Loading...
SUB1997-00002 SUB97 -00002 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION A CITY OF T1OARD Community,DrveCopment Shaping)1(Better Community CITY OF TIGARD 'Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 91-02PC a BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Case Number(s): SUBDIVISION (SUB) 97-9002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(PDR)97-00011 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 97-0001NARIANCE (VAR) 97-00011 ZONE CHANGE(ZON) 97-0001 Case Name(s): DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION Name of Owner. Beacon Homes Name of Applicant: Alpha Engineering. Attn: Mike Miller Address of Applicant: 9600 SW Oak Street. Suite 230 City: Portland State: Oregon Zip: 97223 Address of Property: 10520 SW North Dakota Street City: Tigard State: Oregon Zip: 97223 Tax Map & Lot No(s).: WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. Request—> 1. The applicant has requested Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer and storm drainage line within the 100-year floodplain; 4. Variance approval to allow a cul-de-sac to serve 25 lots, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum number of lots served by a cul-de-sac shall be 20 lots; and 5. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. Zone: Residential, 12 Units Per Acre; R-12. The R-12 zone allows single-family attached/detached residential units, multiple-family residential units, residential care facilities, mobile home parks and subdivisions, public support services, family day care, home occupation, temporary use, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.88, 18.84, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.134, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. Action: —> ❑ Approval as requested © Approval with conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: © Owners of record within the required distance © Affected governmental agencies © The affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator © The applicant and owner(s) Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON MAY 14,1997 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Anneal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290 (B) and Section 18.32.370, which provides that a written appeal may be filed within ten (10) days after notice is given and sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee(s) of $1,745.00 plus transcript costs, not in excess of$500.00. THE DEADLINE FOB FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 3:30 P.M.ON WEDNESDAY MAY 14,1997. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. SUB 97-0002 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION (COVER SHEET) NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE P.C. CITY OF TIGARD A PLANNING COMMISSION CITY TY OF TIGARD FINAL ORDER NO.: 91-02 PC Community`Development Shaping (Better Community A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SUBDIVISION, ZONE CHANGE, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, VARIANCE, AND SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW. SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASES: FILE NAME: DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION Subdivision SUB 97-0002 Planned Development Review PDR 97-0001 Zone Change ZON 97-0001 Sensitive Lands Review SLR 97-0001 Variance VAR 97-0001 PROPOSAL: The applicant requests the following development applications: 1. Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging in size between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer and storm drainage line within the 100-year floodplain; 4. Variance approval to allow a cul-de-sac to serve 25 lots, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum number of lots served by a cul-de-sac shall be 20 lots; 5. A second Variance to allow a 430-foot cul-de-sac, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum length of a cul-de-sac shall be 400 feet; and 6. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. APPLICANT: Alpha Engineering OWNER: Beacon Homes 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 9500 SW 125th Avenue Portland, OR 97223 Beaverton, OR 97008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium Density Residential; 8-12 Dwelling Units Per Acre. ZONING DESIGNATION: R-12 (Residential, 12 Units per acre). LOCATION: 10520 SW North Dakota Street; WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. Located west of the intersection of SW Tiedeman Street and SW North Dakota Street, on the south side of SW North Dakota Street. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 1 OF 27 APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.84, 18.88, 18.92, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.134, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.4, 4.2.1, 7.1.2, 7.3.1, • 7.4.4, 7.6.1, 8.1.1 and 8.1.3. • SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission has APPROVED the proposal subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY. UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED, THE STAFF CONTACT FOR ALL CONDITIONS IS BRIAN RAGER WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, (503) 639-4171. 1. Prior to approval of the final plat, a public improvement permit and compliance agreement is required for this project. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. Once redline comments are addressed and the plans are revised, the design engineer shall then submit nine (9) sets of revised drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public improvement plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address, and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. 3. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all grading for the dwellings, all on-site private utility installation (water, sewer, storm, etc.) and all private street/driveway construction. NOTE: This permit should be obtained in conjunction with the public improvement permit issued by the Engineering Department. 4. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. 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. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 2 OF 27 5. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW North Dakota Street to increase the right-of-way (ROW) to 30 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. 6. The applicant shall construct standard half-street improvements along the frontage of SW North Dakota Street adjacent to the developed portion of this project. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section from curb to centerline equal to 20 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. curb; D. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey subsurface runoff; E. five (5)-foot concrete sidewalk; F. street striping; G. streetlights as determined by the City Engineer; H. underground utilities (NOTE: the applicant may be eligible to pay a fee in-lieu of undergrounding existing overhead utilities); street signs (if applicable); J. driveway apron for the private street; and K. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW North Dakota Street in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 7. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall deposit funds with the City for the future improvement of SW North Dakota Street adjacent to Tract N (the greenway/open space tract adjacent to Fanno Creek). The amount of the funds shall be determined by the City Engineer from a review of an estimate prepared by the applicant's engineer. The estimate should be based on a half-street improvement and need not consider any future grade change of the roadway in association with the City's future bridge project to the east. The funds will be placed into a specific account with the City so they can be used for the street improvement of SW North Dakota Street associated with the bridge project. 8. The private street(s) within the project shall be constructed with a pavement section that meets the City's local residential street standard. 9. A profile of SW North Dakota Street shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 10. The applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the final plat to indicate that the proposed private street(s) will be jointly owned and maintained by the private property owners who abut and take access from it. 11. 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 prior to approval of the final plat. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 3 OF 27 12. The public sanitary sewer design shall be laid out such that, all manholes within the project are within paved access areas and accessible by City maintenance vehicles. 13. The applicant shall dedicate to the City on the final plat, a public sanitary sewer and access easement for the proposed public sanitary sewer line. 14. The applicant shall submit a final design of the proposed private water quality facility. This . design should be part of the site improvement permit submittal that will be reviewed by the Building Division. Calculations for this facility should be submitted to Brian Rager in the Engineering Department for review. 15. The applicant shall include a section within the CC&R's for the project regarding the private water quality facility. This section should specify how the property owners should maintain the facility. 16. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings (for the Engineering permit), as well as the site improvement drawings (for the Building Division site improvement permit). The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994." 17. A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of the lots that are to be "pad" graded to insure that the drainage is directed to the private street or private storm system approved by the Building Division. A soils report shall be provided detailing the soil compaction requirements consistent with the requirements of Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). 18. The applicant shall provide a geotechnical report, per Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC, for the proposed grading slope construction. The recommendations of the report shall be incorporated into the final grading plan. A final construction supervision report shall be filed with the Building Division prior to occupancy of any of the dwelling units. 19. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW North Dakota Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, it shall be paid prior to approval of the final plat. 20. Revised site and landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the Planning Division. Staff Contact: Will D'Andrea. The revised plans shall include the following: A. adjust the property lines of lots 6-17 so that no portion of the floodplain is within the lots; B. a minimum five (5)-foot side yard setback for lot 25; C. a minimum eight (8)-foot garage setback for all lots; D. no patios or footings for decks; E. impervious surface/landscaping calculations that demonstrate that a minimum of 20 percent of the site is landscaped; F. fifteen (15)-foot pedestrian easement, located within the 100-year floodplain, and outside of the delineated wetland; DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 4 OF 27 G. street trees to be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart along both SW North Dakota Street, and the proposed private street; H. buffering and screening in accordance with Community Development Code Section 18.100.080.(D) and (E) within the west and south buffer area; and I. tree mitigation of 91 caliper inches, in accordance with Community Development Code Section 18.150.070.D. Staff found a slight discrepancy between the arborists tree mitigation chart and sheet 1 of the preliminary plans that identifies the location and size of existing trees. The discrepancy is the with the number of 14-inch, 16-inch, and 18-inch caliper trees on the property, and the total numbers being removed. The arborist shall clarify the discrepancy and revise the mitigation plan if necessary. 21. The applicant shall provide findings that show that the approval criteria of Community Development Code Section 18.84.040.A are satisfied. If findings cannot be provided, a revised plan shall be submitted that shows the floodplain area will remain undisturbed. 22. Provide deed restrictions which restrict use of the floodplain area, provides maintenance of the floodplain storage capacity, and maintains the area in its natural state. 23. The applicant shall obtain the necessary, permits, as applicable, from the Division of State Lands and Army Corps of Engineers. 24. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall include in the CC&R's for this project, to be recorded with the final plat, a deed restriction to the effect that, any preserved tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. This shall be in accordance with Community Development Code Section 18.150.045.B. 25. Plans approved by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. 26. Plans reviewed and approved by the City of Tigard Police Department for addressing and signage. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT, THE FOLLOWING CONDITION SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (503) 639-4171.) 27. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with one (1) recorded mylar copy of the subdivision/partition plat. 28. Prior to issuance of any building permits within the subdivision, the public improvements shall be deemed substantially complete by the City Engineer. Substantial completion shall be when: 1. all utilities are installed and inspected for compliance, including franchise utilities; 2. all local residential streets have at least one lift of asphalt; 3. any off-site street and/or utility improvements are completely finished; and 4. all public street lights are installed and ready to be energized. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 5 OF 27 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITION SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be WILLIAM D'ANDREA with the CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION at (503) 639-4171.) 29. All site improvements installed per the approved plans. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; THIS IS NOT AN EXCLUSIVE LIST: 18.160.170 Improvement Agreement: 1. Before City approval is certified on the final plat, and before approved construction plans are issued by the City, the Subdivider shall: A. Execute and file an agreement with the City Engineer specifying the period within which all required improvements and repairs shall be completed; and B. 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 subdivider. 2. 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. 18.160.180 Bond: 1. As required by Section 18.160.170, the subdivider shall file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one of the following: A. An irrevocable letter of credit executed by a financial institution authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon; B. 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 C. Cash. 2. 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. 3. The subdivider shall not cause termination of nor allow expiration of said guarantee without having first secured written authorization from the City. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 6 OF 27 18.160.190 Filing and Recording: 1. 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. 2. Upon final recording with the County, the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 18.162.080 Final Pla_tApplication Submission Requirements: 1. Three copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. 2. 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. 3. Street centerline monumentation shall be provided as follows: A. Centerline Monumentation 1. 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. 2. The following centerline monuments shall be set: a. All centerline-centerline intersection points. b. All cul-de-sac center points. c. Curve points, beginning and ending points (PC's and PT's). 3. All centerline monuments shall be set during the first lift of pavement. B. Monument Boxes Required 1. Monument boxes conforming to City standards will be required around all centerline intersection points, cul-de-sac center points, and curve points. 2. The tops of all monument boxes shall be set to finished pavement grade. 18.164 Street & Utility Improvement Standards: 1. 18.164.120 Utilities A. 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. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 7 OF 27 2. 18.164.130 Cash Of Bono required A. 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. B. 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. • C. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.160.180. 3. 18.164.150 Installation: Prerequisite/Permit Fee A. No land division improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the plans therefor have been approved by the City, permit fee paid and permit issued. 4. 18,164.180 Notice to City Required A. Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. B. If work is discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. 5. 18.164.200 Engineer's Certification Required A. 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: No development applications were found to have been filed with the City. Vicinity Information: Property to the north and south are zoned R-12 (Residential, 12 units per acre) and is developed with multi-family residential structures. Property to the west is zoned R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units per acre) and is developed with single-family residences. Property to the east is zoned I-P (Industrial Park) and is developed with industrial buildings. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-00021PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 8 OF 27 Site Information and Proposal Description: The 4.5 acre property is currently developed with a single-family residence. The property slopes southeasterly from an elevation of approximately 166, to an elevation of approximately 150. Fanno Creek runs in a north-south direction along the easterly property line. The elevation of the 100-year floodplain is approximately 160 feet. The total floodplain area constitutes approximately 2.6 acres. A wetlands delineation has also determined that there is a delineated wetland that is below the elevation of the 100-year floodplain. The applicant is proposing the following development applications: 1. Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging in size between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer and storm drainage line within the 100-year floodplain; 4. Variance approval to allow a cul-de-sac to serve 25 lots, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum number of lots served by a cul-de-sac shall be 20 lots; 5. A second Variance to allow a 430-foot cul-de-sac, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum length of a cul-de-sac shall be 400 feet; and 6. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. SECTION IV: APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Impact Study: Section 18.32.050 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.32.250 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. An impact study was not provided with the application. Any required street improvements to certain collector or higher volume streets and the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) a e mitigation measures that are required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32% of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. Presently, the TIF for each trip that is generated is $169.00. The total TIF for an attached, single-family dwelling is $1,690.00. The applicant has proposed to construct half ('/2) street improvements on SW North Dakota Street. The applicant is proposing to construct half street improvements for approximately 239 feet. The DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-000120N 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 9 OF 27 remaining 167 feet of frontage (adjacent to tract "N") is proposed to be paid through non- remonstrance agreements. Staff has recommended not accepting the non-remonstrance agreements and has required the applicant to essentially pay for the improvements through some type of bond or similar type of fund. Staff will, therefore, estimate the cost of half-street improvements for the total 406 feet of frontage on SW North Dakota Street. Southwest North Dakota Street is designated as a Minor Collector Street facility that is designated to accommodate traffic from adjoining local neighborhoods to access Major Collector and Arterial Streets. The Engineering Department has estimated the cost of half street improvements to be approximately $200.00 per lineal foot. This conservative estimate was determined from current bid tabulations. Assuming a cost $200.00 per lineal foot, it is estimated that the total cost of the half ('/z) street improvements to SW North Dakota Street is $81,200.00 (406 ft. x $200). Based on past City purchases of residential property for street ROW, residential property is assessed at $2.00 per square foot. The applicant is being required to dedicate an additional ten (10) feet of right-of-way along SW North Dakota Street. Assuming a cost of $2.00 per square foot, it is estimated that the total cost of the dedication is $8,120.00 (10 ft. x 406 ft. x $2). The total cost for dedication and improvements is a total of $89,320.00. Upon completion of this development, the future builders of the residences will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $42,250.00 ($1,690 x 25 dwelling units). 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 $132,031.00 ($42,250 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid, and the full impact, is considered an unmitigated impact. Since the TIF paid is $42,250.00, the unmitigated impact can be valued at $89,781.00. Since the cost of the dedication and half street improvement is approximately $89,320.00, the unmitigated impact could be reduced to $461.00. In order to provide connectivity through the block and allow for alternative modes of transportation in an effort to mitigate traffic congestion, the applicant has been conditioned to provide a 15-foot pedestrian easement. An easement is required in accordance with Section 18.164.040(B)(2). It should be noted that only an easement is being required, not dedication of property, with the City proposed to construct the pathway at a later time. The value of the land needed for a 15-foot-wide easement for a pedestrian path is approximately $3,650.00. This is determined by a need of approximately 7,950 (530 feet X 15 feet), based on the approximate length of a pathway through the property. According to the City of Tigard Park and Recreation Facilities System Development Charge Study (Draggo, Nov., 1994), the value of an acre of Sensitive Land is $20,000.00 per acre. The 7,950 square feet needed for the pathway is approximately .1825 acres. The value of this area is approximately $3,650.00. The total estimated cost of the dedication, half street improvements, and value of the easement is approximately $92,970.00. Given the estimated unmitigated impact of approximately $89,781.00, the difference in the conditioned items and the unmitigated impact is approximately $3,189.00. The rough proportionality test means that the conditions imposed must be "roughly proportional" to the impacts associated with a development. The test does not require a precise mathematical calculation. The test does not require a "dollar for dollar" exchange of conditions for impacts, nor does it require that the impacts outweigh or have a higher estimated value than the conditions imposed. The estimated costs (in this case, the street improvements and pedestrian easement) required of the applicant may be greater in estimated value than the value of the unmitigated impact. Although the requirements imposed have a slightly higher estimated value than the unmitigated DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 10 OF 27 impact, the City finds that the conditions meet the rough proportionality test. If the applicant did not provide for the pedestrian easements, pedestrian facilities would have to be provided through the development at the developers cost to meet the requirements of code section 18.164.040(B)(2). Dimensional Requirements: Section 18.54 states that the minimum lot area for each single- family lot in the R-12 zoning district is 3,050 square feet and there is no minimum lot width requirement Although the applicant is proposing lots ranging between 950 and 2,848 square feet, this section is satisfied as the applicant is creating this subdivision through a Planned Development. The provisions of the Planned Development section (18.80) allows the creation of lots which are less than the minimum required by the underlying zone, provided that, the density provisions are not exceeded. Section 18.84.040.A.2 (Floodplain Approval Standards) states that land form alterations or developments shall only be allowed on commercial or industrial property. Section 18.26.030 (Definitions) defines "development" as a building or mining operation, making a material change in the use or appearance of a structure or land, dividing land into two (2) or more parcels, including partitions and subdivisions, as provided in Oregon Revised Statutes 92. Since a subdivision is defined as a development, floodplain property cannot be incorporated within a proposed subdivision on residential property. The proposed plan shows that portions of proposed lots 6-17 include floodplain property. A revised plan shall be submitted which adjusts the property lines of lots 6-17 so that no portion of the floodplain is within the lots. Development Standards: Section 18.54.050 contains standards for the R-12 zone. Single-family detached residential units are a permitted use in the zone, and must comply with the following dimensional requirements: Minimum lot size 3,050 Square Feet Average lot width No Minimum Front setback 15 Feet Garage setback 20 Feet Interior sideyard setback 5 Feet Corner sideyard setback 10 Feet Rear setback 15 Feet* Maximum building height 35 Feet Section 18.80.080 states that front and rear yard setback requirements in the base zone shall not apply to structures on the interior of the project except that a minimum front yard setback of 8 feet is required for any garage opening for an attached single-family dwelling facing a private street The side yard setback provisions shall not apply except that all detached structures shall meet the Uniform Building Code requirements for fire walls. Given the fact that none of the proposed structures (with the exception of lot 25) do not directly abut an adjoining development (as they are separated by a street or open space), all lots and structures are considered interior. Therefore, setbacks shall not be applicable, with the exception of the side yard of lot 25, and the eight (8)-foot setback requirement for garages with openings facing a private street. There is no sideyard setback provided for lot 25, therefore, a revised plan shall be submitted which provides a minimum five (5)-foot sideyard setback for lot 25. The applicant's narrative states that there will be 32 garage spaces associated with the units. A minimum of eight (8) feet is required for any garage opening facing a private street. As indicated on the site plan, the garages on lots 4,5,10,11,12,13,15,16,17 and 18 are not in compliance with the minimum eight (8)-foot setback. A revised plan shall be submitted which provides for a minimum eight (8)-foot garage setback for all lots. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 11 OF 27 Solar Access: Section 18.88.040(B) states that the solar access aesign standard shall apply to applications for a development to create lots in R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5, and R-7 zones and to create lots for single family detached and duplex dwellings in all other residential zones. The applicant's proposal will create lots for attached single-family residential structures, therefore, this section is not applicable. Density: Section 18.92.020 contains standards for determining the permitted project density. The number of allowable dwelling units is based on the net development area. The net area is the remaining area, excluding sensitive lands, land dedicated for public roads or parks, or for private roadways. The net area is then divided by the minimum parcel size permitted by the zoning district to determine the number of lots which may be created on a site. The gross area of the site is approximately 194,406 square feet. The gross area contained within sensitive land areas (floodplain) is approximately 115,322 square feet. The gross area of the site, minus the sensitive lands area. is approximately 79,084 square feet. The net developable area of the site (after deduction of 20% of the gross area for public right-of-way) is approximately 63,267 square feet. With a minimum of 3,050 square feet per lot, this site yields an opportunity for up to twenty (20) lots under the R-12 zoning designation. Transferring the seven (7) lots permitted to be transferred in accordance with section 18.92.030, the total maximum density allowed for this property is twenty-seven (27) lots. The applicant is proposing twenty-five (25) lots. The proposal is, therefore, in compliance with density calculations. Residential Density Transfer. Section 18.92.030 states that sensitive land area subtracted from the gross acres may be transferred to the remaining buildable land areas subject to the following limitations: 1) The number of units which can be transferred is limited to the number of units which would have been allowed on 25 percent of the unbuildable area if not for these regulations; 2) The number of units is limited to 25 percent of the total number of units which could have been constructed on the unbuildable area if not for these regulations; and 3) The total number of units per site does not exceed 125 percent of the maximum number of units per gross acre permitted for the applicable comprehensive plan designation. The gross area contained within sensitive land areas (floodplain) is approximately 115,322 square feet. The net developable area of this area (after deduction of 20% of the gross area for public right-of-way) is approximately 92,257 square feet. With a minimum of 3,050 square feet per lot, this area yields an opportunity for up to thirty (30) lots under the R-12 zoning designation. Allowing a 25 percent transfer of the total number of units which could have been allowed yields an opportunity to transfer seven (7) units onto the remaining buildable portion of the property. Residential Density Transition: Section 18.40.040 states that regardless of allowed housing densities stated in Chapters 18.44 through 18.58, or in Chapters 18.80, 18.92 or 18.94, any property within 100 feet of an established area shall not be developed at a residential housing density greater than 125 percent of the allowed density in the adjacent established area(s). For purposes of this limitation only, the allowed housing density is as specified in the comprehensive plan land use designation, not as in the zoning district. For example, the property within 100 feet of an established low density residential area (one to five dwellings per acre) shall not be developed at residential densities greater than 6.25 dwellings per acre (6.25 = 5 x 1.25). The proposed subdivision is adjacent to a designated "established" area along the west property line. The area within the transition zone is approximately 1.09 acres. The number of units allowed within this transition zone is seven (7) units (6.25 x 1.09). As indicated on the site plan, seven (7) units are proposed within this 100-foot transition area, thereby, satisfying this requirement. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 12 OF 27 Planned Development: Section 18.80 encourages development that recognizes the relationship between buildings, their use, open space, and accessways and thereby maximizes the opportunities for innovative and diversified living environments, while implementing the density range provided through the Comprehensive Plan. Section 18.80.080 states that the minimum lot size, lot depth and lot width standards shall not apply except as related to the density computation under Chapter 18.92. Section 18.80.080 also states that front and rear yard setback . requirements in the base zone shall not apply to structures on the interior of the project except that a minimum front yard setback of 8 feet is required for any garage opening for an attached single-family dwelling facing a private street. Section 18.80.120(A) (Planned Development Review - Approval Standards) requires that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of other Community Development Code Chapters. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.92, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.160, 18.150, and 18.164. The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapters 18.96 (Additional Yard Setback Requirements), 18.98 (Building Height Limitations: Exceptions), or 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) which are also listed under Section 18.80.120.A.2. These Chapters are therefore found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Code section 18.80.120.A.3 provides other Planned Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These other standards are addressed immediately below. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of 18.80.120.A.3.e (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Residential Use) or 18.80.120.A.3.c (Privacy and noise) and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards as these criteria have been applied only to multi-family development. Relationship to the natural and physical environment: Section 18.80.120.A.3.(a) states that the streets, buildings, and other site elements shall be designed and located to preserve the existing trees, topography, and natural drainage to the greatest degree possible and that trees with a six inch caliper measured at four feet in height from ground level shall be saved where possible. The proposed lots and private streets will be located above the 100-year floodplain elevation, if the conditions of approval are followed. The floodplain and wetland area will be preserved. None of the structures will encroach within the floodplain, although a small area will be disturbed for the construction of a water quality facility. An arborist report has been submitted that addresses preservation of trees on the property. In accordance with Section 18.150, trees greater than 12-inch caliper will be mitigated. The proposed plan also includes new landscaping and street trees. Buffering, screening, and compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.80.120.A.3.b states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses. It also states that in addition to the requirements of the buffer matrix, the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy and extent of the buffer required under Chapter 18.100: (a) The purpose of the buffer, for example to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter dust, or to provide a visual barrier; (b) The size of the buffer needs in terms of width and height to achieve the purpose; (c) The direction(s) from which buffering is needed; (d) The required density of the buffering; and (e) Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile. This section shall be satisfied as addressed in the Buffer Matrix (18.100.130) section. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-00012ON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 13 OF 27 Private outdoor area: residential use: 18.80.120.A.3.(d) states that each ground level residential dwelling unit shall have an outdoor private area (patio, terrace, porch) of not less than 48 square feet and shall be screened or designed to provide privacy for the use of the space. The applicant shall submit revised plans that demonstrate compliance with outdoor private area in accordance with this section. The applicant's narrative states that each unit will include a private patio or porch area. It • . is not clear from the site plan if patios or porches are provided. The plan shows what could be construed as patios for lots 5-17, but the majority of these areas are within the 100-year floodplain. Section 18.84.040.A.2 (Floodplain Approval Standards) states that land form alterations or developments shall only be allowed on commercial or industrial property. Section 18.26.030 (Definitions) defines development as a building or mining operation, making a material change in the use or appearance of a structure or land, dividing land into two (2) or more parcels, including partitions and subdivisions, as provided in Oregon Revised Statutes 92. Section 18.32.030 defines a building as, that which is built or constructed, an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner. Therefore, patios are not allowed within the floodplain, nor would footings that support a deck. Landscaping and open space: 18.80.120.A.3.g states that within Residential Development a minimum of 20 percent of the site shall be landscaped. The applicant has not provided calculations regarding the amount of impervious surface and landscaping to be provided on the site, although the applicant has provided a number of tracts that will be used for this purpose. The applicant shall provide impervious surface/landscaping calculations that demonstrate that a minimum of 20 percent of the site is landscaped. Sensitive Lands: Floodplain: Chapter 18.84.040(A) states that the Planning Commission shall approve, or approve with conditions, an application request within the 100-year floodplain based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: 1. Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any narrowing of the floodway boundary. The plan shows that sidewalks, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and a water quality facility will be constructed within the floodplain. The applicant has not provided calculation or evidence of the amount of work being done within the floodplain, nor how this criteria shall be satisfied. The applicant shall provide evidence that this section can be satisfied or the applicant shall redesign the plan to avoid the floodplain. 2. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.42 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards. The subject project is in area designated as Residential on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use map. The sewer and storm related development in the floodplain area are considered a utility and is, therefore, allowed. The proposed future pathway and sidewalks connecting to the path are considered Community Recreation Uses and are allowed. None of the proposed residences, or access, or parking areas will be infringing within the floodplain. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 14 OF 27 3. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood. The applicant has not provided calculations or evidence of the amount of work being done within the floodplain, nor how this criteria shall be satisfied. The applicant shall provide evidence that this section can be satisfied or the applicant shall redesign the plan to avoid the floodplain. 4. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearing Officer as untimely. The Tigard Park Plan indicates that the floodplain area within this parcel is part of the proposed pedestrian pathway system. The City has identified funding of a path in this area through its Capital Improvement Program. The applicant has been conditioned to provide a 15-foot easement within the floodplain area. Staff, therefore, concludes that construction of a pathway is not timely and recommends that the applicant only be required to provide a 15-foot access easement to allow the City to construct a pathway in the future. 5. The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. This criteria is not applicable as a pathway will not be constructed in conjunction with this application. Further, a sensitive lands review will be required for the actual construction of the path and will be reviewed for compliance with this section. 6. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands approvals shall be obtained. The applicant shall obtain the necessary, applicable permits from the Division of State Lands and Army Corps of Engineers. 7. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. The applicant has been conditioned to provide a 15-foot access easement which is sufficient to provide for a pedestrian pathway, in accordance with the pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. While staff recognizes that residential development within the floodplain is not permitted, and the property within the floodplain will, therefore, remain undeveloped. The City has contacted the property owner to discuss the potential purchase of Tracts "N" and "M" for park and open space. Such a purchase would leave the City with the responsibility of flood control maintenance, as well as, maintaining this area in its natural state. Otherwise, the applicant shall provide deed restrictions which restrict use of this floodplain area, provides maintenance of the floodplain storage capacity and maintains the area in its natural state. Landscaping: Section 18.100 contains landscaping standards for new development. The applicant must comply with the standards set forth in Section 18.100.035 which requires that all development projects fronting on a public or private street, or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length plant street trees. Street Trees: Section 18.100.035(B) states the specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shall be as follows: 1. 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; DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 15 OF 27 2. Medium sized trees (25 reet to 40 feet tall, 16 feet to 35 reet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart; 3. Large trees (over 40 feet tall and more than 35 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 40 feet apart. The preliminary plan shows the provision of Bowhall Red Maple and American Sweetgum trees, along the private street and a section of SW North Dakota Street, spaced approximately 40 - 45 feet apart. These types of trees are expected to grow to 40 feet in height and branch approximately 20- 25 feet. These trees fall within a medium sized tree classification. Therefore, the spacing of these trees shall be no greater than 30 feet apart. Therefore, a revised landscape plan shall be submitted that provides for street trees to be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart along both SW North Dakota Street and the proposed private street. Buffer Matrix: Section 18.100.130 contains the buffer matrix to be used in calculating widths of buffering and screening to be installed between proposed uses. The Matrix indicates that where attached single-family abuts detached single-family structures and attached dwelling units (2 or more stories), the required buffer and screening width shall be 10 feet. The proposed attached single-family development abuts detached single-family structures to the west, and attached residential to the south. A ten (10)-foot buffer and screening is required along the west and south property line. Section 18.100.080.D contains the minimum improvement standards for the buffering area. The minimum improvements within a buffer area shall consist of the following: 1) At least one row of trees shall be planted. They shall be not less than 10 feet high for deciduous trees and 5 feet high for evergreen trees at the time of planting. Spacing of the trees depends on the size of the tree at maturity; 2) In addition, at least 10 five gallon shrubs or 20 one gallon shrubs shall be planted for each 1000 square feet of required buffer area; 3) The remaining area shall be planted in lawn, groundcover or spread with bark mulch. A ten (10)-foot buffer has been provided along both the west and south property line. The west buffer area contains approximately 4,680 square feet and the south buffer area contains approximately 1,100 square feet. The west buffer area shall contain 40, five (5) gallon; or 80, one (1) gallon shrubs. The south buffer area shall contain ten (10), five (5) gallon; or 20, one (1) gallon shrubs, in addition to the row of trees. A revised plan shall be submitted that provides buffering in accordance with this section. Section 18.100.080.E states that where screening is required the following standards shall apply in addition to those required for buffering; 1) a hedge of narrow or broadleaf evergreen shrubs which will form a 4 foot continuous screen within 2 years of planting, or; 2) an earthen berm planted with evergreen plant materials which will form a continuous screen 6 feet in height within 2 years. The unplanted portion of the berm shall be planted in lawn, ground cover or bark mulch, or; 3) a 5 foot or taller fence or wall shall be constructed to provide a continuous sight obscuring screen. A revised plan shall be submitted that provides screening in accordance with this section. Visual Clearance Areas: Section 18.102 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30 foot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway and then connecting these two 30 foot distance points with a straight line. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, signs, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height. The height is measured from the top of the curb, or DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-000120N 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 16 OF 27 where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. As indicated on the site plan, this criteria is satisfied. Parking: Section 18.106.030.(A ) states that each unit is required to provide 2 off-street parking spaces. Section 18.80.120.A.3.j (Planned Development:) allows up to 50% of the required attached single-family parking to be accommodated in common parking areas as long as each single-family lot contains at least one off-street parking space. Fifty (50) parking spaces are required for this development, with up to 25 spaces allowed in common parking areas. The applicant's narrative states that individual dwelling units will have attached garages, that there will be 32 garage spaces associated with the units, and that 21 guest spaces are being provided for a total of 53 parking spaces. This requirement is satisfied because each lot will provide at least one (1) parking space, and there are a total of 53 spaces on site. Access: Section 18.108.070.A states the minimum driveway required for each lot shall be 15 feet with 10 feet of pavement width. As indicated on the site plan, each lot will provide a minimum 10- foot-wide driveway. Emergency vehicle turnaround: Section 18.108.070.C. 