OR 97281 RAGE,CA 94556 1S135CA-08800 1S135CA-01400 VILLALOBOS ZOILA& WONG NORMAN K F AND ANN M VILLALOBOS BERNARDO 0& 2433 NE 11TH VOLLALOBOS DANY SAMUEL PORTLAND,OR 97212 11415 SW ESAU PL TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CA-02200 1 35CA-01402 VILLARREAL VICTORIA L& WO N AN K F AND ANN M VILLARREAL MAURICIO S 2433 H 11405 SW 95TH AVE RTLAND, R 97212 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-01401 WASHINGTON COUNTY FACILITES MGMT 169 N FIRST AVE MS42 HILLSBORO,OR 97124 1 S135CA-03300 WHITE HEIDI A& KENNETH A 11231 SW 95TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design Group PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 Tigard, OR 97223 Sue Rorman Diane Baldwin 11250 SW 82nd Avenue 3706 Kinsale Lane SE Tigard, OR 97223 Olympia, WA 98501 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136th Place Tigard, OR 97224 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 CPO 4M Pat Whiting 8122 SW Spruce Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 21-Oct-05 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING G CITY OF TIARD Community(Devetapment Shaping (Better Community I, TatriciaL. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Senior Administrative Special:stfor the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: [Check Approprate Box(s)Belau) © NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE DECISION FOR: SUB2005-00023/VAR2005-00093, 94, 95, 96, 97 & 98 — SOLERA SUBDIVISION ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit"A", and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit'B", and by reference made a part hereof, on January 31,2006,and deposited in the United States Mail on January 31,2006, postage prepaid. }ditia A (Person that pares •tice) STATE OF o2 coN ) County of Washington )ss. City o Tigard ) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 01`f day of o , 2006. • OFFICI,;- .;1,L SUE ROSS NOTAR`'PUBUC-0REGON COMM:F.JON N O C 37371:--LCMMlO ; .'..3FS NOTARY P I I OF BEGUN My Comm . in Expires: la-I-O 7 EXHIBITA_ NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHC ER,VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION -4 !i.. CITY OF TIGARD SUBDIVISION Community(Development ShapingA Better Community DATE OF NOTICE: January 31, 2006 FILE NUMBERS: SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2005-00023 ADJUSTMENT VAR 2005-00093 ADJUSTMENT VAR 2005-00094 VARIANCE VAR 2 05-00095 VARIANCE VAR 2005-00096 VARIANCE VAR 2005-00097 VARIANCE VAR 2005-00098 FILE NAME: SOLERA SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL: The applicant is seeking approval of an 11-lot subdivision on 1.07 acres. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes. Lot sizes within the development are proposed to be between 2,441 and 3,471 square feet (3,065 square feet on average). An access and egress adjustment to the street spacing requirement along SW Greenburg Road, an arterial, from 600 to 240 feet between the existing 95th Avenue and the proposed SW 96th Avenue is requested. Access and egress adjustments for the driveways for proposed Lots 1 though 5, which are within the 150-foot influence area of an intersection with Greenburg Road, are also requested. In addition, the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive R-4.5 zone on the east) for proposed lots 1 through 4. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.370, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. LOCATION: 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S135CA, Tax Lots 2300 and 2302. YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS: Prior to the City making any decision on the Application, you are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written comments on the application to the City. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON FEBRUARY 14, 2006. All comments should be directed to Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at 503-639-4171 or by e-mail to claryp(c�tigard-or.gov. ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS THE CITY OF TIGARD APPRECIATES RECEIVING COMMENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. COMMENTS WILL BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WITHIN THE NOTICE OF DECISION. A DECISION ON THIS ISSUE IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 20, 2006. IF YOU PROVIDE COMMENTS, YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY OF THE FULL DECISION ONCE IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: • Address the specific "Applicabi_ .teview Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; • Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; • Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity on that issue. Failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14-DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: • The application is accepted by the City • Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. • The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. • City Staff issues a written decision. • Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. If you want to inspect the file, please call and make an appointment with either the project planner or the planning technicians. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled Your Right to Provide Written Comments." 1 III ...... .momm--/ VICINITY MAP NV MI ---� k a K SUB2005.00023 I VAR2005-00093 _� vAR2005-00095 L " n I wn'I n +` , VAR2005-00096 vAR2005-00091 r VAR2005-00098 Ill .\ , . .t>=- SOLERA SUBDIVISION pcti ' , I .**/ 'kw FIN, . - 4,--ilr_e • .1 as, -IL or. , • Ili . . Ths, .,.t __,.....,,,,,. ! . 1........ . , 147 111 . 441 1P. _-IMMI m4 1511148:41 UM till L110.1411 L■• ' • C __Ilw`�� �.i� mil/ EXHIBIT. 1S135CA-03700 1S135DB-06500 AASVE SANDRA J AND DAVID J CHRISTOPHER BASIL R AND 11309 SW 95TH AVE BELINDA L TIGARD, OR 97223 9460 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-09000 1S135CA-08700 ACOSTA ADILIA CONACHAN JIM 11455 SW ESAU PL 11420 SW ESAU PL TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-00100 151350B-07000 ALVARADO MARTA M TRUSTEE DALTON DANNY E&SHIRLEY J 11525 SW 95TH AVE 11305 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 15135CA-03200 1S135DB-10000 ARENDES CARINE E& DAVIS BARBARA J ARENDES SHARON L 9405 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 9524 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135DB-05400 1S135CA-02400 BALES MARY ELIZABETH& DAVIS MARGARET M TRUSTEE TERRY VERN 11470 SW GREENBURG RD 11390 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1 S135DB-05700 1S135CA-01700 BARNEY CHARLES R&CATHY L DAVIS STEVE&BARBARA 11450 SW 95TH AVE 11300 SW 97TH CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 15135CA-00307 1S135CD-03700 BEACON HILL PARTNERS LLC DAW LAWRENCE D 7831 SE LAKE RD#200 DAISY L PORTLAND, OR 97267 11605 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-00301 1S135DC-03000 BUYS FRANCES E DEGROOD AL MNIRGINIA E 9645 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST TIGARD, OR 97223 BY AL MNIRGINIA E DEGROOD TRS 22730 SW CHAPMAN RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 1 S135CA-00100 1S135DB-05602 BYRUM ALBERT G III DICKSON DONALD K&CAROL A 11165 SW 95TH AVE PO BOX 219028 PORTLAND, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97225 1S135CA-01900 1 S135CD-01702 CARROLL SONDRA DOBLIE JUDY K 11330 SW 97TH CT 11640 SW 98TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135C0-01500 1S135DB-06300 DORSETT R CRAIG&SHARON MARIE ENDICOTT MICHAEL R& 11550 SW 98TH MELISSA J TIGARD,OR 97223 11270 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-02900 1 35CA-091 DOTSON JASON B/SUE D ESA ATES OWNERS OF 9570 SW LEWIS LANE LO 1- TIGARD, OR 97223 0 1 S135CD-00202 1S135DB-06600 DRENNAN DAVID&JOAN ESTES ALICE L PO BOX 23603 9430 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-09000 1 135CA-042 DRENNAN DAVID A&JOAN F G ELOPMENT INC PO BOX 23603 TIGARD,OR 97281 • 135CD-0910s 1S135CD-00300 DR A■ DAVID A&JOAN FISER MARK A&BEVERLY J PO : .03 1690 MCLEAN BLVD ARD, OR 17281 EUGENE,OR 97405 135C0-09200 1S135DC-03100 DR NAN VID A&JOAN FITZGERALD MEGHAN M&JUSTIN M PO B 3603 11545 SW GREENBURG RD RD,0 7281 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-05100 1S135CA-00303 EATON DICK B&LINDA L GILLINGHAM TERRY L AND 9625 SW LEWIS LN SHARON A TIGARD, OR 97223 9605 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-03601 1 S135CA-03900 EATON RICHARD B&LINDA L GRIGORIEFF KATHRYN Y 9625 SW LEWIS LN 11343 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135DB-07300 1S135DB-05300 EMORY JESSE B& HARDT FREDERICK W III AND LEIGH A GLORIA J 11280 SW 94TH AVE 11420 SW 94TH PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135C0-01600 1S135CD-00205 EMPKIE ROBERT L JR HASTING THOMAS D 6315 SW 198TH AVE SHARON M ALOHA, OR 97007 9555 SW LEWIS LA TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CD-03800 1S135CA-03100 HASTING THOMAS D&SHARON M JAMES FRED C 9555 SW LEWIS LN 9545 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135 D B-05601 1S135CA-01800 HERNANDEZ ABRAHAM VERDE& JAUCH ROGER P HERNANDEZ OSCAR VERDE JAUCH BRENT H 11385 SW 94TH AVE 10648 SW 41ST AVENUE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97219 1 S 135CA-03400 1S135CD-03500 HERNANDEZ JOSE R& JOY DANIEL J JURADO MARIA S& 9655 SW LEWIS LN HERNANDEZ-J MAURILIO TIGARD,OR 97223 11253 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 1 S135CA-01901 1S135DB-05800 HERNANDEZ SUANNY& KELLY DENIS M&SHELLEY R HERNANDEZ NOHEMY& 11445 SW 94TH AVE LORENZO-CARMONA LUIS TIGARD,OR 97223 9640 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-00104 1S135CA-08900 HORST JACQUELINE L KHAN MUSTAFA K& 9565 SW NORTH DAKOTA LOVELY REHANA S TIGARD,OR 97223 11435 SW ESAU PL TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-06100 1S135D8-07100 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF KING DOUGLAS A WASHINGTON COUNTY 11320 SW 94TH AVE 111 NE LINCOLN ST#200-L PORTLAND,OR 97223 HILLSBORO,OR 97124 1 35DB-06200 1S135C0-03400 HO NG AU RITY OF KNEELAND JAMES H&DEBORAH,L WASHI N COUNTY 9690 SW LEWIS LN 111 LIN N ST#200-L TIGARD,OR 97223 LSBORO,O 97124 1S135CA-03000 1S135CA-01902 HOWLAND JOHN P KOCIEMBA DIANE E 9568 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST PO BOX 231021 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135DC-03001 1 S135DB-05504 HUANG JIA-HWAY KREISBERG LOUIS&ELIZABETH J 1910 SE TALTON AVE 11350 SW 95TH AVE VANCOUVER,WA 98683 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135DB-05200 1 S135CD-03100 JAKOVICH JOHN D&MARY LOU KURTZ GAREY L 11450 SW 94TH 4929 SE TENINO DR TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97206 1 S135DB-06800 1 S135CD-00500 LACY JON R AND JANELLE A MAHAR MARYLOU 11265 SW 94TH PO BOX 1064 TIGARD, OR 97223 NEWBERG,OR 97132 1 S135CA-08300 1S135CA-04100 LAMET DANIEL G& MANDERA ZACHARIAH& LAMET V&VERNA DETWEILER JEANIFFER 11355 SW 97TH CT 11355 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-00790 1S135CD-03000 LAMM FAMILY TRUST MCDONALD RYAN&SHAY 11520 SW 98TH AVE 9580 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-05901 1S135CD-08900 LANG GIANG KIEU& MEADOWS KEITH&LINDA LANG LE& 11500 SW 98TH AVE TRAN HOI PORTLAND,OR 97224 11475 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 1 S135DB-06900 1S135CA-00305 LE JONATHAN H& MEARS SEANA& MICHELLE NGUYEN THERESA T 9635 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 11285 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135CA-04300 1S135CA-02303 LEE PAUL TRUSTEE MICKEL TOM 0&JUDITH A 2206 NE 45TH 10261 SW STUART CT PORTLAND, OR 97213 TIGARD,OR 97224 1S135CD-00201 1S135CA-03500 LEWIS DAVID E&MARSHA E MIJATOVIC RELJA& DUSANKA FAMILY TRUST 11275 SW 95TH AVE 9575 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1 S135CD-00200 1S135CA-02300 LEWIS DAVID E&MARSHA E TRS MOINI MAX M& 9575 SW LEWIS LN TAVAKOLI-SHERAJI MOHAMAD-HOSSEIN PORTLAND,OR 97223 2946 NW 11TH AVE CAMAS,WA 98607 1 S135DB-06400 135CA-02302 LEWIS MARY R MOI' i AX & 11250 SW 95TH TAVAK• ERAJI MOHAMAD-HOSSEIN TIGARD, OR 97223 294. W 11T •VE (•MAS,WA 98607 1 S135CD-03600 1S135CA-03600 LEWIS SEAN M&JANEL K MORADO SEBASTIAN & 9595 SW LEWIS LN LUZ MARIA TIGARD, OR 97223 11289 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-03300 1 S135CD-08800 ORR KAREN&LYNART SATTERLUND SCOTT C&CYNTHIA K 9660 SW LEWIS LN PO BOX 230269 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97281 1 S135CA-02301 1 S135CA-02100 PETERSON GEORGIA V SCHARBROUGH KARLA KIM 11487 SW 95TH AVE 11375 SW 95TH TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-02304 1S135DB-05510 PICON-UZCATEGUI MARIA JULIANA SCOFIELD DOUGLAS J&EVELYN J 11500 SW GREENBURG RD 11340 SW 94TH TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-00101 1 S135CA-04000 PRICE ELWIN C&JENNIFER D SKAGERBERG BRET F 11555 SW 95TH AVE 11345 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-06700 1S135CA-08400 PRICE JURREL L&SHERRY M SLIMICK DANIEL&MARY 11245 SW 94TH AVE 11345 SW 97TH CT PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-02800 1S135CA-03800 RAMIREZ JENNIFER& SPADY PATRICIA J ACOSTA TERESA& 11321 SW 95TH AVE CHAVEZ ALFREDO G TIGARD,OR 97223 9550 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD,OR 97223 1 5135CD-00600 1S135DB-06000 REED KATHLEEN M STEVENSON BRYAN P& 11435 SW GREENBURG RD SUMMER L TIGARD,OR 97223 654 WILSHIRE CT NEWBERG,OR 97132 1S135CA-08500 1S135CD-03200 ROMAN SOFIA STEWARD SAMUEL A&LINDA K 11460 SW ESAU PL 9630 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 iSi 35DB-07200 1S135CA-01300 RUSSELL BRENT A/SHANNON R TABB JAMES R 11300 SW 94TH AVE 11400 SW GREENBURG RD PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-10100 1S135CA-02900 SALQUENETTII BONNIE&JEREMY TAYLOR GEORGENE 11160 SW 95TH AVE 9580 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 • r 1 135DC-0300 1S135DB-05900 TIG D OF WILLIAMS CHRIS T&DANIELLE L 131 HALL BLVD 11550 SW GREENBURG RD GARD,0 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135C D-00700 1 S 135DC-03200 TORLAND DORIS WINTERS JOHN W 11425 SW GREENBURG RD 11590 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135DC-03300 1 S135DB-05600 TRAPP WARREN L HELEN W WINTHER STEPHEN&TERESA 11640 SW 95TH AVE 11400 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 15135DB-07400 1S135CA-01703 TRUAIR RYAN R&TONYA G WONG EDWARD YEE&BIN YOU 11260 SW 94TH AVE 138 DANEFIELD PL TIGARD,OR 97224 MORAGE,CA 94556 1S135CA-08600 . 35CA-0170• TRUJILLO FELIPE V WO • : ARD YEE&BIN YOU 11440 SWESAUPL 13; %•N LDPL TIGARD,OR 97223 *RAGE,CA 94556 1 S 135C D-01701 1 5CA-01 • VEZEY CHERYL ANN WONt •.WARD YEE&BIN YOU PO BOX 230299 138 'JANE • PL TIGARD,OR 97281 •RAGE,CA 94556 15135CA-08800 15135CA-01400 VILLALOBOS ZOILA& WONG NORMAN K F AND ANN M VILLALOBOS BERNARDO 0& 2433 NE 11TH VOLLALOBOS DANY SAMUEL PORTLAND,OR 97212 11415 SW ESAU PL TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CA-02200 1 35CA-01402 VILLARREAL VICTORIA L& WO N AN K F AND ANN M VILLARREAL MAURICIO S 2433 H 11405 SW 95TH AVE RTLAND, R 97212 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CA-01401 WASHINGTON COUNTY FACILITES MGMT 169 N FIRST AVE MS42 HILLSBORO,OR 97124 1S135CA-03300 WHITE HEIDI A& KENNETH A 11231 SW 95TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design Group PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 Tigard, OR 97223 Sue Rorman Diane Baldwin 11250 SW 82nd Avenue 3706 Kinsale Lane SE Tigard, OR 97223 Olympia, WA 98501 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Crag head 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136th Place Tigard, OR 97224 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 CPO 4M Pat Whiting 8122 SW Spruce Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 21-Oct-05 Palmer & Associates SUB2005-000231 Attn: Al Jeck 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 VAR2005-00093, 94, 95, 96, 97 & 98 Tigard, OR 97223 SOLERA SUBDIVISION Max Moini and Mohammed-Hossein Tavakoli-Sheraji 2946 NW 11th Avenue Camas, WA 98607 • AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE OF A LAND USE PROPOSAL IMPORTANT NOTICE: THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A COPY OF THE NOTICE THAT WAS POSTED ON THE SITE. In the Matter of the Proposed Land Use Applications for: Land Use File No.: SUB2005-00023NAR2005-00093, 94, 95, 96, 97 & 98 Land Use File Name: SOLERA SUBDIVISION I, Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner for the City of Tigard, do affirm that I posted notice of the land use proposal affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) / 1 e-i TO S.LeJ 62_62,4,67 "pj and did personally post notice of the proposed land use application(s) by means of weatherproof posting in the general vicinity of the affected territory, a copy of said notice being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the l42 day of , 2006. Signature of Person h Performed Posting hAlogfrApatty4nasters1affidavit or posting for staff to post a site.doe SOLERA SUBDIVISION SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2005-00023/ADJUSTMENTS (VAR) 2005-00093 & 94/ VARIANCES (VAR) 2005-00095, 96, 97 & 98 REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of an 11 -lot subdivision on 1 .07 acres. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes. Lot sizes within the development are proposed to be between 2,441 and 3,471 square feet (3,065 square feet on average). An access and egress adjustment to the street spacing requirement aloe SW Greenburg Road, an arterial, from 600 to 240 feet between the existing 95th Avenue and the proposed SW 96th Avenue is requested. Access and egress adjustments for the driveways for proposed Lots 1 though 5, which are within the 150-foot influence area of an intersection with Greenburg Road, are also requested. In addition, the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive R-4.5 zone on the east) for proposed lots 1 through 4. LOCATION: 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S135CA, Tax Lots 2300 and 2302. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,0r square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.370, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Gary Pagenstecher) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, by calling 503-639-4171 , or by email to garyp @tgard-or.gov. A copy of the application and all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and copies for all items can also be provided at a reasonable cost. MIL CITY of TIGARD rA GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM �.- J C __ AREA NOTIFIED °°° o000 o°°o °°°° .... ..R= °°°° °°°° FOR: John Marquart o°o°° isnscava]Oi -W a MEP I RE: I S 135CA; 2300/2302 , . — milir.,==O ■°pO.7 - ICI 1a400L1 181]SCA00'I] 61]506MIII10 i.iiiiii1iI Y/1NA001 AI75GOO1011iU5CIl00tl0 4 NORI H � I I I � Property owner information DAKOTA ST is valid for 3 months from •i. I **AMMO ' ��m the date printed on this map. A175Ca0]10/ „ 1700 . ■ "Ma" RCA'P.. ..nsoa JIIIII 16104• 161]SN0 ti�/M 1WSCa061N ` w --,..,,, lip rib 11111114•Aur ...mg woe IIIII Mr• 11175Ca0])00 OSGI/ 111111111. 1 ilk lilliii 1S1]5Caa7'1 In tiles 6O5C107N1 URINOUS' •01.101%\1 A 1:: till 417411.1. USIMINNI 5 \ . \ stNNO5N1 7,...i 5CR0a 175CA0 AI950eo51001Y scvv7vv au 1000 00 :iii� 161 50000 00 151]SC0001 l 1]seelBle� 1si]scvvlsN ttuscv7vava ' saeNnee IflusCIN �^.-0011100 100 200 300 400 Feet Ka IP _ 11YNNNe' 5000-01 1Ot 5C0e04o1 1"=327 feet `r m� LEWIS LNG �►- IILIP" tttttttiiri tom—_ T g ... .... ,�- I . --■. [_T! City of Tigard SI SW PIHAS r ,� . ■ Information on this map is for general location only and . PIi'tA5 CST '1[� should be verified with the Development Services Division. ,. �� 1111 ' 1T Bard,OR 97223 _ (503)639-4171 •��_ Mill.__ `r_7∎J�- ._ —• '_ httpDYVww.ci.tigard.or.us Community Development Plot date:Nov 2,2005;C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR 1 S 135CA-03700 1S1 35D B-06500 AASVE SANDRA J AND DAVID J CHRISTOPHER BASIL R AND 11309 SW 95TH AVE BELINDA L TIGARD,OR 97223 9460 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-09000 1S135CA-08700 ACOSTA ADILIA CONACHAN JIM 11455 SW ESAU PL 11420 SW ESAU PL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-00100 1S135DB-07000 ALVARADO MARTA M TRUSTEE DALTON DANNY E&SHIRLEY J 11525 SW 95TH AVE 11305 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-03200 1S135DB-10000 ARENDES CARINE E& DAVIS BARBARA J ARENDES SHARON L 9405 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 9524 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97223 1S135DB-05400 1S135CA-02400 BALES MARY ELIZABETH& DAVIS MARGARET M TRUSTEE TERRY VERN 11470 SW GREENBURG RD 11390 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135DB-05700 1S135CA-01700 BARNEY CHARLES R&CATHY L DAVIS STEVE&BARBARA 11450 SW 95TH AVE 11300 SW 97TH CT TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CA-00307 1S1 35CD-03700 BEACON HILL PARTNERS LLC DAW LAWRENCE D 7831 SE LAKE RD#200 DAISY L PORTLAND, OR 97267 11605 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-00301 1S135DC-03000 BUYS FRANCES E DEGROOD AL MNIRGINIA E 9645 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST TIGARD,OR 97223 BY AL MNIRGINIA E DEGROOD TRS 22730 SW CHAPMAN RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 1S135CA-00100 1S135DB-05602 BYRUM ALBERT G III DICKSON DONALD K&CAROL A 11165 SW 95TH AVE PO BOX 219028 PORTLAND,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97225 1S135CA-01900 1S135CD-01702 CARROLL SONDRA DOBLIE JUDY K 11330 SW 97TH CT 11640 SW 98TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CD-01500 1S135DB-06300 DORSETT R CRAIG&SHARON MARIE ENDICOTT MICHAEL R& 11550 SW 98TH MELISSA J TIGARD, OR 97223 11270 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135C D-02900 1 35CA-091 DOTSON JASON B/SUE D ESA ATES OWNERS OF 9570 SW LEWIS LANE LOT 1- TIGARD, OR 97223 0 15135CD-00202 1S135DB-06600 DRENNAN DAVID&JOAN ESTES ALICE L PO BOX 23603 9430 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD, OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-09000 1 135CA-042 DRENNAN DAVID A&JOAN F G ELOPMENT INC PO BOX 23603 TIGARD,OR 97281 1 135C0-0910 1S135CD-00300 DR A AVID A&JOAN FISER MARK A& BEVERLY J PO 603 1690 MCLEAN BLVD GARD, OR 7281 EUGENE,OR 97405 135CD-09200 1S135DC-03100 DR NAN VID A&JOAN FITZGERALD MEGHAN M&JUSTIN M PO B 3603 11545 SW GREENBURG RD T ARD, 0 7281 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135D8-05100 1S135CA-00303 EATON DICK B& LINDA L GILLINGHAM TERRY L AND 9625 SW LEWIS LN SHARON A TIGARD, OR 97223 9605 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135C D-03601 1 S 135CA-03900 EATON RICHARD B& LINDA L GRIGORIEFF KATHRYN Y 9625 SW LEWIS LN 11343 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135DB-07300 1S135DB-05300 EMORY JESSE B& HARDT FREDERICK W III AND LEIGH A GLORIA J 11280 SW 94TH AVE 11420 SW 94TH PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 15135CD-01600 1S135CD-00205 EMPKIE ROBERT L JR HASTING THOMAS D 6315 SW 198TH AVE SHARON M ALOHA, OR 97007 9555 SW LEWIS LA TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-03800 1S135CA-03100 HASTING THOMAS D&SHARON M JAMES FRED C 9555 SW LEWIS LN 9545 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-05601 1S135CA-01800 HERNANDEZ ABRAHAM VERDE& JAUCH ROGER P HERNANDEZ OSCAR VERDE JAUCH BRENT H 11385 SW 94TH AVE 10648 SW 41ST AVENUE TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97219 1 S135CA-03400 1 S135CD-03500 HERNANDEZ JOSE R& JOY DANIEL J JURADO MARIA S & 9655 SW LEWIS LN HERNANDEZ-J MAURILIO TIGARD,OR 97223 11253 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD. OR 97223 1S135CA-01901 1S135DB-05800 HERNANDEZ SUANNY& KELLY DENIS M&SHELLEY R HERNANDEZ NOHEMY& 11445 SW 94TH AVE LORENZO-CARMONA LUIS TIGARD,OR 97223 9640 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135CA-00104 15135CA-08900 HORST JACQUELINE L KHAN MUSTAFA K& 9565 SW NORTH DAKOTA LOVELY REHANA S TIGARD, OR 97223 11435 SW ESAU PL TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135DB-00100 1S135DB-07100 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF KING DOUGLAS A WASHINGTON COUNTY 11320 SW 94TH AVE 111 NE LINCOLN ST#200-L PORTLAND, OR 97223 HILLSBORO,OR 97124 1 35DB-06200 1S135CD-03400 HO NG AU •RITY OF KNEELAND JAMES H&DEBORAH L WASH •IN COUNTY 9690 SW LEWIS LN 111 ■ LIN • N ST#200-L TIGARD,OR 97223 LSBORO,O' 97124 1S135CA-03000 1S135CA-01902 HOWLAND JOHN P KOCIEMBA DIANE E 9568 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST PO BOX 231021 TIGARD. OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DC-03001 1S135DB-05504 HUANG JIA-HWAY KREISBERG LOUIS& ELIZABETH J 1910 SE TALTON AVE 11350 SW 95TH AVE VANCOUVER,WA 98683 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135DB-05200 1S135CD-03100 JAKOVICH JOHN D& MARY LOU KURTZ GAREY L 11450 SW 94TH 4929 SE TENINO DR TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97206 1S135DB-06800 1S135CD-00500 LACY JON R AND JANELLE A MAHAR MARYLOU 11265 SW 94TH PO BOX 1064 TIGARD,OR 97223 NEWBERG,OR 97132 1S135CA-08300 1S135CA-04100 LAMET DANIEL G & MANDERA ZACHARIAH& LAMET V&VERNA DETWEILER JEANIFFER 11355 SW 97TH CT 11355 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-00790 1 S135CD-03000 LAMM FAMILY TRUST MCDONALD RYAN&SHAY 11520 SW 98TH AVE 9580 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135 DB-05901 1 S 135CD-08900 LANG GIANG KIEU& MEADOWS KEITH&LINDA LANG LE& 11500 SW 98TH AVE TRAN HOI PORTLAND,OR 97224 11475 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-06900 1S135CA-00305 LE JONATHAN H& MEARS SEANA&MICHELLE NGUYEN THERESA T 9635 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 11285 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-04300 1S135CA-02303 LEE PAUL TRUSTEE MICKEL TOM 0&JUDITH A 2206 NE 45TH 10261 SW STUART CT PORTLAND,OR 97213 TIGARD,OR 97224 1 S 135CD-00201 1 S135CA-03500 LEWIS DAVID E&MARSHA E MIJATOVIC RELJA&DUSANKA FAMILY TRUST 11275 SW 95TH AVE 9575 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1 S135CD-00200 1 S135CA-02300 LEWIS DAVID E&MARSHA E TRS MOINI MAX M& 9575 SW LEWIS LN TAVAKOLI-SHERAJI MOHAMAD-HOSSEIN PORTLAND,OR 97223 2946 NW 11TH AVE CAMAS,WA 98607 1S135DB-06400 135CA-02302 LEWIS MARY R MOI AX & 11250 SW 95TH TAVAK ERAJI MOHAMAD-HOSSEIN TIGARD, OR 97223 294 W 11T VE MAS,WA 98607 1 S135CD-03600 1 S135CA-03600 LEWIS SEAN M&JANEL K MORADO SEBASTIAN& 9595 SW LEWIS LN LUZ MARIA TIGARD,OR 97223 11289 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-03300 1 S135CD-08800 ORR KAREN&LYNART SATTERLUND SCOTT C&CYNTHIA K 9660 SW LEWIS LN PO BOX 230269 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97281 1S135CA-02301 15135CA-02100 PETERSON GEORGIA V SCHARBROUGH KARLA KIM 11487 SW 95TH AVE 11375 SW 95TH TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-02304 1S135DB-05510 PICON-UZCATEGUI MARIA JULIANA SCOFIELD DOUGLAS J&EVELYN J 11500 SW GREENBURG RD 11340 SW 94TH TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 I S 135C D-00101 1 S135CA-04000 PRICE ELWIN C&JENNIFER D SKAGERBERG BRET F 11555 SW 95TH AVE 11345 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135DB-06700 1 S135CA-08400 PRICE JURREL L&SHERRY M SLIMICK DANIEL&MARY 11245 SW 94TH AVE 11345 SW 97TH CT PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CD-02800 1 S135CA-03800 RAMIREZ JENNIFER& SPADY PATRICIA J ACOSTA TERESA& 11321 SW 95TH AVE CHAVEZ ALFREDO G TIGARD,OR 97223 9550 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135C0-00600 1S135DB-06000 REED KATHLEEN M STEVENSON BRYAN P& 11435 SW GREENBURG RD SUMMER L TIGARD,OR 97223 654 WILSHIRE CT NEWBERG,OR 97132 1 S 135CA-08500 1 S 135C D-03200 ROMAN SOFIA STEWARD SAMUEL A&LINDA K 11460 SW ESAU PL 9630 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-07200 1S135CA-01300 RUSSELL BRENT A/SHANNON R TABB JAMES R 11300 SW 94TH AVE 11400 SW GREENBURG RD PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-10100 1S135CA-02900 SALQUENETTII BONNIE&JEREMY TAYLOR GEORGENE 11160 SW 95TH AVE 9580 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 135DC-0300 1S135DB-05900 TIG D OF WILLIAMS CHRIS T&DANIELLE L 131 HALL BLVD 11550 SW GREENBURG RD GARD, 0 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CD-00700 1S135DC-03200 TORLAND DORIS WINTERS JOHN W 11425 SW GREENBURG RD 11590 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DC-03300 1S135DB-05600 TRAPP WARREN L HELEN W WINTHER STEPHEN&TERESA 11640 SW 95TH AVE 11400 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-07400 1S135CA-01703 TRUAIR RYAN R&TONYA G WONG EDWARD YEE& BIN YOU 11260 SW 94TH AVE 138 DANEFIELD PL TIGARD, OR 97224 MORAGE,CA 94556 1 S 135CA-08600 1 35CA-0170 TRUJILLO FELIPE V WO ► . ARD YEE&BIN YOU 11440 SWESAUPL 13; 5•N LDPL TIGARD, OR 97223 •ORAGE, CA 94556 1 S135CD-01701 1S 5CA-01 .2 VEZEY CHERYL ANN WONt •*WARD YEE& BIN YOU PO BOX 230299 138 SANE • PL TIGARD, OR 97281 ••RAGE,CA 94556 1S135CA-08800 1S135CA-01400 VILLALOBOS ZOILA& WONG NORMAN K F AND ANN M VILLALOBOS BERNARDO 0& 2433 NE 11TH VOLLALOBOS DANY SAMUEL PORTLAND, OR 97212 11415 SW ESAU PL TIGARD, OR 97223 1 S 135CA-02200 1 35CA-01402 VILLARREAL VICTORIA L& WO NO AN K F AND ANN M VILLARREAL MAURICIO S 2433 H 11405 SW 95TH AVE RTLAND, R 97212 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-01401 WASHINGTON COUNTY FACILITES MGMT 169 N FIRST AVE MS42 HILLSBORO,OR 97124 1S135CA-03300 WHITE HEIDI A& KENNETH A 11231 SW 95TH AVE PORTLAND, OR 97223 Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design Group PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 Tigard, OR 97223 Sue Rorman Diane Baldwin 11250 SW 82nd Avenue 3706 Kinsale Lane SE Tigard, OR 97223 Olympia, WA 98501 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136th Place Tigard, OR 97224 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 CPO 4M Pat Whiting 8122 SW Spruce Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:lcurpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 21-Oct-05 Oct . 31 . 2005 2 : 11PM Alrha Community Development No . 5996 P . 2 CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT �. PLANNING DIVISION 1 3125 SW HALL BOULEVARD CITY OF TIGARD TIGARD, OREGON 97223 Community Devefripment PHONE: 503-639-44171 FAX: 503.684.1297 (Attn: Patty/Planning Slra .tgBetterGmnmuaTtty REQUEST FOR 500.FWM021170NINR3MA! NIN Property owner information is valid for 3 months from the date of your request INDICATE ALL PROJECT MAP & TAX LOT NUMBERS (i.e. 1S134AB, Tax Lot 00100) OR THE ADDRESSES FOR ALL PROJECT PARCELS BELOW'. S1 3SCA Z30C), 230Z PLEASE BE AWARE THAT ONLY I SET OF LABELS WILL BE PROVIDED AT THIS TIME FOR HOLDING YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. After submitting your land use application to the City, and the project planner has reviewed your application for completeness, you will be notified by means of an incompleteness letter to obtain your 2 final sets of labels. The 2 final sets of labels need to be placed on envelopes with first class letter-rate postage on the envelopes in the form of postage stamps (no metered envelopes and no return address) and resubmitted to the City, for the purpose of providing notice to property owners of the proposed land use application and the decision The 2 sets of envelopes must be kept separate. The person listed below will be called to pick up and pay for the labels when they are ready NAME OF CONTACT PERSON: .�C �1 N1 � PHONE (.03)45Z.- A FAX; 50 Z- 4 This request may be mailed, faxed or hand delivered to the City of Tigard. Please allow a 2-day minimum for processing requests. Upon completion of your request, the contact person will be called to pick up their request that will be placed in Will Call" by their last name, at the Community Development Reception Desk.. The cost of processing your request must be paid at the time of pick up, as exact cost can not be pre-determined.. PLEASE NOTE: FOR REASONS OF ACCURACY, ONLY ORIGINAL MAILING LABELS PROVIDED BY THE CITY VS. RE-TYPED MAILING LABELS WILL BE ACCEPTED. Cost Description: Si I to generate the mailing list, plus$2 per sheet for printing the list onto labels(20 addresses per sheet) Then, multiply the cost to print one set of labels by the number of sets requested. '`EXAM t'I`PLE "-COST FOR THIS REQUEST ' __ 4 sheets of labels x$2/sheet=$8.00 x 2 sets= $16.00 ._sheet(s)of labels x$2/sheet=$,`/Ax sets= '1`ty 2 sheets of labels x$2/sheet for interested parties x 2 sets= $ 4.00 sheet(s)of labels x$2/sheet foyinterested parties=$ x c sets= `� GENERATE LIST = $11.0.0 / GENERATE LIST = TOTAL, = $31.00 V'kb/ TOTAL = u CITY OF TIGARD l ph/him.) 13 12 5 SW Hall Blvd. 3:52:44PM A� Tigard,Oregon 97223 - 'i J (503) 63 9-4171 Receipt #: 27200500000000005647 Date: 11/02/2005 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid LANDUS Land Use Misc.-39.0000 @$1.0000 100-0000-438000 39.00 Line Item Total: $39.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No.Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check ALPHA COMMUNITY CAC 31920 In Person 39.00 DEVELOPMENT Payment Total: $39.00 cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 1S135CA-02302 MOINI MAX M& TAVAKOLI-SHERAJI MOHAMAD-HOSSEIN 2946 NW 11TH AVE CAMAS,WA 98607 1 Si 35CA-02300 MOINI MAX M& TAVAKOLI-SHERAJI MOHAMAD-HOSSEIN 2946 NW 11TH AVE CAMAS,WA 98607 1i'ca.+,ao PRE-APR HELD BY: CITY TIGARD PLANNING v.IVISI043peE �CC 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223-8189 CD 2.y,: jai 503.6394171/503:684:7297 NOv -2005 CITY OF N LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION OREGON CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING/ENGINEEAfNG File #,,5 1.1.6 0 z vo5- 60021 Other Case# V tie 2e3:6- Um:A3 ;4�(f T5, 76, V7, le- Date 17-110P5 By I �9-P Receipt# , , City LUrb Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑Adjustment/Variance (I or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) ❑Zone Change (III) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment (IV) ❑ Planned Development(III) ❑Zone Change Annexation (IV) ❑ Conditional Use (III) ❑Sensitive Lands Review(I; II or III) ❑Zone Ordinance Amendment(IV) ❑ Historic Overlay (II or III) ❑ Site Development Review (II) ❑ Home Occupation (II) Subdivision (II or III) • • •• r,- - , --•-• • • �V q • 11-- •..yrreessl avaia.e 1 AX MA} &o Lti I 4 C14- c- J "t•�-t-^L-J VS v K�� • S 35C4 Z.300 2302 10 I AL SI I E SIZE ZONING GLASSIFIOA I ION k-o7 Ac. E- 12 APPLICAN )JU ADDRESS/DI I Y/S I Al t/LIP 3/400 Ste) OA. S-c. 230 °7223 PHONE NO. FAX NO. (5o ) A.s2• oo3 C3) 45z-8 3 PRIMARY CON t AL I PtKSON PHONE NO. PROPER I Y OWNER/DEED HOLDER(Attach list if more than one) N1okW AtAb MoMANw\ `17A\a z u - c ash MAILING ADDRESS/DI I WS I A I FJLIP j 2 t4h tvlw �v� (C vAAs J l`6 7 PHONE NU. FAX NO. (340)°t7 °0°6 `When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be hp purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The-oWners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or.submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Please be specific) to LT D���'S. lSt�iC� �AMIL�{ StQS W 1 CYO) 1:%u t-1L tc c \Oy AtJD A1,� k kck-r‘o9.1( 1MPC2nvF.--ny■ SC 101 CiV-- -‘1,t>2G At-r-LICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. THE APPLICANT SHALL CL..I{TIFY THAT: ♦ if the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with tt , terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. ♦ All 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, map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. ♦ The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date 4), �Applicant/Agent/Rse s Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the. terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, ace true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. • 7//://e/e- ?/22/04 Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date / L-3/04 .• Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signa re Datl S/e ve r Jb .(JAS /v, C. /.14.! A A 0 Applicant/Agent/Representative's Si• a■ure Date Z00/Z00d -01. Lfii6LEE809E -14E1 0t.:VC SO,-L0-0L G3AI3033"' ` October 7, 2003 Gary Pagenstecher Sit via Fax 503.598.1960 City of Tigard 13 t25 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Greenburg Heights Deti Mr. Pagenatecher: I am the owner of the properties at 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road. I am under contract to sell the properties to Alpha Community Development, roc. I tall aware of and oorment to Alpha's efforts to continue with the Land use application that 1 originally submitted for these properties in 2004. Please contssct me if you wish to discuss. Sincerely- , • a/e/Oec..4,4": //,/, Max Moini 2946 NW 11 cn Avenue Camas, WA 98607 I 27 CP iti6 20 .8 1061 ££9 09£ INIOW 'Xd4 Wd 6i : t0 SOOZ-LO-100 PRE-APP.HELD BY: CITY OF TI RD PLANNING DIVI ON 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223-8189 503.639.4171/503.684.7297 ITY OF TIGARD ORE LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION le# Other Case # ate By Receipt# City Urb Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR • kdjustmentNariance (I or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) ❑ Zone Change (III) ;omprehensive Plan Amendment (IV) ❑ Planned Development (Ill) ❑ Zone Change Annexation (IV) ;onditional Use.(III) ❑ Sensitive Lands Review (I, II or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment (IV) listoric Overlay(II or III) ❑ Site Development Review (II) lome Occupation (II) Subdivision (II or III) •- --- - --•-• ca • V - -- • 1 •.dress) oval aoe L71 Q0 45 EYee,ybL't q R0 a c/, /yalc/. 2i 972,23 ✓TAF' & I AX LU I NU5. /3 5 C/4 7-ax. Lvts 23,D3 G!tid 30. L SI I t SIC} ZONING ULASSIFICAI ION f. 0 7. acres -/2 'CANE` VG AL _65IGI I YISI A I t/LIF' ?Lo S 14/ H // s/vd 12423z , 9706 E NO. FAX NO ( /2/ 3 503 - ,?55 CRY CON rAC r PtIZSON PHONE NU. '7ev� Rc 5503 - y6,09 - /-2/3 =�I Y OWNtrt/UECU r7ULUEk(Attach list Ir more than one Gt K nu 1' a/id /Iof a th,-,-, ed a it aka/'i' - S4 er4,./"i. �( AUURt5S/CtIT``Y/5TATt//Zil' /� q qo 6v AA l l T 74!/e CA' 45, N6. ` l�(o o 7 ;0- A( 7- 9'090 1 the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be pile purchaser of record or a lessee in ssion with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. TheLowners must sign this application in the provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. )SAL SUMMAr�Y(Pease oe specinc)• - - - S ✓ LC A •I c.S'L(7/ -5-a ! a ,-)/,'ca itr'f- /.S' - .(. / /N r-e.;,);= jTr!P/- G,J rive as 0. 1v Az/Ju,s ep, ,r 7 racer s:6:- / .5("76aC :CATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS RIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. Patty Lunsford - Solera, SUB2005-00022 Page 1 From: Shirley Treat To: Dianna Howse Date: Thursday, February 23, 2006 3:38:12 PM Subject: Solera, SUB2005-00023 Gary Pagenstecher has requested the following Variances be deleted from the Solera Subdivision file, SUB2005-00023. There will also be a Check Refund Request for monies taken in for these variances. VAR2005-00093 $292.00 VAR2006-00019 $292.00 VAR2006-00020 $292.00 VAR2006-00021 $292.00 VAR2006-00022 $292.00 The total to be refunded is $1,460.00 Shirley Treat Planning/Engineering Technician City of Tigard 503-639-4171 ext. 2451 shirley @tigard-or.gov Please visit our website www.tigard-or.gov CC: Gary Pagenstecher CITY OF TIGARD 2/1 J/2UUb 13125 SW Hall Blvd. . '9:14:38AM i/,,�,„l.,, �,.� Tigard,Oregon 97223 ��,. (503) 63 9-417 1 Receipt #: 27200600000000000737 Date: 02/15/2006 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SUB2005-00023 [LANDUS] Prelim Plat w/o PD 100-0000-438000 233.00 SUB2005-00023 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 605.00 VAR2005-00095 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 21.00 VAR2005-00095 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 142.50 VAR2005-00096 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 142.50 VAR2005-00096 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 21.00 VAR2005-00097 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 142.50 VAR2005-00097 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 21.00 VAR2005-00098 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 142.50 VAR2005-00098 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 21.00 VAR2006-00019 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 254.50 VAR2006-00019 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 37.50 VAR2006-00020 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 254.50 VAR2006-00020 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 37.50 VAR2006-00021 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 254.50 VAR2006-00021 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 37.50 VAR2006-00022 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 254.50 VAR2006-00022 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 37.50 Line Item Total: $2,660.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID AcctJCheck No.Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check ALPHA COMMUNITY ST 32393 In Person 2,660.00 DEVELOPMENT Payment Total: $2,660.00 i cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 r, w -` PLEASE DETACH THIS PORTION AND RETAIN FOR YOUR RECORDS. ALPHA '9MUNITY DEVELOPMENT 32393 `'ORTLAND,OR T DATE INVOICE NO. DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT DEDUCTION BALANCE 1-20-06 12006 Development Adj-solera 2 ,660.00 2 , 660.00 CHECK \ 1-20-06 CHECK 32 393 TOTALS> 2 ,660.00 2 ,660.00 DATE NUMBER CITY OF TIGARD 11/9/2005 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 9:07:14AM ,,,,w1/- ,� Tigard,Oregon 97223 'II,, (503) 63 9-4 17 1 Receipt #: 27200500000000005756 Date: 11/08/2005 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid VAR2005-00093 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 37.50 VAR2005-00093 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 8.00 VAR2005-00094 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 37.50 ) VAR2005-00094 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 8.00 VAR2005-00095 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 16.50 VAR2005-00095 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 3.50 VAR2005-00096 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 16.50 VAR2005-00096 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 112.00 VAR2005-00097 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 16.50 VAR2005-00097 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 112.00 VAR2005-00098 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 16.50 VAR2005-00098 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 112.00 Line Item Total: $496.50 Payments: Method Payer User ID AcctJCheck No.Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check ALPHA COMMUNITY CAC 31981 In Person 496.50 DEVELOPMENT Payment Total: $496.50 cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of I Tidemark Advantage[Dianna Howse-DLit] ' . .14214 .. , Fie Edit Options Window Help 1 si 0 cg 0 A • 1 Ede W. Op. Twill Ike 111K WS 181 a Co X kit • a * Pen Vim Add Um Pep Fe* New, Print Fhiud Project -- PR J2005-00875 Status REC i'-',:".•.;'-': ii,e,.:M=. ii,k''.!....,- -' ALIDIA ...11:021 OeriPral Name: JANIS YOUTH PROGRAMS. INC Updated: 11/800D5 DUI IIP Address: 11494 SW GREENBURG RD Proiec$21......„ERA Description: Master RJ2005-00875 Admin. ntamialtan 1 1113 lot subdivision .... Fees Associated with PRTZ(105-00875 Cairene_ Foga 4, .-,,I_1E12005-00023 [LANCIUSI Prielitri Flat,....,•.,ct PC, eceived Date: 1/8/2005 ay: - --. - - ' ' - 11111111.111111116, 'r.-1 El Few Amount Amount nue Tr..Cods Updated By Rename Ant Ho 11 n,`Trii--7 E,LH 1 nri nnifli_47';7:-Inli VAR2005-00093 [LANDUS]50%Joint App Fee $254.50 ,,,:,00 114312006 100-0000-430000 VAR2005-00093 [LRPFI LR Planning Surcharge $31.50 $3750 11/W2005 100-0000-438050 VAR2005-00094 [LANUS]50%Joint App Fee $254.50 $8.00 ,11/8/2005 OU4 10D-0000-438000 VAR2005-00094 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge $31.50 $3750 111)/2005 —CAC 1000000-436050 VAR2005-00095 (LANDUSI 50%Joint App Fee $112.00 $350 11 woos 100410011438000 . .. VAR2005-00095 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge $16.50 $16.501 111/8121205 CAC 100-0000-438050 VAR2005-00096 [LANDIJS150%Joint App Fee $112.00 $112.00 11111/2005— AC 100-0000-4311000 i VAR2005-00096 [LRPF)LR Planning Surcharge $185) si 65d .11 woos ___ICAC 100-0000-438050 4 VAR2005-00097 [LANDUSI 50%Joint App Fee VAR2005-00097 [LRPF)LR Planning Surcharge VAR2005-00098 (LANDUS]50%Joint App Fee VAR2005-00098 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge L AIR total= ' $112.00 .. __._ _ $18.504 $112.00 $16.50 ., $112.00 $16.50 $112.00 $16.50 OXUS CLOLUI, . ------....„ 1110/2005 CAC 100-0000-438000 11$31-2005 CAC 100-0000-438050 11/0/2005 CAC 100-0000-438000 110312005 CAC 100-0000-438050 4/€ 4i-7 4/ 7 /a Af47dsz A • . hv e4-sw/ -L-rR. E/v7-E72.... 7?"- c r e 7 s E-- /41-s. /7//6794/G647-&--6 narerl/E- . iamb,. IV . 2.1 . View/Add Fees ,ie Start' I Ai co 01,6 Novel GrouPWis..•I r Seagate Crrital—I Irl Documentl-tic—fgrDepartmentlis—I Tidemark Adv— si Advantage Syst... I •ri Tr<,, • 12:53 •, ] Tides ark Advantage[Dianna Howse-Dili] , . A- File Edit Options Window Help IP in cg 0 iii • Exit Mar Opts Tad;List ME 013 ® X. Al e ei & Cleve Wnr Add Delft pay Fee Motel ptfat RAW — Subdivision -- SU62005-00023 Status P ,''''" -s': + ,m6121 11 Name:MAX MOINI Updated: 11)1/2005 CAC Ger`P Addressi11490 SW GREENBURG RD Jur. TUG Description. Master# 'RE20D4-00048 Project: SOLERA Admin. hformeitan •rigninally submitted as Greenburg Heights. Revised plan for 10 lot subdivision. Fees Associated with 5U62005-00023 `' r- :=1-:;;zn. - r ��XJ Fee etom s iL Amend Fee Amount Amara DIN •coal By Tran Code�, IF ncel 1 I Fee Type: ILANDUS] Prelim Plat w/o F Tran Code: I Edit I Fee Amount:T $4,937.00 Amount Due: $0.00 Revenue/GL Acct: 00-0000-438000 K Created:111 P812005 By: ICAC Cancel oiect Notes ieIP- case fee($4,937.00)was paid with fees transferred from original se SUB2004-00018, receipt#2004-4481 dated 1008/2004,per authorization from payer Max Moroi,per planner Gary Pagenstecher and CAC. Dl_H 11 alb. IView/Add Fees "'r eStartI i 12 ©0 is.. �I Seas1•b•Crystal...I IM Document'-Mic,, I Depa . .., _ , �____ "":,6 Advantage lir.,. 1 i« I f c 12:46 Ph1J Tidemark Advantage[Dianna Howse-DLH] .:• 1-;7.'47-S:".: " - 4rY -` ",. "R _ y iS 7`':• =' • .mlal File Edit Options Window Help II [sit New Opes Tad'tisc Qez OIS Clsse vi. Add Dales Pag Fu Nueeq Print Relied Variance --VAR2005-00093 Status P x;. 4ti '. ...1021I Name:MAX M01NI Updated: 11'W2005 CAC Gar'" :,' Address 11490 SW GREENBt7RG RD Jur IG Description: Master#ISU62005-00023 Project: OLERA Citations ormerly VAR2004-00083. Adjustment to allow private street less than 150 feet from i le We/section of SW 96th Ave and SW Greenburg Rd. .. 11=16 fees Associated with VAR2005-00093 ', ---�;- y;i-;'. Fee Type IteeendeiGL Amend Fee Amount Amoount Due Updated F [LR• LRMinnirg Surcharge 100-0000-438050 $37.50 - $37.501118/2005 CAC J cancel 1 1 ce 100-0000-438000 $254.50` $8 00 11!,�i1U7 ; Tirlerr}ark Advantage[Dianna Howse-DM] '; �f� „nf. r5 ,.Iw ' .. '.L.. ..� .mod.� '.Y.e,.,....S t..�'it.,.i - ,.�T.K•..F 1.1': File Edit Options Window Help INA D Exit Sty Opa Twit Lk! Get t © di CO x a e . X Gods vier: Add Oakes Pap fee Miami Pant Asked Vat lance -- VAR2005-00094 Status P .N _7':,. :" Adt112.ic Name:MAX MOINI Updated:11/8/2005 CAC �'lddress:11490 SW GREENBURG RD Juc IG Description. Master*ISUB2005-00023 Project: ISOLERA Code Malone Irdjustment request for minimum spacing of a street (SW 96th) along an arterial. Fees Associated with VAR2005-00094 *^" ,. '''';,•,,,„ '-4 _____ Fee Tyke - Cue Updated By Tree Cede 1 • LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 53750 137.501118(2005 CAC I .NEVUS 1 irat App Fee 100-0000-438000 $254 5ttE : . J'u i I,,812005 ■ LF- hcel US .� i ! Fee T YP e� I LAND5016 laird APP F Iran Code: Edit 1 1 Fee Amount: $254.50 Amount Due:I $8.00 r !Iterenue/GLAcct:1100-0000.4 00 I Created: 11)8(200+,5 By: IGAC Cancel MAX MDI Notes portion of the fee($246.50)was paid with fees transferred from original case "•I Help AR2004-00082,receipt 52004-4481 dated 1010812004,per authorization from pay Mex 1, oini,per planner Gary Pagenstecher and CAC, DLH 1118105 I I .1.1.11111. "Milne ?N'1X v4 r .ve9n r- i...v..>....n.....u..i h' 'iw5), Record Fee Payment / Start I .& ..:r e, S Novell GroupWis,.. 1 a Seagate Crystal ,,.1 'J Document I -Mc.., I tmentUses...I .Tiden-7 c Adv_ a Advantage sm... I l«IOW.12'52' T,1emark Advantage[Dianna Howse-DLHj a a,, d r Y'W '" k rt40 `" - J File Edit Options Window Help i4 0 a © A • II Eslt tta, Opts Tad list GEC Olt 14. A m Deka Pay he MN" Nam Wad Variance --VAR2005-00095 Status P ' , fi -' je 1JaY X, Nerne:MAX MO1NI Updated:11 CAC ■ Address:11490 SW GREENBURG RD Jur. RIG — Description: Master# SU■2 0023 Project: LERA Ca°e Cleave ormerly VAR2004-00081. Adjustment to reduce setback of 30'required for abutting re restrictive zoning. Qot 2,proposed five foot side - 7 . x Fees Associated with YAR2005-00095 _ , 1+�� � F ��� Raaan s/GL Amount Fee A _ �r nwtSt Amount Due Tram Code ( RPFJ LR PFJ inFes m-0000-438050 $16.50 $18.5011 Br2005 CAC Fee Type: [LANDUSJ 5D%Joint App F Tran Code: Edit J Fee Amount:( $112.00 Amount Due:r _ $3_- Revenue f GL Acct: 000-430 h Created: 11812005 By: ICAC M up Cancel .ti- A7ui Notes 1ielp portion of the fee($108.50)was paid with fees transferred from original case _ti AR2004-00081,receipt#2004-4481 dated I 0/08Q004,per authorization from payer Max ,per planner Gary Pagenstecher and CAC. DLH 11/8/05 f f zi �II '-j..y 3C.t.;� 1,...:�_�t3.�i'�i�'•Ct. il�''~ .t9d`�.CYw JVusw/Add Fees dontart a S Novell GroupWis... ► Seagate Crystal... Document'-M[... 0epartmentUsas... Tidemark Adv._ Advantage Syst... et 12:47 Ij j -1 - i.� 11 . A ® f �• •- • i.A CITY OF TIGARD 11/8/2005 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 12:15:10PM g,,s,, l i Tigard,Oregon 97223 'J- �.. (503) 639-4171 Receipt #: 27200400000000004481 D.e/6/A41L_ /2 EeE7/4'7 Date: 10/08/2004 77enA/i/ E-ie-k 7V Line Items: ATEA) ES Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SUB2004-00018 [LANDUS]Prelim Plat w/o PD 100-0000-438000 4,937.00 • VAR2004-00081 [LANDUS]50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 108.50 VAR2004-00082 [LANDUS]50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 246.50 r/ VAR2004-00083 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 246.50 ✓ Line Item Total: $5,538.50 Payments: Method Payer User II) Acct./Check No.Approval No. HIM Received Amount Paid Check MAX MOINI CAC 514- In Person 5,538.50 Payment Total: $5,538.50 cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 rb-r s Fe--.5 >i.rE' 12vO6 /DiWQ.y __ 5 o v3 # -/ 9 3 7, 54,a _g .r35. 639:"), II a.ifs)) ) z q?_. _I 5 F.-(1.1; jr x . g- \1 AeLes:fp, I 1414- i 68 . D ■' sigErt A D7 0 r I )75-4. ( rel. .W .6 )r • r ic 04,444/1 •1/111- 2 t/(e. 51' / *.` ir;vrkilii•b(Tlil“s0 i i 6 . ( 6"9 9, 1 V •4 tZ 2 V6. r'' i'le 4 g, 45-,- ,-- '- , 71.4 t rtE r)c,,E -,-- _/ I d7(57 rt) we, ‘.7'C., ID : 'r,..oi,-,,,; ;,4.-:',,.; poktivi _242. — ,,,,A-1 ... ,:. ) ./'', I . .., , I , 1, . , i ) si,-I i . 7 )' 1. i . 12. 6: ' '.-3L7 . ' _ . y e-fuL44 � . y Gary Pagenstecher- Re: Solera Fees Page 1 From: Gary Pagenstecher To: Loo, Kirsten Van Date: 1/20/2006 10:25:19 AM Subject: Re: Solera Fees Kirsten: Your accounting is off in the fee amount attributed to Administrative Variances. You have included fees for Development Adjustments instead of Administrative Variances. The Development Adjustment is used when adjusting a setback within the 20% allowed under TDC 18.370.020.B.b. The Administrative Variance is used when exceeding the 20% adjustment allowed, as in your case (Rear yard setbacks required= 30 feet; proposed=15 feet, or 50% requested variance). Substitute the correct amount for Administrative Variances of$1,168 ($584. x 4 x .5) below in your calculation to reach a Total Due amount of$8,695. Subtract the amount paid to date of$6,035 and the correct Balance Due is $2,660. The difference between the$1,168 figure I gave you earlier and the$2,660 Balance Due can be attributed to the fact that we charged you only for one access and egress adjustment(now there are six) and the 4 variances were identified as development adjustments. In part, I'm sure the confusion regarding fees is due to the changing nature of the project. The last fees you paid were entered on 11-8-05. Yet your current project, substantially redesigned, was submitted after that date on December 6, 2005. Thank you for your careful review of this matter. Gary >>> "Kirsten Van Loo" <kvl@AlphaCommunity.com> 01/19 4:39 PM >>> OK: I just got off the phone after talking with Cheryl Caines-who is the person who takes the money in Tigard for fees for planning projects. The applicant has paid $6035 in fees to date-according to her records. The current required fees are as follows: Subdivision fee $4840 Lot fee $935 85$x 11 lots VZ fee $514 $257 x 4 x .5 Access adj. Fee$1752 $584 x 6 x .5 Total Due -$8041.00 Your request for additional fees doesn't concur with the information Cheryl Caines verified. We have already been through this experience, because the last time additional fees were requested from the City of Tigard -we requested a check from the client, brought it to the city, and were told that it was TOO MUCH -and had to come back to the client and ask for another check for a lesser amount. I need a written accounting of the application fees as they relate to this project- based on the agreements in place and the fees paid to date. Then I can go to the client and reconcile the fees and the balance owing and we can all agree that the correct amount has been transmitted to the City. I would also request that this application be accepted for processing as of January 6, 2006, latest, because we both agreed that it was submitted on December 6th, 2005, and was complete as submitted. I realize that you needed time to review the revised scenerio- I also understand the concerns expressed by my client for a timely land use decision. Kirsten Van Loo Alpha Community Development 503-452-8003 x 209 CC: Bewersdorff, Dick; Caines, Cheryl; Peerman, Kristie Shirley Treat- Re: Solera Fees Page 1 From: Dick Bewersdorff To: Gary Pagenstecher Date: 1/20/2006 11:13:20 AM Subject: Re: Solera Fees EXcellentI!II�I�Il Dick Bewersdorff dick @ci.tigard-or.gov >>> Gary Pagenstecher 01/20 10:25 AM >>> Kirsten: Your accounting is off in the fee amount attributed to Administrative Variances. You have included fees for Development Adjustments instead of Administrative Variances. The Development Adjustment is used when adjusting a setback within the 20% allowed under TDC 18.370.020.B.b. The Administrative Variance is used when exceeding the 20%adjustment allowed, as in your case (Rear yard setbacks required= 30 feet; proposed=15 feet, or 50% requested variance). Substitute the correct amount for Administrative Variances of$1,168 ($584. x 4 x .5) below in your calculation to reach a Total Due amount of$8,695. Subtract the amount paid to date of$6,035 and the correct Balance Due is $2,660. The difference between the $1,168 figure I gave you earlier and the$2,660 Balance Due can be attributed to the fact that we charged you only for one access and egress adjustment(now there are six) and the 4 variances were identified as development adjustments. In part, I'm sure the confusion regarding fees is due to the changing nature of the project. The last fees you paid were entered on 11-8-05. Yet your current project, substantially redesigned,was submitted after that date on December 6, 2005. Thank you for your careful review of this matter. Gary >>> "Kirsten Van Loo" <kvl(a�AlphaCommunitv.com> 01/19 4:39 PM >>> OK: I just got off the phone after talking with Cheryl Caines-who is the person who takes the money in Tigard for fees for planning projects. The applicant has paid $6035 in fees to date - according to her records. The current required fees are as follows: Subdivision fee $4840 Lot fee $935 85$x 11 lots VZ fee $514 $257 x 4 x .5 Access adj. Fee $1752 $584 x 6 x .5 Total Due-$8041.00 Your request for additional fees doesn't concur with the information Cheryl Caines verified. We have already been through this experience, because the last time additional fees were requested from the City of Tigard -we requested a check from the client, brought it to the city, and were told that it was TOO MUCH -and had to come back to the client and ask for another check for a lesser amount. I need a written accounting of the application fees as they relate to this project- based on the agreements in place and the fees paid to date. Then I can go to the client and reconcile the fees and the balance owing and we can all agree that the correct amount has been transmitted to the City. I would also request that this application be accepted for processing as of January 6, 2006, latest, because we both agreed that it was submitted on December 6th, 2005, and was complete as submitted. I realize that you needed time to review the revised scenerio- I also understand the concerns expressed by my client for a timely land use decision. Kirsten Van Loo Alpha Community Development Shirley Treat- Re: Solera Fees Page 2 503-452-8003 x 209 CC: Cheryl Caines; Kristie Peerman; Shirley Treat PLEASE DETACH THIS PORTION AND RETAIN FOR YOUR RECORDS. ALPHA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 3 2 3 9 3 PORTLAND,OR DATE INVOICE NO. DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT DEDUCTION BALANCE 1-20-06 12006 Development Adj-Solera 2 , 660.00 2 , 660.00 RE( FIVE) g... C OITYOF r ; rat S L "�- p ,�UO2--� CHECK \ 1-20-06 CHECK \ 32393 ) 2 , 660.00 2 , 660 .00 DATE NUMBER TOTALS/ t 32393 — — La I p h a * t` .I { ,yam BANNER BANK 98-7107 r. ,_� .. �AICEOSWEGO.OR 3233 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT f ' E '- • a . A.•ALPHA WEST ALPHA EAST ,. 