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 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. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has required the applicant to submit revised plans for review and approval. The location of an emergency vehicle turnaround will be reviewed during this process. Variance - Maximum length and number of lots served by a Cul-de-sac: Community Development Code Section 18.134.050 provides standards for granting a variance as indicated in "bold" print below: The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, be in conflict with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity. The variance will not be materially detrimental to City policy or standards as the private street dimensions are in accordance with access standards. Plans must be approved by the Fire District, thereby, providing adequate emergency access. A slight increase in the length of the street, as well as the number of units, will not diminish the ability of the street to provide adequate access. The variance will not be detrimental to other properties in the vicinity as the variance is limited to a 30-foot extension of the length of an approved cul-de-sac and five (5) additional lots. 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 special circumstances which exist are the surrounding development patterns that prohibit any potential connection to another public street, the location of the 100-year floodplain on the property, and the classification of SW North Dakota Street as a Minor Collector. Surrounding existing development patterns necessitate the provision of a cul-de-sac to serve this subdivision. The floodplain and street classification precludes the provision of another driveway onto SW North Dakota Street. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBCIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 17 CF 27 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 some economic use of the land. The requested variance will in no way affect the permitted use status of the single- family attached residential dwellings allowed. All other City standards will be maintained as discussed in this review process. 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 located as specified in this title. Existing natural systems, traffic, and drainage will not be effected by this variance since the impact of the variance is limited to allowing a slight increase to the length of the cul-de-sac and number of units served by this street. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The variance is not self-imposed as the variance is the result of surrounding development patterns that preclude street connectivity, the lot's depth that precludes the provision of a shorter cul-de-sac design, the location of the 100-year floodplain on the property, and the classification of SW North Dakota Street as a Minor Collector. Surrounding existing development patterns necessitate the provision of a cul-de-sac to serve this subdivision. The floodplain and street classification precludes the provision of another driveway onto SW North Dakota Street. The variance is the minimum variance necessary as the approximately 30-foot extension and allowance of an additional five (5) lots is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Tree Removal: Section 18.150.025 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a subdivision application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. An arborist report has been submitted with this application which identifies the trees on the property and provides recommendations for removal and retention. The report indicates that there are a total of thirty-five (35) trees greater than 12-inch caliper on the site. The proposed plan will be removing ten (10) trees greater than 12-inch caliper, for a total of 182 caliper inches. The applicant is retaining 72 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper and, is thus, required to mitigate 50 percent of the trees removed according to Section 18.150.025.B.2.c and 18.150.070.D. The applicant shall, therefore, prepare a plan detailing the mitigation of 91 caliper inches. Staff found a slight discrepancy between the arborists tree mitigation chart and sheet 1 of the preliminary plans that identifies the location and size of existing trees. The discrepancy is the with the number of 14-inch, 16-inch, and 18-inch caliper trees on the property and the total numbers being removed. The arborist shall clarify the discrepancy and revise the mitigation plan if necessary. Section 18.150.045.B states that, any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section may, thereafter, be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan according to Section 18.150.025 or 18.130.B., and shall not be subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property owner shall record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit impacted by this section to the effect that, such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. Subdivision Design: Section 18.160.060(A) contains standards for subdivision of parcels into four or more lots. To be approved, a preliminary plat must comply with the following criteria: DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 18 OF 27 1. The proposal must comply with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the applicable zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations. The proposed subdivision complies with the Comprehensive Plan Map's Medium Density Residential opportunity for the site, as well as, with the applicable policies and regulations of the R-12 zone and other applicable ordinances and regulations. 2. The proposed plat name must not be duplicative and must otherwise satisfy the provisions of ORS Chapter 92. The proposed name of the subdivision "Dakota Meadows" is not duplicative of any other plat recorded in Washington County. 3. Streets and roads must be laid out so as to conform to the plats of subdivisions and maps of 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. The site does not abut properties with approved plats that would require conformity or connectivity. 4. An explanation has been provided for all common improvements. The applicant has provided an explanation for all common improvements including the provision for public services such as sewer, water, drainage, and street improvements. Street and Utility Improvements Standards: Section 18.164 contains standards for streets and utilities serving a subdivision. Improvements: Section 18.164.030(A) requires streets within and adjoining a development to be dedicated and improved based on the classification of the street Southwest North Dakota Street is classified as a Minor Collector. The applicant has been conditioned to construct half street improvements to Minor Collector standards. The applicant will construct approximately 239 feet of frontage with the construction of the subdivision. The remaining 167 feet will be constructed in the future with the redesign of the bridge over Fanno Creek. The proposed private street will be designed in accordance with City standards. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.164.030(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-sac since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. Given the existing development pattern of surrounding properties, it is not necessary, nor possible, to extend the proposed street to provide for future connections or facilitate future division of adjoining land. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.164.030(G) requires all local 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. 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 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 19 OF 27 show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. This section is not applicable as there is no existing local street that abuts the property which would require extending to provide through circulation. Cul-de-sacs: Section 18.164.030(K) requires that a cul-de-sac shall be no more than 400 feet . long nor provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units. The applicant has requested a variance to this standard to allow the cul-de-sac to provide access to 25 lots and a maximum length of 430 feet. This variance has been approved and is discussed in the variance section. Private Street: Section 18.164.030(S) states that design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer and that private streets serving more than 6 dwelling units are permitted within planned developments. This section also requires a bonded maintenance agreement or the creation of a homeowners association to provide for the continued maintenance of the street in perpetuity. The private street design satisfies City standards. Lots 1-20 will be served by a 24-foot-wide paved accessway. Lots 23-25 will be served by a 28-foot-wide accessway with parking on one (1) side. The main entrance is a 28-foot-wide accessway with parking on one (1) side. The City allows local streets to be built with a 28-foot-wide pavement section with parking on one (1) side. The accessway will allow for a 20-foot unobstructed driving surface, consistent with Fire District requirements. Therefore, the proposed private street satisfies this section. The applicant has also been conditioned to provide for a bonded maintenance agreement or provide a homeowners' association for street maintenance. Block Design: Section 18.164.040(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 18.164.040(B)(1) states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: 1. Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or; 2. For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. 3. For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. This criteria is not applicable as the site is constrained from meeting the specified block perimeter due to existing development patterns and location of the 100-year floodplain. The block in this area is bounded by SW North Dakota Street, SW 115th Avenue, SW Tigard Street, and SW Tiedeman Avenue and is well in excess of 1,800 feet. Block Lengths: Section 18.164.040(B)(2) states that when block lengths greater than 600 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. The property is precluded from providing a street connection between SW North Dakota Street and SW Tigard Street. Since the block exceeds 600 feet, the applicant shall provide a pedestrian pathway connection through the block to provide connectivity with SW Tigard Street. A pedestrian pathway provided with the subject application would connect to an existing pedestrian pathway stubbed at the south property line. A pedestrian pathway is shown on the City Comprehensive Plan Park Plan to follow Fanno Creek. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002IPDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 20 OF 27 While the proposed subdivision plan could accommodate the required pedestrian pathway connection within the subdivision and satisfy this requirement, the City contends that provision of the path within Tracts "N" and "M" would provide a preferable location. This location is preferred given the path's linkage with pathways within the City of Tigard Open Space and Greenway System. The applicant is, .therefore, conditioned to provide a 15-foot pedestrian easement for the purposes of mitigating traffic congestion by providing connectivity and the opportunity for alternative means of transportation. As previously discussed in section 18.32, the requirement for a pedestrian easement is roughly proportional. The City of Tigard has identified funding for the construction of a pedestrian pathway along this section of Fanno Creek in its Capital Improvement Program. The City will, therefore, be constructing the pedestrian way in the future. Since the City will be responsible for the construction of the pedestrian pathway, this code section is satisfied for purposes of this application. The City has contacted the owners to discuss the willingness of the owners to sell Tracts "N" and "M" to the City for park and open space. This discussion is outside the boundaries of this application and is unrelated to the standards and conditions within this report. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.164.060(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 As indicated on the site plan, all twenty-five (25) lots comply with this criteria. Lot Frontage: Section 18.164.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley, unless the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit, in which case the lot frontage shall be at least 15 feet As indicated on the site plan all lots with the exception of Lot 12 comply with this standard. Sidewalks: Section 18.164.070 requires sidewalks adjoining all residential streets. As indicated on the site plan, a sidewalk is being provided along SW North Dakota Street and the main entrance of the private street, thereby, satisfying this standard. PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS: Sections 18.164.030(E)(1)(a) (Streets), 18.164.090 (Sanitary Sewer), and 18.164.100 (Storm Drains) shall be satisfied as specified below: STREETS: SW North Dakota Street This site is located adjacent to SW North Dakota Street, which is classified as a minor collector street on the City's Transportation Plan. The roadway is currently paved, but not fully improved to City standards. The right-of-way (ROW) at present measures 20 feet from centerline; a minor collector street requires 30 feet from centerline. TMC 18.164.030(E) requires the applicant to dedicate additional ROW to meet the minimum width standard. The applicant has indicated that they will dedicate the additional ROW to satisfy this requirement. The proposed project will increase the amount of traffic on the City's street system. In general, single-family development will add approximately ten (10) vehicle trips per day for every new lot, according to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). For this project, there will be approximately 250 new trips per day added to the system. This incremental increase in traffic DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 21 OF 2' warrants improvement to SW North Dakota Street. TMC 18.164.000(E) states that the applicant should be required to improve the street to meet current City standards. The applicant's plan indicates that they will provide a half-street improvement for the portion of the site frontage adjacent to the main developed area. However, there is a large area of the site that contains mostly 100-year floodplain and wetland adjacent to Fanno Creek that the applicant proposes to place within tracts to . be dedicated to the City (Tracts N and M). The frontage of SW North Dakota Street, adjacent to Tract N, is not proposed to be improved by the applicant. The Engineering Department's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) calls for the future reconstruction of the bridge over Fanno Creek on SW North Dakota Street. This reconstruction will result in a need to raise the grade of the street on either side of the bridge. It appears that the portion of roadway adjacent to Tract N would be affected by that improvement. Therefore, Staff recommends that the applicant not construct street improvements along that portion of the site frontage. The applicant has proposed to enter into a Non-Remonstrance Agreement that would obligate the future property owners within the project to pay for the future widening of the street if it were improved as a part of a Local Improvement District (LID). Staff does NOT recommend this type of agreement because they do not work well for subdivisions, as they will affect future property owners that may, or may not, become aware of the agreement before they purchase the dwelling. Notice of the agreement will appear on a title report, but Staff has found that a very low percentage of citizens actually review a title report before buying a house. Because of this, Cities have a very difficult time in calling in this type of agreement because of the potential outcry from the citizens. In lieu of the non-remonstrance agreement, Staff recommends the applicant deposit funds with the City that will be used toward the future improvement of that portion of the street when the City reconstructs the bridge. This option has been utilized between the City and other developers in the past where circumstances prevent the immediate improvement of the street. The City can set up a specific account for the funds so they will only be used for the construction of North Dakota Street. The applicant's funding obligation should be limited to a half-street improvement and an estimate would need to be submitted by the applicant's engineer to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Since the City does not yet have design plans developed for the bridge project, and therefore does not know the extent of the vertical grade change necessary for the street, Staff recommends the estimate for the half-street improvement be based on the existing grade of the street. The funds for the street improvement should be paid to the City prior to approval of the final plat. Proposed Private Street System The applicant's plan indicates the new residential units will be served by private streets with one (1) access onto SW North Dakota Street. Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 18.164.030(S) allows a private street to serve more than six (6) dwelling units if approved through a planned development. This project is being proposed as a planned development and will consist of attached row houses. This type of development usually includes maintenance agreements for certain features within the development, such as open space, driveways and landscaping. A private street is acceptable if the developer provides a mechanism for maintenance by the future property owners. Typically this is done through a homeowners' association and a maintenance agreement that will become part of the CC&R's that are recorded with the final plat. The applicant has indicated that they are willing to establish any necessary CC&R's and maintenance agreement to ensure that the private street system will be maintained by the property owners. These documents should be reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to approval of the final plat. The City's public improvement design DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-000120N 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 22 OF 27 standards require private streets to have a pavement section equal to a public local street. The applicant will need to provide this type of pavement section. WATER: There is public water available from a main line in SW North Dakota Street. The applicant's plan indicates that a new main line will be extended into the development to serve the new lots. SANITARY SEWER: Public sanitary sewer is available from an existing main line in SW North Dakota Street. The plan indicates that a new public main line will be installed within the private street system to serve all of the new lots. It will be necessary that all manholes along the new public sewer line be accessible to City maintenance vehicles. It appears that the proposed manhole behind Lots 22 and 23 will be outside of any paved area; this will need to be adjusted so the manhole will be within a paved access area. The applicant will also need to dedicate, on the final plat, a public sanitary sewer and access easement over the area where the public sewer line will be installed. STORM DRAINAGE: The applicant's plan indicates that the storm water from this project will be directed toward Fanno Creek, which is located along the eastern portion of this site. Storm water will be treated in an on-site private biofiltration swale that will then discharge into the creek. The applicant may need to obtain a Division of State Lands (DSL) permit for any work in the adjacent wetland area next to the creek. STORM WATER QUALITY: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of R&O 91-47. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. As stated previously, the applicant is proposing to treat the on-site water in a biofiltration swale. The preliminary calculations indicate the swale will need to be approximately 118 feet long. The plan provides this length. The construction drawings will need to provide a more detailed design of this facility. Since the facility will be privately maintained, the CC&R's should identify how it should be maintained by the property owners. GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL: USA R&O 91-47 also regulates erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per R&O 91-47, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 23 OF 27 prior to issuance of City permits. All grading work will be inspected by the Building Division as a part of the Site Permit (refer to the SITE PERMIT REQUIRED section that follows). EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES: There are existing overhead utility lines adjacent to SW North Dakota Street. Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in-lieu is - proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. SITE PERMIT REQUIRED: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water, sewer, storm, etc.), grading and private street/driveway construction. Even though this project is a "subdivision", which are usually inspected solely by the Engineering Department, it will contain a significant amount of private utilities and paved areas. The project will be very similar in construction to an apartment project. For this reason, the Site Permit is appropriate and necessary. This permit shall be obtained prior to approval of the final plat and should be obtained in conjunction with the public improvement permit as most of the work associated with the Site Permit will likely need to be constructed at the same time as the public improvements are constructed. APPLICABLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES Citizen Input: Policy 2.1.1 provides the City will assure that citizens will be provided an opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning and development review process. The subdivision is consistent with Policy 2.1.1 because a neighborhood meeting was held by the applicant, notice of the public hearing was provided to owners of property within 250 feet and was published in a newspaper of general circulation. Floodplains: Policy 3.2.2 states that the City shall allow land form alterations or development in the floodplain outside the zero-foot rise floodway which preserve or enhance the function of the zero-foot rise floodway provided the land form alteration and/or development is an area designated commercial or industrial on the Comprehensive Plan land use map. It appears that the 100-year floodplain elevation is approximately at the 160 foot elevation. The development shall occur outside of the 160 foot elevation. The applicant has applied for a Sensitive Lands Permit to place sanitary sewer, storm sewer, sidewalks, and a water quality facility within the floodplain area. The applicant has been conditioned to provide findings as to how the Sensitive Lands approval criteria are satisfied, thereby satisfying this policy. If the applicant cannot provide adequate findings, the plan shall be revised to demonstrate that no work will be done within the floodplain. Floodplains: Policy 3.2.4 states that the City shall prohibit development within areas designated as significant wetlands on the floodplain and wetlands map. No development shall occur on property adjacent to areas designated as significant wetlands on the floodplain and wetlands map within twenty five (25) feet of the designated wetlands area. Development on property adjacent to the significant wetlands shall be allowed under the planned development section of the code. This policy is satisfied as the delineated wetland is not designated as a significant wetland on the floodplain and wetlands map. The applicants proposed development will not require the filling of wetlands DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 24 OF 27 Water Quality: Policy 4.2.1 provides that all development within the Tigard urban planning area shall comply with applicable federal, state and regional water quality standards. Policy 4.2.1 is satisfied as the applicant shall be providing on-site water quality treatment, as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-47. Public Utilities: Policies 7.1.2, 7.3.1 and 7.4.4 provides that the City will require as a condition of development approval that public water, sewer, and storm drainage will be provided and • designed to City standards and that utilities shall be placed underground. Policies 7.1.2, 7.3.1 and 7.4.4 are satisfied because the developer is required to extend public sewer and water systems to this site prior to development. In addition, the developer is required to provide for underground installation of utility lines. Fire Protection: Policy 7.6.1 states that Fire District shall review all new development applications to ensure adequate fire protection is available to serve each new development. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue was provided with a copy of the development plan, in compliance with Policy 7.6.1. Street Improvements: Policy 8.1.1 provides that the City will plan for a safe and efficient street and roadway system that meets current needs and anticipated future growth and development. The subdivision proposal complies with Policies 8.1.1 and 8.1.3 because the proposed improvements should contribute to a safe and efficient street system in this area. The proposed SW North Dakota Street improvements are consistent with City of Tigard standards for collector streets. The internal street serving the subdivision shall also meet City standards in terms of design requirements for private streets. Street Improvements. Policy 8.1.3 states that the City will require the following as a precondition of approval: 1. Development abut a dedicated street or have other adequate access; 2. Street right-of-way shall be dedicated where the street is substandard in width; 3. The developer shall commit to construction of the streets, curbs, and sidewalks to City standards within the development; 4. The developer shall participate in the improvement of existing streets, curbs, and sidewalks to the extent of the development's impacts; and 5. Street improvements shall be made and street signs or signals shall be provided when the development is found to create or intensify a traffic hazard. The subdivision proposal complies with Policies 8.1.1 and 8.1.3 because the proposed extension of improvements to, and within the development, should contribute to a safe and efficient street system in this area. The private street serving the subdivision shall meet City standards in terms of design requirements. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: If constructed to a row house concept, provide the following:- DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 25 OF 27 1. a homeowners' association in conjunction with a maintenance agreement for the commonly owned components; 2. the design complies with R-1 occupancy requirements; 3. structural projections such as, eaves and cornices are not allowed beyond property lines; 4. structures greater than three (3) units shall comply with the Uniform Building Code; and 5. all buildings must be interconnected with a sidewalk accessible to persons with disabilities, with route extending to the public way. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: The applicant shall submit a kiosk plan for review and approval. SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: Plans are not approved at this time. The applicant shall address the following plan notes and re- submit plans for review and approval: 1. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (15 feet for not more than two (2) dwelling units), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.1). 2. Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. Diagrams of approved turnarounds are available from the fire district (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.4). 3. Where fire apparatus access roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway, and in turnarounds as needed (UFC Sec. 902.2.4). Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - TOW AWAY ZONE, ORS 98.810" and shall be installed with a clear space above ground level of seven (7) feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide, by 18 inches high, and shall have black or red letters and border on a white background (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.(1)(2) & (3)). 4. Fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted yellow and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" at each 25 feet. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one (1)-inch-wide, by six (6) inches high (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.2). 5. The minimum number of fire hydrants for a building shall be based on the required fire flow prior to giving any credits for fire protection systems. There shall not be less than one (1) fire hydrant for the first 2,000 GPM required fire flow and one (1) additional fire hydrant for each 1,000 GPM, or portion thereof, over 2,000 GPM. Fire hydrants shall be evenly spaced around the building and their locations shall be approved by the Chief (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1). 6. No portion of the exterior of a commercial building shall be located more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant when measured in an approved manner around the outside of the building and along an approved fire apparatus access roadway (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1). 7. Fire hydrants shall not be located more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway (UFC Sec 903.4.2.4). DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-000120N 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 26 OF 27 8. The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available form the Fire Marshal's office (UFC Sec. 903.3). 9. Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any other construction on the site or subdivision (UFC Sec. 8704). PGE has had the opportunity to review this application and has offered no comments or - objections. SECTION VI. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION It is further ordered that the applicant and the parties to these proceedings be notified of the entry of this order. PASSED: This "� � day of April, 1997 by the City of Tigard Planning Commission. (Signature box below) Lam` Nick Wilson, Pla ing Commission Chair I.\CURPLNIWILL\SUB97-02 DFO DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NC 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 27 OF 27 il--------'—\ 4— _SIN M11RT11W(�T�STREET —>--_ _••-----.\1 ' •. r• ....../..........• •• • IV • ciao i \ ) ) I . r ; I I1,i)......i..;,.i ' • - I 0-:-1-tr.../.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•. . P L---' I 1 ! 1. I■ • II i .• •%• • • • • • • • • • • .• . • Z•1 I il '' ' . . . . . . . . . . . •• III �� ▪:.•�•�:_. .�.. •�•'••!:3./. •-•-' /. u. - .1 I L - -• : ::,..s, •� .. . i a•• 1 CI • — + —�••�••M�•• 't• ,- 1 •i•�•••••�•i�i•�ii��•i•• •aim ..nr•A mars H LEGEND # L1.. [F...•.��J ...m,...�.......... 0 t� .c..•Y•IM. L+Ht.++1+=++H++ M O•r.1..rMY.11104 i f II I / E— 511 1181111 MEET —► ._ _ E •1 --Mos--�- � ` 1 ZON 91-01/SLR 91-01�/ • SITE PLAN < DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION EXHIBIT MAP N i "SITE PLAN/MASTER PLAN" I , i JIL .. ,_______ 4— SR NOm MITA MEET -) -■r. — 1 Lt.a__t,_t__.i.ta.___ 1.1.."s.u. ru.;c:iLlL.daimmil .iN.• 1 _ II 1 1, I I OT 1 LO s6�1�T_ • 1 , 1 5.V I ,T )i/ 1 4 2 . • Aar • (,4451 I. s III . , a• 4 1---- _J I It LOT a I h9ri0 I • lvi tr r`I■ LOT 0 • I I LOT L 51 0 • IA10 ir. W I1 IA N II■ tRACT '1' IA i'l I _ - ,...,............--,•,...,,. ■ 0 1 i� w IA) iir- !lino T,IOC f IOT■.11AL�.a.1�y Yr..11r I O ci 4. ... _ 2,1.1141 U....t d MI K.AA ■ • 3 ; rj; LOT 14 �-------1 • p J7�i r 1 1 I • TRACT 'N 9. '�I he I 1 i Q i 1 hie f r. , I I ( -_ LW p �.►. •T T f • I_ I•• LOT 21 ` C �y // t I e1 I • (\■�/7 I ■ _ »wsr �.JO it .. 1 • -a! LoT1 TRACT le I • I.• ,���' = /'�r..arvnrrrc.lrrow•er.o A.I. . I Z ' TRACT 'L' I . ,� •- I • e r / r ■• z J • 1 LOT sm Sr� I-lr 1 • Q I �1 / I n. '■ LOT N ' • I e•.sr , I 1 •I 1 ' •LOT 26 / I t ; L ).e.e s1 t t rV/ • y �L 'i • Q • •• ••_•• ••_••_■•_••■••■•• •o / ■r1 Ii. j r" OI / ›. I: k LEGEND: I.... U F... .........�._.or. .. E— SW nrAan STREET - • ,H__ 1 AO. g i NOTES. / I LOTS, •n e+rT sesoUL if. 1 MAC TO•A•APO Ir PPIIVATT$TII■ITII • TRACTS. 'C•t• O/01/PACE TRACTS. Y AND 1/ TO K OmICATW TO INN My r l •1 I SUB 97-02/PDR 91-01/ II SITE PLAN 'r iON 97-01/SCR 97-01 • DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION EXHIBIT MAP N ; w PREUMI NARY PLAT" I i II 1 L I'(A er 4 1 , .. VIIIPPw , . , vv . y.- Oir■ #1 .................... BO• la rilit 4% 61 11111 ill 6 . alto -4EJ " - A ii NI 0 • / _PL ■l rillV ■ ■alki w I l iii ME III , Ct3 or AI i I ?IIii : t U a. Ii II IIIIIII &IJ 8 •_ _ • ,. • I ,) ri ! T l, � i -- i-E. - Y -IE PAnCE i k ay , .// CL a i 4ffil . L TM I i t ar 4 \_ .g3y) TIGARD ST "A.,' o I >, w_Adi.sw. aiiiip U oW ST 4 4Iu■■r IP Vicinity Map N SUB 91-0002 ANote: Map is not to scale Dakota Meadows Subdivision MEETING RECORDS Agenda Item: 5 Hearing Date: Apnl'21, 1997 Time: 7:30 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Ai, J!' CITY OF TIGARD FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Community(Development Shaping 4(Better Community SECTION I: APPLICATION SUMMARY CASES: FILE NAME: DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION Subdivision SUB 97-0002 Planned Development PDR 97-0001 Sensitive Lands Review SLR 97-0001 Variance VAR 97-0001 Zone Change ZON 97-0001 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested the following development applications: 1. Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging in size between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer and storm drainage line within the 100-year floodplain; 4. Variance approval to allow a cul-de-sac to serve 25 lots, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum number of lots served by a cul-de-sac shall be 20 lots; 5. A second Variance to allow a 430-foot cul-de-sac, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum length of a cul-de-sac shall be 400 feet; and 6. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. APPLICANT: Alpha Engineering (Mike Miller) OWNER: Beacon Homes 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 9500 SW 125th Avenue Portland, OR 97223 Beaverton, OR 97008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium Density Residential; 8-12 Dwelling Units Per Acre. ZONING DESIGNATION: Residential, 12 Units Per Acre; R-12. LOCATION: 10520 SW North Dakota Street; WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. Located west of the intersection of SW Tiedeman Street and SW North Dakota Street, on the south side of SW North Dakota Street. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.84, CRITERIA: 18.88, 18.92, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.134, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.4, 4.2.1,-7.1.2, 7.3.1, 7.4.4, 7.6.1, 8.1.1 and 8.1.3. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 1 'SECTION II: STA' "RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Director's Designee recommends that the Planning Commission find that the proposed Subdivision will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL, subject to the following recommended conditions of approval: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY. UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED, THE STAFF CONTACT FOR ALL CONDITIONS IS BRIAN RAGER WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, (503) 639-4171. 1 . Prior to approval of the final plat, a public improvement permit and compliance agreement is required for this project. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. Once redline comments are addressed and the plans are revised, the design engineer shall then submit nine (9) sets of revised drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public improvement plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address, and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. 3. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all grading for the dwellings, all on-site private utility installation (water, sewer, storm, etc.) and all private street/driveway construction. NOTE: This permit should be obtained in conjunction with the public improvement permit issued by the Engineering Department. 4. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. 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. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 2 '5. Additional right-of y shall be dedicated to the Publ, ,ong the frontage of SW North Dakota Street to increase the right-of-way (ROW) to 30 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. 6. The applicant shall construct standard half-street improvements along the frontage of SW North Dakota Street adjacent to the developed portion of this project. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section from curb to centerline equal to 20 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. curb; D. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey subsurface runoff; E. five (5)-foot concrete sidewalk; F. street striping; G. streetlights as determined by the City Engineer; H. underground utilities (NOTE: the applicant may be eligible to pay a fee in-lieu of undergrounding existing overhead utilities), street signs (if applicable); J. driveway apron for the private street; and K. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW North Dakota Street in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 7. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall deposit funds with the City for the future improvement of SW North Dakota Street adjacent to Tract N (the greenway/open space tract adjacent to Fanno Creek). The amount of the funds shall be determined by the City Engineer from a review of an estimate prepared by the applicant's engineer. The estimate should be based on a half-street improvement and need not consider any future grade change of the roadway in association with the City's future bridge project to the east. The funds will be placed into a specific account with the City so they can be used for the street improvement of SW North Dakota Street associated with the bridge project. 8. The private street(s) within the project shall be constructed with a pavement section that meets the City's local residential street standard. 9. A profile of SW North Dakota Street shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 10. The applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the final plat to indicate that the proposed private street(s) will be jointly owned and maintained by the private property owners who abut and take access from it. 11. 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 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 3 • ' street(s). The ap Int shall submit a copy of the tR's to the Engineering Department prior to approval of the final plat. 12. The public sanitary sewer design shall be laid out such that, all manholes within the project are within paved access areas and accessible by City maintenance vehicles. 13. The applicant shall dedicate to the City on the final plat, a public sanitary sewer and access easement for the proposed public sanitary sewer line. 14. The applicant shall submit a final design of the proposed private water quality facility. This design should be part of the site improvement permit submittal that will be reviewed by the Building Division. Calculations for this facility should be submitted to Brian Rager in the Engineering Department for review. 15. The applicant shall include a section within the CC&R's for the project regarding the private water quality facility. This section should specify how the property owners should maintain the facility. 16. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings (for the Engineering permit), as well as the site improvement drawings (for the Building Division site improvement permit). The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994.'' 17. A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of the lots that are to be "pad" graded to insure that the drainage is directed to the private street or private storm system approved by the Building Division. A soils report shall be provided detailing the soil compaction requirements consistent with the requirements of Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). 18. The applicant shall provide a geotechnical report, per Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC, for the proposed grading slope construction. The recommendations of the report shall be incorporated into the final grading plan. A final construction supervision report shall be filed with the Building Division prior to occupancy of any of the dwelling units. 19. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW North Dakota Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, it shall be paid prior to approval of the final plat. 20. Revised site and landscaping plans shall be submittea for review by the Planning Division. Staff Contact: Will D'Andrea. The revised plans shall include the following: A. adjust the property lines of lots 6-17 so that no portion of the floodplain is within the lots; B. a minimum five (5)-foot side yard setback for lot 25; STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 4 C. a minimum eight (8)-foot garage setback for all lots; D. no patios or footings for decks; E. impervious surface/landscaping calculations that demonstrate that a minimum of 20 percent of the site is landscaped; F. fifteen (15)-foot pedestrian easement, located within the 100-year floodplain, and outside of the delineated wetland; G. street trees to be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart along both SW North Dakota Street, and the proposed private street; H. buffering and screening in accordance with Community Development Code Section 18.100.080.(D) and (E) within the west and south buffer area; and tree mitigation of 91 caliper inches, in accordance with Community Development Code Section 18.150.070.D. Staff found a slight discrepancy between the arborists tree mitigation chart and sheet 1 of the preliminary plans that identifies the location and size of existing trees. The discrepancy is the with the number of 14-inch, 16-inch, and 18-inch caliper trees on the property, and the total numbers being removed. The arborist shall clarify the discrepancy and revise the mitigation plan if necessary. 21. The applicant shall provide findings that show that the approval criteria of Community Development Code Section 18.84.040.A are satisfied. If findings cannot be provided, a revised plan shall be submitted that shows the floodplain area will remain undisturbed. 22. Provide deed restrictions which restrict use of the floodplain area, provides maintenance of the floodplain storage capacity, and maintains the area in its natural state. 23. The applicant shall obtain the necessary, permits, as applicable, from the Division of State Lands and Army Corps of Engineers. 24. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall include in the CC&R's for this project, to be recorded with the final plat, a deed restriction to the effect that, any preserved tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. This shall be in accordance with Community Development Code Section 18.150.045.B. 25. Plans approved by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. 26. Plans reviewed and approved by the City of Tigard Police Department for addressing and signage. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97.0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 5 PRIOR TO THE , JANCE OF A BUILDING PERMI1, ,E FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: IP (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be Brian Rager with the Engineering Department (503) 639-4171.) 27. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with one (1) recorded mylar copy of the subdivision/partition plat. 28. Prior to issuance of any building permits within the subdivision, the public improvements shall be deemed substantially complete by the City Engineer. Substantial completion shall be when: 1. all utilities are installed and inspected for compliance, including franchise utilities; 2. all local residential streets have at least one lift of asphalt; 3. any off-site street and/or utility improvements are completely finished; and 4. all public street lights are installed and ready to be energized. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITION SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be WILLIAM D'ANDREA with the PLANNING Department at(503) 639-4171.) 29. All site improvements installed per the approved plans. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; THIS IS NOT AN EXCLUSIVE LIST: 18.160.170 Improvement Agreement: 1. Before City approval is certified on the final plat, and before approved construction plans are issued by the City, the Subdivider shall: A. Execute and file an agreement with the City Engineer specifying the period within which all required improvements and repairs shall be completed; and B. 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 subdivider. 2. 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. STAFF REPORT TO THE DLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 5 '18.160.180 Bond: 1. As required by Section 18.160.170, the subdivider shall file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one of the following: A. An irrevocable letter of credit executed by a financial institution authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon; B. 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 C. Cash. 2. 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. 3. The subdivider shall not cause termination of nor allow expiration of said guarantee without having first secured written authorization from the City. 18.160.190 Filing and Recording: 1. 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. 2. Upon final recording with the County, the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 18.162.080 Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: 1. Three copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. 2. 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. 3. Street centerline monumentation shall be provided as follows: A. Centerline Monumentation 1. 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. 2. The following centerline monuments shall be set: a. All centerline-centerline intersection points. b. All cul-de-sac center points. c. Curve points, beginning and ending points (PC's and PT's). 3. All centerline monuments shall be set during the first lift of pavement. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 7 B. Monument ?.s Required 1. Monument boxes conforming to City standards will be required around all centerline intersection points, cul-de-sac center points, and curve points. 2. The tops of all monument boxes shall be set to finished pavement grade. 18.164 Street & Utility Improvement Standards: 1. 18.164.120 Utilities A. 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. 2. 18.164.130 Cash or Bond Required A. 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. B. 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. C. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.160.180. 3. 18.164.150 Installation: Prerequisite/Permit Fee A. No land division improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the plans therefor have been approved by the City, permit fee paid and permit issued. 4. 18.164.180 Notice to City Required A. Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. B. If work is discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. 5. 18.164.200 Engineer's Certification Required A. 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 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA ME-_OWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 8 high grade, Jr to the City acceptance of the s, vision'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: No development applications were found to have been filed with the City. Vicini y Information: Property to the north and south are zoned R-12 (Residential, 12 units per acre) and is developed with multi-family residential structures. Property to the west is zoned R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units per acre) and is developed with single-family residences. Property to the east is zoned I-P (Industrial Park) and is developed with industrial buildings. Site Information and Proposal Description: The 4.5 acre property is currently developed with a single-family residence. The property slopes southeasterly from an elevation of approximately 166, to an elevation of approximately 150. Fanno Creek runs in a north-south direction along the easterly property line. The elevation of the 100-year floodplain is approximately 160 feet. The total floodplain area constitutes approximately 2.6 acres. A wetlands delineation has also determined that there is a delineated wetland that is below the elevation of the 100-year floodplain. The applicant is proposing the following development applications: 1. Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging in size between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer and storm drainage line within the 100-year floodplain; 4. Variance approval to allow a cul-de-sac to serve 25 lots, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum number of lots served by a cul-de-sac shall be 20 lots; 5. A second Variance to allow a 430-foot cul-de-sac, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum length of a cul-de-sac shall be 400 feet; and 6. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 9 SECTION 1V: APF ;ABLE REVIEW CRITERIA At 'INDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Impact Study: Section 18.32.050 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.32.250 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. An impact study was not provided with the application. Any required street improvements to certain collector or higher volume streets and the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) are mitigation measures that are required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32% of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. Presently, the TIF for each trip that is generated is $169.00. The total TIF for an attached, single-family dwelling is $1,690.00. The applicant has proposed to construct half (V2) street improvements on SW North Dakota Street. The applicant is proposing to construct half street improvements for approximately 239 feet. The remaining 167 feet of frontage (adjacent to tract "N") is proposed to be paid through non-remonstrance agreements. Staff has recommended not accepting the non-remonstrance agreements and has required the applicant to essentially pay for the improvements through some type of bond or similar type of fund. Staff will, therefore, estimate the cost of half-street improvements for the total 406 feet of frontage on SW North Dakota Street. Southwest North Dakota Street is designated as a Minor Collector Street facility that is designated to accommodate traffic from adjoining local neighborhoods to access Major Collector and Arterial Streets. The Engineering Department has estimated the cost of half street improvements to be approximately $200.00 per lineal foot. This conservative estimate was determined from current bid tabulations. Assuming a cost $200.00 per lineal foot, it is estimated that the total cost of the half (V2) street improvements to SW North Dakota Street is $81,200.00 (406 ft. x $200). Based on past City purchases of residential property for street ROW, residential property is assessed at $2.00 per square foot. The applicant is being required to dedicate an additional ten (10) feet of right-of-way along SW North Dakota Street. Assuming a cost of $2.00 per square foot, it is estimated that the total cost of the dedication is $8,120.00 (10 ft. x 406 ft. x S2). The total cost for dedication and improvements is a total of $89,320.00. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 10 'Upon completion of this ::lopment, the future builders of th sidences will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $42,250.00 ($1,690 x 25 dwelling units). 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 $132,031.00 ($42,250 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid, and the full impact, is considered an unmitigated impact. Since the TIF paid is $42,250.00, the unmitigated impact can be valued at $89,781.00. Since the cost of the dedication and half street improvement is approximately $89,320.00, the unmitigated impact could be reduced to $461.00. In order to provide connectivity through the block and allow for alternative modes of transportation in an effort to mitigate traffic congestion, the applicant has been conditioned to provide a 15-foot pedestrian easement. An easement is required in accordance with Section 18.164.O40(B)(2). It should be noted that only an easement is being required, not dedication of property, with the City proposed to construct the pathway at a later time. The value of the land needed for a 15-foot-wide easement for a pedestrian path is approximately $3,650.00. This is determined by a need of approximately 7,950 (530 feet X 15 feet), based on the approximate length of a pathway through the property. According to the City of Tigard Park and Recreation Facilities System Development Charge Study (Draggo, Nov., 1994), the value of an acre of Sensitive Land is $20,000.00 per acre. The 7,950 square feet needed for the pathway is approximately .1825 acres. The value of this area is approximately $3,650.00. The total estimated cost of the dedication, half street improvements, and value of the easement is approximately $92,970.00. Given the estimated unmitigated impact of approximately $89,781.00, the difference in the conditioned items and the unmitigated impact is approximately $3,189.00. The rough proportionality test means that the conditions imposed must be "roughly proportional" to the impacts associated with a development. The test does not require a precise mathematical calculation. The test does not require a "dollar for dollar" exchange of conditions for impacts, nor does it require that the impacts outweigh or have a higher estimated value than the conditions imposed. The estimated costs (in this case, the street improvements and pedestrian easement) required of the applicant may be greater in estimated value than the value of the unmitigated impact. Although the requirements imposed have a slightly higher estimated value than the unmitigated impact, the City finds that the conditions meet the rough proportionality test. If the applicant did not provide for the pedestrian easements, pedestrian facilities would have to be provided through the development at the developers cost to meet the requirements of code section 18.164.040(B)(2). Dimensional Requirements: Section 18.54 states that the minimum lot area for each single-family lot in the R-12 zoning district is 3,050 square feet and there is no minimum lot width requirement. Although the applicant is proposing lots ranging between 950 and 2,848 square feet, this section is satisfied as the applicant is creating this subdivision through a Planned Development. The provisions of the Planned Development section (18.80) allows the creation of lots which are less than the minimum required by the underlying zone, provided that, the density provisions are not exceeded. Section 18.84.04O.A.2 (Floodplain Approval Standards) states that land form alterations or developments shall only be allowed on commercial or industrial property. Section 18.26.030 (Definitions) defines "development" as a building or mining operation, making a material change in the use or appearance of a structure or land, dividing land into two (2) or more STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97.0002.DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 11 'parcels, including partitio. .Ind subdivisions, as provided in C. Jon Revised Statutes 92. Since a subdivision is defined as a development, floodplain property cannot be incorporated within a proposed subdivision on residential property. The proposed plan shows that portions of proposed lots 6-17 include floodplain property. A revised plan shall be submitted which adjusts the property lines of lots 6-17 so that no portion of the floodplain is within the lots. Development Standards: Section 18.54.050 contains standards for the R-12 zone. Single-family detached residential units are a permitted use in the zone, and must comply with the following dimensional requirements: Minimum lot size 3,050 Square Feet* Average lot width No Minimum Front setback 15 Feet Garage setback 20 Feet* Interior sideyard setback 5 Feet Corner sideyard setback 10 Feet Rear setback 15 Feet* Maximum building height 35 Feet Section 18.80.080 states that front and rear yard setback requirements in the base zone shall not apply to structures on the interior of the project except that a minimum front yard setback of 8 feet is required for any garage opening for an attached single- family dwelling facing a private street. The side yard setback provisions shall not apply except that all detached structures shall meet the Uniform Building Code requirements for fire walls. Given the fact that none of the proposed structures (with the exception of lot 25) do not directly abut an adjoining development (as they are separated by a street or open space), all lots and structures are considered interior. Therefore, setbacks shall not be applicable, with the exception of the side yard of lot 25, and the eight (8)-foot setback requirement for garages with openings facing a private street. There is no sideyard setback provided for lot 25, therefore, a revised plan shall be submitted which provides a minimum five (5)-foot sideyard setback for lot 25. The applicant's narrative states that there will be 32 garage spaces associated with the units. A minimum of eight (8) feet is required for any garage opening facing a private street. As indicated on the site plan, the garages on lots 4,5,10,11,12,13,15,16,17 and 18 are not in compliance with the minimum eight (8)-foot setback. A revised plan shall be submitted which provides for a minimum eight (8)-foot garage setback for all lots. Solar Access: Section 18.88.040(B) states that the solar access design standard shall apply to applications for a development to create lots in R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5, and R-7 zones and to create lots for single family detached and duplex dwellings in all other residential zones. The applicant's proposal will create lots for attached single-family residential structures, therefore, this section is not applicable. Density: Section 18.92.020 contains standards for determining the permitted project density. The number of allowable dwelling units is based on the net development area. The net area is the remaining area, excluding sensitive lands, land dedicated for public roads or parks, or for private roadways. The net area is then divided by the minimum parcel size permitted by the zoning district to determine the number of lots which may be created on a site. The gross area of the site is approximately 194,406 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 12 'square feet. The gro area contained within sensitive d areas (floodplain) is approximately 115,322 square feet. The gross area of the site, minus the sensitive lands area. is approximately 79,084 square feet. The net developable area of the site (after deduction of 20% of the gross area for public right-of-way) is approximately 63,267 square feet. With a minimum of 3,050 square feet per lot, this site yields an opportunity for up to twenty (20) lots under the R-12 zoning designation. Transferring the seven (7) lots permitted to be transferred in accordance with section 18.92.030, the total maximum density allowed for this property is twenty-seven (27) lots. The applicant is proposing twenty-five (25) lots. The proposal is, therefore, in compliance with density calculations. Residential Density Transfer: Section 18.92.030 states that sensitive land area subtracted from the gross acres may be transferred to the remaining buildable land areas subject to the following limitations: 1) The number of units which can be transferred is limited to the number of units which would have been allowed on 25 percent of the unbuildable area if not for these regulations; 2) The number of units is limited to 25 percent of the total number of units which could have been constructed on the unbuildable area if not for these regulations; and 3) The total number of units per site does not exceed 125 percent of the maximum number of units per gross acre permitted for the applicable comprehensive plan designation. The gross area contained within sensitive land areas (floodplain) is approximately 115,322 square feet. The net developable area of this area (after deduction of 20% of the gross area for public right-of-way) is approximately 92,257 square feet. With a minimum of 3,050 square feet per lot, this area yields an opportunity for up to thirty (30) lots under the R-12 zoning designation. Allowing a 25 percent transfer of the total number of units which could have been allowed yields an opportunity to transfer seven (7) units onto the remaining buildable portion of the property. Residential Density Transition: Section 18.40.040 states that regardless of allowed housing densities stated in Chapters 18.44 through 18.58, or in Chapters 18.80, 18.92 or 18.94, any property within 100 feet of an established area shall not be developed at a residential housing density greater than 125 percent of the allowed density in the adjacent established area(s). For purposes of this limitation only, the allowed housing density is as specified in the comprehensive plan land use designation, not as in the zoning district. For example, the property within 100 feet of an established low density residential area (one to five dwellings per acre) shall not be developed at residential densities greater than 6.25 dwellings per acre (6.25 = 5 x 1.25). The proposed subdivision is adjacent to a designated "established" area along the west property line. The area within the transition zone is approximately 1.09 acres. The number of units allowed within this transition zone is seven (7) units (6.25 x 1.09). As indicated on the site plan, seven (7) units are proposed within this 100-foot transition area, thereby, satisfying this requirement. Planned Development: Section 18.80 encourages development that recognizes the relationship between buildings, their use, open space, and accessways and thereby maximizes the opportunities for innovative and diversified living environments, while implementing the density range provided through the Comprehensive Plan. Section 18.80.080 states that the minimum lot size, lot depth and lot width standards shall not apply except as related to the density computation under Chapter 18.92. Section 18.80.080 also states that front and rear yard setback requirements in the base zone shall not apply to structures on the interior of the project except that a minimum front STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 13 'yard setback of 8 feet it_ 4uired for any garage opening fc. .n attached single-family dwelling facing a private street. Section 18.80.120(A) (Planned Development Review - Approval Standards) requires that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of • other Community Development Code Chapters. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.92, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.160, 18.150, and 18.164. The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapters 18.96 (Additional Yard Setback Requirements), 18.98 (Building Height Limitations: Exceptions), or 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) which are also listed under Section 18.80.120.A.2. These Chapters are therefore found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Code section 18.80.120.A.3 provides other Planned Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These other standards are addressed immediately below. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of 18.80.120.A.3.e (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Residential Use) or 18.80.120.A.3.c (Privacy and noise) and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards as these criteria have been applied only to multi-family development. Relationship to the natural and physical environment: Section 18.80.120.A.3.(a) states that the streets, buildings, and other site elements shall be designed and located to preserve the existing trees, topography, and natural drainage to the greatest degree possible and that trees with a six inch caliper measured at four feet in height from ground level shall be saved where possible. The proposed lots and private streets will be located above the 100-year floodplain elevation, if the conditions of approval are followed. The floodplain and wetland area will be preserved. None of the structures will encroach within the floodplain, although a small area will be disturbed for the construction of a water quality facility. An arborist report has been submitted that addresses preservation of trees on the property. In accordance with Section 18.150, trees greater than 12-inch caliper will be mitigated. The proposed plan also includes new landscaping and street trees. Buffering, screening, and compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.80.120.A.3.b states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses. It also states that in addition to the requirements of the buffer matrix, the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy and extent of the buffer required under Chapter 18.100: (a) The purpose of the buffer, for example to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter dust, or to provide a visual barrier; (b) The size of the buffer needs in terms of width and height to achieve the purpose; (c) The direction(s) from which buffering is needed; (d) The required density of the buffering; and (e) Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile. This section shall be satisfied as addressed in the Buffer Matrix (18.100.130) section. Private outdoor area: residential use: 18.80.120.A.3.(d) states that each ground level residential dwelling unit shall have an outdoor private area (patio, terrace, porch) of not less than 48 square feet and shall be screened or designed to provide privacy for the use of the space. The applicant shall submit revised plans that demonstrate compliance with outdoor private area in accordance with this section. The applicant's narrative states that each unit will include a private patio or porch area. It is not clear from STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 14 'the site plan if patios or p es are provided. The plan shows at could be construed as patios for lots 5-17, but a le majority of these areas are within ale 100-year floodplain. Section 18.84.040.A.2 (Floodplain Approval Standards) states that land form alterations or developments shall only be allowed on commercial or industrial property. Section 18.26.030 (Definitions) defines development as a building or mining operation, making a material change in the use or appearance of a structure or land, dividing land into two (2) or more parcels, including partitions and subdivisions, as provided in Oregon Revised Statutes 92. Section 18.32.030 defines a building as, that which is built or constructed, an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner. Therefore, patios are not allowed within the floodplain, nor would footings that support a deck. Landscaping and open space: 18.80.120.A.3.g states that within Residential Development a minimum of 20 percent of the site shall be landscaped. The applicant has not provided calculations regarding the amount of impervious surface and landscaping to be provided on the site, although the applicant has provided a number of tracts that will be used for this purpose. The applicant shall provide impervious surface/landscaping calculations that demonstrate that a minimum of 20 percent of the site is landscaped. Sensitive Lands: Floodplain: Chapter 18.84.040(A) states that the Planning Commission shall approve, or approve with conditions, an application request within the 100-year floodplain based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: 1. Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any narrowing of the floodway boundary. The plan shows that sidewalks, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and a water quality facility will be constructed within the floodplain. The applicant has not provided calculation or evidence of the amount of work being done within the floodplain, nor how this criteria shall be satisfied. The applicant shall provide evidence that this section can be satisfied or the applicant shall redesign the plan to avoid the floodplain. 2. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.42 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards. The subject project is in area designated as Residential on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use map. The sewer and storm related development in the floodplain area are considered a utility and is, therefore, allowed. The proposed future pathway and sidewalks connecting to the path are considered Community Recreation Uses and are allowed. None of the proposed residences, or access, or parking areas will be infringing within the floodplain. STAFF F SPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 15 '3. Where a land for,. alteration or development is per,. _.ced to occur within the floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood. The applicant has not provided calculations or evidence of the amount of work being done within the floodplain, nor how this criteria shall be satisfied. The applicant shall provide evidence that this section can be satisfied or the applicant shall redesign the plan to avoid the floodplain. 4. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearing Officer as untimely. The Tigard Park Plan indicates that the floodplain area within this parcel is part of the proposed pedestrian pathway system. The City has identified funding of a path in this area through its Capital Improvement Program. The applicant has been conditioned to provide a 15-foot easement within the floodplain area. Staff, therefore, concludes that construction of a pathway is not timely and recommends that the applicant only be required to provide a 15-foot access easement to allow the City to construct a pathway in the future. 5. The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. This criteria is not applicable as a pathway will not be constructed in conjunction with this application. Further, a sensitive lands review will be required for the actual construction of the path and will be reviewed for compliance with this section. 6. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands approvals shall be obtained. The applicant shall obtain the necessary, applicable permits from the Division of State Lands and Army Corps of Engineers. 7. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. The applicant has been conditioned to provide a 15-foot access easement which is sufficient to provide for a pedestrian pathway, in accordance with the pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. While staff recognizes that residential development within the floodplain is not permitted, and the property within the floodplain will, therefore, remain undeveloped. The City has contacted the property owner to discuss the potential purchase of Tracts "N" and "M" for park and open space. Such a purchase would leave the City with the responsibility of flood control maintenance, as well as, maintaining this area in its natural state. Otherwise, the applicant shall provide deed restrictions which restrict use of this floodplain area, STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 16 provides maintena of the floodplain storage capacity ' maintains the area in its natural state. Landscaping: Section 18.100 contains landscaping standards for new development. The applicant must comply with the standards set forth in Section 18.100.035 which requires that all development projects fronting on a public or private street, or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length plant street trees. Street Trees: Section 18.100.035(B) states the specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shall be as follows: 1. 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; 2. 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; 3. Large trees (over 40 feet tall and more than 35 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 40 feet apart. The preliminary plan shows the provision of Bowhall Red Maple and American Sweetgum trees, along the private street and a section of SW North Dakota Street, spaced approximately 40 - 45 feet apart. These types of trees are expected to grow to 40 feet in height and branch approximately 20- 25 feet. These trees fall within a medium sized tree classification. Therefore, the spacing of these trees shall be no greater than 30 feet apart. Therefore, a revised landscape plan shall be submitted that provides for street trees to be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart along both SW North Dakota Street and the proposed private street. Buffer Matrix: Section 18.100.130 contains the buffer matrix to be used in calculating widths of buffering and screening to be installed between proposed uses. The Matrix indicates that where attached single-family abuts detached single-family structures and attached dwelling units (2 or more stories), the required buffer and screening width shall be 10 feet The proposed attached single-family development abuts detached single-family structures to the west, and attached residential to the south. A ten (10)-foot buffer and screening is required along the west and south property line. Section 18.100.080.D contains the minimum improvement standards for the buffering area. The minimum improvements within a buffer area shall consist of the following: 1) At least one row of trees shall be planted. They shall be not less than 10 feet high for deciduous trees and 5 feet high for evergreen trees at the time of planting. Spacing of the trees depends on the size of the tree at maturity; 2) In addition, at least 10 five gallon shrubs or 20 one gallon shrubs shall be planted for each 1000 square feet of required buffer area; 3) The remaining area shall be planted in lawn, groundcover or spread with bark mulch. A ten (10)-foot buffer has been provided along both the west and south property line. The west buffer area contains approximately 4,680 square feet and the south buffer area contains approximately 1,100 square feet. The west buffer area shall contain 40, five (5) gallon; or 80, one (1) gallon shrubs. The south buffer area shall contain ten (10), five (5) gallon; or 20, one (1) gallon shrubs, in addition to the row of trees. A revised plan shall be submitted that provides buffering in accordance with this section. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDMSION PAGE 17 -Section 18.100.080.E st s that where screening is requir the following standards shall apply in addition to those required for buffering; 1) a hedge of narrow or broadleaf evergreen shrubs which will form a 4 foot continuous screen within 2 years of planting, or; 2) an earthen berm planted with evergreen plant materials which will form a continuous screen 6 feet in height within 2 years. The unplanted portion of the berm shall be planted in lawn, ground cover or bark mulch, or; 3) a 5 foot or taller fence or wall shall be constructed to provide a continuous sight obscuring screen. A revised plan shall be submitted that provides screening in accordance with this section. Visual Clearance Areas: Section 18.102 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30 foot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway and then connecting these two 30 foot distance points with a straight line. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, signs, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height. The height is measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. As indicated on the site plan, this criteria is satisfied. Parking: Section 18.106.030.(A ) states that each unit is required to provide 2 off- street parking spaces. Section 18.80.120.A.3.j (Planned Development:) allows up to 50% of the required attached single-family parking to be accommodated in common parking areas as long as each single-family lot contains at least one off-street parking space. Fifty (50) parking spaces are required for this development, with up to 25 spaces allowed in common parking areas. The applicant's narrative states that individual dwelling units will have attached garages, that there will be 32 garage spaces associated with the units, and that 21 guest spaces are being provided for a total of 53 parking spaces. This requirement is satisfied because each lot will provide at least one (1) parking space, and there are a total of 53 spaces on site. Access: Section 18.108.070.A states the minimum driveway required for each lot shall be 15 feet with 10 feet of pavement width. As indicated on the site plan, each lot will provide a minimum 10-foot-wide driveway. Emergency vehicle turnaround: Section 18.108.070.C. 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 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. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has required the applicant to submit revised plans for review and approval. The location of an emergency vehicle turnaround will be reviewed during this process. Variance - Maximum length and number of lots served by a Cul-de-sac: Community Development Code Section 18.134.050 provides standards for granting a variance as indicated in "bold" print below: STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 18 'The proposed variance not be materially detrimental t( purposes of this title, be in conflict with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, Lo any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity. The variance will not be materially detrimental to City policy or standards as the private street dimensions are in accordance with access standards. Plans must be approved by the Fire District, thereby, providing adequate emergency access. A slight increase in the length of the street, as well as the number of units, will not diminish the ability of the street to provide adequate access. The variance will not be detrimental to other properties in the vicinity as the variance is limited to a 30-foot extension of the length of an approved cul-de-sac and five (5) additional lots. 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 special circumstances which exist are the surrounding development patterns that prohibit any potential connection to another public street, the location of the 100-year floodplain on the property, and the classification of SW North Dakota Street as a Minor Collector. Surrounding existing development patterns necessitate the provision of a cul-de-sac to serve this subdivision. The floodplain and street classification precludes the provision of another driveway onto SW North Dakota Street. 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 some economic use of the land. The requested variance will in no way affect the permitted use status of the single-family attached residential dwellings allowed. All other City standards will be maintained as discussed in this review process. 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 located as specified in this title. Existing natural systems, traffic, and drainage will not be effected by this variance since the impact of the variance is limited to allowing a slight increase to the length of the cul-de-sac and number of units served by this street. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The variance is not self-imposed as the variance is the result of surrounding development patterns that preclude street connectivity, the lot's depth that precludes the provision of a shorter cul-de-sac design, the location of the 100-year floodplain on the property, and the classification of SW North Dakota Street as a Minor Collector. Surrounding existing development patterns necessitate the provision of a cul-de-sac to serve this subdivision. The floodplain and street classification precludes the provision of another driveway onto SW North Dakota Street. The variance is the minimum variance necessary as the approximately 30-foot extension and allowance of an additional five (5) lots is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Tree Removal: Section 18.150.025 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a subdivision application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002.DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 19 'standards and method:. it will be used by the applicant ,.rotect trees during and after construction. An arborist report has been submitted with this application which identifies the trees on the property and provides recommendations for removal and retention. The report indicates that there are a total of thirty-five (35) trees greater than 12- inch caliper on the site. The proposed plan will be removing ten (10) trees greater than 12- inch caliper, for a total of 182 caliper inches. The applicant is retaining 72 percent of existing - trees over 12 inches in caliper and, is thus, required to mitigate 50 percent of the trees removed according to Section 18.150.025.B.2.c and 18.150.070.D. The applicant shall, therefore, prepare a plan detailing the mitigation of 91 caliper inches. Staff found a slight discrepancy between the arborists tree mitigation chart and sheet 1 of the preliminary plans that identifies the location and size of existing trees. The discrepancy is the with the number of 14-inch, 16-inch, and 18-inch caliper trees on the property and the total numbers being removed. The arborist shall clarify the discrepancy and revise the mitigation plan if necessary. Section 18.150.045.B states that, any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section may, thereafter, be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan according to Section 18.150.025 or 18.130.B., and shall not be subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property owner shall record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit impacted by this section to the effect that, such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. Subdivision Design: Section 18.160.060(A) contains standards for subdivision of parcels into four or more lots. To be approved, a preliminary plat must comply with the following criteria: 1. The proposal must comply with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the applicable zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations. The proposed subdivision complies with the Comprehensive Plan Map's Medium Density Residential opportunity for the site, as well as, with the applicable policies and regulations of the R-12 zone and other applicable ordinances and regulations. 2. The proposed plat name must not be duplicative and must otherwise satisfy the provisions of ORS Chapter 92. The proposed name of the subdivision "Dakota Meadows" is not duplicative of any other plat recorded in Washington County. 3. Streets and roads must be laid out so as to conform to the plats of subdivisions and maps of 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. The site does not abut properties with approved plats that would require conformity or connectivity. 4. An explanation has been provided for all common improvements. The applicant has provided an explanation for all common improvements including the provision for public services such as sewer, water, drainage, and street improvements. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 20 'Street and Utility Impr( nents Standards: Section 18.' contains standards for streets and utilities servilig a subdivision. Improvements: Section 18.164.030(A) requires streets within and adjoining a development to be dedicated and improved based on the classification of the street. Southwest North Dakota Street is classified as a Minor Collector. The applicant has been conditioned to construct half street improvements to Minor Collector standards. The applicant will construct approximately 239 feet of frontage with the construction of the subdivision. The remaining 167 feet will be constructed in the future with the redesign of the bridge over Fanno Creek. The proposed private street will be designed in accordance with City standards. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.164.030(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-sac since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. Given the existing development pattern of surrounding properties, it is not necessary, nor possible, to extend the proposed street to provide for future connections or facilitate future division of adjoining land. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.164.030(G) requires all local 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. 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. This section is not applicable as there is no existing local street that abuts the property which would require extending to provide through circulation. Cul-de-sacs: Section 18.164.030(K) requires that a cul-de-sac shall be no more than 400 feet long nor provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units. The applicant has requested a variance to this standard to allow the cul-de-sac to provide access to 25 lots and a maximum length of 430 feet. This variance has been approved and is discussed in the variance section. Private Street: Section 18.164.030(S) states that design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer and that private streets serving more than 6 dwelling units are permitted within planned developments. This section also requires a bonded maintenance agreement or the creation of a homeowners association to provide for the continued maintenance of the street in perpetuity. The private street design satisfies City standards. Lots 1-20 will be served by a 24-foot-wide paved accessway. Lots 23-25 will be served by a 28-foot-wide accessway with parking on one (1) side. The main entrance is a 28-foot-wide accessway with parking on one (1) side. The City STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-00O2-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDMSION PAGE 21 'allows local streets to be .c with a 28-foot-wide pavement se. ,n with parking on one (1) side. The accessway will allow for a 20-foot unobstructed driving surface, consistent with Fire District requirements. Therefore, the proposed private street satisfies this section. The applicant has also been conditioned to provide for a bonded maintenance agreement or provide a homeowners' association for street maintenance. Block Design: Section 18.164.040(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 18.164.040(B)(1) states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: 1. Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or; 2. For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. 3. For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. This criteria is not applicable as the site is constrained from meeting the specified block perimeter due to existing development patterns and location of the 100-year floodplain. The block in this area is bounded by SW North Dakota Street, SW 115th Avenue, SW Tigard Street, and SW Tiedeman Avenue and is well in excess of 1,800 feet. Block Lengths: Section 18.164.040(B)(2) states that when block lengths greater than 600 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. The property is precluded from providing a street connection between SW North Dakota Street and SW Tigard Street. Since the block exceeds 600 feet, the applicant shall provide a pedestrian pathway connection through the block to provide connectivity with SW Tigard Street. A pedestrian pathway provided with the subject application would connect to an existing pedestrian pathway stubbed at the south property line. A pedestrian pathway is shown on the City Comprehensive Plan Park Plan to follow Fanno Creek. While the proposed subdivision plan could accommodate the required pedestrian pathway connection within the subdivision and satisfy this requirement, the City contends that provision of the path within Tracts "N" and "M" would provide a preferable location. This location is preferred given the path's linkage with pathways within the City of Tigard Open Space and Greenway System. The applicant is, therefore, conditioned to provide a 15-foot pedestrian easement for the purposes of mitigating traffic congestion by providing connectivity and the opportunity for alternative means of transportation. As previously discussed in section 18.32, the requirement for a pedestrian easement is roughly proportional. The City of Tigard has identified funding for the construction of a pedestrian pathway along this section of Fanno Creek in its Capital Improvement Program. The City will, therefore, be constructing the pedestrian way in the future. Since the City will be responsible for the construction of the pedestrian pathway, this code section is satisfied for purposes of this application. The City has contacted the owners to discuss the willingness of the owners to sell Tracts "N" and "M" to the City for park and open space. This discussion is outside the boundaries of this application and is unrelated to the standards and conditions within this report. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 22 'Lots - Size and Shape. Iction 18.164.060(A) prohibits ' lepth from being more than 2.5 times the aver-de lot width, unless the parcel Bess than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. As indicated on the site plan, all twenty-five (25) lots comply with this criteria. Lot Frontage: Section 18.164.