144,‘,... Aµ -44 : 'mo . c,- i 17 ,i 11. � l PLAZA WEST,SUITE 239 501 NE HOOD,SUITE 310`-' ;f e ;`5 x;-"""•i --'� �4 I g }.q".,,� PORTLAND,01'157223:- GRESHAM,OR 97030 rt _ . E 19� a't 'i^ .'1 .. , [5031 452-800-3,:',V [503]489-1803 4,4-,o� e 1 %. rt.. h � 74%° Pay: *. F" ' Tvy thousand six hundred sixty, dollars and no cents 1S S I,.. '' , T 1 J .7'' rt 'r H ' , DATE C31HnECK NO .. :s:: srr : AMOUNT . ,� �! ,' � i'j' J&nary 20, 2006 32393 $,r„*'f'"2 , 660 .00• PAY C� y of Tigard: t4 ! �, ;,,r pr. y �(,i-'' - 1-4,!... ,5 ,,�� ni-f 6 TO THE 13125 Sw Hall Blvd " -' ,l►. d,; If� `� ; , yK �T. f f r ”{ {� Siff` s(, y • °©F R, Ti gard , OR 97223 , f,' ",;?a "�,,,:l'14 t �i, 41r. r. ,' �;,..: t� r °'A r �' { gyp "f 1,11.:tit K cif 4s\r_ r o � PP I' of F; ceived Fax : Jan 25 2005 12:43PM Fax Station : SR Desi. LC , . 2 JAN 25 2005 12:38 FR CT IBERTY CENTRE503 672 0686 TO 5034 53 P.02/84 ,, W6mvn8tto .,any,Oregon 2004-079989 0711 212 0 0o.,11;27 PM ti'T$R t, onan G RETURN TO i O-0W Cna1 eM-7 K ORl7NSWALD ix M. Moroi X10.6066.00611.00630100.TOIL•13313.110 ahamad-Hossein Tavakoli-Sheraji film-iiiimuill �III:946 Northwest 11th Avenue 00616406200400788680020020 S Any Nv,"M,O,nerr&fe",eonla.4T....., ,,,.. :auras, Washington 98607 "ofe�""b°e""aw•r+tarw"^"6""c'"tet% 4. =�„'_`ti" anon,do homy es'ditty MY M,, in Inemannu St �'ij p,NEO*u iNne and ordod lnA,S d !2y1 r:.}_':`e�� 1 mC.111 Of ILO Melly ntil a change is requested all tax Amy RHen Mi em,BroctorNeeenurtendhood00% `Gf;�S: catements shall be sent to the following Esr2ddelo[money cis* ddress: Is stated above , j� this insu41fl ►it tp a rd BCrow No, 5500-39330-SSR RS C di e e. /�("ARi 41 rder No: 285301 "U11 t Ore .hV �INSU I -COMPANY -t iy Yq8 / `WARRANTY DR= - STATUTORY .- Ai6giiii i '.4. (INDIVIDUAL or CORPORATION) • JANIS YOUTH PROGRAMS, INC., a Domestic Non-profit corporation Grantor, conveys and warrants to MAX M. MOINI, as to an undivided 50si. interest and MOFUMAD-HOSSEIN TAVAXOLI-SHERAJI, as to an undivided 50% intreest; Grantee, the following described reel property free of encumbrances except as specifically set forth herein: (Continued) **THIS DEED IS BEING RE-RECORDED TO CORRECT/COMPLETE THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION** This instrument will not allow use of the property described in this instrument in violation of applicable land usa laws and regulations. Before signing or accepting this instrument, the parson acquiring fee title to the property should check with the appropriate city or county planning department to verify approved uses and to determine any limits on lawsuits against farming or forest practices as defined in ORS 30.930. ENCUMBRANCES: Taxes for the fiscal year 2004-2005, a lien but not yet payable. The premises herein described are within and subject to the statutory powers' • including the power of assessment of Clean Water Services. (Continued) "> WASHINGTON COUNTY • ke.:."' y} REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX The true consideration for this conveyance is $303,000.00 it S,30:5.°45 7-1&-C'{ 3 FEE PAID DATE Dated July B, 2004 ; if a corporate grantor, it has caused its name to be signed by order of its board of diredtors. Janus r./ Pro• ,.,, n . ey: Dennis Morrow, Ex Director STATE OF OREGON, County of Multnomah )es. This instrument wan acknowledged before me on by 2004 This instrument was aoknowled9ad before me on July 8 , . by Dennis Morrow ! as Executive Director of Janus Youth Pro:ram, Inc., a Domestic Non-Profit corporation / 1Zw1: ORf1CIAL SEAL e rte.-„r. 5 R SODSEAL Notary Public for Oreyo c� ".'' NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON My commission expires: /-/�-4� V COMMISSION NO 340737 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 17,2005 cei ve• ax : •n '• • . - ' 'mete • JAN 25 2005 12:38 FR CT1C- 7RTY CENTRE503 872 0686 TO 5034698' P.03/04 • IIINIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIIIIIIII 2001_79919 Order No: 285301 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Being a portion of Lot 3 of BOETCHERS ADDITION, situated in the John L. Hicklin Donation Land Claim No. 54, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon. to-wit: Beginning at an iron pipe marking the Northwest corner of said Lot 3; and running thence North 89°15' East 164.0 feet to an iron pipe; thence South 2°57; West 291.26 feet along the Easterly boundary line of the Leonard Davie Tract as recorded in Deed Book 168, at Page 183,, to an iron pipe marking an intersection with the Northerly right of way line of Southwest Oreenburg Road; thence along said right of way line South 7B°37' East 25.27 feet to an iron rod and the true point of beginning of the tract herein described; thence North 2°57' East along the Easterly boundary line of a 25.0 foot roadway easement 192.77 feet to a brass screw set in concrete East of the West wall of a fish pond; thence South 84°01' East 97.58 feet to an iron rod; thence South 6°50' Weet 64.34 feet to an iron rod; thence South 31 00B' West 47.76 feet to an iron rod; thence South 0°03' West 92.80 feet to a point of intersection with the Northerly right of way line of said Southwest Oreenburg Road; thence North 70037' West along said right of way line to the true point of beginning. TOGETHER WITH an easement for ingress and egress over the following described parcel, Beginning at an iron pipe marking the Northwest corner of said Lot 3; and running thence North 89°15' East 164.0 feet to an iron pipe; thence South 2'57' West 100.54 feet along the Easterly boundary line of the Leonard Davis Tract as recorded in Deed Book 168 at Page 163 to a point, said point marking the true point of beginning of the description; thence continuing South 2°57' West 190.42 feet along said Easterly boundary line to an iron pipe marking an intersection with the Northerly right of way line of S.W. Oreenburg Road; thence along said right of way line South '18°37' East 25.27 feet to an iron rod; thence leaving said right of way line North 2°57' Eaet 192.77 feet to a brass screw set in concrete East of the West wall of a fish pond; thence North 84 001' west 25. feet to the point of beginning. ALSO TOGETHER WITH an easement for ingress and egreee over the following described parcel: Beginning at the Southeast corner of that tract conveyed to Loretto I. Hunnicutt by deed recorded as Recorder's Fee No. 81004825, said point also being on the Northerly right of way of S.W. Oreeburg Road; thence along the Easterly line of the said Hunnicutt Tract North 00°03' East 92.60 feet; thence North 31°08' East 47.76 feet to a point; thence leaving said East line South 78°37' East parallel with the Northerly right of way of Greenburg Road 25 feet to a point on the Easterly line of an easement described in Hook 525, Page 640, Records of Washington County; thence Southerly following the Easterly line of said easement to the most Northerly Northwest corner of that parcel conveyed to Loretta I. Hunnicutt as Recorder's Fee No. 80039574, Records of Washington County; thence South 31°08' West 21.23 feet; thence South 0°03' west 90.65 feet to a point on the North right of way of S.W. Greenburg Road; thence along said right of way North 7B°37' West 25.50 feet to the point of beginning. Encumbrances, continued Regulations, including levies, liens, assessments, rights of way, and eaeements of Tualatin Valley Water District. 'eceive° ax : an II ax a ion : ' Pest°n • . JAN 25 2005 12:38 FR CT -LIBERTY CENTRE503 872 0696 TO 503" 553 P,04/04 • LEGAL DESCRIPTION cent. Portion of Lot 3 BOETCRER'S ADDITION, situated in the John L. Hicklin Donation Land Claim No. 54, in Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Lot 3 and running thence North 89°15' East 164.0 feet along the Northerly boundary line of said Lot 3 to an iron pipe, being the Northeast corner of a tract conveyed to Leonard Davis by Deed recorded in Book 168, Page 183, Deed Records, Washington County, Oregon, said iron pipe marking the true paint of beginning of this description; thence continuing North 89°15' Beet 150.90 feet; thence South 0°03' Went 93.87 feet; thence North 09°15' East 10 feet; thence South 0°03' West 115.34 feet to an iron rod on the North line of tract described in Deed to George R. Walker, et ux, recorded March 10, 1965, in Book 543, Page 417, Records of Washington County; thence North 89°57' West along said North line 49.04 feet, more or leas, to a point on the Easterly line of that certain easement described in Deed to George R, Walker, at ux, recorded October B, 1964, in Nook 525, Page 640, Records of Washington County; thence South 31°08' West, along the Easterly line of said easement, 21.23 feet to an angle point thereof; thence South 0°03' West, along the Easterly line of said easement 120.65 feet, more or less to a point on the center of SW Greenburg Road; thence North 7e°37' West, along said center line to the Southeast corner of said Davie Tract; thence North 3°05' East along the East line of said Davis Tract to the true point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following described tract of land: Being a portion of Lot 3 of BOETCHER'S ADDITION, Situated in the John L. Ricklin Donation Land Claim No. 54. Township 1 south, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon, to-wit: Beginning at an iron pipe marking the Northwest corner of said Lot 3; and running thence North 89°15' East 164.0 feet to an iron pipe; thence South 2°57' West 291.26 feet along the Easterly boundary line of the Leonard Davie Tract as recorded in Deed Book 168 at Page 153 to a iron pipe marking an intersection with the Northerly right of way line of Southwest Greenburg Road; thence along said right of way line South 78'37' East 25.27 feet to an iron rod and the true point of beginning of the tract herein described; thence North 2°57' East along the Easterly boundary line of a 25.0 foot roadway easement 192.77 feet to a brass screw set in concrete East of the West wall of a fish pond; thence South 84°01' East 97.58 feet to an iron rod; thence South 6°50' West 64.34 feet to an iron rod; thence South 31°08' West 47.76 feet to an iron rod; thence South 0°03' West 92.80 feet to a point of intersection with the Northerly right of way line of said Southwest Greenburg Road; thence North 70°37' West along said right of way line to the true point of beginning. ** TOTAL PAGE.04 ** Chicago Title Insurance Company (Member of the Fidelity National Financial, Inc. group of companies) Fidelity National Financial Group of Companies' Privacy Statement July 1,2001 We recognize and respect the privacy expectations of today's consumers and the requirements of applicable federal and state privacy laws. We believe that making you aware of how we use your non-public personal information ("Personal Information"),and to whom it is disclosed,will form the basis for a relationship of trust between us and the public that we serve.This Privacy Statement provides that explanation. We reserve the right to change this Privacy Statement from time to time consistent with applicable privacy laws. In the course of our business,we may collect Personal Information about you from the following sources: • From applications or other forms we receive from you or your authorized representative; • From your transactions with,or from the services being performed by, us,our affiliates, or others; • From our interact web sites; • • From the public records maintained by governmental entities that we either obtain directly from those entities,or from our affiliates or others; and • From consumer or other reporting agencies. Our Policies Regarding the Protection of the Confidentiality and Security of Your Personal Information We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. We limit access to the Personal Information only to those employees who need such access in connection with providing products or services to you or for other legitimate business purposes. Our Policies and Practices Regarding the Sharing of Your Personal Information We may share your Personal Information with our affiliates, such as insurance companies, agents,and other real estate settlement service providers. We also may disclose your Personal Information: • to agents, brokers or representatives to provide you with services you have requested; • to third-party contractors or service providers who provide services or perform marketing or other functions on our behalf; and • to others with whom we enter into joint marketing agreements for products or services that we believe you may fmd of interest. In addition,we will disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission,when we are required by law to do so, or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement,transaction or relationship with you. One of the important responsibilities of some of our affiliated companies is to record documents in the public domain. Such documents may contain your Personal Information. Right to Access Your Personal Information and Ability To Correct Errors Or Request Changes Or Deletion Certain states afford you the right to access your Personal Information and, under certain circumstances,to find out to whom your Personal Information has been disclosed. Also, certain states afford you the right to request correction,amendment or deletion of your Personal Information. We reserve the right,where permitted by law,to charge a reasonable fee to cover the costs incurred in responding to such requests. 1 . Chicago Title Insurance Company ' • PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT May 11, 2004 Chicago Title Insurance Co. Order No: 285301 650 NE Holladay St. , #125 Escrow No: 5500-39330-SSR Portland, OR 97232 Ref: Janus Youth/ Tavakoli-Sheraji Attention: Shannon Sodorff Phone No: 503-973-7525 Standard Owners Coverage $ 340, 000. 00 Premium $1, 030 .00 Municipal Lien Search $ 50 .00 We are prepared to issue a title insurance policy in ALTA (1992) form and amount shown above insuring the title to the property described herein. This report is preliminary to the issuance of a policy of title insurance and shall become null and void unless a ..cy is issued, and the full premium therefore paid. Vestee: JANIS YOUTH PROGRAMS, INC. , a Domestic Non-profit corporation Dated as of: April 27, 2004 at 8:00 A.M. Subject to the exceptions, exclusions, conditions and stipulations which are part of said policy, and to exceptions as shown herein. CHICAGGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF OREGON I I By: ..&O A L ' ii Cindy Alek-a Title Offic- - 10001 S.E. Sunnyside Road Clackamas, OR 97015 phone 503-653-7300 fax 503-653-7763 2UESTIONS CONCERNING THE CLOSING OF THIS TRANSACTION SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO YOUR :ROW OFFICER, Shannon Sodorff, at phone 503-973-7525 and fax number 503-872-0669. • • 'Order,No: 285301 L_,CRIPTION (Continued) GENERAL EXCEPTIONS (Standard Coverage Policies only) 1. a. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. b. Proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. a. Easements, liens, encumbrances, interests or claims thereof which are not shown by the public records. b. Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. • 3 . Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the public records. 4. a. Unpatented mining claims; b. Reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; • c. Water rights, claims or title to water; whether or not the matters excepted under (a) , (b) , or (c) are shown by the public records. 5. Any lien or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. Order No: 285301 SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS Taxes, including the current fiscal year, not assessed because of Non-Profit Corporation Exemption. If the exempt status is terminated under the statute prior to the date on which the assessment roll becomes the tax roll in the year in which said taxes were assessed, an additional tax may be levied. Levy Code: 023-81 Account No. : R274367 Map No. : 1S135CA Tax Lot No. : 02302 7. City liens, if any, of the City of Tigard. (An inquiry has been directed to the City Clerk concerning the status of said liens and a report will follow if such liens are found. ) 8. The premises herein described are within and subject to the statutory powers including the power of assessment of Clean Water Services. 9. Regulations, including levies, liens, assessments, rights of way, and easements of Tualatin Valley Water District. 10. Trust Deed, including the terms and provisions thereof, given to secure an indebtedness with interest thereon and such future advances as may be provided therein; Dated: May 15, 2003 Recorded: June 12, 2003 Recorder' s Fee No. : 2003-094585 Amount : $877, 000.00 Grantor: Janus Youth Programs, Inc. , an Oregon nonprofit corporation, which acquired title as Janis Youth Programs, Inc. , an Oregon domestic nonprofit corporation Trustee: First American Title Insurance Company Beneficiary: Umpqua Bank (Affects other property also) NOTE: Property address is identified as: 11490 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, Oregon 97223 NOTE: Any transfer of the herein described property is subject to the payment of Washington County Transfer Tax at the rate of $1. 00 per $1, 000. 00 or fraction thereof of stated consideration. (Continued) Order No: 285301 LEGAL DESCRIPTION ing a portion of Lot 3 of BOETCHERS ADDITION, situated in the John L. Hicklin Lunation Land Claim No. 54, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon, to-wit: Beginning at an iron pipe marking the Northwest corner of said Lot 3; and running thence North 89°15' East 164.0 feet to an iron pipe; thence South 2°57; West 291.26 feet along the Easterly boundary line of the Leonard Davis Tract as recorded in Deed Book 168 , at Page 183, to an iron pipe marking an intersection with the Northerly right of way line of Southwest Greenburg Road; thence along said right of way line South 7B°37' East 25 .27 feet to an iron rod and the true point of beginning of the tract herein described; thence North 2°57' East along the Easterly boundary line of a 25. 0 foot roadway easement 192 . 77 feet to a brass screw set in concrete East of the West wall of a fish pond; thence South 84°01' East 97.58 feet to an iron rod; thence South 6°50' West 64.34 feet to an iron rod; thence South 31°08' West 47.76 feet to an iron rod; thence South 0°03' West 92 .80 feet to a point of intersection with the Northerly right of way line of said Southwest Greenburg Road; thence North 7B°37' West along said right of way line to the true point of beginning. TOGETHER WITH an easement for ingress and egress over the following described parcel : Beginning at an iron pipe marking the Northwest corner of said Lot 3; and running thence North 89°15' East 164. 0 feet to an iron pipe; thence South 2°57' West 100. 84 feet along the Easterly boundary line of the Leonard Davis Tract as recorded in Deed Book 168 at Page 183 to a point, said point marking the true point of beginning of the description; thence continuing South 2°57' West 190.42 feet along said Easterly boundary line to an iron pipe marking an intersection with the Northerly right of way e of S.W. Greenburg Road; thence along said right of way line South 78°37' East ap.27 feet to an iron rod; thence leaving said right of way line North 2°57' East 192 .77 feet to a brass screw set in concrete East of the West wall of a fish pond; thence North 84°O1' West 25. feet to the point of beginning. ALSO TOGETHER WITH an easement for ingress and egress over the following described parcel: Beginning at the Southeast corner of that tract conveyed to Loretta I. Hunnicutt by deed recorded as Recorder's Fee No. 81004825, said point also being on the Northerly right of way of S.W. Greenburg Road; thence along the Easterly line of the said Hunnicutt Tract North 00°03' East 92 .60 feet; thence North 31°08' East 47. 76 feet to a point; thence leaving said East line South 78°37' East parallel with the Northerly right of way of Greenburg Road 25 feet to a point on the Easterly line of an easement described in Book 525, Page 640, Records of Washington County; thence Southerly following the Easterly line of said easement to the most Northerly Northwest corner cf that parcel conveyed to Loretta I. Hunnicutt as Recorder' s Fee No. 80039574, Records of Washington County; thence South 31°08' West 21.23 feet; thence South 0°03' West 90. 65 feet to a point on the North right of way of S.W. Greenburg Road; thence along said right of way North 78°37' West 25.50 feet to the point of beginning. Order No: 285301 SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS (Cont ed) NOTE: Any conveyance or encumbrance by Janus Youth Programs, Inc. should be executed pursuant to a proper resolution of the members voted on at a duly called meeting of the membership in accordance with the by-laws or other authority of the corporation. Certified copies of the resolution authorizing the conveyance and encumbrance and of the minutes of the meeting of the membership and copies of the By-Laws or other authority for such conveyance or encumbrance should be furnished for examination. NOTE: We find no judgments or United States Internal Revenue liens against: Mohammed Tavakoli-Sheraji or Max M. Moini END OF REPORT cc: Mohammed Tavakoli-Sheraji and Max Moini Janus Youth Programs Dennis Morrow Realty Trust Group, Inc. Rick Cravens/Barb Schaumberg Closing CLA/j j e May 11, 2004 • gp '�g0pp I.\ y r 2.27 i I.Q\\ \�\\�ci.\\\ \\\\\ �\ \\'.\\\ 50' 1 7433 88.00 71.00 110' j ge ' 84-3016 e� \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ •e? '. �� e ' r i '128 \\\\\\\\" r\\ \\\\\\h4 \\\\\\\�\z' \\\\\\y,\�� N �U88- /. J 1 5 i 1____ 88-147 3 ,. 220.77 a = 3� i 40.00 165.60 50.00 50.00 50.00 45.67 d'� /\' -2i 23 et.- 'der i P, i 44'p�s g 2900 8 3000 03100 S 3200 1st 1w� 1902 ° 1901 1 $ 2 $ 3 8 ai I 4 41 AC 40 AC ?)..1 50.86 _50.0.i ,4-0. 85.11 6p 1800 68.60 j x.00 99.37 `� 513,s 8 <°• ° 8 C (' c 3300 >" 77 ,y 8 d '` ° 3500 j 5 "' <a �� `) 3600 v 99.02 I->' �2 f) \) T 3 • 888-37W ! 8 8 7 0'. i �° °' '� 3400 m A 6 to 38 aT:cia a so 0o m R"?6'R 6- 4200 0 ' 1900 " .73 AC (v 28.06 ,, �q TRACT A' • 11 1 165.80 C J 8.34 d., ,�. - 69.90 `� -. • Al 700 ?b T 9 $3800 °:20':,4, 4100 a . S 10 v°' 13 m� 1 8400 220.77 60.00 56.86 t' 8945 w c� I (^ 109,96 o i 00 �. 2 �'> 3900 a 4020 g 0 '' • �'/ tc ' 120.55 220.77 - ... s88�8-20W , CC 'c',▪ ' •,�,• 7 164' 158 90 ....%-. / 1 �� ` ce/ <'" <� .I F..-- P. 300 X r. 2100•�! %' 1 ~ 72 AC a 26 AC m • , 8800 t 1_ 1 • .- 2400 1 9�! : 50• a 4 �. , . .7, 1.37 AC i S N i . d _t 8790 t/ , ' 10 los' i '" I1 .c-8900 S`TR ..f 87.6'6 i ix f /7 5 ° A' S 75.98 , 3 1 r 8600 _+ g 2200 �' ". ! 1t 77.02 Q a 2 c 1 i is .28 AC m i .,, Y'`<' 31''..1 906 0 w '� 75.97 I 2302 f ".. ,.>,'v11, ID 850(1/7 ,� \ �aeo4 '° 7_.66 11,E ��) ) � 6a.04 3, 'Y" „ L /� 'dry n • 1S! r .,'= f �, 2303 �f J, ,sou > ^�8 a7 25" 0 2304 0 14 AC �' " I, w i 2 N ;y 1, S .18 AC •�, _ ;:.. b 2301 V- <1-• •136 7739 m .13 AC1y; ';�. i E,' ` ' 88.88 f CHICAGO TITLE This plat is for your aid in locating your land with reference to streets and other parcels. ile this plat is believed to be correct,the company assumes no liability for any loss occurring by reason of reliance thereon. Map No. 1S135CA 02302 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 10001 S.E SUNNYSIDE ROAD CLACKAMAS,OREGON 9T015 re - /48p // cS, o .-) Cc , P&1 Ce At/es �• f �S` y vf� [c 3 t ,� y u ;"--t74.: .5^ r l: 1 . to `•1 --.-:`..L.;"'*4`-$' ;..�'.a�' ��i '• gar ., ilr.--, ar �� --0"..;,,,!-i:'. ..,-.:-..474.-:,..,: ,nE.` 1 r.ti,•r*- . s1 a Ltr, ,, ` . .ly iry,-, 41'e, 14F 4 rl�C'+Q E�,- ' c. _ >r r` „cam `-uw.3Hti :q . F'W r � .t:u i;:1 - .;asj ElAt∎:5 r e,e't zr , " ` ... : ty- f8 "fie &mrnuimy __ - }. �1�-"ia r,'�rtq'�'?yv"l..+v t4} y� � �- '+"'f � � a; w•::��t'•y rp I. 14,- = __ ti w. J. 1�dlro eb °J1 �Y`�{.: 9���"S s •fl 1.1 F y,:r •; +�j `: n G v.,_ •....r.... -r .3� ' '7 S.n-7YY! d�,4-.�,�� 1.=iat& 3v?.a�� ...:i.i ..<.ii+3..-_ :..mi�iPtlilu. RESIDENTIAL F/TFFE4 APPLICANT: tv4t.y MNo i AGENT: *-,/' -✓� R� 'c.c' Phone: ( ) f•7 ioqo Phone: ( ) 6a; 1 2-1 PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: ii iii 0 514) 0 r �Ivry r?-.-t TAX MAP(S)/LOT #(S): i 17 4 C/ -1-7),:,-!-L.' k z-..-3,22? NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: fV f (?1u�iaii ./eel r,,,,t1') V 'M, ' - 1) /ci (Zo.ae G l n ,a.z) _4✓CP,r s:i et air,51.x---,) f r'°OPOSAL DESCRIPTION: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: Atillimii Ve4$a>L Re I T'L1 ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: ` /Z • CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAM (C.I.T.)AREA: 6- 5 ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18. ci V l MINIMUM LOT SIZE: " 0 sq. ft. Average Min. lot width: ft. Max_ building height: -35. ft. Setbacks: Front 15 ft. Side 5" ft. Rear tU ft. Corner _/t) ft. from street. 5. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: °? % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: °z' %. GARAGES: 2.--0 ft. p(HEIGHBORHOOD MEETING [Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE(S), AND THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application_ CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9 Residential ADo(icatioNPlanning Division Secton J NARRATIVE [Refer to Code Chapter 183901 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. The applicant should revie the code for applicable criteria. j IMPACT STUDY [Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050) As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE AN IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. ACCESS [Refer to Chapters 18.105 and 18.765) r i 1D Minimum number of accesses: I X 0 ri, fs cw -(- Minimum access width: - Minimum pavement width: 1 WO' a id le,fr 3--6 i.Vr+ . mac4 Zt,C' P`"`eL S 5lw f r 6--i D be m i, I WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7051 i :A Within all ATTACHED HOUSING (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling SHALL BE CONNECTED BY WALKWAY TO THE VEHICULAR PARKING AREA, COMMON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILITIES. (RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION [Refer to Code Chapter 18.715)-SEE EXAMPLE BELOW. The NET RESIDENTIAL UNITS ALLOWED on a particular site may be calculated by dividing the n( area of the developable land by the minimum number of square feet required per dwelling unit as specified by the applicable zoning designation. Net development area is calculated by subtracting the following land area(s) from the gross site area: All sensitive lands areas including: f3.1 fgui v,,,t, ➢ Land within the 100-year floodplain; no > Slopes exceeding 25%; - ' 141 gib,' P ➢ Drainageways; and '7 b -59 6 > Wetlands for the R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5 and R-7 zoning districts. Public right-of-way dedication: - A • Single-family allocate 20% of gross acres for public facilities; or n q --- IC )rn,,,-a ➢ Multi family allocate 15% of gross acres for public facilities; or 92 [of', (i ft > If available, the actual public facility square footage can be used for deduction. I EXAMPLE OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS: EXAMPLE: USING A ONE ACRE SITE IN THE R-12 ZONE(3,050 MINIMUM LOT SIZE)WITH NO DEDUCTION FOR SENSITIVE LANDS Single-Family Multi-Family 43,560 sq.ft of gross site area 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 8,712 sq_ft. (20%)for public right-of-way 6,534 sq. ft. (15%)for public right-of-way NET: 34,848 square feet NET: 37,026 square feet — 3,050 (minimum lot area) -:- 3,050(minimum lot area) = 1i Units Per Acre = 12.1 Un:ts Per Acre *The Development Code requires that the net site area exist for the next whole dwelling unit NO ROUNDING UP IS PERMITTED. *Minimum Project Density is BO%of the maximum allowed density.TO DETERMINE THIS STANDARD,MULTIPLY THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS RYA. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 Residentia Aopficabon/Plannino Division Section 0PECIAL SETBACKS [Refer to e Section 18.1301 D STREETS: feet from the centerline of D. FLAG LOT: A TEN (10)-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK applies to all primary structures. ZERO LOT LINE LOTS: A minimum of a ten (10)-foot separation shall be maintained between each dwelling unit or garage. D MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL building separation standards apply within multiple-family residential developments. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES UP TO 528 SQUARE FEET in size may be permitted on lots less than 2.5 acres in size. Five (5)-foot minimum setback from side and rear lot lines. ACCESSORY STRUCTURE UP TO 1,000 SQUARE FEET on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size. [See applicable zoning district for the primary structures'setback requirements.] I I FLAG LOT BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.1301 MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 11/2 STORIES or 25 feet, whichever is less in most zones; 2% stories, or 35 feet in R-7, R-12, R-25 or R-40 zones provided that the standards of Section 18.730.010.0.2 are satisfied. ❑ BUFFERING AND SCREENING [Refer to Code Chapter 18.745) In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the CITY REQUIRES LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREAS along certain site perimeters_ Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFFERS applicable to your proposal area is: Buffer Level along north boundary. Buffer Level along east boundary. Buffer Level along north boundary. Buffer Level along east boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: td(LANDSCAPING [Refer to Code Chapters 18.145,18.765 and 18.7051 STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. RECYCLING [Refer to Code Chapter 18.755) Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. orating e ure within r le.a_r oarea such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Lenny Hing is the contact person and can be reached at (503) 625-6177_ CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9 Residential Appficabon/Planning Division Section PARKING [Refer to Code Chapteb_ •8.765 a18.705) ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVEWAYS MUST BE PAVED. D Single-family Requires: One (1) ff-street parking space per dwelling unit; and One 1) space per unit less than 500 square feet. D Multiple-family Requires: 1.25 spaces per unit for 1 bedroom; 1.5 spaces per unit for 2 bedrooms; and 1.75 spaces per unit for 3 bedrooms. Multi-family dwelling units with more than ten (10) required spaces shall provide parking for the use of guests and shall consist of 15% of the total required parking. NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. Parking stalls shall be dimensioned as follows: D Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet. 6 inches X 18 feet, 6 inches. D Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet. 6 inches X 16 feet, 6 inches. D. Handicapped parking: All parking.areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned disabled person parking spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. ❑ BICYCLE RACKS [Refer to Code Section 18.7651 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. ❑ SENSITIVE LANDS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.775) The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE F( DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL ( ° DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON / orAA, UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive land areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. ❑ STEEP SLOPES [Refer to Code Section 18.715.070.01 When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. CLEARWATER SERVICES[CWS) BUFFER STANDARDS [Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 31 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area_ The following to identifies the required widths: CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 9 Residential AppficationJPlanning Division Section .ABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION s ORDER 96-44 .r-. n�ti , ,�, y s�' .N?` ..4 i War� .w` - it 1" . , r, 1`c IF- ; 1, i,F_:a • i � ntS T� ' E '•'0 N' M1 :y '- ' �0 ,: Dtl ':'" �' SID Q F- E p" M ar� . _:% .. �V.:: . i ;r- . . r f l g .7:.. �.. _.e.9'R ag .Eh rSIDE O ,� Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% • 10 to <50 acres 15 feet + >50 to <100 acres 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands <0.5 acre 25 feet • • Existing or created wetlands >0.5 acre <25% 50 feet • Rivers,streams, and springs with year-round flow • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres • Natural lakes and ponds _ • • Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25% 1 10 to <50 acres 30 feet • $ >50 to <100 acres 50 feet • Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50-200 feet. Measure • Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow in 25-foot increments from the starting • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres point to the top of ravine (break in • Natural lakes and ponds <25%slope), add 35 feet past the top of ravine' Starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankful flow) for streams/rivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring boundary, and/or average high water for lakes or ponds, whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor,shall not serve as a starting point for measurement. ?Vegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 3Tha vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced to +t,if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as provided for in the USA Design and Construction Standards. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. CWS Service Provider Letter: PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service �j✓Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the R&O 96-44 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas, CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. 1 SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.780) 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 / Director's review. TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.CJ A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided fof any" parcel or co Ir l naio lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, artition, site development review, planned development, or conditional use is filed_ Protection is preferred over removal where possible. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 9 Residential Apprication/Planninp Division Section THE TREE PLAN SHALL It. .UDE the following: ➢ Identification of the location, size, species, and condition of all existing trees greater than 6- inch caliper. ➢ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches (" caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D accordir to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development cod. provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: • Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; • Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; • Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; • Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; ➢ Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and ➢ A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. IF your pt vo do e5 eat le ivd cx�f / tnf� el-042-4s, r �►, r-24,./14 q/MITIGATION Meier to Code Section 18.790.060E 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 reasonab;� available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natur 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. Fq/CLEAR VISION AREA Meter to Code Chapter 18.795) The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The siz of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification and a existing obstructions within the clear vision area_ The applicant shall show the clear vision areas the site plan, and identify any obstructions in these areas. - CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9 Residential ApplcationIPlanning Division Son [y FUTURE STREET PLAN AND EXTEA N OF STREETS (Refer to Code Section . I0.030.FJ A FUTURE STREET PLAN shall: > Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition. The plan shall show the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include other parcels within 200 feet surrounding and adjacent to the proposed land division. 7 Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and pedestrian facilities on or within 500 feet of the site. Where necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed. 6.1'0 /�, y LI 1u-,^f-.- CMr C, Ch/.T r 1 ii," 5 ;Cr (✓�'�641'i pr� b' ' / 14' ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to lode Section 18.810.060] MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2% TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1'/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. BLOCKS [Refer to Code Section 18.810.090] f ' The perimeter of BLOCKS FORMED BY STREETS SHALL NOT EXCEED-4789U FEET measured along the right-of-way center line except where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development. When block lengths greater than 330 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. CODE CHAPTERS 18.330(Conditional Use) 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) 1. 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) 18.340(Director's Interpretation) /18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) _ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) / 18.350(Planned Development) 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) - 18.780(Signs) -7-T 18.360(Site Development Review) 18.710(Arrc Cory Residential Units) i 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) / 18.715(Density Computations) I/ 18.790(Tree Removal) 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) /18. 720(Design Compatibility Standards) L_ 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) _718.385(Miscellaneous Permits) t18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) _ 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) 18.740(Historic Overlay) - 18.420(Land Partitions) 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) V/ 18.430(subdivisions) 1 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) • 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) / 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) V 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste Recycling Storage) _ 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 9 Residential Appfralion/Ptanning Division Section ADDITIONAL.CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: &prp05t, lift Front p 4. eit,,,r. h (V fu-vL of-c4-reek Ase..Jivd r ctLik : i lrl 14-- C9 ri Al (x ro JSa1 511-4 ♦ Et (� 4.404A (4,1s i2c tnauciti (fp Ft/ Te v.*ew:, ,4, t5 rid" gate JAA 1,-C. r a pp UJ c rt wi 4,7 TAIL.1 y AL _Q,ni I re-Sp��n y 'Or 4'1,14 tiu ^ 4 ie-i , e.I Mau rat _ .....� w.41 n I aete A ! . !mac, C1 y ( A /1 i/Wc.4 r oo tc (Al Ve-rt,r ti.-t o t- fm t(x/u1 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. The Planning counter closes at 4:00 PM. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. One (1), 8'VZ" x 11" map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of tl application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the count submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitteu materials are required. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 9 Residentig AppG;abon/Planning Division Secfion The administrative decisi r public hearing will typically occur roximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted a ,ng complete by the Planning Divis. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard (.r �`-� %cyrt r-; . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. 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. SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION (County Surveyor's Office: 503-648-88841 PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicants are required to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyor's Office in order to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects related to 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 statrrrelative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). • PREPARED BY: /40176•LiA CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-1291 E-MAIL: (staffs first name)@ci.tigard.or.us TITLE 18(CITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE)INTERNET ADDRESS: www.citioard.or.us Atty\masters\Pre-App Notes Residental.doc Updated: 26-Jun-02 (Engineering section:preapp.eng) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division Section PRE-APPLICATION:CONFERENCE !MIS — ENGINEERING SECTION' Q e14i itin ercoon _ PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Map(s): 1S135CA Tax tot(sl: 02300 8 02302 Use Type: Subdivision 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: • SW Greenburg Road to 50 feet from centerline ❑ SW to feet (� SW to feet ❑ SW to feet Street improvements: ® Half street improvements will be necessary along SW Greenburg Road, to include: ® 36 feet of pavement from centerline ® concrete curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 8-foot concrete sidewalk with planter strip ® street trees spaced per TDC LI street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ® Other: 18.705.030.H.3 Access Management: Minimum spacing of driveways and streLs along an arterial shall be 600 feet. CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 6 Engineering DenartmentSectton n street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: (—] feet of pavement n concrete curb (� storm sewers and other underground utilities -foot concrete sidewalk ❑ street trees n street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ❑ Other: • T1 street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: (� feet of pavement n concrete curb ❑ storm sewers and other underground utilities [� -foot concrete sidewalk 7 street trees ❑ street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. n Other: ❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: n feet of pavement n concrete curb storm sewers and other underground utilities ❑ -foot concrete sidewalk 7 street trees • 7 street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Other: n street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: (� feet of pavement concrete curb U storm sewers and other underground utilities 1 -foot concrete JiU VVQIn 7 street trees street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 6 gineerinc Department Section n Other: Agreement for Future Street Improvements: In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not curre practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development appro may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to provide a future improvement guarantee. The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee: (1.) (2.) Overhead Utility Lines: (l Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW Prior to , the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in- lieu described above. Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) 8 inch line which is located in Greenburg Road. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to extend the public sewer along their frontage and within the protect. Water Supply: The Tualatin Valley Water District (Phone:(503) 642-1511) provides public water service in the area of this site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. • Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (South Division) [Contact: Eric McMullen, (503) 612-7010] provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyeu to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 6 Engineering Department Section drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure • that the proposed system w �commodate runoff from upstrear. .)perties when fully developed. Provide detention on-site. 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. 00-7) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of new impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $210. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ® Construction of an on-site water quality facility. n Payment of the fee in-lieu. Other Comments: 1Il proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. Provide a Traffic Impact report. 'RAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. thin TIr= uy u,v , ri ITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 016 gineering Department Section PERMITS Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PH permit from the Engineering Department. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in City HP" For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted review and approval. The Engineering Department fee structure for this permit is considered a cost recovery system. A deposit is collected with the application, and the City will track its costs throughout the life of the permit, and will either refund any remaining portion of the deposit, or invoice the Permittee in cases where City costs exceeds the deposit amount. NOTE: Engineering Staff time will also be tracked for any final design-related assistance provided to a Permittee or their engineer prior to submittal of a PFI permit application. This time will be considered part of the administration of the eventual PFI permit. • The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security. Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows: NOTE If an PFI Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a mL. _ detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued • after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumt that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Engineering Department Section w4R NG PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: ' S- Zo - 0< ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT STAFF DATE Phone: [503)639-4171 Fax: [503)624-0152 ,cument2 2evised: September 2,2003 ITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 tglneering Department Section gyp° 5 V ✓e FACT SHEET Project Name: Solera Proposed Actions: Land Use Approval for an 11 Lot Subdivision for attached units Tax Map: 1S1 35CA Tax Lots 2300, 2302 Site Size: 1 .07 acres Location: Located on the north side of SW Greenburg Road, west of SW 95th Avenue and south of SW North Dakota Street at street no. 11490- 11494. Gearhart Acres subdivision abuts the site to the northeast. Zoning: R-12 Owners: Max Moini, Mohammed Tavakoli-Sheraji 2946 NW 1 1 th Avenue Camas, WA 98607 tel: 360-817-9090 Applicant: Palmer & Associates 9600 SW Oak Street #230 Portland, OR 97223 tel: 503-452-8003 contact: Jerry Palmer Representative: Alpha Community Development 9600 SW Oak Street #230 Portland, OR 97223 tel: 503-452-8003 contact: Kirsten Van Loo GENERAL INFORMATION: This application requests approval for an 1 1-lot subdivision, Solera, on the site specifically identified by Tax Lots 2300 and 2302, Tax Map 1 Si 35CA. The subject site is approximately 1.07 acres and is currently zoned R-12 by the City of Tigard. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet and a maximum height of 35 feet. The site is largely open and grassed with few structures or trees. A single-family residence measuring roughly 4,300 square feet exists in the south-central portion of the site, and will be removed upon development. The site features scattered landscape trees of varying species, none of which are larger than 12 inches in caliper. No defined stands or groves of trees exist. Topographically, the site slopes downhill quite gradually from a high point of 220 feet in the eastern portion of the site toward low points of 212 feet along the northern property line and 213 feet southwestern corner. VICINITY & SITE INFORMATION, The immediate area can be currently characterized as low to medium density single-family housing, generally located within subdivisions and scattered large- site lots. There are also pockets of medium-high density and attached housing nearby. Some commercial/industrial uses exist along the railroad corridor west- northwest of the site. Site Location The site is generally located along the north side of SW Greenburg Road, west of SW 95th Avenue, and south of SW North Dakota Street at street no. 1 1490- 1 1494. Gearhart Acres subdivision abuts the site to the northeast. The access to the site will be via a new public street, which follows a north-south alignment along the site's west property line (shared with TL 2400). The street will be stubbed to the site's northern boundary for future extension north toward North Dakota as the surrounding area re-develops. The new street-96th Avenue -will intersect with SW Greenburg Road roughly 250 feet west of SW 95th Avenue. Existing Uses A single-family residence measuring roughly 4,300 square feet, asphalt drive and walkway exist on TL 2302. The house is set back approximately 97 feet from SW Greenburg Road, and will be removed upon development. Topography The subject site slopes downhill quite gradually from a high point of 220 feet in the eastern portion of the site toward low points of 212 feet along the northern property line and 213 feet southwestern corner. Overall, slopes typically range from 3.1% to 4.4% across the site with a small area of relatively steep drop at the northern property line toward TL 3900. Vegetation The site features grass and little other existing vegetation. There are scattered landscape trees of varying species, none of which are greater than 12 inches in caliper. A small hedgerow exists along the north end of the eastern property line. There are no pronounced stands or groves of trees. Transportation The site has frontage on SW Greenburg Road, which is designated an existing Major Collector/proposed Arterial by the City of Tigard Transportation System Plan. The existing SW Greenburg Road right-of-way is varied in width based on recent development activity and dedications, with 3 vehicle lanes and an average pavement width of roughly 44 feet. SW Greenburg Road features curbside sidewalks throughout and a posted speed limit of 35 mph. Parking is prohibited on both sides of the street. The proposed subdivision has public transit access with the nearest routes along SW Greenburg Road immediately adjacent to the site. Tri-Met routes 76 (Beaverton-Tualatin) and 78 (Beaverton-Lake Oswego) stop in both directions within 600 feet of the site at either SW 98th Avenue or SW 95th Avenue. Both routes serve the nearby Washington Square Transit Center, where other routes (43, 45, 56 and 62) may be accessed. Auto and non-auto transportation facilities continue to develop in the local area and improvements proposed with this subdivision will facilitate completion of needed transportation infrastructure. The proposed subdivision will provide half- street improvements adjacent to the site on Greenburg Road. The proposal also includes a north-south oriented public street, facilitating connectivity and block standardization between SW North Dakota and Greenburg Road as future development occurs. Surrounding Land Uses The immediate area can be currently characterized as low to medium density single-family housing, generally located within subdivisions and scattered large- site lots. There are also pockets of medium-high density and attached housing nearby. Some commercial/industrial uses exist along the railroad corridor west- northwest of the site. Subdivisions nearby which appear to have been developed to R-4.5 standards include Meadow View, O'Neel Acres, Dakota Grove and Ruth. Gearhart Acres, north of the subject site, is in an R-12 zone. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Solera subdivision is a proposed residential development on 1 .07 acres, designed to comply with the R-12 zoning district, while providing a buffer to the lower density residential development to the east. The project design includes eleven single family attached lots and a new public street. Lots average approximately 3050 square feet. The new public street, SW 96th Avenue, is a Local Residential Street that will provide connectivity between SW Greenburg Road and SW North Dakota Street upon future extension. Parking is proposed along one side of the new public street, SW 96th Avenue. This application proposes a unique street section for 96th Avenue in order to protect the trees on the east side of the adjacent property. The eventual total ROW will be 50 feet wide. The current project will build the full street improvement—28 feet of pavement, curbs, and a curb-tight sidewalk—within a dedication of 39.5 feet. When the property to the west redevelops to R-12 density, the commensurate ROW dedication will be 10.5 feet of ROW with a meandering sidewalk through the significant trees preserved within the 16 foot wide planter strip. In order to provide the best habitat for these unique and significant trees, the normal planter strip of 5.5 feet on each side of the local street will be combined on one side—the west side. The current development will carry the financial burden of the full street improvement — minus the meandering sidewalk — in order to respect the value and character of the tress along the west PL. The unique street section balances the needs for sidewalks, landscape strips and street trees with the preservation of a significant natural and scenic feature adjacent to the site. F.V,ur 15 3141 ,Otd n.:33, nJ Snrt,+- 1 Get•pd lOtd -JS] ®A w•':.yn.ww�eav w.. Cn n.tk Fbv'P1,0 nrvs,be.utrt.A 1 rna;`".00.rd •ppo t.a,r M1n•, iug rc r 000 1(Of.y t \o p.,knlF peno.trn v(00-•�0 fen,1an.ntmrcn.+u • ApptrpttaN W,,cen;,o It4t(r,wN annct,N SELECTED STREET SECTION w/Modification Domestic water service to the Solera subdivision will be provided by a new water line in 96th Avenue connecting with the existing main in SW Greenburg Road. Sanitary sewer and storm/surface water drainage capabilities will likewise be provided via installation of new lines within 96th Avenue which connect to existing lines in SW Greenburg Road. Individual lateral connections to utilities will be provided to all lots and water meters will be located at the ROW per Tigard standards. 1.." r>r;, 'r- .., Solera Subdivision Page 4 of 18 APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE CRITERIA NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING The original neighborhood meeting was held Thursday, August 19, 2004. A second neighborhood meeting was held October 20'", 2005 at Metzger Elementary School at 6:30 pm. Meeting minutes and associated materials are attached. 18.430.040: SUBDIVISION APROVAL CRITERIA: PRELIMINARY PLAT The applicant is proposing to subdivide Tax Lots 2300 and 2302 into 11 residential lots. A proposed preliminary plat in compliance with the R-12 zoning district has been submitted with this application and plan set. The preliminary plat is also in conformance with other applicable ordinances as reflected by this narrative and the preliminary plans. The Washington County Survey Department has reviewed and accepted the proposed Solera plat name, and its approval is included herein. This document serves as the narrative for the project and contains explanations for all proposed improvements and applicable City of Tigard standards, guidelines and criteria. 18.510.020 (F): R-12 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL The property is currently zoned R-12 by the City of Tigard. The purpose of the R- 12 Land Use designation is accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. The proposed subdivision containing attached single-family homes is a permitted development use under the provisions of the Section. 18.510.2: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES Except as noted below, the proposed development site will comply with the dimensional requirements as laid out in Table 18.510.2, specifically: Required Setbacks Other Requirements Front Yard 15 feet Lot Size: 3,050 sq. ft. minimum Side Yard 5 feet Lot Width: N/A Street Side 10 feet Height: 35 feet maximum Rear Yard 15 feet Coverage: 80% Garage 20 feet Side/Rear abutting R-4.5: 30 feet The proposed subdivision will comply with all of the above development standards, with an adjustment to the required 30-foot setback on four lots where side and/or rear yards abut the more restrictive R-4.5 zone. This adjustment occurs at the rear/side of lots 1 through 4, and is discussed in detail under Adjustments, at the end of this document. Per Section 18.430.020(D), lot averaging is allowable, provided no lots are less than 80% of the minimum lot size of the underlying district. In this case, the minimum lot size allowed would be 2,440 square feet. The average proposed lot size is 3050 square feet +/-, with the smallest parcel being 2,441 square feet. The applicant requests the averaging allowance. 18.705: ACCESS/EGRESS & CIRCULATION Preliminary sight distance certification in accordance with all applicable standards has been performed by Jeff Vanderdasson, a Professional Engineer licensed by the State of Oregon, and is included herein per the terms of this Section. As required under Section 18.705.030, all proposed lots have direct access to a public street, in this case 96th Avenue. Every lot has 25 feet or more direct frontage on the proposed new public street. 