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage • on public or private streets, other than an alley, unless the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit, in which case the lot frontage shall be at least 15 feet. As indicated on the site plan all lots with the exception of Lot 12 comply with this standard. Sidewalks: Section 18.164.070 requires sidewalks adjoining all residential streets. As indicated on the site plan, a sidewalk is being provided along SW North Dakota Street and the main entrance of the private street, thereby, satisfying this standard. PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS: Sections 18.164.030(E)(1)(a) (Streets), 18.164.090 (Sanitary Sewer), and 18.164.100 (Storm Drains) shall be satisfied as specified below: STREETS: SW North Dakota Street This site is located adjacent to SW North Dakota Street, which is classified as a minor collector street on the City's Transportation Plan. The roadway is currently paved, but not fully improved to City standards. The right-of-way (ROW) at present measures 20 feet from centerline; a minor collector street requires 30 feet from centerline. TMC 18.164.030(E) requires the applicant to dedicate additional ROW to meet the minimum width standard. The applicant has indicated that they will dedicate the additional ROW to satisfy this requirement. The proposed project will increase the amount of traffic on the City's street system. In general, single-family development will add approximately ten (10) vehicle trips per day for every new lot, according to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). For this project, there will be approximately 250 new trips per day added to the system. This incremental increase in traffic warrants improvement to SW North Dakota Street. TMC 18.164.030(E) states that the applicant should be required to improve the street to meet current City standards. The applicant's plan indicates that they will provide a half-street improvement for the portion of the site frontage adjacent to the main developed area. However, there is a large area of the site that contains mostly 100-year floodplain and wetland adjacent to Fanno Creek that the applicant proposes to place within tracts to be dedicated to the City (Tracts N and M). The frontage of SW North Dakota Street, adjacent to Tract N, is not proposed to be improved by the applicant. The Engineering Department's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) calls for the future reconstruction of the bridge over Fanno Creek on SW North Dakota Street. This reconstruction will result in a need to raise the grade of the street on either side of the bridge. It appears that the portion of roadway adjacent to Tract N would be affected by that improvement. Therefore, Staff recommends that the applicant not construct street improvements along that portion of the site frontage. The applicant has proposed to enter STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 23 -into a Non-Remonstranc€. jreement that would obligate the fL e property owners within the project to pay for the future widening of the street if it were improved as a part of a Local Improvement District (LID). Staff does NOT recommend this type of agreement because they do not work well for subdivisions, as they will affect future property owners that may, or may not, become aware of the agreement before they purchase the dwelling. Notice of the agreement will appear on a title report, but Staff has found that a very low percentage of citizens actually review a title report before buying a house. Because of this, Cities have a very difficult time in calling in this type of agreement because of the potential outcry from the citizens. In lieu of the non-remonstrance agreement, Staff recommends the applicant deposit funds with the City that will be used toward the future improvement of that portion of the street when the City reconstructs the bridge. This option has been utilized between the City and other developers in the past where circumstances prevent the immediate improvement of the street. The City can set up a specific account for the funds so they will only be used for the construction of North Dakota Street. The applicant's funding obligation should be limited to a half-street improvement and an estimate would need to be submitted by the applicant's engineer to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Since the City does not yet have design plans developed for the bridge project, and therefore does not know the extent of the vertical grade change necessary for the street, Staff recommends the estimate for the half-street improvement be based on the existing grade of the street. The funds for the street improvement should be paid to the City prior to approval of the final plat. Proposed Private Street System The applicant's plan indicates the new residential units will be served by private streets with one (1) access onto SW North Dakota Street. Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 18.164.030(S) allows a private street to serve more than six (6) dwelling units if approved through a planned development. This project is being proposed as a planned development and will consist of attached row houses. This type of development usually includes maintenance agreements for certain features within the development, such as open space, driveways and landscaping. A private street is acceptable if the developer provides a mechanism for maintenance by the future property owners. Typically this is done through a homeowners' association and a maintenance agreement that will become part of the CC&R's that are recorded with the final plat. The applicant has indicated that they are willing to establish any necessary CC&R's and maintenance agreement to ensure that the private street system will be maintained by the property owners. These documents should be reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to approval of the final plat. The City's public improvement design standards require private streets to have a pavement section equal to a public local street. The applicant will need to provide this type of pavement section. WATER: There is public water available from a main line in SW North Dakota Street. The applicant's plan indicates that a new main line will be extended into the development to serve the new lots. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 24 • -SANITARY SEWER: Public sanitary sewer is available from an existing main line in SW North Dakota Street. The plan indicates that a new public main line will be installed within the private street system to serve all of the new lots. It will be necessary that all manholes along the new public sewer line be accessible to City maintenance vehicles. It appears that the proposed manhole behind Lots 22 and 23 will be outside of any paved area; this will need to be adjusted so the manhole will be within a paved access area. The applicant will also need to dedicate, on the final plat, a public sanitary sewer and access easement over the area where the public sewer line will be installed. STORM DRAINAGE: The applicant's plan indicates that the storm water from this project will be directed toward Fanno Creek, which is located along the eastern portion of this site. Storm water will be treated in an on-site private biofiltration swale that will then discharge into the creek. The applicant may need to obtain a Division of State Lands (DSL) permit for any work in the adjacent wetland area next to the creek. STORM WATER QUALITY: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of R&O 91-47. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. As stated previously, the applicant is proposing to treat the on-site water in a biofiltration swale. The preliminary calculations indicate the swale will need to be approximately 118 feet long. The plan provides this length. The construction drawings will need to provide a more detailed design of this facility. Since the facility will be privately maintained, the CC&R's should identify how it should be maintained by the property owners. GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL: USA R&O 91-47 also regulates erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per R&O 91-47, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. All grading work will be inspected by the Building Division as a part of the Site Permit (refer to the SITE PERMIT REQUIRED section that follows). STAFF REPCr -0 THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 25 -EXISTING OVERHEAD .. _ITV LINES: There are existing overhead utility lines adjacent to SW North Dakota Street. Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. SITE PERMIT REQUIRED: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on- site private utility installations (water, sewer, storm, etc.), grading and private street/driveway construction. Even though this project is a "subdivision", which are usually inspected solely by the Engineering Department, it will contain a significant amount of private utilities and paved areas. The project will be very similar in construction to an apartment project. For this reason, the Site Permit is appropriate and necessary. This permit shall be obtained prior to approval of the final plat and should be obtained in conjunction with the public improvement permit as most of the work associated with the Site Permit will likely need to be constructed at the same time as the public improvements are constructed. APPLICABLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES Citizen Input: Policy 2.1.1 provides the City will assure that citizens will be provided an opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning and development review process. The subdivision is consistent with Policy 2.1.1 because a neighborhood meeting was held by the applicant, notice of the public hearing was provided to owners of property within 250 feet and was published in a newspaper of general circulation. Floodplains: Policy 3.2.2 states that the City shall allow land form alterations or development in the floodplain outside the zero-foot rise floodway which preserve or enhance the function of the zero-foot rise floodway provided the land form alteration and/or development is an area designated commercial or industrial on the Comprehensive Plan land use map. It appears that the 100-year floodplain elevation is approximately at the 160 foot elevation. The development shall occur outside of the 160 foot elevation. The applicant has applied for a Sensitive Lands Permit to place sanitary sewer, storm sewer, sidewalks, and a water quality facility within the floodplain area. The applicant has been conditioned to provide findings as to how the Sensitive Lands approval criteria are satisfied, thereby satisfying this policy. If the applicant cannot provide adequate findings, the plan shall be revised to demonstrate that no work will be done within the floodplain. Floodplains: Policy 3.2.4 states that the City shall prohibit development within areas designated as significant wetlands on the floodplain and wetlands map. No development shall occur on property adjacent to areas designated as significant wetlands on the floodplain and wetlands map within twenty five (25) feet of the STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 26 -designated wetlands a Development on property a :ent to the significant wetlands shall be allowea under the planned development section of the code. This policy is satisfied as the delineated wetland is not designated as a significant wetland on the floodplain and wetlands map. The applicants proposed development will not require the filling of wetlands Water Quality: Policy 4.2.1 provides that all development within the Tigard urban planning area shall comply with applicable federal, state and regional water quality standards. Policy 4.2.1 is satisfied as the applicant shall be providing on-site water quality treatment, as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-47. Public Utilities: Policies 7.1.2, 7.3.1 and 7.4.4 provides that the City will require as a condition of development approval that public water, sewer, and storm drainage will be provided and designed to City standards and that utilities shall be placed underground. Policies 7.1.2, 7.3.1 and 7.4.4 are satisfied because the developer is required to extend public sewer and water systems to this site prior to development. In addition, the developer is required to provide for underground installation of utility lines. Fire Protection: Policy 7.6.1 states that Fire District shall review all new development applications to ensure adequate fire protection is available to serve each new development Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue was provided with a copy of the development plan, in compliance with Policy 7.6.1. Street Improvements: Policy 8.1.1 provides that the City will plan for a safe and efficient street and roadway system that meets current needs and anticipated future growth and development. The subdivision proposal complies with Policies 8.1.1 and 8.1.3 because the proposed improvements should contribute to a safe and efficient street system in this area. The proposed SW North Dakota Street improvements are consistent with City of Tigard standards for collector streets. The internal street serving the subdivision shall also meet City standards in terms of design requirements for private streets. Street Improvements. Policy 8.1.3 states that the City will require the following as a precondition of approval: 1. Development abut a dedicated street or have other adequate access; 2. Street right-of-way shall be dedicated where the street is substandard in width; 3. The developer shall commit to construction of the streets, curbs, and sidewalks to City standards within the development; 4. The developer shall participate in the improvement of existing streets, curbs, and sidewalks to the extent of the development's impacts; and 5. Street improvements shall be made and street signs or signals shall be provided when the development is found to create or intensify a traffic hazard. The subdivision proposal complies with Policies 8.1.1 and 8.1.3 because the proposed extension of improvements to, and within the development, should contribute to a safe and efficient street system in this area. The private street serving the subdivision shall meet City standards in terms of design requirements. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 27 SECTION V: OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: If constructed to a row house concept, provide the following: 1. a homeowners' association in conjunction with a maintenance agreement for the commonly owned components; 2. the design complies with R-1 occupancy requirements; 3. structural projections such as, eaves and cornices are not allowed beyond property lines; 4. structures greater than three (3) units shall comply with the Uniform Building Code; and 5. all buildings must be interconnected with a sidewalk accessible to persons with disabilities, with route extending to the public way. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: The applicant shall submit a kiosk plan for review and approval. SECTION VI AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: Plans are not approved at this time. The applicant shall address the following plan notes and re-submit plans for review and approval: 1. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (15 feet for not more than two (2) dwelling units), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.1). 2. Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. Diagrams of approved turnarounds are available from the fire district (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.4). 3. Where fire apparatus access roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway, and in turnarounds as needed (UFC Sec. 902.2.4). Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - TOW AWAY ZONE, ORS 98.810" and shall be installed with a clear space above ground level of seven (7) feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide, by 18 inches high, and shall have black or red letters and border on a white background (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.(1)(2) & (3)). STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PAGE 28 -4. Fire apparatus ac s roadway curbs shall be paint( ellow and marked "NO PARKING FIRE Li- . .c" at each 25 feet. Lettering shah .iave a stroke of not less than one (1)-inch-wide, by six (6) inches high (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.2). 5. The minimum number of fire hydrants for a building shall be based on the required fire flow prior to giving any credits for fire protection systems. There shall not be less than one (1) fire hydrant for the first 2,000 GPM required fire flow and one (1) additional fire hydrant for each 1,000 GPM, or portion thereof, over 2,000 GPM. Fire hydrants shall be evenly spaced around the building and their locations shall be approved by the Chief (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1). 6. No portion of the exterior of a commercial building shall be located more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant when measured in an approved manner around the outside of the building and along an approved fire apparatus access roadway (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1). 7. Fire hydrants shall not be located more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway (UFC Sec 903.4.2.4). 8. The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available form the Fire Marshal's office (UFC Sec. 903.3). 9. Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any other construction on the site or subdivision (UFC Sec. 8704). PGE has had the opportunity to review this application and has offered no comments or objections. SUBDIVISION APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID ONLY IF THE FINAL PLAT IS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF TIGARD WITHIN EIGHTEEN MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. „„z, ///a%, April 11. 1997 PREPARED BY: William D'Andrea DATE Associate Planner, AICP April 11, 1997 APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdorff DATE Planning Manager i:\curpin\wiII\sub97-02.dec STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 97-0002-DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBOMSICN PAGE 29 • t. - - - - - . SW NN DAKOTA sT T ►m - __ .. T 1..,_. ♦��•� � I 1111• • � .- ,•••••••• ` \ 4 �: • . .l•• .••\ ) ) I �' S• . . . .r: •1111 • • . . .• • Z• •4• — ..--• � W I I t 1. •/• •i • II 0• .J4 11!. _ • ' • •/• ;; ;`I v✓ 4•» 1 •• .•f•••) I`. • • • • • • • • • • •••• ....i I .1 11 I, I •%. '•.•%•••••••••.•.••••••••• • I LI IT I l l ts,� z 1I I I Vi•l• �\•yi• ••, . • z III •; �.. �: :-. .z .� Q :3 • .x •�•r ;:. r• 1 _1111, I L — ::_.s:•••::`• •••.•.•.•:::::::::::::::::::::::::: a c�.•'.' o Ii:�•'• ••:;• '.•. .•. ....•.•. ...•... ..- •. .•.1111 r»+.v■ /b 414.111 H LEGEND LL 1 I..•••...I mum*edam••.•.w I.4 O I i •�� - - •1 •.•1114 wwm.u....w U 1 •t J1 rww r.rw.OW* -[L r -•.ww F— SW TIGAHD STREET --. 1 ` . 1 j••.l r `A�� , . J ty 040•••••• 4. .L L t.. .•+c4o•...M ∎ I I SOB 97-02/PDR 91-01/ , ' SITE PLAN 1 TON 97-01/SLR 97-01 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION EXHIBIT MAP N IITE PLAN/MASTER Puuh . 1 ri 3 "0 — — — — •' ♦• r swum'UKATA aiAEFT —++•0+� — .. — — .•..4L L�.1l_i...l.iJ.___tJ_1...1T7____ -1_�ii * • •• �6 44`1 , 1 ,'1 %, i I OT 1 ` �O sb�� i• ■ ; luusr !7 L �+ ,`� '. • :ni Ill OT ! •Ts{1 e2 1 • I1N71 /. �' ��. ——� I II LOT 3 � h4JT4 I Ille Iurssr 5 LOT ?T rT • !11 / • i . I I `LOT 4 •L•T 10 _ 1•w sr. _ L11pp,• sr �� 1 O I■ PACT I19.,11 I1 _ • - 1•.nv»r•�•.-.•n....s • � Z 0000 • Tp • *4�..... ■irl'�i�i. _ 11 ACT 'N' I O s .��y •.�,` _ 2,eta J1: a• .. C r _.TR.O• . a• I LOO sr t - � • L/♦ 3 '•�� Lot 1. -i -I--------�' j• ■ *mil! 1A . - 'i • �.• LOTU�� I • -T-- --r- LL I i i • 'TRACT 'H •�. i1�,s • M.Sr: in -r---1- A r r^ ._•- •T 7 V •• LOT 21 • C �J' 1 Z `I`Ce• 1 __in;�LOIsr �/30>-� �', TRACT 'S./' I • i — •lI ••0 sr i , -nNr.rnr�...t�row....ar.... I Z i TRACT 12` , , I • • Z 1 .. I Q A , , I • II LOT 2t ' ' I ^ 1 • ' EI 1.7•Sr ' 1 • �.1.■ 1 � = 1 I I� o ' LOT 46 .- r 1 •• L I 71138 Sr r i 1 1 • .■t • ■ 0 1 LEGEND — ' �..•■...r ... ......� w — — — SW MAID STREET — — — — U �----1 710. I.�.. I I•NOTES• I1 LOTS I •ay K.c.xrw j TRACTS•A•AND 1. PRIVATE STIIQTS / TRACT*. •C•-L' Orbs MACS 1 TRACT• Y me X TO s=OAT TO TI MTV / 1 / I ' ! ` SUB 97-02/PDR 91-01/ I SITE PLAN 1ON 97-01/SLR 97-01 . EXHIBIT MAP N DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION 1 PREUMIMABY PLAT" i . , _/ , \ " - 1 N ___, L: • 1 . , ,, 7-y).-4,1 ' w ,. -..„_-,:--___r- 1_, ,_,., e„,„, „„,,,,, 411111B1_ a ust4j'i :... . ► ,r 111111 MOB JNDS ).■ ? - 1Ia ni ( c-,, , „I', ; . AIM 1111 T_____ pi ca. a MU Ir � = o I ----FT NCh1M UA1C IA 51 I T' 0) U FT, � ; -----_ ' i 7 H ACE r . <' mc 1 .a. ! , _____J i_. ) , 1 Tos_ I, . __I ST CO T1 GARD ST 411 CD) &iv.:■Alta k L i 1 wa-mlk O>; , ..a..... .:1=91 .....m...„1„ i i 41111R9 OW MEAD sT l' Vicinity Map - - -_ N 1 SUB 91-0002 Note: Map is not to scale , Dakota Meadows Subdivision -_ - - _ - --_ - :--- _:-:&W--NORTH-OAK(IT/4 STREW . •may' ••. • •r•• t .• •• •• • •••�•`*.e_�./'••i•� • ' •••• ..... • - M- • N _ � ' •4141. . dile rill . �� • �� rM�Y r1i !At. i.••. •.�� • )� •�.� T • •• • •t • • ,. ••T Alas.. �• • • •k i . :. . .•` 1 •• •'• • • •Mw�•� • • r'•�r • • • • ..•. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 ‘. . '• • • • • •1..• • • • • • • •••. • .0...0%. • • • • • • • • • • • • •• S • ' •• • • • •4 •• •1 • • • • • • • • L� • • • b • ` • • • • • • • • • • ••.' • .••. '• • •• •• •• • • •1 • •'• • • • • • • • • • ��• I •. !• e, • » • • • • • • • • • • •••• : . . . r•. J ‘) 1 • • • • • • • 1• • t • • • • • • • •• t • • • 1 • J • •1••• • • • • • • ••• • • • • • • • • I. • • • • • • • • • • • ••••• r•••J••••1 • •'• • • • • • 1 ' •• • • •'• • • i• • ` • • • • • • • • ••I ,•••1 • ••• • , • • f .i • . t t ••• •• • • i• • /'. • • • • • ••._ - • . . . .1. 1 • • • • • • • • • •�,.. • :i•• • • • • •• ■ • • • . . • • • • • • • • •i.••• .1 ' .0 .. • • : • • ••• • • • • ••• E l I. .7.•._I !. �.�•' •• ••d,. •'• ••••••••••••••••• • •• t i I.1 • • - • • •'4 • ••• • • • • • •• •). I t . • •. lU.; . . . • •'• • • • • • IT,:::::.., l ,Er•..‘•t, i • / . •'. • • • • • • C i • •1•• •• • • • • • • 1 I .•1• 1) ••• I• •'•f•' •.• • • • • •'iii \\ _ •t � ••J 1• •• ••/•• •'• •••• • •• •• ••_ _ • ••. • •• • • • 3 • •i•• r ;t y• • • ••• • • ••• • • • . . ••:. . ti•• • ,•••.vim•'• • • •••• 1 • • • •' • • ', • • • • ' '• • • • • •• ••\• • b — ••u �••�■■ •i•Lieii:r•iiii•i.:ii�i•■ •iJ 1 1 •.••• • • •MINIM• • •f■ •• I II a.t► .P1. lavui • • • .1t.Il0 YU 04.14 w L.• N Owv•n•Si•. A •.••■••• ■••.fa• ■ • • tatfa • • • t S e►•'t 9C 101 IS Kat PC 101 IS /I Kit C 101 •• w • • a 4 • 1 si .1. OV&U _� -71 ,� I0 ca.1 to li ► 1 n1073 tit 101 II- : law .. p•. t 01 ti 101 0181 . 'IS •K► 10Yk11 I 11 MMIP . • VP Kea 101 1$ • •t I tM. i 10 •I t tits a- 133416 VLO>1V 'H1UON MS 'It .ttt 9 101 •0. • ••• . .. isi•tQ� V 1 10 •• A • 1 • • • • 4 ' - 1 vel 'ft killi Ornam '• ..,..iii .l. C. 4 11' • ■1 • • )1,3• 4,10...19:11144:.IIIP:i7+. g g Iv 441 1 ill c ...26.1...a..... . :Sj4.0::ii•..:;s:,,:N(1.of.;::.livrO 3,4..:.::1.iv,s.. iiR 1..:%. 1 sp:K;(:):e.. ,IA..:./..,,S,.1...,..f..,T.:,...R.../1.,.:.:.:.....::::;..../...::..E...::::.7...:..,:.....::::.T...............1,.,....:............:...,...............:,..:........:,..;._:i...,... •lowster me a I II NI 1119 5 ii p . .- 4•••,11. • Iril .."/'.• ,... s 1 Vt ' 11 0'4 :ilez-,...., • ... .#., •. ..:.:::4 i nik, IIIIIIM 004 '..di.::::1 t . 1 ..:.:•••."..: q 1467-61.7..f i el, ., 44 '.'1. ' ...... .......:711 . ..; k,i.31. • _ . - 1/641)* 71'1■i. "'At! -a4c•t.,-::'::.i.i. —... r :. L.,...) ., .....t. . • • - 9ii„...6.4 Jim lj • Al WIWI lel VIII, .'31;* 1\ • 1 I s • , . , . . . • N' ,..., •• :0.0.11.•.• . t s , . •• I ...4.....,:.111.-Ili■ -oniror-41;le:e; ••••'es.If' .:.:.:.:.••••S ••••• 01.0:•::•......• 1 ....X. •.:,....• ••••••••O. ... ••••••••••• 110.•••••• • 0 11.0%•••4 . ••_•VP_••••• .‘ °X.,.,....3 .. . .. , ..•••••if • - 1 3 • .. • ';01 •Pp• ' W...Nal -.v • ..■ : -... 4-7 -''4 ___, 4 1.e' ..;...... .55t.,.. . s---r V , ••••••‘..•••■•• •■• . ••••:::t'a..$ I .0 .,._.. . : 7P.Itri 41 ' r • .111-110.4...•:411 ..4,:•.. ; i I.,10114 ; ' •'•:::::: ..‘:: , . rg. -• 4 .i ,If , "..; • . -..-•:.•:-.-.. p: .. .-.4.. . - ‘c / -..:... -..- -c•• . -.F./ N • ' ..01,51 , 310. ; .0.' • ••••••••■•••••••• , ,. i •41/0 e 1 it a ail i'44 1.%/t90A .t. / ., ° ii ., .. .. 1. AP, .##," •••• .•,..4 ...,. 7.• • •....3.,..t...„„....,,,,...s.,...,1 , ,,,,;),...... .94. .,(....„..://:,..i..i..i..,_,t_;.,...,..„... ., .) . f, : so -_ _.-• , • - I (41,44211 i or. lo•ii a- Jr :, ;.11 W, , iprop 7 40 4,14.0.•••••;•I...•••• ...- • ire NI . -6 .V . 1401 ...or/ ,•••••••••O. 6.0.0. 41V ely\•' 1 .ell •.' 4( .4•1,4/;••ri.i.x.:.:.*:.: . .. , - 0 4p, s .„,„ •! ... ;9'et .;4' ••••••••• •• 1 - iii 61 i i , / ,'", ,,,,'.,_;*.::•:•:•;::::::::: 1ji . —;• re' . • ••••■••••••.0: ' i , .V. •0 • .4••••••••••''0.0. •, , 0 PAP •• $••• .. • ktfil t I/ i . . i sl:- • All,, 4 16 ? // .r ' .. , 1,4,,,..:••••1... '....•..:•• :•••_•:•.:......% ° --'''AO ,-.• ' ;.•••;:•!.:::•:•:.) ...., . . . t.1 r4er.l.-::-..,,,6 i".,,,API■4•Yi.....,v4; " 01 •'ib'Ot" -v- . •.':' . 0 frtt"' -''el:). c:0--..*t...:m. • ..,f,;...• 1 1 4e ...,,• .r ,4,.." 0, : ..:. - 7,/,,,;.:.......::... .1 fa i .A..Jiredi.# . if ,,, •IP - *1.04 e ,„ A ..•.. .....,:.... *di 4' --'.: .01.91.14..,• : . •-• "...of,. .;.:::...:..:.•:"... ,.... . *0' •;•:•:::.• •, ••-•••• , , .1 ,.) •• ! ., ...,1, ..., ... '.:-.. ' • •., •I •;,,ir, ..,17 4001/ a .., . - •.... z _ ii -. •. . . . .... .•. . • .... 1 !'"•. . • .. Ia wow v^ NUJ' i_i_uI .• .„,-.. APR 10 '97 04:52PM ALPHA ENGINEERING P. 1/1 PHA ENGINEERING, INC %JO0 S.W. OAK, SUITE 23v PORTLAND, OR 97223 (503) 452-8003 FAX: (503) 452-8043 FAX COYER SHEET DATE: 4.10.96 TIME: TO: Will D'Andrea FAX NO. 684-7297 City of Tigard Planning JOB NO. 141-018 RE: Dakota Meadows Draft Conditions FROM: Mike Miller case: SUB 97-0002 Number of pages 1 (including cover sheet). Having reviewed your draft Conditions of Approval we have attached our recommendations ( they are marked as suggested corrections in the margins of your draft conditions). In general there are 4 Issues of clarification: 1)The variance request for the cul-de-sac should reference that the proposed length is over 400 feet. 2)We feel that the street trees shpould not be required along Dakota fronting on Parcel"N"for the following reasons: -The half street improvements along this section of proposed right-of-way are contingent upon the proposed grades pf that section of Dakota and are not yet designed.Trees planted along this section of Dakota may need to be relocated due the potential grading and fill related to the future construction of a bridge. -Trees along this section of open space wilco block views of Fanno Creek from Dakota and will create an urban character where there is a potential to create an attractive natural vista. 3) Although lots 5 - 17 propose private outdoor areas over the 100 year flood plain in the form of raised decks d balconies they will not interfere with the flood plain as they will be substantially above it We feel that they should not be classified as a "structure" in the flood plain as the only Impact will be the post footings.We are,of course prepared to submit findings that there will be no hydrological impacts caused by such footings. 4)We feel that we should not be required to provide an easement through the middle of the property for a bike trail as it would adversely affect the value of the remaining open space. Rather we fell that the requirements for pedestrian connectivity should be limited to providing a connection between the southern adjacent project and our tract"A" and "B". Thanks again for your continued help on this project. i ,A CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community PUBLIC NEARING NOTICE I NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, APRIL 21. 1997 AT 7;30 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO: SUBDIVISION (SUB) 97-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(PDR) 97-0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW(SLR) 97-0001NARIANCE (VAR) 97-0001/ ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 97-0001 FILE TITLE: DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION APPLICANT: Alpha Engineering OWNER: Beacon Homes Attn: Mike Miller 9500 SW 125th Avenue 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 Beaverton, OR 97005 Portland, OR 97223 REQUEST D 1. The applicant has requested Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer and storm drainage line within the 100-year floodplain; 4. Variance approval to allow a cul-de-sac to serve 25 lots, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum number of lots served by a cul-de-sac shall be 20 lots; and 5. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. LOCATION: 10520 SW North Dakota Street; WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. The property is situated west of the intersection of SW Tiedeman Street and SW North Dakota Street, on the south side of SW North Dakota Street. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.88, 18.84, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.134, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. ZONE: Residential, 12 Units Per Acre; R-12. The R-12 zone allows single-family attached/detached residential units, multiple-family residential units, residential care facilities, mobile home parks and subdivisions, public support services, family day care, home occupation, temporary use, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.31 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. SUB 97.0002 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF 4/21/97 P C PUBLIC HEARING ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRIT-"EN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED A' "ON MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. OR 'ESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT _ PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION AFTER MARCH 31. 1997, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AND ALL PARTIES TO RESPOND PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT WHICH A COMMENT IS DIRECTED PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. 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. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY—FIVE CENTS(250 PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER WILLIAM D'ANDREA,AT(503)639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. • \ \_-_—___ __ILt- i sm . ' i 37 -4 -T_ ~ra MU t---\ - 1......;,... .mow i.. 1.111 .� -J 1 11!!1It I i • Yra - �1 1 —T777--i It -7-7---, , . .. - - ---. --7. i lai0)-1, niutei I. I \A-- Ni. 1....::, n! , ! Li r' i ...__, , , , /.i AAth \\ 44/NN/� SUB 97-0002 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF 4/21/97 P.C.PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS r � PASCUZZI INVESTMENT L.L.C. 10250 S.W. NORTH DAKOTA ST. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 APRIL 9, 1997 MR. WILLIAM D'ANDREA CITY OF TIGARD 13125 S.W. HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 RE: SUBDIVISION FILE NO. 97-0002 DEAR MR. D'ANDREA; MY BROTHERS AND 1 OWN PROPERTY AND STEEL BUILDINGS IN PART OF THE INDUSTRIAL SANCTUARY DIRECTLY EAST OF THIS PROPOSED SUBDIVISION. WE DEVELOPED MUCH OF THIS LAND IN THE EARLY 1960'S WHEN MAIN STREET IN TIGARD WAS REALLY THE MAIN STREET. AS YOU ARE AWARE, MUCH DEVELOPMENT AND IN-FILL HAS OCCURRED SINCE THEN. AS A GENERAL RULE,WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT, PROVIDED IT IS DONE IN A THOUGHTFUL MANNER WITH RESPECT FOR THE INTERESTS OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS. ALTHOUGH IT APPEARS SOME OF THE LOT SIZES OF THIS SUBDIVISION ARE QUITE SMALL,WE ARE STRUGGLING WITH A MORE SERIOUS CONCERN. HUMAN NATURE BEING WHAT IT IS,WE FEAR THE FUTURE RESIDENTS OF THIS DEVELOPMENT MAY SOMEDAY COMPLAIN TO THE CITY OF TIGARD ABOUT THE VISUAL ESTHETICS OF OUR BUILDINGS AND/OR THE ROUTINE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES OF OUR TENANTS. CURRENTLY, OUR INDUSTRIAL TENANTS INCLUDE STEEL FABRICATING SHOPS, TWO STEEL PRODUCTS COMPANIES (ONE INDOOR AND ONE OUTDOOR),A CONCRETE CUTTING COMPANY,A MACHINE TOOL COMPANY AND A LANDSCAPE MATERIALS SUPPLIER. SOME OF THESE COMPANIES HAVE BEEN RENTING FROM US AT THIS LOCATION FOR OVER 25 YEARS! ESSENTIALLY,WE WANT IT PLACED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD THAT WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE DEVELOPMENT. HOWEVER, POTENTIAL HOME BUYERS IN THE SUB-DIVISION SHOULD BE MADE AWARE THAT THEIR NEIGHBORS ACROSS FANNO CREEK ARE LONG ESTABLISHED INDUSTRIAL COMPANIES THAT ALSO HAVE A RIGHT TO "QUIET ENJOYMENT'OF THEIR PROPERTY. THIS RIGHT TO MAINTAIN AND CONDUCT THESE BUSINESS' SHOULD NOT BE INFRINGED JUST BECAUSE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CHANGES FROM SINGLE RESIDENCE FARMLAND TO A 25 LOT SUB-DIVISION IN 1997. IF YOU HAVE FURTHER QUESTION REGARDING OUR POSITION ON THIS MATTER, I MAY BE REACHED AT(503)639-8891. elk4. P L ^ P:, S it MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: April 9, 1997 TO: Will D'Andrea, Planning Division FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer E;:r-- RE: SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001, Dakota Meadows Subdivision Description: This proposal is for a 25-lot subdivision, with lots ranging in size from 950 to 2,848 square feet (sf). The site is located at 10520 SW North Dakota Street (WCTM 1S1 34DA, Tax Lot 3300). The property sits south of and adjacent to SW North Dakota Street and Fanno Creek flows southerly through the eastern portion of the site. Findings: 1 . Streets: SW North Dakota Street This site is located adjacent to SW North Dakota Street, which is classified as a minor collector street on the City's Transportation Plan. The roadway is currently paved, but not fully improved to City standards. The right-of-way (ROW) at present measures 20 feet from centerline; a minor collector street requires 30 feet from centerline. TMC 18.164.030(E) requires the applicant to dedicate additional ROW to meet the minimum width standard. The applicant has indicated that they will dedicate the additional ROW to satisfy this requirement. The proposed project will increase the amount of traffic on the City's street system. In general, single family development will add approximately 10 vehicle trips per day for every new lot, according to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). For this project, there will be approximately 250 new trips per day added to the system. This incremental increase in traffic warrants improvement to SW North Dakota Street. TMC 18.164.030(E) states that the applicant should be required to improve the street to meet current City standards. The applicant's plan indicates that they will provide a half-street improvement for the portion of the site frontage adjacent to the main developed area. However, there is ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows PAGE 1 a large area of the site that contains mostly 100-year floodplain and wetland adjacent to Fanno Creek that the applicant proposes to place within tracts to be dedicated to the City (Tracts N and M). The frontage of North Dakota Street adjacent to Tract N is not proposed to be improved by the applicant. The Engineering Department's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) calls for the future reconstruction of the bridge over Fanno Creek on North Dakota Street. This reconstruction will result in a need to raise the grade of the street on either side of the bridge. It appears that the portion of roadway adjacent to Tract N would be affected by that improvement. Therefore, Staff recommends that the applicant not construct street improvements along that portion of the site frontage. The applicant has proposed to enter into a Non-Remonstrance Agreement that would obligate the future property owners within the project to pay for the future widening of the street if it were improved as a part of a Local Improvement District (LID). Staff does NOT recommend this type of agreement because they do not work well for subdivisions, as they will affect future property owners that may or may not become aware of the agreement before they purchase the dwelling. Notice of the agreement will appear on a title report, but Staff has found that a very low percentage of citizens actually review a title report before buying a house. Because of this, Cities have a very difficult time in calling in this type of agreement because of the potential outcry from the citizens. In lieu of the non-remonstrance agreement, Staff recommends the applicant deposit funds with the City that will be used toward the future improvement of that portion of the street when the City reconstructs the bridge. This option has been utilized between the City and other developers in the past where circumstances prevent the immediate improvement of the street. The City can set up a specific account for the funds so they will only be used for the construction of North Dakota Street. The applicant's funding obligation should be limited to a half-street improvement and an estimate would need to be submitted by the applicant's engineer to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Since the City does not yet have design plans developed for the bridge project, and therefore does not know the extent of the vertical grade change necessary for the street, Staff recommends the estimate for the half-street improvement be based on the existing grade of the street. The funds for the street improvement should be paid to the City prior to approval of the final plat. Proposed Private Street System The applicant's plan indicates the new residential units will be served by private streets with one access onto SW North Dakota Street. TMC ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows PAGE 2 18.164.030(S) allows a private street to serve more than six dwelling units if approved through a planned development. This project is being proposed as a planned development and will consist of attached row houses. This type of development usually includes maintenance agreements for certain features within the development, such as open space, driveways and landscaping. A private street is acceptable if the developer provides a mechanism for maintenance by the future property owners. Typically this is done through a homeowners association and a maintenance agreement that will become part of the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) that are recorded with the final plat. The applicant has indicated that they are willing to establish any necessary CC&R's and maintenance agreement to ensure that the private street system will be maintained by the property owners. These documents should be reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to approval of the final plat. The City's public improvement design standards require private streets to have a pavement section equal to a public local street. The applicant will need to provide this type of pavement section. 2. Water: There is public water available from a main line in SW North Dakota Street. The applicant's plan indicates that a new main line will be extended into the development to serve the new lots. 3. Sanitary Sewer: Public sanitary sewer is available from an existing main line in SW North Dakota Street. The plan indicates that a new public main line will be installed within the private street system to serve all of the new lots. It will be necessary that all manholes along the new public sewer line be accessible to City maintenance vehicles. It appears that the proposed manhole behind Lots 22 and 23 will be outside of any paved area; this will need to be adjusted so the manhole will be within a paved access area. The applicant will also need to dedicate, on the final plat, a public sanitary sewer and access easement over the area where the public sewer line will be installed. 4. Storm Drainage: The applicant's plan indicates that the storm water from this project will be directed toward Fanno Creek, which is located along the eastern portion of this site. Storm water will be treated in an on-site private biofiltration swale that will then discharge into the creek. The applicant may need to obtain a Division of State Lands (DSL) permit for any work in the adjacent wetland area next to the creek. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows PAGE 3 5. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of R&O 91-47. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of the building permit. As stated previously, the applicant is proposing to treat the on-site water in a biofiltration swale. The preliminary calculations indicate the swale will need to be approximately 118 feet long. The plan provides this length. The construction drawings will need to provide a more detailed design of this facility. Since the facility will be privately maintained, the CC&R's should identify how it should be maintained by the property owners. 6. Grading and Erosion Control: USA R&O 91-47 also regulates erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per R&O 91- 47, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. All grading work will be inspected by the Building Division as a part of the Site Permit (see Section 8). 7. Existing Overhead Utility Lines: There are existing overhead utility lines adjacent to SW North Dakota Street. Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in- lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows PAGE 4 8. Site Permit Required: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water, sewer, storm, etc.), grading and private street/driveway construction. Even though this project is a "subdivision", which are usually inspected solely by the Engineering Department, it will contain a significant amount of private utilities and paved areas. The project will be very similar in construction to an apartment project. For this reason, the Site Permit is appropriate and necessary. This permit shall be obtained prior to approval of the final plat and should be obtained in conjunction with the public improvement permit as most of the work associated with the Site Permit will likely need to be constructed at the same time as the public improvements are constructed. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT: Note: Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact for the following conditions will be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (639-4171). 1. Prior to approval of the final plat, a public improvement permit and compliance agreement is required for this project. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. Once redline comments are addressed and the plans are revised, the design engineer shall then submit nine (9) sets of revised drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public improvement plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. 3. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall obtain a Site Permit from the Building Department to cover all grading for the dwellings, all on- site private utility installation (water, sewer, storm, etc.) and all private street/driveway construction. NOTE: this permit should be obtained in ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows PAGE 5 conjunction with the public improvement permit issued by the Engineering Department. 4. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. 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. 5. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW North Dakota Street to increase the right-of-way to 30 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. 6. The applicant shall construct standard half-street improvements along the frontage of SW North Dakota Street adjacent to the developed portion of this project. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: a. City standard pavement section from curb to centerline equal to 20 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. curb d. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey subsurface runoff e. 5 foot concrete sidewalk f. street striping g. streetlights as determined by the City Engineer h. underground utilities (NOTE: the applicant may be eligible to pay a fee in-lieu of undergrounding existing overhead utilities) street signs (if applicable) j. driveway apron for the private street k. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW North Dakota Street in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 7. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall deposit funds with the City for the future improvement of SW North Dakota Street adjacent to Tract N (the greenway/open space tract adjacent to Fanno Creek). The amount of the funds shall be determined by the City Engineer from a review of an estimate prepared by the applicant's engineer. The estimate should be based on a half-street improvement and need not consider any future grade ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows PAGE 6 change of the roadway in association with the City's future bridge project to the east. The funds will be placed into a specific account with the City so they can be used for the street improvement of North Dakota Street associated with the bridge project. 8. The private street(s) within the project shall be constructed with a pavement section that meets the City's local residential street standard. 9. A profile of SW North Dakota Street shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 10. The applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the final plat to indicate that the proposed private street(s) will be jointly owned and maintained by the private property owners who abut and take access from it. 11. 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 (Brian Rager) prior to approval of the final plat. 12. The public sanitary sewer design shall be laid out such that all manholes within the project are within paved access areas and accessible by City maintenance vehicles. 13. The applicant shall dedicate to the City on the final plat a public sanitary sewer and access easement for the proposed public sanitary sewer line. 14. The applicant shall submit a final design of the proposed private water quality facility. This design should be part of the site improvement permit submittal that will be reviewed by the Building Division. Calculations for this facility should be submitted to Brian Rager in the Engineering Department for review. 15. The applicant shall include a section within the CC&R's for the project regarding the private water quality facility. This section should specify how the property owners should maintain the facility. 16. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings (for the Engineering permit), as well as the site improvement ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows PAGE 7 drawings (for the Building Division site improvement permit). The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994. 17. A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of the lots that are to be "pad" graded to insure that the drainage is directed to the private street or private storm system approved by the Building Division. A soils report shall be provided detailing the soil compaction requirements consistent with the requirements of Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). 18. The applicant shall provide a geotechnical report, per Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC, for the proposed grading slope construction. The recommendations of the report shall be incorporated into the final grading plan. A final construction supervision report shall be filed with the Building Department prior to occupancy of any of the dwelling units. 19. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW North Dakota Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $ 27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, it shall be paid prior to approval of the final plat. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 20. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a recorded mylar copy of the subdivision/partition plat. 21 . Prior to issuance of any building permits within the subdivision, the public improvements shall be deemed substantially complete by the City Engineer. Substantial completion shall be when: 1) all utilities are installed and inspected for compliance, including franchise utilities, 2) all local residential streets have at least one lift of asphalt, 3) any off-site street and/or utility improvements are completely finished, and 4) all public street lights are installed and ready to be energized. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows PAGE 8 IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; THIS IS NOT AN EXCLUSIVE LIST: 18.160.170 Improvement Agreement: 1 . Before City approval is certified on the final plat, and before approved construction plans are issued by the City, the Subdivider shall: A. Execute and file an agreement with the City Engineer specifying the period within which all required improvements and repairs shall be completed; and B. 