18.715: DENSITY COMPUTATIONS Based on Residential Density Calculation provisions in the code, the number of dwelling units permitted on this site can be calculated by dividing the net area by the minimum lot size, which in this case is 3,050 square feet. In this development, the net area is calculated by subtracting the public right-of-way, private street tracts, sloped and drainage areas (if any) from the gross acreage. The density computations for the Dakota Glen subdivision are as follows: Net Area Calculation Gross square feet 46,749.2 square feet (1 .07 acres) Minus rights-of-way 13,029.0 square feet (actual) Steep slopes/drainageways 0 square feet Equals Net Area 33,722.2 square feet / 3,050 = 11.06 dwellings Minimum Dwelling Units Required x .80 = 8.85 dwellings Total Dwelling Units Proposed 11 dwellings 18.725: ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE The proposed development is to be improved for detached single-family residences, and therefore not expected to generate significant levels of noise, emission, vibration, odor, glare or other nuisance. 18.745.040: STREET TREES The proposed subdivision fronts 2 public streets, SW Greenburg Road and proposed 96th Avenue for more than 100 feet. Street trees measuring at least 2 inches in caliper will be installed in accordance with this Section, in the front and/or side yards of the adjacent lots, along the public streets. The specific standards listed in Section 18.745.040C shall dictate the spacing, size and other specifications relative to planting of street trees. Vision clearance will also be preserved in determining final spacing. Final approval of species and locations shall be subject to review by the Director in accordance with Section 18.745.0408. Upon maturation, it is recognized that the street trees shall be pruned in such a manner as to provide for 8 feet of clear space between the sidewalk and the tree canopy. Refer to the street tree/landscaping plan for preliminary street tree locations and species. 18.745.050: BUFFERING AND SCREENING The proposed subdivision abuts residential uses on all sides. The new development will have attached units constructed, while existing development to the east is detached single family in an R 4.5 zone. Tigard Development Code excerpt A. General provisions. 1. It is the intent that these requirements shall provide for privacy and protection and reduce or eliminate the adverse impacts of visual or noise pollution at a development site, without unduly interfering with the view from neighboring properties or jeopardizing the safety of pedestrians and vehicles; 2. Buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter(Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2).The owner of each proposed development is responsible for the installation and effective maintenance of buffering and screening. When different uses would be abutting one another except for separation by a right-of-way, buffering,but not screening, shall be required as specified in the matrix; 3. In lieu of these standards, a detailed buffer area landscaping and screening plan may be submitted for the Director's approval as an alternative to the buffer area landscaping and screening standards, provided it affords the same degree of buffering and screening as required by this code. Page 9 of the plans includes a preliminary planting plan for the rear (easterly) yards of all eleven lots. This planting plan creates a significant vegetative buffer between the proposed development and the existing homes to the east. The development standard mandates a 30-foot "separation" between buildings on the subject property and the western property line of the lower density district to the east. The 30-foot (or more) separation is maintained on 8 of the eleven lots. Lots 1 through 3 have a 15 foot setback from the rear PL, and Lots 3 and 4 combined have a ten foot building setback from the north PL of TL 2304. This buffer area planting plan is submitted to satisfy Provision 3 as quoted above. The planting plan has been designed to provide significant separation between the two distinct zoning districts, while creating useable, pleasant rear yard spaces for the residents of each new dwelling unit. A six foot wood or vinyl privacy fence is proposed along the PL of abutting existing residential property at the east and north sides of the project. 18.765: OFF-STREET PARKING Each lot will feature a minimum of two off-street parking spaces (including garage) to serve the detached single-family residential homes. This meets or exceeds the requirements set forth in the Section and Table 18.765.2. Driveways shall be constructed of concrete per City specifications. ')C Solera Subdivision Page / of 18 18.775: SENSITIVE LANDS Clean Water Services' Pre-Screening Site Assessment indicates that sensitive lands do not exist on site or within 200' of the site. This Assessment form serves notice that no further service provider letter is necessary and is attached. 18.790: TREE REMOVAL A tree assessment, performed by Walter H. Knapp Silviculture & Urban Forestry, has been performed and is attached herein. There are a total of 13 existing trees located within the project boundaries, none of which are greater than 12 inches in caliper. 13 of the 13 (100%) existing trees indicated on the site plan are proposed to be removed as they are either: located outside any sensitive areas, within the limits of grading for the new public street (96th Avenue), or 11 home sites/building envelopes. However, per the terms of this Section, no degree of mitigation is required, as none of the trees measure more than 12 inches in caliper. Nonetheless, significant tree and/shrub landscaping is planned along the easterly edges of the project to provide separation and vegetative separation between this development and the adjacent properties. Street trees will be planted in the front yards of the eleven new homes, further diversifying and enhancing the vegetative composition of the neighborhood. 18.795: VISUAL CLEARANCE AREAS The proposed subdivision features an intersection of two public streets, proposed 96th Avenue and SW Greenburg Road. SW Greenburg Road is identified as an existing Major Collector/proposed Arterial in the City of Tigard TSP. Clear vision triangles, as stipulated by standards shall be maintained without obstructions of 36" or higher as required by Section 18.795.040. The location of the intersection currently enjoys sight distances of greater than 350 feet (posted speed limit times a factor of 10) in both the northwesterly and southeasterly directions along Greenburg Road. Private residential driveways that provide access to a public street, in this case proposed 96th Avenue, and home setback shall comply with the standards set forth in Section 18.510.2 to further ensure safety of pedestrians and exiting vehicles. 18.810: STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS Streets: The new public street, 96th Avenue, will be constructed to City specifications for a Local Residential Street carrying <1,500 vehicles per day. A 50-foot right-of-way is proposed for the street with 28 feet of pavement. Five-foot sidewalks are proposed for both sides of the street with one sidewalk being "curb-tight", and the other meandering through the preserved trees (future). It is important to note that the preliminary plat proposes to dedicate only the eastern 39.5 feet of the right-of-way to include 28 feet of pavement, eastern curb, and sidewalk. The remaining western portion of right-of-way will be dedicated as the lands to the west (TL 2400, et al) are re-developed. Preliminary indications are that the subdivision will not create conditions requiring a traffic impact analysis, as 11 single-family lots are typically expected to add only roughly +J- 10 daily vehicle trips per lot (110 total) to SW Greenburg Road. City Engineer shall make final determinations. The new street, 96th Avenue, shall be dedicated to the City as a part of final plat approval. The northern half of SW Greenburg Road shall be improved to City specifications throughout the length of the subdivision (approximately 125.6 linear feet). This improvement will include widening the northern half of the existing roadway and constructing curb gutter and sidewalk per City specifications and the objectives set forth by the TSP. Sanitary Sewer: Sanitary sewer service will be provided to each lot within the site by building individual lateral connections to a new sanitary sewer running beneath 96th Avenue and connecting to existing sanitary facilities in SW Greenburg Road. Surface Water Run-off: Storm water runoff will be collected via a catch basin and pipe system to a new storm line running beneath 96th Avenue, connecting with existing storm facilities in the SW Greenburg Road right of way. Stormwater will be detained and passed through a stormwater management vault on-site prior to its release into the City conveyance facilities. The proposed storm facilities will be constructed in compliance with Resolution 91-47 whereby Clean Water Services and the City of Tigard have agreed to enforce Surface Water Management regulations requiring the construction of said facilities. Domestic Water: Domestic water service will be provided to each lot within the site by providing individual lateral connections to a new water line running beneath 96th Avenue, connecting with an existing main in SW Greenburg Road. 18.810.030: STREETS A. Improvements. 1. The proposed development has frontage on SW Greenburg Road and proposed 96th Avenue. 2. Proposed 96th Avenue shall meet the standards of Chapter 18.810.0030. 3. SW Greenburg Road, adjacent to this development, meets the standards of Chapter 18.810.030, or will be made so via half-street improvements. B. Creation of rights-of-way for streets and related purposes. With the preliminary approval and recording of the final plat of the Greenburg Heights subdivision, the necessary public rights-of-way will be created and dedicated. C. Creation of access easements. The pre-application conference and initial submittal made reference to an easement across the site to provide access to TL 2304 believed by City Solera Subdivision Page 9 of 18 staff to exist, however, the applicant's title search found no evidence of such an easement, and it has therefore been deleted from the site plan/ preliminary plat. ll. Street location,width and grade. The final street location, width and grade of half-street improvements on SW Greenburg Road and proposed 96th Avenue shall comply with the requirements of this Chapter and provide for appropriate service to the 11 residential lots in question as well as provide for future extension northward toward SW North Dakota Street. All final grades and curves shall be approved by the City Engineer per Subsection M. E. Minimum rights-of-way and street widths. The proposed public right-of-way and roadway for 96th Avenue shall be sufficient to accommodate the improvements necessary for a street generating the ADT associated with 11 single-family lots, safety, utility, lighting, emergency access, sidewalk and street tree requirements. Proposed 96th Avenue meets the standards set forth by Table 18.810.1. See the street sections on the plans for compliance review. F. Future street plan and extension of streets. A circulation plan has been submitted with this application (Sheet 3- Aerial Photograph) indicating anticipated patterns of auto travel on existing and proposed streets in and around the subdivision within the prescribed distance of 530 feet. There is one transit stop transit stop within 530 feet of the site, and another within roughly 600 feet, both of which are accessible directly from SW Greenburg Road. The subdivision's proposed construction of 96th Avenue will intersect with SW Greenburg Road at roughly 90 degrees and feature an alignment stubbed to the northern property line, thereby providing for eventual connectivity northward to SW North Dakota Street upon future development. While the City of Tigard Transportation System Plan (excerpt at right) aa� does not specifically call pi ' CITY of TIGARD for anorth-south •� Transportation ;;:,., System Plan oriented connection •• r.Fin .l: I1 L. between SW Greenburg � ���_: m.-_. Road and SE North #441110,1,--;141•11: ■z-r,;4.� � Dakota Street in this 41111.41 "� '�; ._=� area, the applicant 4 ; e!i •'1404: proposes to provide this ""�" '�� !4 r. opportunity in an effort ` ,,.�:.►�;��- to create smaller block �'; i ::�' rw�c, dimensions in the neighborhood. 3 -- - -- - -- :4i:. lal ember (O.: v;:ed I),�ceml)er?t0O., Solera Subdivision Page 10 of 18 N. Street Alignment and connections. As indicated on the plans, 96th Avenue meets the requirements of this Subsection. The street has been designed to facilitate direct access to and from SW Greenburg Road for the residents of the subdivision. 1. Intersection angles. As shown on the plans, the proposed intersection of 96th Avenue and SW Greenburg Road is approximately 90 degrees, and meets the design standards of this Subsection. Alignment shall provide for a similar intersection with SW North Dakota Street upon eventual build-out. Aside from residential driveways, which are not subject to this Subsection, this is the only intersection proposed. J. Existing rights-of-way. SW Greenburg Road is the only existing right-of-way adjacent to the project site. Current right-of-way meets the requirements set forth in Table 18.810.1 and the City of Tigard TSP, or will be made so via half-street improvements. M. Street names. The name, 96th Avenue, shall not duplicate or be easily confused with any existing street in Washington County. Final naming/numbering shall be subject to approval by the Director. N. Grades and curves. Grades on 96th Avenue meet the requirements of Subsection N, and final grades and curve radii are subject to approval by the City Engineer. 0. Curbs,curb cuts,ramps and driveway approaches. Concrete curbs and driveway aprons shall be constructed for each proposed lot as specified by Subsection 0. Q. Access to arterials and collectors. Access to the Solera subdivision is provided via SW Greenburg Road to proposed 96th Avenue, which will be a local residential street. The subdivision has been designed to minimize traffic conflicts to the greatest extent possible. No through traffic is possible as the construction of the new public street, 96th Avenue, will serve only 11 lots and be stubbed to the site's northern property line. Access into all residential lots shall be from the lower classification street, in this case proposed 96th Avenue. Lot 1 shall be screened appropriately where possible from SW Greenburg Road. An adjustment is sought for driveways within the influence area, which is discussed in detail above under 18.370.020, Adjustments. Y. Street Lighting. Street lighting shall be installed for auto, pedestrian and resident safety according to City of Tigard specifications. Solera Subdivision Page 11 of 18 AA. Street cross-sections. Cross-sections of public and private streets meet the standards set forth by this Subsection and have been included in the preliminary plans for review. A('. Traffic Study. Preliminary indications are that the subdivision does not require a traffic impact analysis under this Subsection. The proposal is not located at a high collision area, and the proposed 11 residential lots can typically be expected to generate +/- 110 vehicle trips per day. City Engineer shall make final determinations. 18.810.040: BLOCKS The Solera subdivision is an infill project within the existing block bound by SW Greenburg Road, SW North Dakota Street and SW 95th Avenue; and therefore does not propose any new blocks. The eventual extension of proposed 96th Avenue northward will effectively halve this existing block, thereby making for a more complete transportation system and more convenient pedestrian network. 18.810.060: ADDITIONAL LOT REQUIREMENTS All lot sizes, widths, shapes, and orientation are appropriate for the location and use of the development. As shown on the plans, all proposed lots meet the design requirements of this Chapter with respect to width, depth, shape and frontage. 18.810.070: SIDEWALKS Five-foot concrete sidewalk constructed to City specifications shall be installed along one side of proposed 96th Avenue. While the new public street is designed to include sidewalks to specification on both sides of the street, this project includes a ROW dedication of 39.5 feet which includes two-way auto travel surface measuring 28 feet and one 5 foot sidewalk along the east side of the street. 18.810.090: SANITARY SEWERS Sanitary sewer service will be provided to each lot within the site by providing individual lateral connections to a new sanitary sewer running beneath proposed 96th Avenue, which connects with existing sanitary facilities in SW Greenburg Road. 18.810.100: STORM DRAINAGE Storm water will be collected via a catch basin and pipe system to a new storm sewer running beneath 96th Avenue, which connects with existing storm facilities in SW Greenburg Road. Stormwater will be treated with a stormwater management vault to meet water quality requirements. Detention will be provided on-site with an underground piped system. All storm pipe shall be physically separate and independent of all sanitary pipe. Solera Subdivision Page 12 of 18 18.810.120: UTILITIES This Section requires that overhead utility lines servicing a development to be placed underground or at the election of the developer; a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid at a rate determined by the City Engineer. All new utility lines will be placed underground, and those along the project's SW Greenburg Road frontage will be "undergrounded" or fee paid prior to issuance of building permits. 18.370.010 VARIANCES A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide standards for the granting of variances from the applicable zoning requirements of this title where it can be shown that, owing to special and unusual circumstances related to a specific property, the literal interpretation of the provisions of the applicable zone would cause an undue or unnecessary hardship,except that no use variances shall be granted. The proposed Solera subdivision has four ■ t 1 i u lots, - 1,2, 3, and 4 - that do not comply ■�pt - p.; un - i of with the standards set forth in Table 510.2. �lla■ mum,;min Specifically, they are: �� Irk • Lot 1 -proposed 15 foot rear yard :, �� �m r� • Lot 2 -proposed 15 foot rear yard - ��� *�, �■■ • Lot 3-proposed 15 foot rear yard m t : . 2 o • Lot 3/4- proposed 10 foot side yard � /1,11a • Table 510.2. Development Standards -1 _ _ fg=kr R-12:Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district must be 30 feet. The project site is zoned R-12, and the area abutting to the east has more restrictive zoning - R-4.5. C. Approval process and standards. 1.Variances shall be processed by means of a Type II procedure,as governed by Section 18.390.040, using standards of approval contained in Subsection 2 below. 2.The Director shall approve,approve with conditions,or deny an application for a variance based on finding that the following criteria are satisfied: a.The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title,to any other applicable policies and standards,and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; The requested variance allows the property to be developed to the appropriate density, with attached single-family dwelling units that meet the density expectation of the zone. The variance will not be detrimental to the purposes of the ordinance -or to adjacent properties- because a 30-foot (or more) setback is proposed for the majority of the easterly PL, and significant landscape plantings and a 6-foot fence are proposed to protect the adjacent properties from the impacts of the new development. Other properties in the same zoning district have not been developed to the planned density. , . II: Solera Subdivision Page 13 of 18 47CL ►h —17,01 LK - 43 4)o. i•IP 1k."" �S 4'4541 sc. KIKir 1 1,4 30' vi°"q 7 I 7 B 30 , .A yri/cinoir-e4de LA site p 2-cst4-> b.There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control,and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; The application requires a variance to this setback requirement because of the site constraints specifically inherent to this property. The parcel to the west has significant mature trees that merit preservation. Because these trees are on the PL-the proposed public ROW was shifted to the east to place the majority of the dedication burden on the subject property. A typical "shared" ROW on the PL between the subject site and TL 2400 would require a dedication of 25 feet of ROW. The proposed design requires 39.5 feet of dedication- 14.5 feet more than the 50% typical for this design scenario. Additionally-at some point in the history of this area -TL 2304 was developed with an SFR and subsequently zoned R 4.5. The "notch" that IL 2304 makes in the R-12 zoning district in this area creates a design dilemma for ANY development on the subject property. c.The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land; The property is zoned R-12 and allows attached and detached dwelling units on lots averaging 3050 square feet or more in area. The proposed development complies with the basic criteria for development within the district. Strict adherence to the required 30 foot setback between the new homes on the site and the more restrictive R-4.5 lands to the east could negatively impact the applicant's ability to meet reasonable density requirements of the underlying R- 12 zoning, and limit the ability to generate adequate economic benefit, thereby limiting or restricting the rights otherwise afforded this property. The variance will provide residents of this project the benefit of a typical R-12 compliant yard, while preserving the existing conditions and privacy of neighboring yards. d. Existing physical and natural systems,such as but not limited to traffic,drainage,dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title;and The request does not have any impact on traffic, drainage, specific land forms or parks in the area. The existing rear and side yards to the east of the site will not be impacted in anyway, thereby preserving the characteristics of the R 4.5 district. The variance will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare. The result is a balance between setbacks that afford relatively equal benefit to residents of both the new subdivision and existing neighbors. Imposition of the 30-foot setback would "force" the street ROW towards the opposite side of the property and mandate removal of all of the large specimen trees along that property line. e.The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The site features insufficient width east-to-west to accommodate R-12 compliant lots and the necessary street right-of-way to serve them while respecting the 30- foot setback. The adjustment to the setbacks along one side of the property also allows greater protection of the unique and significant trees on the opposite "'. :)rirrncil SubtI C( r-d-rr. :OUD .amber 2005 Solera Subdivision Page 14 of 18 property line adjacent to the new public street. Imposition of the 30-foot setback would "force" the street ROW towards the opposite side of the property and mandate removal of all of the trees along that property line. Removal of these trees would cause a "hardship" on the neighborhood as a whole because the trees are healthy, unique and an asset to the surrounding property. There was no option to locate the new street on the other side of the property- at the eastern edge of the site-because of the access spacing standards requiring maximum separation of local streets intersecting with Greenburg Road. The design presented in this application is the best solution to meet the intent of all the overlapping land use regulations applicable to this property. 18.370.020: ADJUSTMENTS Per the terms of this Section, the applicant is seeking the following adjustments under the provisions of this Community Development Code. 705.030.H.Access Management H.Access Management 1. An access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs,sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT,Washington County,the City and AASHTO(depending on jurisdiction of facility.) 2. Driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be 150 feet,measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway.The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage,the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel.If shared access is not possible or practical,the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. Approval of this application requires an adiustment to the standard requiring driveway restrictions within 150 feet of the intersection of 96th Avenue and Greenburg Road., The proposed subdivision requires construction of a new public street, 96th Avenue, to intersect with existing SW Greenburg Road, designated as an existing Major Collector/proposed Arterial by the TSP. Residential lots]through 5 have driveways on 96th Avenue within the influence area of SW Greenburg Road, as measured 150 feet from the northerly curb. The subdivision does not include any adjacent parcels or access easements through adjacent parcels that would make compliance with this Section possible. In such a case, the applicant shall place these residential driveways as far as possible from the intersection. That is, each of these driveways will be located as far north as possible in order to avoid the intersection of SW Greenburg Road and proposed 96th Avenue to the greatest extent possible. The location of the driveways for these five lots is shown on the plans. The driveways are paired where possible, and are located to minimize vehicle movement conflicts to the greatest extent possible. i. .' ) - r h Solera Subdivision Page 15 of 18 L4 5 h. '5 5?}c 3. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. Approval of this application requires an adlustment to the access spacing standard of 600 feet spacing between points of access on a Collector/ Arterial. The proposed subdivision requires construction of a new public street, 96th Avenue, to intersect with existing SW Greenburg Road, designated as an existing Major Collector/proposed Arterial by the TSP. 96th Avenue will intersect with SW Greenburg Road approximately 250 feet from the westerly right-of-way for SW 95th Avenue. 600 foot access spacing is not possible along this section of Greenburg Road, and alternate consolidated access is not feasible for this property. The location of the new public street will facilitate access to the adjacent parcel to the west, when that property redevelops to planned urban density. Thus a consolidation of access points is anticipated for future development. 5.ADJUSTMENT TO ACCESS AND EGRESS STANDARDS(CHAPTER 18.705). a. In all zoning districts where access and egress drives cannot be readily designed to conform to Code standards within a particular parcel,access with an adjoining property shall be considered. If access in conjunction with another parcel cannot reasonably be achieved,the Director may grant an adjustment to the access requirements of Chapter 18.705 through a Type II procedure,as governed in Section 18.390.030, using approval criteria contained in Subsection 2b below. b.The Director may approve,approve with conditions,or deny a request for an adjustment from the access requirements contained in Chapter 18.705,based on the following criteria: (1) It is not possible to share access; The proposed Solera subdivision has the opportunity to share access with the adjacent property to the west-TL 2400- facilitating development of that parcel at some future date. There are no other opportunities for access consolidation, so this project is required to provide access to the subdivision from within the bounds of the site. (2)There are no other alternative access points on the street in question or from another street; No opportunity to access the proposed Solera subdivision exists from another street because the site is not adjacent to any other public streets. The future streets plan identifies a potential connection northward to SW North Dakota Street; but this scenario is contingent on the eventual development of lands to the north of the site. Additionally, there are no existing public streets stubbed to the project site that can be extended as an alternative to the proposed 96th Avenue, and as discussed above, no adjacent parcels are party to this subdivision (3) The access separation requirements cannot be met; The required minimum spacing of streets and driveways along an Arterial is 600 feet. In this case, the site does not feature sufficient frontage to accomplish such street spacing. The site has only 125.6 feet of frontage. Coupled with the frontages of TL 2304 (71.39 feet) and TL 2301 (96.89 feet) located east, between the site and SW 95th Avenue; the maximum possible street spacing is still insufficient at less than 293.9 feet. The figure is diminished further when the required right-of-way width is considered. As a result, the applicant has proposed a new public street as far as feasible from SW 95th, which will be discussed below in item (4). Solera Subdivision Page 16 of 18 (4)The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access; The subdivision is designed to locate the proposed new public street, 96th Avenue, as far as possible from existing SW 95th Avenue, thereby minimizing the degree of adjustment sought for access spacing purposes. The applicant has proposed the north-south oriented right-of-way along the site's western property line, resulting in an alignment that provides for a spacing of roughly 255 feet between interior ROW lines. While this dimension is deficient, it is the greatest spacing possible within the bounds of the site. The applicant has further minimized the scale of adjustment sought by proposing less than 100% of the required right-of-way width on-site. The applicant is proposing improvements adequate to serve this subdivision in the interim, assuming that the remaining western portion of the right-of-way will be dedicated and improved upon eventual development of lands to the west of the site (TL 2400). This facilitates consolidation of accesses to serve multiple properties and separation of access points to the greatest degree possible. (5) The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access;and The street spacing between proposed 96th Avenue and existing SW 95th Avenue is expected to provide safe access. The proposed intersection is located along a portion of SW Greenburg Road that has adequate sight distance for exiting vehicles traveling in both directions. During peak AM and PM traffic flows, the stopped traffic will allow turning movements onto and off of Greenburg Road as courtesy movements, and during non-peak periods the turning movements will be safe- based on "vehicle platooning" from nearby traffic signals. (6)The visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 will be met. As discussed in this document and illustrated on the plan set, the necessary vision clearance triangle shall be maintained without obstruction at the intersection of proposed 96th Avenue and SW Greenburg Road. The vision clearance areas are demonstrated on the accompanying plans. 18.390: QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING The materials in this application package demonstrate compliance with all relevant code and Comprehensive Plan requirements. Included in the application is all the information requested on the application form, along with this narrative document addressing the appropriate criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; the required fees; a list of all surrounding property owners, as well as other potentially affected parties. The Subdivision is consistent with the underlying zoning requirements and all relevant City ordinances and standards. An Impact Study was performed by SR Design, LLC as part of the initial submittal. A copy of the study attached. Solera Subdivision Page 17 of 18 SUMMARY/CONCLUSION The proposed subdivision complies with all applicable elements of the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code, or seeks the appropriate adjustments to accommodate the design while complying with the intent and purpose of the land use regulations. The proper steps have been taken to ensure compatibility with the established neighborhood character within the context of existing City of Tigard R-12 zoning. The design and number of lots proposed meet the density requirements of the site; and adequate public facilities and services exist, or are proposed, to serve the development. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed to City and other applicable standards. The proposed subdivision will create housing in a manner consistent with, and complementary to, the surrounding residential developments and complaint with zoning parameters. The applicant therefore respectfully requests that this application for subdivision be approved with the requested variances and adjustments. FROM :WASHINGTON_COUNTY SURVEY FAX NO. :5038462909 Oct. 10 2005 10:08AM P2 10-06-'05 14: 34 FROM- �iF�, ,. . ;. I:i .i. WASHINGTON COUNTY LAND USE AND TRA NSPORT4 TTON• SURVEYOR'S OFFICE Amply S.IQN, r i»..A T N.AMiNt; I request that the Washington County Surveyor's Office reserve the following subdivision name: PROPOSED NAME OF SUBDIVISION: MAP AND TAX LOT NUMBER: ^CITY JURISDICTION (Which City?) OR COUNTY JURISDICTION: C ,. \CtAf%.I) SURVEYOR'S NAME: COMPANY NAME: OWNER'S NAME: MIC4 1\1\01199 '; (Vk4AAMMi-.1) I understand that if the name is not used within five years, it will l:,)e automatically canceled. Name of person reserving name: YAW pAvok vv./a* '2G'.Ci&c-::.\' Company name: A) :calk& C:c un1j. _ . ... Address: 6.' ' t" •• `-•;t :q Telephone number: Fax number ! 4v -� 4 .. E-Mail: y c.t cx0 C^' q. ► K:, ALMS* :.. Y.... AlfSignature: . 1 Date: K)/(0/1:25_______.. /0- to • 0�� Name approved Washington County Surveyor's Office 155 North First Avenue, Suite 350-15 Hillsboro, OR 97123 Fax: (503)846-2909 vt r7:rIt Ic'I'I:ms I lit V EYMA•I•A nut w ruVn,02ASUC1NAMG.[OCA I0-M-04 Wk RECEIVED 10-10-' 05 09: 59 FROM- 5038462909 TO- P002/002 Greenburg Heights IMPACT STUDY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM: The proposed 10-lot subdivision development fronts SW Greenburg Road to the south, SW 95th Avenue to the west, Boetcher's Addition to the east and Gearhart Acres to the north. There is an existing home fronting SW Greenburg Road with a driveway and one (1) existing drop. All the curb and sidewalk along SW Greenburg is installed and the drops will be removed and replaced with curb and sidewalk with the development Per our Pre-Application Conference Notes, SW Greenburg Road will have an additional 15-feet (+1-) of right-of-way dedication to provide a 50-foot right-of way from the centerline of Greenburg Road. Stormwater run-off from the road fronting the project site (Greenburg Road) will continue to be collected and conveyed with the existing storm system in the road. The access to the proposed development for the 10 lots will be via the new proposed public street that connects to SW Greenburg Road. There will also be one (1) private street that connects to the new public street. The proposed development will generate 16-AM peak hour trips and 14- PM peak hour trips. This level of usage is deemed to be well below any threshold value that would trigger a detailed traffic impact study. The additional traffic generation is well below 10% of the peak hour traffic on Greenburg Road (1175 vph). DRAINAGE SYSTEM: Storm water runoff from the existing site drains to the northwest corner of the property and to the southern edge of the property. The flow to the northwest eventually drains into inlets located in SW Greenburg Road to the west of the site. The flow to the southern edge drains into an inlet located in SW Greenburg Road at the east property boundary. The development of the proposed subdivision does not change the drainage pattern but instead of utilizing overland flow, the flow will be collected, treated, and detained prior to discharge into the existing storm drainage system located in SW Greenburg Road. Water quality treatment of the proposed newly created impervious area will be by cartridge filter catch basins, by Stormwater Management, sized appropriately in accordance to CleanWater Service's water quality requirements. Detention will be provided by an in-ground pipe detention facility, which will be sized to discharge at the pre-developed flow rates. PARK SYSTEM: This development is not proposing to donate any land to the City of Tigard for open space and parks. GREENBURG HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION 1 IMPACT STUDY • SEWER SYSTEM: There is an existing 8-inch sewer line located in SW Greenburg Road at the southern edge of the project. The line now terminates at a manhole at the western edge of the project and is located approximately at the centerline of existing pavement. This line is proposed to be extended to the east 90 feet and a new manhole constructed to receive the sanitary flow from the proposed subdivision. WATER SYSTEM: An 8-inch waterline exists in SW Greenburg Road and will be connected to a new line that will run through the new public street. The meters will be banked off of the public street to serve the lots located on the private street. • NOISE IMPACTS: This development is a single-family detached residential subdivision which should not generate any extraordinary noise impacts to the surrounding neighbors. • • GREENBURG HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION 2 IMPACT STUDY S E P 1 3 2004 File Number ea°Ik Service By • = re: Pre-Screening Site Assessment - -oa't'.otitumitment re- 9 Jurisdiction /(ga(cL Date 9/13/0 Map & Tax Lot j S j 3.5q c t 3 v o Owner 4/art 110.n. Site Address //et y Sc 6U, 3z_, ^ ?i 7 - 90 y0 ° Contact Proposed Activity Address 5� Prs G� c_ j 0-i�f e/9� /7 ! 6/!id 'y�3 Phone .rG✓e.-n2-7, a lm/- ��� 5/60,y-1-5S-5144-4--r 673-V‘"s • Official use only below this line Y N NA Y N NA (� Sensitive Area Composite Map (-T Stormwater Infrastructure maps � v Map# /S! k)11 1)k QS # 1/.2 I n rn Locally adopted studies or maps El 10 Other Specify Specify Based on a review of the above information and the requirements of Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order No. 04-9: n Sensitive areas potentially exist on site or within 200' of the site. THE APPLICANT MUST PERFORM A SITE CERTIFICATION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER OR STORMWATER CONNECTION PERMIT. If Sensitive Areas exist on the site or within 200 feet on adjacent properties, a Natural Resources Assessment Report may also be required. aj Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on site or within 200' of the site. This pre- screening site assessment does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your property. NO FURTHER SITE ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQUIRED. THIS FORM WILL SERVE AS AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE A . STORMWATER CONNECTION PERMIT. I ( The proposed activity does not meet the definition of development. NO SITE ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQUIRED. Comments: Reviewed By: Date: 9/1/71/0 y Returned to Applicant !flail X Fax Counter Date 7/i 7/GY By 155 n First Avenue,Suite 270•Hllleboro,Oregon 97124 Phone: (5Q3)846-3553•Fax: (503)846-3525•www.cleanwernrxervices.org • I -ceived Fax : Au. 06 2C04 2:410 Fax S- a ion r SR tesi• LLC Aug. 6 . 2D04 2 :35PM CLEAN WATER SERVICES 503 6614439 No 2605 P . 1 '1111 l • • IA;� JUL 2 7 ,004 Fiie.Nwnber '1 76 + e n r` li es.. • g• Ssosit We-Ar_ - creentrtg Site Assessment Jurisdiction Cell y J� G'r� _ Date y/a vc Map &Tax Lot _ ../57.5CA [1,t a.30.�, Owner —771`1. iysr , ,• Site Address /1440 .Sig 36.o `71' 7 e 97as Contact Proposed Activity Address SK. ,✓ JO -l0T ,50bdupiz,1 Phone eva=i944e" .7mw,, 1,7ochr-' •=-- - PAae'L-'.SZ$-yb9-/.x/y. / •52)3- G� Y33 uNrcli ur only below MID ifro Y N NA Y N NA ElSensitive Area Composite Map Q ii Stormwater Infrastructure maps 1 Map �f /.1/1.4)47 QS# n 0 Locally adopted studies or maps ri 721 Other Specify Specify ___�--- Based on a review of the above Information and the requirements of Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order No.04-0: n Sensitive areas potentially exist on site or within 200' of the site.THE APPLICANT MUST PERFORM A SITE CERTIFICATION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER'OR STORMWATER CONNECTION PERMIT. if Sensitive Areas exist on the site or within 200 feet on adjacent properties, a Natural Resources Assessment Report may also be required. Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on site or within 200'of-the site. This.pre- screening site assessment does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quellty.sensitive areas if they are subsequently disoovered on your property. NO FURTHER SITE ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER is REQUIRED. THIS FORM WILL SERVE AS AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE A . STORMWATER CONNECTION PERMIT. [❑ The proposed activity does not meet the definition of development, NO SITE ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQUIRED. Comments: Reviewed Ely: - Date: - - 1/1/4'' Returned to Applicant Mail Fax Counter_ Post-it"Fax Nola 7671 Dale 09 G�6^s■ / Dctt _ 8y d �TO MA/a" From J gi P //e podDept. Go. /,,�y�p /l Phone r Phone r5.v. ,64,,, eta.. FauR♦Q� ` Ruch E • d ESSB-69{7-EOS 011 uisec NS Wi-OI : B b002 EI daS Page 1 of l Albert Castaneda From: McMullen, Eric T. [Eric.McMullen @tvfr.com] Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 1:14 PM To: Albert Castaneda Subject: RE. Solera Albert, This arrangement is acceptable to the Fire District. Eric T. McMullen Deputy Fire Marshal Tualatin Valley Fire& Rescue Ph. 503.612.7000 Fax 503.612.7003 eric.mcmullen@tvfr.com www.tvfr.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s)and may contain confidential and privileged information.Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Original Message From: Albert Castaneda [mailto:afc @AlphaCommunity.com] Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 11:50 AM To: McMullen, Eric T. Subject: Solera Eric, I am attaching a pdf of one of the projects that we discussed on Tuesday. Per our conversation, in exchange for not being required to construct a turn-around we will sprinkle each building. We are submitting back to Tigard on Monday. I was hoping you could respond to this email so that we can include it with our application. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thanks for the help. «999261-SITE PLAN.pdf» Albert Castaneda, PE Project Manager Alpha Community Development Phone: 503.452.8003 Fax: 503.452.8043 12/2/2005 \\\\� i IL 4100 � 1L3 alpha I \ t. ! — _............I DEVELOPMENT F VELOPM ! i 'S 1� � 'Ii •L 3900 TL 4006 I 50° 1 1 1 , 1 11. R`[ E0.5 I I 4600 SW Oak.AJtl°230 `I 1 I R/w S RI C/L 0• p OorllorId.OR 97223 I ................... .............. 452E13 IR m asa eoa I ' 1 - _r�__�_j1f,�-_�__ .. - FMK PPUNRpI 6p' •• ww•w.manacumnNruh corn "1 11 �• EEEAN0FRb60 Ss b[l 12D'7 lb •I•L2/DO I 2� ' I - REVISIONS Lq 1 , : -- 30.M Sr - Ii ` NO. DATE DEECRIPI•ION I 1 ~ b1 c 4D[w i g ' r.........._.__.3..._....._.._...� ..._...___....._.�.,` -—a 0i;Sr ;- `� GR ul TO SCALE DRIVE 1 j k 3.67E Si i b, N IA ' I I I 3.378 Sr I Q ;DAY. . I -IL 2200 I 1 I 2 I b' 6 I Ib CA R/W --—60E Sr—-- .0 0.5 X11 Z �� 50 ..._ I 5 ■b ........;_ Ana r i --•_- 1 1440 Sr i.__.. I b ' �b in v�S r ISII, r A 4 3,676 Sr Ig / _ l ! — — Lw ]EY / I -- gp..I /� n SW GREENBURG RD _-----1//A� u/STE(C1 WDEN$FROU APPRD% 02 TO 23 0 SOLERA ! Napo[0 N1uEC ROW j NW O' 1e'NOW DFUIC/IIUN NEOURCU _ ` I " 6. 2 - Ti_2303 Nol ID SCALE 1 fl Lai p ig 2304 r- ' aa . —I L Et e'POE -. .. .. . ��ElEa6, LEGEND SIDE"^"` 112301 ----CR000SCO RIONT D wAT PRELIMINARY '� : ..........-._.....PNSTiNC MONT-OF-66. " PROPOSED D1Re PLAT ................ M1 ---PROPOSED CENTERLINE En SIP10 rigor CENTERLINE —PROPJSEO PROPCPI [ a�6a REENQU►tG RD , . .., �EweTNVD PROP[R1Y LNC ----PnOPOSE0 BOUNDARY ONE i ... ...�... .mow. ..e+.memms...! III .___-'� .......... I i alpha :Ni CD COMPALINiTY P T.29t . PROJECT NO. 661•3.1 A CO SCALE mm PLANNING■ 1 ■ b 16 64 NOVEMBER DOES ,R[.>o 6T 4 N:ywoOl6.]61\091✓KSDAIII4CR\+nh130E MN.aq•SM:AN Pm 03.3006.11:1anek • -alpha COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT October 7, 2005 RE: PROPOSED 10-LOT SUBDIVISION - REVISED (SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DWELLINGS) TAX MAP 2S1 35CA, 2300, 2302 11490- 11494 SW Greenburg Rd. Dear Resident: Alpha Community Development is representing the developer of the property described above. A 10-lot detached single-family residential subdivision is proposed for this location. This property is currently zoned R-12 (3,050 sq. ft. minimum lot size). You should have also received a letter last year from Max Moini inviting you to an August 19.2004 neighborhood meeting for a 10-lot planned development with adjustments. As you may be aware, that development has not proceeded, and a new developer has taken over the land use application. Because the previous land use application is being used, no new neighborhood meeting is required, but we would like to meet with the neighbors as an informational courtesy and to foster community goodwill. You are invited to attend a meeting on: October 20, 2005, 6:30 p.m. Metzger Elementary School library 10350 SW Lincoln St. Tigard, OR 97223 Please note that this will be an informal meeting on preliminary development plans. These plans may or may not be altered prior to final land use decision. Depending on the type of land use action required, you may also receive future notice from the City of Tigard for you to either participate with written comments and/or an opportunity to attend a public hearing. Should you have any questions regarding this proposal, please call me at 503-452-8003. Sincerely, _ q,u , ) I Jeff Vanderdasson, P.E. • Project Manager enclosures Plaza West,Suite 230,9600 SW Oak,Portland,Oregon 97223 [1] 503-452-8003 [F] 503-452-8043 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SIGN-IN SHEET P 0 23g6°3 NAME: rl ' � ' ADDRESS: ip.1 .(40_04(2I • w v z T 1--&N)fl C c1-72Z-3 J 0/4N W L2.4440 12EAM/A/v (r-#�� 7ZZ 3 o4/ 4n / . . - L:4 /1k.r , QA 97: �!► ; 5 ��fir.-w.,�-� --� �C CV1 DATE: October 20, 2005 PROJECT: Solera 328-031 AtaIpha COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Solera (formerly Greenburg Heights) neighborhood meeting notes date: October 20, 2005 location: Metzger Elementary School, 10350 SW Lincoln St. Meeting called to order at 6:30 pm. Presenters - John Marquart (JM), Alpha Community Development Al Jeck (AJ), Alpha Community Development JM and AJ introduced themselves and welcomed participants. JM read the City of Tigard prepared statement required for neighborhood meetings, and explained that the previous subdivision design proposal was being abandoned by owner, and that the existing land use application is being assumed by buyer of the property. Therefore, contrary to the Tigard prepared statement's declaration that no application has been submitted as of the meeting, an application (currently deemed incomplete) is on file with the City. JM gave a brief summary of the previous 10-lot subdivision plan for reference before presenting the new 10-lot subdivision plan. This presentation included a discussion of: site location and vicinity, existing conditions, site zoning/ density requirements, lot count and layout, public street improvements and alignment, preliminary utility location and other general site and project characteristics. Of particular note was the alignment of the street with respect to City acceptability, width of improvements and impact on trees on neighboring property. AJ added that the project arborist would work closely with street contractor, who is expected to use an air spade, to ensure their protection and root avoidance. The meeting was then opened for questions from the audience. question: What is the tree removal/mitigation scenario? (JM): There are 13 of 13 trees proposed for removal on-site, none of which measure greater than 12", which would trigger mitigation planting. Every effort will be made to protect trees on neighboring property as Mr. Jeck indicated. question: By performing half-street (or+/- 75%) improvements on the new north- south street, are you setting the stage for tree removal on the neighboring lot (along your western boundary) should it re-develop? (JM): Yes, barring adjustment/variance to street standards, tree removal would be required in order to complete the public street improvements to Tigard 54' specification. However, we have proposed the street alignment here in direct response to City direction per the comments on the prior submittal. Additionally, there is no guarantee that the parcel to the west must develop, and we will take care not to disturb. **This question was raised several times.** Plaza West-Suite 230-9603 SW Oak-Portland-Oreaon 97223 Office 5 13 452-8003-Fax 503 452-8043 www.alphacornmun'ty.com 44-4* ciIpha COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT question: If you were to place 100% of this street on your site, what would the project look like? (AJ): The site is irregularly shaped, and therefore does not have adequate width to accommodate such an arrangement while meeting density requirements and remaining economically viable. question: Is there a monetary value to, say, the 9th or 10th lot that could possibly be offset in exchange for the street location and resulting tree preservation? (AJ): There may be, but I am not prepared to give a value here. It may be possible to calculate, but without 10 lots, we are likely looking at a project vs. no project. comment: That is a very unique and quality stand of trees. (JM): We are well aware of the trees, but have responded to the City's direction regarding street location/alignment. We will make every effort to safeguard with arborist's direction during construction. (AJ): We have been in discussions with the owner regarding their status and preservation. question: Are there any lots under 3,050 square feet? (JM): Yes, but code permits lot averaging, provided that no lots are smaller than 80% of the underlying zoning (2,440). question: What type of homes are proposed? (JM): 2-story detached single family. question: What will be the price range of the new homes? (AJ): Alpha does not build homes, but we expect them to be upper$200's. question: Have you given any thought to zero-lot line development? (AJ): We have studied attached units (duets) conceptually, but the builder response we received indicated a preference for the detached plan. question: Has the stub street design met with approval for fire vehicle access? (JM): This information is not available at the time of this meeting, but any subdivision must meet with fire marshal approval before land use approval will be granted. • Plaza West-Sute 230-9600 SW Oak-Poi-hand-Oregon 97223 Office 503 452-8003-=ax 503 452-8043 www.alphacommun.ty.com /� -- I -- — CITY of ' RD OE00 RAPHIL IA �N SYSTEM <v(v r ,�>I;! NOTINED Ck- �:I (504') $r r ,t k,,cb�1 Ff 41 B t�p c„=3,=, ° cp d¢J1 �� f". N_______i ,' ` �'� FOR: Shirean Molnl Z off}E t�.�d'�"�'� �+�irr5 4 rw ;Y Sr''' o — RE: I S 135CA; 2300/2302 i-s � e, f - _ o f E'%1"-.,'''-'7' w 7,° n x Id e ,,�r'v„3 } 7fx y' I. �1� 1�Id ti�1ih r 2iti sj NoKTH [.".�...,_P ,. ��aYFa # e ��c° r DAKOTA ST Property owner information �� r t td is valid for 3 months from ���� � �I 4,1.'1 , I -a, ,a,., t I II the date printed on this map. q ,.tl b I ,,,_• . It P F K � r I k.K` `1 I '2 I, ;--III 11111" FliF`'7:3!:7;',' l f �w , #.. ,'4 1, - r 1i I t 1 O,i^ I I ,o iftr, t I i _ ¢ W ty s I +i F a k A N 4ir.r.fi i t .�� „g. �Y, a —..- 4-r GRF� '' , pr -, , .. ,, ..,,, },...r 0 700 200 300 400 Feel ; 5 � � k t H, ° .s I a - T ', ,.,.,,,,,:r.,r q t,I , +^=30e feel — r'a T� r 'Y��� ri�p ��� f t rt t Fy I I ,l / �' ' ` + Nf yam r '!,I "^E"� {i Q CT- r LEWIS �. ,,I.—� _ ! �� �'� �'':: ` rt �. City of Tigard _ — �� ��'���I - — �t,�,,s n 71 ..�f, t�' In fameDan on this RxaP Is lar general ion only end _L r.,� : +„ oq.. ?'d:'l should he verified wtih me Oevelogned Ser ion O Division - . SW PIHA3 CT --_ 13 ard.O rl97223 l PIHAS ST _ :,c� Tpam.oR D7223 1 I I l I �...