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 subdivider. 2. 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. 18.160.180 Bond: 1 . As required by Section 18.160.170, the subdivider shall file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one of the following: A. An irrevocable letter of credit executed by a financial institution authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon; B. 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 C. Cash. 2. 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. 3. The subdivider shall not cause termination of nor allow expiration of said guarantee without having first secured written authorization from the City. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows PAGE 9 18.160.190 Filing and Recording: 1. 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. 2. Upon final recording with the County, the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 18.162.080 Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: 1. Three copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. 2. 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. 3. Street centerline monumentation shall be provided as follows: A. Centerline Monumentation 1. 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. 2. The following centerline monuments shall be set: a. All centerline-centerline intersection points. b. All cul-de-sac center points. c. Curve points, beginning and ending points (PC's and PT's). 3. All centerline monuments shall be set during the first lift of pavement. B. Monument Boxes Required 1. Monument boxes conforming to City standards will be required around all centerline intersection points, cul-de-sac center points, and curve points. 2. The tops of all monument boxes shall be set to finished pavement grade. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows PAGE 10 18.164 Street & Utility Improvement Standards: 1. 18.164.120 Utilities A. 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. 2. 18.164.130 Cash or Bond Required A. 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. B. 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. C. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.160.180. 3. 18.164.150 Installation: Prerequisite/Permit Fee A. No land division improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the plans therefor have been approved by the City, permit fee paid and permit issued. 4. 18.164.180 Notice to City Required A. Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. B. If work is discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. 5. 18.164.200 Engineer's Certification Required A. 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 ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows PAGE 11 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. � e APPROVED: Greg Berry, Acting City Engineer i:\engtrianr\sub97-02.bdr ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows PAGE 12 04/07/97 15:46 $503 378 4844 STATE LANDS 2001. 003 ., [ FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET P Olio FAX DIVISION OF STATE LANDS 775 Summer St.NE `G ', Salem, OR 97310 y0,f �It'' phone: (503) 378-3805 fax: (503) 378-4844 TO: Oregon Name Vatitte14 0' f 1 tV 6&_ DIVISION OF n ,y,.�o Annette Lafka STATE LANDS Agency ` ����rt�'N Wetlands Program 775 Summer St.NE V Policy and Planning Salem,Oregon 97310-1337 (503)378-3805 Ext.233 Fax# 62 VI — 7 0 FAX(503)378-48 PcAcv SyL - 5z4 —I611, Comments: Date Sent: 4i b Time Sent: . / :4 Number of Pages(including cover) 04/07/97 15:46 $503 378 4844 STATE LANDS El002/003 Oregon ti April 7, 1997 ( I ) Colin MacLaren SRI/Shapiro/AGCO 1650 NW Front Avenue DIVISION 0 F Portland. Oregon 97209 STATE LANDS RE: Wetland Delineation for Cookson property located in T1S, RIW, Section 34 tax lot 3300, 3400 in Tigard, Oregon. Det#96-0602 STATE LAND BOARD JOHN A. KITZHA13ER Governor Dear Colin: PHIL KEISLING Secretary of State I have reviewed your wetland delineation report for the above referenced site and J HILL the boundary changes submitted based on our further review of on site State Treasurer conditions. Based on the data presented and changes made, I concur with the conclusions of the report. The area of wetland represented in the revised version 775 Summer Street NE of Figure 4 is subject to Oregon's Removal-Fill Law (ORS 196.800-196.990). Salem,OR 97310-1337 (503) 378-3805 FAX (503) 378-4844 Development plans for the site indicate the landscaped area and bike path TTY (503) 378-4615 proposed in Tract 'D'will impact the western tip of the wetland as currently designed. A state permit is required for 50 cubic yards or more of fill, removal or ground alteration in the wetland area. Revisions to the landscape plan which avoid ground alteration within the wetland need to be explored. Bill Parks, Division Resource Coordinator for Washington County will coordinate any permit reviews. If you have any questions regarding the delineation review, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ,) Annette Lalka Wetland Inventory Specialist Wetlands Program c: William D'Andrea, City of Tigard, Planning Department Jim Goudzwaard, Corps of Engineers Peter Kusyk, Beacon Homes Bill Parks, DSL k:wetlands/annette/letters/96-0602.doc 04/07/97 15:47 13'503 378 4844 STATE LANDS 411003/003 NORTH , DAKOTA STREET ir; 104 150 • ■■ . ---. .11/100--- 154 152 '. ••••• 4111/'. . . . I'•••*.- . /. ..,•"0;. .. .•• •••...... ....... • .• 1 1 / ...., 4 ...• •• . ........ .. / . d...t.i. .444........ ........................ . , • 1 •••.1-1.4',;•Y i.t; ---. ... ......... . /. .- 15o .17:1:-:..7.:.04,1 W,- :.•.".".•............ :... .I / 1 I .401'1 -. . a',. ••• ••• ••'•••"• r' • '• ••:1"••'s •1*...••-• -• -••••••••- --• • s•j. ..y:.er ,40.. ... ... ......... ..... 1 t\ 1.1•11,1,..:74k.S...-. •••1•••.:::::::::1:-....i i .. ,„.z...-...... .r . As.. ............... •-.:-.•-•,,:':, • •••.• •••••-• •- ,..... w,.4-4,%... ;"? ".*:.*.".-.'.'.'.---.1*.'.':. 152 \ \ '1. 1•'•.!.-.4 :: : ;.•••••••••.•••••••••• (••••-•••••1 \ •••••••.• ••••••••••••,•••••••••••• •••• ‘...1• \ N ••••••.•••••••••••••••••'•-•-•-•:;:-V...i.1 \ 1 • •••• •••• ••••••• •• ••• * ••••• •••• •••••••••••1•-• • . ••..3........ ........ . 1. .. • /0 ----1, e‘ ........... ...... i•-•- "-•••-•-••" •-• ;.. . : \ -4.........-..--::::::-.... -.-.-•.• . .-ic.):. 1 \ P gi . : ................. ........i. . / •••••--••-•• • •-• •-•-•• ---1 •-•••••••--• --••• ••••••-•••• - • t.„2.0 • , I "° .....• 1 . i .••••••-•• ••••••.....•••.- : e - r ••' .• '11 ' vi / lorpor . ........... ........ ........., .. • 1 It . \ . \ • • A...... ................ ............... . • ••••••• . .......... ......... ... ...... ..... ...... . "'•• . .. . ..... . ..- ._:. .. • .• /... .4(4'. ,,, 4., • ....••••••• 4,0) ......• . •..... • ,...• i / e •. • ---• . 1111111111F111111111111 .,..., Potentially Jurisdictional [.••••• wetlands 1111 III, 0 75 150 111l11111 111111‘ :., Additional jurisdictional t.•••••••• wetlands NORTH , FEET • Sample sites Base map from AEI., 1996 4961111 4/2/97 Potentially jurisdictional wetlands and sample sites at the Cookson FIGURE property, south of S.W. North Dakota Street at Fanno Creek,in Tigard, 4 Oregon. 9 SRI/SHAPIRO /AGCO INCORPORATED -- iMO REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ` � �� CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development RECEIVED PLANNING Shaping Better Community DATE: March 28,199/ APR 21 1997 TO: Michael Miller,Operations Water Dept.Manager CITY OF TIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea[x3151 Phone:(5031 639-4171 Fax:[5031684-7297 RE: SUBDIVISION(SUB)91-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR)91-0001 ZONE CHANGE(ZON)91-0001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW(SLR)97-0001 ➢ DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION A request for the following development applications: 1. Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map; and 4. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer line within the 100-year floodplain. LOCATION: 10520 SW North Dakota Street; WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. The property is situated west of the intersection of SW Tiedeman Street and SW North Dakota Street, on the south side of SW North Dakota Street. ZONE: Residential, 12 Units Per Acre; R-12. The R-12 zone allows single-family attached/detached residential units, multiple-family residential units, residential care facilities, mobile home parks and subdivisions, public support services, family day care, home occupation, temporary use, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.88, 18.84, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Monday -April 7, 1997. 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: `L15r&7v1 72..4A/ 01-/ ca'c. JJ 4 , 1,4-1/)/24,u / r-Em /z 255-6 Kr-E-7- (/dtt- PonT'o kds of 77-/E- _t,.z-n.,"1C,5 NluS7 ,6'E' we rsf/.v 25e> Fir a/ ,Ei/L6-,44,.O/2A.n/7') 7.14-c./GFz / /9i2e,77-7e.A_/ (be via) is , '. ('lease provide the foil-ming information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: Phone Number's]:u 9 I SUB 97-0002 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY MEMORANDUM DATE: April 9, 1997 TO: William D'Andrea, City of Tigard FROM: Julia Huffman, USA SUBJECT: Dakota Meadows Subdivision, SUB 97-0002 PDR 97-001 SANITARY SEWER Each lot within the development should be provided with a means of disposal for sanitary sewer. The means of disposal should be in accordance with R&O 96-44 (Unified Sewerage Agency's Construction Design Standards, July 1996 edition). Engineer should verify that public sanitary sewer is available to uphill adjacent properties, or extend service as required by R&O 96-44. STORM SEWER Each lot within the development should have access to public storm sewer. Engineer should verify that public storm sewer is available to uphill adjacent properties,or extend storm service as required by R&O 96-44. Hydraulic and hydrological analysis of storm conveyance system is necessary. If downstream storm conveyance does not have the capacity to convey the volume during a 25-year, 24-hour storm event, the applicant is responsible for mitigating the flow. WATER QUALITY Developer should provide a water quality facility to treat the new impervious surface being constructed as part of this development. FLOOD PLAIN Site contains flood plain/flood way designations. Grading within the flood plain/flood way shall be done in such a manner as to preserve the flood storage and flood conveying area without effecting any upstream or downstream properties in accordance with R&O 96-44. 155 North First Avenue,Suite 270,MS 10 Phone:503/648-8621 Hillsboro,Oregon 97124 FAX:503/640-3525 . William D, Bard April 9, 1997 drea, City of Tigard ge 2 SENSITIVE AREA `9 Sensitive Area" �'e a "exists. Developer e vela p e r mus t p reserve a 25-foot corridor as descr ibed i�d in R&� �e of 4 separating the sensitive area from development. Fanno C r e � O sensite area corridor shall identified 4 e3 1 Posed path gh the a�� r sh°uJd meet the sections 3 11b 1 c and 3. the above through the joint 1200-C erosion control permit is required. PZ1N fro r (�� T UALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE c. �') FIRE PREVENTION � 4755 S.W.Griffith Drive . P.O.Box 4755 4, Beaverton,OR 97076 . (503)526-2469 . FAX 526-2538 u J /6' \Y" RESG April 2, 1997 Will D'Andrea City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Dakota Meadows Subdivision 10520 SW North Dakota SUB 97-0002 File Number; 1446-97 Dear Will: This is a Fire and Life Safety Plan Review and is based on the 1994 editions of the Uniform Fire Code (UFC) and those sections of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) and Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC) specifically referencing the fire department, and other local ordinances and regulations. Plans for the above noted project are not approved. Please address the following items and resubmit plans to this office for review and approval. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (15 feet for not more than two dwelling units), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.1) Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. Diagrams of approved turnarounds are available from the fire district. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.4) Where fire apparatus access roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and maintain the minimum 20 foot wide unobstructed driving surface, "No parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. (UFC Sec. 902.2.4). Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - TOW AWAY ZONE, ORS 98.810" and shall be installed with a clear space above ground level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have black or red letters and border on a white background. (UFC Sec. 901.4.5(1)(2)&(3)) "Working"Smoke Detectors Save Lives Will D'Andrea April 2, 1997 Page 2 Fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted yellow and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE", at each 25 feet. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.2) The minimum number of fire hydrants for a building shall be based on the required fire flow prior to giving any credits for fire protection systems. There shall not be less than one (1) fire hydrant for the first 2,000 gallons per minute(GPM) required fire flow and one (1) additional fire hydrant for each 1,000 GPM or portion thereof over 2,000 GPM. Fire hydrants shall be evenly spaced around the building and their locations shall be approved by the Chief. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1) No portion of the exterior of a commercial building shall be located more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant when measured in an approved manner around the outside of the building and along an approved fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1) Fire hydrants shall not be located more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.4) The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute(GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's office. (UFC Sec. 903.3) Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any other construction on the site or subdivision. (UFC Sec. 8704) Please note row housing is treated by the fire district the same as apartment houses as fire fighting and rescue requirements are the same. If I can be of any further assistance to you, please feel free to contact me at 526-2469 referring to the above noted file number. Sincerely, ' a/L13411 Gene Birchill, DFM Plans Examiner GB:kw cc: Alpha Engineering, Inc. 9600 S.W. Oak, Suite 230 Portland, OR 97223 �... ,.�V�`,� Tua tin Valley Fire & R ,cue J Fire Prevention 4755 SW Griffith Drive - PO Box 4755 - Beaverton,OR 97076 - (503)526-2469 - FAX 526-2538 p LETTER ❑ NO LETTER TIME To L.- 1 L r� 73`�i .A- Date: l/ /).-1/ 2 ❑ WC ❑ CC�❑I MC ❑ BV ITI ❑TU ❑ DU �❑ SH {WI ❑ KC Jurisdiction File Number: 3j7 )- ›0 ., Project Name: )<% T l� IV? 4p?C?,,5 t-c- Projec Address: / C S �/ cj /th.—).-G-u 0A1/Cz t _ TVF&R File Number: (Whenever referring to this project please include the TVF&R File Number) r Project approved Project not approved- Please address items checked below and re-submit plans for review and approval to the: ❑ TVF&R Fire Marshal's Office ❑ Planning Department having jurisdiction for routing to the TVF&R Fire Marshal's Office Project conditionally approved subject to correction of items checked below. This is a Fire and Life Safety Plan Review and is based on the 1994 Editions of the Uniform Fire Code (UFC) and those sections of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) and Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC) specifically referencing the fire department, and other local ordinances, regulations and guidelines. 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. (UFC Sec. 902.2.1) 2) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD EXCEPTION FOR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the requirements for fire apparatus access may be modified as approved by the Chief. (UFC Sec. 902.2.1 Exception 1) 3) ADDITIONAL ACCESS ROADS: Where there are 25 or more dwellings, an approved second fire apparatus access roadway • must be provided to a city/county roadway or access easement. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2) t 4) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed driving surface with a width of not less than 20 feet(15 feet for not more than two dwelling units), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.1) 5) SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all-weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load)and 50,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.2) Please provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. Please provide documentation from a registered engineer that the finished construction is in accordance with the approved plans or the requirements of the Fire Code. 6) TURNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall not be less than 25 feet and 45 feet respectfully, as measured from the same center point. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.3) X7) DEAD END ROADS: Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. Diagrams of approved turnarounds are available from the fire district. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.4) 8) BRIDGES: Bridges shall be designed, inspected and final construction approved by a registered engineer. The bridge shall be designed in accordance with the American Association of Highway and Transportation Officials "Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges." The bridge shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry 50,000 pounds. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.5) 9) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus access roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles, "No Parking"signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. (UFC Sec. 902.2.4) Signs shall read"NO PARKING - FIRE LANE-TOW AWAY ZONE, ORS 98.810"and shall be installed with a clear space above ground level of 7 feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and shall have black or red letters and border on a white background. (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.(1) (2) & (3)) 10) GRADE: Fire apparatus access roadway grades shall not exceed an average grade of 10 percent with a maximum grade of 15 percent for lengths of no more than 200 feet. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.6). Intersections and turnarounds shall be level (maximum 5%)/ with the exception of crowning for water run-off. / / File Number 11) PAINTED CURBS: Fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted yellow and marked"NO PARKING FIRE LANE"at \\\ each 25 feet. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. (UFC Sec.901.4.5.2) k12) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS-MINIMUM NUMBER OF FIRE HYDRANTS: The minimum number of fire hydrants for a building shall be based on the required fire flow prior to giving any credits for fire protection systems. There shall not be less than one(1) fire hydrant for the first 2,000 gallons per minute(GPM) required fire flow and one(1) additional fire hydrant for each 1,000 GPM or portion thereof over 2,000 GPM. Fire hydrants shall be evenly spaced around the building and their locations shall be approved by the Chief. (UFC Sec.903.4.2.1) 13) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS-FIRE HYDRANTS: No portion of the exterior of a commercial building shall be located more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant when measured in an approved manner around the outside of the building and along an approved fire appatatus access roadway. (UFC Sec.903.4.2.1) 14) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS-FIRE HYDRANTS: Fire hydrants for single family dwellings and duplexes shall be placed at each intersection. Intermediate fire hydrants are required if any portion of a structure exceeds 500 feet from a hydrant as measured in an approved manner around the outside of the structure and along approved fire apparatus access roadways. Placement of additional fire hydrants shall be as approved by the Chief. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.2) X 15) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall not be located more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec.903.4.2.4) 16) FIRE HYDRANT/FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 70 feet of a fire department connection (FDC). Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.5) FDC locations shall be as approved by the Chief. (1996 Oregon Structural Specialty Code, Sec. 904.1.1) 17)FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONS ON BUILDINGS: Fire department connections shall not be located on the building that is being protected. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.5) �/ /`18) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS-REQUIRED FIRE FLOW:, The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute(GPM)or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's office. (UFC Sec.903.3) 19) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS-REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single family dwellings and duplexes shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the structure(s)are 3,600 square feet or larger,the required fire flow shall be determined according to UFC Appendix Table A-III-A-1.(UFC Appendix III-A,Sec.5) 20) RURAL BUILDINGS-REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: Required fire flow for rural buildings shall be calculated in accordance with National Fire Protection Association Standard 1231. Please contact the Fire Marshal's office for special help and other requirements that will apply. (UFC Sec. 903.3) /21)ACCESS AND FIREFIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any other construction on the site or subdivision. (UFC Sec. 8704) 22) KNOX BOX: A Knox Box for building access is required for this building. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an application and instructions regarding installation and placement. 23) REQUIRED INSPECTIONS: Please contact the Fire Marshal's office at the appropriate times for inspection of the following: 124) PL--q-4-5c. ii-)8 T-1-- 12,0t, y,3 S 1. 0.2 c, l5- 7,1-2- df 7------A2 0 L/ J 1,z____ d , Nc,,_ ,e), S ;v2. t 6_ i 0, 7r/ 5-,9,—,_ 4-,y ;', frz (71..-tK- .-- 0 Y� /2�s ..,c. 25) AWcc: APPLICANT ❑ PLANNING DEPT ABUILDING DEPT Plan Reviewer Signature s REQUEST FOR COMMENTS � CITY OF TG ICiARD RECEIVED PLANNING Community Development Shaping (Better Community DATE: March 28,1991 APR 0 2 1997 TO: Brian Moore,PGE CITY OFTIGARD FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea[x3151 Phone:[5031639-4171 Fax:[5031684-7291 RE: SUBDIVISION[SUB)91-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(PDRI 91-0001 ZONE CHANGE[ZONI 91-0001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR)91-0001 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION A request for the following development applications: 1. Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map; and 4. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer line within the 100-year floodplain. LOCATION: 10520 SW North Dakota Street; WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. The property is situated west of the intersection of SW Tiedeman Street and SW North Dakota Street, on the south side of SW North Dakota Street. ZONE: Residential, 12 Units Per Acre; R-12. The R-12 zone allows single-family attached/detached residential units, multiple-family residential units, residential care facilities, mobile home parks and subdivisions, public support services, family day care, home occupation, temporary use, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.88, 18.84, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and 8 decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Monday -April 7, 1997. 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: �• q (lease provide the following information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: I Phone Number's): - SUB 97-0002 / DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS , CITY OF TI TIGARD RECEIVED PLANNING Community Development S(rapingA Better Community APR 01 1997 DATE: March 28,1991 CRY TIG� 0 TO: Tigard Police Department Interim Crime Preventjon Officer —L-1) FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea[x3151 Phone:15031639-4171 Fax:[503)684-7291 RE: _ SUBDIVISION(SUB)91-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R Rl 91-00._— ZONE CHANGE[IONI 91-0001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR]91-0001 r DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION < A request for the following development applications: 1. Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map; and 4. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer line within the 100-year floodplain. LOCATION: 10520 SW North Dakota Street; WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. The property is situated west of the intersection of SW Tiedeman Street and SW North Dakota Street, on the south side of SW North Dakota Street. ZONE: Residential, 12 Units Per Acre; R-12. The R-12 zone allows single-family attached/detached residential units, multiple-family residential units, residential care facilities, mobile home parks and subdivisions, public support services, family day care, home occupation, temporary use, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.88, 18.84, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Monday -April 7. 1997. 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: Q/Wt L eN,1,L2- I9- " - ,4 Please provide the fotrowing information)Name of Person's)Commenting: I Phone Number's]: 0-67.6. ,r,9 ) I SUB 97-0002 I/ DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 4 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS M CITY OF TIGARD Community cDeve(opment Shaping Better Community DATE: March 28,199/ TO: ,Roy,Property Manager . �' FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea(x315) Phone:(5031639-4171 Fax:[5031684-7297 RE: SUBDIVISION(SUB)91-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[PDRI 91-0001 ZONE CHANGE(ZON)91-0001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR)91-0001 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION A request for the following development applications: 1. Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map; and 4. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer line within the 100-year floodplain. LOCATION: 10520 SW North Dakota Street; WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. The property is situated west of the intersection of SW Tiedeman Street and SW North Dakota Street, on the south side of SW North Dakota Street. ZONE: Residential, 12 Units Per Acre; R-12. The R-12 zone allows single-family attached/detached residential units, multiple-family residential units, residential care facilities, mobile home parks and subdivisions, public support services, family day care, home occupation, temporary use, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.88, 18.84, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Monday -April 7, 1997. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: / We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: V 1 bt (Please provide the fo&ywing information)Name of Person(s)Commenting: Phone Numher(s): 1 SUB 97-0002 J DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY TIlGARD Community Deve(opment Shaping)/Better Community DATE: March 28,1991 TO: David Scott,Building Official FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea 1x3151 Phone:15031 639-4171 Fax:1503)684-7297 RE: SUBDIVISION(SUBI 91-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[PORI 91-0001 ZONE CHANGE[ZONI 91-0001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW ISLRI 91-0001 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION A request for the following development applications: 1. Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map; and 4. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer line within the 100-year floodplain. LOCATION: 10520 SW North Dakota Street; WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. The property is situated west of the intersection of SW Tiedeman Street and SW North Dakota Street, on the south side of SW North Dakota Street. ZONE: Residential, 12 Units Per Acre; R-12. The R-12 zone allows single-family attached/detached residential units, multiple-family residential units, residential care facilities, mobile home parks and subdivisions, public support services, family day care, home occupation, temporary use, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.88, 18.84, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Monday -April 7, 1997. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: (� ) 4- i //'#r/7/ Ow nee GJ/O('fAI/Oh I lClrtof rt 74/dry 4i l4 R i71 41n T Is, 4H C �r t4/1 r��,b,�.. k �v 744., ev1r.li'r era iI rim e0.1•4 v�_,._jc}J (L ) a:4f �l,t/ f e'yr 4 w e� ei ti/PI,"iot 7/ C3 ) fir.,r M r41 "*?e ( f, .n r (e: r. ,-/t 1 4n.w/ corn, :. 21 I 4//.t.,, `Q y 6, p e v",, x 7/3, /ras. 4) 7i L-t 1,1 f 4 b4 1,14,/,./ Le h i'Y r P,64// !'°y j,`y c. �/ 7/, , 11,1,f6 t�. JL 1.I dam,r.f (1.744. �S ) 4 1( t N 1144i∎7 j 7►o,!1 O-e oiler /er ea' '1t C7 e/ 4-../1 u ill,e" /-v 412-""•'''A) L ',T4 eteJ/L1�i 1')� 1,,,y< ret- 71 ,1 fJ�f'✓f•II�. �� 71� ,pt. 1. )t V- 4! di4 lot (Tlease provide the foffawing information)Name of Person[sl Commenting: /// I Phone Number[sl: I SUB 97-0002 / DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OFTIGARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community DATE: March 28,1997 TO: Per Attached FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea(x315) Phone:(5031639-4171 Fax:15031 684-7297 RE: SUBDIVISION[SUB)97-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[PDR)97-0001 ZONE CHANGE(ZON)97-0001/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR)97-0001 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION A request for the following development applications: 1. Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map; and 4. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer line within the 100-year floodplain. LOCATION: 10520 SW North Dakota Street; WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. The property is situated west of the intersection of SW Tiedeman Street and SW North Dakota Street, on the south side of SW North Dakota Street. ZONE: Residential, 12 Units Per Acre; R-12. The R-12 zone allows single-family attached/detached residential units, multiple-family residential units, residential care facilities, mobile home parks and subdivisions, public support services, family day care, home occupation, temporary use, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.88, 18.84, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: Monday -April 7, 1997. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written comments provided below: '► (Please provide the fon-owing information)Name of Persons)Commenting: I Phone Number(s): I SUB 97-0002 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL/REQUEST FOR COMMENTS , REQUEST FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION UST FOR LAND USE a DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS C(T Ares: (CI (El ts] (WI CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS 4:1 Mace ter ravtow la Library ClT Boektsl FILE NAME Ti f itigadta2 (J1. ) L FILE NM. 3W3 e `C2 CITY OFFICES - n ,____ ADVANCED PLANNING/Nadine Smith,P,....psp..,,,.._COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./.0...%vs r.d,„.ssAs a„.T./c, .v.�l� L BUILDING DIV./David Scott,er,....yoek.a ENGINEERING DEPTJBnan Rager,o4..,a.,,,.,,e, .., . -WATER DEPT./Michael Miller.o,.,.an.M...,., _CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,clR.cord., `OPERATIONS DEPT./John Roy,pr...rryM.np., _OTHER SPECIAL DISTRICTS k TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE _TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT , NIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY Fire Marshall Administrative Office Lee Walker,SWM Program Washington County Fire District PO Box 745 155 N. First Street (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 PO Box 4755 Planning Director 2501 SW First Avenue 775 Summer Street, NE Beaverton,OR 97076 PO Box 369 PO Box 59 Salem,OR 97310-1337 Tualatin,OR 97062 Portland.OR 97207 _Larry Conrad,sem(mu..r _OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. _Mike Matteucci,Nf.phbad coact METRO _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street.NE 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem.OR 97310-1380 CITY OF DURHAM Portland.OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 City Manager US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. w PO Box 23483 _Mary Weber,Grm tAarrauemni CoarOmn« _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.d.DVLP. 333 SW First Avenue Durham,OR 97281-3483 _Mel Huie,Grs.nspaus Co!.1. or(CPA's20AS) 1175 Court Street,NE PO Box 2946 Salem,OR 97310-0590 Portland.OR 97208-2946 _CITY OF KING CITY _METRO AREA BOUNDARY COMMISSION City Manager 800 NE Oregon Street _OREGON DEPT.OF TRANS.(ODOT) WASHINGTON COUNTY 15300 SW 116th Avenue Building$16.Suite 540 Aeronautics Division Dept.of Land Use&Trans. King City,OR 97224 Portland.OR 97232-2109 Attn: Tom Highland.Ptwvq 155 N. First Avenue 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350. MS 13 _CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO _OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY Salem.OR 97310 Hillsboro,OR 97124 Planning Director Bonneville Power Administration PO Box 369 PO Box 3621 _ODOT, REGION 1 _Brent Curtis(cpAs) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 Routing TTRC-Attn: Renae Ferrera Sonya Kazen,own.Rim cows. _Scott King(CPAs) Portland,OR 97208-3621 123 NW Flanders _Mike Borreson(Env...,, _CITY OF PORTLAND Portland.OR 97209-4037 _Jim Tice(GA',) David Knowles,punning eore,u o. _OREGON, DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY _Tom Harry(current P, App.) Portland Building 106, Rm. 1002 811 SW Sixth Avenue _ODOT, REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A _Phil Healy(Current Pt apps) 1120 SW Fifth Avenue Portland.OR 97204 Jane Estes,P,,,,uscimawil Portland.OR 97204 PO Box 25412 Portland.OR 97298-0412 II11LITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES _BURLINGTON NORTHERN R/R _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO. _TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Administrative Office Jason Hewitt Clifford C.Cabe.Construction Engineer Kim Knox.Protect Planner 1313 W. 11th Street Twin Oaks Technology Center 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard 710 NE Holladay Street Vancouver,WA 98660-3000 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Portland,OR 97232 Portland,OR 97232 Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 _COLUMBIA CABLE COMPANY _TCI CABLEVISION OF OREGON _US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Craig Eyestone 'NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY Linda Peterson Pete Nelson 14200 SW Bngadoon Court Scott Palmer 3500 SW Bond Street 421 SW Oak Street Beaverton-OR 97005 220 SW Second Avenue Portland.OR 97201 Portland,OR 97204 Portland.OR 97209-3991 GENERAL TELEPHONE ; Paul Koft,Engineenng ZPORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY MC: 0R030546 Brian Moore Tigard,OR 97281-3416 14655 SW Old Scholls Ferry Road Beaverton,OR 97007 h pattyvnasters■tcnoace me 7-Feb-97 MAILING / NOTIFICATION RECORDS Albs AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OF.111' o Community Decefopment Shaping_-i,Better Community STA 1tL- OAF OREGON ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Patricia L Lansford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for The City of Tigard, Oregon. • That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED ❑) PUBLIC HEARING FOR: MINN rarowaIwrnra) W MruaucWaaIatel {cbsct obauxiata box balm) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ri Tigard City Council . That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED ❑) DECISION FOR: (OM rs about rrallr s) City of Tigard Planning Director • That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED ❑) FINAL ORDER FOR: Cana I=sem I miladM) {cbect apprsurtate box below} ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission r Tigard City Council • That I served OTHER NOTICE OF FOR: A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICEIS) of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A", wag mailed to ea ; namgd person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit"B", o?,#he . !1� •-y of /, . J C 199/, and deposited in the United States Mail on the i i` iJ da - ..144, 199_; postage prepaid. 'I Ag A - -, ' - .4 )11 pared Notice ' I Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the -4 day of , 19z2 ti ,/ ♦�*�,, OFFICIAL SEAL Jj DIANE M JELDERKS ` `' " NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON �:`4;o COMMISSION NO 04614? NO Y PUBLIC OF OREG MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBEP,�, - ' Mit ommission Expires. i c7/2X, _ FILE INFO_ ?-7 Cla"Mk 71Ag 1 7—CA'PD4 `'7-t-C oN `f7---6i ' 9:7-61=lawn 7)./A-4-4 Ittmcf4i i, EXHIBIT A CITY T1 10ARD r ommuntty,Development SFtaping)1,Better Community CITY OF TIGARD r Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 97-02PCc=> BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Case Number(s): SUBDIVISION (_SUB) 97-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(PDR) 97-00011 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW(SLR) 97-0001NARIANCE (VAR) 97-00011 ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 97-0001 Case Name(s): DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION Name of Owner: Beacon Homes Name of Applicant: Alpha Engineering. Attn: Mike Miller Address of Applicant: 9600 SW Oak Street. Suite 230 City: Portland State: Oregon Zip: 97223 Address of Property: 10520 SW North Dakota Street City: Tigard State: Oregon Zip: 97223 Tax Map & Lot No(s).: WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. Request:—> 1. The applicant has requested Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer and storm drainage line within the 100-year floodplain; 4. Variance approval to allow a cul-de-sac to serve 25 lots, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum number of lots served by a cul-de-sac shall be 20 lots; and 5. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. Zone: Residential, 12 Units Per Acre; R-12. The R-12 zone allows single-family attached/detached residential units, multiple-family residential units, residential care facilities, mobile home parks and subdivisions, public support services, family day care, home occupation, temporary use, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.88, 18.84, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.134, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. Action: —> ❑ Approval as requested 0 Approval with conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: 0 Owners of record within the required distance 0 Affected governmental agencies 0 The affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator 0 The applicant and owner(s) Final Decision: 9> THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON MAY 14,1997 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact. decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Anneal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290 (B) and Section 18.32.370, which provides that a written appeal may be filed within ten (10) days after notice is given and sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee(s) of $1,745.00 plus transcript costs, not in excess of$500.00. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 3:30 P.M.ON WEDNESDAY MAY 14,1997. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. SUB 97-0002 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION (COVER SHEET) NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE P C. CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION ` ~' CITY OF TIGARD FINAL ORDER NO.: 91-02 PC Community Depefopment • Shaping Better Community A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SUBDIVISION, ZONE CHANGE, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, VARIANCE, AND SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW. SECTION L APPLICATION SUMMARY CASES: FILE NAME: DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION Subdivision SUB 97-0002 Planned Development Review PDR 97-0001 Zone Change ZON 97-0001 Sensitive Lands Review SLR 97-0001 Variance VAR 97-0001 PROPOSAL: The applicant requests the following development applications: 1. Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging in size between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer and storm drainage line within the 100-year floodplain; 4. Variance approval to allow a cul-de-sac to serve 25 lots, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum number of lots served by a cul-de-sac shall be 20 lots; 5. A second Variance to allow a 430-foot cul-de-sac, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum length of a cul-de-sac shall be 400 feet; and 6. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. APPLICANT: Alpha Engineering OWNER: Beacon Homes 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 9500 SW 125th Avenue Portland, OR 97223 Beaverton, OR 97008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium Density Residential; 8-12 Dwelling Units Per Acre. ZONING DESIGNATION: R-12 (Residential, 12 Units per acre). LOCATION: 10520 SW North Dakota Street; WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. Located west of the intersection of SW Tiedeman Street and SW North Dakota Street, on the south side of SW North Dakota_Street. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 1 OF 27 APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.84, 18.88, 18.92, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.134, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.4, 4.2.1, 7.1.2, 7.3.1, 7.4.4, 7.6.1, 8.1.1 and 8.1.3. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission has APPROVED the proposal subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY. UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED, THE STAFF CONTACT FOR ALL CONDITIONS IS BRIAN RAGER WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, (503) 639-4171. 1. Prior to approval of the final plat, a public improvement permit and compliance agreement is required for this project. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. Once redline comments are addressed and the plans are revised, the design engineer shall then submit nine (9) sets of revised drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public improvement plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address, and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. 3. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all grading for the dwellings, all on-site private utility installation (water, sewer, storm, etc.) and all private street/driveway construction. NOTE: This permit should be obtained in conjunction with the public improvement permit issued by the Engineering Department. 4. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. 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. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002JPDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 2 OF 27 5. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of SW North Dakota Street to increase the right-of-way (ROW) to 30 feet from the centerline. The description shall be fled to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 6. The applicant shall construct standard half-street improvements along the frontage of SW North Dakota Street adjacent to the developed portion of this project. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section from curb to centerline equal to 20 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. curb; D. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey subsurface runoff; E. five (5)-foot concrete sidewalk; F. street striping; G. streetlights as determined by the City Engineer; H. underground utilities (NOTE: the applicant may be eligible to pay a fee in-lieu of undergrounding existing overhead utilities); street signs (if applicable); J. driveway apron for the private street; and K. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW North Dakota Street in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 7. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall deposit funds with the City for the future improvement of SW North Dakota Street adjacent to Tract N (the greenway/open space tract adjacent to Fanno Creek). The amount of the funds shall be determined by the City Engineer from a review of an estimate prepared by the applicant's engineer. The estimate should be based on a half-street improvement and need not consider any future grade change of the roadway in association with the City's future bridge project to the east. The funds will be placed into a specific account with the City so they can be used for the street improvement of SW North Dakota Street associated with the bridge project. 8. The private street(s) within the project shall be constructed with a pavement section that meets the City's local residential street standard. 9. A profile of SW North Dakota Street shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 10. The applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the final plat to indicate that the proposed private street(s) will be jointly owned and maintained by the private property owners who abut and take access from it. 11. 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 prior to approval of the final plat. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 3 OF 27 12. The public sanitary sewer design shall be laid out such that, all manholes within the project are within paved access areas and accessible by City maintenance vehicles. 13. The applicant shall dedicate to the City on the final plat, a public sanitary sewer and access easement for the proposed public sanitary sewer line. 14. The applicant shall submit a final design of the proposed private water quality facility. This design should be part of the site improvement permit submittal that will be reviewed by the Building Division. Calculations for this facility should be submitted to Brian Rager in the Engineering Department for review. 