� I G 003163- V \ _ I ___ _ LN l l— M+P.,/ww+N.n.Dg Community Devel., .rent Plot date:Jul 27,2004;C:\may AGICO3.APR 1 1S135CA-03700 1S135CA-01900 AASVE SANDRA J AND DAVID J CARROLL SONDRA 11309 SW 95TH AVE 11330 SW 97TH CT TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-09000 15135CA-08500 ACOSTA ADILIA CASTILE JAMES&AUDREY 11455 SW ESAU PL 8100 SW DURHAM RD TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97224 1 S135CD-00100 1 35CA-0860 ALVARADO MARTA M TRUSTEE CAS MES&AUDREY 11525 SW 95TH AVE 810 RHAM RD TIGARD, OR 97223 P RTLAND, 97224 1S135DB-10100 1S135DB-06500 ANDERSON GARY ROBERT& CHRISTOPHER BASIL R AND SHARON LEE TRUST BELINDA L BY ANDERSON GARY ROBERT/SHARON LEE 9460 SW NORTH DAKOTA 11160 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135CA-03200 1S135DB-10000 ARENDES CARINE E& DAVIS BARBARA J ARENDES SHARON L 9405 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 9524 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97223 .0B-05400 1S135CA-02400 BALES MARY ELIZABETH& DAVIS MARGARET M TRUSTEE TERRY VERN 11470 SW GREENBURG RD 11390 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135DB-05700 15135CA-01702 BARNEY CHARLES R& CATHY L DAVIS PETERS&KAREN M BOROSKE 11450 SW 95TH AVE 4348 SW WASHOUGA AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97201 1S135CA-00307 135CA-0170 BEACON HILL PARTNERS LLC DA P ER S & KAREN M BOROSKE 7831 SE LAKE RD 4200 434 ASHOUGA AVE PORTLAND,OR 97267 RTLAND, R 97201 1S135CA-00301 1 135CA-0171. BUYS FRANCES E DA ER S &KAREN M BOROSKE 9645 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 434: W v • HOUGA AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 ••RTLAND,OR 97201 1S135CA-00100 1S135CA-01700 E M ALBERT G III DAVIS STEVE&BARBARA ■ ..,j SW 95TH AVE 11300 SW 97TH CT PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1„-c 1S135CD-03700 1S135DB-07000 DAW LAWRENCE D DYE WARD J&KAREN M DAISY L 213 HIDALGO 11505 SW 95TH AVE LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 T"^ARD, OR 97223 1S135DC-03000 1S135DB-05100 DEGROOD AL MNIRGINIA E EATON DICK B&LINDA L REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 9625 SW LEWIS LN BY AL MNIRGINIA E DEGROOD TRS TIGARD,OR 97223 22730 SW CHAPMAN RD SHERWOOD,OR 97140 1 S135DB-05602 15135CD-03601 DICKSON DONALD K&CAROL A EATON RICHARD B& LINDA L PO BOX 219028 • 9625 SW LEWIS LN PORTLAND, OR 97225 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CD-01702 1 S135D6-07300 DOBLIE JUDY K EMORY JESSE B& 11640 SW 98TH AVE LEIGH A TIGARD, OR 97223 11280 SW 94TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 1S135CD-01500 1S135CD-01600 DORSETT R CRAIG EMPKIE ROBERT L JR 11550 SW 98TH AVE 6315 SW 198TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 ALOHA,OR 97007 111-02900 151350B-06300 G_ .,ON JASON B/SUE D ENDICOTT MICHAEL R & 9570 SW LEWIS LANE MELISSA J TIGARD, OR 97223 11270 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CD-00202 ' 135CA-09 0 DRENNAN DAVID&JOAN ES E ATES OWNERS OF PO BOX 23603 LOTS TIGARD, OR 97281 1 S135CD-09000 15135DB-06600 DRENNAN DAVID A&JOAN ESTES ALICE L PO BOX 23603 9430 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD, OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 S135CD-09201 35CA-04 0 DR' A DAVID A&JOAN F G ELOPMENT INC PO Be • 603 T.' ARD, OR '7281 135CD-0910 1 S 135CA-00303 DP A AVID A&JOAN GILLINGHAM TERRY L AND 3 SHARON A Th.,rtD, OR 281 9605 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD,OR 97223 \(g • 1S135DB-05300 1S135DB-05200 HARDT FREDERICK W III AND JAKOVICH JOHN D&MA-<Y LOU GLORIA J 11450 SW 94TH 11420 SW 94TH TIGARD, OR 97223 TV'ARD, OR 97223 15135CD-00205 15135CA-03100 HASTING THOMAS D JAMES FRED C SHARON M 9545 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 9555 SW LEWIS LA TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 15135CD-03800 1 S135CA-02300 HASTING THOMAS D& SHARON M JANIS YOUTH PROGRAMS INC 9555 SW LEWIS LN 738 NE DAVIS TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97232 1S135DB-05601 1 35CA-023 HERNANDEZ ABRAHAM VERDE& JANI TH PROGRAMS INC HERNANDEZ OSCAR VERDE 738 D S 11385 SW 94TH AVE RTLAND,0 97332 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135CA-03400 1S135CA-01800 HERNANDEZ JOSE R& JAUCH ROGER P JURADO MARIA S & JAUCH BRENT H HERNANDEZ-J MAURILIO 10648 SW 41ST AVENUE 11253 SW 95TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97219 TIGARD, OR 97223 :A-01901 1S135CD-03500 HERNANDEZ SUANNY& JOY DANIEL J HERNANDEZ NOHEMY& 9655 SW LEWIS LN LORENZO-CARMONA LUIS TIGARD, OR 97223 9640 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135DB-06100 1S135CA-08700 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF JUNGKIND WERNER TRUST WASHINGTON COUNTY c/o JUNGKIND ROSE M&DEBORAH M 111 NE LINCOLN ST#200-L 10820 SW SUMMER LAKE DR HILLSBORO,OR 97124 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 ]35DB-06200 1S135CA-08900 HO• ING AUT RITY OF KHAN MUSTAFA K& WAS • G % COUNTY LOVELY REHANA S 111 N • OLN ST#200-L 11435 SW ESAU PL SBORO, •- 97124 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135CA-03000 1S135DB-07100 HOWLAND JOHN P KING DOUGLAS A 9568 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 11320 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 S135DC-03001 1S135CD-03400 HI'"NG JIA-HWAY KNEELAND JAMES H&DEBORAH L 1 ;E TALTON AVE 9690 SW LEWIS LN VANCOUVER,WA 98683 TIGARD, OR 97223 15135CA-01902 1 S135CD-00300 KOCIEMBA DIANE E LEWIS GARY M TRUE E PO BOX 231021 3975 SW 97TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97225 1 S135DB-05504 1S135DB-06400 KREISBERG LOUIS &ELIZABETH J LEWIS MARY R 11350 SW 95TH AVE 11250 SW 95TH TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 15135CD-03100 1S135CD-03600 KURTZ GAREY L LEWIS SEAN M&JANEL K 9600 SW LEWIS LN 9595 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135DB-06800 1S135CA-00305 LACY JON R AND JANELLE A MAGNUSON AARON T&TINA R 11265 SW 94TH 9635 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 15135CA-08300 1S135C0-00500 LAMET DANIEL G & MAHAR MARYLOU LAMET V&VERNA PO BOX 1064 11355 SW 97TH CT NEWBERG, OR 97132 TIGARD, OR 97223 0-00790 1S135CD-03000 L FAMILY TRUST MCDONALD RYAN&SHAY 11520 SW 98TH AVE 9580 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 161350B-05901 1S135CA-02303 LANG GIANG KIEU & MICKEL TOM 0&JUDITH A LANG LE& 10261 SW STUART CT TRAN HOI TIGARD, OR 97224 11475 SW 94TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135CA-04300 1S135CA-03500 LEE PAUL TRUSTEE MIJATOVIC RELJA&DUSANKA 2206 NE 45TH 11275 SW 95TH AVE PORTLAND, OR 97213 TIGARD, OR 97223 15135CD-00201 1S135CA-03600 LEWIS DAVID E &MARSHA E MORADO SEBASTIAN& FAMILY TRUST LUZ MARIA 9575 SW LEWIS LN 11289 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135CD-00200 19135CA-04100 LEWIS DAVID E &MARSHA E TRS NGUYEN HUNG Q 3. N LEWIS LN 11355 SW 95TH AVE PL .AND,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1 S135CA-00104 1S135CD-00600 OLSON RALPH E &CAROLE A REED KATHLEEN M 16640 SW 147TH 11435 SW GREENBURG RD TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S1351)13-05B00 1S135DB-07200 ORMAND SASHA A HULL& RUSSELL BRENT A/SHANNON R ORMAND DOUGLAS M 11300 SW 94TH AVE 11445 SW 94TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1 S 135C D-03300 1 S 135 C D-08800 ORR KAREN&LYNART SATTERLUND SCOTT C&CYNTHIA K 9660 SW LEWIS LN PO BOX 230269 TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97281 1S135CD-06900 1S135CA-02100 PARKER MICHAEL SCHARBROUGH KARLA KIM 16594 SW TIMBERLAND DR 11375 SW 95TH ALOHA,OR 97007 TIGARD, OR 97223 1 S 135CA-02301 1S135DB-05510 PETERSON GEORGIA V SCOFIELD DOUGLAS J&EVELYN J 11487 SW 95TH AVE 11340 SW 94TH TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 CA-02304 1S135CA-04000 P,.,UN-UZCATEGUI MARIA JULIANA SKAGERBERG BRET F 11500 SW GREENBURG RD 11345 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CD-00101 1S135CA-08400 PRICE ELWIN C& JENNIFER D SLIMICK DANIEL& MARY 11555 SW 95TH AVE 11345 SW 97TH CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135DB-06700 1S135CA-03800 PRICE JURREL L&SHERRY M SPADY PATRICIA J 11245 SW 94TH AVE 11321 SW 95TH AVE PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135C D-02800 1 S 135 D B-06000 RAMIREZ JENNIFER& STEVENSON BRYAN P& ACOSTA TERESA& SUMMER L CHAVEZ ALFREDO G 654 WILSHIRE CT 9550 SW LEWIS LN NEWBERG,OR 97132 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S135CA-03900 1S135CD-03200 Ro°■ USSEN JAMES STEWARD SAMUEL A& LINDA K SW 95TH AVE 9630 SW LEWIS LN TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1 S135CA-013D0 1S135CA-03300 TABB JAMES R WHITE HEIDI A& 11400 SW GREENBURG RD KENNETH A TIGARD,OR 97223 11231 SW 95TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 1 S 135CA-02900 1S135DB-05900 TAYLOR GEORGENE WILLIAMS CHRIS T& DANIELLE L 9580 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 11550 SW GREENBURG RD PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 135DC-030 2 1S135DC-03100 TIG D TY OF WINTERS JOHN W 131 HALL 11590 SW 95TH T ARD, 0 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135CD-00700 1S135DC-03200 TORLAND DORIS WINTERS JOHN W 11425 SW GREENBURG RD 11590 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 1 S13513C-03300 1 S135DB-05600 TRAPP WARREN L HELEN W WINTHER STEPHEN&TERESA 11640 SW 95TH AVE 11400 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 B-07400 1S135CA-01400 RYAN R&TONYA G WONG NORMAN K F AND ANN M 11260 SW 94TH AVE 2433 NE 11TH TIGARD,OR 97224 PORTLAND, OR 97212 1S135CD-01701 1 135CA-01402 VEZEY CHERYL ANN WO N AN K F AND ANN M PO BOX 230299 2433 TH TIGARD,OR 97281 RTLAND, 97212 1S135CA-08800 1S1350B-06900 VILLALOBOS ZOILA& WOODY DAVID C JR AND VILLALOBOS BERNARDO 0& CAROLYN N VOLLALOBOS DANY SAMUEL PO BOX 230046 11415 SW ESAU PL TIGARD, OR 97281 TIGARD,-OR 97223 1 S 135CA-02200 VILLARREAL VICTORIA L 11405 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 1S135CA-01401 WP°HINGTON COUNTY 1 TERESA WILSON PROP MGR 16a FIRST AVE MS-42 HILLSBORO,OR 97124 Nathan and Ann Murdock PO Box 231265 mard, OR 97281 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Crag head 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 David Chapman 9840 SW Landau Place Tigard, OR 97223 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST CIT SUBCOMMITTEE (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 23-Feb-04 '`- -al p ha COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE CERTIFICATION Date: September 1, 2005 TIGARD, OREGON Engineering Division 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Proposed Solera Subdivision—Preliminary Sight Distance Certificate The access for this proposal is located at the site's west property line, onto SW Greenburg Road. The speed limit along SW Greenburg Road is 35 M.P.H.,based upon the posted speed limit,requiring 350 feet of sight distance in both directions. As required by code, sight distance from the proposed access was measured to be in excess of 350 feet to the west and east of the proposed. These Code Sections respectively require that measurements be based on an eye height of 3.5 feet and an object height of 4.25 feet above the road; and be assumed to be 10 feet from the near edge of pavement to the front of a stopped vehicle. (Actual measurement is taken 15 feet from pavement edge). In conclusion, I hereby certify that the preliminary intersection sight distance at the proposed access for Solera Subdivision conforms to the requirements for sight distance as set in the Tigard Development Code. Alpha Community Development QED PROFFf ° 4.4,4 16,723 r OREGON ", ' >, Y 20, �� 55�� Renews 6-30-06 Plaza West,Suite 230,9600 SW Oak,Portland,Oregon 97223 [T] 503-452-8003 [F] 503-452-8043 Walter H.Knapp Silviculture& Urban Forestry September 30, 2004 ARBORIST REPORT—GREENBURG HEIGHTS The proposed Greenburg Heights development in Tigard is basically an open site,with scattered landscape trees, none of which are larger than 12 inches in diameter. Trees growing on adjacent properties east and west of the site have canopies that extend across the boundary. The area beneath the canopy (the dripline area) is considered the default protection area for adjacent trees. The preliminary location of adjacent tree driplines is shown on the existing conditions plan. Much of this protection area falls within planned setbacks. Specific delineation of the protection area will be determined by: • Survey of trunk location of trees on adjacent property. • Identification of property boundaries. • Measurement of crown dimensions (dripline). • On-site investigation of root zone and root characteristics where needed. The size and location of the protection areas will need to be considered in grading and utility plans, as well as in determining location and design of building footprints. Protection fencing location and type will be determined by the project arborist and incorporated into a tree protection plan. s „ �„�. Walter H. Knapp Certed Forester, SAF 406 Certed Arborist,ISA PN-0497 761.5 SW Dunsmuir Lane,Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone:(503)646-4349 Fax:(503)265-8117 Walter H.Knapp Silviculture& Urban Forestry Arborist Report—Greenburg Heights October 25, 2005 Several small trees, all less than 12-inches in diameter, are growing on the Greenburg Heights site. None of these trees is planned for retention. The adjacent site to the west has numerous mature trees growing close to the common boundary(table 1). The existing conditions plan shows the location of these trees, as well as their crown dimensions (dripline). An access road is proposed for the west boundary of Greenburg Heights, well within the root zones of the trees on the adjacent site. Many of these trees could be adversely impacted by construction of the proposed road. Table 1. Tree Inventory: Adjacent property/west boundary' Species Estimated Dist.to Comments DBH Tree ponderosa pine 44 5 Good condition redwood 12,40 6 Good condition bigleaf maple 12 5 Poor construction tolerance deodar cedar 48 15 Exceptional tree. port Orford cedar 10 4 Susceptible to root disease port Orford cedar 16 4 Susceptible to root disease port Orford cedar 18 4 Susceptible to root disease port Orford cedar 24 4 Susceptible to root disease birch 12 4 Poor construction tolerance - port Orford cedar 12 4 Susceptible to root disease port Orford cedar 18 4 Susceptible to root disease;basal decay port Orford cedar 18 4 Susceptible to root disease birch 16 0 Poor construction tolerance port Orford cedar 24 1 Susceptible to root disease If the road cannot be relocated outside the root zones of the adjacent trees, the following procedures are suggested: 1. Move the road as far as possible from the trees. 2. Make the road as narrow as possible. I Trees are listed from south to north,proceeding from Greenburg Road.Note that I did not enter the adjacent property to the west. Distance to the tree was estimated from the boundary or measured with an optical rangefinder. Tree diameters were based on visual estimates. 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane,Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone: (503)646-4349 Fax: (503)265-8117 Page 2 oft 0459 Greenbu.s deights ARB.doc 10/25/2005 Walter H.Knapp 3. Build up the road from existing grade, removing only the litter layer.2 Use the construction profile shown in figure 1. The objective of this approach is to maintain a favorable root environment in the soil beneath the road. 4. If any deep excavation is required within the root zones, use an Air Spade to locate and prune roots prior to construction. 5. If construction is done within the root zones, obtain permission to raise the tree crowns for clearance, in order to avoid excessive damage. Pruning should be done by an established tree service under the supervision of a Certified Arborist. Fi.ure 1. Schematic drawin:, road rofile. surfacing clean crushed rock 2"+ no fines . - . M111;11-resm.14 a Ir4=1:1 - . . . •L fateC native soil -remove litter la er• no excavation within root area Conclusions and Recommendations. The proposed procedures are based on experience and recommendations from arboricultural practice and research. Response of the trees to these treatments and approaches is unknown. In my opinion, most of the trees have a good chance of initial survival,but some may decline in health and vigor in the long term. In particular,the Port Orford cedars are highly vulnerable to root disease during construction as a result of soil-borne fungal spores, and the maple and birch trees have low construction tolerance. In addition, the close proximity of the road will remain a concern for the health of the trees. %�P �eip Walter H. Knapp Certified Forester, SAF 406 Certified Arborist, ISA PN-0497 2 The"build-up"approach was used with apparent success at the Moore's Meadow and Bretton Woods sites in Tigard. 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane,Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone: (503) 646-4349 Fax:(503)265-8117 _____., . _ �ctha ,:...., , ,,,,,:..,COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO: Kim McMillan, Department of Engineering City of Tigard \S�cc%NO PROFF$. FROM: Jeff Vanderdasson, P.E. / 16,723 i -7: PROJECT: Solera OREGON DATE: November 30, 2005 .2, 'z)- 20, Nc3 c,°� 4 V A N D t 0 ' Project Overview Renews 6/30/06 The proposed Solera Subdivision is located on SW Greenburg Rd between SW 95th Ave. and SW 97th at. The stormwater runoff will be collected in an underground drainage system and will be treated and discharged into the existing storm system located in SW Greenburg Rd. The subject property consists of 1.07 Acers with existing R-12 zoning Water Quality Design Water quality treatment will be provided with a Stormwater Management Filter system. The water quality facility was designed to treat the entire flow delivered to it during a design storm of 0.36" of rainfall within a 4-hour period. The resulting flow is 0.06 cfs during this event. Two filter cartridges will be required in order to meet treatment requirements but three Storm water 360 catch basin filters will be utilized in order to treat all runoff produced by the new impervious areas. Underground Piped Detention Facility Storm water detention is required on the project as it is in the Fanno creek watershed. We developed two hydrographs for the project: one for pre-development conditions and one for the post-development conditions for the entire site based upon a 2, 10 and 25-year, 24-hour return storm as required in Appendix A Section 1.2-C of the Clean water services Manual. The post-development 2, 10 and 25-year hydrographs were routed through the piped detention facilities using a Hydraflow Hydrograph, a Stormwater management program. Detention storage was accomplished using a 42" pipe and a control manhole with a combination of orifices to achieve the pre-developed release rates. Upstream of this system a sumped manhole will be used to remove sediment prior to the detention pipe. Using the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph with a 24-hour duration, the following is a summary of pre- and post developed run off rates. PRE-DEVEL. DETEN. BYPASS POST-DEVEL. EVENT RUN-OFF 3CHARGE RUN-OFF 2-Year 0.31 cfs 0.20cfs 0.13cfs 0.30 cfs* 10-Year 0.53 cfs 0.37cfs 0.18cfs 0.50 cfs* 25-Year 0.63 cfs 0.46cfs 0.21 cfs 0.59 cfs* * Due to the "lag" effect of the detention system the total post development runoff is not a direct relation of the sum of the two peak flows. The control structure for the underground piping system will consist of a 48" precast, catch basin with detention orifices installed in a orifice plate. The top of the cross assembly riser will provide an overflow for events larger than the 25-year event. See CleanWater Services Std. Detail no. 544. Storm Drainage Conveyance Sizing As required, our system will be designed to convey a 25-year return frequency 24-hour event using the Rational Method. Proposed pipe material will be PVC. An 'n' value of 0.011 will be used as a basis for pipe sizing. The flow computations can be found in the appendices. Stormwater runoff will be collected, detained, treated, and discharged to the existing system South of the site in Greenburg Road. The existing system is a 12 " line @ 1.36% with a capacity of, 4.92cfs. The release rate from the detention system matches the existing site runoff. Thus making downstream conveyance computations unnecessary. • Water Quality computations IMPEC.Ulott3 AP-6A % Haus 6-5 _ /3i3Z0 DC v cc s 2,4 Zo PAW NC2 - 1,340 WALK 2,° ° W4v 0.3b ' rnnPCLwous pe.ePt i2 0.36 X 24 SD It 014.5- cc tut F al4•4114400 o.ob cPs 5'to Q,►M F I Ling GA e.'re,of E5 iv = w >< (44 0 0.°6 )t C 444/1S) 1 0 # Z c. 1' -4O4 - 4474 PROJECT: Sot-cgA -alpha CLIENT: JOB#: 329.031 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DESIGNER: gPiT DATE: /l - 30 • oS PAGED: Plaza West, Suite 230 9600 SW Oak Portland, Oregon 97223 T 503.452.8003 F 503.452.8043 www.alphacommunity.com Table of Contents Storm design.gpw Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday, Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM 2 - Year Summary Report 1 Hydrograph Reports 2 Hydrograph No. 1, SBUH Runoff, Pre design 2 TR-55 Tc Worksheet 3 Hydrograph No. 2, SBUH Runoff, Post design 4 TR-55 Tc Worksheet 5 Hydrograph No. 3, Reservoir, Pipe Detention 6 Pond Report 7 Hydrograph No. 4, SBUH Runoff, Bypass 8 TR-55 Tc Worksheet 9 Hydrograph No. 5, Combine, Total 10 10 - Year Summary Report 11 Hydrograph Reports 12 Hydrograph No. 1, SBUH Runoff, Pre design 12 TR-55 Tc Worksheet 13 Hydrograph No. 2, SBUH Runoff, Post design 14 TR-55 Tc Worksheet 15 Hydrograph No. 3, Reservoir, Pipe Detention 16 Pond Report 17 Hydrograph No. 4, SBUH Runoff, Bypass 18 TR-55 Tc Worksheet 19 Hydrograph No. 5, Combine, Total 20 25 - Year Summary Report 21 Hydrograph Reports 22 Hydrograph No. 1, SBUH Runoff, Pre design 22 TR-55 Tc Worksheet 23 Hydrograph No. 2, SBUH Runoff, Post design 24 TR-55 Tc Worksheet 25 Hydrograph No. 3, Reservoir, Pipe Detention 26 Pond Report 27 Hydrograph No. 4, SBUH Runoff, Bypass 28 TR-55 Tc Worksheet 29 Hydrograph No. 5, Combine, Total 30 100 - Year Summary Report 31 Hydrograph Reports 32 Hydrograph No. 1, SBUH Runoff, Pre design 32 TR-55 Tc Worksheet 33 Hydrograph No. 2, SBUH Runoff, Post design 34 TR-55 Tc Worksheet 35 Hydrograph No. 3, Reservoir, Pipe Detention 36 Pond Report 37 Contents Storm design.gpw Hydrograph No. 4, SBUH Runoff, Bypass 38 TR-55 Tc Worksheet 39 Hydrograph No. 5, Combine, Total 40 IIII 1 Hydrograph Summary ..eport Hvd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Volume Inflow Maximum Maximum Hydrograph type flow interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft) (ft) (cuft) 1 SBUH Runoff 0.31 6 480 5,366 — ---- — Pre design 2 SBUH Runoff 0.36 6 480 5,361 --- ----- Post design 3 Reservoir 0.20 6 504 5,361 2 210.37 399 Pipe Detention 4 SBUH Runoff 0.13 6 474 1,796 — Bypass 5 Combine 0.30 6 480 7,157 3,4 --- Total Storm design.gpw Return Period: 2 Year Wednesday, Nov 30 2005, 2:06 PM Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve 2 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 1 Pre design Hydrograph type = SBUH Runoff Peak discharge = 0.31 cfs Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time interval = 6 min Drainage area = 1.07 ac Curve number = 88 Basin Slope = 0.5 °Ao Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 13.8 min Total precip. = 2.50 in Distribution = Type IA Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume=5,366 cult Pre design Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 1 —2 Yr Q (cfs) 0.50 0.50 0.45 0.45 0.40 0.40 0.35 0.35 0.30 0.30 0.25 0.25 0.20 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.05 ilm. 0.05 0.00 Ell IIIIL - 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Hyd No. 1 Time (hrs) • 3 TR55 Tc WorksheE. Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 1 Pre design Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.150 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 102.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 2.40 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 1.50 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 12.90 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 12.90 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 27.00 133.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 1.85 3.80 0.00 Surface description = Paved Unpaved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 2.76 3.15 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 0.16 + 0.70 + 0.00 = 0.87 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 0.00 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.00 Total Travel Time, Tc 13.80 min 4 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 2 Post design Hydrograph type = SBUH Runoff Peak discharge = 0.36 cfs Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time interval = 6 min Drainage area = 0.83 ac Curve number = 93 Basin Slope = 0.5 % Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 10 min Total precip. = 2.50 in Distribution = Type IA Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume=5,361 cult Post design Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 2—2 Yr Q (cfs) 0.50 0.50 0.45 0.45 0.40 0.40 0.35 0.35 0.30 0.30 0.25 0.25 0.20 — 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.10 • 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.00 - 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Hyd No. 2 Time (hrs) • 5 TR55 Tc Workshee Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 2 Post design Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.150 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 75.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 2.40 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 2.67 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 8.01 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 8.01 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 74.00 65.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 1.00 5.40 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 1 .61 4.72 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 0.76 + 0.23 + 0.00 = 0.99 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.79 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 3.14 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.50 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.79 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 175.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 1.05 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 1.05 Total Travel Time, Tc 10.00 min 6 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday, Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 3 Pipe Detention Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 0.20 cfs Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time interval = 6 min Inflow hyd. No. = 2 Max. Elevation = 210.37 ft Reservoir name = New Pond 1 Max. Storage = 399 cult Storage Indication method used. Hydrograph Volume=5,361 cuft Pipe Detention Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 3--2 Yr Q.(cfs) 0.50 0.50 0.45 - 0.45 0.40 0.40 0.35 0.35 0.30 - 0.30 0.25 - 0.25 0.20 - - -- 0.20 0.15 - 0.15 0.10 - 0.10 0.05 —'`'"-° 0.05 0.00 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Time(hrs) • Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 Pond Report 7 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday, Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Pond No. 1 - New Pond1 Pond Data Pipe dia. = 3.50 ft Pipe length = 90.0 ft No. Barrels = 1.0 Slope = 0.50 % Invert elev. = 208.50 ft Stage/ Storage Table Stage(ft) Elevation(ft) Contour area(sqft) Incr.Storage(cuft) Total storage(cuft) 0.00 208.50 00 0 0 0.20 208.70 00 3 3 0.40 208.90 00 16 19 0.59 209.09 00 31 50 0.79 209.29 00 42 92 0.99 209.49 00 48 140 1 19 209.69 00 53 194 1.38 209.88 00 57 251 1.58 210.08 00 60 310 1.78 210.28 00 61 371 1.98 210.48 00 62 433 2.17 210.67 00 62 495 2.37 210.87 00 61 556 2.57 211.07 00 59 616 2.77 211.27 00 57 673 2.96 211.46 00 53 726 3.16 211.66 00 48 774 3.36 211.86 00 42 816 3.56 212.06 00 31 847 3.75 212.25 00 16 863 3.95 212.45 00 3 866 Culvert/ Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D] Rise(in) = 2.40 2.50 0.00 0.00 Crest Len(ft) = 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Span(in) = 2.40 2.50 0.00 0.00 Crest El.(ft) = 211.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 No.Barrels = 1 1 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 Invert El.(ft) = 208.50 210.50 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect --- --- --- Length(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No Slope(%) = 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 N-Value = .013 .013 .013 .000 Orif.Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exfiltration= 0.000 in/hr(Wet area) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft Note:Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control. Stage(ft) Stage/ Discharge Stage(ft) 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 - 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 - 0.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Total O Discharge(cfs) Hydrograph Plot 8 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 4 Bypass Hydrograph type = SBUH Runoff Peak discharge = 0.13 cfs Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time interval = 6 min Drainage area = 0.24 ac Curve number = 96 Basin Slope = 0.0 % Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 4.8 min Total precip. = 2.50 in Distribution = Type IA Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume=1,796 cult Bypass Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 4--2 Yr Q (cfs) 0.50 0.50 0.45 0.45 0.40 0.40 0.35 0.35 0.30 0.30 0.25 0.25 0.20 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.00 - 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Hyd No. 4 Time (hrs) • 9 TR55 Tc Workshei Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 4 Bypass Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.150 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 40.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 2.40 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 4.00 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 4.12 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 4.12 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 75.00 22.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 6.70 4.50 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 4.18 4.31 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 0.30 + 0.09 + 0.00 = 0.38 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.79 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 3.14 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.50 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.79 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 48.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 0.29 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.29 Total Travel Time, Tc 4.80 min Hydrograph Plot 10 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 5 Total Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 0.30 cfs Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time interval = 6 min Inflow hyds. = 3, 4 Hydrograph Volume=7,157 cuft Total Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 5--2 Yr Q (cfs) 0.50 0.50 0.45 0.45 0.40 0.40 0.35 0.35 0.30 0.30 0.25 - 0.25 0.20 - 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.10 _ 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Time(hrs) 410 Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4 11 Hydrograph Summary r<eport '' • Hydrograph Peak Time I Time to Volume Inflow Maximum Maximum Hydrograph type flow interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft) (ft) (cuft) 1 SBUH Runoff 0.53 6 480 8,635 ---- Pre design 2 SBUH Runoff 0.55 6 480 8,094 --- ---- ---- Post design 3 Reservoir 0.37 6 498 8,094 2 211.18 649 Pipe Detention 4 SBUH Runoff 0.18 6 474 2,610 --- --- Bypass 5 Combine 0.50 6 486 10,704 3,4 ----- Total Storm design.gpw Return Period: 10 Year Wednesday, Nov 30 2005, 2:06 PM Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve 12 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday, Nov 30 2005, 2:6 PM Hyd. No. 1 Pre design Hydrograph type = SBUH Runoff Peak discharge = 0.53 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time interval = 6 min Drainage area = 1.07 ac Curve number = 88 Basin Slope = 0.5 % Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 13.8 min Total precip. = 3.45 in Distribution = Type IA Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume=8,635 cuft Pre design Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 1 -- 10 Yr Q (cfs) 1.00 I 1.00 0.90 - 0.90 0.80 - - 0.80 0.70 0.70 0.60 0.60 0.50 -- 0.50 0.40 - 0.40 0.30 -- 0.30 0.20 --- --- 0.20 0.10 - 0.10 0.00 = 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Hyd No. 1 Time (hrs) • 13 TR55 Tc WorksheL Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 1 Pre design Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.150 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 102.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 2.40 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 1.50 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 12.90 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 12.90 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 27.00 133.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 1.85 3.80 0.00 Surface description = Paved Unpaved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 2.76 3.15 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 0.16 + 0.70 + 0.00 = 0.87 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 0.00 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.00 Total Travel Time, Tc 13.80 min Hydrograph Plot 14 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday, Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 2 Post design Hydrograph type = SBUH Runoff Peak discharge = 0.55 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time interval = 6 min Drainage area = 0.83 ac Curve number = 93 Basin Slope = 0.5 % Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 10 min Total precip. = 3.45 in Distribution = Type IA Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume=8,094 cult Post design Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 2— 10 Yr Q (cfs) 1.00 - 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.80 0.80 0.70 0.70 0.60 0.60 0.50 A - 0.50 0.40 — 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.10 _ 0.10 0.00 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Hyd No. 2 Time(hrs) • 15 TR55 Tc Workshee Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intel's°lve Hyd. No. 2 Post design Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.150 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 75.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 2.40 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 2.67 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 8.01 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 8.01 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 74.00 65.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 1.00 5.40 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 1.61 4.72 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 0.76 + 0.23 + 0.00 = 0.99 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.79 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 3.14 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.50 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.79 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 175.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 1.05 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 1.05 Total Travel Time, Tc 10.00 min 16 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 3 Pipe Detention Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 0.37 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time interval = 6 min Inflow hyd. No. = 2 Max. Elevation = 211.18 ft Reservoir name = New Pond1 Max. Storage = 649 cuft Storage Indication method used. Hydrograph Volume=8,094 cult Pipe Detention Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 3— 10 Yr Q (cfs) 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.80 0.80 0.70 0.70 0.60 0.60 0.50 t 0.50 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Time(hrs) • Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 Pond Report 17 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday, Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Pond No. 1 - New Pond1 Pond Data Pipe dia. = 3.50 ft Pipe length = 90.0 ft No. Barrels = 1.0 Slope = 0.50% Invert elev. = 208.50 ft Stage/Storage Table Stage(ft) Elevation(ft) Contour area(sqft) Incr.Storage(cuft) Total storage(cuft) 0.00 208.50 00 0 0 0.20 208.70 00 3 3 0.40 208.90 00 16 19 0.59 209.09 00 31 50 0.79 209.29 00 42 92 0.99 209.49 00 48 140 1.19 209.69 00 53 194 1.38 209.88 00 57 251 1.58 210.08 00 60 310 1.78 210.28 00 61 371 1.98 210.48 00 62 433 2.17 210.67 00 62 495 2.37 210.87 00 61 556 2.57 211.07 00 59 616 2.77 211.27 00 57 673 2.96 211.46 00 53 726 3.16 211.66 00 48 774 3.36 211.86 00 42 816 3.56 212.06 00 31 847 3.75 212.25 00 16 863 3.95 212.45 00 3 866 Culvert/Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D] Rise(in) = 2.40 2.50 0.00 0.00 Crest Len(ft) = 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Span(in) = 2.40 2.50 0.00 0.00 Crest El.(ft) = 211.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 No.Barrels = 1 1 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 Invert El.(ft) = 208.50 210.50 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect - - - Length(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No Slope(%) = 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 N-Value = .013 .013 .013 .000 Orif.Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exfiltration= 0.000 in/hr(Wet area) Tailwater Elev.= 0.00 ft Note:Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control. Stage(ft) Stage/Discharge Stage(ft) 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Total Q Discharge(cfs) 18 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 4 Bypass Hydrograph type = SBUH Runoff Peak discharge = 0.18 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time interval = 6 min Drainage area = 0.24 ac Curve number = 96 Basin Slope = 0.0 % Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 4.8 min Total precip. = 3.45 in Distribution = Type IA Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume=2,610 cult Bypass Q (c ) Hyd. No. 4-- 10 Yr Q (cfs) 0.50 0.50 0.45 - 0.45 0.40 0.40 0.35 0.35 0.30 0.30 0.25 0.25 0.20 — -- -- 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.00 --- 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Hyd No. 4 Time (hrs) • 19 TR55 Tc Workshee Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 4 Bypass Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.150 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 40.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 2.40 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 4.00 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 4.12 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 4.12 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 75.00 22.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 6.70 4.50 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ftls) = 4.18 4.31 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 0.30 + 0.09 + 0.00 = 0.38 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.79 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 3.14 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.50 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.79 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 48.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 0.29 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.29 Total Travel Time, Tc 4.80 min Hydrograph Plot 20 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday, Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 5 Total Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 0.50 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time interval = 6 min Inflow hyds. = 3, 4 Hydrograph Volume=10,704 cult Total Q (cfs) Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 5-- 10 Yr 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.80 0.80 0.70 0.70 0.60 0.60 0.50 0.50 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.20 — 0.20 0.10 - 0.10 0.00 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Time(hrs) • Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4 21 Hydrograph Summary .<eport — 1 1 Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Volume Inflow Maximum Maximum Hydrograph type flow interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft) (ft) (cuft) 1 SBUH Runoff 0.63 6 480 10,239 --- ----- Pre design 2 SBUH Runoff 0.63 6 480 9,408 ---- -- Post design 3 Reservoir 0.46 6 492 9,408 2 211.60 760 Pipe Detention 4 SBUH Runoff 0.21 6 474 2,998 ---- -- Bypass 5 Combine 0.59 6 492 12,406 3,4 ----- Total Storm design.gpw Return Period: 25 Year Wednesday, Nov 30 2005, 2:06 PM Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve 22 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 1 Pre design Hydrograph type = SBUH Runoff Peak discharge = 0.63 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time interval = 6 min Drainage area = 1.07 ac Curve number = 88 Basin Slope = 0.5 % Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 13.8 min Total precip. = 3.90 in Distribution = Type IA Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume=10,239 cult Pre design Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 1 —25 Yr Q (cfs) 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.80 - ---- - 0.80 0.70 0.70 0.60 0.60 • 0.50 0.50 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Time(hrs) • Hyd No. 1 23 TR55 Tc WorksheE Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 1 Pre design Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.150 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 102.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 2.40 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 1.50 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 12.90 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 12.90 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 27.00 133.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 1.85 3.80 0.00 Surface description = Paved Unpaved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 2.76 3.15 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 0.16 + 0.70 + 0.00 = 0.87 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 0.00 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.00 Total Travel Time, Tc 13.80 min Hydrograph Plot 24 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 2 Post design Hydrograph type = SBUH Runoff Peak discharge = 0.63 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time interval = 6 min Drainage area = 0.83 ac Curve number = 93 Basin Slope = 0.5 % Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 10 min Total precip. = 3.90 in Distribution = Type IA Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume=9,408 cult Post design Q (cfs) Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 2-25 Yr 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.80 - - 0.80 0.70 0.70 0.60 0.60 0.50 0.50 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.10 - 0.10 0.00 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Hyd No. 2 Time (hrs) 25 TR55 Tc WorksheL Hydraflow Hydrographs by I ntelisolve Hyd. No. 2 Post design Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.150 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 75.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 2.40 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 2.67 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 8.01 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 8.01 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 74.00 65.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 1.00 5.40 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 1.61 4.72 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 0.76 + 0.23 + 0.00 = 0.99 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.79 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 3.14 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.50 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.79 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 175.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 1.05 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 1.05 Total Travel Time, Tc 10.00 min 26 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday, Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 3 Pipe Detention Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 0.46 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time interval = 6 min Inflow hyd. No. = 2 Max. Elevation = 211.60 ft Reservoir name = New Pond 1 Max. Storage = 760 cuft Storage Indication method used. Hydrograph Volume=9,408 cuft Pipe Detention Q (cfs) Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 3--25 Yr 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.80 0.80 0.70 0.70 0.60 0.60 0.50 0.50 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.10 = 0.10 0.00 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Time(hrs) Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 Pond Report 27 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday, Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Pond No. 1 - New Pond1 Pond Data Pipe dia. = 3.50 ft Pipe length = 90.0 ft No. Barrels = 1.0 Slope = 0.50 % Invert elev. = 208.50 ft Stage/ Storage Table Stage(ft) Elevation(ft) Contour area(sqft) Incr.Storage(cuft) Total storage(cuft) 0.00 208.50 00 0 0 0.20 208.70 00 3 3 0.40 208.90 00 16 19 0.59 209.09 00 31 50 0.79 209.29 00 42 92 0.99 209 49 00 48 140 1.19 209.69 00 53 194 1.38 209.88 00 57 251 1.58 210.08 00 60 310 1.78 210.28 00 61 371 1.98 210.48 00 62 433 2.17 210.67 00 62 495 2.37 210.87 00 61 556 2.57 211.07 00 59 616 2.77 211.27 00 57 673 2.96 211.46 00 53 726 3.16 211.66 00 48 774 3.36 211.86 00 42 816 3.56 212.06 00 31 847 3.75 212.25 00 16 863 3.95 212.45 00 3 866 Culvert/Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D] Rise(in) = 2.40 2.50 0.00 0.00 Crest Len(ft) = 1.00 0-00 0.00 0.00 Span(in) = 2.40 2.50 0.00 0.00 Crest El.(ft) = 211.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. Barrels = 1 1 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 Invert El.(ft) = 208.50 210.50 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect --- --- --- Length(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No Slope(%) = 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 N-Value = .013 .013 .013 .000 Orif.Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exfiltration= 0.000 in/hr(Wet area) Tailwater Elev.= 0.00 ft Note Culvert/Orifice outdoes have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control. Stage(ft) Stage/ Discharge Stage(ft) 4.00 4.00 3.00 - - 3.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 • 0.00' 1 0.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Total 0 Discharge(cfs) 28 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 4 Bypass Hydrograph type = SBUH Runoff Peak discharge = 0.21 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time interval = 6 min Drainage area = 0.24 ac Curve number = 96 Basin Slope = 0.0 % Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 4.8 min Total precip. = 3.90 in Distribution = Type IA Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume=2,998 cult Bypass Q (cfs) Hyd. No.4—25 Yr Q (cfs) 0.50 0.50 0.45 0.45 0.40 0.40 0.35 0.35 0.30 - 0.30 0.25 0.25 0.20 0.20 0.15 --.— - - 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.05 - 0.05 0.00 --- 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Hyd No. 4 Time (hrs) • 29 TR55 Tc Workshe, Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 4 Bypass Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.150 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 40.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 2.40 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 4.00 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 4.12 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 4.12 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 75.00 22.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 6.70 4.50 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 4.18 4.31 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 0.30 + 0.09 + 0.00 = 0.38 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.79 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 3.14 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.50 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.79 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 48.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 0.29 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.29 Total Travel Time, Tc 4.80 min 30 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 5 Total Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 0.59 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time interval = 6 min Inflow hyds. = 3, 4 Hydrograph Volume= 12,406 cult Total Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 5--25 Yr Q (cfs) 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.80 0.80 0.70 0.70 0.60 -- 0.60 0.50 0.50 0.40 0.40 ::: J 0.30 1 , - 0.20 Ai 0.10 � .....�` 0.10 0.00 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Time (hrs) • Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4 31 Hydrograph Summary deport µ -' Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Volume Inflow Maximum Maximum Hydrograph type flow interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft) (ft) (cuft) 1 SBUH Runoff 0.78 6 480 12,414 ---- -- Pre design 2 SBUH Runoff 0.75 6 480 11,171 --- -- ---- Post design 3 Reservoir 0.77 6 486 11,171 2 211.77 797 Pipe Detention 4 SBUH Runoff 0.25 6 474 3,516 ---- — ---- Bypass 5 Combine 0.97 6 486 14,687 3,4 Total Storm design.gpw Return Period: 100 Year Wednesday, Nov 30 2005, 2:06 PM Hydraflow Hydrographs by Inte iso ve 32 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 1 Pre design Hydrograph type = SBUH Runoff Peak discharge = 0.78 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time interval = 6 min Drainage area = 1.07 ac Curve number = 88 Basin Slope = 0.5 % Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 13.8 min Total precip. = 4.50 in Distribution = Type IA Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume=12,414 cult Pre design Q (cfs) Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 1 -- 100 Yr 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.80 0.80 0.70 - - - 0.70 0.60 0.60 0.50 - 0.50 0.40 0.40 0.30 - 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.00 - 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Hyd No. 1 Time (hrs) • 33 TR55 Tc Workshet Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 1 Pre design Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.150 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 102.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 2.40 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 1.50 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 12.90 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 12.90 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 27.00 133.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 1.85 3.80 0.00 Surface description = Paved Unpaved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 2.76 3.15 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 0.16 + 0.70 + 0.00 = 0.87 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 0.00 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.00 Total Travel Time, Tc 13.80 min 34 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday, Nov 30 2005,2.6 PM Hyd. No. 2 Post design Hydrograph type = SBUH Runoff Peak discharge = 0.75 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time interval = 6 min Drainage area = 0.83 ac Curve number = 93 Basin Slope = 0.5 % Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 10 min Total precip. = 4.50 in Distribution = Type IA Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume=11,171 cuff Post design Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 2— 100 Yr Q (cfs) 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.80 0.80 0.70 - 0.70 0.60 0.60 0.50 0.50 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.00 - 4■A/j 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Hyd No. 2 Time(hrs) • 35 TR55 Tc WorksheL Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 2 Post design Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.150 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 75.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 2.40 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 2.67 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 8.01 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 8.01 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 74.00 65.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 1.00 5.40 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 1.61 4.72 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 0.76 + 0.23 + 0.00 = 0.99 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.79 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 3.14 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.50 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.79 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 175.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 1.05 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 1.05 Total Travel Time, Tc 10.00 min Hydrograph Plot 36 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 3 Pipe Detention Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 0.77 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time interval = 6 min Inflow hyd. No. = 2 Max. Elevation = 211.77 ft Reservoir name = New Pond 1 Max. Storage = 797 cuft Storage Indication method used. Hydrograph Volume=11,171 cuft Pipe Detention Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 3-- 100 Yr Q (cfs) 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90 • 0.80 0.80 0.70 - - 0.70 0.60 0.60 0.50 0.50 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.00 - - 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Time (hrs) • Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 Pond Report 37 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday, Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Pond No. 1 - New Pond1 Pond Data Pipe dia. = 3.50 ft Pipe length = 90.0 ft No. Barrels = 1.0 Slope = 0.50 % Invert elev. = 208.50 ft Stage/ Storage Table Stage(ft) Elevation(ft) Contour area(sqft) Incr.Storage(cult) Total storage(cult) 0.00 208.50 00 0 0 0.20 208.70 00 3 3 0.40 208.90 00 16 19 0.59 209.09 00 31 50 0.79 209.29 00 42 92 0.99 209.49 00 48 140 1.19 209.69 00 53 194 1.38 209.88 00 57 251 1.58 210.08 00 60 310 1.78 210.28 00 61 371 1.98 210.48 00 62 433 2.17 210.67 00 62 495 2.37 210.87 00 61 556 2.57 211.07 00 59 616 2.77 211.27 00 57 673 2.96 211.46 00 53 726 3.16 211.66 00 48 774 3.36 211.86 00 42 816 3.56 212.06 00 31 847 3.75 212.25 00 16 863 3.95 212.45 00 3 866 Culvert/ Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D] Rise(in) = 2.40 2.50 0.00 0.00 Crest Len(ft) = 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Span(in) = 2.40 2.50 0.00 0.00 Crest El.(ft) = 211.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. Barrels = 1 1 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 Invert El. (ft) = 208.50 210.50 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect --- --- --- Length(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No Slope(%) = 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 N-Value = .013 .013 .013 .000 Orif.Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exfiltration= 0.000 in/hr(Wet area) Tailwater Elev.= 0.00 ft Note:Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control. Stage(ft) Stage/ Discharge Stage(ft) 4.00 I I 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Total O Discharge(cfs) Hydrograph Plot 38 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 4 Bypass Hydrograph type = SBUH Runoff Peak discharge = 0.25 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time interval = 6 min Drainage area = 0.24 ac Curve number = 96 Basin Slope = 0.0 % Hydraulic length = 0 ft Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 4.8 min Total precip. = 4.50 in Distribution = Type IA Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = N/A Hydrograph Volume=3,516 cuft Bypass Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 4— 100 Yr Q (cfs) 0.50 0.50 0.45 0.45 0.40 0.40 0.35 -- 0.35 0.30 0.30 0.25 — 0.25 0.20 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Hyd No. 4 Time(hrs) • 39 TR55 Tc Workshe Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 4 Bypass Description A B C Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.150 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 40.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 2.40 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 4.00 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 4.12 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 4.12 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 75.00 22.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 6.70 4.50 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 4.18 4.31 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 0.30 + 0.09 + 0.00 = 0.38 Channel Flow X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.79 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter (ft) = 3.14 0.00 0.00 Channel slope (%) = 0.50 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 2.79 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 48.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 0.29 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.29 Total Travel Time, Tc 4.80 min 40 Hydrograph Plot Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Wednesday,Nov 30 2005,2:6 PM Hyd. No. 5 Total Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 0.97 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time interval = 6 min Inflow hyds. = 3, 4 Hydrograph Volume=14,687 cult Total Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 5-- 100 Yr Q (cfs) 1.00 1.00 0.90 1 - - 0.90 0.80 0.80 0.70 - - 0.70 0.60 --- 0.60 0.50 0.50 0.40 0.40 0.30 - 0.30 0.20 - 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.00 ' 0.00 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Time(hrs) • Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4 Conveyance computations and details HALSTL_ D'S ARBORICULTURE "Specialists in the care and preservation of trees" • CONSULTANTS, INC. David Halstead,Consultant,B.S. Phillip Whitcomb,Consultant • • P.O.Box 1182•Tualatin,OR 97062 (503)245-1383 October 10, 2005 Ms. Margrett M. Davis • 11470 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, OR 97225 I� Ph: 639-6932 / • Reference: Tree Evaluation and Preservation Guidelines • Subject: Trees Along South Edge of Property • Location: 11470 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, OR 97225 ••. I On 9-29-05 I was called out to evaluate the health, structure of all trees located along the south property line. The purpose of my evaluation was to assess the present condition of • the trees, and the impact of the forthcoming construction on the neighboring property to the ?' south. NOJP94 '4! Within this report and out in the field I have tagged the trees with the numbers B007771- B007788 for easy reference within the rest of this report I will be referring to only the last three digits of the numbers. Also on my field notes and within this report I have noted location of the trees based on the number of feet north the bases of the trees are from the survey stakes for the property line. Tree Assessment A For the purpose of this report, health and structure will be rated from 10% to 100%, 100% being a perfect, and 10% being an unhealthy and structurally unstable. Any trees that are rated below 40% on either health or structure, will be considered hazardous, and will be listed in bold print. Any trees that are special due to size, health and/or variety will be underlined. The abbreviations listed below are as follows, (DBH) Diameter Breast Height, (DGL) Diameter Ground Level, (HGHT) Height, (SPRD) Spread, (HLTH) Health and (STRCT) Structure. } Tree # SPIECIES DBH DGL HGHT SPRD HLTH STRUCT 771 Pine 12" 14" 45' 15' 70% 50% (Pinus Ponderosa) Location: 0' 772 Pine 38" 57 110' 70' 60% 60% (Pinus Ponderosa) Location: 4' 773 Redwood 24" 59 " 60' 40' 80% 50% (Sequiowa semprevirens) Location: 6' 774 Maple 10" 24" 50' 30' 80% 60% Email: hac@spiritone.com www.halsteadsarboriculture.com CCB#0068646 Page 2 Reference: Tree Evaluation and Preservation Guidelines Subject: Trees Along South Edge of Property Location: 11470 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, OR 97225 Tree # SPIECIES DBH DGL HGHT SPRD HLTH STRUCT 776 Hawthorn 4" 13" 20' 15' 40% 40% (Cretagus monogyna) Location: 9' 777 Cedar deodar 38" 60" 90' 80' 80% 60% (Cedarus deodar) Location: 11' 778 Cedar 17" 23" 80' 40' 70% 70% (Thuja plicata) Location: 7' 779 Cedar 12" 14" 80' 40' 70% 70% (Thuja plicata) Location: 5' 780 Cedar 15" 19" 80' 30' 70% 70% (Thuja plicata) Location: 5' 781 Cedar 10" 14" 70' 15' 70% 70% (Thuja plicata) Location: 5' 782 Birch 10" 12" 60' 30' 60% 40% (Betula populifolia) Location: 5' 783 Cedar 19" 25" 80' 40' 70% 60% (Thuja plicata) Location: 5' 784 Cedar 17" 24" 80' 30' 70% 60% (Thuja plicata) Location: 5' 785 Cedar 17" 38" 60' 40' 70% 50% (Thuja plicata) Location: 5' 786 Birch 15" 18" 50' 30' 60% 40% (Betula populifolia) Location: 2' 787 Cedar 22" 31" 60' 40' 70% 50% (Thuja plicata) Location: 4' 788 Apple 9" 18" 40' 60' 60% 50% (Malus domestica) Location: 13' Special trees are marked as such due to either their size and/or species, and will require extra consideration during excavation to ensure that their roots are not disturbed. Tree Care Preservation Guidelines: Before construction begins, preserved tree root zones will need to be protected by the installation of orange Tree Protection Fencing out to the canopy drip line of the preserved trees. Fencing needs to attached to 7-foot tall steel fence post placed eight feet apart on center forming a protective line around the preserved trees and fence post need to be firmly anchored to the soil to a depth of two feet. A small diameter cable and/or wire should be weaved or sewn through the protective fencing two feet above ground to secure the fencing. The fencing, as described, will need to be maintained throughout the entirety of the project. Page 3 Reference: Tree Evaluation and Preservation Guidelines Subject: Trees Along South Edge of Property Location: 11470 SW Greenburg Road Tigard, OR 97225 Tree Care Preservation Guidelines Continued: Before any work is done within the protected area and/or if the fencing needs to be adjusted due to hardscape construction, it will first require the approval of the consulting arborist and then be supervised on site. Structural and deadwood tree pruning will also need to be completed during construction site preparation/site clearing in order to make these trees safe for surrounding persons and property. The arboriculture technicians working within the trees will also need to inspect the tree/s very carefully to make sure that the preserved trees are well prepared for the forthcoming construction. After project completion, therapeutic fertilization will be necessary for all preserved trees to help stimulate new root growth from roots damaged during construction and replenish any lost soil nutrients for optimum tree growth. Hazardous tree removal within project boundaries needs to be completed in a careful manner as to not damage any preserved tree. Any tree or existing stump removed within 15 feet of a preserved tree needs to have the stump ground out rather than excavated to reduce overall root trauma. All work within protected areas will be under the supervision of the resident arborist. If any further information or technical assistance is needed please contact me immediately. Sincerely, det,,,,rx.e)A Zetyto-a8,--- James Lowery Certified Arborist, PN #1808-A David Halstead BS, CA Reduced PI a in Seis • SOLERA alpha TAX MAP: 1 S 135CA • 02300 & 02302 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY OF TIGARD ,WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON 96005W Oak.Suite 230 Portland.OR 97223 1J503152A0Q3 II)sal 452 PROJECT TEAM: I TL MAPS/411 : w. _ 4l1.N,� OWNER ___ � 3 o,c.......