15. The applicant shall include a section within the CC&R's for the project regarding the private water quality facility. This section should specify how the property owners should maintain the facility. 16. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings (for the Engineering permit), as well as the site improvement drawings (for the Building Division site improvement permit). The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994." 17. A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of the lots that are to be "pad" graded to insure that the drainage is directed to the private street or private storm system approved by the Building Division. A soils report shall be provided detailing the soil compaction requirements consistent with the requirements of Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). 18. The applicant shall provide a geotechnical report, per Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC, for the proposed grading slope construction. The recommendations of the report shall be incorporated into the final grading plan. A final construction supervision report shall be filed with the Building Division prior to occupancy of any of the dwelling units. 19. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW North Dakota Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, it shall be paid prior to approval of the final plat. 20. Revised site and landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the Planning Division. Staff Contact: Will D'Andrea. The revised plans shall include the following: A. adjust the property lines of lots 6-17 so that no portion of the floodplain is within the lots; B. a minimum five (5)-foot side yard setback for lot 25; C. a minimum eight (8)-foot garage setback for all lots; D. no patios or footings for decks; E. impervious surface/landscaping calculations that demonstrate that a minimum of 20 percent of the site is landscaped; F. fifteen (15)-foot pedestrian easement, located within the 100-year floodplain, and outside of the delineated wetland; DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 4 OF 27 G. street trees to be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart along both SW North Dakota Street, and the proposed private street; H. buffering and screening in accordance with Community Development Code Section 18.100.080.(D) and (E) within the west and south buffer area; and tree mitigation of 91 caliper inches, in accordance with Community Development Code Section 18.150.070.D. Staff found a slight discrepancy between the arborists tree mitigation chart and sheet 1 of the preliminary plans that identifies the location and size of existing trees. The discrepancy is the with the number of 14-inch, 16-inch, and 18-inch caliper trees on the property, and the total numbers being removed. The arborist shall clarify the discrepancy and revise the mitigation plan if necessary. 21. The applicant shall provide findings that show that the approval criteria of Community Development Code Section 18.84.040.A are satisfied. If findings cannot be provided, a revised plan shall be submitted that shows the floodplain area will remain undisturbed. 22. Provide deed restrictions which restrict use of the floodplain area, provides maintenance of the floodplain storage capacity, and maintains the area in its natural state. 23. The applicant shall obtain the necessary, permits, as applicable, from the Division of State Lands and Army Corps of Engineers. 24. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall include in the CC&R's for this project, to be recorded with the final plat, a deed restriction to the effect that, any preserved tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. This shall be in accordance with Community Development Code Section 18.150.045.B_ 25. Plans approved by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. 26. Plans reviewed and approved by the City of Tigard Police Department for addressing and signage. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT, THE FOLLOWING CONDITION SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (503) 639-4171.) 27. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with one (1) recorded mylar copy of the subdivision/partition plat. 28. Prior to issuance of any building permits within the subdivision, the public improvements shall be deemed substantially complete by the City Engineer. Substantial completion shall be when: 1. all utilities are installed and inspected for compliance, including franchise utilities; 2. all local residential streets have at least one lift of asphalt; 3. any off-site street and/or utility improvements are completely finished; and 4. all public street lights are installed and ready to be energized. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 5 OF 27 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS, THE FOLLOWING CONDITION SHALL BE SATISFIED: (Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact shall be WILLIAM D'ANDREA with the CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION at (503) 639-4171.) 29. All site improvements installed per the approved plans. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; THIS IS NOT AN EXCLUSIVE LIST: 18.160.170 Improvement Agreement: 1. Before City approval is certified on the final plat, and before approved construction plans are issued by the City, the Subdivider shall: A. Execute and file an agreement with the City Engineer specifying the period within which all required improvements and repairs shall be completed; and B. 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 subdivider. 2. The agreement shall stipulate improvement fees and deposits as may be required to he 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. 18.160.180 Bond: 1. As required by Section 18.160.170, the subdivider shall file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one of the following: A. An irrevocable letter of credit executed by a financial institution authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon; B. 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 C. Cash. 2. 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. 3. The subdivider shall not cause termination of nor allow expiration of said guarantee without having first secured written authorization from the City. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-00012ON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 6 OF 27 • 18,160190 Filing and Recording: 1. 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. 2. Upon final recording with the County, the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 18.162.080 Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: 1. Three copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. 2. 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. 3. Street centerline monumentation shall be provided as follows: A. Centerline Monumentation 1. 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. 2. The following centerline monuments shall be set: a. All centerline-centerline intersection points. b. All cul-de-sac center points. c. Curve points, beginning and ending points (PC's and PT's). 3. All centerline monuments shall be set during the first lift of pavement. B. Monument Boxes Required 1. Monument boxes conforming to City standards will be required around all centerline intersection points, cul-de-sac center points, and curve points. 2. The tops of all monument boxes shall be set to finished pavement grade. 18.164 Street & Utility Improvement Standards: 1. 18.164.120 Utilities A. 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. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-00012ON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 7 OF 27 2. 18.164.130 Cash or Bond rtequireci A. 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. B. 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. C. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.160.180. 3. 18.164,150 Installation: Prerequisite/Permit Fee A. No land division improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the plans therefor have been approved by the City, permit fee paid and permit issued. 4. 18.164.180 Notice to City Required A. Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. B. If work is discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. 5. 18.164.200 Engineer's Certification Required A. 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: No development applications were found to have been filed with the City. Vicinity Information: Property to the north and south are zoned R-12 (Residential, 12 units per acre) and is developed with multi-family residential structures. Property to the west is zoned R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units per acre) and is developed with single-family residences. Property to the east is zoned I-P (Industrial Park) and is developed with industrial buildings: DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 8 OF 27 Site information and Proposal Description: The 4.5 acre property is currently developed with a single-family residence. The property slopes southeasterly from an elevation of approximately 166, to an elevation of approximately 150. Fanno Creek runs in a north-south direction along the easterly property line. The elevation of the 100-year - floodplain is approximately 160 feet. The total floodplain area constitutes approximately 2.6 acres. A wetlands delineation has also determined that there is a delineated wetland that is below the elevation of the 100-year floodplain. The applicant is proposing the following development applications: 1. Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging in size between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer and storm drainage line within the 100-year floodplain; 4. Variance approval to allow a cul-de-sac to serve 25 lots, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum number of lots served by a cul-de-sac shall be 20 lots; 5. A second Variance to allow a 430-foot cul-de-sac, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum length of a cul-de-sac shall be 400 feet; and 6. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. SECTION IV: APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Impact Study: Section 18.32.050 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.32.250 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. An impact study was not provided with the application. Any required street improvements to certain collector or higher volume streets and the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) are mitigation measures that are required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32% of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. Presently, the TIF for each trip that is generated is $169.00. The total TIF for an attached, single-family dwelling is $1,690.00. The applicant has proposed to construct half ('/:) street improvements on SW North Dakota Street. The applicant is proposing to construct half street improvements for approximately 239 feet. The DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 9 OF 27 remaining 167 feet of frontage (adjacent to tract "N") is proposed to be paid through non- remonstrance agreements. Staff has recommended not accepting the non-remonstrance agreements and has required the applicant to essentially pay for the improvements through some type of bond or similar type of fund. Staff will, therefore, estimate the cost of half-street improvements for the total • 406 feet of frontage on SW North Dakota Street. Southwest North Dakota Street is designated as a Minor Collector Street facility that is designated to accommodate traffic from adjoining local neighborhoods to access Major Collector and Arterial Streets. The Engineering Department has estimated the cost of half street improvements to be approximately $200.00 per lineal foot. This conservative estimate was determined from current bid tabulations. Assuming a cost $200.00 per lineal foot, it is estimated that the total cost of the half ('/:) street improvements to SW North Dakota Street is $81,200.00 (406 ft. x $200). Based on past City purchases of residential property for street ROW, residential property is assessed at $2.00 per square foot. The applicant is being required to dedicate an additional ten (10) feet of right-of-way along SW North Dakota Street. Assuming a cost of $2.00 per square foot, it is estimated that the total cost of the dedication is $8,120.00 (10 ft. x 406 ft. x $2). The total cost for dedication and improvements is a total of$89,320.00. Upon completion of this development, the future builders of the residences will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $42,250.00 ($1,690 x 25 dwelling units). 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 $132,031.00 ($42,250 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid, and the full impact, is considered an unmitigated impact. Since the TIF paid is $42,250.00, the unmitigated impact can be valued at $89,781.00. Since the cost of the dedication and half street improvement is approximately $89,320.00, the unmitigated impact could be reduced to $461.00. In order to provide connectivity through the block and allow for alternative modes of transportation in an effort to mitigate traffic congestion, the applicant has been conditioned to provide a 15-foot pedestrian easement. An easement is required in accordance with Section 18.164.040(B)(2). It should be noted that only an easement is being required, not dedication of property, with the City proposed to construct the pathway at a later time. The value of the land needed for a 15-foot-wide easement for a pedestrian path is approximately $3,650.00. This is determined by a need of approximately 7,950 (530 feet X 15 feet), based on the approximate length of a pathway through the property. According to the City of Tigard Park and Recreation Facilities System Development Charge Study (Draggo, Nov., 1994), the value of an acre of Sensitive Land is $20,000.00 per acre. The 7,950 square feet needed for the pathway is approximately .1825 acres. The value of this area is approximately $3,650.00. The total estimated cost of the dedication, half street improvements, and value of the easement is approximately $92,970.00. Given the estimated unmitigated impact of approximately $89,781.00, the difference in the conditioned items and the unmitigated impact is approximately $3,189.00. The rough proportionality test means that the conditions imposed must be "roughly proportional" to the impacts associated with a development. The test does not require a precise mathematical calculation. The test does not require a "dollar for dollar" exchange of conditions for impacts, nor does it require that the impacts outweigh or have a higher estimated value than the conditions imposed. The estimated costs (in this case, the street improvements and pedestrian easement) required of the applicant may be greater in estimated value than the value of the unmitigated impact. Although the requirements imposed have a slightly higher estimated value than the unmitigated DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 10 OF 27 impact, the City finds that the conditions meet the rough proportionality test. If the applicant did not provide for the pedestrian easements, pedestrian facilities would have to be provided through the development at the developers cost to meet the requirements of code section 18.164.040(B)(2). Dimensional Requirements: Section 18.54 states that the minimum lot area for each single- , family lot in the R-12 zoning district is 3,050 square feet and there is no minimum lot width requirement Although the applicant is proposing lots ranging between 950 and 2,848 square feet, this section is satisfied as the applicant is creating this subdivision through a Planned Development. The provisions of the Planned Development section (18.80) allows the creation of lots which are less than the minimum required by the underlying zone, provided that, the density provisions are not exceeded. Section 18.84.040.A.2 (Floodplain Approval Standards) states that land form alterations or developments shall only be allowed on commercial or industrial property. Section 18.26.030 (Definitions) defines "development" as a building or mining operation, making a material change in the use or appearance of a structure or land, dividing land into two (2) or more parcels, including partitions and subdivisions, as provided in Oregon Revised Statutes 92. Since a subdivision is defined as a development, floodplain property cannot be incorporated within a proposed subdivision on residential property. The proposed plan shows that portions of proposed lots 6-17 include floodplain property. A revised plan shall be submitted which adjusts the property lines of lots 6-17 so that no portion of the floodplain is within the lots. Development Standards: Section 18.54.050 contains standards for the R-12 zone. Single-family detached residential units are a permitted use in the zone, and must comply with the following dimensional requirements: Minimum lot size 3,050 Square Feet Average lot width No Minimum Front setback 15 Feet Garage setback 20 Feet Interior sideyard setback 5 Feet Corner sideyard setback 10 Feet Rear setback 15 Feet* Maximum building height 35 Feet Section 18.80.080 states that front and rear yard setback requirements in the base zone shall not apply to structures on the interior of the project except that a minimum front yard setback of 8 feet is required for any garage opening for an attached single-family dwelling facing a private street The side yard setback provisions shall not apply except that all detached structures shall meet the Uniform Building Code requirements for fire walls. Given the fact that none of the proposed structures (with the exception of lot 25) do not directly abut an adjoining development (as they are separated by a street or open space), all lots and structures are considered interior. Therefore, setbacks shall not be applicable, with the exception of the side yard of lot 25, and the eight (8)-foot setback requirement for garages with openings facing a private street. There is no sideyard setback provided for lot 25, therefore, a revised plan shall be submitted which provides a minimum five (5)-foot sideyard setback for lot 25. The applicant's narrative states that there will be 32 garage spaces associated with the units. A minimum of eight (8) feet is required for any garage opening facing a private street. As indicated on the site plan, the garages on lots 4,5,10,11,12,13,15,16,17 and 18 are not in compliance with the minimum eight (8)-foot setback. A revised plan shall be submitted which provides for a minimum eight (8)-foot garage setback for all lots. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 11 OF 27 Solar Access: Section 18.88.040(B) states that the solar access design standard shall apply to applications for a development to create lots in R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5, and R-7 zones and to create lots for single family detached and duplex dwellings in all other residential zones. The applicant's proposal will create lots for attached single-family residential structures, therefore, this section is not applicable. Density: Section 18.92.020 contains standards for determining the permitted project density. The number of allowable dwelling units is based on the net development area. The net area is the remaining area, excluding sensitive lands, land dedicated for public roads or parks, or for private roadways. The net area is then divided by the minimum parcel size permitted by the zoning district to determine the number of lots which may be created on a site. The gross area of the site is approximately 194,406 square feet. The gross area contained within sensitive land areas (floodplain) is approximately 115,322 square feet. The gross area of the site, minus the sensitive lands area. is approximately 79,084 square feet. The net developable area of the site (after deduction of 20% of the gross area for public right-of-way) is approximately 63,267 square feet. With a minimum of 3,050 square feet per lot, this site yields an opportunity for up to twenty (20) lots under the R-12 zoning designation. Transferring the seven (7) lots permitted to be transferred in accordance with section 18.92.030, the total maximum density allowed for this property is twenty-seven (27) lots. The applicant is proposing twenty-five (25) lots. The proposal is, therefore, in compliance with density calculations. Residential Density Transfer: Section 18.92.030 states that sensitive land area subtracted from the gross acres may be transferred to the remaining buildable land areas subject to the following limitations: 1) The number of units which can be transferred is limited to the number of units which would have been allowed on 25 percent of the unbuildable area if not for these regulations; 2) The number of units is limited to 25 percent of the total number of units which could have been constructed on the unbuildable area if not for these regulations; and 3) The total number of units per site does not exceed 125 percent of the maximum number of units per gross acre permitted for the applicable comprehensive plan designation. The gross area contained within sensitive land areas (floodplain) is approximately 115,322 square feet. The net developable area of this area (after deduction of 20% of the gross area for public right-of-way) is approximately 92,257 square feet. With a minimum of 3,050 square feet per lot, this area yields an opportunity for up to thirty (30) lots under the R-12 zoning designation. Allowing a 25 percent transfer of the total number of units which could have been allowed yields an opportunity to transfer seven (7) units onto the remaining buildable portion of the property. Residential Density Transition: Section 18.40.040 states that regardless of allowed housing densities stated in Chapters 18.44 through 18.58, or in Chapters 18.80, 18.92 or 18.94, any property within 100 feet of an established area shall not be developed at a residential housing density greater than 125 percent of the allowed density in the adjacent established area(s). For purposes of this limitation only, the allowed housing density is as specified in the comprehensive plan land use designation, not as in the zoning district. For example, the property within 100 feet of an established low density residential area (one to five dwellings per acre) shall not be developed at residential densities greater than 6.25 dwellings per acre (6.25 = 5 x 1.25). The proposed subdivision is adjacent to a designated "established" area along the west property line. The area within the transition zone is approximately 1.09 acres. The number of units allowed within this transition zone is seven (7) units (6.25 x 1.09). As indicated on the site plan, seven (7) units are proposed within this 100-foot transition area, thereby, satisfying this requirement. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 12 OF 27 Planned Development: Section 18.80 encourages development that recognizes the relationship between buildings, their use, open space, and accessways and thereby maximizes the opportunities for innovative and diversified living environments, while implementing the density range provided through the Comprehensive Plan. Section 18.80.080 states that the minimum lot size, lot depth and lot width standards shall not apply except as related to the density computation under Chapter 18.92. Section 18.80.080 also states that front and rear yard setback requirements in the base zone shall not apply to structures on the interior of the project except that a minimum front yard setback of 8 feet is required for any garage opening for an attached single-family dwelling facing a private street. Section 18.80.120(A) (Planned Development Review - Approval Standards) requires that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of other Community Development Code Chapters. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.92, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.160, 18.150, and 18.164. The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapters 18.96 (Additional Yard Setback Requirements), 18.98 (Building Height Limitations: Exceptions), or 18.144 (Accessory Use and Structures) which are also listed under Section 18.80.120.A.2. These Chapters are therefore found to be inapplicable as approval standards. Code section 18.80.120.A.3 provides other Planned Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These other standards are addressed immediately below. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of 18.80.120.A.3.e (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Residential Use) or 18.80.120.A.3.c (Privacy and noise) and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards as these criteria have been applied only to multi-family development. Relationship to the natural and physical environment: Section 18.80.120.A.3.(a) states that the streets, buildings, and other site elements shall be designed and located to preserve the existing trees, topography, and natural drainage to the greatest degree possible and that trees with a six inch caliper measured at four feet in height from ground level shall be saved where possible. The proposed lots and private streets will be located above the 100-year floodplain elevation, if the conditions of approval are followed. The floodplain and wetland area will be preserved. None of the structures will encroach within the floodplain, although a small area will be disturbed for the construction of a water quality facility. An arborist report has been submitted that addresses preservation of trees on the property. In accordance with Section 18.150, trees greater than 12-inch caliper will be mitigated. The proposed plan also includes new landscaping and street trees. Buffering. screening. and compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.80.120.A.3.b states that buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses. It also states that in addition to the requirements of the buffer matrix, the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy and extent of the buffer required under Chapter 18.100: (a) The purpose of the buffer, for example to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter dust, or to provide a visual barrier; (b) The size of the buffer needs in terms of width and height to achieve the purpose; (c) The direction(s) from which buffering is needed; (d) The required density of the buffering; and (e) Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile. This section shall be satisfied as addressed in the Buffer Matrix (18.100.130) section. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 13 OF 27 Private outdoor area: residential use: 18.80.120.A.3.(d) states that each ground level residential dwelling unit shall have an outdoor private area (patio, terrace, porch) of not less than 48 square feet and shall be screened or designed to provide privacy for the use of the space. The applicant shall submit revised plans that demonstrate compliance with outdoor private area in accordance with this section. The applicant's narrative states that each unit will include a private patio or porch area. It is not clear from the site plan if patios or porches are provided. The plan shows what could be construed as patios for lots 5-17, but the majority of these areas are within the 100-year floodplain. Section 18.84.040.A.2 (Floodplain Approval Standards) states that land form alterations or developments shall only be allowed on commercial or industrial property. Section 18.26.030 (Definitions) defines development as a building or mining operation, making a material change in the use or appearance of a structure or land, dividing land into two (2) or more parcels, including partitions and subdivisions, as provided in Oregon Revised Statutes 92. Section 18.32.030 defines a building as, that which is built or constructed, an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner. Therefore, patios are not allowed within the floodplain, nor would footings that support a deck. Landscaping and open space: 18.80.120.A.3.g states that within Residential Development a minimum of 20 percent of the site shall be landscaped. The applicant has not provided calculations regarding the amount of impervious surface and landscaping to be provided on the site, although the applicant has provided a number of tracts that will be used for this purpose. The applicant shall provide impervious surface/landscaping calculations that demonstrate that a minimum of 20 percent of the site is landscaped. Sensitive Lands: Floodplain: Chapter 18.84.040(A) states that the Planning Commission shall approve, or approve with conditions, an application request within the 100-year floodplain based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: 1. Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any narrowing of the floodway boundary. The plan shows that sidewalks, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and a water quality facility will be constructed within the floodplain. The applicant has not provided calculation or evidence of the amount of work being done within the floodplain, nor how this criteria shall be satisfied. The applicant shall provide evidence that this section can be satisfied or the applicant shall redesign the plan to avoid the floodplain. 2. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.42 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards. The subject project is in area designated as Residential on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use map. The sewer and storm related development in the floodplain area are considered a utility and is, therefore, allowed. The proposed future pathway and sidewalks connecting to the path are considered Community Recreation Uses and are allowed. None of the proposed residences, or access, or parking areas will be infringing within the floodplain. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 14 OF 27 3. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood. The applicant has not provided calculations or evidence of the amount of work being done within the floodplain, nor how this criteria shall be satisfied. The applicant shall provide evidence that this section can be satisfied or the applicant shall redesign the plan to avoid the floodplain. 4. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearing Officer as untimely. The Tigard Park Plan indicates that the floodplain area within this parcel is part of the proposed pedestrian pathway system. The City has identified funding of a path in this area through its Capital Improvement Program. The applicant has been conditioned to provide a 15-foot easement within the floodplain area. Staff, therefore, concludes that construction of a pathway is not timely and recommends that the applicant only be required to provide a 15-foot access easement to allow the City to construct a pathway in the future. 5. The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. This criteria is not applicable as a pathway will not be constructed in conjunction with this application. Further, a sensitive lands review will be required for the actual construction of the path and will be reviewed for compliance with this section. 6. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands approvals shall be obtained. The applicant shall obtain the necessary, applicable permits from the Division of State Lands and Army Corps of Engineers. 7. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. The applicant has been conditioned to provide a 15-foot access easement which is sufficient to provide for a pedestrian pathway, in accordance with the pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. While staff recognizes that residential development within the floodplain is not pem-iitted, and the property within the floodplain will, therefore, remain undeveloped. The City has contacted the property owner to discuss the potential purchase of Tracts "N" and "M" for park and open space. Such a purchase would leave the City with the responsibility of flood control maintenance, as well as, maintaining this area in its natural state. Otherwise, the applicant shall provide deed restrictions which restrict use of this floodplain area, provides maintenance of the floodplain storage capacity and maintains the area in its natural state. Landscaping: Section 18.100 contains landscaping standards for new development. The applicant must comply with the standards set forth in Section 18.100.035 which requires that all development projects fronting on a public or private street, or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length plant street trees. Street Trees: Section 18.100.035(B) states the specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shall be as follows: 1. 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; DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002JPDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 15 OF 27 2. Medium sized trees (25 reet to 40 feet tall, 16 feet to 35 met wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart; 3. Large trees (over 40 feet tall and more than 35 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no • greater than 40 feet apart. The preliminary plan shows the provision of Bowhall Red Maple and American Sweetgum trees, along the private street and a section of SW North Dakota Street, spaced approximately 40 - 45 feet apart. These types of trees are expected to grow to 40 feet in height and branch approximately 20- 25 feet. These trees fall within a medium sized tree classification. Therefore, the spacing of these trees shall be no greater than 30 feet apart. Therefore, a revised landscape plan shall be submitted that provides for street trees to be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart along both SW North Dakota Street and the proposed private street. Buffer Matrix: Section 18.100.130 contains the buffer matrix to be used in calculating widths of buffering and screening to be installed between proposed uses. The Matrix indicates that where attached single-family abuts detached single-family structures and attached dwelling units (2 or more stories), the required buffer and screening width shall be 10 feet. The proposed attached single-family development abuts detached single-family structures to the west, and attached residential to the south. A ten (10)-foot buffer and screening is required along the west and south property line. Section 18.100.080.D contains the minimum improvement standards for the buffering area. The minimum improvements within a buffer area shall consist of the following: 1) At least one row of trees shall be planted. They shall be not less than 10 feet high for deciduous trees and 5 feet high for evergreen trees at the time of planting. Spacing of the trees depends on the size of the tree at maturity; 2) in addition, at ieast 10 five gaiion shrubs or 20 one gallon shrubs shaii be planted for each 1000 square feet of required buffer area; 3) The remaining area shall be planted in lawn, groundcover or spread with bark mulch. A ten (10)-foot buffer has been provided along both the west and south property line. The west buffer area contains approximately 4,680 square feet and the south buffer area contains approximately 1,100 square feet. The west buffer area shall contain 40, five (5) gallon; or 80, one (1) gallon shrubs. The south buffer area shall contain ten (10), five (5) gallon; or 20, one (1) gallon shrubs, in addition to the row of trees. A revised plan shall be submitted that provides buffering in accordance with this section. Section 18.100.080.E states that where screening is required the following standards shall apply in addition to those required for buffering; 1) a hedge of narrow or broadleaf evergreen shrubs which will form a 4 foot continuous screen within 2 years of planting, or; 2) an earthen berm planted with evergreen plant materials which will form a continuous screen 6 feet in height within 2 years. The unplanted portion of the berm shall be planted in lawn, ground cover or bark mulch, or; 3) a 5 foot or taller fence or wall shall be constructed to provide a continuous sight obscuring screen. A revised plan shall be submitted that provides screening in accordance with this section. Visual Clearance Areas: Section 18.102 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30 foot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway and then connecting these two 30 foot distance points with a straight line. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, signs, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height. The height is measured from the top of the curb, or DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 16 OF 27 where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. As indicated on the site plan, this criteria is satisfied. Parkins: Section 18.106.030.(A ) states that each unit is required to provide 2 off-street parking spaces. Section 18.80.120.A.3.j (Planned Development:) allows up to 50% of the required attached single-family parking to be accommodated in common parking areas as long as each single-family lot contains at least one off-street parking space. Fifty (50) parking spaces are required for this development, with up to 25 spaces allowed in common parking areas. The applicant's narrative states that individual dwelling units will have attached garages, that there will be 32 garage spaces associated with the units, and that 21 guest spaces are being provided for a total of 53 parking spaces. This requirement is satisfied because each lot will provide at least one (1) parking space, and there are a total of 53 spaces on site. Access: Section 18.108.070.A states the minimum driveway required for each lot shall be 15 feet with 10 feet of pavement width. As indicated on the site plan, each lot will provide a minimum 10- foot-wide driveway. Emergency vehicle turnaround: Section 18.108.070.C. 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 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. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has required the applicant to submit revised plans for review and approval. The location of an emergency vehicle turnaround will be reviewed during this process. Variance - Maximum length and number of lots served by a Cul-de-sac: Community Development Code Section 18.134.050 provides standards for granting a variance as indicated in "bold" print below: The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, be in conflict with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity. The variance will not be materially detrimental to City policy or standards as the private street dimensions are in accordance with access standards. Plans must be approved by the Fire District, thereby, providing adequate emr-rgency access. A slight increase in the length of the street, as well as the number of units, will not diminish the ability of the street to provide adequate access. The variance will not be detrimental to other properties in the vicinity as the variance is limited to a 30-foot extension of the length of an approved cul-de-sac and five (5) additional lots. 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 special circumstances which exist are the surrounding development patterns that prohibit any potential connection to another public street, the location of the 100-year floodplain on the property, and the classification of SW North Dakota Street as a Minor Collector. Surrounding existing development patterns necessitate the provision of a cul-de-sac to serve this subdivision. The floodplain and street classification precludes the provision of another driveway onto SW North Dakota Street. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 17 OF 27 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 some economic use of the land. The requested variance will in no way affect the permitted use status of the single- family attached residential dwellings allowed. All other City standards will be maintained as discussed in this review process. 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 located as specified in this title. Existing natural systems, traffic, and drainage will not be effected by this variance since the impact of the variance is limited to allowing a slight increase to the length of the cul-de-sac and number of units served by this street. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The variance is not self-imposed as the variance is the result of surrounding development patterns that preclude street connectivity, the lot's depth that precludes the provision of a shorter cul-de-sac design, the location of the 100-year floodplain on the property, and the classification of SW North Dakota Street as a Minor Collector. Surrounding existing development patterns necessitate the provision of a cul-de-sac to serve this subdivision. The floodplain and street classification precludes the provision of another driveway onto SW North Dakota Street. The variance is the minimum variance necessary as the approximately 30-foot extension and allowance of an additional five (5) lots is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Tree Removal: Section 18.150.025 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a subdivision application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. An arborist report has been submitted with this application which identifies the trees on the property and provides recommendations for removal and retention. The report indicates that there are a total of thirty-five (35) trees greater than 12-inch caliper on the site. The proposed plan will be removing ten (10) trees greater than 12-inch caliper, for a total of 182 caliper inches. The applicant is retaining 72 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper and, is thus, required to mitigate 50 percent of the trees removed according to Section 18.150.025.B.2.c and 18.150.070.D. The applicant shall, therefore, prepare a plan detailing the mitigation of 91 caliper inches. Staff found a slight discrepancy between the arborists tree mitigation chart and sheet 1 of the preliminary plans that identifies the location and size of existing trees. The discrepancy is the with the number of 14-inch, 16-inch, and 18-inch caliper trees on the property and the total numbers being removed. The arborist shall clarify the discrepancy and revise the mitigation plan if necessary. Section 18.150.045.B states that, any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section may, thereafter, be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan according to Section 18.150.025 or 18.130.B., and shall not be subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property owner shall record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit impacted by this section to the effect that, such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. Subdivision Design: Section 18.160.060(A) contains standards for subdivision of parcels into four or more lots. To be approved, a preliminary plat must comply with the following criteria: DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002JPDR 97-00012ON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 18 OF 27 1. The proposal must comply with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the applicable zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations. The proposed subdivision complies with the Comprehensive Plan Map's Medium Density Residential opportunity for the site, as well as, with the applicable policies and regulations of the R-12 zone and other applicable ordinances and regulations. 2. The proposed plat name must not be duplicative and must otherwise satisfy the provisions of ORS Chapter 92. The proposed name of the subdivision "Dakota Meadows" is not duplicative of any other plat recorded in Washington County. 3. Streets and roads must be laid out so as to conform to the plats of subdivisions and maps of 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. The site does not abut properties with approved plats that would require conformity or connectivity. 4. An explanation has been provided for all common improvements. The applicant has provided an explanation for all common improvements including the provision for public services such as sewer, water, drainage, and street improvements. Street and Utility Improvements Standards: Section 18.164 contains standards for streets and utilities serving a subdivision. Improvements: Section 18.164.030(A) requires streets within and adjoining a development to be dedicated and improved based on the classification of the street. Southwest North Dakota Street is classified as a Minor Collector. The applicant has been conditioned to construct half street improvements to Minor Collector standards. The applicant will construct approximately 239 feet of frontage with the construction of the subdivision. The remaining 167 feet will be constructed in the future with the redesign of the bridge over Fanno Creek. The proposed private street will be designed in accordance with City standards. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.164.030(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-sac since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. Given the existing development pattern of surrounding properties, it is not necessary, nor possible, to extend the proposed street to provide for future connections or facilitate future division of adjoining land. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.164.030(G) requires all local 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. 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 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 19 OF 27 show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. This section is not applicable as there is no existing local street that abuts the property which would require extending to provide through circulation. Cul-de-sacs: Section 18.164.030(K) requires that a cul-de-sac shall be no more than 400 feet long nor provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units. The applicant has requested a variance to this standard to allow the cul-de-sac to provide access to 25 lots and a maximum length of 430 feet. This variance has been approved and is discussed in the variance section. Private Street: Section 18.164.030(S) states that design standards for private streets shall be established by the City Engineer and that private streets serving more than 6 dwelling units are permitted within planned developments. This section also requires a bonded maintenance agreement or the creation of a homeowners association to provide for the continued maintenance of the street in perpetuity. The private street design satisfies City standards. Lots 1-20 will be served by a 24-foot-wide paved accessway. Lots 23-25 will be served by a 28-foot-wide accessway with parking on one (1) side. The main entrance is a 28-foot-wide accessway with parking on one (1) side. The City allows local streets to be built with a 28-foot-wide pavement section with parking on one (1) side. The accessway will allow for a 20-foot unobstructed driving surface, consistent with Fire District requirements. Therefore, the proposed private street satisfies this section. The applicant has also been conditioned to provide for a bonded maintenance agreement or provide a homeowners' association for street maintenance. Block Design: Section 18.164.040(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 18.164.040(B)(1) states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: 1. Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or; 2. For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. 3. For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. This criteria is not applicable as the site is constrained from meeting the specified block perimeter due to existing development patterns and location of the 100-year floodplain. The block in this area is bounded by SW North Dakota Street, SW 115th Avenue, SW Tigard Street, and SW Tiedeman Avenue and is well in excess of 1,800 feet. Block Lengths: Section 18.164.040(B)(2) states that when block lengths greater than 600 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. The property is precluded from providing a street connection between SW North Dakota Street and SW Tigard Street. Since the block exceeds 600 feet, the applicant shall provide a pedestrian pathway connection through the block to provide connectivity with SW Tigard Street. A pedestrian pathway provided with the subject application would connect to an existing pedestrian pathway stubbed at the south property line. A pedestrian pathway is shown on the City Comprehensive Plan Park Plan to follow Fanno Creek. DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 20 OF 27 While the proposed subdivision plan could accommodate the required pedestrian pathway connection within the subdivision and satisfy this requirement, the City contends that provision of the path within Tracts "N" and "M" would provide a preferable location. This location is preferred given the path's linkage with pathways within the City of Tigard Open Space and Greenway System. The applicant is, therefore, conditioned to provide a 15-foot pedestrian easement for the purposes of mitigating traffic congestion by providing connectivity and the opportunity for alternative means of transportation. As previously discussed in section 18.32, the requirement for a pedestrian easement is roughly proportional. The City of Tigard has identified funding for the construction of a pedestrian pathway along this section of Fanno Creek in its Capital Improvement Program. The City will, therefore, be constructing the pedestrian way in the future. Since the City will be responsible for the construction of the pedestrian pathway, this code section is satisfied for purposes of this application. The City has contacted the owners to discuss the willingness of the owners to sell Tracts "N" and "M" to the City for park and open space. This discussion is outside the boundaries of this application and is unrelated to the standards and conditions within this report. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.164.060(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. As indicated on the site plan, all twenty-five (25) lots comply with this criteria. Lot Frontage: Section 18.164.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley, unless the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit, in which case the lot frontage shall be at least 15 feet. As indicated on the site plan all lots with the exception of Lot 12 comply with this standard. Sidewalks: Section 18.164.070 requires sidewalks adjoining all residential streets. As indicated on the site plan, a sidewalk is being provided along SW North Dakota Street and the main entrance of the private street, thereby, satisfying this standard. PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS: Sections 18.164,030(E)(1)(a) (Streets), 18.164.090 (Sanitary Sewer), and 18.164.100 (Storm Drains) shall be satisfied as specified below: STREETS: SW North Dakota Street This site is located adjacent to SW North Dakota Street, which is classified as a minor collector street on the City's Transportation Plan. The roadway is currently paved, but not fully improved to City standards. The right-of-way (ROW) at present measures 20 feet from centerline; a minor collector street requires 30 feet from centerline. TMC 18.164.030(E) requires the applicant to dedicate additional ROW to meet the minimum width standard. The applicant has indicated that they will dedicate the additional ROW to satisfy this requirement. The proposed project will increase the amount of traffic on the City's street system. In general, single-family development will add approximately ten (10) vehicle trips per day for every new lot, according to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). For this project, there will be approximately 250 new trips per day added to the system. This incremental increase in traffic DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 21 OF 27 warrants improvement to SW North Dakota Street. TMC 18.164.000(E) states that the applicant should be required to improve the street to meet current City standards. The applicant's plan indicates that they will provide a half-street improvement for the portion of the site frontage adjacent to the main developed area. However, there is a large area of the site that contains mostly 100-year floodplain and wetland adjacent to Fanno Creek that the applicant proposes to place within tracts to be dedicated to the City (Tracts N and M). The frontage of SW North Dakota Street, adjacent to Tract N, is not proposed to be improved by the applicant. The Engineering Department's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) calls for the future reconstruction of the bridge over Fanno Creek on SW North Dakota Street. This reconstruction will result in a need to raise the grade of the street on either side of the bridge. It appears that the portion of roadway adjacent to Tract N would be affected by that improvement. Therefore, Staff recommends that the applicant not construct street improvements along that portion of the site frontage. The applicant has proposed to enter into a Non-Remonstrance Agreement that would obligate the future property owners within the project to pay for the future widening of the street if it were improved as a part of a Local Improvement District (LID). Staff does NOT recommend this type of agreement because they do not work well for subdivisions, as they will affect future property owners that may, or may not, become aware of the agreement before they purchase the dwelling. Notice of the agreement will appear on a title report, but Staff has found that a very low percentage of citizens actually review a title report before buying a house. Because of this, Cities have a very difficult time in calling in this type of agreement because of the potential outcry from the citizens. In lieu of the non-remonstrance agreement, Staff recommends the applicant deposit funds with the City that will be used toward the future improvement of that portion of the street when the City the bridge.� TL: L has been between the bridge. I his option has been utilized between the City and other developers in the past where circumstances prevent the immediate improvement of the street. The City can set up a specific account for the funds so they will only be used for the construction of North Dakota Street. The applicant's funding obligation should be limited to a half-street improvement and an estimate would need to be submitted by the applicant's engineer to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Since the City does not yet have design plans developed for the bridge project, and therefore does not know the extent of the vertical grade change necessary for the street, Staff recommends the estimate for the half-street improvement be based on the existing grade of the street. The funds for the street improvement should be paid to the City prior to approval of the final plat. Proposed Private Street System The applicant's plan indicates the new residential units will be served by private streets with one (1) access onto SW North Dakota Street. Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 18.164.030(S) allows a private street to serve more than six (6) dwelling units if approved through a planned development. This project is being proposed as a planned development and will consist of attached row houses. This type of development usually includes maintenance agreements for certain features within the development, such as open space, driveways and landscaping. A private street is acceptable if the developer provides a mechanism for maintenance by the future property owners. Typically this is done through a homeowners' association and a maintenance agreement that will become part of the CC&R's that are recorded with the final plat. The applicant has indicated that they are willing to establish any necessary CC&R's and maintenance agreement to ensure that the private street system will be maintained by the property owners. These documents should be reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to approval of the final plat. The City's public improvement design DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002IPDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 22 OF 27 standards require private streets to have a pavement section equal to a public local street. The applicant will need to provide this type of pavement section. • WATER: There is public water available from a main line in SW North Dakota Street. The applicant's plan indicates that a new main line will be extended into the development to serve the new lots. SANITARY SEWER: Public sanitary sewer is available from an existing main line in SW North Dakota Street. The plan indicates that a new public main line will be installed within the private street system to serve all of the new lots. It will be necessary that all manholes along the new public sewer line be accessible to City maintenance vehicles. It appears that the proposed manhole behind Lots 22 and 23 will be outside of any paved area; this will need to be adjusted so the manhole will be within a paved access area. The applicant will also need to dedicate, on the final plat, a public sanitary sewer and access easement over the area where the public sewer line will be installed. STORM DRAINAGE: The applicant's plan indicates that the storm water from this project will be directed toward Fanno Creek, which is located along the eastern portion of this site. Storm water will be treated in an on-site private biofiltration swale that will then discharge into the creek. The applicant may need to obtain a Division of State Lands (DSL) permit for any work in the adjacent wetland area next to the creek. STORM WATER QUALITY: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of R&O 91-47. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. As stated previously, the applicant is proposing to treat the on-site water in a biofiltration swale. The preliminary calculations indicate the swale will need to be approximately 118 feet long. The plan provides this length. The construction drawings will need to provide a more detailed design of this facility. Since the facility will be privately maintained, the CC&R's should identify how it should be maintained by the property owners. GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL: USA R&O 91-47 also regulates erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per R&O 91-47, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-00012ON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 23 OF 27 prior to issuance of City permits. All grading work will be inspected by the Building Division as a part of the Site Permit (refer to the SITE PERMIT REQUIRED section that follows). • EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES: There are existing overhead utility lines adjacent to SW North Dakota Street. Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. SITE PERMIT REQUIRED: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water, sewer, storm, etc.), grading and private street/driveway construction. Even though this project is a "subdivision", which are usually inspected solely by the Engineering Department, it will contain a significant amount of private utilities and paved areas. The project will be very similar in construction to an apartment project. For this reason, the Site Permit is appropriate and necessary. This permit shall be obtained prior to approval of the final plat and should be obtained in conjunction with the public improvement permit as most of the work associated with the Site Permit will likely need to be constructed at the same time as the public improvements are constructed. APPLICABL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES Citizen Input: Policy 2.1.1 provides the City will assure that citizens will be provided an opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning and development review process. The subdivision is consistent with Policy 2.1.1 because a neighborhood meeting was held by the applicant, notice of the public hearing was provided to owners of property within 250 feet and was published in a newspaper of general circulation. Floodplains: Policy 3.2.2 states that the City shall allow land form alterations or development in the floodplain outside the zero-foot rise floodway which preserve or enhance the function of the zero-foot rise floodway provided the land form alteration and/or development is an area designated commercial or industrial on the Comprehensive Plan land use map. It appears that the 100-year floodplain elevation is approximately at the 160 foot elevation. The development shall occur outside of the 160 foot elevation. The applicant has applied for a Sensitive Lands Permit to place sanitary sewer, storm sewer, sidewalks, and a water quality facility within the floodplain area. The applicant has been conditioned to provide findings as to how the Sensitive Lands approval criteria are satisfied, thereby satisfying this policy. If the applicant cannot provide adequate findings, the plan shall be revised to demonstrate that no work will be done within the floodplain. Floodplains: Policy 3.2.4 states that the City shall prohibit development within areas designated as significant wetlands on the floodplain and wetlands map. No development shall occur on property adjacent to areas designated as significant wetlands on the floodplain and wetlands map within twenty five (25) feet of the designated wetlands area. Development on property adjacent to the significant wetlands shall be allowed under the planned development section of the code. This policy is satisfied as the delineated wetland is not designated as a significant wetland on the floodplain and wetlands map. The applicants proposed development will not require the filling of wetlands DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 24 OF 27 Water Quality: Policy 4.2.1 provides that all development within the Tigard urban planning area shall comply with applicable federal, state and regional water quality standards. Policy 4.2.1 is satisfied as the applicant shall be providing on-site water quality treatment, as required by Unified • Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-47. Public Utilities: Policies 7.1.2, 7.3.1 and 7.4.4 provides that the City will require as a condition of development approval that public water, sewer, and storm drainage will be provided and designed to City standards and that utilities shall be placed underground. Policies 7.1.2, 7.3.1 and 7.4.4 are satisfied because the developer is required to extend public sewer and water systems to this site prior to development. In addition, the developer is required to provide for underground installation of utility lines. Fire Protection: Policy 7.6.1 states that Fire District shall review all new development applications to ensure adequate fire protection is available to serve each new development. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue was provided with a copy of the development plan, in compliance with Policy 7.6.1. Street Improvements: Policy 8.1.1 provides that the City will plan for a safe and efficient street and roadway system that meets current needs and anticipated future growth and development. The subdivision proposal complies with Policies 8.1.1 and 8.1.3 because the proposed improvements should contribute to a safe and efficient street system in this area. The proposed SW North Dakota Street improvements are consistent with City of Tigard standards for collector streets. The internal street serving the subdivision shall also meet City standards in terms of design requirements for private streets. Street Improvements. Policy 8.1.3 states that the City will require the following as a precondition of approval: 1. Development abut a dedicated street or have other adequate access; 2. Street right-of-way shall be dedicated where the street is substandard in width; 3. The developer shall commit to construction of the streets, curbs, and sidewalks to City standards within the development; 4. The developer shall participate in the improvement of existing streets, curbs, and sidewalks to the extent of the development's impacts; and 5. Street improvements shall be made and street signs or signals shall be provided when the development is found to create or intensify a traffic hazard. The subdivision proposal complies with Policies 8.1.1 and 8.1.3 because the proposed extension of improvements to, and within the development, should contribute to a safe and efficient street system in this area. The private street serving the subdivision shall meet City standards in terms of design requirements. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: If constructed to a row house concept, provide the following: DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 25 OF 27 1. a homeowners' association in conjunction with a maintenance agreement for the commonly owned components; 2. the design complies with R-1 occupancy requirements; 3. structural projections such as, eaves and cornices are not allowed beyond property lines; 4. structures greater than three (3) units shall comply with the Uniform Building Code; and 5. all buildings must be interconnected with a sidewalk accessible to persons with disabilities, with route extending to the public way. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: The applicant shall submit a kiosk plan for review and approval. SECTION VL AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: Plans are not approved at this time. The applicant shall address the following plan notes and re- submit plans for review and approval: 1. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (15 feet for not more than two (2) dwelling units), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 teet 6 inches (UI-(..; Sec. 902.2.2.1). 2. Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. Diagrams of approved turnarounds are available from the fire district (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.4). 3. Where fire apparatus access roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway, and in turnarounds as needed (UFC Sec. 902.2.4). Signs shall read "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - TOW AWAY ZONE, ORS 98.810" and shall be installed with a clear space above ground level of seven (7) feet. Signs shall be 12 inches wide, by 18 inches high, and shall have black or red letters and border on a white background (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.(I)(2) & (3)). 4. Fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted yellow and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE at each 25 feet. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one (1)-inch-wide, by six (6) inches high (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.2). 5. The minimum number of fire hydrants for a building shall be based on the required fire flow prior to giving any credits for fire protection systems. There shall not be less than one (1) fire hydrant for the first 2,000 GPM required fire flow and one (1) additional fire hydrant for each 1,000 GPM, or portion thereof, over 2,000 GPM. Fire hydrants shall be evenly spaced around the building and their locations shall be approved by the Chief (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1). 6. No portion of the exterior of a commercial building shall be located more than 250 feet from a fire hydrant when measured in an approved manner around the outside of the building and along an approved fire apparatus access roadway (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1). 7. Fire hydrants shall not be located more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway (UFC Sec 903.4.2.4). DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-000120N 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 26 OF 27 8. The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available form the Fire Marshal's office (UFC Sec. 903.3). - 9. Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any other construction on the site or subdivision (UFC Sec. 8704). PGE has had the opportunity to review this application and has offered no comments or objections. SECTION VI. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION It is further ordered that the applicant and the parties to these proceedings be notified of the entry of this order. PASSED: This al/ day of April, 1997 by the City of Tigard Planning Commission. (Signature box below) Nick Wilson, Pla ing Commission Chair I:\CURPLN\WILL\SU897-02.DFO DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-C001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 27 OF 27 7,..,; T T OBNIDI I - I Pi! 1 I ; i i 3 . , .. : 1 ; i 1 i ■ i 4 : / 1 i rri . i e , i i , i , ! 1 1 i / x . . , 1 j L - - -_ _ I ______„. __..... , -- ___.- ,----- i w - SW 105T11 AVENUE -' J rn — J 1 -I T I ••fl W a,.. - • Z _ I _• • . r _ - ___ I J A •4 1 I '••• •.•:.:•..:...:•..:•..:..•.••.•.•.•.•:..•....:•.•.•:•.•.•:•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•...•.„.....0 • a g 2C co a .... ........„ ,................................................ . ..... .............r-........ .74,1 • el I v,;:-., ,.................................................................................._„, ... . q 2 3 r ..._,.., :.:... '..:.. .. . .'.' IIJ it s . ..... . . . . . .. .00 •......................................................... 4.,,., "CO . .i L..r ••SI limb—.'.im..it d�r•lb.ur..•on..S.••...".�.•eemus a5Ism. • �•� . • , .... ..w..r. MILD.. ; . mat • CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION i EC it s We le — — — — — • t— $W MIIT1 UNITA STOUT -,..�..,�. — . --- ....a.u_.t La......ts,„4.2.t-..iir..-- TE.t 1MA,„mooala l..win I. I I ; • �� b�1 ■ 1 - Ir•• r. . , !I.` • ! Es r `7 s __e II //:::::‘ , , .4, .1'4,1 5 I 0 0 4472 F • rr +" 1 d )9TSO. 'r LOT P I • ; _ H2 r • • I LOT 4 1+T1,0 - - +wsr LLpp ND I. iiRACT 'Or RSet11I _ - awn v»rame...»no or.er • Z iiii • �0,t•. i" ri'i r z Z�_ ACT 'W' a I? *kip 111 hgoT �r o» :r.�e er n. .a ! O In I "11111,1 TRACT S r. A. 2000 S t I. - _ - • CO LOT 1 i �J I-------I I r •.0 - � ' torte I• LOT 1e1' I • �. r 1 • i I • 1TRACT 'N 9. , L. sr. I r • I I I • I .540 S r � I _ I • 1_..T_rT r I • L 0 +T 7 r I • (.• � LOT 21 ` • G -Ii.- i w.osr . ■ z • -- use `'20 /' TRACT 'A/• / • u+eo s r OMNI • I TRACT 1 I . • Z • n . Q• L J • I I-8:L? I . .- , r r 7 , / ( a t iLOT 24 r' I L.• • r +x Sr = ' • 1T i LOT 26 • r • p • I 2+•.s r r 2 I N ■I I •~Ter■t=4 / O !' LEGEND r F....,..; .-. 4 V — — 4- SW n�uo sTM�r -o— — i lie 1 kr i NOTES. /I 1 10T11 1 •„ +[$O dIIM / I T11ACT••••A/O Y PRIAT!•TKR. TRACt• •C'-1• OM•AC! TACT• Y MO X TO K(YWCA TIM TO TV MTV / •1 i ii I 1 SUB 97-02/POR 91-01/ SITE PLAN 97-01/SLID 97-01 T 1 EXHIBIT MAP N I DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT” "Exhibit B" Alpha Engineering SUB 97-0002/PDR 91-0001/10N 07-0001/SLR 97-0001 Attn: Mike Miller DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Portland, OR 97223 [Page 1 of 11 Beacon Homes 9500 SW 125th Avenue Beaverton, OR 97005 Pasquale Pascuzzi Pascuzzi Investment, L.L.C. 10250 SW North Dakota Street Tigard, OR 97223 Bill Parks, Division Resource Coordinator Oregon Division of State Lands 775 Summer Street, NE Salem, OR 97310-1337 Monika Lew 11315 SW 105th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Dennis B. Catmull 11348 SW 105th Place Tigard, OR 97223 h:\patty\docs\SUB 97-02.Ibs TIGARD COMMISSION PLANNING CO MISSION d_ CITY Of TIGARO OREGON NOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME AND NOTE THEIR ADDRESS ON THIS SHEET...(Please PRINT) AGENDA ITEM #:,j. ( Page l of , DATE OF HEARING: `- /al /4 7 ICASE NUMBER(S): SC(tei 7-0 cco), /?Df q -GOt iISLie 1 7-CCDI /Vhtg q7 e i, I OWNER/APPLICANT: ,f/ I I ZCn% 6i 7 -LTC LOCATION: I C5, C &L) N c'1 f(\ Dti kcj‘;•-' PLEASE''PRINT YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, AND INCLUDE YOUR ZIP CODE PROPONENT (For the proposal) OPPONENT (Against the proposal) =_===-- ____=- -_- (Print Name 1Address)Zip &Affiliation) (Print Name/Address/Zip&Affiliation) Name: Name: MO rti ' L�s,...) Address: Address: )F2.i S �G..) if-,S‘ pia,„ Citv/State/Zip: Citv/StatelZip: 't } a rvrA, . C P 9 7 3 .,.- J Name: Name: wtiitf-S =' 'D `r-win i Address: Address: k Cge ‘ ` n 6.47 ql Citv/StateJZip: CitvBtate/Zip: \ \ r^ ��A.-nY `�(. I Name: Name: Address: Address: - Citv/State/Zip: Citv/State/Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: Citv/State/Zip: Citv/StatefZiD: Name: Name: Address: Address: Citv/State/Zip: City/State/Zit): h:\loo,\ognuppc-m.t • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING .4 4,' CRY OF TIOARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community STATE OAF OXEGON ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) I, Patricia L Lansford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specialist II for The ity of Tigard, Oregon. That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED ❑) PUBLIC HEARING FOIL - / 1 ca•aM.r....Imean} (!itsr public huh Miter public Wel Mel I {check eopnorlatte hex below} ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director G Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission E Tigard City Council ❑ That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED ❑) DECISION FOR: (Ma M.mMmm uomec.ro City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ That I served NOTICE OF (AMENDED ❑) FINAL ORDER FOR: lama MI Mum smuarm) {check ep(011112te hex below} ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ That I served OTHER NOTICE OF FOR: A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICE'S) of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A_", yvap mailed to e- .Airrne4 person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exbiib ", on the _ •eAg �� 199!, and deposited in the United States Mail on the /-'--c---. da • /Ay-.,di 199L ge prepaid. itaii .MysrAW Prepared Notice W . V/ Q Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the ? day of a..... , 19/1 +... OFFICIAL SEAL .,) if '�r!•r* DIANE M JELDERKS 1 /AIL Ni;" NCOOMMISS COMMISSION 046142 / MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07,1999 NOT •Y PUBLIC OF ORE6 My Commission Bon . : ,, C : lust6 /�D /Rqi dl L.l�. /T 0, U,111c e, �k:-Dak(X i4iet izosc I / ORIBIT CITY OF TIGARD Community(Development Shaping Better Community PUBLIC NEARING NOTICE I NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, APRIL 21. 1997 AT 7:30 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO: SUBDIVISION (SUB) 97-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(PDR) 97-0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW(SLR) 97-0001NARIANCE (VAR) 97-0001/ ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 97-0001 FILE TITLE: DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION APPLICANT: Alpha Engineering OWNER: Beacon Homes Attn: Mike Miller 9500 SW 125th Avenue 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 Beaverton, OR 97005 Portland, OR 97223 REQUEST ➢ 1. The applicant has requested Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer and storm drainage line within the 100-year floodplain; 4. Variance approval to allow a cul-de-sac to serve 25 lots, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum number of lots served by a cul-de-sac shall be 20 lots; and 5. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. LOCATION: 10520 SW North Dakota Street; WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. The property is situated west of the intersection of SW Tiedeman Street and SW North Dakota Street, on the south side of SW North Dakota Street. • APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.88, 18.84, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.134, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. ZONE: Residential, 12 Units Per Acre; R-12. The R-12 zone allows single-family attached/detached residential units, multiple-family residential units, residential care facilities, mobile home parks and subdivisions, public support services, family day care, home occupation, temporary use, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.31 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. SUB 97-0002 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF 4/21/97 P C PUBLIC HEARING ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRIT 7N TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTON MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORA ESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY. CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION AFTER MARCH 31. 1997, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAY$ AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AND ALL PARTIES TO RESPOND PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT WHICH A COMMENT IS DIRECTED PRECLUDES Ail APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NQ COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (250 PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (250 PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER WILLIAM D'ANDREA.AT(503)639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. 11%_1 W\ finis' ;_ • ,W.4""r. • I • 111111-) sues CT \, i • • . ABC U-��` �,, II Imo` i wair t a sr • Akilk N ( \‘' ' ANNA SUB 97-0002 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF 4/21/97 P .PUBLIC HEARING 5 ua 94-c /PIE-97--: Vzolv97--ago,/ -000) 0O7)4t.64D9AL5,ste5, (41, / 04=4) vocoo 1S134DA-04200 �+- 1 SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION CO. BROOKS,SUSAN a+ 10557 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST Clifford C. Cabe, Construction Engineer TIGARD,OR 97223 5424 SW McLoughlin Blvd. Portland OR 97202 1S134DA-04300 1S134DA-05500 BROWN,REBECCA E CATMULL,DENNIS B&PAULA 10551 SW NORTH DAKOTA 11348 SW 105TH PL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S134DA-03300 1S134DA-05600 COOKSON,WILLIAM V DAILEY,DALE E&SANDRA L BETTY L 11343 SW 105TH PL 10520 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 134 DA-00100 1 S 134 DA-03600 DBSI PACIFIC INCOME& FITZGERALD,SANDRA J GROWTH FUND-II 10587 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 1070 N CURTIS RD#270 TIGARD,OR 97223 BOISE,ID 83706 1S134DA-03700 1S134DA-05700 HOLMAN,SCOTT W LAMB,JOHN B&TWILA D 16018 WALUGA DR 11315 SW 105TH PL LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 TIGARD,OR 97224 1S134DA-05800 1S135CB-00300 MARTIN.SHARI R MERLO STATION PARTNERS 11293 SW 105TH PL P O BOX 23516 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 134 DA-05400 1 S 134 DA-05300 MILLS,DONALD R AND NANCY ANN NEWCASTLE HOMES INC 11310 SW 105TH PL PO BOX 23291 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1S1 34 DA-06000 1S1 34 DA-03400 NODAK OWNERS OF LOTS 1-7 PASCUZZI INVE T LLC RT 5,BOX 62 10250 RTH DAKOTA SHERWOOD,OR 97140 T RD,OR 97223 1S135CB-00200 1S135CB-00400 PASCUZZI INVESTMENT LLC PASCUZZI,ARTHUR 10250 SW NORTH DAKOTA PASCUZZI,PAT TIGARD,OR 97223 10250 SW NORTT DAKOTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 1S134DA-03000 1S134DA-05900 PATECKY,KENNETH F REID,MICHAEL EVAN&JAN MICHE 4014 ROSE ST 11221 SW 105TH PL VANCOUVER.WA 98660 TIGARD,OR 97223 54 ' 97--tea PD&I 7-owl/51-x2 -u9c) 3L S, ( , 2 o F 2 l —mot/ �H9 ) 1S134DD-00100 1S134DD-00102 RICHARDS,JAMES E&SHARON S SCHAEFER,DONALD M&MILYNN 0 .44 N KENSINGTON ST PO BOX 23697 'ASTORIA,OR 97103 TIGARD,OR 97281 1 S 134DA-03500 1 S 134DA-03900 SCHOENK,WILLIAM A THALER,TODD A&ANNETTE 10593 SW NORTH DAKOTA 10575 SW N DAKOTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 134DD-00103 1S134DA-00302 TIGARD,CITY OF VENABLES,JOHN V AND 13125 SW MEYERS-VENABLES,VICKI J PO B 3397 7120 SW 60TH AVE ARDOR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97219 1S135BC-01200 1S134DA-00300 WASHINGTON SQUARE INC WEIS,C L 700 FIFTH AVE STE 2600 11180 SW 106TH AVE SEATTLE,WA 98104 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 134 DA-04100 1 S 134 DA-04000 WILLIAMS,JAMES ESSEL WILLIAMS,JAMES ESSEL 10569 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST 10569 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 ,TGARD,OR 97223 1S134DA-00400 WITHROW,PAMELA JEAN 11150 SW 106TH TIGARD,OR 97223 ALPHA ENGINEERING MIKE MILLER 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 Portland OR 97223 Beacon Homes 9500 SW 125th Avenue Beaverton OR 97005 , \ L 1 IVM' ] IP Vir#OPir...„, lig 40 : pi iiiipin& 11.�� . -* Ip 1111114, -' . WNDS•,' ,}a I'll 111,...,01 LIR • 0 ___________ C iiiiiiii ir. rioira , WINDS e: i ir al g : pi 1R 0• a. 0 NUKIh UAK IA 5I 1-7i SU CT 7 \\N c . _______ C — ___.--- g-- PA CEL---> ;:- N C CO J - 0. IPI Mt-1 A d 7--.,t Co TIGARD ST I 4PPAIIII Ali o ....la >, . ...., U MEADOW,i ST ..,,, � Vicinity Map N SUB 97-0002 Note: Map is not to scale Dakota Meadows Subdivision Q •. ■, AMp 1 2" WNDS•.' , V It% Oa i W NDS..:.PL- C rill co .I C. IN mi64 ,s, ..... i • • ..M111 1..11111141 isi ••.-ucirmiiiiiwiege• 8 NORTH OAK A S r CD c •_ 1'' .. �� ,St • ""� 161340A-033M Co 1S134Dh03400 16135034:02C0 i c . e:,. . e. cr , •r::�� 13136C8-00400 CL 1111 mCi 0) • 0 151340D-00,00 151340D00173 Emml © 1S131DD.W1Q2 L ff^ O VJ / TI GARD ST Ammi U Vicinity Map SUB 97-0002 Note: Map is not to scale Notification Map N 0 . SUBDIVISION APPLICATION If . 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 CITY OF TIGARD l ' k PRE-APP. HELD WITH: A W/ !� A P ::; • GENERAL INFORMATION DATE OF PRE-APP.: Property Address/Location(s): ( DSZ© FOR STAFF USE ONLY NortH p A � � Case No.(s): t i" COO >- /eCN Tax Map &Tax Lot#(s): [�° X71 �' Other Case No.(s): � on- , tiS\--Ni( 0 3 ,e' ----I1ok Receipt No.: 97- a i0 4/3 q '5G/2 G17-G( Application Accepted By: �e h Q7 Site Size: Alit ' ,�r� PP P Y Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)*: moo.-, . ; 5 4 Date: /U Address: 616720 6Gs) /2c4 Phone: 24 //5'Y City: / - -6--- 04. Zip: q 7 O r Date Determined To Be Complete: Applicant': Address: Phone: Comp Plan/Zone Designation: City: Zip: When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant CIT Area: must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written Recording Date and Number: authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owner(s) must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. Rev.ES/31/96 i.curpin\rnasterslsubapp doc PROPOSAL SUMMARY The owners of record of the subject property request Subdivision { approval to divide a: REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS l{ _parcel into 25 lots between v Application Elements Submitted: 1/5 b and "`s'quare feet in size. ❑ Application Form Zg ❑ Owner's Signature/Written Authorization ❑ Title Transfer Instrument or Deed (provide any additional information t]�re) ❑ Site/Plot Plan (8'1/2�"x 11") 1 . � 1/ 5 ) ZQ( ' (#of copies based on pre-app check list) .+! — i� ❑ Applicant's Statement , •19),417 rRir (#of copies based on pre-app check list) ❑ Filing Fee (Preliminary Plat)....$2,125.00 �� y (+$10 Per Lot)ii, Ario '''' (Final Plat) $ 295.00 D011 If lipl r �i [i hr i_ -- - . --- 1 ,_ i List any VARIANCE OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: APPLICANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as described on the front of this application in the"Required Submittal Elements" box. (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request, for all types cf Land Use Applications.) THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject property, • If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, may be revoked if it is fcund that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property. DATED this day of _ , 19 C-- X .1.• 4 Owner's ignature / Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 z 1 ALPHA ENGINEERING, I744TEL 4RAMMOV u ft Engineering • Development Services • surveying 9600 S.W. OAK STREET SUITE 230 PORTLAND, OREGON 97223 • DATE 3 _ 10 ATTENTION 9 ^ JOB NO. :(503) 452-8003 FAX (503) 452-8043 r f _ TO , i F .17 l ve RE: 4 WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑ Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints El Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION a-y 3-/()-_ 97 � ,� pA Rci tA VY\E ArtcxADs P tt■ fX c,/ T .vrr/ 4 199 .00 THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval /]:g(For your use ❑ Approved as noted CI Submit copies for distribution ❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO SIGNED: OAte, 711/1/41261/ If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once. 1 1 ' APPLICATION FOR ' SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ' SUBDIVISION For a 25-unit attached subdivision DAKOTA MEADOWS Submitted February 14, 1997 AEL141-018 tilt&1119321+E =MOM SCB 97-0002/PLR 97-0001/MN 97-0001/SCR 97-0001 APPLICATION FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SUBDIVISION For a 25-unit attached subdivision DAKOTA MEADOWS Submitted February 14, 1997 AE 1:141-018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Facts Page 2 General Information Page 3 Vicinity/Site Page 4 Proposal Description Page 5 Procedures Page 6 Zoning District Classifications Page 6 Overlay Districts Page 8 Supplemental Provisions Page 11 Development & Administration Page 14 Land Division & Standards Page 14 Summary Page 15 Appendices A Subdivision Application B Affidavits of Posting and Mailing Notices C Preapplication Notes D Title Report/Assessor's Map/Legal Description E List of Surrounding Owners F Water Quality and Hydrological Analysis G Submittal Plans DAKOTA MEADOWS FACTS: Applicant: Beacon Homes 9500 S.W. 125th Avenue Beaverton, OR 97005 Owner: Peter Kusyk Owner: Beacon Homes 9500 S.W. 125th Avenue Beaverton, OR 97005 Owner: Peter Kusyk Development Consultant: Alpha Engineering Inc. 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 Portland, OR 97223 Project Manager: Mike Miller Location: 10520 SW North Dakota Tigard, OR Tax Lot: Tax Lot 3300 and 3400 of Map 1S1 34DA Applicable Code Criteria: Community Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40,18.54, 18.80, 18.84, 18.88, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106,18.108, 18.114, 18.144, 18.150, 18.160, 18.164 DAKOTA MEADOWS Page 2 I: GENERAL INFORMATION: A development approval request for Site Development Review and Planned Development approval to allow the construction of a 25-lot subdivision as a Planned Unit Development. Background Information: The existing site is about 4 1/2 acres and accommodates three structures including a single family house, a garage, a stable. The current use of the property is a single family residence with limited gardening and horse pastures in the higher areas with the remaining lower portion of the site in its undisturbed natural state. The proposed development will redevelop the site with five "town home buildings in character and scale with the neighborhood. Each building will consist of between four and seven individual dwelling units. Individual dwelling units will have attached garages and will include a private patio or porch area. The project is designed as a "For Sale" project with each of the 25 individual town homes being plotted on separate lots. The residential lots will range in size from 950 square feet to 2848 square feet. This plan dedicates approximately 2.3 acres of open space to the City of Tigard in order to allow the City to complete a regional bicycle trail and open space linkage along Fanno Creek. As the existing trail segments on either side of this project are actively used by many bicycle commuters, dedication of this open space will enable the City to complete this significant regional linkage. In addition to the City dedication, another 3/4 acre of common open space lots will be reserved as common open space to serve the residents of the project. The total open space proposed on the entire property including the City dedication will comprise over 2/3 of DAKOTA MEADOWS Page 3 SF rsEe -to L)5E ? l l a -F A-1 EA-4 o CI-Do/4),J) C'Ti-lX- /57 - t NG/Scu Co L rz-r c't FE C- 5. Z- iy (-25 ,pp//c4, ?s N ,fre, 41141 DrS�ht-5- fLoY ICE) rc-T rte! .64c-1/i-/ie5, L,P �e-D -«,4r) 7 �o the original acreage of the property. Upon approval of the Preliminary Plat and accompanying Planned Development permits, it is the applicant's intent to immediately finalize construction plans and to build the project. Vicinity Information: The project is located within walking distance to a major recreational and natural amenity---Fanno Creek. Fanno Creek incorporates a bicycle and pedestrian trail for much of its length through Tigard and into Beaverton. The Dakota Meadows project is also fairly close to a major regional shopping center. Washington Square with its theaters, restaurants, and shopping is just across Interstate 217 to the northeast. Lincoln Center, a significant office and employment complex is two blocks to the south of Washington Square. The land uses immediately surrounding the project site are varied. An apartment project is located to the north, and another one to the south, single family houses to the west, and industrial to the east. The addition of an attached residential enclave would provide moderately priced housing opportunities in an urban neighborhood. The proposed subdivision would offer an alternative form of housing in an area which currently contains predominantly single family units. The project is accessed directly from North Dakota Street which runs east/west, and consists of a 20' wide section of asphalt with no curbs or sidewalks. Site Information: The site contains 4.45 acres and has 406' +/- of frontage along the front boundary (North Dakota Street). The lot depth averages about 478'. The site slopes gently to the east, falling at about 1% fall across DAKOTA MEADOWS Page 4 the western "plateau" portion of the site then falling a little more steeply toward the flood plain on the eastern side. The eastern edge of the property is roughly defined by Fanno Creek. There are several clusters of trees located throughout the property, most of which will be preserved in the proposed plan. All of the trees within the flood plain area will be preserved. As well, a cluster of trees, shown in "Tract H" on the Subdivision Plan are proposed to be retained as a focal feature and neighborhood amenity centered on the project entry. Proposal Description: The applicant proposes to construct five buildings: one tri-plex, a four-plex, a five-unit building, a six-unit building and a seven unit building; resulting in 25 dwelling units on a 25 lot subdivision. Almost 2/3 of the site will be in open space, with 3/4 of the total open space being retained in its undisturbed natural state. Several private streets (Tracts "A" & "B") will serve the project providing access to the units, garages and parking bays. Resident parking is, accommodated within the units in garages, with guest parking for the most part being parallel parking. A network of sidewalks will provide pedestrian access to each unit and throughout the project, as well as connecting the project to the surrounding neighborhood. Project sidewalks will also be linked to the bicycle trail which is proposed to be built by the City. The nature of the site, it's location, and the underlying density all fit the criteria for submitting this application as a Planned Unit Development. This will permit the applicant to design more compact lots, thereby preserving the maximum amount of open space, while achieving a reasonable density. DAKOTA MEADOWS Page 5 //ctrra,1/2-'ve II: PROCEDURES FOR DECISION MAKING 18.32: QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING The applicant is submitting a proposal in complete 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 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 Planned Unit Development is consistent with the underlying zoning requirements and all relevant City ordinances and standards. The applicant requests that all proceedings be compiled into a single action in accordance with section 18.32.100. III: ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATIONS & REQUIREMENTS 18.40.040: RESIDENTIAL DENSITY TRANSITION This code provision is applicable to this project as the adjacent uses and zoning are established as a low density residential area (not to exceed 5 units per acre). According to the code: "...any property within 100 feet of an established area shall not be developed at a residential housing density greater than 125% of the allowed density in the adjacent established area(s)". Accordingly, the project was designed to not exceed 125% of the adjacent uses to the west: Area within Transition zone (100' X 476' = 47,600 or 1.09 acres) Maximum density in Transition Zone (125% of 5= 6.25 units per acre) Maximum number of units within Transition Zone (6.25 X 1.09=6.8) DAKOTA MEADOWS Page 6 There are no more than 6.8 units (or 125% of the adjacent established zone density) proposed to be within 100 feet of this established adjacent use or zone. 18.54: R-12 MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL The property is fully within the R-12 Multi-family Residential Zone as established by the City of Tigard. The purpose of the R-12 Land Use designation is in part to establish sites for single family attached residential developments. The proposed use is permitted outright under section 18.54.030 18.54.050: DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS The proposed development site will comply with the dimensional requirements as laid out in section 18.62.050, specifically: Setbacks Other Requirements Front Yard 15 feet Min. Lot Size 3050 sf** Side Yard 5 feet Min. Lot Frontage 25 feet** Street Side 10 feet Max. Height 35 feet Rear Yard 15 feet Max. Width/Depth 2.5/1 Garage 20 feet* There are several exceptions to the above dimensional criteria which are specifically included the zoning code to accommodate attached projects. The following clarifications apply to this project and are correlated with the relevant code provisions: *Under provisions of Section 18.80.080.0 of the Tigard Zoning Code, only an 8 feet setback is required from a private street to the garage, which is as is shown on the proposed plan. **As permitted by Section 18.80.080.A-1, which applies to planned developments, "the minimum lot size, lot depth and width shall not apply except as related to the density computation...". Density calculations will be fully Page 7 DAKOTA MEADOWS addressed in section V, Supplemental Provisions, 18.92.020. IV: OVERLAY DISTRICTS 18.80: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT The applicant is proposing to develop this project as a Planned Development. The intent of the Planned Development is to provide the means for creating a planned environment through the application of flexible standards which result in superior residential development. In order to enable the efficient use of land and to promote an economic arrangement of land use, special provisions are made for buildings, circulation systems, open space and utilities that maximize the site's development potential. The Planned Development designation also permits the applicant to create a development that maximizes the opportunity for an innovative and diversified living environment. The applicant's intent of providing home ownership on this site is most suited through the use of attached town home units, with each unit being on its own lot. A Planned Development provides the applicant with the flexibility to create individual lots that are smaller than the minimum lot size as long as the provisions of the density computation are met. Density calculations are discussed in more detail in Section 18.92. In accordance with Section 18.80.060 Planned Development Allowed and Disallowed of the Tigard Municipal Code, this project meets criteria 1 through 3 under subsection B. As outlined below: B. A planned development shall not be allowed in residential zones located in areas designated as "Established Areas" on the Comprehensive Plan map except, the Commission may approve a planned DAKOTA MEADOWS Page 8 development within an "Established Area"where the Commission finds: 1. Development of the land in accordance with the provisions of the "Established Area" would: a. Result in efficient use of land; or b. Result in removing significant natural resources; or c. Result in a change of character of the area surrounding a significant historic feature or building; 2. The planned development approach is the most feasible method of developing the area; and 3. The site is of a size and shape that the compatibility provisions of Chapter 18.92 can be met. Specifically, development of this property under the provisions of the Planned Development overlay district is warranted due to the following findings: 1) It results in efficient use of the land. Under standard subdivision regulations, this zone only permits minimum lot sizes of 3,050 square feet. The planned development regulations allow for flexibility in lot sizes, which has enabled the applicant to achieve a more efficient lot layout, yielding 12 additional units. 