$ Wvq REVISIONS MAX MOINI&MOHAMMED TAVAKOLFSHERAJI I 11 v i:;,, sw n�o„st NO. DATE DESCRIPTON 2946 NW IIIHAVE. - 1y 21i. p CAMAS.WA 98607 - A b: 31 PH:17601-0i7-9090 I I —— _— __ y, s,mask Sl an cramatua L. 10 E WMc ! t APPLICANT/ENGINEERS/SURVEYORS I j SITE 3w � {? " ALPHA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I ' efY *a 3 Sw wwe 5l `� x sh' - 9600 SW OAK,SURE 230 ;4 6 ‘.036Y P} PORTLAND.OR.97223 ./ p ,i y s,�,4;,r•i,.... 37 , k PH:(503)452.8003 I4 I 8 gw Kell)* X.wec 5.,. ,,R 33" 4'^ 4^b ° sr,Gan 4 k. rf0= yTv4ys �T♦vifd APPLICANTS REPRESENTATIVE i� 7 % "'. �.,> , 1 ALPHA COMMUNITY DEVEI OPMENT V "'tki rM*` h, �@ 9600 SW OAK.SURE 230 T:_2403 T__6 __ __ IL 2200 152997nPVlk(] PORTLAND,OR.97223 PH:150314528003 I ! . — __ FAX:(5031452A043 r —_ — NOT TO SCALE CONTACT:KIRSIEN VAN LOO I 5 UTILITIES&SERVICES I SOLERA WATER: CITY OF FIGARD I ! 4 STORM: CRY OI IIGARD I SEWER: CITY Of TIGARD - POWER: PORTLAND GENERAL E RESCUE 3 / & FIRE: TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE d RFSCIIE POLICE: CRY OF TIGARD POLICE DEPT. —— SHEET INDEX: SCHOOL: TIGARD SCHOOL DISTRICT PARKS: CITY OF TIGARD f 2 GAS: NORTHWEST NATURAL GAS I I —_ —— I TITLE SHEET i ; . I', 1 2 EX.CONDITIONS PLAN TITLE NOTES: 3 AERIAL VIEW AND CONNECTIVITY PLAN SHEET ___-7 -L�, SITE AREA: 1.07 ACRES .'''�� ' '' 4 PRELIMINARY PLAT EXISTING ZONING: R.12 TAX MAP: 1 S 135CA 1--_ 5 UTILITY PLAN TAX LOT: 2300.2302 NUMBER OF LOTS: I I 6 GRADING&EROSION CONTROL PLAN AVERAGE LOT SIZE: 3,065 SF. DRAWING DALE: 1206-2005 W�Re�NBURG no 7 96TH AVENUE PLAN 8 SW GREENBURG IMPROVEMENT PLAN BENCHMARK: J`aI P ha 9 STREET TREE PLAN BRASS DISK IN THE CURB AT THE SOIJIHWESI COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORNER Of I H K) E INTERSLCIN OF SW GREENBURG ROAD AND SW 95TH AVE -. PROJECT NO.: 32*43 TYPE: PLANNIN( DATE: NOVEMBER 200 GRAPHIC SCALE 1 ��I >o . N.w,oi.ws-zai\awu‘NUwux..,nrEr:Sass.zsl-m,.awJ;IrtL Zan.1 Doc m.am.laolrm pm ' I I 11.41' 1 i 380 I 4 - TL i !---- IMAM , alpha , • , -AM EX 2-FT ITOUR COMMUNITY —a.— Ex lo-Fr mow, I ,___----- —xx--- Ex sA.T..ar SEME.■ DEVELOPMENT -r- EX STORM CRAM IL 3900 IL 4000 —.-- EX WATER LINE cx ' I 9600 SW Oak Sulfa 230 --,x0. EX BURIED POSER . POKR EX OYERHEACI Portland,OR 97223 —T— EX TELEPHONE UNE 1 in 933-4&241331 M503.524043 . 1 -_.:-_;;;;XXX;-:,-- —=—..,__ 1 ---C.,- EX CAME TY LINE www oX.cconrnundy can /— ''' ._,., .-•-•-•-•-•-• co FENCE ,.,,, , f P// 5 cx SANITARY MANHOLE ...••• I /...4' / I , • EX SANITARY CLEANOUT -. / ...., / 0 EX weft.MANHOLE ,.."" :11 __/ ■ IL 2100 1 REVISIONS 0 EX CATCH BASIN ,-- ../ /4t• / 0 EX STORM=MOUT ZT. EX FIRE/OMANI NO DATE DESCRIPTION - .. v / / EX WAITER MEIER / / 1 ,< ....1 • EX MAIER VALYE ..„....". SS.t_. . ../ / / , • Ex OAR vALYE ■ - / ....fr. / I re ex TELEPHONE men f NIS 11/ / : // ,,e / el EX CABLE RISER / o EX LIGHT POLE .....> ( / I •ce EX TREES TO REMAIN ,, / , , , 1 , , c„.._ , .. , •M EX TREES TO EIE REMOA 0 IL 24'd) 1 I... / °"7,?'(, ,i Kaptc,, J IL 2200 \ iy. ik, — f{ _ L_ .....‘at. M.rK". Ill ...... .,..,t_ s.,..... I I TREEiSHRLIEI OESICNAIElti CA VTR e 1m r•■,‘ \ ' ..._::-/ \ ...-1111,tlt DAKTER MAXIE \,.... 13 EIRCti Ili; We + - ',.. C CEOIR 'J H HARTPORN \ I q maw:..........„.......: SIMI:-..' ''''' 4..LI'"1. 111-735.11:23" s I \ L LAUREL .1%. LJAKEADRONA 1 ! is. '''''i ••• el ....,...,.. _,... P KUM UO UNNHORM CEODUOUS I : 1 I SOLERA PA114te . , 71-2303 1 I \ * 1/\ ■._4' \ 1 "' Ix , •_,- , ....... ,ft...4We- 4 1 0 r --LT SA: . '... kii.21160 ._. // 4,2*Al T-206 T I IL VA I EXISTIN .."441F*.r,itgetr47- altd. C nr DIT II•iu1.2, ...., .1,, , CONDITIONS •---, ---- _''--.-;:-.•-.-,.i,... I PLAN , ReEiva ----,-, . roe'PRIRWI .-' ..,.. 4.32 . .. -4,:-/- alpha ----.... . ..., COMMUNITY.DEVELOPMENT 0 PROJECT MO .... ■ TYPE PLANNINI SCALE DATE NOVENSENxso 151=10 PT 2 R\IR.A.P.2....0,R.J.E.G\•SRE,,,,,,,,,,.RT TN.0 THEO.M.EXT‘OT TO..TOTININ 0NY a ------4.44.0 . 8 NORTJ1 QAKOTA � alpha 1k a �, COMMUNITY _ � � xa ! � DEVELOPMENT 4. � el 9600 SW oak Sulfa 230 3 ° v ftt ,,• v y p \, 5 ' �' Portland,OR 97223 k"�° � m503-452-8CO3 Il 4524043 x+l ... yr; # _r err n..' ^\ 1T*4I e x i it. ^^ 3 -..,•.v .v ,,,, 1 4 - ,. a �, N » r t a .' � teas SOLERA .r' �. a t— ,,,,,.. .4., ..?«,),,,,i, ii. . = , 4 r �I ,�, , " q` x AERIAL N. ItisK—* Of . li ? _.� "+ T� % � Z '. ��y AND 4 ® � � CO NECTI ITY N V ' ..*:"1117141,1„ ,.. .t, : I = ,. iia ,,,,. �• PLAN c COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT * 111114 „,„ 7.„. .'±' '... 'di': ,. IIIIIP;:', ':.,:l•.... Sint ,Iirl ill[._ T g m { fir PROJECTED, 1211-10=, , $ yb PW"°R! N a M ee yC ! r av /RO!Z D.k . ■__... _____ ,.!.,:44540k, o. 3 _ , ‘0,,,,,,,. ..,.:- -- ,,,,, ,: ,,,, ..„ ,n■e,nee, alphai 1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • • • : ■ IL 4000 SDC8 1 INV.OUT 209.118.10*SO E PUE —...... _-. LEGEND ...... SOW 5 -- EASEMENT LNES INV.IN 209.77,10*SO pm li ---1 SIDCE 2 ER— PROPOSED SANITARY SEVER IP96°04.49503z1S4oWnexeudr,,,,,,,,nR7424:45:9:7227 • INV.CUT 20960,12-so WAW.1.1 OUALTY I Midi I SO,— PROPOSED STORM DR/011 REVISIONS — — CATCH VEIN — —I io 1111 - _II 11 2100 EN STONSI ORAN NO. DATE DESCRIPTION — I I'WATER I • IIIII : 9 1 ; I— — — — i 111116 17 _ ; pRE:soposSANI11:11.:LAYT;I:E4s. • TO; PR'PRP:OP7MWOOSE:UNSSAIC.4WTORAI7TARMUYNEAM17.7 SONH 4 — _ _ —NV IN 209.13,is'so INV OUT 20900 IrS0 I : [I ' 7 I 11.2200 i . . A _ _ - -•-.1 U 1121.14 • TI.2400 1 i 1 riiili ' ,... _ _ _ . . F,prx S DETENR• 1 1, soCH 2 SYSTEM .- I S 'l; : 1R 01410 NN a t:11 04 — — — --I I 240.IN 20E51 IV SO NV OUT 20845.12*50 <1!1,1 _ _ ,.21a, 3 — — I Ii SOLERA . 11iI ! 90C9-1— IL 2303 1 : . . . . : . . .• : .• : Kw 2 i . . , , NV.TN 206,11.is-so ■ CATCH 8A9N NV.El 201579.10.SO • 11.2304 i NV OUT 207.99,12-. I I iik, :', — — 1 I il .._._,...,.,. —-----'S9-------------c--."' 461619 .".-....." •."'' " '•• I /-=.12 ' IL 2301 UTILIT .. --- - ----- / 9 Ir P 4.4001.A I ... .. ,. ,. 9.It'011 8...226.4 PLAN ... ......... t . --- ---- --. _-::::., ----- ..... , ........ .... ....... ---04-al p h a 1 0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.: 22843 SCALE rvPI: PLAOR20N4 ViIMM. 11N.90 PT t.e,00.995,2411d,\PLANNINC,.$14FEISV99261-11I1L-CONI.H.,S.ET 0434 Duca 3045-1007am 10,1 • "° I EX=�T LGNTWR alpha 4'- GET._... EX ID-F7 CWTDUM --� oRA„ADE D,RE Ra~ COMMUNITY !--�tQ —Xf— EX SANITARY SERER DEVELOPMENT i , — --r 'IL TL 4000 a—.. EX$TORY DRAM ..., - - I .._.................. Ex WATER UNE .---_�-_--k--.-.-- 11J-`l EX GAS UNE 96005W Oat,Suite 230 .—A • Ex BARED POW+ (-'}• .t A _-.... _ .. Ex OVERHEAD PONE pI�BIO�mBt�N 9706La�DQ d- q • a 11P=141119 .-1 - _ _.•-.,j EX TELEPHONE LINE —our—•+..• E%CABLE iv ARE www.pLOCon mLngy.cOn T __��__ -- ' - -' j / - T • • E%SANITARY MANHOLE / N 1N - ii IL 2100 • E%SANITARY CLEANWT CSA , I., I . �' : o EX STORM BASIN REVISIONS * I I - - .... �- / No. DATE IDEA 'ON / '1 • �'""' ...-y__.__z I • EX STORM fYEANWT — i$ I // t , Ex FIRE HYDRANT SEE TREE-- -- 1 4qR, N y EX WATER METER VALVE �1 i - -7-- • E%WATER VALVE ��� - PROTECTION ~,1 I '-' I 1 if DAD' • E%GATE VALVE NOTES j i ! �, 1— S Ex TELEPHONE RISER I ( I 1 •, I - - - S�ISTs'E 0 Ex CABLE RISER t N .. ...._r r : EX u(i1T POLE 4",-• I y� fil) EX TREES TO REMAIN ! ` p II 1 /i �r }yR :.l:;y - -j II IL ZZW I SGY EX TREES t0 BE REMOVED TL 2A�40 i+!r VtA]( I 1• I --�_ I 1:110. I 5 ,i TREE PROTECTION NOTES Y CLE t yL ,J :A = S21d NnIw IH AT AN ON-SITE PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING,CONTRACTORS WU.BE BRIEFED W DETAIL. _� i-'v"f� JJljj NN SE YFR-'_ _ II ABOUT NNE TREE REQUIREMENTS PRESERVATION AND ENVIRONMENTALLY ZONED EQUIPMENT OF THE SHE,IE,ANO -- 1 r,� 4 I i APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS SUCH AS THE RESTRICTIONS ON EQUIPMENT MANEUVERING, �J : STORAGE,STOCKPILING AND OTHER CONSTRMCTION ACTIVITIES WORN THESE AREAS. SLL FREE j / M EI ��' _ I ALL CONSTRUCTION WORK,INCLUDING STRONG,STORAGE,AND EQUIPMENT MANEUVERING. PROTECTION 1 I E �T�. -:.:-..::7!. WEL DE CONFINED WREN TOE CANSTRUCnEN ZONE LNTnS.LOCATED OUTSIDE O(TREE NOTES r ,.- k' d1101.. ""�� .. R IN1STfl'• PROTECTDN AREAS AND TNF ENVRONMENTUL ZONES. TEMPORARY CONS RUCTCG([HONG TALL A iNSTA E0 ALONG THE BOUNDARY HE ' - \ TREE.PRESERVAIIDN ZONE AND AROUND.DIVIDUAL TREES AND CERTIFIED N dE TREE / tt ��l�EE PRESERVATONN PLAN FOR PROTECTOR FENCING WLL GENERALLY BE WSTALED 5 FEET A I i{t, \ 2WJJ WTSOC 0(TINE DRIPLNE J(iRCES,GR AS ORECIED 0Y RK PRO.ECT LANDSCAPE SOLERA II(\ I �'\ ARCHITFC.T. FENCING NEED NOT BE INSTALLED UWG BWNDARIF$G(TREE ��� ;1I1 :1 G i_ I L. IA. : PRESEN VAiION AREAS NHIlL NO CONSTRUCTION ROOK WILL OCCUR(E.G.,ALONG OUTER _ti+` �1; I .`� ',E • PROPERTY LINES). --4,........_. _+r j' ! , , FENCING GUST BE(OUR TEAT W HEIOOT AND MAY BE EIIHER BRIGHTLY COLORED '`'� \ 1 I,`� ■ - ?.... PLASTIC FENCING SOURED NTH METAL PASTS CR STEEL FENCWC On CONCRETE BLOCKS ,��„�,,, V I FENCING WLL BE NSIALIED BEFORE CONSTRUCTION STARTS AND WLL REMAIN N PEACE , � "\- UNTIL ALL CaNSTRUCTIW WORK 5 COYPLEIED CUNSTRUCRTR ENTRANCE ]T \'4 i '` -ISaT sD:b THE CONSTRUCTION FOREMAN WILT BE RESPONSIBLE MR ENSURING THAT ALL \ __ 2301 ARE PROPERLY INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE $- .. E �/ Est-C.10 :I OTN �` ` ` -`;- R 1M1Y'R PA"C (ERGO. N TREE PROTECTION N - �/5111 � r CONSTRUCTION FENCES A ., ..,� J! c G GE P F DAMAGED ON IMPPLYTfkIY(UNCTNONING(ENfTNG ANO OiHE E' E ON DE CES GRADING, ] \`�'�j`I� a� • ,\1 `'^i: _ '� k NH RE WILL BE REPLACED IMMEDIATELY BY THE CONTRACTOR. EROSION ` ...-....„`� � nEeN" a +•; CONTRACTOR TO MATCH .,,,. CZ)yNERAL TREE NOTES: NN 1' SRO ... . i°u t`a lii NO Rae _ _........... CONTROL ' + t'�- -I THERE ARE NO HERITAGE AND/OR HISTORIC TREES.GCAlEO 101 THIS ENTIRE SITE. PLAN °E'Tan_''+•.-„ 4\•_ . "_.,_ TREES.SHRUBS OR VEGETATION TO BE W WO.OR REMOVED W1 AN ENVIRONMENTAL Z O alpha COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCALE PROJECT YO,: 12142 RU D T6 JO TYPE: PLANNER _.._... DATE: 1 N•10 R N\PI•\1NF-TAI\OE+OVIA XINOSHTTS\R'AEAA I-CA D.Gwp-SAM 224I TING DEMOS-IOd1.KgS 6 ! I 1' ill;/ 1 i 1 I . -- „. J • • �i - — — alpha wOpD$ED _ �. �;6 7 run�nE now i v i` �{ ; � �= " COMMUNITY j � ✓ DEVELOPMENT ( --'_-- P6DPDSEO A� 5 3 1 CuNB fl GV itER� PROPOSED ' T f rT F— ,�Aa; ] .� !t - � i r t€ era N m 50 4524=PI 5a64s2aDq_ 11 t T T-•-- - - - _ _ — .•.,.V,.�aer,:lcw.:,x,nnr.crnl• _ sw ssrH n 4• ry r ,I, _ -- ---e REVISIONS NO. DATE OE$CEUn1042 1 1 i 2 i 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 19 I I u , �� — 1 CURB, ....K I Ti as I I I I I I I I XIS I I I I I I I I v. •> 1 ' I I I I I I I I , 10 E.MSS i S more If : 19 .. N.P.my-219.16 N.P.STA•2+20.43 PM STA-2+50 L.P.EEEV•211.60 PN ELEV-221.50 LP.STA•0+51.49 A.D.•-14.61 PN su• 0260s K•0'VC SOLE RA PIA Cap-711.67 200.Op•VC • A.D.-7.19 K-5.67 P41 STA-4+75 PH EIEV-205.00 51 A AD.-162 ♦ d K-26.20 100.00'VC i P • 96TH AVE. PLAN 710: - �.. : R i_ r i • W PROFILE I : 200' I I. ._ — — • • j • ... -444-alpha iI , COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 160;... .... .... ..: .. ........... .................. . • ._........._ • .... ..... _.... .. ..__... .. ......... .. .......... _._ ...... .... �'R ■ : I PROJECT N0.: »2• • i ■ .. O TYPE: PLANImN • • ... i................. DATE: i N . i . i SCALE i . x 7 MOO ws6 1.06 1«ao 2«00 :«60 3«60 swo 4.60 a«fio 5900 S.so 6+00 6+50 7+00 1_ 1IN-60 PT NA1:4!0 9,61\dx0\MAN.\SHEETS\999261-MEV dwo.SHEEE 2b.Dr::07 1005 Ia06arn Oml I . , L 151.05" _ --Tr- -11 6911524.E- I ,_ .... A ......„.„.. _ u I 0 LEGEND 1 L 1, 10 Ti...200 . . PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAy alpha i . (FISTING RIGNT-OF-WAY COMMUNITY t I I i I - - - - PROPOSED CURB AND DOTER : I I I 1 i I i. PROPOSED CENTERuNE DEVELOPMENT I i 9 , MENG CER TERUNE . - - __ - _Lt., , I.. : . : „..... .. PROPoSED HANCIIC AP RAup i 1 I 8 . : 9600 SW Oak,Suite 230 ! • L____J PROPOSED A C PAVING Portland,OR 97223 - - - 5 05157 1 I : i'. ',•_.__:,,1 PROPOSED 30EwALK . pl 303-152-1003 fl3064523343 i 7 , :; i i FolOXED SIDEWALK By www oph.lcomrounll,corn I • 1 , 1 ! ■ — — _ — 112200 P.2400 I 1: '. r ) 6 ..... .. 1 I • REVISIONS i : •-•--,.... 1 4.7A I. ' — — No OATS DE3CRIPT1ON I 1 1 r _ I h- ------- --------) , 1 f ' _ _ - _ - I i 1 4 I 1 i - _ 3 N .... 1 _ 1 ' 4.446 Inns.. ........ I I PROPOSED .....s ROW I :-1,--, 2/0-..... I.N.... 2 I 71.2303 .; ; __. I I :•, ._. 1 ) I , — -,,,,, ,-__ i • -‘ - _ .• ______-______ 1 ,• '',----•-— i i-----•... _. .............. ,N 78- ." alliftiftimmeammi : 11_2301 1 . i ,,,____,,, .................................. .........„. MSTING EDGE OF PAVhsc SOLERA 041000021 TO 004, I ...... ..... _..... al4v--I---- . ........ .. 74 9000 1 i r• - • -----:- .-7-.:s. ,-__ ...... . -- . SCALE MME' . • 01.6 . • • • I It.30 A I i i 1 --■_._ 'z SW GREENBUR N P HALF STREET ii li IMPROVEMENT i f PLAN ! . 1 , 1 ' 11 I 1 I i 1 i Ex311NG CENTER LINE I • . . ! 1 i , ....•• 4.•. ._.....__,.- , --..r._-•._._,.....7 - _.7 2_--7•.: '-- i . .. alpha FLOWN : • . , : • • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • 1 : . . • . . . • • . . • . : • . • • PROJECT MC: 321-031 . . . z,,, 4.• I : : . i • : . : • . i • . i •• ' . : • . TYPE: PLANNING DATE. ! i • 1 . .• ■ ! 1 1 I . i ! 1 ' . 6050 64.04 • 5+50 5+00 4+50 4+00 3+50 3+00 0090 2+00 1+50 1+00 0+50 0+00 -0+50 MVAG,S4/241,Nw4,ANIPIMGONEET5‘90261.0/EFITN/PG onN-.Ea WA Doc amos.B.A.A.y. 1 T i��IJ u „,_r■ U _ alpha 1 COMMUNITY — 4,' _ �,, ,�c�� PLANT SCHEDULE r+ � STREET TREES Orr SIZE !PACING DOrAN1CAL NAME COMMON NAME DEVELOPMENT aF 1O p Ie 7 CAL .AS SHAM Pr=0 cau.Elar4N4 CALI ERr PEAR 9600 5W Oak,SoIto 230 ��.. :rw � Portland.OR 97223 111,94 ` 5���1 (t 503-4528003 IFI 503452. 43 I I ■�. 9 � TREES OTT SIZE SPACING BOTANICAL NAME COMM Rove . " s E I DID as MIOAt AS.'CONCOLOR 140411E RR 1 I 1 - ---- C. •'- s r� Ae sNOUN ACER G tleBH ►APERDARK MAPLE REVISIONS 8 16 r CAL Ap eNCUPI CEIGIe QCIpENTAL1e ILEeTERN MORO, �� 8 r.i a ] CAL. 44 S.W. ARA 9 4 $TAGNOR2 SUMAC NO. DATE DESCRIPTION 7 \ �1!.I, SHRUB an MZE e9•ACING BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAM I I. J / CR*/1� TI ]4Al Ae MIQW GAIELLIA SALAItl1A eyANOIA CnygLIA uj I -- -- Qf 1.AQ� 0 29 ]GAL 69•010.61 RNGOODENDR2X1 SP. rowocclENDRan NP. 'I fiI-., li -WIND VOIDS g,w►• ��I RL��I 0�PRNACY FENC£' I e. IN_---_ -- --II Z �`r a71,St Aiik 7\/\7\/\/\IF I I "KZ!WO u►%aA` G ISOLERA 1 lal jAh,; I Ili� Ire ISM _ STREE �4, — TREE •�� ��I h PLAN �r dig _ 6x11 F �._ i it i G 4 I. •III ��_ �� 111, -444-alpha SwGl� r�.' ; _L1— IA P E� LLB • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT E B .... -... RITA,I 111- UIQG RpO Privacy Fence-Elevation Nn PROJECT NO: en341 ... TYPE: PLANNER GATE. NOVENSEN 200 O SCALE ____. O 0 1a 20 40 HARM,MT.261 Vle,, 4:.N:JG`SIREIBPII261 OAM,-Rel:2We Dec 07.SCE-10050N pnl 9 -1, A i .TIsilt . _ . . .ci.\\\ _ ..—A. ' -,' TL 3800 ..... ....... •-)--'..:;;:-.-,... —.... . \ ...__—2 o_. \■ ' . —----- ..._ _ ._.. -- ,,- . , \ ---I -210----. - --- ' alpha • , 4—1-'I.— TL 3900 . TL 4000 COMMUNITY .--r-il- i 1 _-------210--- \ I • • DEVELOPMENT c.,--r" .. ,1 .. 1 : .• .• - cr 1 a,1 d 5,I' - 1 905' • : • k _, .• ' t ------= --ek,;-' ..-t'-a. , 7---- _ --.-s ___. = • .L. L =,r, ..r.L..r 1 11 : • 9600 SW Oak,Suite 230 , - , .____ _ ••.,._. i I / )) ' ...,- / • .• .• Portland,OR 97223 ,•-• ■ ; .„......-V, .• - .-------- •I. / I [T]503-452-8033 [F]503-452-8043 ..- ,- . / .-s.- , / ..---- IT3f! TL 2100 www.Ophocommunity.com • --.._ , C 24717 iC- , ../.... ,.' .• .• .• .• 5.G.416 /.- X-11 • • i — . • • / . 1: / / , 'Pi . '`i i lit REVISIONS . . / '' *.'""r /1 ■ i / NO. DATE DESCRIPTION 1 1— ------————7-....."1 S1)--- 7 :,..8 8 /-' \ / 1 1 9/671f '-' I 1 7 / , ' ..'' / / S■89ST 'E t / t ( ./ .i............_.. .::".!.... „„ .. -------"i :,..s. -----971: "I:1;i: N.,L 1,::;,:, H \ ■ ' I / Ii 9197R I 1 i , , I \ I 2 MlINK*^V-h,1 „ ,• ..,. E X I S T I N G IL 2200 TL 2400 I \ "r.! FONTs; ' . i a.-> 24:1 VRI.ANQ FLOW 120 0 1.50% ---------...... 1 \ J...-..1 1 : I) 7-----... ' . \ -In : EXISTItk •-...._e• --"' ...„,,, I i ------- _ ! ' HOUSE • i LoW- • 18 % ----4,) • .......___. . \ . \.1... .•••-•.. • I ;,,c4,,I, 12 , . . \, ..,:, ----21 ■ - . . AM • .' +, I . : I i• ‘.c.f"." 4 L.I ' -:: ' I--- . - N 89-57.3.5-W i i 1 /' -1- ' • --4. ..,,, . , ■ LY"N ,,, oF I .• .• .• . I APPROXIMATE,/ 1 811'‘t11.411. KIC 1 I .• • I I IN • 1A2. I i • I DRIP LINE 1 11..2303 , 1"---- 1 ,, ; \ '-..... Li., ;i_ i 2304 : .• . .. ' ------------. .• • 1-------- ---------_ . : -----sp-- ........ I \ 1 ..,:.:-.-, • vX1r1:4G, /II i GREENBURG . .1 •--1 • .sos -- 0 l_ \ . ------ I, . i...A...?-ly pi , i \/ 11 1 HEIGHTS _.......... ••. .. -------- --- - ,,6-.. ' - • I .., - -'-fr■L....... :-:!...t.-- -'---. r ' 1 i I --_ • .-7 -.„, i .... ---. ., • - MN& .-;:-' ----"44.412:231:;14.a__—.?tP•btr_ty7-...z: .-•:., -. / r.IM=21::t...0 2301 ...„.. ._ - s.._- ,: --"rP----,,•, 25*. 5.4r ,._..--- _ .... :, :.1::,:.20,2; . .............. ... . ,, ",-,......,--.7,/,,, its„.„,,,r,,,:,,,. I 1 - .I'M-____ ....... j ---''''''IL-''''-----.s,---.7-----:"---P"...:---- - .. _. _-..,,___.•.-,,,_-_ .... . • PRE DEVELOPMEr _ I TIME OF - - :::-.7..... L.;zn::F.,,,,,,,.-•--:4<' ----... c — ----____ ,...,z,‘-- I -•.2.:-.. ..--.:::: ::,,,,,...."::;::::::::,-.-......1.-..---- ------ • ,-- CONCENTRATI011 -.:-...:---- `, ..--' 1 ------..77---,•""".-, r:-27-- _ .,, 1 . ...._ ,._ : t (c. -- --•-... ..... . .......................... ..._ •-_.... 1 i . : ..• --ilz.--- a I p h a TL 202 .• .• I • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IL 3C0 . i ! PROJECT NO.: 999-261 TYPE: PLANNING DATE: C:\work\BGPlot_2592\99926I-SWM-TC.dwg-SHEET:2234 PRE DEV Dec 05.2035-9:18orn gmt . . \ . N\\\\\\ • \ TL 3700. • • ..---Akk-4"---' ‘ 0,'N . . : . . . 1 11 . TL 4100 . . . TL 3800 ‘ • . ____‘, • alpha ! 1- i ,.. . - s , . • ; I I \ \ \-\'''4-- \ 1 . , . , ,, - - ------- i COMMUNITY • DEVELOPMENT , 1 TL 3900 TL 4000 t 1 1 - , 9600 SW Oak,Suite 230 , . Portland,OR 97223 .0:r e, :. 0 .....,...,....___ __,_,,_._ __ ---• pi 503-4524033 19 503-452-8043 . twii ' ,1,4111*14 : -_-,....i" -=`.= = -.--- i..! . ; www.alphocommunily.com 41....' .:.1.. . / — —7— ---- I ' .-- I■ ea ■ I.. 1 9 I ':ittitAl.''.1..3 , / 0 — 4 • 1.1.7,X „11'''t''' ' ' __rHANINF1 Fl OW/ __ _ 175 0 0.507: 01111041-: , ; - - /— - - , I 1 , 41114 7 1111 1 I „---- "'; i f ? I TL 2100 REVISIONS NO. DATE DESCRIPTION 1 41 • I — / 7 1...9 . I I )' e.1k4 ! ' 1 9 ,,,, . : .. '11: IS, ; / ....—_r _—...r.-- , 4-- ... i \ /0" '1 62 ' —..../ I/ 7 1 '0 1- 1 .• ----- 1 __ I .' i C 1 1 • 1 .-- . 1 //I 7 ( : 1 pr. „, , - - —7, --1 moo TL 2400 i '' I. d I I ' 6 ........._._ ..1...„ ',.-. ,. 11111" 1411011 ,i _ .__ .• 4.1 Ill'i'll pi ....._ ---.....,_ : gyali ii Is . .• • .-____.... 'tit- l':111•IPC \II 5 ....., . • e____ ,--,.., __ .....— , 1 i ...-- qii tif, I\,4 , -. / -- 1 ______ 111 i 0 wiir -------:-__:...------__..2W i ---. i . ( 411=r —.• — . ....-.. . \,■7•'I 1:161.1411 - -- 3: ,7 , 1111/11-;\ C"'i i , - , i 1 .---/--. GREENBURG mr; H_______L..... .-_....._..... LAR No FLowTh 2303 CHANNEL FLOW 414 1:1, PP- I N 'I \ 1 -2— '.."- —C---------Qj-0-4-013'g- ,111011 ,, ;\-:,; \i 1 '--A ‘--• TL 2304 HEIGHTS A RI. , I. Ai . -- ,, 16.4. . , , ‘. . A • • 1: I D ... LOW —75 0 6.70% — ---........ ."-:,' ..., -411•11 a. ..•-■-• ......... , i mak.j .7-4.-1•_%•••4 .....,.._____ , -:-‘; '' 1 NI ----- __ -• .... ..---w.- ..., ...„__ ' ... /1.1;:l.,q't'S'3 : POST -----____ ....;.......,„.____, ... ,,,, --..,,r,„,.,L..1 ,, ,,.:f,, it.r.,,, 1.. If:''X7,:-.--1-C-.4 1 --------:-. ---—.i "---" -- DEVELOPMENT TIME OF . ---------- : --. ..<., Soce --.....,_______......_......,..:...__--- .'''',. ......"' CONCENTRATIOr --.... --..._ ----........__ ,..-vb-- ....--- ... 1 ---------.---.::'-.-:-.------....:-------___. N. 1 444-alpha COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I PROJECT NO.: 9911-2151 TYPE: PLANNING DATE: C:\work\BCPict_2592\999261-3wm-TC.dwg-SHEET:22,04 POST DEV Dec 05,2055-9:21am gni 1 , ion— OM iss6 �'ty� r A` _�" k I j 0 , # • • �� r — w1 �� j t yf flyy 1 `di. gr, • ., .11 4•„, ,N,A4 . - ;sbi1 # '� ,� :.ro � .',� � + COMMUNITY•I )� - ,; s. DEVELOPMENT 414.44 ‘ii• 1 _ J I; ::.'"_.�M' I 1"�:fir '.- � 1 '. _ .iiiiiip. , _ - ■�[ ' +f "�T Ilk_ p ii iit Itilif- di �' i :J' t P TIM •' ` `°� r E- 1 + ! 1 " 9600 SW Oak.Suite 230 r } 1 # sJ �; I '�+_, Portland, OR 97223 �' • n: 1 s'. { 3 . e '�linp„., I ( « a ��� , , [11503-52.8003[9 503452-8043- -I2 ei�.. * _Mask n,4r.,,. I M *� `�• www alphacommuniry.com -Mk .Alt .". .- f,� ' * i -``;� '�� �� ` �r t �.� i�.. '.' r' �� l _ REVISIONS itt - ,`, • j 1 1 •i •. - _ NO- DATE DESCRIPTION j ! i.3Tl .mss r ' -.. ,..41014 tici: 11X111111- 4 jr., I? air _ .3,e 4 i I kr tr: .. .. . 1_10.4 , r, - . _ _ sr . - 11' CE*3 4 , /44 lar -. i gii ......_, " 1 f AIR . .1 ...401;ii . .. : .ir/ . gYar,k , 410, ,k vr. .. 4..„, . . II:f........,.. , , • , ...„ op..... •414-- 1 - ! ..,, ..I 111111* .1' 'illibli -'r".-1 !21.0 7....114 ,.. . . .40.6.4.,, ,,...1 k l , P 4 -..11 . * wi or,...1• ;401.1, . - , ,r/jer7P-101.. --.1/ 1. "- 4 .: . r- \ ' _ 1, . , _ UK. 01 A, ; . k 0 46_ , lit .. e . , II i , ' a 0 :,.41: ilk -' P.'4.* , ,440, ....rirN 4- ip.i.i „imp 14, ./. . .1,4_41, „...,.. r )5 . 1r -, . .1„,. :it; ,, , A A. . „ill!' . 11` . X11 1 lilt, ��- ♦. w _ _ .. _r, . i , ..., iii Or' °eV/ . i - ---,'.../114:- N., / ,.., At' ,iv .1. -. 44: - .rigs. Ift - Ilrillinekak ..... . , . Ir... i I 1 / ' -,. 4,, idWii ...iraasai,vempl„...._ .41( tit' ----___ vir Ivir 4 " jtr IIMN ..„. .itiar 11M,1k 11161 ilk . i , 1 A.- °41111110. - . r.... 4.-:. .4), IV..,..• i •,.. . ' r _ :,, , 4 . ,. --'41b. . 4-7.11. - "Ai .„, 4,1:1 If: 1 .4* r- 1 1 r, 7—s_.._1 i.. a %.. - - ` - '• .Ere- ,,,� fi' - .•AL. , i Ilk ‘ 1 4. .0 „ , .�' .. 1' - .. t b : .' � SOILS. .. *ff. y Y ' r it a• �1'• I'- AND s N , I, I ,4y . ' TOPOGRAPHY ma s• - I� l .. • . ," ' rte �.. 4.1_ .f , .� Ag_-.� _ a �,� 1 " I I , ,41.- . V. MAP IN -,. 40;11; b li lillt ,. ,. .,. ,,, , , ?..... .1,.....„ , ki, . • .... „ .41._ , i t, IL. ..,,4.41, -,.,...N. , .4 ' '" , .4,... r . 114a . .� I 444-alpha 104�} ®� r�+ \ 1 _ Ai*Nl.. ,�-+i, r ~ y •aa _yam i 1 , - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AlIF iii. „ilil. ).:.„.-1-11110 r i . _ .,,,,„ / N., '', ( ! 4s - f .::0._.,f Nt,., YYi-261 ti I .V'.,- PLANNI 7. • . ..,... AI, A ,fir, \ a _ k. T.'• •..r . - .. ._..... -a '•.TES. 40 l't ,4,0-ti . .--, - ., . 9 ■ C:\work\BGPIot 1424\999261SOIL34wg-SHEET:22[34 Aug 19.2006-3:1 Ipm gmt i i Alpha Community Development Project Name: Greenburg Heights Date: August 22,2005 Project Number: 999-261 Operator: Garry Truyens SUMP £ olio. LOCATION AREA ACRES COEFF. CA CA CA TIME CONC.-MIN. "I" Q=C.I.A. PIPE n= .011 From To Sub. Total "C" Inlet Drain Total 25 Year C.F.S. Size S(act) s(Fric) Partial Flow Full Flow Lgth. REMARKS Vel(7.0 fps min) Vel SDCB 1 CUT IN 1 A .32 .86 0.28 0.00 5 00 5.0 _ 3.40 .95 12 " 0.50 % 0.05% 7.0 1.2 212 ' SDCD2 CUT IN 1 B .44 .86 0.38 0.00 5 00 • 5.0 3,40 1.29 10 " 0.50 % 0.25% 7.0 2.4 21 ' * CUT IN 1 SDMH 2 A-B .76 0.66 5.0 0.5 5.5 3.33 2.20 12 " 0.50 % 0.27% 7.0 2.8 58 ' SD CB3 SDMH 2 C .27 .86 0.23 0.00 5 00 _ 5.0 _ 3.40 .78 10 " 0.50 % 0.09% 7.0 1.4 21 ' 0 DMH2 SDMHI A-C 1.03 0.89 5.5 0.1 5.6 3.31 2.95 12 " 0.50 % 0.49% 7.0 3.8 34 ' W N • N ti x GENERAL NOTES: 1.) STORMFILTER BY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT INC., PORTLAND, OREGON (800/548-4667). r Z 2.) CATCH BASIN MUST BE SET LEVEL. s 3.) EXTERNAL PIPING AND COUPLINGS TO BE PROVIDED BY OTHERS. Mr a W 4.) INLET AND OUTLET PIPES TO BE GROUTED INTO HOLES PROVIDED. JOINTS TO BE WATER-TIGHT. e 1.4 5.) STORMFILTER REQUIRES REGULAR MAINTENANCE. REFER TO OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE C Z MANUAL FOR DETAILS. 3 r 6.) CATCH BASIN STORMFILTER STRUCTURAL SPECIFICATIONS: X f CC LOAD RATING: H-20 (20,800 LB.) O CONSTRUCTION: 4,500 PSI REINFORCED CONCRETE y EXPOSED COMPONENTS: PLASTIC AND OTHER NON-CORROSIVE MATERIALS (EXCEPT LID AND GRATE) CARTRIDGE ACCESS LID: CAST-IRON MANHOLE LID GRATE: WELDED STEEL - OREGON DOT TYPE 2 (NARROWED) BASE WEIGHT: 2,240 LB. TOP WEIGHT: 860 LB 112' PLASTIC WEIR p VITH 4' CLEANIIUT HDLE AND PLUG 24' C.I. FR. & CAVE' bit 6'-O' ti GRATE & FRAME c T s' 3' f1REGIlN DfT TYPE 2 CZ $1 CNARRIIWED) ce 2'-4�' 13. 2'-2i' 0 ti Z Li Li T � -- ▪4 /O O O • D.•..ma����En� Iq U O 1111• • 0 0 0 0 �.���,�--- Q O A . `!•4 • 00000 ...-----� C m � � U U i ��. •• '000000000000. x g a ^ i•i • u� EN • "' 0 000000.. ■,�rim-•v a.. 0000000 • . I:iu •� 1�1��1 rim O O O O O i��OMI�i�∎s∎1 Z0 v1 I r. 1��/--- --— `�. 0.0.0 • t I•■____��∎ww o ': Q CX (2)-2 TON LIFT INSERTS 0 U a BASE PLAN 'PVC PLASTIC BAFFLE COVER PLAN ' 4' PIPE Tfl FILTER i,-. .71, '!A air t4 + / / '1I STANDARD RANGE N I..• (2.75' to 2.9') p r O 1 D 3 6 8 re V �� 4'0 CLEANlIUT Hf1LE III i, i-. _low,-i ).: VITH PLUG iiii' a m 3)'4' onollu I•)�II111/ • noLET PIPE '•A OI d Tfl BE GROUTED IN PLACE _\' BY CfiNTRACTiIR 6 i •l2-INCH 0 WILE SMALLER NITUTLET PIPE 2—INCH 0 PIPE FRAM FILTER The STORMWATER MANAGEMENT i i SYormJti[er SIDE INLET BAY FILTER BAY Bx t U.S. PATENT No. 5,322.629, t No. 5,707,627, No. 6,027,639, MM n No. 6,624,676. AND OTHER U.S. AND FOREIGN PATENTS PENDING L., \ ^ e 7 DATA BLOCK ONE - CARTRIDGE CONCRETE CATCH BASIN STORMFILTER STRUCTURE CALLOUT ID WATER QUALITY FLOW (CFS) CONVEYANCE FLOW (CFS) RETURN PERIOD OF PEAK FLOW MEDIA TYPE RIM ELEVATION _ PIPE I.E. * PIPE MATERIAL PIPE DIAMETER INLET PIPE _ OUTLET PIPE CONFIGURATION: OUTLET P1 MIRROR IMAGE CONFIGURATION NOT AVAILABLE IN CONCRETE • INLET Pipe stubs are for illustration only. Pipes to be grouted into hole(s) provided OPTIONS (AVAILABLE AT EXTRA COST): HOLE FOR OUTLET STUB OTHER THAN 12" ]CLEAN—OUT IN WEIR OTHER THAN 4" CORED HOLE FOR INLET PIPE ]OTHER: * Outlet pipe IE is 33 to 35 inches (2.75 to 2.9 feet) below the rim. Deeper outlet holes provided at extra cost. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT INC . 12021—B N.E. AIRPORT WAY• PORTLAND, OR 97220 (503) 240-3393 • FAX: (503) 240-9553 sHEET °OMPIED°" CHECKED °`° °"" CONCRETE CATCH BASIN STORMFILTER oww e.: LGS .r.ToycD sr DOC 2/3 on m �wvn+ oro DATA BLOCK UNIT 2 K so. -1 PROJECT ea. DRAWING STORMWATER N..._ I IOD1 CBSF-1-Cmc d.y M A N A G E M E N T I N C. C EDIT:LGS PLOT DA1G 5/17/7001 2 A CONCRETE CATCH BASIN STORMFILTER SPECIFICATIONS PART 1 GENERAL 2.2 CONCRETE CATCH BASIN COMPONENTS 1.1 SECTION INCLUDES A. Concrete Catch Basin: Catch basin shall be pre-cost concrete construction, with reinforcing steel and mesh. Wall thickenesses shall be Catch Basin StormFilter approximately 3-inches (exact dimensions to be shown on shop drawings). Strength shall be odequote to support standard H-20 traffic loading. All 1.2 RELATED SECTIONS external fastenings and components shall be mode of non-corrosive material. Concrete shall hove a 28-day strength of 4.500 psi. Reinforcing Section [ ]: bar shall be grade 60 and shall meet ASTM A-615. Reinforcing mesh shall be grade 65 and shall meet ASTM A-185 1.3 SUBMITTALS B. Cotch Basin Grote and Frame: Grating shall consist of two welded steel A. Storrnwoter Management Inc. (SMI) to submit shop drawing to contractor bar grates with capacity for H-20 traffic loading. Bar dimensions and for approval spacing shall be according to Oregon Department of Transportation (0007) Drawing 1RD336. Grote and dimensions shall be according to this 000T B. Stormwater Management to submit Operation and Maintenance Manual to drawing except narrowed as shown on the SMI detail. contractor if requested. C. Catch Basin Manhole-type Lid: The lid over the cartridge chamber shall PART 2 PRODUCTS be a standard 24-inch cost-iron manhole lid with two lift holes. The support ring shall be cost into a separate slab as shown on the SMI 2.1 INTERNAL COMPONENTS detail. A. All internal components including PVC piping, filter cartridge(s) and filter 2.3 CONTRACTOR-PROVIDED COMPONENTS media (as specified in the StormFilter data block) shall be provided by Stormwater Management Inc.. 2035 NE Columbia Blvd., Portland, OR 97211 A. Sub-Base: Shall be 6-inch minimum of 3/4-inch minus rock or as (800/548-4667). otherwise specified in the general technical specifications. B. PVC Piping: All internal PVC piping and fittings shall meet ASTM 01785. B. Backfill: Shall be 3/4-inch minus rock or os otherwise specified in the general technical specifications. C. Filter Cartridge: PART 3 EXECUTION 1. Cartridge bottom pan, inner ring, and hood shall be constructed from 3.1 CONCRETE CATCH BASIN linear low-density polyethylene. Cartridge screen shall consist of galvanized 1' a 1/2' welded wire fabric (16 gouge minimum) with o bonded PVC cooling. Internal ports shall consist of PVC or ABS pipe and fittings. A. Catch basin floor shall be set level and plumb. Siphon-priming float shall be constructed from linear low-density polyethylene. Outer filter fabric shall be 10 x 8.5 clear fiberglass mesh. B. Contractor shall prevent sediment and debris from entering the filter Inner filter fabric shall be 10 x 8.5 clear fiberglass mesh over Enkamat unit during construction. 7210 or woven polyethylene with o US Standard Sieve #20 opening size. All C. Contractor shall compact sub-base to 95% of maximum density or as miscellaneous screws, nuts, and fasteners shall be aluminum or stainless otherwise specified by engineer. Unsuitable material below sub-grade shall sleet. be replaced as directed by engineer. 2. An orifice plate shall be supplied with each cartridge to restrict flow D. H necessary, the inlet chamber may be filled with clean water to assist rote to 15 gpm maximum. in preventing flotation during construction until the structure is bockfilled. D. Filter Media: Filter media shall be by Stormwoter Management or E. Contractor shall compact backfill to 95% of maximum density or as approved alternate. Filter media shall consist of one or more of the otherwise specified by engineer. following, as specified in the StormFilter data block: 1. Perlite Media: Perlite media shall be mode of natural siliceous volcanic F. Outlet (downstream) pipe (or on appropriate fitting) shall be grouted rock free of any debris or foreign matter. The expanded perlite shall have into the hole that is provided for the outlet. The grout shall form a a bulk density ranging from 6.5 to 8.5 lb/ft3 and particle sizes ranging water-tight connection. from 0.06 to 0.50 inches. G. If an inlet (upstream) pipe is required, the inlet pipe (or an appropriate 2. CSF Leaf Media: CSF Leaf media shall be mode exclusively of fallen fitting) shall be grouted into the hole that is provided for the inlet. The deciduous leaves with less than 5% by dry weight of woody or green yard grout shall form a water-tight connection. debris materials. Filter media shall be granular and shall contain less than 0.5% foreign material such as glass or plastic contaminants. Media shall be dry at the time of installation. 3.2 FILTER CARTRIDGE The CSF Leaf media shall have a bulk density ranging from 40 to 50 Catch Basin StormFilter shall be provided complete with cortridge(s) and Ib/ft3 and particle sizes ranging from 0.05 to 0.50 inches. Maximum level cartridge media installed. of dust for filter media shall be defined as: media passing through a US Standard Sieve #4 shall hove no more than 10% (by mass of dry media) 3.3 CLEANUP passing a US Standard Sieve #45. A. The project site shall be clean and free of dirt and debris before runoff 3. Zeolite Media: Zeolite media shall be mode of naturally occurring is allowed to enter the filter. Site work shall be in a complete condition as clinoptilolite, which has a geological structure of potassium-calcium-sodium approved by the engineer. The project site includes any surface that aluminosilicale. contributes storm drainage to the system. The zeolite media shall have a bulk density ranging from 44 to 50 lb/ft3, B. The inlet/outlet chamber and filter chomber(s) shall be free of particle sizes ranging from 0.125 to 0.25 inches, and a cation exchange construction debris and sediment before the system is placed in operation. capacity ranging from 1.0 to 2.2 meq/g. C. Contractor shall remove the 4-inch temporary construction plug(s) 4. Iron-Infused Media: Iron-infused media shall be made from phenolic between the inlet chamber and filter chomber(s) to place the system in resin mixed with iron particles and polymerized to form open cellular foam. operation. The stock materials must be free of debris with the iron particles being non-reactive and non-greased. D. The cleanout plug (generally a 4-inch expansion plug) in the overflow weir wall shall remain in place for proper operation of the system. The iron-infused media shall have a bulk density ranging from 20 to 30 Ib/ft3 and particles sizes ranging from 0.0 to 0.5 inches. END OF SECTION 5. Pleated Fabric Insert Pleated fabric insert sholl be constructed with a minimum of 75 sq-ft of fabric placed between two aluminum end cops with neoprene gaskets. The overall dimensions of the insert shall be 16.0" 0.D. x 11.5' I.D. a 18.25' tall. The fabric shall meet the following specifications: 140 pleats measuring 2.125' x 18.25'; 100% 3D PE/PET bicomponent fiber; thickness of 19 mils; Mullen Burst of 96 psi; and Coulter Porometer of 70 micron. s"EET °`aim`° ""'®wm °`° DOE, CONCRETE CATCH BASIN STORMFILTER -Br $0 Ns�am err -oat 3/3 an WC feASON aro wsa. ONE-CARTRIDGE UNIT SPECIFICATIONS 3 PROJECT No DRAWING FILE NAME: STORMWA N.T.S. _ 2001 C8SF-1-Concdrq MANAGEMENT INC. inn(00 LOS PLOT OATS 5/17/2001 NOTES: A ,� �, A 1. ALL MANHOLE SECTIONS SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM C-478 AND APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF STD. MANHOLE DRAWING NO. 010 �, ' 2 18L" T AND OUTLET PIPE NOT TO EXCEED I'(lir' ,' 3. PROVIDE SPECIAL DETAIL FOR OUTLET FLOW INLET - OUTLET CONTROL EXCEEDING 18" DIA. SUMP VOLUME AVAILABLE MINIMUM MAXIMUM 60" M.H.= 58.9 CF 98.1 CF 72" M.H.= 84.8 CF 141.3 CF PLAN 84" M.H.= 115.4 CF 192.3 CF PROVIDE SPECIAL DETAIL FOR VOLUME REQUIREMENTS EXCEEDING 192.3 CF if"-" ..mod' SUMP VOLUME REQUIREMENTS .'p � ' 20 CF/1.0 CFS OF INFLOW 58.9 CF MINIMUM REQUIRED REMOVABLE WATERTIGHT CAP OUTLET FLOW CONTROL ' .a '.!;t� PLASTIC OR DUCTILE IRON PIPE "T" '• OR APPROVED EQUAL. FLOC 2 FT FLOW INLET OUTLET >' 18" f 12" .tea: ' . r:e= i36"MIN. STD '�:'' U:a' SECTION B—B T s B B Iv , � v VARIABLE SUMP 4: DEPTH .—• 60" MAXIMUM r:::• :.. ANCHOR TO WALL WITH STAINLESS STEEL RISER 36" MINIMUM ;:A 60" MINIMUM e;a CLAMP OR STAINLESS STEEL BAND AND STAINLESS o:. p STEEL EXPANSION ANCHORS MIN. 2 PLACES. ` :;`' STEEL BAND TO BE MIN. OF 2" WIDE . .•• . . .., ,.i.o:1:"g7-:- .:;':"...;,";:; )4' SELF TAPPING CONCRETE ANCHOR : 'Q:•':.:':,ti.'.,e'a i •:�. ': •ai.;7•to.'','.'':, - PHILLIPS 5-12 OR EQUAL. )4"X1 )4" STAINLESS STEEL BOLT. MANHOLE DIAMETER TO BE DETERMINED � ;.. BY SUMP VOLUME REQUIREMENTS. p \7 o ''Q •tap) a ' SECTION A-A CLAMP DETAIL (SECTION A—A) N.T.S. WATER QUALITY N AN H 0 L E C1eanWate Services DRAWING NO. 515 REVISED 09-03 Our commitment is clear. 27 SEE S' )RAWING NO. 200 FOR TOP SECTION DETAILS Q ,° rA 3" SEE STD. ■ 48.. • - DRAWING NO. 100 a. , .o ° :. FOR STEPS .• Q d .'1•. .Ia'." ' .- A' •f175ilfii Y4' a:'.111111111 (1 c.Q: ORIFICE PLATE -•. d:•AND GUIDE PER • ••e • • CWS DETAIL , .. • MAX~ p • 1!.11 • a o . d • P . FOR PRE—CAST STRUCTURES • INSTALL HDPE SPACER AND •� • •' . ENCLOSE ORIFICE PLATE ON ••p. ' •• - ! o .va' • '•• ° P d V ' - • • o •V" ' ° /"I SIDES AND BOTTOM. FOR CAST IN PLACE STRUCTURES PROVIDE L...-A CONCRETE SPACER FOR SECTION B—B MOUNTING FRAME. PLAN VIEW MAXIMUM 27" FROM TOP OF FIRST STEP TO TOP OF GRATE. c\I i Y /////l//I o.•;•• ORIFICE PLATE Vie::.'. 4 -1:11...;.: AND GUIDE PER CWS DETAIL #546 , . ;4 a ° : . �, _ w 48" . - {6" FOR POURED IN PLACE 1 T ;'' " ° 5" WITH REINFORCEMENT FOR PRE—CAST y NOTES: o - Aa Li ° } 1. THIS IS AN ALTERNATE DESIGN FOR THE SECONDARY STRUCTURE CD a' '' - , IN OUTFLOW CONTROL STRUCTURE— CWS DETAIL #545 a . 7 ;' PE SIZES " : 2. PRECAST CATCH BASIN SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE• Q •- ARIABL ; .- WITH ASTM C-478. v 3. NON—SUMP INLET MANHOLE SHALL BE — -; -3"M n(. ° IN CHANNELED. V.: o;e 4. ALL POURED IN PLACE CONCRETE SHALL HAVE A 28 DAY '� •4 v STRENGTH OF 3000 PSI. AND A SUMP OF 2" TO 4" 5. ORIFICE I.E. TO BE SHOWN ON PLAN SET. ORIFICE DESIGN 1 °.',4 O •: 18" TO BE OUTLINED IN DRAINAGE REPORT. SUMP •4 i;;5*:;41: 21;53'�'e'''"F 10" MINIMUM OF �'a" TO 0" COMPACTED BASE MATERIAL. SECTION A- A ALTERNATIVE OUTFLOW CONTROL STRUCTURE I (MODIFIED CG-48 M.H.) CleanWater Services DRAWING NO. 544 Our commitment is clear. I a1:;; SOLERA n '�a alpha p TAX MAP : 1 S 135CA • 02300 & 02302 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY OF TIGARD ,WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON 9600 SW Oak,Suite 230 Portland,OR 97793 M503-45243003 503152 [F7 503-452-8043 3900 TL 4000 www.alphacommundy.com PROJECT TEAM: MAr'vv[sT �_ .__-..... � ,SDOm OWNER �` U T *000 c+ Sw ha 5 ,,,, REVISIONS -,�-- -- -- SviCagcade.4ve �-.:' .V !w!;......_. MAX MOINI&MOHAMMED TAVAKOLI-SHERAJI I-- - I Sw Thom 51 NO DATE DESCRIPTION 2946 NW 11TH AVE. I 6:: i `� l `s' a", 21 co CAMAS,WA 98607 a a m: q i d _ — — — — — sw Noah Dekote St Cn,onbu o PH:(3eo)s17-9o90 10 TL 2100 '° •f cPetofl f _ o i I `" SATE —t� G < 0 6 APPLICANT/ENGINEERS/SURVEYORS I — — — — — — 4 x. m ALPHA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT i� S`` pn�;s e 4 h n S 9600 SW OAK.SUITE 230 + � W/ • — — — — — — ____1 �`t t Q d' CAP' <,9at 4 `dtc�'14. PORTLAND,OR.97223 < ( P PH:(503)452 8003 < 8 ( ,� gw Kaltume st ^ L,e,,*Av, et9 0� "co 8,,s„, hs 6 P ss,n ' Pi e.SI sw Gorden PI - - - - - - ; :€ Asa.,,S` Tigard APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE 7 I s"e, 44',,,, s, 3 ae 4- ALPHA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT — — — — — — TL 2200 Q �' S� r` 7.. t 9600 SW OAK.SUITE 230 TL TnE` F 2905 MeoQu;St com ux P?20(2 Ne0/74 PORTLAND,OR.97223 I PH:(503)452-8003 I _ _ _ _ _ _ I NOT TO SCALE FAX:(503)452-8043 CONTACT:KIRSTEN VAN LOO 5 t _ _ _ _ _ _ SOLERA UTILITIES & SERVICES 1 i • WATER: CITY OF TIGARD I I 4 STORM: CITY OF TIGARD ! _ _ _ _ - _ SEWER: CITY OF TIGARD I ____ POWER: PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC 1 i j. 3 / . FIRE: TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE I ( . : POLICE: CITY OF TIGARD POLICE DEPT_ 1 ; SHEET INDEX: SCHOOL: TIGARD SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 ! TL 2303 I \ PARKS: CITY OF TIGARD t I I GAS: NORTHWEST NATURAL GAS I � ' I TL 2304 1 1 TITLE SHEET `, 1 2 EX.CONDITIONS PLAN TITLE I — __ 3 AERIAL VIEW AND CONNECTIVITY PLAN SHEET NOTES: F , l SITE AREA: 1.07 ACRES ' J 4 PRELIMINARY PLAT EXISTING ZONING: R.12 IL 2301 TAX MAP: IS 135CA 5 UTILITY PLAN TAX LOT: 2300,2302 . ____-__4 .._ NUMBER OF LOTS: 11 6 GRADING&EROSION CONTROL PLAN AVERAGE LOT SIZE: 3,065 SF. S _ �-- DRAWING DATE: 12-06-2005 `�_ 5'W G - -- i 7 96TH AVENUE PLAN - .___ EENBU RG R`D— - __ -----------T---__-_J �_ 8 SW GREENBURG IMPROVEMENT PLAN BENCHMARK: _______ _ a I f h a - 9 STREET TREE PLAN BRASS DISK IN THE CURB AT THE SOUTHWEST ` 1` ---_� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF 1 ---- - ` -___! SW GREENBURG ROAD AND SW 95TH AVE PROJECT NO.: 328-031 TYPE: PLANNING DATE: NOVEMBER 2005 GRAPHIC SCALE G , 1 0 60 ( IN FEET 30 I irwe= rt. N.\pa1\999-261\dwg\PLANNING\SHEETS\999-261-T(RE.dwg-SHEET:2244 Dec 06.2005-I0:I5omgnt . , , ; • ..,„...• , ....* -..--""--- -—I , . - ' ,..--------.... I I TL 3700 I 1 ..- - I li4ti*— -— i_- . _ i I ----.--- __,— , , .• : ..• TL 4100 I __—— _ -205—— I . . • ... : TL 380Q 1 i , al pha _,..., _____________._....__________..___ , . . . --. LEGEND .. . : . ....205__ I : • _ I 1 __--- -----Z64--- EX 2-FT CONTOUR ----250----- EX i0-FT CONTOUR ..-f' —ss— EX SANITARY SEWER . : DEVELOPMENT ____,- , • 1 _i.'__DO-- 1 . —se— EX STORM DRAIN w— EX WATER LINE -------- ___ -11.4000 —0— EX GAS UNE -- -I 71_3900 , . 9600 SW Ook,Suite 230 1 ------ i i , . —PW1-- EX BURIED POWER I -------------2.10-- 1 1 —On— EX OVERHEAD POWER Portland.OR 97223 i..----------- i i . —1— EX TELEPHONE UNE [I]503-452-8003[F]5O3-452- 43 -I:\Cr"I 4.- aos' 1 . ... . r 1 —c,,Tv— EX CABLE N UNE \ a ''' ._:,--,-"ge-nt----z,--7-_ -.:.1:::,-,,,;,-,:om --_—,--_-_-_,-,... — www_olphocommunity.com .• wk- -4'.-_..-•- -W-i7R I.I-.. t I •-•-•-•---- EX FENCE .3 r- .......2is--- --- -.\! 4P ..../ ,- — ------ -1...4 1 0 EX SANITARY MANHOLE --,„<i. / li i 0 EX SANITARY CLEANOUT , / /-- ' ....."" I / 0 EX STORM MANHOLE REVISIONS , / ---- 4-1 , , i __ / ---' t . IL 2E0 0 EX CATCH BASIN NO. DATE DESCRIPTION I C 2CM -...-11 7' --to --- 1%, 0 EX STORM CLEANOUT 1 / I - \ / / .i. V..t..• -.47 EX FIRE HYDRANT . I 1 "/‘ ..:-. " Y / / • s EX WATER METER I < -‘•'''•b' ji / / I . EX WATER VALVE „.„, .., .,„ I / i iF ,I . EX GATE VALVE i N f._ / EX TELEPHONE RISER :.. I „ ,, .- . ” B/67R --- / -..' I I 0 Ex CABLE RISER / 1 / /- It i LOW * EX LIGHT POLE _ W I ,, I / / SIBIF51 E •e, " TREES TO REMAIN > \ .- I / I < al C-4 • / , , \ I i 1 , 1.,,,,,, EX TREES TO BE REMOVED 1 / : I I -.', I 11 9•;971? lr-----TI .., \ 1 TL 2200 • l -0) IL.\,'1( / 2 DMIX EXISTING d • • TL 24): -,--'1 F08114 ss. 0 m \• —,,:g,,_. rivo, I. . :. IREE/SHRUB DESIGNATION \"....- \\ I: ."'", 1----1---------- 66. '.k. AI STR f- 0 de CO \I , DIAMETER NAME \ / '1), L MAP I . B BIRCH l'-- \---- I EXISTIlk L--------P-1. '2"-- '''' C CEDAR • t -,_ H HAWTHORN . .....--- IN \ i HOUSE \ ---... / L LAUREL \ --- I ‘. 1 r ---\„ : —1-----; ,/ 1 M MADRONA MA MAPLE / ,.. r j ---:::-. : ---2/4,._k . P PLUM / 43.2tE.— --L i UO UNKNOM DECIDUOUS IN I .' ''V ,• ---. IIMIN.... ".------1 :... '.* N 11957.35.W . N., 16 ......- "...... .....? • • 'O ,I., . \ ! -..... . SOLERA - ----\-0fA., * riair I\ • APPROXIMATZ/ 7P' Am emir - • • • DRIP LINE TL 2303 \,..7",..„..Limrtiv, 1 IL 2304 ,., ------,. L. \ , , , , , XISTING \ I \._ .-1/ i I hs4 errAR-1 .1.\ \i ` \ i \ ,•,..; \ a 1, . --• -____-____ _ i • -. -......„ .en• - I : • ir•IR WITH YPC TISCREIED • 41111‘,... 41 D 5:F ' .., ••.„,. r'r - - _ TL 2301 ...- \ , CONDITIONS _____ ......., -----4•1--*__ ---__ _.- -- ..... .. 1------ _ , - IL 9000 -_._,...7 -...'`.----7--.-.....\-- wr1.■ .- ,... ----___ ...... _. — — . .. (c. '----"---- -... V4--""-- . ----------..I ..... --,....„. ..---- -...„. -----. etifept TYLUA.- -0 BENCH UARK w 214.79-------_ ----'1-----I,-------.-_ ---------... ON OPERATING NOT OF -_ -- FIRE HYDRA N NT ...._,T_________ .,....:..,..,. --••--..--- - N. • __ ----_____--■-..._ -- • - --" ----__,_ ---44t-alpha I __ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ...... I 1 . PROJECT NO.: 328-031 TYPE: PLANNING SCALE DATE: NOVEMBER 2005 30 0 15 30 60 N!e 1 iN.30 FT 14:\proj\999-261\dwa\PLANNING\SHEETS\999261-EXISId.0•SHEET: 2134 Dec06.2C05-10:15am pmt 1 , ,--------,71\ - 4 -, , i, ,..vd I -!1.-- ---1 ' / \ t,rk....1... -, .4 ,kik. '• , • Al.• , • 's - '''•' 7 4'7;1 -— 7,7744.47.4 r /t.1,. al -=','". -*ip'' .,- -gtV'' SAex,.........$1,8t••$04.414,04. . 4 41/4 • NORTtsii Elq:..kKOTA/,‘ aI p h a .. _.. . , COMMUNITY , . , . „_ tit , r. , .....,. „...4„.„ . . 7,,,,,,,,,..____ ,.... ,...1 , 1 c,,... ..„, , , f . . ' •• Ifkk Jo ' DEVELOPMENT il. 4 , t 1* ,,,r "'"'"r""r"''''' ". * 1 .i, A ..'i',..4tr, -, , , , , ' 1,4,.`:,..".. ■ 5 „ i.„. _,,,,, _ vos +,,, . ,4 .7, ," 4/..311111 - 10-1104k., , 4 ...4 , t 4' .1. '''4r '4 "P..; ' ,"4 i4 Lt- , . 4r i., ": f ".”," , 1 I " 4,5„,„,„„4.44,- ,5„t , • , 4$ 440' 9 * , t ,,' o. 4' a. . ,„44.„......04,,,..4K red, , , ,.., . .,:c it. . it . ,,, , , . ' i '- - , 1 ., *. 4 , ... I , , , , I ' , ., . . it, .„, ,„r_. ,..tr,. rz,,,, .. . ,..._ 4, 4 , . ii, -f . i... ' ft , , . _ .„ - - - I , 1 f 11 r ..4k. - ..i.7,4 f...'°-,.., .,7 9mp60000.5031452.80030S7Wpn:00c7:19k,mR503: ye223:92300043rn ' / ' IA;t ., 1 .0""- II.' . , r .,. , ,. • ., Ir. p, -. .' -.. --„ .4`..." t.-`, - '4.. ;# REVISIONS . . . . , ,,,,,,t,„; :.,..„..,44.;., ;i ,,, ., , i .0 ,:s , 'I; V141146.46* ' '-'4':::1 ,„,.,,, t NO. DATE DESC1RWTION „, , ,•4* ' ' — , ,, _ - 4 le '' °''''',7P44,4tti -,„' ,. 74' vo c'l .,:_i lo. 41* 4* ' . ---, ze, •,:t- I , , . , . , i t' r.,,P -..- .,_ ; I .444044 , .4. 4 F, ■..-,. , t ,,,, .e4r ' ''t., r ti „,, . * - , .N,„ I J., _ ...__t; i 116 , ''''' ,,I'' ^:46:0 ,,,,,,,,,,....77,.. ....11, „.... 1'---SIII"'*”: , 41,44,711'.4IrlIkrkTrt" all": 4...-- r'''''''1 .,..1 ", 12-1, I ■ ,..„ . ., 1,,z,,,_10.. r '" ''' '''' .141i -tr ,...! 1,' .-41- et-.. .=- 7 4'Z''.. ' ' ' 4**,44'4 * :", 1. X r ,,„,. . , , - i ' -,-.0.4 .T4' . . , .„.1 .4 • .- ,.% ,. ,, , . ,, ---- . . ...._ , -0*-- ,- -ow- '411'',,.., ' , -II* ' * ,„ . .. r ..44.. - . * , 4 , -.-,,Nlit „ - _ .....- 4 .t --$, ... A . 0.0"*.4% ' - -- 1,$- ; ', ,.. ,A...„. i ' \ .4*,, ,,,- ° rr = , co,' \ I ---.7.------- lii 14, - '-,“ IV ..." t#4:‘ .„..4<",' 4k .. -' 4,k,'f':"...■,*; '' '' 40,46,,r .-, ., i, ., ''. t A •••,,a. '',,,'7. . i ' 1:, 11.4r 1: '''''''. ' ' 4 4.' ""' '. '44 4S7P1144' * ''' d SOLERA ;,.. ''';*,.. .1/47e' ''- ,,,- !,,:ett, 4: : ''''''„,,I1.-':':=, t, ?' ' '',:r.• ... ',,,-.. .:;-- . ,,,4 , ..,_,,,,,..:,,,, _.,, ...i. , ,,, ,,,, ,..„ .. . , ,, * ■.,A _ „,.- „ ,''' , ,...., A tp ,,,,, ' , ''''':,4„,r - ,- - ..... , .i ., 4 ,.", ". - ' -*.;.,.: - -, . --'4.'e., e'" ' I , .„ . . ... ..,. ,,..._ •, . . Jw , 1 ,,,, -- ,..0. ; -.. . - - — -- 4.t.i...... .‘• I t to , H vo..-,,..,..-‘ty.„ ?-., .i..-,:,..-11...„ .„ ; 9 .. .._.., , . ...' ...•'.,Lt**,.. '4 . . .. -__ _ .341116. ' '''''''' ' ''''' '''' '''.1k.'1 '-' 4 ,'.0., . ,•;,,, -; I 8 _____ _ ,4,e iip. , .., ,. . . . ;... .,,.:-.- „skt,..e .. ...,,,-.„1,.. - ,4,7*---,-' r- .,.. „. • ef ', ,,,4_44 ,,, - , - ' - - i AERIAL VIEW - ' - IC ' . -7' 4.:2-,-;:r= ;14 . • .4! '-§ 1 ! . . '- . " ,. 1 • , - -,t ' .-4-.I.#' • .‘1% :.• - , - , .41..4, _.--i.A. ,,-,,,--z.:, , , , cri -F—-- . — ,,ti,41-;'' ,, .. l'' >tii ' 4-4;;;-17.-4' ,-'-A: ": - "' 'i'-A AND , ' ''.,:-.,-7,'; 4, 0...4"'' ' .4,-..--.N. .' , '''''.. - -- f. .!-.:- -7. ..---"'"*.l. _ __ _ 4i I ' .;,,, .4, < ,, a, ..,„ A , Ir.-- CONNECTIVITY : .. 4, • , , - . ..,. .. ,,, : i ft.' ' • -,,, 4.4....• , __ ____ t , , - — 44- 4 it---- 4 1 4 ,11 ,X, .:' -4.,• i'''‘',:tk, ...r -, =.=' ' ' - „„i;- i PLAN r.,,,, „ -,,,, ,„ ,,,,i,,v ,,, .0i ,:, IP .a*, , . l'=';,,r7- . 4... , .. ..., t .... _ f .1, . 'CD '" -rk- '''., - 7,4$41,,, - , 141'''t*I' 1 ' '''''' 6 - ' '1444_,,-I'' :6 ' '''' I i -47---41;* :igt1 -—— *-.,,,-;'' ''''.Ill' 1 ' ' ' '•- - '' :- 7°'.. . ' '** i k... , t . .... -. .4 ' '16''''''' ..„, '110111 ,..f' - — - 1 1 ., ' 3 .. . .. libillit to' , 'NW :Irt.:0,,,,,,,..f.„.:1;4 4.4.-r . .. , ( - .A , ,, 4., , a f - . 4vs c i 0 , -,, • 1. - . *,,,t-',‘1,I ',-;ts''', t ' - — ,,--ii..ikr, 14- . . . , joilla , ' • .' ;', ., 1 i ., v i 1 : '•••,- ' '`' .„ ..« i. -' LI':„. ' ' ,- ,,* , ' u.7,,' 1;4 ' - ' ''• ' -4..",,,,t)aRt,,,,%,.. " ' .,- i '46,., .4* ...,•, ,, ,*41,..,.. , . .-; ,..1A • -.,.=-<, , ,,,!.... ....._,4 i...,...'" ,.. _ •1,-- ' At et . - '.,, kg, rt-- 1 ,, -44 K , , , ,---- - --.. ___ - -:-...p.; tool•-t' -4 K., I ....• EVEDLOPh3214ArANENIi , . .1 14;" w , - 41t-' sc- aw , , ,'-"..... ENBLJR , It% G FZO o' . . -- - '- 6,44.4,„ .1 * .1tv.i'.>,. " ply, 4 4 .0 ..74,4,,,' ``' '-• , -.4v4aar,11r, r i - 4 Nit - - ; * ‘11"N\prof\999 2:1\-0 9 PLA-NN4NG\SHEETS\499161-AERIAL 6.0•SHEET ZW4 Dec 06.2005-10 i ban,7nt COTYPE pDATE:Rmo j‘m PLAN TN 1 veN o.: ,....,, \ \\ \\ . . 100- , I 1L4100 \\ „... Ti.380 alpha 0 • \ % . ___________ \ . , 1 \ , ,, ____ : COMMUNITY \ \v, DEVELOPMENT \ i : \ \ \\ 5a o' , , : t 11_3900 IL 4000 1 I I I 1 i 10.5 1 39.5' 1 I FliT. i 1 I 9600 SW Oak,Suite 230 I R/W R/Wi 5.5. . C/L•. i.5,.....Ri_W Portland. OR 97223 i 20.0' 1 I [1]503-452-8003 [9 503-452-8043 I - --- min S-11-----rtn-----—-- FUTURE PLANTER EIM ad 1 i 11 - — , STRIP WITH 1 MEANDERING 1 www a]phocommunity com 1 ..;1: 3,097 SF I,... SIDEWALK 15.5' 4' 1 •P ,F, ".I i I I 1 I v ■ 1207 1 ..., 1 b I in --1,`, 1 1L2100 REVISIONS 1 , I iv 2.0%1 3,034 SF 2.5% I'' NO. DATE DESCRIPTION I .1 i •;,' I I-.1 - 12,n' ___. SIDEWALK / 1 , '5'S i 9 a : I I " 3,065 SF I" SW 96TH AVENUE ,___ — __„ . _ _ _1 . 123.2. - -- ( -.•°:""'.''' 0 '0,..0 NOT TO SCALE wi 1 8 3,178 SF _ 1- I 7 10.0 co > 134.5"- < .• : • • . -,,:f i io ,o .• 4, N I 3,378 SF ■ • " 135.7* —I TL 2200 F.-.. IL 2400 1 w' 1 6 ro R/W a) I ,,, gl L_ 3,409 SF I,,,, 50.0' -------- i ------1_,... .• : I I ' ..v7 n• ---- 0.5.-.-r U) -,.... I , (1)'' :7; F s ,b ,_ el 5O - 3,440 SF I f;' a 5' __., 20 4.1 1 -----1 PLANTER D 15.0. I STRIP 7------- ___ r 1 .14: _3/471 _ 1 I ' '':, ,c,"'i ; 3 t. i I 28. .--,.; " 2,544 SF SW GREENBURG RD 1 f / I ", I HALF STREET WIDENS FROM APPROX 10.2.-13 3 TO 230 SOLERA f PROPOSED FUTURE ROW 71 .- ' 1 80.9' 15' ROW DEDICATION REQUIRED r............................Z..., I,' 2 TL 2303 NOT TO SCALE V I"' TI_2304 • 1------______ 1 . • --1---___ ------------7.---L----.... / ;01, -I 82.0. —I -'. / Ki I•-s I -----______ -- Ila , --4 .. , ----7----_ it \ ia'4411312ftilf -1:-- EPUE -.. llowassesitift 8' PUBLIC LEGEND SIDEWALK U.2301 • —--—PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY PRELIMINARY VISION 0 I —-- EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY ..... LE 4) " . PT .........._ TRIANG - _ PROPOSED CURB --- I -•---- 0 b _ — — —PROPOSED CENTERLINE S IV GR=. F.--___ Ci _ . FO 3,, -------'--„ I EXISTING CENTERLINE 4-ENEI -• "" ---,..- ---___...._ 1 - Lircr-G RD ---- --,___j ----PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE • - ---__ -- - .1.--„........ -- EXISTING PROPERTY LINE ------■-2.--------___ - ___ No, ------o-- ---—PROPOSED BOUNDARY LINE -... ._. • - Pi.ou -----4-- - -----_ -----••-•., s isie 7-alpha GCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • I 11_202 PROJECT NO.: 328-031 IL 300 SCALE TYPE: PLANNING 30 0 15 33 60 DATE: WmilMIN 1 IN-30 FT N:\proi\999-261\dwg\PLANNING\SHEETS\999241-SITE PLAN.dwg-SHEET:211604 Dec 06.2005-10.16n gmt ihr I . 4,.^ H alpha . ____ , . • • COMMUNITY i - ca. SD 1 "IL 3900 TL 4000 DEVELOPMENT ! INV. OUT 209.88, 10- SD ( 18'PUE I 9600 SW Oak,Suite 230 I SDMH 5 INV- IN 209.77, 10• SD (!, Portland,OR 97223 INV- OUT 209.60, 12•sD LEGEND It s 11 sDCe 2 m say 2�DD3 m so3 es2 eon• i t'=''' I WATER QUALITY EASEMENT ONES ' www.alphacommunity.com rj _ _ .CATCH BASIN _ —_ I —SS>— PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER ■ I I �Iry L' rt I —SS— EX SANITARY SEWER 1 t 10 + 2U —SD>— PROPOSED STORM DRAIN —D--— EX STORM DRAIN REVISIONS WATER S —R PROPOSED WATER UNE SERVICE (TYP.) NO DATE DESCRIPTION ! (1 I W EX WATER LINE 7 I ® PROPOSED SANITARY MANHOLE : x — — — — I ——----^.. __----— { • EX SANITARY MANHOLE I o �' i • PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE cn f° 8 I Ir1 EX STORM MANHOLE SDMH 4 1III I wv. IN 20913, 12" SD • PROPOSED CATCH BASIN i ? INV. OUT 209.03. 12-SO I tt.. I I 1 7 1 I - H 4 — — — — 1 TL 220(7 � TL 2400 6 I — — — — PIPED I 5 • oETENTI. j I SYSTEM SDCB 2 • tI WATER QUALITY – I • SDMH 3 - CATCH BASIN I INV. IN 208.55. 12- SD T INV. OUT 208.45, 12'S0 I / 7-- , 50M1-1 2 1 – I INV. IN 208.19, 12• SD I W SEIM ATER'QUALITY I TL 2303 , SOLE RA INV. 7 SD CATCH BASIN O 2 INV. OUT 207.9.9 9,. 1 12.50 TL 2304 I 1---_. lit I _ _ 1 E _"`_`_ IE 12'N Em202.3 TL 2301 SDMH•-~T'^•-- ...______ / IE '['DOT 1i=2L:+.2; NV. IN 207.82 ��. ' TO BE RELOCATE] UTILITY --- +NV: or 207.72 ss SVV GRe "v-- — __-_, _~ PLAN ENgV 1 -alpha I0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • 1 PROJECT NO.: 328-031 SCALE TYPE: PLANNING 30 0 15 30 60 DATE: livel 1 IN=30 FT 5 • N: 01999-261\dw PUNNING\SHEETS\999261-I1fILCON.dw -SHEET:22%34 Dec 06.2005-10:16om t \PI I 9\ B 9^' I A _ : \ LEGEND alpha 205--,' i I \ - -26.-- EX 2-FT CONTOUR � \ \ --� —26i— EX 1D-FT CONTOUR i \ \ __ _ - X DRAINAGE DIRECTION COMMUNITY -'',0-f - - EX SANITARY SEWER DEVELOPMENT s j 1 % — _ — _ _ 1 TL 3900 TL 4000 EX STORM DRAIN • I _ .- 1 - I w— EX WATER LINE _--_ — 1 O-_ i G EX GAS LINE 1 K"a Ex BURIED POWER 9600 SW Oak.Suite 230 n 1 -- -- Ex OVERHEAD OWE --'_� - ..- •� ti-i EX TELEPHONE LINER [T]503452- 3 [F]501-4528043 .o / ` '. I / i 0:1— EX CABLE N LINE www.alphacornmunity.com • 1 "," i i EX FENCE -- -- :' �1..,- — T I I:r EX SANITARY MANHOLE 1 „�.�" i , # "�L 2100 $ EX SANITARY CLEANOUT i 2100 c247R,, 6 r ..:1 4r I_-"_ - .4........„ I r 0 EX STORM MANHOLE REVISIONS i11 .^ g' o EX CATCH BASIN l % — in NO. DATE DESCRIPTION Ft.... -/ 1 ,�t S EX STORM CLEANOUT `7 EX FIRE HYDRANT 'I.1,, . Y a 1 e EX WATER METER -- -SEE NEE >'''- \ III — —Y / — �� • EX WATER VALVE PROTECTION 816 . I A EX GATE VALVE NOTES ,� ■ 11, D.�'.--.-..... ....... _ __., Es EX TELEPHONE RISER / ----- -1-' S1 89'5Y 'E __.._..... -. EX CABLE RISER `• !,:;;;/;', ..L','''''" x - -� .? EX LIGHT POLE d, 1 3� ,t 7 \ I •e EX TREES TO REMAIN • 1 ., I H 9",97R 1►"-JINGJ — . I �2200 •e EX TREES TO BE REMOVED TLnA�t•s 1I [a ++ tL 24 O ` v �j I..i.. , A ,i 8 T5 1 `; / � j i ' eaur 'VA 5 TREE PROTECTION NOTES �� ('1 I I xt.TC ate AT AN ON-SITE PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING, CONTRACTORS WALL BE BRIEFED IN DETAIL �� ,�s' _ ABOUT THE TREE PRESERVATION AND ENVIRONMENTALLY ZONED AREAS OF THE SITE, AND _ '�, T Hpl15E;\ A I I' , APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS SUCH AS THE RESTRICTIONS ON EQUIPMENT MANEUVERING, �� \\ 1� : 't _ STORAGE, STOCKPILING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES WITHIN THESE AREAS. SEE TREE P 'i _ `.21' — 1 ALL CONSTRUCTION WORK, INCLUDING STAGING, STORAGE, AND EQUIPMENT MANEUVERING, I �� i1 I _ _1 WILL BE CONFINED WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ZONE LIMITS, LOCATED OUTSIDE OF TREE PROTECTION ' — - N 895135'w 1 a 1 //4 4' "� n7 49.2fL / -• PROTECTION AREAS AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL ZONES. NOTES rs-' ll� I ' 4 € `_ �} - =• '�% TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FENCING WILL BE INSTALLED ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF THE t1 �y TREE PRESERVATION ZONE AND AROUND INDIVIDUAL TREES AND IDENTIFIED IN THE TREE f1 I `'"1\ ! 1 PRESERVATION PLAN FOR PROTECTION. FENCING WILL GENERALLY BE INSTALLED 5 FEET-4 APPROXIMA / 1�IIV;, I I '� ANNG \ "ry 23O OUTSIDE OF THE DRIPUNE OF TREES, OR AS DIRECTED BY THE PROJECT LANDSCAPE SOLERA _ '� 1 r \ I TL ARCHITECT. FENCING NEED NOT BE INSTALLED ALONG BOUNDARIES OF TREE IF1� "" t 1 \ ! • r L TL 2304 PRESERVATION AREAS WHERE NO CONSTRUCTION WORK WILL OCCUR (E.G., ALONG OUTER 1 ■i q I \EXISTINL. I `: 1 y\�� r ,�-- PROPERTY LINES). _ '11 ` ( ............__ ____.. ..,„. ...._...�. PLASTIC FENCING SECURED WITH METAL POSTS OR STEEL FENCING ON CONCRETE BLOCKS. 1 I--- BRIGHTLY ^ ' I , 1 \a\ �I �� f FENCING MUST BE FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT AND MAY BE EITHER BRG TL COLORED �a � ' 1 ..�, . I,1 r, 6 ��',_ w \ 1 I FENCING WILL BE INSTALLED BEFORE CONSTRUCTION STARTS AND WALL REMAIN IN PLACE -1-�,.c-- ,I. s,b UNTIL ALL CONSTRUCTION WORK IS COMPLETED. \ y UN PLET --_ CO,yRUCTION ENTRANCE .,��N„ 1 ,• /`-0 THE CONSTRUCTION FOREMAN WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING THAT ALL --r �, +°, yr..n / IE i_•IN t rA IL 2301 CONSTRUCTION FENCES ARE PROPERLY INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE ._ ".�,,;;`� "`°"°' ++ / CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. ._.__ .� E,z rrT�, L�: GRADING 1 �� �._` ,..\,---_____ '� �- OF PAVING OTHER TREE PROTECTION DEVICES : - '—�. 'may \ CURB LINE WILL BE REPLACED IMMEDIATELY BY THE CONTRACTOR. 'b%� �'V---� EX DAMAGED OR IMPROPERLY FUNCTIONING FENCING AND 0 .�"`--J- (STING EDGE I R �1j -L EROSION SEE s CONTRACTOR TO MATCH - - GENERAL TREE NOTES:NBURG :.. 1 T W P_,. T CONTROL '`V �i' FOR LINE AND GRADE --___ .1:6'• �� '""^-,..-i THERE ARE NO HERITAGE AND/OR HISTORIC TREES LOCATED ON THIS ENTIRE SITE PLAN s ' ===="�---._� �_"�-may.,-_ NO TREES, SHRUBS OR VEGETATION TO BE CUT OR REMOVED WITHIN AN ENVIRONMENTAL i _.. �_-``_ \ _ `_�� ZONE. -alpha (0 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCALE PROJECT NO.: 328-031 30 0 15 30 60 TYPE: PLANNING `— --�—__� DATE: 1 IN=30 FT N:\pdi\999-261\dwg\PUNNING\SHEETS\9992 61-GRAD.dw -SH EET-2D3. Dec 06.2005-I:16am gm 1 6 : I 110 1 / I 1 I r . . .410 i / ■ / / I 1 I i / / . , , 4 ) _ 1 ,------------- I -----------74•- 1 .....--- 1 alpha , t / i __ _ __ __ _ __ _ ,.._, _ _.. , , PROPOSED ,' 'Ir'': 0.1:0 7.00 7.2i1.511 : .• . . FUTURE ROW 1 ., .,, ■--- . - ,--- ■ . ' • I • • ." : ....,......./:;4- .... 1: 1, . :El. i •, I i 1 COMMUNITY yi i : ' i , ..... i . , i , ________(71;,-3o• - -- _ . ;i i 1 - PROPOSED '''''''‘\\I DEVELOPMENT I/1 i CURB & GUTTE1-;\._ 11111m.....\ .127..1.=,0.....L_ -__ PROPOSED ....". ..-^ ........,„. ..........e........„...... / / €.0 ii \ BARICADE ....,../....... ..., ' - ----- 4 1 i 1 i 1- .......r,,,, •:•:r.':'' . ,-,-, ■.,,,, /I 1 I if /, . ,,,,,,,,,,:: : ._, • _ __:: ,,,, . ._ , SIN 96TH AVE ,• -- ___- _- 1 Portland, OR 97223 - 0 ,„ -- • cP• I 7 I O.i ...„,. '''„ 0, •D r...., --,- 1 1 71.1002 [T]503-452-8003 19 503-452-8043 o 3,0o .'•ig - .._ r I I www.olphocommunify com , ...... / 4' 11 I 1 e 0+ - -- ( ,''- ...4 ' i • I r ,..:. i-- ---------- I 1 p ____ _-_-_ _-_:111 : REVISIONS I m i 1 ... /1 . i NO. DATE DESCRIPTION : I ' . / -- r al :. , 1 -,,•'•,:1' :-• ,.-- , 1 I 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 I 11 :1 PROPOSED-T LIONOUTHIC I CURB &SIDEWALK I C , ... € • AL II - i -..,! -• . I ot -q 3 1 Q i 8 ... 1 TL 3700 , .....-....- 1 "I 1 . .•• . IL NOD 9062 i 5 00'02'25" • ;II/ i / .../ , '90s. -C.1-- 1 if/ ,/. I * IL 3300 i I Ii• 811 / 1 ; t..1 i it 1 4 1 TL 3500 / I - TL 3300 i i ;11. bi Val I , --/(1 ; 1 i I 1 , IL 2304 * 43' i ;71 9 S 00'02'25"W , ,....., ill 115 60' -8 I If I . S 0002.25 W 7...,/ I/ / 1 m , -„....., H.P. ELEV = 218.16 H.P. STA 4. 2+20.93 PM STA = 2+50 LP. ELEV- 211.96 PVI ELEV= 221.50 LP. STA = 0+51.49 A.D. = -14.61 PVI STA = 0+60.35 K = 13.69 PNA ELEV= 211.67 SOLERA A.D. - 7.18 .... 200.00' VC K .4 5.57 P%.4 STA-= 4+25 P■A ELEV= 205.00 . 40.00' VC . c., 0 ,, A.D. = 3.82 in ._+ 7,j, U) K = 26.20 d) .3 z 100.00' VC tfi V n - + w'1 • - a 4., 2 .... O ° 0 • vs r•i F., .3 -3 0 c. + 220, - o i •. ili I .. e‘ ;,..,. .• .• . .• .• I • , ., . I : .••• .• .• ,,-- , I :7, I : .• .• .• : .. .••I • .•••• : ..._._- ....._-...' --•-..- . ..• : .• > co ! 1A1 ..+--- : -d-- I (..) ,., • . : .•: . : in r -1- 6 ,.., .• . .• 1 . . : ...._ g o I . •-..-„----i-----, . t -1--- r- m it 96TH AVENUE -2.f .---.--r-'''' 1 .‘ ! I \ , . 2 • ---Z.---- `L. 01 P. .--. I . ' --...... .. 'SI 4.3 PLAN : -....,4 + I 210-- : • •.... a 2 i .•• • i --- . --.. I. AND , .• -... Sf:4 I'i : ..... PROFILE .• ..• .• _ . • -.. ..: , . .• .. .. .. • -----_:_„..... : ... ----..--....„_ i t . .• .• .• • .• .• .• .• .• .• 200 1.-----.4.------1 • • .• . .• .• .• .• '• 7-- 4"f4 I . . .-............ ... ........... . - p'..,i4,, . alpha .4 - ____ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT --- .• -----'s--....._1....., 190 - -..--- I , _. , PLANNING 3 2 8 3 1 . TP1::::.E.1:ECT NO.: .• - • : .••• I .. . . . . ..• : . ' I (Ci..)) DATE: : : . . .• . : ; I i i . SCALE .•• : • • • . ... ■ : : , . : ,. .• 30 0 15 30 66 • ..........._:____ i ' . . ' 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00 7 1 IN=SO FT N:\prof\999-261\dwg\PLANNING\SHEETS\999261-STREET.dwg-SHEET:21b-.34 Dec06.2006-10:16am grnt 0 , , 1 . : • . L lace . i - Inn .11.011111! -N 1391524-E- n \ 1 / 1 LEGEND a I p h a . ,____________ I .. io 13, m g I- TL 2100 PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY —PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER PROPOSED CENTERLINE • DCEOVMELMOPUMNEITNYT 9 1 EXISTING CENTERLINE 4.1: , PROPOSED HANDICAP RAmP I —-_—------- -.-.' ! f ‘ 9600 SW Oak.Suite 230 1 i . •- • 8 OM' -E - 4.mpriv:::: PROPOSED A.C. PAVING Portland,OR 972_23 pi 503452,3033 IFJ 503452-8043 S 8917 - I":.'::.... •,--d PROPOSED SIDEWALK t www.olphacommunity.com I ! i '7 PROPOSED SIDEWALK BY• ' I • . : . ..;, , ---- OTHERS• TI . . I TL 2200 i 1.-..:::-,.,, .:-.1 EXISTING SIDEWALK •: : TL 2400 • 6 REVISIONS . -0.. NO. DATE DESCRIPTION 7--. .... .* .1 r. . .• . , ---____.... I . .• - 8 . -- ----.............., 5 • _j I — ___ I _. : ., —_________ 4 I — — — —1 I 1 . 49.20' : • 1 3 N Br57.35"W I __ ' , . i - g'....!?- i ' • I 4` PROPOSED •••, ,.. I ----------, ___ ..,...„7,----FUTURE ROW 2 i TL 2303 4)---....._____,........._ .............. I TL 2304 1 _ 1 :' , --____ _ , ■ --- ...,_______) 1 :: ( ,, .R-,.. _ -----._____ ... _._, 2 g Ti . . . . 1 -_. ------ ___ lar ■;,;,.. .':: ---1 1 ! - i rnirsiamearia --____ I • - TL 2301 • ----____ • : . .1.... i --- ----.___ _. / -..-".....-..........___ 44.00 -----.47 I EXISTING EDGE OF PAVING _____________. --- --4-- ----.---/D .—. &CURB LINE SOLERA _ SW ' . --___ —______5 ,r1.--_ — .I 11_9030 ---_______ 3,,,, CONTRACTOR TO MATCH SCALE .0.:I. .. n- --------___------7---------ENBURG RD -re, UN AN' e.' I 30 0 15 30 60 - _____:. ...r _____ `---_._.....____ --_______ ----..-______ • • MIS 1110111.1111 . --- -34.00___. ' • • • IIMI "-- -4........ — 1 IN=30 FT --------4-.-_, ..... ...... ......,„........../.4.40 --....,............_ 1 --------..._ --..-. ---••••.„.„,.., .,.. ----.._ -....._______ . !-- SW GREENBURG RI , ,.., L, L... . V HALF STREET En I- cn , i2 wz LI- LI IMPROVEMENT < > 2 0 CC a . 2 IX PLAN m _ m 220, • , . . . , —, - 220 i 1 : .•• I : i ' . . . . i , i 1 ! .•• • I .• , : . . . : • TE 1 I ...._.!__...... ..- I . . I ! EXISTING CENTER LINE i • 1 1 • 1 : • . • 1 1 _.,...----t-i___:_______i_-----, 1• 1 --------L--------4-----------------4—• - I-1 •-I-- -F— • . , - ""• -- 4 .-- • -4.._ •--r• : -,- — -- - -. —— ——— — 1 I i 1 I I ___-.-i—-- — : . - -444-alpha 210 I i •-•• ---- 210 _.1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1 71 i • 7 1 i ,.._ ,■ I i .:•, J1 i I I _ 1, PROPOSED lowuN -i t 7 _ . . d. _ ,i -,.•.• _ _: _ PROJECT NO.: 328-031 .• • . I , • . : • • . • ' TYPE: PLANNING 1 _____4_ . 1 . : : .. 200 DATE: I i 1 , I I 1 I . I i ■ . ! ■ , I • . , I 1 i . 1 1 • • . i . i . ; - 7+50 7+00 6+50 6+00 5+50 5+00 4+50 4+00 3+50 3+00 2+50 2+00 1+50 1+00 0+50 0+00 -0+50 NApioN 999-261\dwg\PLANNING\SHEETS\999261-GREEN0URG.dwg-SHEET:27%34 Dec 06.2005-10:16am gm? (IP 0 � _ - , . ---n_.; _li. alpha a a. _ - , p s. , PLANT SCHEDULE COMMUNITY ��' p') DEVELOPMENT ISTREET TEES QTY SIZE SPACING BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME 10�1kJ 1'- �, 13 2"GAL. AS SHOWN PT-RU5 CALLERYANA GALLERY PEAR 960D SW Oak,Suite 230 I : I �����,J ' Portland,OR 97223 I9 1( �iil (11 503-452-8003�J 503-452-W43 I Ito.NMI 9 Oka TREES QTY SIZE SPACING BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME www.alphocommunity.com I ® 7 _— :4 b-T B48 AS SNOIU4 ARIES CONCOLOR WHITE FIR r•\-I�ri� PA PERE3ARK MAPLE �� � WESTERN REDBUD REVISIONS , I_i�- NO. DATE DESCRIPTION ,.� 8 ��� _._.. 2 CAL AS SHOWN RHI15 TYPHINA STAGHORN SUMAC I - -e)' *r y tkAlt, SHRUB oTY SIZE SPACING BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME I E 7 0-0,,, 71 2 GAL AS SNOOIN CAMELLIA SASANQUA SASANOJA CAMELLIA 1 �. , �` /.- _29 2 GAL AS SHOWN RHODODENDRON SP. RHODODENDRON S . 1 I 6 e_, z , .'�. WIND VOIDS ' I ito��q i - ,S�i 6' PRIVACY FENCE a i�� 5 �, NV , A „are I-' ' & '',; - —■ 4 ` 7 /\/\/\/\ /\ I I tic.r. All* 11.046''..\ I CO 3 \�j�p� .. it : .�i ,_... 1 II S O L.E RA I II 1 01 2 v. lin: 1 ® 1 Lro: STREET mg,1 ® TREE � ►��� 1►U PLAN , .. 11111741111"114,- 'A, • i -III-1 I I I I-1 I I-I 11-I 11-I 11-III-I 11-111_ 1 1- Till II= -i I " • '111 =11 _ •III- III • 1=1 44-4-alpha s0, /r 1r _I -A -_ -Iii_ GRe.,Na 11-111-111 111-111-111-1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT •Alm �R ,,=,,,=,,,=, —1�i 1=1�1—I�,e G Rp O Privacy Fence-Elevation NTS PROJECT NO-: 999-261 TYPE: PLANN INC DATE: NOVEMBER 200! SCALE zo o io zo AO iiiiii 1 IN 4 20 FT 9 C:\wok\BGPIo1_2612\999261-PLNT.dwg-SHEET:2231 Dec 06.2005-1105am gm. CITY OF TIOARD Community Development Shaping)1 BetterCommunit, [_ LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION 120 DAYS = 5/20/2006 FILE NOS.: SUBDIVISION SUB) 2005-00023 _ _ ___......... ,t !_- e-!-----t.±,:z.-. --Exiliv-iimui0/not fiitjaized) AD'USTM ENT VAR 005-00094 VARIANCE VAR 2105-00095 VARIANCE VAR 2005-00096 VARIANCE VAR 2005-00097 VARIANCE VAR 2005-00098 FILE TITLE: SOLERA SUBDIVISION APPLICANT: Palmer & Associates OWNER: Max Moini and Attn: Al Jeck Mohammed-Hossein Tavakoli-Sheraji 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 2946 NW 11`h Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Camas, WA 98607 REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of an 11-lot subdivision on 1.07 acres. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes. Lot sizes within the development are proposed to be between 2,441 and 3,471 square feet (3,065 square feet on average). An access and egress adjustment to the street spacing requirement along SW Greenburg Road an arterial, from 600 to 240 feet between the existing 95 Avenue and the proposed SW 961" Avenue is requested. Access and egress adjustments for the driveways for proposed Lots 1 though 5, which are within the 150-foot influence area of an intersection with Greenburg Road, are also requested. In addition, the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive R-4.5 zone on the east) for proposed lots 1 through 4. LOCATION: 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S135CA, Tax Lots 2300 and 2302. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.370, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. DECISION MAKING BODY: ❑ TYPE I © TYPE II ❑ TYPE III ❑ TYPE IV DATE COMMENTS WERE SENT: JANUARY 31, 2006 DATE COMMENTS ARE DUE: FEBRUARY 14, 2006 ❑ HEARINGS OFFICER (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM ❑ PLANNING COMMISSION (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PM ❑ CITY COUNCIL (TUES.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PM ®STAFF DECISION (TENTATIVE) DATE OF DECISION: MARCH 20, 2006 I COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION ® VICINITY MAP ® TREE PLAN ® OTHER ® SITE PLAN ❑ WETLAND DELINEATION ® IMPACT STUDY ® NARRATIVE E DRAINAGE REPORT ® ARBORIST REPORT STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner (503) 639-4171, x2434 Thanks, Morgan Tracy, AICP Associate Planner y of Tigard - Community Development 125 SW Hall Boulevard (503) 639-4171, ext. 2428 >>> "Jeff Caines" <jeffc @srdllc.com> 8/1/2005 3: 08:16 PM >>> Mr. Tracy, I would like to request another extension for the Max Moini property. I would like to continue the application until Monday October 1, 2005. Please let me know if you are able to allow me this extension. I hope to have a revised application submitted for your review no later then the deadline. Thank you for your consideration. Jeff Caines Jeff Caines SR Design LLC 8196 SW Hall Blvd. , Suite 232 Beaverton, OR 97008 office: 503.469.1213 fax: 503. 469.8553 www.srdllc.com 2 PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN Project: Greenburq Heights COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST Date: 9/28/05 GRADING Z Existing and proposed contours shown. ❑ Are there grading impacts on adjacent parcels? ❑ Adjacent parcel grades shown. ❑ Geotech study submitted? STREET ISSUES Z Right-of-way clearly shown. ® I Centerline of street(s) clearly shown. ❑ Street name(s) shown. Label new N-S street as 96th Avenue ® Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown. I I Street profiles shown. Greenburg profile to extend 300 feet beyond frontage in each direction. Show grades (%) n Future Street Plan: Must show street profiles, topo Show tax lots, topo (aerial OK) and existing on adjacent parcel(s), etc. conditions (i.e. homes) along proposed street route ❑ Traffic Impact and/or Access Report Section 18.705.030.H.2& 3 must be addressed in the narrative section for 18.705 as well as in the adjustment section.. ® Street grades compliant? ❑ Street/ROW widths dimensioned and appropriate? Show total ROW dedication width for N-S street(96th Avenue) ❑ Private Streets? Less than 6 lots and width A private street will be required to serve lots appropriate? 1, 2 & 3 (no direct access to Greenburg or 76th Avenue for these lots). Private street for lots 7 & 10 or provide each lot with 25 feet of frontage. ❑ Other: SANITARY SEWER ISSUES Existing/proposed lines shown. ❑ Stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? _ WATER ISSUES ❑ Existing/proposed lines w/ sizes noted? ❑ Existing/proposed fire hydrants shown? • ❑ Proposed meter location and size shown? ❑ Proposed fire protection system shown? STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines shown? ❑ Preliminary sizing calcs for water quality/detention Explain bypass flow and CB3 Qout. provided? ❑ Water quality/detention facility shown on plans? Label WQ CBs ❑ Area for facility match requirements from calcs? ❑ Facility shown outside any wetland buffer? REVISED 09/28/05 • ❑ Storm stubs to adjacent p, .;Is required/shown? - The submittal is he eviifee ed ❑ COMPLETE ® INCOMPLETE By: Date: 9/28/05 REVISED: 09/28/05 A 11/01/2005 04:26 NO.061 D01 PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN Project: Greenburq Heights COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST Date: 9/28/05 ADING Existing and proposed contours shown. Are there grading impacts on adjacent parcels? , Adjacent parcel grades shown. Geotech study submitted? STREET ISSUES Right-of-way clearly shown. _ Centerline of street(s) clearly shown. Street name(s) shown_ Label new N-S street as 96 'Avenue Existing/proposed curb.or edge of pavement shown. + Street profiles shown. Greenburg profile to extend 300 feet beyond frontage in each direction. Show grades (%) ❑ Future Street Plan: Must show street profiles, topo Show tax lots, topo (aerial OK) and existing on adjacent parcel(s), etc. conditions (i.e. homes) along proposed street route ❑ Traffic Impact andlor Access Report Section 18.705.030.H.2 & 3 must be addressed in the narrative section for 18.705 as well as in the adjustment section.. 7 Street grades compliant? ❑ Street/ROW widths dimensioned and appropriate? Show total ROW dedication width for N-S street(96`"Avenue) Private Streets? Less than 6 lots and width A private street will be required to serve lots appropriate? 1, 2 & 3(no direct access to Greenburg or 764"Avenue for these lots). Private street for lots 7 & 10 or provide each lot with 25 feet of _ frontage. ❑ Other: SANITARY SEWER ISSUES , R Existing/proposed lines shown. 0 Stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? WATER ISSUES _ Existing/proposed lines w/ sizes noted? Existing/proposed fire hydrants shown? R . Proposed meter location and size shown? Proposed fire protection system shown? STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines shown? ❑ Preliminary sizing talcs for water quality/detention Explain bypass flow and C83 Qout. provided? J _ `1 /Voter •uati, /detention facilit shown on .fans? ! Label WQ CBs TO: JOkflJ _ R , Area far facility match requirements from talcs? MA-4cte�e� Facility shown outside any wetland buffer? I fl cam..r•r n. ....,.... RF3ECEIGED 11-81—' 05 16: 18 FROM- 7:,_ 001, 18.705.030 General Provisions H.Access Management 2. Driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections.Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be 150 feet,measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage,the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel.If shared access is not possible or practical,the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. 3.The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet.The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. Oct . 4. 2005 12: 21PM Alpha Community Development No .5823 P . 1 *--4;47-alpha COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fax Transmittal DATE: October 3,2005 ATTENTION: Gary Pagenstecher TO: City of Tigard 13500 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 FAX NO.: 503-684-7297 RE: Solera (Greenburg Heights) PROJECT NO.: 328-030 TOTAL PAGES: 3 Including this page REMARKS: Please review and call me to discuss SIGNED: / Uc d l f Vanderdasson CC. Plaza West.Suite 230,9600 SW Oak, Portland,Oregon 97223• (f]503-452-8003[F)503-452-8043 Oct . 4 . 2005 12 : 21PM Aloha Community Development No . 5823 P . 2 Jeff Vanderdasson From: AiJeck Sent: Tuesday,August 02, 2005 4:36 PM To: 'morgan(cDcLtigard.or us' Cc: Jeff Vanderdasson; Jerry Palmer Subject: FW: Moini Property -Last Extension Morgan, Regarding this project, Jerry Palmer, and I have been working on a revised plan, and are are confused as to the "requirement" for an access easement to the neighbor to the east_ This property is a 887 square foot house on a 7800 square foot lot. Becatise of its small size, it is not a likely stand-alone development site. it currently accesses directly to Greenburg from its own driveway on the opposite side of the hou.,c from our subdivision. The only thing on our side of this structure are living areas and a small side yard, not even large enough to park a car. For us to create an access easement for this property would seem to serve no practical purpose. What am I missing here? Appreciate it if you could explain your rationale.. Thanks, Morgan. Al Jeck Original Message From: Jeff Vanderdasson Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 3:07 PM To: Al Jeck Subject: FW: Moini Property - Last Extension Does this work for you? If not let me know_ Original Message From: Morgan Tracy [mailto:Morgan @ci.tigard.or,.us] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 10:42 AM To: Jeff Caines Cc: Dick Rewersdorff Subject: Re: Moini Property - Last Extension Mr. Caines, your prompt and timely correspondence is always appreciated. Yes, you may have another extension. Just to confirm: on June 1, 2005 you requested a 30 day extension to the 120 day clock set to expire on July 29 effectively extending the deadline to August 29, 2005. On June 30th you requested another extension, but only to August 5th for you to submit a final application. At that time we presumed this new application would "reset the clock". Your current extension is to continue the application until October 1, 2005. . Our interest is that the City's ability to process an appeal is not predjudiced by lack of time. So long as this concern is covered, we arc willing to continue extending the application timeline for a reasonable period. With an October 1 deadline, a new submittal will need to be received by September 1st. At that time, we will assess whether Lhe new submittal constitutes a major. change (we think it will) and new notice will be required and the 120 day clock will reset . No further extensions will be necessary after that point. On the other hand, if we do not receive an :application by September 1, then the City will need Lo proceed with the current application as is. As you recall, the city had determined that application as is did not meet and could not be conditioned to meet the code requirements, therefore a decision to deny the proposal was imminent. I hope this recap helps keep it all straight. 1 Oct . 4. 2005 12 :21PM Alpha Community Development No .5823 P . 3 L Thanks, _ Morgan Tracy, ATCP Associate Planner City of Tigard - Community Development 13125 SW Hall Boulevard (503) 639-4171, ext . 2428 >>> "Jeff Caines" <jeffc @srdllc.com> 8/1/2005 3:08:16 PM >>> Mr. Tracy, I would like to request another extension for the Max Moini property. I would like to continue the application until Monday October 1, 2005. Please let me know if you are able to allow me this extension_ T hope to have a revised application submitted. for your review no later then the dcadline- Thank you for your consideration. Jeff Caines Jeff Caines SR Design LLC 8196 SW Ha1,1. Blvd., SuiLe 232 Beaverton, OR 97008 office: 503.969. 1213 fax: 503. 469.8553 www.srdlic.com 2 294n 6 N.W. 1 th AvO. Of lax PA Pi/06d Cares,WA 98607 Xtz...., ('hoe n(360)817-9090 , 0 7> ' 7— p 77- Fax(360)833-1941 TELCOPY FOR CO Y. f Pa. ( e?') re C'V) e t :.. U ._.-- TELECOPY NUMBER : (.5 03) 3 Th — /f6D NAME OF SENDER : /96-X /4,'/ ,' _ DATE SENT /z)/I/(9-5- NUMBER OF PAGES . / G .) (Including Cover Sheet) TIME SENT 7-4 3 /*/ MESSAGE See attached The information contained in this facsimile message may be privileged and confidential. It is intended only for the use of the individ- ual or entity to whom it is sent. If the recipient of this transmittal is not the intended recipient,or an employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient,any dissemination,distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original message to us at the above address via the U.S, Postal Service. Thank you. i0 'd 11761 ££8 098 INIOW 'XVW Wd i2 : I0 9002-L0-100 ..�. .. ....w. u._ - J.•J"1 J LlJ V 1".1 r- October 7, 2005 Gary Pagenstecher Sent via Fax 503.598.1.960 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Greenburg Heights Dear Mr. Pagenstecher: I fun the owner of the properties at 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road. I am under contract to sell the properties to Alpha Community Development. Inc. I am aware of and consent to Alpha's efforts to continue with the land use application that I originally submitted for these properties in 2004. Please contact me if you wish to discuss. Sincerely ia,X/1.(1,4.4...A.. //0/ Max Moini 2946 NW 11'Avenue Cartza5, WA 98607 Z0 'd Ib6i ££8 09E INIOW 'XdW Wd IZ : 10 9002-L0-100 fp OCT 1 2 2005 October 10, 2005 By L CITY OF TIGARD Al Jeck OREGON Palmer Associates 9600 SW Oak Street#230 Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Completeness Review-Greenbur'Heights, Case File No. SUB2004-000018 Dear Mr.Jeck: The City has received your revised application for Subdivision Review (SUB2004-00018) to create 10 residential lots averaging 3,173.9 square feet. As discussed September 30, 2005, staff finds that the revised application proposes a significantly changed development from the preceding proposal submitted by SR Design. Since the revised development proposal addresses concerns the City identified in the original proposal, the City will process the application without accessing additional application fees. However, the revised application will need to be renoticed to apprise interested parties of the significant changes. The cost of re-noticing will be the applicant's responsibility (Please contact Patty Lunsford, Planning Secretary, 718-2438). In addition, the 120-day clock for the City to reach a final decision began on April 7, 2005 when the SR Design application was found complete. Several requests by SR Design to extend the 120-clock were granted by the City. With this revised proposal, the 120-day clock will again be reset to begin when your revised application is found complete. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the submittal materials and has determined that the following additional information is necessary before the application can be deemed complete: 1. Pre-application Conference. You have provided pre-application notes that are dated 5/20/04. Pre-application conferences are valid for 6 months. Please also include documentation of subsequent staff discussions that have contributed to the present design. 2. Neighborhood Meeting. You have provided neighborhood meeting information dated July 8, 2004 from the previous application. You have said that you plan to hold another neighborhood meeting this month. Please document the new meeting and add this information to your application. 3. Fees. According to our records, fees you have paid do not include those required to process the requested adjustments: four development adjustments (4 x1/2 x $257.00) and two access and egress adjustments (2 x 1/2 x $584.00). The requested adjustments may change depending on how the subdivision design changes in response to the private street requirement identified in the Public Facilities Checklist. Please revise accordingly and submit the appropriate fees with your application. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 4. Tree Removal. You submitted an Arborist Report from Walter Knapp dated September 30, 2005. As Mr. Knapp suggests in his letter report, a tree protection plan including a narrative and site plan will need to be submitted to protect trees that exist on adjoining parcels. 5. Public Facility Items. Please address the eight items noted in the attached public facility checklist. Please contact Kim McMillan with any question regarding these items (503-718-243 6. Number of Application Copies. Please submit 9 full sets of your application material (each set shall be an exact duplicate of all information pertaining to the application, narrative, forms, letters, studies, plans, etc.) In addition, 7 plan sets shall be included, these may be reduced to 11x17 or 8.5x11 if legible. Lastly, one set of 8.5x11 size plans is required for our filing purposes. 7. Envelopes with Postage. Please supply two sets of pre-addressed (no return address), stamped (not metered), #10 size envelopes. Addresses must have been obtained within the previous three months from the date of application completeness. Include the mailing list for confirmation. Once this additional information is submitted, staff will review the additional materials to determine if the application is complete. Once the application has been deemed complete, the formal comment and review process will begin, which typically takes 6 to 8 weeks. It should be noted that staff has not reviewed the application submittal for compliance with the relevant code criteria, and that additional items may arise during the application review which may require further clarification. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your application, please don't hesitate to contact me at 639-4171, extension 2434. Sincerely, I 017v-L/‘ Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner C: SUB 2004-00018 Land Use File i:\curpin\garylsubdividsion(pd)1sub2004-00018(greenburg heights)\sub2004-00018 incomplete.doc Jeff Vanderdasson From: Al Jeck Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 4:36 PM To: 'morgan @ci.tigard.or.us' Cc: Jeff Vanderdasson; Jerry Palmer Subject: FW: Moini Property-Last Extension Morgan, Regarding this project, Jerry Palmer and I have been working on a revised plan, and are are confused as to the "requirement" for an access easement to the neighbor to the east. This property is a 887 square foot house on a 7800 square foot lot. Because of its small size, it is not a likely stand-alone development site. It currently accesses directly to Greenburg from its own driveway on the opposite side of the- house from our subdivision. The only thing on our side of this structure are living areas and a small side yard, not even large enough to park a car. For us to create an access easement for this property would seem to serve no practical purpose. What am I missing here? Appreciate it if you could explain your rationale. Thanks, Morgan. Al Jeck Original Message From: Jeff Vanderdasson Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 3:07 PM To: Al Jeck - • Subject: FW: Moini Property - Last Extension Does this work for you? If not let me know. Original Message - - From: Morgan Tracy [mailto:Morgan @ci.tigard.or.us] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 10:42 AM To: Jeff Caines Cc: Dick Bewersdorff Subject: Re: Moini Property - Last Extension Mr. Caines, your prompt and timely correspondence is always appreciated. Yes, you may have another extension. Just to confirm: on June 1, 2005 you requested a 30 day extension to the 120 day clock set to expire on July 29 effectively extending the deadline to August 29, 2005. On June 30th you requested another extension, but only to August 5th for you to submit a final application. At that time we presumed this new application would "reset the clock". Your current extension is to continue the application until October 1, 2005. Our interest is that the City's ability to process an appeal is not predjudiced by lack of time. So long as this concern is covered, we are willing to continue extending the application timeline for a reasonable period. With an October 1 deadline, a new submittal will need to be received by September 1st_ At that time, we will assess whether the new submittal constitutes a major change (we think it will) and new notice will be required and the 120 day clock will reset. No further extensions will be necessary after that point. On the other hand, if we do not receive aft application by September 1, then the City will need to proceed with the current application as is. As you recall, the city had determined that application as is did not meet and could not be conditioned to meet the code requirements, therefore a decision to deny the proposal was imminent. I hope this recap helps keep it all straight. 1 John Marquart From: Al Jeck nt: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 4:20 PM John Marquart Subject: Solera: recap of discussions with Morgan Tracy and neighbors re road placement. John, For your completeness response, following is the recap: After I was first contacted by Max Moini expressing interest in selling the property, I immediately placed a call to Morgan Tracy at Tigard Planning. My questions to Morgan were: what was the status of the application?, why (in his opinion) had the applicant decided to pull out?, what wass required for the City to support subdivision approval?, and was it possible (and under what conditions, etc.)for us to assume the applicant's position in the current application (as opposed to starting over)? In his return phone message, Morgan stated that the City had been very specific with Moini that the proposed road alignment was unacceptable, and would have to change to secure approval. He suggested that we meet in person as soon as possible to discuss further. We met 9:00 AM on June 21. Jeff Vanderdasson attended with me. Kim McMillan from Transportation was also present. Morgan and Kim showed us the original street design that came into the site at the midpoint of the Greenburg frontage, made a quick 90 degree turn west, and stubbed out perpendicular to the west boundary. I recall their two main concerns being the sharpness of the curve, and more importantly, the stub out directly into Ms Davis' home. They went on to show us a street plan alternative presented by Moini that brought the road into the property at the western edge of the Greenburg frontage, and then continued straight north along the west boundary. This plan also showed this street connecting to a proposed future street pattern to the north. This was the only feasible road alignment presented or discussed at the meeting. Morgan and Kim both indicated that this design satisfied their primary concerns and was potentially approvable. No other street option was presented or considered. They also indicated that two neighbors-- Margaret Davis and John Drennan--had expressed serious objections to the original street plan. From this meeting, the -"nclusion of both Jeff and me was that staff had reviewed this issue thoroughly and concluded that the west alignment cussed was the only workable street design. Judith and I subsequently met with Ms Davis and Mr. Drennan at 10:00 AM on August 22 to show them our revised plan and to discuss any concerns they may have. Mr. Drennan especially seemed pleased with the road re-alignment, his concerns originally being that the stub out across from Ms Davis' hous was unacceptable, and even more important, that any entry point off Greenburg farther to the east was too close to the existing intersection at 95th. Ms Davis asked about putting the road on the east side of our site, but seemed to understand that that location would not work. Her only other expressed concerns regarding the road were that it may affect the health of her large trees. To that, I offered to send out an arborist to evaluate the trees and recommend ways to protect the trees and roots during and after construction. This was done--the report is being prepared for submittal with the completeness response. I intend to share the results of this report with Ms Davis when we have it. Contact me if you have questions. Al 1 . "+- .&` (4416. ,../4,05--LAND USE APPLICATION Dateect:�'t as COMPLETENESS REVIEW COMPLETE kr INCOMPLETE STANDARD INFORMATION: Deed/Title/Proof Of Ownership 0( Neighborhood Mtg. Affidavits, Minutes, List Of Attendees Impact Study (18.390) USA Service Provider Letter Aft Construction Cost Estimate ❑ # Sets Of Application Materials/Plans 0 Pre-Application Conference Notes e' Envelopes With Postage (Verify Count) PROJECT STATISTICS: Building Footprint Size ❑ % Of Landscaping On Site ❑ % Of Building Impervious Surface On Site J .'"" Lot Square Footage PLANS DIMENSIONED: /'r!+(] Building Footprint Ail Parking Space Dimensions(Include Accessible& Bike Parking)OW Truck Loading Space Where Applicable /We' Building Height 40:rp tern Access Approach And Aisle e Visual Clearance Triangle Shown PAT ADDITIONAL PLANS: i''- Vicinity Map M-e- Architectural Plan [�''� Tree Inventory Existing Conditions Plan ❑ Landscape Plan d' Site Plan ,J9 Lighting Plan TREE PLAN/MITIGATION PLAN: /Nlr4-3.'r icy ADDITIONAL REPORTS: (list any special reports) CI El LJ 111 u ❑ RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: ❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) ❑ 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) 2( 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) 18.340(Director's Interpretation) ❑ 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) ❑ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) Li 18.350(Planned Development) 0 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) ❑ 18.780(Signs) I 18.360(Site Development Review) [1I 18.7 I 0(Accessory Residential Units) ❑ 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) 0 18.370(variances/Adjustments) Z 1 8.715(Density Computations) 2.1 18.790(Tree Removal) I 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) Cl 1 8.720(Design Compatibility Standards) 1 8.795(Visual Clearance Areas) 1 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) Li 1 8.725(Environmental Performance Standards) CI 18.797(Water Resources(WR)Overlay District) 0- 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) ❑ 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) 1 8.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) I 1 8.41 O(Lot Line Adjustments) ❑ 18.740(Historic Overlay) IJ 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) 1 8.420(Land Partitions) ❑ 18.142(Home Occupation Permits) 18.430(Subdivisions) El 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) 1 8.51 O(Resident al coning Districts) - 1 8.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 1 8.520(Commercial coning Districts) _ 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) 1 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) ILI 1 8.760(Nonconforming Situations) ADDITIONAL ITEMS: Non -raft Moe') e..034(1 eft_ i� ►/ .t. se I:\curpin\masters\revised\land use application completeness review.dot REVISED: 17-Jan-01 tcdpha COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Letter of Transmittal DATE: December 6, 2005 ATTENTION: Gary Pagenstacher TO: City of Tigard, Planning Department Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon RE: Solera PROJECT NO.: 328-031 Via: x Messenger: ❑ First Class Mail ❑ Overnight Delivery ❑ Pick-up ❑ Electronic Rush / Route Transmitted: x FOR APPROVAL ❑ FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ❑ FOR YOUR USE ❑ AS REQUESTED Attached: COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION 9 12/6/05 Revised Application Submittal Books 1 12/6/05 8-1/2 b y ] ] reduced dwgs of project REMARKS: Please contact me- kvl @alphacommunity.com - if you need any additional information for land use approval processing for this project. I can send you an electronic copy of the findings if you find it helpful. SIGNED: Kirsten Van Loo Plaza West,Suite 230,9600 SW Oak,Portland,Oregon 97223• [T]503-452-8003[F]503-452-8043 Project: - ` - � �'"' t �j . LAND USE APPLICATION Date: 1/� P6 COMPLETENESS REVIEW _ COMPLETE p INCOMPLETE STANDARD INFORMATION: Deed/Title/Proof Of Ownership _ Neighborhood Mtg. Affidavits, Minutes, List Of Attendees Impact Study (18.390) , ' USA Service Provider Letter III Construction Cost Estimate ❑ -_# Sets Of Application Materials/Plans Pre-Application Conference Notes ❑ Envelopes With Postage (Verify Count) 'PROJECT STATISTICS: Building Footprint Size ❑ % Of Landscaping On Site 1 I % Of Building Impervious Surface On Site Lot Square Footage PLANS DIMENSIONED: ..❑ - Building Footprint ji, --❑ Parking Space Dimensions(Include Accessible&Bike Parking) ,.=E Truck Loading Space Where Applicable L. Building Height . ❑ Access Approach And Aisle . J Visual Clearance Triangle Shown ADDITIONAL PLANS: ❑ Vicinity Map ONE Architectural Plan ❑ Tree Inventory ❑ Existing Conditions Plan ❑ Landscape Plan ❑ Site Plan r '" lighting Plan . TREE PLAN/MITIGATION PLAN: ADDITIONAL REPORTS: (list any special reports) Li ,,,,,.A- CI a _ °a • RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: 18.330(Conditional Use) ❑ 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) 2/ 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) ❑ 18.340(Director's Interpretation) ❑ 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) I I 1 8.350(Planned Development) 21 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) El 18.780(Signs) ❑ 18.360(Site Development Review) ❑ 1 8.710(Accessory Residential Units) ❑ 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) ❑ 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) .❑' 18.715(Density Computations) 12 18.790(Tree Removal) ❑ 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) ❑ 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) 2 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) ❑ 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) 2 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) ❑ 18.797(Water Resources(WR)Overlay District) Ej18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) IT 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) ❑ 1 8.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) ❑ 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) I I 1 8.740(Historic Overlay) Q 1 8.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) ❑ 18.420(Land Partitions) ❑ 1 8.742(Home Occupation Permits) 0 1 8.430(Subdivisions) ❑ 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) ❑ 1 8.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) I I 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) ❑ 1 8.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) J 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) ADDITIONAL ITEMS: I:\curpin\masters\revised\land use application completeness review.dot REVISED: 17-Jan-01 • January 5, 2005 CITY OF TIGARD Al Jeck OREGON Palmer Associates 9600 SW Oak Street #230 Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Completeness Review-Solera (formerly Greenburg Heights, SUB2004-00018), Case File No. SUB2005-000023 Dear Mr. Jeck: The City has received your revised application for Subdivision Review (SUB2005-00023) to create 11 residential lots averaging 3,050 square feet. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the submittal materials and has determined that the following additional information is necessary before the application can be deemed complete: 1. Neighborhood Meeting. You have provided neighborhood meeting information for an October 20, 2005 meeting for the previous 10-lot single-family detached application. However, an affidavit for posting notice has not been submitted. In addition, your application now includes 11 lots and town home style construction. You may wish hold an additional neighborhood meeting to ensure that your project adequately addresses neighbors concerns and to reduce the risk of an appeal. If so, please document the new meeting and add this information to your application. 2. Number of Application Copies. Please submit 9 full sets of your application material (each set shall be an exact duplicate of all information pertaining to the application, narrative, forms, letters, studies, plans, etc.) In addition, 7 plan sets shall be included, these may be reduced to 11x17 or 8.5x11 if legible. Lastly, one set of 8.5x11 size plans is required for our filing purposes. 3. Envelopes with Postage. You have supplied envelopes with your previous applications (the date escapes me). Addresses must have been obtained within the previous three months from the date of application completeness. Please request an updated mailing list to ensure your list is accurate (contact Patty Lunsford: 503- 718-2438). Once this additional information is submitted, staff will review the additional materials to determine if the application is complete. Once the application has been deemed complete, the formal comment and review process will begin, which typically takes 6 to 8 weeks. It should be noted that staff has not reviewed the application submittal for compliance with the relevant code criteria, and that additional items may arise during the application review which may require further clarification. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 If you have any questions regarding this letter or your application, please don't hesitate to contact me at 639-4171, extension 2434. Sincerely, 74447 -- Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner C: SUB 2004-00018 Land Use File i:\curpin\gary\subdividsion(pd)\sub2004-00018(Solera)\sub2005-00023 incomplete.doc 4j4aIpha COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Letter of Transmittal ❑ For Approval RECEIVED ❑For Your Use ❑As Requested JAN 11 2006 ❑For Review& Comment OILY Of TIGARD PLANNINIKINSIPIMMING To(..4 > Date l ( I— J Job No. ' Rem We are sending you: ❑Attached Copies Date Description 4^ S El Under Separate Cover Via "�' ❑Fax ❑Messenger ❑First Class Mail ❑Overnight Delivery ❑Pick-up ❑Electronic File If enclosures are not as noted, please notify us at once: 503-452-8003 •Remarks Alpha Community Development Signed 9600 SW Oak, Suite 230 CC Portland, Oregon 97223 TEL 503-452-8003 Received by Date FAX 503-452-8043 www.alphacommunity.com CITY OF TIGARD January 20, 2006 OREGON Al Jeck Palmer Associates 9600 SW Oak Street #230 Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Completeness Review for Solera, Case File No. SUB2005-000023 Dear Mr. Jeck: The City received your revised submittal materials for Solera (SUB2005-00023) on December 6, 2005 and January 20, 2006. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the submittal materials and has determined that the application can be deemed complete. The formal comment and review process will begin from the date of this letter and typically takes 6 to 8 weeks. It should be noted that staff has not reviewed the application submittal for compliance with the relevant code criteria, and that additional items may arise during the application review which may require further clarification. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your application, please don't hesitate to contact me at 639-4171, extension 2434. Sincerely, C 6 ,, 4�i`7/ Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner C: SUB 2004-00018 Land Use File is\curpin\gary\subdividsion(Solera)\sub2005-00023 complete.doc 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Z_erc.r c ? __ ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHC R,VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. A.. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION •!I CITY OF TIGARD SUBDIVISION Community cDeveCopment Shaping Better Community DATE OF NOTICE: January 31, 2006 FILE NUMBERS: SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2005-00023 ADJUSTMENT (VAR 2005-00093 ADJUSTMENT (VAR 2005-00094 VARIANCE VAR 2 05-00095 VARIANCE VAR 2005-00096 VARIANCE VAR 2005-00097 VARIANCE VAR 2005-00098 FILE NAME: SOLERA SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL: The applicant is seeking approval of an 11-lot subdivision on 1.07 acres. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes. Lot sizes within the development are proposed to be between 2,441 and 3,471 square feet (3,065 square feet on average). An access and egress adjustment to the street spacing requirement along SW Greenburg Road, an arterial, from 600 to 240 feet between the existing 95t Avenue and the proposed SW 96th Avenue is requested. Access and egress adjustments for the driveways for proposed Lots 1 though 5, which are within the 150-foot influence area of an intersection with Greenburg Road, are also requested. In addition, the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive R-4.5 zone on the east)for proposed lots 1 through 4. ZONE: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.370, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. LOCATION: 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road; WCTM 1S135CA, Tax Lots 2300 and 2302. YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS: Prior to the City making any decision on the Application, you are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written comments on the application to the City. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON FEBRUARY 14, 2006. All comments should be directed to Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at 503-639-4171 or by e-mail to garyp(a�tigard-or.gov. ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS THE CITY OF TIGARD APPRECIATES RECEIVING COMMENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. COMMENTS WILL BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WITHIN THE NOTICE OF DECISION. A DECISION ON THIS ISSUE IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 20, 2006. IF YOU PROVIDE COMMENTS, YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY OF THE FULL DECISION ONCE IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: • Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; • Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; • Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity on that issue. Failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14-DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: • The application is accepted by the City • Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. • The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. • City Staff issues a written decision. • Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. If you want to inspect the file, please call and make an appointment with either the project planner or the planning technicians. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of$.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written Comments." 111NMIN = Si VICINITY MAP 1117 EE 101 ~ _ - SUB2005-00023 r-- VAR200S-00093 _ . _ ° -L� 1r_ '-_-___ - VAR2005-00094 - YAR2005.00095 k ''''... RI 1 LoTA �. YAR2005-00097 11111111 Inn VAR2005-00098 ' I v - SOLERA SUBDIVISION Iii à/' %1 - ;:;:im, a Sew N lo? • _____ r--■i weans p Aped lamprn P111A1 Sr ' ion =wpm .i-fli----777.:::-..-.--x-------- NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SUBDIVISION (SUB) 2005-00023 SOLERA SUBDIVISION TIGARD 120 DAYS = 5/20/2006 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: SOLERA SUBDIVISION CASE NOS.: Subdivision(SUB) SUB2005-00023 Adjustment(VAR) VAR2005-00094 Variance AR VAR2005-00095 Variance AR VAR2005-00096 Variance AR VAR2005-00097 Variance AR VAR2005-00098 REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of an 11-lot subdivision on 1.07 acres. The lots are proposed to be developed with attached single-family homes. Lot sizes within the development are proposed to be between 2,441 and 3,471 square feet (3,065 square feet on average). An access and egress adjustment to the street spacing requirement along SW Greenburg Road, an arterial, from 600 to 240 feet between the existing 95th Avenue and the proposed SW 96th Avenue is requested. In addition, the applicant is seeking variances to reduce the rear yard setback from the required 30 feet to the proposed 15 feet (setback from more restrictive R-4.5 zone on the east) for proposed lots 1 through 4. APPLICANT: Palmer&Associates OWNERS: Max Moini and Attn:Al Jeck Mohammed-Hossein Tavakoli-Sheraji 9600 SW Oak Street,Suite 230 2946 NW 1 1th Avenue Tigard,OR 97223 Camas,WA 98607 COMP. PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATION: R-12: Medium Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square-feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. LOCATION: 11490 and 11494 SW Greenburg Road;WCTM 1S135CA,Tax Lots 2300 and 2302. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.370, 18.390, 18.430, 18.510, 18.705, 18.715, 18.725, 18.745, 18.765, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the preliminary subdivision request subject to certain conditions of approval, APPROVED the adjustment to the street spacing standard and to the driveway locations within the area of influence with Greenburg Road, and DENIED the variances to reduce the rear yawl setback to the adjacent R4.5 zoned property to the east of the site. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision,available at City Hall. • THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (25 per page,or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice 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 Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 4, 2006 AND EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 19, 2006 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. ppe-al: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues,properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that maybe adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON APRIL 18, 2006. estions: For further information please contact the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,Oregon 97223. _ 111111/ VnaNIITYMAP IIPIPSU62005.00023 411 -' ` YAR200S-00044-- r YAR2005-00095 I VAR200S-00096 YAR200S-00091 1 ! . Ell III■ YAR2005-00098 ` == SOLERA SUBDIVISION ♦ 8.a: Ppi_Auk -- --ird II II . �---_Mr i QFF�. ',. A _ �. i - SRC 1 Iilikv, Ali. riiii 'Imiliblillial GP all..1 P7NA9 BT ' ri.w��rwar+.. 1 \ ........ . ---i . . ___''.. ,\s`‘ L__ 1 t...] ' 1 I 1 I \i:\ !, 1 „. 1 _._te -S _, -:1.._._.. ses:v�. �F - } = - rT.�r. 1 I r . taa -y_ f , i-'r-- R-I taM i -.,. yQ r _ SI CITY J IGARD t SUB200S-00023/VAR200S-00094,95,96,97&98 N SOLERA SUBDIVISION (Mop Is not to scale) y genstecher-Phone Call Pagel] Gary Pa -<0 V37 204)4 - too©2� From: Steve Martin j.� To: Dick Bewersdorff I t C Date: 12/11/2006 1:49:30 PM Subject: Phone Call Dick, FYI, There was a message on Matt Stine's phone that I answered. Margaret Davis at 11470 SW Greenburg Rd. is concerned that Alpha Development might have damaged her old trees when they put in a new road. Apparently she wrote a letter to the City before the development went in expressing her concerns. (She is 96 and thinks she might be taken advantage of.) I asked if she had an arborist look at the trees and she said not since the road went in I told her the development probably had an arborist that might be aware if the trees were injured. I told her I would pass along this info to CD, as I am sure you are aware of this development, etc. She also has an old pear tree that she thinks might be eligible for the heritage tree program. Her phone is 503-639-6932. Thanks, Steve Please note: The City of Tigard has converted to a new domain name. My e-mail address is now steve @tigard-or.gov Steve Martin City of Tigard Parks Supervisor 503-639-4171 ext. 2598 steve @tigard-or.gov o , iS nJjp l/ /3 t o /u' M 7 1)f 5'/ J,. ,__ , ... . I .)- IP , \\.1 ‘,. i, i . i TL 4000 .. ‘ . , ,. , 4 i .:, LEGEND t ..L. TL 3900 . ----PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY I 1 1 1 • . 1 6' MASONRY —__ EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY . I f) SCREENING WALL alpha PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER , 1 1 , I — - —PROPOSED CENTERUNE 14' , , 1 159.05' N 8915'24" E — - —EXISTING CENTERUNE COMMUNITY 1 1 _ _ — _ — — _ - - _ _ _ _ ____ _ _1 _ _ _ _ _120_0 PROPOSED PUBUC UTILITY 1 EASEMENT . DEVELOPMENT _ — - ;'' • ..F.:ATM •...r.V4 4 ' ,. ,f,....,. .. t. . ..„.,,,,,,., .• ,t, , t • , 1. 3,136 SF 121.3' 1 ■ , b (.6 cNI I - PROPOSED BUILDING SETBACK , ----—PROPOSED PROPERTY UNE — EXISTING PROPERTY LINE . 9600SW Oak.Suite 230 . . . _r _ _ _ • PROPOSED BOUNDARY LINE , . , 1 Portland,OR 97223 ,r',..; •••- ; i 9 -to , _ EXISTING BOUNDARY LINE b CV [T]503-452-8003 IF]503-452-8043 • 4:1 ,• PROPOSED HANDICAP RAMP lilat :II!! g • 3,048 SF Ili -c\; CNI 0 I• www alphacommunity.com _ (0 I 0 TL 2100 „„- ,. . L'Itigi'l."":1 PROPOSED A.C. PAVING ■ 4 ..._ _ _ _ _ - - 8 -c, r:.!!:.,......,:l PROPOSED SIDEWALK SIDEWALK r REVISIONS NO. DATE DESCRIPTION 1 „;1;;II•'::;,#', '. i iv!, ',•;4'.:;:7;:;:11.:- inifi. IN 1 ., ..f?r';'''''. 1 c\j • . ; : 3,079 SF 123.8' _ 1 "I 7:42 _ _ --.1 ri _ — T _ ._:_ - _ _ _ - - CT) 0•.• RAYWOOD ASH - FRAXIMUS OXYCARPA "RAYWOOD" _—.1..- ,S. . a) 1 1 7 , 1 ;:s- 10.00' r..i S 89'57'35" E 0.0( i'''' 50.0' ULT. 39.0' I t 3,145 SF j I 1 ."'-l'I.'' -To s's, "---------- R/w cA. Rr 27.0' I PA I p i S ', ,: 1:::,. !, ,; ' - 4 1 r 1 6 --, \ N .0 -°.1.,.:(D 8 , , TL 2400 , , ul - ,,_ I 1 1 47,.:-:i,, -,* .. 1 1 3,178 SF • 0.5' ,...- . •,_ i , 127 3' — H • -•-• 2.0' „". :tl'x" CNI 1- - il----- - - _ . I ,. ,...,4 177 i 1-.,1?.... .4 .:7r. „ l'iN I i , , 5 3,213 SF , • b.I 3 Ln, csj.. FUTURE DEDICATION PLANTER 1 \_SIDEWALK . ■ Iv i'• in I ..' , 1. 1 "I 3f.T————— - _ _ 5NN _ _ _ , P TL 2200 SW 96TH AVENUE NOT TO SCALE OD PROrez, th.,*;:, .,,,e. , 0,10 -- 1 -."' e.....i,::-7.g.„ 4 i in, CA s/w k•• • , ," __. ! NI VI I ..*. !, ., En. -Cb.( i 3,426 SF 17P/I/41./.41a-cie C-4..)14 741r- AA' /i/Z mow N- s.---------- I ,i-,1"'.':.:g1:, .T, : , . 138.8' ,._ _ _ _., 0.; ,.,),,..,,,:... , , --- __ ,..,,a m„lf, .,„ r/et--,.-- 0.5' ' -CD.I 1 LAN R VALID THROUGH 12-31-07 -....____ '.'74“.. .:■.'k,:: .;■:' ir.- f" :PROPOSED 3 ., t - . I STRIP -......____ 'Llk '4,41 4 iri t-soz .,.,A., , , — L_. 3, ]..-• In, c•-4, , 1 • - •• 0.- -''. 1 •14 .1' :A5 9. - 1 "1 5.a. _ --.... — - -— - - — - - — - - . .;- ;-•''.';';',? ki:' . 4-9.2' SIDEWALK l '1.4°,; ,i ili , - - 1----- f i 1 ..*, 49.20' SOLERA i I .tz.,„'.',,i,i. ,....:,:(i .04 I ..,...)/ 4 N 8957'35" W SW GREENBURG RD 2 , ,,, .-,- 0, 1 I ..:.L.4:te;.- ,-,.; r.: i .p.-ti,,,...1- .i... I, n I :1'' ,15'.. 1 i i . 3,563 SF ' 1 :-... ,-: AS' HALF STREET WIDENS FROM APPROX. 10.V-13.3. TO 23.0' 15' ROW DEDICATION REQUIRED NOT TO SCALE SUBDIVISION 81 7' I-- -•-. ..- - - - -. c, 5°6 20,0S- -occ,2-.3 TL 2303 3-V2 -TYPE C - , 48 p„.. 4:;•!1'..'''!..;"; ,..- aik i I 1 -- 9'BASE ROCK = ---- 2,-(3/4"-0)LEVEUNG COURSE 1 - k 1 :--ri,:;;;.,.1• ?, 1 "si, i 3,897 SF 7'(r-0) AGGREGATE BASE -•,-,,,,, . 95%OF MODIFIED PROCTOR ASTM 01557 II 71 Ir) -----,,,,,.„,,, / /•.1, ;,„ , ; 11 ,. ,, s% i CO 0,1 TL 2304 11, COMPACTED SUBGRADE SOILS APPROVED NATIVE OR 95X OF P STANDARD PROCTOR -- ____ • ------.. ,.. :'-'--,..-,....„...,,,.„A"( kji,. , „:1%,.4 441b, ' ---- :-:_-_--_-_ F., AIL SITE •- -... l'W":!...4,,,-*'•',-;:s':,,AlIr 74.8, - --:::--.-._ — SW 96TH AVENUE • A.C.PAVEMENT SECTION PLAN .. IN ' ': -,,,'-...''',..7.•'..',5),,,,,,-;•.---....., -., .. -''''''------....,--_,.._, • .,., 0) - , SAWCUT AND MATCH FROM irl/e4e4 dr,Vje‘Zin. WY-3 ,--N., • ., TL 2301 EXISTING PAVEMENT EDGE 4'AKHALT CONCRETE MIN..OR MATCH EXISTING I "...4 / 1-1,a-TYPE C ON 2-1/2 TYPE B --___ ',...-'''.:... EXISTING .- ol m NT 15VASE ROCK • -- ..... ______ 7 .3.-we-o)LEbEUNG COURSE Glg -- , 1 95X OF MODIT1ED PROCTOR AVM 01557 - _ COMPACTED SUBGRADE SOILS -----_ - _ IN APPROVED NAME OR 95Z OF ‘,_ , - _ SW G ip.b 11... , AIL STANDARD PROCTOR --- --s---- 1.----E-----____- - IFACENift", 4+00 --------==,-,=,, :, SW GREENBURG ROAD ------ ---E iDURG - --__■___ A.C.PAVEMENT SECTION - NOT TO SCALE - _ PROJECT NO.: 1:050401 _ — . . c.., , eao0s _ 0ov From: walt.knapp©comcast.net To: "Maris Buxton" <Maris @tigard-or.gov> 6ye Date: 12/18/2006 2:10:31 PM C� Subject: FW: Maris, here is the email sent to Matt in October. Please call me if you have 0 f any questions. Thanks, n Walt CU Walter H. Knapp Silviculture & Urban Forestry 7615 SW Dunsmuir Beaverton, OR 97007 P: 503.646.4349 F: 503.265.8117 M: 503.330.3732 <mailto:waltknapp @comcast.net> waltknapp @comcast.net From: Steve Oaks [mailto:Steve.Oaks @AlphaCommunity.com] Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 1:24 PM To waltknapp©comcast.net Subject: FW: From: Walt Knapp [mailto:walt.knapp©comcast.net] Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 8:38 PM To: Matt Stine Cc: Troy Sandstrom; Steve Oaks Subject: All construction has been completed. Tree protection inspections will be suspended until home construction begins and permits are issued. Please note that the protection fencing along the private property (including the area adjacent to the ponderosa pine discussed in the last report) has been removed. All fencing in this area was removed to facilitate paving of the road along the boundary. This work has been completed, and there is no additional work planned or required within tree protection areas. Based on my inspections and on-site consultations, I believe that the trees on the property and adjacent areas have been adequately protected during construction. Thanks to all for helping to protect the trees. Walt Walter H. Knapp Silviculture & Urban Forestry 7615 SW Dunsmuir Beaverton, OR 97007 P: 503.646.4349 F: 503.265.8117 M: 503.330.3732 <mailto:waltknapp @comcast.net> waltknapp©comcast.net From: Matt Stine To: Maris Buxton Date: 9/22/2006 7:27:54 AM Subject: Fwd: Solara biweekly tree protection inspection 0459 FYI. Matt Stine Tigard City Forester Tigard, Oregon MSTINE @tigard-or.gov (503) 718-2589 >>> walt.knapp@comcast.net 09/21 2:30 PM >>> Construction is active on the site, but not within tree protection areas. Fences are up and in good condition. There are no current tree protection issues. Walt Knapp Walter H. KnappSilviculture & Urban Forestry7615 SW DunsmuirBeaverton, OR 97007 P: 503.646.4349F: 503.265.8117M. 503.330.3732waltknapp@comcast.net Matt Stine Tigard City Forester Tigard, Oregon MSTINE @tigard-or.gov (503) 718-2589 >» walt.knapp@comcast.net 09/12 7:08 PM >>> Please note that I had not been making the bi-weekly inspections. However, I had visited the site anytime that work was taking place within tree protection areas. Chad Mitchell (RevCon Construction) and Steve Oaks (Alpha Community Development) have been keeping me involved at critical times. Nevertheless, I have now scheduled bi-weekly inspections for tree protection. Today's inspection: Fences are in place. There is no current activity within protection areas. Walt Knapp Walter H. KnappSilviculture & Urban Forestry7615 SW DunsmuirBeaverton, OR 97007 P: 503.646.4349F: 503.265.8117M: 503.330.3732waltknapp@comcast.net Matt Stine Tigard City Forester Tigard, Oregon MSTINE @tigard-or.gov (503) 718-2589 >>> walt.knapp @comcast.net 10/07 11:26 AM >>> Tree protection fencing is in place; however, the fence should be extended to the edge of the dripline of the large ponderosa pine (Troy, please pass this along to Chad). The trees appear to be in good condition. Walt Knapp Walter H. KnappSilviculture & Urban Forestry7615 SW DunsmuirBeaverton, OR 97007 P: 503.646.4349F:: 503.265.8117M: 503.330.3732waltknapp@comcast.net Page 1 of 1 Maris Buxton - Fwd: Solara trees lm: Matt Stine To: Maris Buxton Date: 08/17/2006 7:58 AM Subject: Fwd: Solara trees For the file. Matt Stine Tigard City Forester Tigard, Oregon MSTINE @tgard-or.gov (503) 718-2589 >>> walt.knapp @comcast.net 08/16 5:08 PM >>> Today I evaluated the proposed storm sewer installation at Solera with Chad Mitchell. I anticipate little root disturbance from the construction. However, in the vicinity of the deodar cedar, I recommend that the excavator dig at right angles to the line of the storm trench. All roots will need to be pruned prior to backfilling. Please let me know if you have any questions. Walt Walter H. Knapp Silviculture&Urban Forestry 7615 SW Dunsmuir Beaverton,OR 97007 P.. 503.646.4349 F: 503.265.8117 M: 503.330.3732 waltknapp@comcast.net file://C:\Documents and Settings\maris\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00001.HTM 08/17/2006 ‘314-6 200 tap After recording return to: Solera,LLC 9200 SW Nimbus Ave Beaverton OR 97008 OK ) 10, /<<y� 114 . i /O(n 1 DECLARATION OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS, CONDITIONS,AND RESTRICTIONS FOR SOLERA 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Article 1. DEFINITIONS 2 Article 2. PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THIS DECLARATION 4 Article 3. OWNERSHIP AND EASEMENTS 6 Article 4. LOTS AND HOMES 9 Article 5. COMMON AREA 19 Article 6. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE 21 Article 7. SOLERA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 24 Article 8. DECLARANT'S RIGHTS 25 Article 9. FUNDS AND ASSESSMENTS 26 Article 10.INSURANCE 33 Article 11.GENERAL PROVISIONS 34 CCR,Solera DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS,AND RESTRICTIONS FOR SOLERA THIS DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS OF SOLERA ("Declaration") is made this day of , 2006, by Solera, LLC, as the Declarant. RECITALS WHEREAS, the Declarant is the owner, or controls, all that certain real property and improvements thereon located in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon, referred to as the Plat of Solera, recorded , 2006, as Document No. ,Lots 1 through 10. WHEREAS, Declarant intends to develop the Property as a Class 1 planned community, under ORS 94.550 and to establish the planned development project of Solera, Declarant desires to impose these mutually beneficial covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, assessments and liens on the Property under a comprehensive general plan of improvement and residential development for the benefit of all of the Owners,the Lots and any Common Area within Solera; and WHEREAS, Declarant has deemed it desirable for the preservation of the values and amenities in Solera to create a Homeowners Association, which shall be a non-profit Oregon corporation, to which will be delegated and assigned the powers and authority to own, maintain and administer the Association and any Common Area and facilities, and administer and enforce the covenants, conditions, and restrictions of this Declaration, and collect and disburse the assessments and charges hereinafter created. NOW THEREFORE, the Declarant declares that the Property shall be held, transferred, sold, conveyed and occupied subject to the following covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, charges and liens, or as noted herein, which shall run with the land and shall be binding upon all parties having or acquiring any right,title or interest in the Property or any part thereof and shall inure to the benefit of the Association and of each Lot Owner. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 1 ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS 1.1. "Architectural Review Committee" or "ARC" shall mean the Declarant until turnover and thereafter shall refer to the Board of Directors unless the Board has appointed a separate body to carry out the functions described in Article 6 in which case "ARC" shall refer to this body. 1.2. "Articles" shall mean the Articles of Incorporation for the non-profit corporation, Solera Homeowners Association, or such similar name approved by and filed with the Oregon Corporation Commissioner. 1.3. "Association" shall mean and refer to Solera Homeowners Association, its successors and assigns. 1.4. "Board" or "Board of Directors" shall mean the Board of Directors of Solera Homeowners Association. 1.5. `Building Structure" shall mean a building that is comprised of one or more contiguous Homes constructed and located on Lots, including without limitation, garage structures located on the Lots, whether attached to or detached from the Building Structure. 1.6. "Bylaws" shall mean and refer to the Bylaws of the Association, attached hereto as Exhibit"A", and which shall be properly adopted and recorded in the County of Washington. 1.7. "Common Area(s)" shall mean and refer to any areas of land shown on the recorded plat of the Property, commonly designated as "Tracts", including any improvements thereon, which are intended to be devoted to the common use and enjoyment of the members of the Association, and areas outlined herein as the maintenance responsibility of the Association, unless provided otherwise in this Declaration. Currently, no designated Tracts exist within the Plat for Solera. Additional areas may be designated Common Areas through annexation of additional phases to Solera. 1.8. "Common Home Exteriors" shall mean the exterior of each attached Home at the Property. Common Home Exteriors shall include the siding, trim, rain gutters, downspouts, rain drain and footing drain systems, roof, roof eaves, and flashing, including garage whether attached or detached to dwelling unit. Common Home Exteriors do not include the interior landscaping within enclosed courtyards or patios, decks, fencing, or driveways, except as may be spelled out within this document. Also CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 2 excluded from Common Home Exteriors are the maintenance responsibilities that rest solely with the Owners of such Lots as defined in this Declaration. 1.9. "Declarant" shall mean and refer to Solera, LLC, its successors or assigns, or any successor or assign to any of their interests in the development of the Property. "Declarant" shall not refer to any other subsequent purchaser of a Lot or Home. 1.10. "Declaration" shall mean the covenants, conditions, restrictions, and all other provisions set forth in this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Solera. 1.11. "General Common Expenses" shall mean those expenditures made or liabilities incurred by the Association, including reserves. Such definition should also apply to the words, "Common Expenses"as used in this Declaration. 1.12. "General Plan of Development" shall mean the Declarant's general plan of development of the Property as approved by appropriate governmental agencies, as may be amended from time to time. 1.13. "Home"shall mean and refer to any portion of a structure situated on a Lot designed and intended for use and occupancy as a residence by a single family or household. 1.14. "Lot" shall mean and refer to any plot of land indicated upon the recorded subdivision map of the Property, including any annexations to Solera. 1.15. "Lot Easement Area" shall mean and refer to those portions of any Lot subject to any easement benefiting the Association. The term"Lot Easement Area" shall not refer to any portions of any Lot encumbered by an easement to any other party, including without limitation, any governmental entity. 1.16. "Members" shall mean and refer to the Owners of Lots in Solera and who are members of the Solera Homeowners Association. 1.17. "Occupant"shall mean and refer to the occupant of a Home who shall be the Owner, lessee or any other person authorized by the Owner to occupy the premises. 1.18. "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record Owner, including Declarant, whether one or more persons or entities, of the fee simple title to any Lot or a purchaser in possession under a land sale contract. The foregoing does not include persons or entities that hold an interest in any Lot merely as security for the performance of an obligation. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 3 1.19. "Plat" shall mean and refer to the recorded Plat(s) of Solera, and any annexation plats. 1.20. "Property" shall mean and refer to all real property described within the Plat of Solera, and any annexations of additional property, including any Common Area, and all improvements located on the real property, as may be brought within the jurisdiction of the Association and be made subject to this Declaration. 1.21. "Rules and Regulations" shall mean and refer to the documents containing rules and regulations and policies adopted by the Board of the Association or the Architectural Review Committee ("ARC"), and as may be from time to time amended by the Board and/or ARC. 1.22. "Solera of additional lands to Solera and any Common Area included within the Plat of Solera. 1.23. "Turnover Meeting" shall be the meeting called by the Declarant to turn over control of the Association to the Class A members. ARTICLE 2 PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THIS DECLARATION 2.1. The real property which is and shall be held, transferred, sold, conveyed and occupied subject to this Declaration is located in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, Oregon, in that certain plat map entitled"Solera" filed in the plat records of Washington County, Oregon, more particularly described as consisting of Lots 1 through 10. 2.2. At any time during the initial term of this Declaration, the Declarant may, at its sole option, annex additional property into the Association to be subject to the terms hereof to the same extent as if originally included herein and subject to such other terms, covenants, conditions, easements and restrictions as may be imposed thereon by Declarant. Declarant currently anticipates that there will be a total of 10 Lots in the subdivision, including the Lots on this Plat,and Lots expected to be created in property to be annexed to the subdivision, but this number may be adjusted at the sole discretion of Declarant. Declarant shall have no obligation of any kind to annex any additional land to the Property. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 4 (a). Eligible Property. There is no limitation on the number of Lots, which Declarant may annex to the Property, or the right of Declarant to annex common property, except as may be established by applicable ordinances, agreements, or land use approvals. (b). Consent or Joinder Not Required. No consent or joinder of any Class A member as defined in the Bylaws, attached hereto as Exhibit"A," or other party except the record owner of the land being annexed shall be necessary to effect any annexation made pursuant to this Section. (c). Declaration of Annexation. Annexation shall be evidenced by a written Declaration of Annexation executed by the Declarant, or (in the case of an annexation by action of members) by the Board and the owners of the property being annexed, setting forth the legal description of the property being annexed and any additional covenants, conditions and restrictions to be applied to such annexed property. Notwithstanding any provision apparently to the contrary, a declaration with respect to any annexed property may: (i). establish such new land classifications and Types of Lots and such limitations, uses, restrictions, covenants and conditions with respect thereto as Declarant may deem to be appropriate for the development of the annexed property; (ii). with respect to existing land classifications, establish additional or different limitations, uses, restrictions, covenants and conditions with respect thereto as Declarant may deem to be appropriate for the development of such annexed property; and/or (iii). contain provisions necessary or appropriate to comply with any condition, requirement, or imposition of any governmental or regulatory authority. Without limitation of the meaning of the foregoing provisions of this Section, in any Declaration of Annexation the Declarant may, but shall not be obligated to, establish different Types of Lots and have particular rights and obligations pertain to different Types of Lots, establish easements particular to different Lots, establish assessments that pertain only to certain Types of Lots, establish maintenance obligations of the Association or of Owners that vary in accordance with different Types of Lots, establish insurance and casualty provisions that relate to certain Types of Lots and not others, and establish limited common areas that benefit particular Lots to the exclusions of other Lots and provisions particular to such limited common areas. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 5 (d). Voting Rights: Allocation of Assessments. Upon annexation, additional Lots so annexed shall be entitled to voting rights and shall be responsible for payment of assessments as required for that fiscal year. At the beginning of the next fiscal year, assessments for the general common areas shall be apportioned equally based upon the total number of Lots following such annexation, but assessments that are relative to a specific product type will be spread equally over only the units of that type. (e). No Duty to Annex. Nothing herein contained shall establish any duty or obligation on the part of the Declarant or any member to annex any property into the Association and no owner of property excluded from the Association shall have any right to have such property annexed thereto. Declarant is under no obligation to build Homes on any or all of the Lots contained in the original Plat. ARTICLE 3 OWNERSHIP AND EASEMENTS 3.1. Non-Severability. The interest of each Owner in the use and benefit of any Common Area shall be appurtenant to the Lot owned by the Owner. No Lot shall be conveyed by the Owner separately from the interest in any Common Area, subject to the provisions of Section 3.3. Any conveyance of any Lot shall automatically transfer the right to use any Common Area without the necessity of express reference in the instrument of conveyance. There shall be no judicial partition of any Common Area. Each Owner, whether by deed, gift, devise or operation of law, for his/her own benefit and for the benefit of all other Owners, specifically waives and abandons all rights, interests and causes of action for judicial partition of any interest in any Common Area and does further agree that no action for judicial partition shall be instituted, prosecuted or reduced to judgment. The ownership interest in any Common Area and Lots described in this Article are subject to the easements granted and reserved in this Declaration for drainage, needed maintenance support and maintenance of the exterior appearance for the Building Structures. Each of the easements reserved or granted herein shall be deemed to be established upon the recordation of this Declaration and shall forever be deemed to be covenants running with the land for the use and benefit of the Owners and their Lots and shall be superior to all other encumbrances applied against or in favor of any portion of Solera. 3.2. Ownership of Lots. Title to each Lot in Solera shall be conveyed in fee to an Owner. If more than one person and/or entity owns an undivided interest in the same Lot, such person and/or entities shall constitute one Owner. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 6 3.3. Ownership of Any Common Areas. Title to any Common Area, if any, shall be conveyed to the Association at the time of Turnover, pursuant to Section 3.7 of the Bylaws, attached hereto as Exhibit "A". The Board of Directors may convey title to any present or future Common Area Tracts, if any, to a City, County or other Government agency. The Association, with the approval of 60% of the Association membership,may sell, convey or mortgage the Common Area. 3.4. Easements. Individual deeds to Lots may, but shall not be required to set forth the easements specified in this Article. (a) Easements on Plat. Any Common Area Tracts are subject to the easements and rights of way shown on, or noted, on the Plat of Solera. These include easements for public pedestrian and bicycle access, sanitary sewer easements, storm drainage, access and public utility easements. (b) Easements for Common Area. Every Owner shall have a non- exclusive right and easement of use and enjoyment in and to any Common Area, which shall be appurtenant to and shall pass with the title to every Lot. (c) Easements Reserved by Declarant. So long as Declarant owns any Lot, Declarant reserves an easement over, under and across any Common Areas in order to carry out sales activities necessary or convenient for the sale of Lots. In addition, Declarant hereby reserves to itself, and for its successors and assigns, a perpetual easement and right-of-way for access over, upon and across any Common Areas for construction, utilities, communication lines, drainage, and ingress and egress for the benefit of the Lots or other property owned by Declarant. Declarant, for itself and its successors and assigns,hereby retains a right and easement of ingress and egress over, in, upon, under and across any Common Area and the right to store materials thereon and to make such other use thereof as may be reasonably necessary or incident to the construction of the improvements on the Property or other real property owned by Declarant in such a way as to not unreasonably interfere with the occupancy, use, enjoyment or access to an Owner's Lot by that Owner or his/her family,tenants, guests or invitees. (d) Additional Easements. Notwithstanding anything expressed or implied to the contrary, this Declaration shall be subject to all easements granted by Declarant for the installation and maintenance of utilities and drainage facilities necessary for the development of Solera. No structure,planting or other material shall be placed or permitted to remain within any easement area which may damage or interfere with the installation or maintenance of utilities, or which may change the direction of flow of drainage channels in the easements, or which may obstruct or retard the flow or water through drainage channels in the easements. The easement area of each Lot and all CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 7 improvements thereon shall be maintained continuously by the Owner of the Lot, except for those improvements for which a public authority, utility company or the Association is responsible. In addition, an easement is specifically reserved to the Owners of any contiguous Home in each structure, and the Association, as their interests may exist, for access to, and right of repair or service to utility and/or drainage lines and facilities which exist on each Lot for common use of Owners in said structure. (e) Association's Easements. There are hereby reserved to the Association and its duly authorized agents and representatives such easements as are necessary to perform the duties and obligations of the Association set forth in this Declaration, the Bylaws and Articles for the maintenance of any needed support for the structures, and any exterior maintenance. (f) Easement to Governmental Entities. There is hereby reserved and granted a non-exclusive easement over any Common Area to all governmental and quasi- government entities, agencies, utilities, and their agents for the purposes of performing their duties within Solera. However, where applicable, Association may be subject to compensation for the taking or use of such easement rights. (g) Landscaping. The Association reserves an easement for any landscape maintenance, upkeep and replacement, as well as utilities pertaining to landscaping or maintenance for front yards and street-side yards, including street frontage planter strips and any entry monument. (h) Maintenance Easement. An easement is hereby reserved in favor of the Association and its successors, assigns, contractors, agents and employees over, across, and under each Lot, the exterior portions of the dwelling units on each Lot, any Common Areas, and any other areas of the Property necessary or appropriate for the purposes of accomplishing any maintenance, repair, or replacement of Improvements which become necessary. (i) Maintenance Obligations/Owner Restrictions. Except as specifically noted in this document, the Owner, at his/her expense, shall maintain, repair and replace the improvements and utility installations in any Lot Easement Area and shall hold the Association harmless from any such costs. (j) Public Utility Easements. The following Public Utility Easement has been provided for on the Plat: An eight (8) foot wide public utility easement exists along all lot lines where they abut a public street. (k) Retaining Walls. Retaining walls may have been constructed within the Property (the "Retaining Walls"). The Retaining Walls are not in all cases located on a Lot or Tract line. The location of a Retaining Wall (or the construction by CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 8 an Owner of any improvements on or near the Retaining Wall) shall not constitute evidence of the intended location of a Lot line, or provide grounds for any claim of adverse possession or prescriptive easement. Each Lot upon which any portion of a Retaining Wall is located shall be subject to an easement, for the benefit of all other Lots, for the purposes of support by and natural drainage from such Retaining Wall. Retaining Walls may or may not have been designed by a professional engineer, and no Owner shall take any action to add, construct or place any improvement on the Lot so that it may, in the judgment of the Association: result in disturbance of, weakening of, or damage to the Retaining Walls; increase any engineered load or alter design criteria; or cause damage to the wall and surrounding properties. Any improvements on Lot will need prior approval of Architectural Review Committee. Regardless of such approval, any Lot Owner who takes such action shall be responsible for all resulting costs of repair and restoration of the Retaining Wall. Otherwise, neither the Association nor any other Owner shall have any affirmative obligation to maintain or repair the Retaining Walls. However, should they elect to do so, the Association, any Owner whose Lot is adjacent to a Retaining Wall, and their duly authorized agents and representatives, shall have the right to enter the property upon which any portion of a Retaining Wall is located for the purpose of making any necessary repair to or maintenance of the Retaining Wall. ARTICLE 4 LOTS AND HOMES 4.1. Residential Use. Lots shall be used for residential purposes only. Except with the consent of the Board of Directors, no trade, craft, business, profession, commercial or similar activity of any kind shall be conducted on any Lot, nor shall any goods, equipment, vehicles, materials or supplies used in connection with any trade, service or business be kept or stored on any Lot. Nothing in this paragraph shall be deemed to prohibit the following: (a) Commercial Activities of Individual Residences. The right of the Owner of a Lot to maintain his/her professional or personal library, keep his/her personal business or professional records or accounts, handle his/her personal business or professional telephone calls or confer with business or professional associates, clients or customers, in his/her residence, so long as such activity is not observable outside of the residence, does not significantly increase parking or vehicular traffic, or is in violation of applicable local government ordinances. The mere parking on a Lot or in the street, of a vehicle bearing the name of a business shall not, in and of itself, constitute a violation of this provision. The Board of Directors shall not approve commercial activities otherwise prohibited by this paragraph unless the Board determines that only normal residential activities would be observable outside of the residence and that the activities would not be in violation of applicable local government ordinances. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 9 (i) Neither the Association, the Board of Directors, nor the management agent shall be held responsible for any loss of wages, income or computer connectivity if telephone, computer or interne service is interrupted by the Association, an Association vendor, or utility, or the management agent. 4.2. Construction. Except for construction performed by or contracted for by Declarant, no construction, reconstruction or exterior alterations shall occur on any Lot, unless the approval of the ARC is first obtained pursuant to Article 6. Consideration such as siting, shape, size, color, design, height, solar access, or material may be taken into account by the ARC in determining whether or not to consent to any proposed work. Such work includes, but is not limited to Homes, storage shelters, swimming pools, spas, landscaping, greenhouses, patios, fencing,basketball hoops or remodeling. The intent of this covenant is to ensure quality of workmanship and material, harmony of external design with the existing and planned structures as to location and visual compatibility and finish grade elevations. Original construction designs, materials and product specifications by Declarant may vary from any or all specified in this document. All construction performed by or contracted for by Declarant, shall be presumed to have met these minimum requirements or have been granted a variance thereto. 4.3. The following restrictions are minimum standards applicable to all Lots: (a) Height. No Home shall exceed three stories in height above the ground at street level; (b) Floor Area. The square footage area of a Home shall not be less than 1400 square feet exclusive of attics,patios,decks,porches,balconies and garages; (c) Garages. A garage must be constructed on each Lot. Garages may be used as a sales office by Declarant, but must be converted to a garage before permanent occupancy. Garages are to be maintained primarily for the storage of automobiles or similar vehicles. No garage may be enclosed or otherwise used for habitation, nor may any garage door be removed except when necessary to repair or replace a garage door with the same type of garage door. (d) Security Doors/Windows and Screen Doors. No security doors and no exterior security bars or devices on windows and doors shall be installed without the prior written approval of the ARC. If the ARC approves any type security door or window security, such approval shall encourage or require a single style for all Homes so they will maintain a uniform and aesthetic appearance. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 10 4.4. Completion of Construction. The construction of any building on any Lot, including painting and all exterior finish, shall be completed within six (6) months from the beginning of the construction so as to present a finished appearance when viewed from any angle. In the event of undue hardship due to weather conditions, this provision may be extended for a reasonable length of time upon written approval from the ARC. The Lot and building area shall be kept reasonably clean and in workmanlike order, free of litter, during the construction period with a garbage disposal facility located on site during such construction period. If construction has not commenced within three (3)months after the project has been approved by the ARC,the approval shall be deemed revoked unless the Owner has applied for and received an extension of time from the ARC. All provisions of this Article 4 shall exclude any construction by Declarant. 4.5. Landscaping. (a) Declarant reserves the right to install and maintain landscape improvements on Lots for sales and marketing purposes, and hereby reserves a landscape easement on the front yards of said Lots and the street side yards for this purpose. Declarant is not obligated to provide any landscaping in said areas noted in this section. (b) The Association shall maintain irrigation and landscaping on front yards and side yards not enclosed by a fence, including any street frontage planter strips for all Lots and entry monuments (even if outside of Common Area Tracts). In the event, however, the need for such maintenance or repair is caused by the willful or negligent act or omission of an Owner, his/her or her family, tenants, guests or invitees, and to the extent such maintenance or repair is not covered by the Association's insurance policy, the costs of such maintenance and repair may, at the discretion of the Board of Directors, be charged to the Owner as an Individual Assessment. The acceptance and submission of any insurance claims for Association insurance is at the sole discretion of the Board of Directors. (c) Owners may use any enclosed side and rear yard for any purpose not prohibited hereunder, provided such use is not deemed, by the ARC or the Association, to be a nuisance. Maintenance of said enclosed side and rear yard areas is the Owner's sole responsibility. (i) Landscape installation of rear yards or enclosed areas on Lot by Owners is subject to approval by the ARC. Said completed landscaping on Lots shall be installed by Owners no later than 6 months after occupancy. CCR.Solera.113006.doc 11 All rear yard landscaping shall be maintained in a good condition, including watering, weeding, pruning, fertilization, mowing and other forms of maintenance. If Owner fails to maintain said landscaping, Declarant, or Association in their place reserves the rights outlined in Section 4.24 to maintain. (ii) Any plantings which are added by the owners of said Lots, to the front yard or side yard areas will be at the sole expense of the Owner and the Owner shall be solely responsible for their maintenance and survival. Further, the Association and their landscape maintenance contractor will bear no responsibility for the survival, maintenance, damage or replacement of Owner/Occupant installed plants. 4.6. Exterior Maintenance. Each Owner shall provide exterior maintenance upon their Home as follows:paint,repair,replace and care for roofs, gutters, downspouts, exterior building surfaces, and other exterior improvements, including, without limitation, exterior mounted lighting fixtures (except light bulbs and excluding any recessed light fixtures) the exterior portions of any chimneys, and landscaping as per Section 4.5, repair or replacement of doors, windows, screens, skylights, glass in light fixtures, and other glass surfaces. The cost of such maintenance shall the expense of the Owner. 4.7. Tree Cutting Restrictions. In no event shall any existing trees be removed without the written authority of the City of Tigard. If the Owner has a certified arborist declare that the tree is diseased or otherwise a hazard, then the Owner may petition the City of Tigard, and the City may or may not require that replacement plantings are provided. If one of the named trees is removed without written authority of the City of Tigard, Owner shall be required to provide replacement consistent with the tree ordinance of the City of Tigard and Owner shall bear all costs, including reasonable attorney fees, of compliance. 4.8. Rental of Homes. An Owner shall be entitled to rent or lease his/her residence, subject to the following: (a) Written Rental Agreements. A written rental or lease agreement is required, specifying that: (i) the tenant shall be subject to all provisions of the Declaration, Bylaws and Rules and Regulations, and (ii) failure to comply with any provision of the Declaration,Bylaws and Rules and Regulations shall constitute a default under the rental agreement. (b) Minimum Rental Period. The period of the rental or lease is not less than thirty(30) days; and CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 12 • (c) Tenant Must Be Given Documents. The Owner gives each tenant a copy of the Declaration,Bylaws and Rules and Regulations. (d) Owner Responsibility. Owner shall be responsible for any violations by tenants and shall be solely responsible for either correcting or eliminating such violations, or getting tenant to do same. 4.9. Animals. No animals, livestock or poultry of any kind shall be raised, bred, kept or permitted within any Lot other than a reasonable number of domestic household pets which are not kept, bred or raised for commercial purposes and which are reasonably controlled so as not to be a nuisance. Any inconvenience, damage or unpleasantness caused by such pets, including noise, shall be the responsibility of the respective Owners thereof. No dogs shall be permitted to roam the Property unattended, and all dogs shall be kept on a leash while outside a Lot. An Owner may be required to remove a pet from the property upon the receipt of the third notice in writing from the Association Board of Directors of violation any rule, regulation or restriction governing pets within the Property. A "reasonable number of domestic household pets" and the definition of"domestic household pets" shall be subject to rules adopted and approved by the Board in its sole discretion. 4.10. Nuisance. No noxious, harmful or offensive activities shall be carried on upon any Lot or any Common Area, nor shall anything be done or placed on any Lot or Common Area which interferes with or jeopardizes the enjoyment, or which is a source of annoyance to the other Owners or Occupants. 4.11. Parking. Parking of boats, trailers, commercial vehicles, mobile homes, campers, other recreational vehicles or equipment regardless of weight shall not be allowed on any part of the Lot or Common Area. Parking shall only be in garages, or driveways if no portion of the vehicle overhangs the street, sidewalks or pathways. Garages shall be primarily used for vehicular parking and not solely for storage. The parking of vehicles is prohibited on any public or private street within the Property if posted or marked "No Parking", or curbs are painted to restrict parking. No parking in any Common Areas, other than private streets,unless so posted. 4.12. Vehicles in Disrepair. No Owner shall permit any vehicle, which is not currently licensed or is in an extreme state of disrepair to be abandoned or to remain parked upon any Lot for a period neither in excess of forty-eight (48) hours, nor on a Common Area for any length of time. A vehicle shall be deemed in an "extreme state of disrepair" when the Board of Directors reasonably determines that its presence offends the Owners and Occupants. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 13 Should any Owner fail to remove such vehicle within five (5) days following the date on which the notice is mailed to him/herby the Association, the Association may have the vehicle removed from the Property and charge the expense of such removal to the Owner. All oil or grease on roadways or driveways shall be cleaned up immediately by Owner. 4.13. Signs. The temporary display of a "For Sale" sign on a Lot, not exceeding twenty-four(24) inches high and thirty-six (36) inches long,may be within the front-yard, or inside of a first floor, front, street facing window of a residential Building Structure. "For Rent" and/or"For Lease" signs are prohibited. The restrictions contained in this paragraph shall not prohibit the temporary placement of"political" signs on any Lot by the Owner or Occupant, or construction and marketing related signage by the Declarant or its contractors. No sign of any kind, other than Declarant's marketing signs or any Association signs for the common good of the Community, which have been previously approved by the Board of Directors,will be allowed on Common Areas. 4.14. Rubbish and Trash. No Lot or part of the Common Area shall be used as a dumping ground for trash or rubbish of any kind. All garbage and other waste shall be kept in appropriate containers for timely and proper disposal, out of public view. Yard rakings, dirt and other material resulting from landscaping work shall not be dumped onto streets, the Common Areas or any other Lots. Should any Owner fail to remove any trash,rubbish,garbage,yard rakings or any such materials from any Lot,any roadways or Common Area where deposited by him/her within five (5) days following the date on which notice is mailed to him/herby the Board of Directors, the Association may have such materials removed and charge the expense of such removal to the Owner. Each Owner is responsible for trash disposal, and shall remove individual trash containers within 12 hours of collection. No trash and/or storage containers shall be visible from any adjacent street or neighboring Lot, and shall not be allowed to emit any odors or attract insects or rodents. 4.15. Fences and Hedges. No fences or boundary hedges shall be installed without prior written approval of the ARC. Any fencing installed on Owner's Lots either by Owner, or by Declarant, will be Owner's maintenance responsibility. All fences that are Owner's responsibility are to be maintained in condition acceptable to Board and ARC. Fences on any Common Area properties, along the perimeter boundaries of the plat, or any fences that are directly visible from adjacent streets, or common areas will be maintained by the Association.All side yard fencing shall maintain a five(5)foot setback from the front of the house. No fencing will be allowed in the front yard. All fence materials, designs, and colors subject to prior approval of the ARC. Any perimeter fencing on the Plat boundaries, adjacent to privately owned property, will be uniform in design and appearance. No chain link fencing will be visible from a street, Common Area, or the first floor of an adjacent Lot, except that originally installed by the Declarant. All Declarant installed chain link shall be maintained by the Association. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 14 4.16. Service Facilities; Utilities. Service facilities (e.g. garbage containers, clotheslines, air conditioning compressors, etc.) shall be screened such that the elements screened are not visible at any time from the street or a neighboring Home. All utility lines, including those shared in common with owners of any contiguous Home in the same structure, shall be maintained, repaired and replaced by the Owner of each Lot, or all Owners individually and/or collectively at their sole expense, as may be determined. The Association's efforts to resolve issues between Owners, for any provisions of the Association documents, is done solely for the Owners' benefit and will in no event create any liability for the Association. The Association will be responsible for the maintenance of any drainage lines and pipes for gutters from the homes to the point of intersection with the publicly owned storm drain facility. The Association is not responsible for the maintenance of any utility, cable TV, or phone facilities. The location of any heating and/or air conditioning compressors or heat pumps will be as previously determined by Declarant. Said locations must take into consideration the noise and view from adjacent Homes, common areas or streets. No window air conditioners will be installed or approved by the ARC. 4.17. Antennas, Satellite Dishes and Solar Collectors. No Owner may erect or maintain a television or radio receiving or transmitting antenna, satellite dish or similar implement or apparatus, or solar collector panels or equipment upon any Lot without the prior written consent of the ARC. Placement shall be restricted to building surfaces not considered part of the front plane of the residence. No installations shall be lower than the first level ceiling height. The preferred location shall be the barge rafter or gabled ends of any living unit. Exterior satellite dishes with a surface diameter of eighteen (18) inches or less may be placed on any Lot so long as they are not visible from the street and are screened from all neighboring Homes. Approved installation locations shall in no way violate current FCC rules or regulations concerning said installation locations. The authority of the ARC in this matter shall be subject to any regulations issued by the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") or any other applicable governmental authority. 4.18. Exterior Lighting or Noisemaking Devices. Except with the consent of the ARC, no exterior lighting or noisemaking devices shall be installed or maintained on any Lot, other than security and fire alarms. However, false alarms of security and fire systems will not be allowed to repeatedly occur. Seasonal holiday lighting and decorations are permissible if consistent with any applicable rules and regulations and if installed no more than thirty (30) days before the celebrated holiday, and removed within thirty(30)days after the celebrated holiday. CCR Solera. 113006.doc 15 4.19. Recreational Equipment. No playground, athletic or recreational equipment or structures, including without limitation, basketball backboards, hoops and related supporting structures, shall be permitted, installed or utilized on any Lot in view from any public street, sidewalk or Common Area within the Property. 4.20. Grades, Slopes, and Drainage. There shall be no interference with the established drainage patterns or systems over or through any Lot within the Property so as to affect any other Lot or Common Area or any areas outside the Property unless adequate alternative provisions are made for proper drainage and are approved by the ARC. The term "established drainage" shall mean any wall, drainage swales, conduits, inlets and outlets designed and constructed on the Property. 4.21. Damage or Destruction to Home and/or Lot. If all, or any portion of a Lot or Home, is damaged by fire or other casualty the Owner shall restore the damaged improvements subject to the provisions of any applicable insurance policies. Restoration must be performed so that the improvements are in substantially the same condition in which they existed prior to the damage, subject to current governmental regulations, building codes, and provisions of Article 6 of this Declaration. The Owner must commence such work within sixty (60) days after the damage occurs and must complete the work within six(6)months thereafter. 4.22. Detached Buildings. No permanent or removable detached accessory buildings, including, but not limited to, storage buildings, greenhouses, children's playhouses and similar structures, shall be built without the prior written consent of the ARC. No detached buildings shall be used as additional living space and none shall contain any plumbing. Outbuildings shall be of a one (1) story design and the outside walls shall not exceed seven(7)feet in height,nor shall the overall height exceed nine (9) feet, measured from the existing Lot grade, or have total floor area in excess of ten (10) percent of the first floor area of the main dwelling (excluding the area of the garage and any porches). They shall be constructed of wood and the roofing, siding color, style and finish shall match that of the exterior material of the house. Metal sheds are prohibited. Heavy duty rubber or unbreakable plastic or composite storage sheds that are portable and temporary in nature, MAY be approved providing that they are: 1) screened or hidden from the view of neighboring Lots and Common Areas, and 2) aesthetically harmonious with the home in terms of color and texture/finish (e.g. pebbled/muted/dull). No such buildings shall be used as additional living space and none shall contain any plumbing. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 16 4.23. Owner's Maintenance Obligations. All improvements upon any Lot, not maintained by the Association, shall at all times be maintained by the Owner in a clean and attractive condition, painted and in good repair, and in such a fashion as not to create a hazard of any kind. All work on such items is subject to ARC review and approval prior to commencement of work. Homes will be provided with landscape maintenance as outlined elsewhere in this Declaration. In the event repair or replacement of the common foundations of a Building Structure or common firewall (which terms shall have the same meaning as party walls) of a Building Structure should become necessary or appropriate, then the Owners of the Homes within the Building Structure that required such repair or replacement shall be jointly responsible for such repair and/or replacement, and the Owners of such affected Homes shall share equally in the expense of such repair and replacement. In the event an Owner of a Home determines repair or replacement of the common foundations or common firewalls of a Building Structure is necessary or appropriate, that Owner shall notify the other Owners of the affected Homes within the Building Structure of the need to perform such repair or replacement. If a majority of the Owners of the affected Homes within the Building Structure agree that such repair or replacement is necessary, they shall jointly cause such work to be performed, and each Owner of an affected Home shall pay an equal portion of the expense of such work. If an Owner of an affected Home determines repair or replacement of the common foundations or common firewalls of a building Structure is necessary or appropriate and a majority of the Owners of the other Homes affected or claim to be affected do not concur with such determination, then the Owners of the Homes affected (or claimed to be affected) shall mutually agree upon and retain a professional engineer licensed in the State of Oregon having at least five (5) years experience in such matters to inspect the common foundations or common firewalls, and such engineer shall make a determination as to whether such repair or replacement is required. The determination of such engineer shall be binding to the affected Owners, and all expenses and fees of the engineer and of the repair or replacement work required to be performed if any, shall be borne as provided in the Section. In the event the Owners of Homes so affected or claimed to be so affected cannot agree upon a professional engineer having the required qualifications within a 30-day period, then any of the affected Owners may make application to the ARC, which shall select such engineer having the requisite qualifications. The fees and expenses of the engineer shall be shared equally by the Owners of the Homes affected or claimed to be affected. In the event the Owner of an affected Home fails to contribute to the expense of the repair or replacement of the common foundation or common firewalls by thirty (30) days after written demand therefore,then the amount not paid or reimbursed, as well as interest thereon at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum from the date of such written demand shall become a charge and lien against the Owner of a Home failing to make such payment or reimbursement. Each Owner of Homes shall be deemed to have agreed by acceptance of a deed conveying the Home, that any such lien shall be effective without the necessity of CCR.Soles.113006.doc 17 obtaining the joinder of such Owner in the execution of any instrument, upon the filing by another Owner of an affected Home of a claim of lien in the Official Records of Washington County, Oregon. 4.24. Right of Maintenance and Entry by Association. If an Owner fails to perform maintenance and/or repair which he/she is obligated to perform pursuant to this Declaration for buildings or landscaping, and if the Board determines, after notice and a hearing (given pursuant to the provisions of the Bylaws), that such maintenance and/or repair is necessary to preserve the attractiveness, quality, nature and/or value of Solera, the Board may cause such maintenance and/or repair in connection therewith to be performed and may enter any such Lot whenever entry is necessary in connection with the performance of any maintenance or construction which the Board is authorized to undertake. Entry shall be made with as little inconvenience to an Owner as practicable and only after advance written notice of not less than forty-eight (48) hours, except in emergency situations. Such right of maintenance shall include, but not be limited to, buildings, street trees and front and street-side yard landscape. 4.25. Association Rules and Regulations. The Board of Directors, from time to time, may adopt, modify or revoke Rules and Regulations governing the conduct of persons and the operation or use of Lots and Common Areas, as it may deem necessary or appropriate in order to assure the peaceful and orderly use and enjoyment of the Property. A copy of any Rules and Regulations,upon adoption, amendment,modification or revocation thereof, shall be delivered by the Board of Directors promptly to each Owner and shall be binding upon all Owners and Occupants of all Lots upon the date of delivery or actual notice thereof. The method of adoption of such Rules and Regulations shall be provided in the Bylaws of the Association. 4.26. County Ordinances and Regulations. The standards and restrictions of Article 4 shall be the minimum required. To the extent the ordinances and regulations of the City of Tigard, Washington County, or the State of Oregon are more restrictive, or provide for a higher or different standard, the ordinances and regulations of the City of Tigard, Washington County, or the State of Oregon, and any jurisdiction of Property, which may be annexed into,shall prevail. 4.27. Violation. The Association may impose a fine, charge or penalty for any violation of this Declaration, the Bylaws and Rules and Regulations after reasonable notice of the violation and a reasonable opportunity for a hearing. Additionally, the Association may seek injunctions or other equitable relief or may file an action for money damages owing from such violations. CCR.Sclera. 113006.doc 18 4.28. Security. The Association is not responsible for security of the neighborhood or any Homes. The Owners are exclusively responsible for security of their Home and Property. 4.29. Retaining Walls. See Article 3, Section 3.4(o). 4.30. Windows, Decks, Porches and Outside Walls. To preserve the attractive appearance and proper maintenance of the Building Structures and Property, the nature of items that may be placed in or on windows, decks, porches, and the outside Walls, so as to be visible from the street or Common Areas are more specifically defined as follows: (1) Window coverings, curtains, shutters, drapes or blinds, other than those of commercially produced quality, shall not be permitted to be visible from any public or private street, pathway, Common Area or adjacent property; (2) Garments, rugs, laundry and other similar items may not be hung from windows, facades, porches, or decks; (3) Planters, pots or other solid materials that can either (a) gather moisture leading to potential material disintegration or damage, and/or(b) potentially fall and create a safety concern, are not to be displayed on porch or deck railings,porch decks or fence caps and posts. Planters on decks may be displayed if raised adequately off the deck surface to allow for airflow and moisture evaporation. 4.31. Conditions of Approval. This subdivision is subject to the Conditions of Approval, per Case File No. (SUB)2005-00023, City of Tigard Planning Department, attached to these Declarations as Exhibit`B." ARTICLE 5 COMMON AREA Currently, no common areas are designated on the Plat for Solera. Should common areas be designated in the future, or by future annexations, the following provisions shall apply. 5.1 Use of Common Areas. Use of Common Areas is subject to the provisions of the Declaration, Bylaws, Articles and Rules and Regulations promulgated by the Board of Directors. There shall be no use of the Common Area except by Owners and their invitees. There shall be no obstruction of any part of the Common Area. Nothing shall be stored or kept in the Common Area without the prior written consent of the Board of Directors. No alterations or additions to the Common Area shall be permitted without the prior written approval by the Board of Directors. Any work so authorized by the Association's Board of Directors shall be considered a temporary easement over the Common Area. Nothing shall be stored or kept in the Homes or Common Area, which will increase the rate of insurance on the Common Area, or other CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 19 Association insurance, without the prior written consent of the Board. At the Owner's sole expense, written approval from the Association's insurance carrier for such work in the Common Area must be obtained. If there are any insurance settlement claims or condemnation awards paid to the Association, a portion of the entire proceeds may be directed to the Lot Owner for said improvements. 5.2 Maintenance of Common Area. The Association shall be responsible for maintenance, repair,replacement,and upkeep of the Common Area, including,but not by way of limitation, all drainage systems, landscaping, irrigation systems, benches, play equipment, common area lighting not maintained by a public agency, fencing, pathways, benches, gazebos, and any other Improvements that may be included in Common Area. The Association shall keep the Common Area and improvements thereon in good condition and repair, provide for all necessary services and cause all acts to be done which may be necessary or proper to assure the maintenance of the Common Area in first class condition. 5.3 Alterations to Common Area. Only the Association shall construct, reconstruct, or alter any improvement situated upon the Common Area. A proposal for any construction of or alteration, maintenance or repair to an improvement may be made at any meeting. A proposal may be adopted by the Board, subject to the limitations contained in the Bylaws and the Declaration. 5.4 Funding. Expenditures for alterations, maintenance or repairs to an existing capital improvement for which a reserve has been collected shall be made from the reserve account. As provided in Section 10.6, the Board may levy a special assessment to fund any construction, alteration, repair or maintenance of an improvement (or any other portions of the Common Area) for which no reserve has been collected or for which the reserve account is insufficient to cover the cost of the proposed improvement. 5.5 Landscaping. The Association shall be responsible for all landscaping located in any Common Area properties, as provided in Section 3.4 (g). All landscaping on any portion of the Common Area shall be maintained and cared for in a manner consistent with the standard of design and quality as originally established by Declarant or the ARC. 5.6 Condemnation of Common Area. If all or any portion of the Common Area is taken for any public or quasi-public use under any statute, by right of eminent domain or by purchase in lieu of eminent domain, the entire award shall be received by and expended by the Board of Directors in a manner which in their discretion is in the best interest of the Association. The Association shall represent the interest of all Owners in any negotiations,suit or action or settlement in connection with such matters. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 20 5.7 Damage or Destruction of Common Area. In the event any Common Area is damaged or destroyed by an Owner or any of his/her Occupants, guests, tenants, licensees, agents or members of his/her family in a manner that would subject such Owner to liability for such damage under Oregon law, such Owner does hereby authorize the Association to repair such damage. The Association shall repair the damage and restore the area in workmanlike manner as originally constituted or as may be modified or altered subsequently by the Association in the discretion of the Board of Directors. The reasonable cost necessary for such repairs shall become a special assessment upon the Lot of the Owner who caused or is responsible for such damage. ARTICLE 6 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE 6.1. Architectural Review. No improvement shall be commenced, erected, placed or altered on any Lot until the construction plans and specifications showing the nature, shape, heights, materials, colors, and proposed location of the improvement have been submitted to and approved in writing by the ARC. The ARC will only have authority to make decisions related to the Lots and not the Common Area Tracts. Any architectural or design considerations on the Common Area Tracts will be solely within the power of the Board of Directors. It is the intent and purpose of this Declaration to assure quality of workmanship and materials and to assure harmony of exterior design with the existing improvements and landscaping. The ARC is not responsible for determining compliance with structural and building codes, solar ordinances, zoning codes or other governmental regulations, all of which are the responsibility of the Lot Owners. The procedure and specific requirements for review and approval of construction may be set forth in design guidelines adopted from time to time by the ARC. Construction by the Declarant is presumed to have been approved and is thereby exempt from this review. In all cases, which the ARC consent is required by this Declaration, the provision of this Article shall apply. The ARC and the Board of Directors are hereby granted an easement over the Lots to enable the ARC to carry out its designated functions. 6.2. Architectural Review Committee - Appointment and Removal. The ARC shall consist of no more than three (3) members, as the Board may appoint from time to time. The Declarant reserves the right to appoint all members of the ARC and all replacements thereto until turnover. The Declarant may appoint a single person to serve as the ARC. After turnover, the Declarant shall delegate the right to appoint and remove members of the ARC to the Board of Directors. The terms of office for each member of the ARC shall be for one (1) year unless lengthened by the Board at the time of appointment or unless the Board serves as the ARC in which event the terms of the ARC members shall be the same as their terms as Board members. The Board may appoint CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 21 any or all of its members for the ARC and there should be no requirement for non-Board members on the ARC. The Board may appoint one or more members to the ARC who are not Owners,but who have special expertise regarding the matters, which come before the ARC. In the sole discretion of the Board, such non-Owner members of the ARC may be paid and that cost paid by applicants or the Association. 6.3. Majority Action. Except as otherwise provided in this Declaration, a majority of the members of the ARC shall have the power to act on behalf of the ARC, without the necessity of a meeting and without the necessity of consulting the remaining member of the ARC. The ARC may render its decision only by written instrument setting forth the action taken by the members consenting thereto. 6.4. Duties. The ARC shall consider and act upon the proposals and/or plans submitted pursuant to this Article. The ARC, from time to time and at its sole discretion, may adopt architectural rules, regulations and guidelines ("Architectural Standards"). The Architectural Standards shall interpret and implement the provisions of this Declaration for architectural review and guidelines for architectural design, placement of buildings, color schemes, exterior finishes and materials and similar features which may be used within the Property; provided, however that the Architectural Standards shall not be in derogation of the minimum standards established by this Declaration. 6.5. ARC Decision. The ARC shall render its approval or denial decision with respect to the construction proposal within twenty (20) working days after it has received all material required by it with respect to the application. All decisions shall be in writing. In the event the ARC fails to render its decision of approval or denial in writing within sixty (60) days of receiving all material required by it with respect to the proposal, the application shall be deemed approved. Approval by the ARC does not imply government approval,which is solely the responsibility of the Owner. 6.6. ARC Discretion. The ARC may, at its sole discretion, withhold consent to any proposed work if the ARC fords the proposed work would be inappropriate for the particular Lot or incompatible with the design standards that the ARC intends for Solera. Consideration such as siting, shape, size, color, design, height, solar access, or other effect on the enjoyment of other Lots or the Common Area, and any other factors which the ARC reasonably believe to be relevant, may be taken into consideration by the ARC in determining whether or not to consent to any proposed work. 6.7. Non-waiver. Consent by the ARC to any matter proposed to it or within its jurisdiction shall not be deemed to constitute a precedent or waiver impairing the ARC's right to withhold approval as to any similar matter thereafter proposed or submitted to it for consent. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 22 6.8. Appeal. At any time after Declarant has delegated appointment of the members of the ARC to the Board of Directors pursuant to Section 6.2, any Owner adversely impacted by action of the ARC may appeal such action to the Board of Directors. Appeals shall be made in writing within ten(10)days of the ARC's action and shall contain specific objections or mitigating circumstances justifying the appeal. If the Board is already acting as the ARC, the appeal shall be treated as a request for a rehearing, but in such case the Board must actually meet and receive evidence and argument. A final, conclusive decision shall be made by the Board of Directors within fifteen (15) days after receipt of such notification. The determination of the Board shall be final. 6.9. Effective Period of Consent. The ARC's consent to any proposed work shall automatically be revoked three (3) months after issuance unless construction of the work has been commenced or the Owner has applied for and received an extension of time from the ARC. 6.10. Determination of Compliance. The ARC shall inspect, from time to time, all work performed and determine whether it is in substantial compliance with the approval granted. If the ARC finds that the work was not performed in substantial conformance with the approval granted, or if the ARC finds that the approval required was not obtained, the ARC shall notify the Owner in writing of the noncompliance. The notice shall specify the particulars of any noncompliance and shall require the Owner to take the necessary action to bring the work into compliance with the approved project. 6.11. Non-compliance. If the ARC determines that an Owner has not constructed an improvement consistent with the specifications on which approval is based, and if the Owner fails to diligently commence to remedy such non-compliance in accordance with the provisions of the notice of noncompliance, then at the expiration of the third (31) day from the date of such notification, the ARC shall provide a notice of a hearing to consider the Owner's continuing non-compliance. The hearing shall be set not more than thirty(30) days from the date of the notice of non-compliance. At the hearing, if the ARC finds that there is no valid reason for the continuing non-compliance, the ARC shall determine the estimated costs of correcting it. The ARC shall then require the Owner to remedy or remove the same within a period of not more than ten(10) days from the date of the ARC's determination. If the Owner does not comply with the ARC's ruling within such period or within any extension of such period as the ARC, at its discretion, may grant, the Association may (a) remove the non-complying improvement, (b) remedy the non-compliance, or(c) file suit to compel compliance. The costs of such action shall be assessed against the Owner and his/her Lot, including all attorneys' fees and other costs expended and incurred to enforce compliance, before suit or action is filed and at trial or on any appeal or review therefrom. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 23 6.12. Liability. Neither the ARC, the Board, their agents, nor any member thereof shall be liable to any Owner, Occupant, or builder for any damage, loss or prejudice suffered or claimed or claimed to be suffered arising from any action by the ARC or a member thereof or failure of the ARC or a member thereof, provided only that the member has acted in good faith in accordance with the actual knowledge possessed by him. 6.13. Estoppel Certificate. Within fifteen (15) working days after written request is delivered to the ARC by an Owner, and upon payment to the ARC of a reasonable fee fixed by the ARC to cover costs, the ARC shall provide such Owner with a certificate executed by the Chairman of the ARC, and acknowledged, certifying with respect to any Lot owned by the Owner, that as of the date thereof either (a) all improvements made or done upon or within such Lot by the Owner comply with this Declaration or any Rules and Regulations either promulgated by the Board or the ARC, or (b) such improvements do not so comply, in which event, the certificate shall also identify the non-complying improvements and set forth with particularity the nature of such noncompliance. The Owner, his/her heirs, divisees, successors and assigns shall be entitled to rely on the certificate with respect to the matters set forth. The certificate shall be conclusive as between the Declarant,the ARC, the Association and all Owners,and all such persons deriving an interest through any of them. ARTICLE 7 SOLERA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 7.1. Members. Each Owner shall be a mandatory member of the Association. Membership in the Association shall be appurtenant to, and may not be separated from, ownership of any Lot. Transfer of ownership of a Lot automatically transfers membership in the Association. Without any other act or acknowledgement, Occupants and Owners shall be governed and controlled by this Declaration the Articles, Bylaws, and Rules and Regulations and any amendments thereof. 7.2. Proxy. Each Owner may cast his/her vote in person,pursuant to a proxy executed by the Owner, or by written ballot, as provided by ORS 94.647. An Owner may not revoke a proxy given pursuant to this section except by actual notice or revocation to the person presiding over a meeting of the Association. A proxy shall not be valid if it is undated or purports to be revocable without notice. A proxy shall terminate one (1)year after its date,unless the proxy specifies a shorter term. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 24 7.3. Procedure. All meetings of the Association, the Board of Directors, the ARC, and Association committees shall be conducted with such rules of order as may from time to time be adopted by the Board of Directors. Notwithstanding which rule of order is adopted,the chairman shall be entitled to vote on all matters,not merely to break a tie vote. A tie vote does not constitute a majority or approval of any motion or resolution. 7.4. Contracts Entered Into by Declarant or Before Turnover Meeting. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Declaration, any management contracts, service contracts or employment contracts entered into by Declarant or the Board of Directors on behalf of the Association before the Turnover Meeting shall have a term of not more than three(3) years. In addition, any such contract shall provide that it may be terminated without cause or penalty by the Association or Board of Directors upon not less than thirty (30) days' notice to the other party given not later than sixty (60) days after the Turnover Meeting. ARTICLE 8 DECLARANT'S RIGHTS 8.1. General. Declarant is undertaking the work of developing Lots and other improvements within Solera. The completion of the development work and the marketing and sale of the Lots is essential to the establishment and welfare of the Property as a residential community. Until the Homes on all Lots on the Property have been constructed, fully completed and sold, with respect to the Common Areas and each Lot on the Property,the Declarant shall have the special rights set for in this Article 8. 8.2. Voting Rights. The Association shall have two (2) classes of voting members, as described in Section 3.7(b)of the Bylaws, attached hereto as Exhibit"A". 8.3. Interim Board and Officers. Declarant or the Owners shall form a transitional advisory committee (the "Transitional Advisory Committee") to provide for the transition from administrative responsibility by Declarant for the Property to. administrative responsibility by the Association, in accordance with Section 3.7 of the Bylaws, attached hereto as Exhibit"A". 8.4. Board of Directors. The Board of Directors shall be elected in accordance with Article 4 of the Bylaws, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", and recorded herewith. CCR Solera. 113006.doc 25 8.5. Marketing Rights. Declarant shall have the right to maintain a sales office and model on one or more of the Lots which the Declarant may or may not own,to be staffed by the employees of the Declarant or any licensed real estate sales agents. The Declarant and prospective purchasers and their agents shall have the right to use and occupy the sales office and models during reasonable hours any day of the week. The Declarant may maintain a reasonable number of"For Sale" signs at reasonable locations of the Property, including,without limitation,the Common Area. 8.6. Declarant's Easements. The Declarant has reserved easements over the Property as more fully described in Article 3.4, Sections(c)and(d)hereof. 8.7. Appearance and Design of Solera. Declarant shall not be prevented from changing the exterior appearance of the Common Area, including the landscaping or any other matter directly or indirectly connected with project in any manner deemed desirable by Declarant, provided that the Declarant obtain governmental consents required by law. The construction and material standards of Article 4 notwithstanding, Declarant may change exterior and/or interior designs from initial plans and provisions in this document, without notice. This may include designs, colors, and type of materials, provided Declarant obtains any necessary governmental consent. 8.8. Construction by Declarant. All construction by Declarant establishes the standards for the ARC and meets any Design Guidelines of the Association. Additionally, the Declarant or any contractor or homebuilder shall have the right to construct residences on any Lot, and to store construction materials and equipment on such Lots in the normal course of construction. ARTICLE 9 FUNDS AND ASSESSMENTS 9.1. Purpose of Assessment. The assessments levied by the Association shall be used exclusively to promote the recreation, health, safety, and welfare of the Owners and Occupants, and for the improvement, operation and maintenance of any Common Area,including maintenance and administrative costs, and insurance for Association. (a) Common Expense Designations. Common Expenses of the nature described in Section 9.1 which are to be, or are, incurred by the Association for the benefit of all of the Owners of Lots within the Property shall be separately budgeted for allocation among all such Owners and shall be designated"General Common Expenses". CCR.Solera.1 13006.doc 26 9.2. Covenants to Pay. Declarant, on behalf of each and every subsequent Owner of any Lot, covenants and agrees that each Lot will pay the Association the assessments and any additional charges levied pursuant to this Article 9. (a) Funds Held. The assessments collected by the Association shall be held by the Association for and on behalf of each Owner and shall be used solely for the operation, care and maintenance of Solera as provided by this Declaration. Upon the sale or transfer of any Lot, the Owner's interest in the funds shall be deemed automatically transferred to the successor in interest of such Owner,and is not refundable. 9.3. Basis of Assessments and Commencement of Assessments. (a) Assessments are to be levied against all Lots, except those owned by the Declarant, or any successor Declarant or Builder who acquires all of the platted Lots in a bulk purchase, whether or not such Lots have been improved with a substantially completed Home. Provided, however, that no Assessment shall be levied against any Lot, until such time as it is first conveyed to a purchaser other than Declarant or Declarant's assignee. Assessments for all Lots conveyed by the Declarant to a purchaser/Owner, either by deed or land sales contract, shall begin on the day of the recording of the deed or land sale contract conveying or contracting to convey the Lot to the new Owner. (b) In lieu of paying operating assessments, Declarant will contribute, in a timely manner, non-refundable monies to the Association in order to support budgeted, or previously agreed to, operating costs in excess of current Association revenues, so long as Declarant owns any Lots. After the date of the Turnover Meeting, said contributions shall be in accordance with the last Association budget approved prior to the Turnover Meeting. (c) Notwithstanding Section 9.3(a), to the extent required by law, Reserve Fund Assessments described in Section 9.5 shall begin accruing on each platted Lot from the date of the first Lot as the Property becomes subject to assessment under Section 9.3(a); provided, however, that Declarant may defer payment of any accrued assessment for a Lot under this Section 9.3(c) until the date such Lot is first conveyed to a purchaser other than Declarant or Declarant assignee. The books and records of the Association shall reflect the amount owing from Declarant for all such Reserve Fund Assessments. 9.4. Annual Assessments. Annual assessments for each fiscal year shall be established when the Board approves the budget for that fiscal year. Annual assessments shall be levied on a fiscal year basis. The fiscal year shall be June 30. Unless otherwise specified by the Board, annual assessments shall be due and payable in monthly installments on the first day of each month during the term of this Declaration. CCR Solera. 113006.doc 27 (a) Budget. Regardless of the number of Members or the amount of assets of the Association, each year the Board shall prepare, approve and make available to each Member a pro forma operating statement (budget) containing; (i) estimated revenue and expenses on an accrual basis; (ii) the amount of the total cash reserves of the Association currently available for replacement or major repair of the Common Area and for contingencies; (iii) an itemized estimate for the remaining life of, and the methods of funding to defray repair, replacement or additions to major components of the Common Area; and (iv) a general statement setting forth the procedures used by the Board in the calculation and establishment of reserves to defray the costs and repair, replacement or additions to major components of the Common Area. For the first fiscal year,the budget shall be approved by the Board no later than the date on which annual assessments are scheduled to commence. Thereafter, the Board shall annually prepare and approve the budget and distribute a copy thereof to each Member, together with written notice of the amount of the annual assessments to be levied against the Owner's Lot, not less than thirty (30) days and not more than ninety (90) days prior to the beginning of the fiscal year. The assessments in the budget to be collected at intervals as determined by the Board of Directors may include both operating and maintenance costs and the reserve assessments, all as defined in the Association documents. (b) Allocation of Assessments. The total amount in the budget shall be charged equally against all sold Lots as annual assessments. Declarant may offset operating assessment payments due under this Declaration through the payment of maintenance or utility costs described herein, subject to submittal of paid invoices to the Association. (c) Other Assessments. In addition to all assessments described in this Article 10, the Association shall assess all Lots for costs and expenses incurred by or at the direction of the Board for upkeep and maintenance of the exterior walls, exterior paint and roofing, and exterior maintenance of the front and side yards, including street frontage planter strips of all Homes. In addition to the maintenance fund and the reserve fund described above, separate funds are hereby established for receipt, administration and distribution of proceeds arising from assessments against all Lots related to the upkeep and maintenance of the exterior building and landscape maintenance described above. Such assessments will be fixed annually in accordance with the general budget guidelines outlined in Section 9.4 (a) above for the general association assessment. These maintenance responsibilities shall be subject to the same terms and conditions as the regular or special periodic assessments described above. A reserve study required in Section 9.5 (b) below shall incorporate these maintenance responsibilities. Exterior wall painting is to include any trim. All doors, windows and any skylights, including frames, glass replacement and cleaning is the sole responsibility of Owners. (d) Non-Waiver of Assessments. If before the expiration of any fiscal year the Association fails to fix annual assessments for the next fiscal year, the annual assessments established for the preceding year shall continue until a new annual CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 28 assessment is fixed. The provisions of this section are subject to the provisions of the Oregon Planned Community Act. 9.5. Reserve Funds (a) Reserve Fund for Replacing Common Elements. Declarant shall establish a reserve fund in the name of the Association for replacement, in whole or in part, of any completed improvements located in, on, or under the Common Area or Lots for which the Association is responsible pursuant to this Declaration, that will normally require replacement in more than three (3) and fewer than thirty (30) years, for any exterior painting to the extent the Common Area improvements include exterior painted surfaces, for other items, whether or not involving the Common Area, if the Association has responsibility to maintain the items, and for other items for which reserves are required by the Declaration or Bylaws ("Reserve Fund"). The Reserve Fund need not include those items that could reasonably be funded from the maintenance fund or operating assessments, or for which one or more Owners are responsible for maintenance and replacement under the provisions of this Declaration or the Bylaws. For purposes of funding the Reserve Fund, the Declarant initially, and thereafter the Association, shall impose an assessment to be called the "Reserve Fund Assessment" equally against each Lot. The Reserve Fund Assessment shall be based on the reserve study, and updates thereof, described in Section 9.5 (b), or other sources of reliable information. Nothing herein shall limit the authority of Declarant or the Association to establish other separate and unrelated reserve funds that are funded by assessments for reserves that are in addition to the Reserve Fund or that relate only to a particular type or category of Lot. The Reserve Fund shall be kept separate from other funds and may be used only for the purposes for which reserves have been established as specified in this Section, although the Board may borrow funds with a specified repayment program, in accordance with the Oregon Planned Community Act. Required Reserve Fund Assessments for completed improvements shall begin accruing from the date the first Lot assessed is conveyed. Declarant may elect to defer payment of the Reserve Fund Assessments due on Lots it owns until the date of the conveyance of the Lot to an Owner. However, the Declarant may not defer such payment beyond the date of the Turnover Meeting. The book and records of the Association shall reflect the amount owing from the Declarant for all Reserve Fund Assessments. After the Turnover Meeting, the Board may borrow funds from the Reserve Fund to meet high seasonal demands on the regular operating funds or to meet other unexpected increases in expenses. Such funds borrowed from the Reserve Fund shall be repaid from regular annual or special assessments against the Lots, if the Board has adopted a resolution, which may be an annual, continuing resolution, authorizing the borrowing of funds. Not later than the adoption of the budget for the following year, the Board shall adopt by resolution a written payment plan providing for repayment of the borrowed funds within a reasonable period. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 29 The Board may adjust the amount of the Reserve Fund Assessments as indicated by any reserve study or update, and provide for other reserve items that the Board, in its discretion, may deem appropriate. In addition, after the second anniversary of the turnover meeting, the Association may elect to reduce or increase future Reserve Fund Assessments by a 75%vote of the Owners. Any funds established for any of the purposes mentioned in this Section shall be deemed to be within the Reserve Fund notwithstanding that it may not be so designated by the Board of Directors. The amount of the Reserve Fund shall constitute an asset of the Association and shall not be refunded or distributed to any Owner. (b) Reserve Study and Maintenance Plan. The Board of Directors shall annually conduct a reserve study, or the review and update of an existing study, of the Common Area, and Common Home Exterior components to determine the requirements of the reserve fund described in Section 9.5(a) above. The reserve study shall include (a) identification of all items for which reserves are required to be established; (b) the estimated remaining useful life of each item as of the date of the reserve study; (c) the estimated cost of maintenance, repair, or replacement of each item at the end of its useful life; and (d) a thirty (30) year plan with regular and adequate contributions, adjusted by estimated inflation and interest earned on the reserve fund, to meet the maintenance, repair, and replacement schedule. Annually, in concurrence with the reserve study review, the Board shall also review and update, as necessary, an Association Maintenance Plan to reflect, at a minimum, recent maintenance that has taken place, changes in the physical status of a reserve component, or the addition of a physical component that has come to the Board's attention. 9.6. Special Assessments. The Board of Directors shall have the power to levy special assessments against an Owner or all Owners in the following manner for the following purposes: (a) Deficits in Operating Budget. To correct a deficit in the operating budget,by vote of a majority of the Board; (b) Breach of Documents. To collect amounts due to the Association from an Owner for breach of the Owner's obligations under the Declaration,the Bylaws, or the Rules and Regulations, by vote of a majority of the Board. All provisions of this Section 9.6 (b) shall be interpreted by the provisions of the Oregon Planned Community Act relative to the imposition of fines and penalties. (c) Repairs. To make repairs or renovations to the Common Area if sufficient funds are not available from the operating budget or replacement reserve accounts by vote of a majority of the Board; or CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 30 (d) Capital Additions. To make capital acquisitions, additions or improvements, by vote of at least seventy-five percent(75%) of all votes allocated to the Lots. Any special assessments shall be owned solely by the Association regardless of their purpose and the individual Owners so assessed shall have no rights or interests in said funds. 9.7. Accounts. (a) Types of Accounts. Assessments collected by the Association will be deposited into at Ieast two (2) separate accounts with a bank, which accounts shall be designated as (i) the Current Operating Account and (ii) the Reserve Account. Those portions of the assessments collected for current maintenance and operation levied under Section 9.4 (b) will be in the Current Operating Account and those portions of the assessments collected as reserves for replacement and deferred maintenance of capital improvements into the Reserve Account. Special Assessments shall be deposited into one of the two accounts, whichever is deemed by the Board to be appropriate. Withdrawal of funds for the Association's Reserve Account shall require the signatures of two(2)Directors,or Board approval in the written minutes of the Association. (b) Reserve Account. The Association shall pay out of the Reserve Account only those costs that are attributable to the maintenance,repair or replacement of capital improvements for which reserves have been collected and held. After the individual Lot Owners have assumed responsibility for administration of the planned community, the Board of Directors may borrow funds from the reserve account to meet high seasonal demands on the regular operating funds or to meet unexpected increases in expenses. Funds borrowed must be authorized by a resolution passed by the Board of Directors, which also outlines the manner of repayment from later assessments. Such resolution may be an annual continuing resolution, authorizing the borrowing of funds. Not later than the adoption of the budget for the following year, the Board shall adopt by resolution a written payment plan providing for repayment of the borrowed funds within a reasonable period. (c) Current Operating Account. All ordinary maintenance and operating expenses shall be paid from the Current Operating Account. 9.8. Default in Payment of Assessments,Enforcement of Liens. (a) Personal Obligation. All assessments properly imposed under this Declaration or the Bylaws shall be the joint and several personal obligation of all Owners of the Lot to which such assessment pertains. In a voluntary conveyance (that is, one CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 31 • other than through foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure) the grantees shall be jointly and severally liable with the grantor(s) for all Association assessments imposed through the recording date of the instrument affecting the conveyance. Said provisions shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Oregon Planned Community Act. A suit for a money judgment may be initiated by the Association to recover such assessments without either waiving or foreclosing the Association's lien. (b) Association Lien. At any time any assessment (of any type provided for by this Declaration or the Bylaws) or installment thereof is delinquent, the Association,by and through its Board or any management agent, may file a notice of lien in the deed records of Washington County, Oregon against the Lot in respect to which the delinquency pertains. Once filed, such lien shall accumulate all future assessments or installments, interest, late fees, penalties, fines, attorneys' fees (whether or not suitor action is instituted) and other appropriate costs properly chargeable to an Owner by the Association,until such amounts are fully paid. The provisions regarding the attachment, notice, recordation and duration of liens established on real property under ORS 94.704 to 94.716, as the same may be amended, shall apply to the Association's lien. The lien shall be foreclosed in accordance with the provisions regarding the foreclosure of liens under ORS Chapter 88. The lien of the Association shall be superior to all other liens and encumbrances except property taxes and assessments, any first mortgage, deed of trust or land sale contract recorded previously to the Association's notice of lien and any mortgage or deed of trust granted to an institutional lender which is recorded previously to the Association's notice of lien. (c) Interest; Fines; Late Fees; Penalties. The Board in its reasonable discretion may from time to time adopt resolutions to set the rate of interest, and to impose late fees, fines and penalties on delinquent assessments or for violations of the provisions of this Declaration, the Bylaws, any Rules and Regulations, and any rules and regulations adopted by the ARC. The adoption of such impositions shall be communicated to all Owners in writing not less than thirty (30) days before the effective date by a notice mailed to the assessment billing addresses of such Owners. Such impositions shall be considered assessments which are lienable and collectible in the same manner as any other assessments. Provided, however, no fine or penalty for violation of this Declaration, the Bylaws or any Rules and Regulations (other than late fees, fines or interest arising from an Owner's failure to pay regular or special assessments)may be imposed against an Owner or his/her Lot until such Owner is given an opportunity for a hearing as provided in Section 4.26. (d) Acceleration of Assessments. In the event an Owner is delinquent in payment of any assessment or installment on any assessment, the Association, upon not less than ten(10) days written notice to the Owner, any accelerate the due date of the full annual assessment for that fiscal year and all future installments of any special assessments. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 32 (e) Association's Right to Rents/Receiver. In any foreclosure suit by the Association with respect to such lien, the Association shall be entitled to collect reasonable rent from the defaulting Owner for the use of his/her Lot or shall be entitled to the appointment of a Receiver. Any default by the Owner in any provisions of the Declaration or Bylaws shall be deemed to be a default by the Owner of any mortgage to which the Owner is party or to which the Lot is subject. ARTICLE 10 INSURANCE 10.1. Types of Insurance. For the benefit of the Association and the Owners, the Board of Directors shall obtain, maintain at all times, and pay for out of the Operations Fund,the types of insurance described in the following sections of Article 10. Such policies shall be issued by reputable insurance companies,authorized to do business in the State of Oregon. Such policies shall provide that the coverage there under cannot be canceled or substantially modified without at least 10 days written notice to the Association. The named insured on the policy shall read Solera Homeowners Association. 10.2. Liability Insurance. The Association shall maintain comprehensive general liability insurance coverage insuring the Declarant, the Association, the Board of Directors, and the managing agent, against liability to the public or to Owners and their invitees or tenants, incident to the operation, maintenance, ownership or use of the Common Areas, including legal liability arising out of lawsuits related to employment contracts of the Association. There may be excluded from such policy or policies coverage of an Owner(other than as a member of the Association or Board of Directors) for liability arising out of acts or omissions of such Owner and liability incident to the ownership and/or use of the part of the Property as to which such Owner has the exclusive use or occupancy; (a) Limits of liability under such insurance shall not be less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000)on a combined single-limit basis; (b) Such policy or policies shall be issued on a comprehensive liability basis and shall provide a cross-liability endorsement wherein the rights of named insureds under the policy or policies shall not be prejudiced as respects his, her or their action against another named insured. 10.3. Workers' Compensation Insurance. The Association shall maintain workers' compensation insurance to the extent necessary to comply with any applicable laws. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 33 10.4. Fidelity Insurance. The Board of Directors may cause the Association to maintain blanket fidelity insurance for all officers, directors, trustees, management agent, and employees of the Association and all other persons handling or responsible for funds of, or administered by, the Association. In the event that the Association has retained a management agent, the Board of Directors may require such agent to maintain fidelity bonds for its officers, employees and agents handling or responsible for funds of, or administered on behalf of, the Association. The cost of such insurance, if any, shall be borne entirely by the Association. (a) The total amount of fidelity insurance coverage required shall be based upon the best business judgment of the Board of Directors. (b) Such fidelity insurance shall name the Association as obligee and shall contain waivers by the insurance issuers of all defenses based upon the exclusion of persons serving without compensation from the definition of "employees" or similar terms or expressions. The insurance shall provide that they may not be canceled or substantially modified (including cancellation for nonpayment of premium) without at least ten(10)days' prior written notice to the Association. 10.5. Insurance by Lot Owners. The insurance described in paragraphs 10.2 and 10.3 above does not provide personal liability coverage for the Owners, nor fire or extended coverage casualty insurance for the Owners' personal property, the inside surfaces of the Building Structure, and all other improvements including, but not limited to, appliances, heaters and air conditioners, cabinets, flooring, wall and window coverings, light fixtures, flood and personal property nor the Lot or land on which the Building Structure resides. The responsibility for obtaining insurance that covers at least these items rests solely with the individual Owners,except as noted herein above. 10.6. Planned Community Act Requirements. The insurance maintained by the Association shall comply with the requirements of the Oregon Planned Community Act,ORS 94.550 to 94.780. ARTICLE 11 GENERAL PROVISIONS 11.1. Records. The Board of Directors shall preserve and maintain minutes of the meetings of the Association, the Board and any committees. The Board of Directors shall also keep detailed and accurate financial records including individual assessment accounts of Owners, the balance sheet, and income and expense statements. Individual assessment accounts shall designate the name and address of the Owner or Owners of the Lot, the amount of each assessment as it becomes due, the amounts paid upon the CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 34 account, and the balance due on the assessments. The minutes of the Association, the Board and committees, and the Association's fmancial records shall be reasonably available for review and copying by the Owners. A reasonable charge may be imposed by the Association for labor and materials relative to providing copies. Owners can obtain copies of this information within 10-days of receipt of a written request. 11.2. Indemnification of Directors, Officers, Employees and Agents. The Association shall indemnify any Director, officer, employee or agent who was or is a party or is threatened to be made a party to any threatened,pending or completed action, suit or proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative or investigative (other than an action by the Association) by reason of the fact that he/she is or was a Director, officer, employee or agent of the Association or is or was serving at the request of the Association as a Director, officer, employee or agent of another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise, against expenses (including attorneys' fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred by said person in connection with such suit, action or proceeding if he/she acted in good faith and in a manner he/she reasonably believed to be in, or not opposed to,the best interest of the Association, and, with respect to any criminal action or proceedings, had no reasonable cause to believe his/her conduct was unlawful. The termination of any action, suit or proceeding by judgment, order, settlement, conviction, or with a plea of nolo contendere or its equivalent, shall not of itself create a presumption that a person did not act in good faith and in a manner which he/she reasonably believed to be in, or not opposed to, the best interest of the Association, and with respect to any criminal action or proceedings, had reasonable cause to believe his/her conduct was unlawful. Payment under this clause may be made during the pendency of such claim, action, suit or proceeding as and when incurred, subject only to the right of the Association to reimbursement of such payment from such person, should it be proven at a later time that such person had no right to such payments. All persons who are ultimately held liable for their actions on behalf of the Association as a Director, officer, employee or agent shall have a right of contribution over and against all other Directors, officers, employees or agents and members of the Association who participated with or benefited from the acts which created said liability. 11.3. Enforcement; Attorneys' Fees. The Association and the Owners within the Property or any mortgagee on any Lot shall have the right to enforce all of the covenants, conditions, restrictions, reservations, easements, liens and charges now or hereinafter imposed by any of the provisions of this Declaration as may pertain specifically to such parties or owners by any proceeding at law or in equity. Failure by either the Association or by any Owner or mortgagee to enforce any covenant, condition or restriction herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of their right to do so thereafter. CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 35 11.4. Severability. Invalidation of any one of these covenants, conditions or restrictions by judgment or court order shall not affect the other provisions hereof and the same shall remain in full force and effect. 11.5. Duration. The covenants, conditions and restrictions of this Declaration shall run with and bind the land for a term of thirty-five (35) years from the date of this Declaration being recorded, after which time they shall be automatically extended for successive periods of ten (10) years, unless rescinded by a vote of at least ninety percent (90%) of the Owners and ninety percent (90%) of the first mortgagees. Provided however, amendments, which do not constitute rescission of the planned development, may be adopted as provided in Section 11.6 below. Additionally, any such rescission that affects the Common Area shall require the prior written consent of the County of Washington, Oregon. 11.6. Amendment. Except as otherwise provided in Sections 11.5, 11.9, and the restrictions set forth elsewhere herein, this Declaration may be amended at any time by an instrument approved by not less than seventy-five percent (75%) of the total votes for all Lots subject to this Declaration, of each class of members that are eligible to vote. Any amendment must be executed, recorded and certified as provided by law. Provided, however,that no amendment of this Declaration shall affect an amendment of the Bylaws or Articles without compliance with the provisions of such documents, and the. Oregon Non-Profit Corporation Act. Provided further, so long as the Declarant own any Lot, no amendment affecting the general plan and development or any other right of the Declarant herein contained may be affected without the express written consent of the Declarant or its successors and assigns. 11.7. Release of Right of Control. The Declarant may give up their right of control in writing at any time by notice to the Association, subject to the provisions of the Oregon Non-Profit statutes and the Oregon Planned Community Act. 11.8. Personal Pronouns. All personal pronouns used in this Declaration, whether used in the masculine, feminine or neuter gender, shall include all other genders; the singular shall apply to the plural and vice versa. 11.9. Unilateral Amendment by Declarant. The Declarant may amend this Declaration in order to comply with the requirements of the Federal Housing Administration of the United States, the Federal National Mortgage Association, the Government National Mortgage Association, the Federal Home Mortgage Loan Corporation, any department, bureau, board, commission or agency of the United States or the State of Oregon, or any other state in which the Lots are marketed and sold, or any corporation wholly owned, directly or indirectly, by the United States or the State of Oregon, or such other state, the approval of which entity is required in order for it to CCR.Solera. 113006.doc 36 r - insure, guarantee or provide fmancing in connection with development of the Property and sale of Lots. Prior to the Turnover Meeting, no Declarant amendment shall require notice to or approval by any Class A member. 11.10. Resolution of Document Conflicts. In the event of a conflict among any of the provisions in the documents governing Solera, such conflict shall be resolved by looking to the following documents in the order shown below: 1. Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions; 2. Articles of Incorporation; 3. Bylaws; 4. Rules and Regulations. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned being the Declarant herein,has executed this instrument this 8 day of 1 i - , 2006. SOLERA, LLC, An Oregon Limited Liability Company By: 1 V11L-- Title: -+ i-+`\eie"t-is cr-s c- STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of Washington ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on 1E'�. Br , 2006,by T errs 1. Al . &..I m i,— , of Solera LLC.J OFFICIAL SEAL ? NO PUBLIC FOR OREGON ? r LAURIE E MACK My Commission Expires: I U --?-4-a-1)6 ? '..%.,�;� COMMISSION NO. 98751) MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCT.24,20091 CCR.Solera.113006.doc 37 411/ ARBORIST FIELD OBSERVATIONS TIGARD Date: 7 Project Name: /1' �.+�,� 5°3 . 7 .060 l 5—ff, i ked'�,Q". Compliance Violation Notes 1. Location of tree protection fence 2. Condition of tree protection fence is adequate. 3. Preserved trees are healthy and undamaged. 4. No dumping of material within the TPZ 5. Roots (>1") within excavation are pruned 6. No compaction with the TPZ 7. No fill within the TPZ fft )- r r . t S �i1 ,- "A- '1 er" P'ex e �k�y S"c!e / fl,a c� l (4?(.\ f/`f L + (era, bv�(16 (4 I 5.4. 1r�rk Je 4,�.y c,�y v(�+ J8 so,t /'e �i'� 11 -� JJ J leAc• r / q.f.. Inspection Perfor y: )4L‘ PrAl■( I:\CURPLN\Masters\ARBORIST FIELD OBSERVATIONS.doc CITY OF TIGARD 1/13/2011 ;: i 9:52:47AM 13125 SW Hall Blvd. T I t; ,,R f1 Tigard,OR 97223 (503)639-4171 Conditions Associated With Case #: SUB2005-00023 Project Name: SOLERA SUBDIVISION # DESCRIPTION STATUS STATUS DATE SEVERITY APPLIED BY ACTION BY FINAL TREE PROTECTION PLAN Met 6/20/07 Gary Pagenstecher Gary Pagenstecher 1. Prior to any site work,the applicant shall submit a final tree protection plan that clearly depicts the proposed tree protection measures,and includes the following notations:"Tie applicant shall notify the City Arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction."If it is necessary to enter the tree protection zone at any time with equipment(trucks,bulldozers,etc.)the project arborist and City Arborist must be notified before any entry occurs. Before entering the TPZ,the project arborist and City Arborist shall determine the method by which entry can occur, along with any additional tree protection measures."The project arborist shall provide the City Arborist with bi-weekly reports through and including building construction on the conditions arid activities related to tree protection measures and activities. PUBLIC FACILITY IMPROVEMENT DR Met 7/7/06 KSM JJR 10. The app icant"s Public Facility Improvement permit construction drawings shall indicate that full width street improvements, including traffic control devices, mailbox clusters,concrete sidewalks,driveway aprons,curbs, asphaltic concrete pavement,sanitary sewers, storm drainage, street trees, streetlights,and underground utilities shall be installed within the interior subdivision streets. Improvements shall be revised to provide parking on one side,with supporting traffic data submitted, and a 5 foot planter strip between the curb and sidewalk along 96th Avenue and will be constructed to local street standards. ROW FOR GREENVIEW DRIVE Met 8/8/06 KSM JJR 11. The proposed ROW for Greenview Drive shall be 50 feet,except at the corner,where the ROW must be the Washington County Eyebrow Corner,Standard Drawing M-45.5. The applicant"s PFI plan submittal shall clearly dimension all aspects of the selected eyebrow corner(inside radius, outside radius and centerline radius). PROFILE OF GREENBURG RD Met 7/7/06 KSM JJR 12. A profile of Greenburg Road shall be required,extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. NO ACCESS ONTO GREENBURG Met 7/7/06 KSM JJR 13. No lot within this development shall be permitted to access directly onto Greenburg Road. All driveways within 150 feet of the intersection of SW Greenburg and SW Greenview must be placed as far north from Greenburg Road as possible. CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS Met 7/7/06 KSM JJR 14. The applicant"s construction drawings shall show that the pavement and rock section for the proposed private street(s)shall meet the City"s public street standard for a local residential street. SEWER AND DRAINAGE DETAILS Met 7/7/06 KSM JJR 15. Sanitary sewer and storm drainage details shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement(PFI)permit plans. APPROVAL FROM TVWD Met 12/15/06 KSM KSM 16. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection and fire hydrants prior to issuance of the City"s Public Facility Improvement permit. ON-SITE WATER QUALITY FACILITY Met 8/8/06 KSM JJR Page 1 of 4 * DESCRIPTION STATUS STATUS DATE SEVERITY APPLIED BY ACTION BY 17. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards(adopted by Resolution and Order No.00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department(Kim McMillan)for review and approval prior to issuance of the PFI permit. EROSION CONTROL PLAN Met 7/7/06 KSM JJR 18. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement(PFI)permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the"Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, February 2003 edition." 1200-C GENERAL PERMIT Met 8/8/06 KSM JJR 19. The applicant shall obtain a 1200-C General Permit issued by the City of Tigard pursuant to ORS 468.740 and the Federal Clean Water Act. DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS Met Gary Pagenstecher JJR 2. Prior to any site work,the applicant shall show the driveway locations for any proposed lots located within 150 feet of the intersection of SW Greenburg Road and SW 96th Avenue shall be located as far north from Greenburg Road as possible. TEMPORARY HAMMERHEAD TURNAROUN Met 7/7/06 KSM JJR 20. The applicant"s plans shall be revised to provide a temporary hammerhead turnaround in a tract. REVISED LOT CONFIGURATION Met 8/16/06 Gary Pagenstecher Gary Pagenstecher 21. Prior to Final plat approval,the applicant shall provide City staff with a revised lot configuration that demonstrates compliance with TDC Section 18.430.020.D. VEHICULAR ACCESS FROM GREENBUR Met 12/12/06 KSM BRS 22. Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the plat stating that vehicular access from SW Greenburg Road to individual lots shall not be allowed. BUFFER LANDSCAPE MATERIALS Applied Gary Pagenstecher Gary Pagenstecher 23. Prior to Final plat approval,the applicant shall provide City staff with a landscape plan showing that the buffer landscape materials and width along the north and west boundary of the subject property will meet the requirements of Chapter 18.745. [A 10-foot buffer is required along the north property line of lot 10] VEHICULAR ACCESS FROM GREENBUR Met 12/12/06 KSM BRS 24. Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the plat stating that vehicular access from SW Greenburg Road to individual lots shall not be allowed. AS-BUILT DRAWINGS OF PUBLIC IM Met 12/11/06 KSM JJR 25. Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1)3 mil mylar,2)a diskette of the as-builts in"IJWG"format, if available;otherwise"DXF"will be acceptable, and 3)the as-built drawings shall be tied to the City"s GPS network. The applicant"s engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure(manholes,catch basins,water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83(91). ADDRESSING FEE Met 8/28/06 KSM BRS 26. Prior to inal plat approval,the applicant shall pay the addressing fee. (STAFF CONTACT: Bethany Stewart, Engineering). STATE PLANE COORDINATES ON 2 M Met 12/14/06 KSM BRS 27. The applicant"s final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the City"s global positioning system(GPS)geodetic control network(GC 22). These monuments shall be on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the coordinates,the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by:"GPS tie networked to the City"s GPS survey."By random traverse using conventional surveying methods. Page 2 of 4 # DESCRIPTION STATUS STATUS DATE SEVERITY APPLIED BY ACTION BY FINAL PLAT APPLICATION SUB REQ Met 12/15/06 KSM BRS 28. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements:A. Submit for City review four(4)paper copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. B. Attach a check in the amount of the current final plat review fee(Contact Planning/Engineering Permit Technicians, at(503)639-4171,ext. 2421).C. The final plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes(ORS 92.05),Washington County, and by the City of Tigard.D. The right-of-way dedication for Greenburg Road shall be made on the final plat.E. NOTE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive notice from the Engineering Department indicating that the City has reviewed the final plat and submitted comments to the applicant"s surveyor.F. After the City and County have reviewed the final plat,submit two mylar copies of the final plat for City Engineer signature(for partitions),or City Engineer and Community Development Director signatures(for subdivisions). CC&R'S Met 12/19/06 KSM BRS 29. Prior to approval of the final plat,the applicant shall prepare Conditions,Covenants and Restrictions(CC&R"s)for this project,to be recorded with the final plat, that clearly lays out a maintenance plan and agreement for the proposed private street(s). The CC&R"s shall obligate the private property owners within the subdivision to create a homeowners association to ensure regulation of maintenance for the street(s). The applicant shall submit a copy of the CC&R"s to the Engineering Department(Kim McMillan)prior to approval of the final plat. REVISED LAYOUT FOR LOTS 1-4 Met 6/20/07 Gary Pagenstecher Gary Pagenstecher 3. Prior to site work,the applicant shall provide the City staff with a revised layout for lots 1-4 including an illustration of proposed building envelopes that satisfy the dimensional requirements of TDC Table 18.510.2 for the R-12 Zoning District. FINAL SIGHT DISTANCE CERTIF. Met KSM JJR 30. Prior to final plat approval,the applicant"s engineer shall provide final sight distance certification for the intersections of Greenburg Road/Greenview Drive and Greenview Drive/Greenview Court. PROHIBITS DIRECT ACCESS Met 31. Prior to final plat approval,the applicant shall place a note on the plat that prohibits direct access onto Greenburg Road from any lot. PHOTOMYLAR COPY OF FINAL PLAT Met 2/26/07 KSM BRS 32. Prior to issuance of building permits,the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a"photomylar"copy of the recorded final plat. PFI PERMIT FOR PUBLIC ROW Met 7/7/06 KSM JJR 4. Prior to commencing onsite improvements, a Public Facility Improvement(PFI)permit is required for this project to cover street improvements and any other work in the public right-of-way. Eight(8)sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE:these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement(PFI)permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards,which are available at City Hall and the City"s web page(www.ci.tigard.or.us). PFI PERMIT PLAN SUBMITTAL Met 7/7/06 KSM JJR 5. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the"Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE ACCESS/PR Met 7/7/06 KSM JJR 6. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application, and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. SIGNAGE AT ENTRANCE OF D/WS Applied KSM DRL Page 3 of 4 # DESCRIPTION STATUS STATUS DATE SEVERITY APPLIED BY ACTION BY 7. The applicant shall provide signage at the entrance of each shared flag lot driveway or private street that lists the addresses that are served by the given driveway or street. ADDITIONAL ROW ALONG GREENBURG Met 12/19/06 KSM BRS 8. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of Greenburg Road to increase the right-of-way to 50 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department:. CONSTRUCTION PLANS TO ENGRG DE Met 7/7/06 KSM JJR 9. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit, which indicate that they will construct a half-street improvement along the frontage of Greenburg Road. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include:A.City standard pavement section for a 5 lane Arterial street from curb to centerline equal to 36 feet;B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage;C. concrete curb, or curb and gutter as needed.D. storm drainage. including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey surface and/or subsurface runoff;E. 8 foot concrete sidewalk with a 5 foot planter strip;F. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements:G. street striping;H. streetlight layout by applicants engineer, to be approved by City Engineer;l. underground utilities;J. street signs(if applicable);K. driveway apron (if applicable); andL. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Greenburg Road in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. Page 4 of 4