2) Significant natural resources were preserved. A standard subdivision would have resulted in the loss of significant resources namely a stand of existing trees within the developable area, which the applicant was able to preserve under the provisions of the planned development overlay district. DAKOTA MEADOWS Page 9 3) The planned development approach was the most feasible method of developing the land. It was not feasible to develop this project with only 13 lots, therefore the planned development approach which attains 25 units was the only feasible approach. 4) The compatibility provisions of Chapter 18.92 have been met. As is explained in more detail in this section of the application, all density calculations/computations have been met for this project. 18.84: SENSITIVE LANDS OVERLAY DISTRICT A portion of this site has been designated with a Sensitive Lands Overlay. There are known wetlands and a significant area of the site is encompassed by flood plains. These sensitive areas have been delineated by a biologist and have been surveyed and mapped and are shown on the attached Site Analysis Map. A wetlands report will be submitted under separate cover. The wetlands area and its associated buffer are wholly contained within the flood plain. No development, or structures are proposed within these Sensitive Lands areas or within the wetland buffer. Consequently permitting of sensitive lands is not required. As allowed outright by Section 18.84.015 accessory uses such as lawns, gardens, removal of noxious vegetation, such as blackberries, and installation of fences are permitted; except in the floodway. These permitted uses and maintenance items are proposed on the plans for the project Alpha Engineering, will assure the proposed water quality along with the associated utilities will meet compliance with all applicable agencies. A storm water analysis is included in the appendices of this narrative. 18 .88: SOLAR ACCESS This section is not applicable to the Dakota Meadows project as none of the units proposed are duplex or single family units. Page 10 DAKOTA MEADOWS V: SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) (ORS 660- 12) requires that all municipalities revise their code to meet the TPR, and that in the event that said revision not be made that any new development be required to comply with said Statute. The City of Tigard has enacted such changes in its code. Many of the relevant portions of the code that have had a direct affect on this application have only recently come into effect. Substantial changes to the code are to be found in Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 18.106 (Parking & Loading), Chapter 18.108 (Access, Egress & Circulation), Chapter 18.164 (Street & Utility Improvement Standards). 18.90: ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The applicant understands that compliance with state, federal, and local environmental regulations is the continuing obligation of the property owner, and will abide by the applicable standards. 18.92.02: DENSITY COMPUTATIONS According to the Residential Density Calculation provisions within 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 3050 square feet. The net area is derived by subtracting any sensitive lands, public right-of-ways, and private streets from the gross acreage. The density computations for Dakota Meadows are as follows: Page 11 DAKOTA MEADOWS Net Area Calculation Gross Square feet 194,406 minus Sensitive Lands 115,322 minus Public Right-of-ways 2,400 minus Private Streets 21,660 equals Net Area subtotal 55,024 Plus Density Credit * of 25% of Sensitive Lands 28,831 Total Net Acreage 83,855 Maximum Number of Units 83,855 (Net Area) divided by 3050 (Min. Lot size) = 27 *Permitted by 18.92.030 (Residential Density Transfer) 18.96.020: ADDITIONAL SETBACK FROM CENTERLINE REQUIRED In conjunction with this code provision, a 30 foot building setback from the centerline of North Dakota has been incorporated into the plan proposal. 18.100.030: STREET TREES As the public street as well as the private street is more than 100 feet in length, the developer will be required to plant street trees in accordance with this section. The specific standards listed in section 18.100.35 shall dictate the spacing, size, as well as other specifications inherent to planting of street trees. 18.100.070: LANDSCAPING & SCREENING Street trees will be planted along the developed portion of the project's frontage on North Dakota Street, and along the entire length of the internal private streets, as required under section 18.100.030, and detailed in section 18.100.035. No street trees are proposed along the portion of the property that fronts directly on natural open space in order to maintain views into the open space from the street for aesthetic as well as safety Page 12 DAKOTA MEADOWS and surveillance reasons. Buffering and screening is required between the proposed residential development and the surrounding lesser density single-family land use which exists to the east of the project. In accordance with 18.100.130 the Buffer Matrix, a 10 foot buffer with screening has been incorporated. Screening including landscaping, and fencing will be accomplished in compliance with 18.100.070 and 18.100.080, and as shown on the landscape concept plan. 18.102: VISUAL CLEARANCE AREAS Any future landscaping will be consistent with this section, ensuring the preservation of vision clearance triangles at the entrance from North Dakota Street, and at the internal private street junctions. 18.106: OFF-STREET PARKING Vehicle Parking: Parking will be accommodated adjacent to the proposed private street. Under Section 18.106.030 Al the applicant will provide at least 2 off- street parking spaces for each dwelling. As shown on the chart on the Site Plan drawing there will be 32 garage spaces associated with the units, and 21 guest spaces for a total of 53 spaces, resulting in an overall parking ratio of 2.12 spaces per unit. 18.108: ACCESS/EGRESS & CIRCULATION Vehicular Access: As required under section 18.108.040 all proposed lots have direct access to the proposed private street which is in turn accessed from North Dakota Street. No flag lots are proposed. Section 18.108.070A permits a pavement width of 20- feet to provide access for single family attached dwelling units on individual lots if built as a Planned Unit Development. DAKOTA MEADOWS Page 13 18.114: SIGNS The applicant shall ensure that any signs related to the name of the proposed development shall comply with the relevant standards of this chapter as they are applicable. VI: DEVELOPMENT & ADMINISTRATION 18.144: ACCESSORY STRUCTURES The location of mailboxes, and a lighting plan will be submitted with the Final Construction plans and upon further discussions with the City. 18.150: TREE REMOVAL While the design of this development strived to retain as many of the existing trees as possible it will be necessary to remove several trees to accommodate limited development. In accordance with the provisions of this code section a permit will be applied for the removal of any trees having a trunk over six inches or more in diameter, four feet above the ground. VI: LAND DIVISION & DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 18.160: SUBDIVISION The applicant will be subdividing the site into 25 residential lots. However, the proposed subdivision is being submitted in compliance with Section 18.80 (PUDs), and therefore is subject to the same restrictions, and conditions as set forth under this section of the Code. Therefore this section is not applicable. 18.164: STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS Streets: An additional ten feet of right-of-way width along the entire frontage will be dedicated to the City. Public street development proposed as a part of this DAKOTA MEADOWS Page 14 application will encompass the western 225 feet of half- street improvements above the 100-year flood plain. As the City has yet to formulate definite plans and funding for the improvements to the Fanno Creek bridge and associated roads and other improvements within the Creek's floodplain, the applicant hereby agrees to sign a non-remonstrance agreement for the purposes of the formation of a Local Improvement District to fund the street improvements fronting on this property within the flood plain at a subsequent date. The proposed layout will allow the City of provide pedestrian and bicycle access within the land to be dedicated to Tigard and to the link the proposed trail segment with the existing trails and open space networks. Sanitary Sewer: Sanitary sewer service is currently available from an existing line in North Dakota Street. The applicant will construct a single 8" line that will connect to an existing manhole within the street. Surface Water Run-off: Storm water run-off created by the new development in excess of the existing run-off will be intercepted and collected in a private water quality pond in combination with a biofiltration swale. The proposed storm facilities will be constructed in compliance with Resolution 91-47 whereby, the Unified Sewerage Agency and the City of Tigard have agreed to enforce Surface Water Management regulations requiring the construction of said facilities. Domestic Water & Fireflow: Adequate domestic water and fire flow is provided to the site from 8" line in North Dakota Street. An fire hydrant is proposed at the center of the project and is within 250 feet of all units. SUMMARY The proposed Planned Unit Development complies with all applicable elements of the Community Plan, and Development Code. It is also compatible with the Page 15 DAKOTA MEADOWS established neighborhood character within the City boundaries. Adequate public facilities and services exist to serve the development and all improvements will be constructed to City and other applicable standards. Page 16 DAKOTA MEADOWS Appevaix A ASUBDIVISION APPLICATION ��I�i 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 ITY OF TIGARD • PRE APP. HELD WITH: PA NERAL INFORMATION ! ��-r : DATE OF PRE-APP.: p . Property Address/Location(s): [ OSZo c7 FOR STAFF USE ONLY \t tH P/%-fati4 ! Case No.(s): Ta x Map & Tax Lot# � �j(s): � ?j Other Case No.(s): -1-76\- 4 10-ra rtrzc.t O Receipt No.: Site Size: ir• .14- / Application Accepted By: Date: operty Owner/Deed Holder(s)': ,A 5 L• I aog Address: v s7) (5(.4) 12-S--6'12-S--6'4/e- Phone: 2 /7// ry: 136--•' 10-- (94 Zip: q ?t90 r Date Determined To Be Complete: Anplicant -- - / / . ,dress: Phone: Comp Plan/Zone Designation: City: Zip: .'Vhen the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant CIT Area: must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written Recording Date and Number thorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owner(s) 1st sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. Rev.eaves i:'c In masterslsubapp.doc tOPOSAL SUMMARY The owners of record of the subject property request Subdivision E proval to divide a: REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS parcel into 25 lots between ✓ Application Elements Submitted: 1_ /'d and AiRgig square feet in size. ❑ Application Form I Z0'4 ❑ Owner's Signature/Written Authorization l ❑ Title Transfer Instrument or Deed (provide any additional information re) ❑ Site/Plot Plan (81/7-x 11-) l • 5 gQ() (#of copies based on pre-app check list) `.� ❑ Applicant's Statement --}� �� (#of copies based on pre-app check list) 'OP '�f 1— 'r�(i ❑ Filing Fee (Preliminary Piat)....$2,125.00 SW el y li, ' (+510 Per Lot) t ( (Final Plat) S 295.00 ■1116 v' -.4- ONAL .....„. ,,:,, _...e....4i, Aderillirjartia=00. Air ..,- 1 - I st any VARIANCE OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: • • PPLICANTS: consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as i ascribed on the front of this application in the "Required Submittal Elements" box. i ietaiied Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request, for all types of Land Use Applications.) APPLICANT(S)SHALL CERTIFY THAT: - The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject property, If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, may be revoked if it is fcund that any such statements are false. The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property. DATED this day of , 19 \ "-,vner's Signature Owner's Signature • ner's Signature Owner's Signature • • 2 2 f AppericL < AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE WITHIN SEVEN(7) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE SIGN POSTING,RETURN THIS M ]DAVIT TO: ::Plauaing Division 13125 SW Hall BoulevArd • Tigaid,OR 97223 .b—affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed ?-6 (,o fi Sci bd i v+5+a k1 affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) if no address s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) 1 1 S1-C 6 v% .YE A , and did on the 74"`i day of Novo 19 `,'personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a /e"-c) application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. . The sign was posted at 10520 SW DAkota (Tax Map 1S1 34DA� Tax Lot 3300 & 3400) (state location you posted notice on property) gnature (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETEINOTARIZE) Subscribed and swom/ammzed before me on the a.(12 day of N 41Q111 bi' 19` OFFICIAL SEAL yy ( ''?1'. BOEBIE J PEE!+ l f'1 , ; �i rlor 1ra1n+G . ' 71 VI C-`' ARY P�1GUC-ORE„pM corrti��SgION NO. O5U471 NOTARY UB' IC CAF OREG�ON�I MY COMMISS;:�I E ;' IncS OCT 1 •, � �; My Commission Expires: bCf , I ?COO Applica L please complete i or=ation below for proper placement with proposed project) rA. OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: 'YPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPI E - 4 frk& I, va-me of ApplicantiOwner. ctCOVl , !Address or C-ene_ral Location of Subject'Property. 0 • •7& 1 iubject?roper::Tax Map(s)and Lot t(s): n:'sogm∎pzerpi auuValpas.:srt I • - \ k( - 0 )8 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) )ss. City at Tigard ) I, i v l . cfr(Ae L c - k4, I Li , being duly sworn, depose and say that on Povewi ,24 #`11 , 19 _,L, I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the attached list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at (or near)- _ /oSzo w d 7`' ` ..- I 34-P4- / ---r- . G a _ a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at 11 Q$—C with postage prepaid thereon. r -� > Signature (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON,NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 4X-0 day of %I j CV - , 19 L/‘ ,'3 BOSEFI J PFENN!Nti , 2...:t''! NOLMS'Y l'IJF.1.!C-OR:G( N ; - /. 4 --,,, , "....,:i., COMMISCiO% NO. G5:3471 ; 4. NA&AWE / At - -' ...._ :�•;:r OCT is, `^,..;:. NOTARY PU I LI •F OREGO My Commiss76n Expires: . :poiicant. please complete information below for proper placement with proposed projec_) TNA.ME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: '/:J■:Nj ' • iN N f • YPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: La I 4.111!=MIM KINEMETrWIIMP 1 ame of�.pplicant:Owner: fo'"6,7' C'- I I. I Address or General Location of Subject,V-qpe f: / 0 W ',JAM& I abject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot T(s): 1patty m J 100W NArft7 1`)& '11-5(\) ICANC _ Par 4_ z 95ba 66)izs-IttAie &J. cs-z,/-/y9f _ -, ', /reao -6df.) elja.a. ei3f--6746.? , x1 11;•tor _ A iitiv /144/7-if, 0,6. MybCivt, Ili—AO l'Is'it"-LA \(\ 1 ) \ 0 (--'- '0 \ 4 •\ Co 4iY. 0Wc, ),,,j VI/k..1,it Ls vtL3 L #1--S__LP-- (viasi -(9-3o c Ul—, -141th (dttu ( lIzfg Sul (051--in P/ lkttvits (Asiiidit_ttl( U 5w los-ft oot We 4 didt-c . ,,„ s.tA,/. 105pl ‘Zo 0777 ---?-1-.- A '44.: _ % * 5 50 1 CoP(4 -97?3. eat .4 Liii• • 1 ' 11 Lf5 S- CA) Il 5-tk, ,t Co3 ci- 41 , ijat_% sc,) Jo s— pac t -iLlagS -Jk 1■15- ploptitio .., AppavicG C CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES City of Tilord, Ore�o. RESIDENTIAL r� . /O/? / Co FF: 14)11/ D',4Aii)/e4 'LICANT: AGENT: MIKE MiILFfR 6447),„/.4, f ne:f ) Phone: f ) L(5Z- SOC,3 P°f1PERTY LOCATION: IOORESS: /05 Z /4) D4XOT4 fAX MAPITAX LOT: 15/ 34/DA 33001 34100 N ESSARY APPLICATION(S): ()$Tj1\j l5lQ • / /d4Niv DFVELO'PM.g P POSAL DESCRIPTION: • !J O v • t) • G IPREHENSIVE P V DESIGNATION: MED/()AA Zi ING DESIGNATION: R /Z C?T'?EN INVOLVEMENT G TI A AREA: 6�Z4� FACILITATOR: PHONE: (503) ZC NG DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size:3050sq. ft. Average lot width: — ft. Maximum building height: 35 ft. Se 3cks: front 16 ft. side 5 ft. x "'rear /5 ft. corner /D ft. from street. 64040roe zC' Maximum site coverage: % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: Za (Refer to Code Section 18. 5`-1 ) ,r 3d' c.✓Nc.ZE 47. Res7, ic7 s e rizsAE TIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot frontage: 25 feet, unless lot is created through the Minor Land Partition process. bets • q •_ : - -- - . - _ . -- - - _ - . • a.- • .7- - • - acccoe eo3cRient. ,177-4c,71 -f) 5.7- /5 fee-7- fxoNfT•46E The depth of all lots shall not exceed 21/z times the average width, unless the parcel is less than 1'/z times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. (Refer to Code Section 18.164.060 Lots) ITY TMGARO Pre-Application Conference,Votes Page 1 of 10 =oh 1ppacancoPannurq Oeoatatrnt Sect= C- 1 ECIAL SETBACKS • Streets: 30 feet from the centerline of N.tAY., T-k • Established areas: /00 " feet from 4ti/,c$7 p,?OPE l L/i" • Lower intensity zones: feet, along the site's J boundary. • .• . . - : • • — • • — • • • -- - - •• . - — . • • . • Multi-family residential building separation: (Refer to Code Section 18.96.030) Accessory structures up to 528 square feet in size may be permitted on lots less than 2.5 acres in size - 5 foot minimum setback from side and rear lot lines. Accessory structure up to 1000 square feet on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size (See applicable zoning district setbacks for primary structures.) B LDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS • Maximum height of 30 feet in R-1, R-2, R-3.5 and R-4.5 zones. • Maximum el t o 5 eet In an. -- zo - . • Maximum height of 45 feet in t e R-25 zone. • Maximum height of 60 feet in the R-40 zone. F G LOT BUILDING H T PROVISIONS Maximum height of 1'/ s • or 25 feet, whichever is less in most zones; 21/2 stories, or 35 feet in R-7, R-12, R-25 or R-40 zones provi that the standards of Code Section 18.98.030(B) are met. • s :. IO► -- -..m.Ie below The Net Residential Units allowed on a particular site may be calculated by dividing the net 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: 1. All sensitive lands areas including: a. Land within the 100 year floodplain. ' b. Slopes exceeding 25%. c. Drainageways. 2. Public right-of-way dedication. a. Single-family allocate 20% of gross acres for public facilities. b. Multi-family allocate 15% of gross acres for public facilities. (Refer to Code Section 18.92) E) MPLE OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS: I 1 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 areal = 11.4 Units Per Acre = 12.1 Units Per Acre * The Development Code requires that the net site area exist for the next whole dwelling unit NO ROUNDING UP IS PERMITTED. CIT TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 10 etc ci a00canor4Paniriq Oevummt Sect= „ L—OCKS The perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 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. • When block lengths greater than 600 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. &REEtJWA Cc/ NEC-TIOPJ (Refer to Code Section 18.164.040) VJO U 1 fl S.QT/sFc- '-kSSIDENTIAL DENSITY TRANSFER The City of Tigard allows a Residential Density Transfer of up to 25% of the units that could otherwise have been developed on sensitive lands areas listed in the density calculations that may be applied to the developable portion of the site. DEFItslE A¢, E”; /,.J Pico r%F/41A/ (Refer to Code Section 18.92.030). It is the responsibility of the applicant for a residential development application to provide a detailed calculation for both the permitted residential density and the requested density transfer. RESIDENTIAL DENSITY TRANSITION Regardless of the allowed housing density in a zoning district, any property within 100 feet of a designated established area shall not be developed at a density greater than 125 percent of the maximum Comprehensive Plan designation (not zoning) of the adjacent parcel. Transition area applies to any property which is a designated established area. The subject property is designated as an DEVE(opixio- area. The subject property is adjoined b} stablished areas to the -rte tlt, : , = - URE STREET PLAN AND EXTENSION OF STREET 1. A future stree p an s a : a. 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. b. Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and pedestrian facilities on or within 500 feet of the site. 2. 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. (Refer to Code Section 18.164.030) RI IDENTI • . ELO- ENT SOLAR ACC S ; • : S All subdivisions and minor partitions are subject to solar access requirements. These requirements state that a minimum of 80' • of all lots created must be oriented for solar accessibility. The basic standard, which determines solar - cessibility, requires that 80% of total number of pre'osed lots: 1. Demonstrate a north-s.,uth dimension of at least 90 feet. 2. Demonstrate a front lot e orientation within 30 degrees of a true east-west axis. C1T "F TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 10 Rai al App6naonPlaanmq Department Section �� 7 The total or partial : emption of a site from the solar access requirement may be :pproved for the following reasons: 1. East, west or n•rth slopes steeper than 20%. 2. Off-site shade s.urces (structures, vegetation, topography). 3. On-site shade so. roes (vegetation). Adjustments allowing a re•uction of the 80% solar lot design requirement may be made •r the following reasons: 1. Reduced density or a increased cost of at least five percent due to either: a. East, west or n•rth slope greater than 10%. b. Significant natur.I feature. c. Existing road or letting pattern. d. Public easement • right-of-way. 2. Reduction in important dev_ opment amenities. 3. Pre-existing shade (vegetatie n). Pt CASE NOTE: Maps and text are re.,, ired which are Sufficient to show that the development complies with the solar deli• .ndards, or that specific lots should be exempted or adjusted out. The following items shal be included in the analysis: 1. The north-south lot dimension an, front lot line orientation of each proposed lot. 2. Protected solar building lines and elevant building site restrictions, if applicable. 3. For the purpose of identifying tree . related to exemption requests, a map showing existing trees which are at least 30 feet tall and a ver 6 inches diameter at a point 4 feet above grade shall be submitted. This map shall include th- following: a. Height. b. Diameter. c. Species. • d. A statement declaring that they ar: to be retained. 4. Copies of all private restrictions relating to s•lar access. The design characteristics of a developed solar-ode ted lot are high levels of wintertime sun striking the south walls and roofs of the house, house orientation aximizing south window area, and a south-sloping roof area. To achieve this, one may utilize the followin•: 1. Protected Solar Building Line - The solar buil .rig line must: a. Be oriented to within 30 degrees of a true st-west axis. b. Provide a minimum distance of 70 feet from the middle of the lot to the south property line. c. Provide a minimum distance of 45 feet fro the northernmost buildable boundary of the subject lot to the north property line. 2. Performance Options - There are two performance o tions which may be utilized as follows: a. The house to be oriented within 30 degrees of a east-west axis and have at least 80% of the ground floor's south wall protected from shade b. At least 32% of the glass and 500 square feet of th roof area face south and be protected from shade. Irf TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 10 niG APOicauorelannang Oepartrrvern S.ctan PLEASE NOTE: Regardless of the option(s) used through the design of the Subdivision or Minor Land Partition. all one and two family_singLe-family residences are reviewed_throagh the building permit process for compliance with Solar Balance Point standards. Please contact the Building Division for further information reaardina the Solar Balance Point standards and the options that are available related to building height and construction. — P ZKJNG AND ACCESS All parking areas and driveways must be paved. • Sin•le famil : :-.uires 2 off-street parking spaces per dwe • unit • Multiple family: Requires 1.5 parking spaces per unit for 1 bedroom. Requires 2 parking spaces per unit for 1+ bedrooms. Multi-family dwelling units with m an 10 required spaces shall provide parking for the use of guests and shall consist of 15% of otal required parking. (Refer to Code Section 18.106.030) No more than 400/Q. of required spa may be designated and/or dimensioned as compact spaces. Parking stalls shall be dimensio as follows: • Standard parking space dimensions: 8 ft. 8 inches X 18 ft. • Compact parking space •• ensions: 8 ft. X 15 ft. • Handicapped parkin All parking areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned disabl=. person parking spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces t. •e provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapp=• parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropr . e sign shall be posted. BICYCL,F.RKS Bicycle racks a quired for multi-family, commercial and industrial developments. Bicycle racks shall be locate • areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Bicycle parking spaces sha e provided on the basis of one space for every fifteen (15) required vehicular parking spaces. Minimum number of accesses: _ Minimum access width: Maximum access width: Minimum pavement width: RE..,UIRED WALKWAY LOCATI Within all attache 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. CL VISION AREA ---17e—Cry requires that clear vision areas be maintained between three and eight feet in height at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification. (Refer to Code Section 18.102) :1T TIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 10 ?«K I knuicauoruPnnnq Devil-anent S•cxn C19 B 'FERING AND SCREENING In order to increase privacy and to either reduce or eliminate adverse noise or visual impacts betwee adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer area along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffe 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 Community Development Code. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.100) The required buffer widths which are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: ft along north boundary. ft. along east boundary. ft along south boundary. /a ft along west boundary. In addition, sight obscuring screening is required along rrtET REFS 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 feet of the right-of-way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two inches when measured four 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 tree for every seven par • g spaces must be planted in and around all parking areas _ in order to provide a vegetative canoe ect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen th arking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, de ative walls, and raised planters. For detailed information on design requirements for parking ar s and accesses. (Refer to Code Chapters 18.100, 18.106 and 18.108) REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS A tree pan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be Y: provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, major partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. The tree plan shall include the following: Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.150.070.D. according to the following standards: > Retainage of less than 25 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; > Retainage of from 25 to 50 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D; :1T1 TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 10 ,w/ I AopScioa P!ar ring Decrmrnt Salon > Retainage of from 50 to 75 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D; > Retainage of 75 percent or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. Trees removed within the period of one (1) year prior to a development application listed above will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.150.070.D. (Refer to Code Section 18.150.025) I‘4"""IGATION Replacement of a tree shall take place according to the following guidelines: > A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. > If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. > If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: > The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other _ property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. > The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. In lieu of tree replacement under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. (Refer to Code Section 18.150.070 (D) SIi IS Sign permits must be obtained prior to installation of any sign in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for review before the Hearings Officer. - ZIT TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 10 `es it appuca=Man son Department Sernon /� SENSITIVE LANDS The Code provides regulations for lands which are potentially unsuitable for development due to areas within the 100-year floodplain, natural drainageways, wetland areas, on slopes in excess of 25 percent, or on unstable ground. Staff will attempt to preliminarily identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify -n • - I-n• - • - •• .n.. - i - .-f i '•n •f -n i • - I_ • m •- f-- f inei -. .n .I-n •m'i-. i - - application. -v-I.. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.84) Chapter 18.84 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. Residential development is prohibited within floodplains. • n. ,NARRATIVE The applicant shall submit a narrative which provides findings for all 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. Applicant should review code for applicable criteria. CUE SECTIONS ✓18.80 18.98 18.114 _ 18.150 18.84 /18.100 18.116 /18.160 18.88 .— 18.102 18.120 18.162 /18.92 ■18.106 18.130 _x18.164 18.96 18.108 18.134 Mr ACT STUDY As a part of the application submittal requirements, applicants are required to include impact study with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.32 Section .050) When a condition of approval requires transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.32 Section .250) VEIGHBORHOOD MEETIN The applicant shall notify all property owners within 250 feet and the appropriate CIT Facilitator of their proposal. A minimum of 2 weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) IT) TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 10 ZStE 1 aDD.[]OON P1X1fYnq Of0](VIflrtf Set-Jon &e) RECYCLING Applicant should contact franchise hauler for review and approval of site servicing compatibility with Pride Disposal's vehicles. CONTACT PERSON: Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal at (503) 625-6177. (Refer to Code Section 18.116) ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: 7b7,0 L,2/4 c RVE V, 1/ER iF y' /00- f/Gor�P/ /ice ,E/ t DEA'+5/1 y r,dit/ 44 z c iA A) Of DEv "/F/ctD?/9f•J(7•P05f • iE�►: • /A� nxiYF Tio�) 4 47N To Ts/E Soy 7// ,gs��vt�7 �.✓ F/Gb 40TH 8 AUTO CCUieT !.<//D7HS To (ra►4.101y uJ /( /cpp70 foF 1?R1 T-' 57, Lt E S V/NG- 7<o v,)/7.5 4-71,/?G vs.0 -�,co(>G. l)f/50,45 /itS .4ppeweo Ctr ' E.44/ t-eia SC7 x god = sa,000 = [/y icRE E rr -,4 /T i I` / 5x 1.-zs - *s '� �vur5 C1 lF o��� Cf�RR�C+� !1ti/�S - Fir ,trgs OW/0 ��4QC��, RE5/ 4694F DR ;EDURE 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. aP .ICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All applications must be accepted by a Planning Division staff member of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other week days. !IT) TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 10 nut I Aopoczcioa!inmg Oepumunt Se ,on Maps submitted with an application shall be folded iN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. Coe 8.5 inch by 11 inch map of a proposed project should be ubm_itied for attaohment_to the staff report or administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted, The Planning Division and Engineering Division will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10, to 20 day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard nT CQUNC// . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. This pre-application conference and the notes of the conference are intended to inform the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of good site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. Additional pre-application conference(s) is/are required if an application(s) is/are to be submitted more than six months following this pre-application conference, unless the additional conference(s) is deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division. - PREPARED BY: tl �I DI4A)C4ZEtq PLANNING DIVISION Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 :'oc attykoreaco-r.mat _' nng Becton:preaop.en9) uty 19. 1996 ;IT't TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 10 of 10 nut I AppticanoruPlannan 3epumtent Seczon /� r/' / \S ma 411 City of Tigard, Oregon PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ENGINEERING SECTION UBLIC FACILITIES The purpose of the pre-application conference is to: (1.) Identify applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and ordinance provisions. (2.) To provide City staff an opportunity to comment on specific concerns. (3.) To review the Land Use Application review process with the applicant and to identify who the final decision making authority shall be for the application. The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of- way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: (1.) to ` feet from centerline. (2.) k tPaAA.L_ to feet e.Cr k •-)■-&Th (3.) to feet from centerline. � w 1S u, A 2s t cat, � R� l •Street improvements: (1.) t Z street improvements will be necessary along -(r( (2.) street improvements will be necessary along ) S (3.) Street improvements shall include feet of pavement from centerline, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of utility wires (a fee may be collected if determined appropriate by the Engineering Department), a five-foot wide sidewalk (sidewalks may be required to be wider on arterials or major collector streets, or in the Central Business District), necessary street signs, streetlights, and a two year streetlighting fee. 'OF TIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 3 tenng Department Section r> 1 1 In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the street improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to execute a non-remonstrance agreement which waives the property owner's right to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district formed to improve (1.) (2.) Pedestrianways/bikeways: Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) inch line which is located in Rc-'ctep.1 e. YTG-The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the ddveloper's responsibility to Water Supply: The \W-+l) Water tdelpet - Phone:(503) (0 4il( provides public water service in the area of this site. The District should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (Contact: Gene Birchill, (503) 526-2469) provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Other 0--b82-1.J.,-.\-4-42 'E �i. > � u-t i� �tE S $'C,4 4.457F.. sit- t+-1- 6j C .?2-7.�1�.r Af54--(fp V\JPAV 44.1 t) (B1L, vM) st Y OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 3 eenng Department Secnon G � c� Storm sewer improvements: v a .4 P >N j ( 1S— r 4 SLS t \ FORM WATER QUALITY The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of new impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $180.00. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. .� ;. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. —REST OPENING PERMIT No work shall be performed within a public right-of-way, or shall commence, until the applicant has obtained a street opening permit from the Engineering Department. FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONS All projects that require a grading plan also require that the applicant shall submit a typical floor plan for each lot. This floor plan shall indicate the elevations of the four corners of that plan along with elevations at the corner of each lot. PREPARED BY: - �zi&k- ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 ginloatty\nreaop.eng ster section.preapp-r mst) Apnl 23, 1996 i'OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 3 eennq Department Section CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .. APPLICATION CHECKLIST ' CITY OF TIGARD The items on the checklist below are required for the succesful completion of your application submission requirements. This checklist identifies what is required to be submitted with your application. This sheet MUST be returned and submitted with all other applicable materials at the time you submit your land use application. See your application for further explanation of these items or call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. ""����,, Staff: // D �� Date: /O1710 APPLICATION & RELATED DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE ✓ MARKED ITEMS A) Application form (1 copy) I/ B) Owner's signature/written authorization ef C) Title transfer instrument/or grant deed a - D) Applicant's statement No. of Copies Z.4'( E) Filing Fee $ Z,/Z6 AG/tor /007011'0 77D Z/70 Zlb o7t1EL SITE-SPECIFIC MAP(S)/PLAN(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE J MARKED ITEMS A) Site Information showing: No. of Copies Z1 t 1. Vicinity map I2r. 2. Site size & dimensions o' 3. Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10%) 2 4. Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds 0' 5. Locations of natural hazard areas including: ❑ (a) Floodplain areas (b) Slopes in excess of 25% ❑ (c) Unstable ground a (d) Areas with high seasonal water table (e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential ❑ (f) Areas having severely weak foundation soils ❑ 6. Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Map Inventory including: ❑ (a) Wildlife habitats ❑ (b) Wetlands 7. Other site features: (a) Rock outcroppings ❑ (b) Trees with 6" + caliper measured 4 feet from ground level r3'" 8. Location of existing structures and their uses 9. Location and type of on and off-site noise sources ❑ 10. Location of existing utilities and easements e� 1 1 . Location of existing dedicated right-of-ways car LAND USE APPLICATION I LIST PAGE 1 OF 5�/ t B) Site Development Plan Indicating: No. of Copies 1 . The proposed site and surrounding properties ❑ 2. Contour line intervals ❑ 3. The location, dimensions and names of all: (a) Existing & platted streets & other public ways and easements on the site and on adjoining properties ❑ (b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site ❑ (c) Alternative routes of dead end or proposed streets that require future extension ❑ 4. The location and dimension of: - (a) Entrances and exits on the site ❑ (b) Parking and circulation areas ❑ (c) Loading and services area ❑ (d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation ❑ (e) Outdoor common areas ❑ (f) Above ground utilities ❑ 5. The location, dimensions & setback distances of all: (a) Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities, and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet of the site ❑ (b) Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site ❑ 6. Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions ❑ 7. Sanitary sewer facilities ❑ 8. The location areas to be landscaped ❑ 9. The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques ❑ 10. The location of mailboxes ❑ 11 . The location of all structures and their orientation ❑ 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements ❑ C) Grading Plan Indicating: No. of Copies 711 The site development plan shall include a grading plan at the same scale as the site analysis drawings and shall contain the following information: 1 . The location and extent to which grading will take place indicating: (a) General contour lines (b) Slope ratios ❑ (c) Soil stabilization proposal(s) (d) Approximate time of year for the proposed site development ra. 2. A statement from a registered engineer supported by data factual substantiating: (a) Subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering report ❑0 (b) The validity of sanitary sewer and storm drainage service proposals (c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated LAND USE APPLICATION/UST PAGE 2 OF S�,r� D) Architectural Drawings Indicating: No. of Copies ZH The site development plan proposal shall include: 1 . Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures proposed for use on-site 2. Typical elevation drawings of each structure E) Landscape Plan Indicating: No. of Copies z The landscape plan shall be drawn at the same scale of the site analysis plan or a larger scale if necessary and shall indicate: 1 . Description of the irrigation system where applicable ❑ 2. Location and height of fences, buffers and screenings e' 3. Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces Er 4. Location, type, size and species of existing and proposed plant materials e ' 5. Landscape narrative which also addresses: (a) Soil conditions ❑ (b) Erosion control measures that will be used ❑ F) Sign Drawings: ❑ Sign drawings shall be submitted in accordance with Chapter 18.114 of the Code as part of the Site Development Review or prior to obtaining a Building Permit to construct a sign. G) Traffic Generation Estimate: ❑ H) Prelimina Partitio Lot Line Ad'ustment Ma. Indicatin•: No. of Copies 1 . The owner of the subject parcel ❑ 2. The owner's auth.rized agent ❑ 3. The map scale (21 50,100 or 200 feet - 1) inch north arrow and date ❑ 4. Description of panel location and boundaries ❑ 5. Location, width an. names of streets, easements and other public ways within and ad .cent to the parcel ❑ 6. Location of all perm.nent buildings on and within 25 feet of all property lines 7. Location and width o all water courses ❑ 8. Location of any trees ithin 6" or greater caliper at 4 feet above - ground level ❑ 9. All slopes greater than 5% ❑ 10. Location of existing uti ities and utility easements ❑ 11 . For major land partitio which creates a public street: (a) The proposed righ -of-way location and width ❑ (b) A scaled cross-se on of the proposed street plus any reserve strip ❑ 12. Any applicable deed rest ictions ❑ 13. Evidence that land partiti.n will not preclude efficient future land division where applicable ❑ 1 LAND USE APPLICATION/LIST PAGE 3 OF i i.�� /� I) Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map and Data Indicating: No. of Copies .1-{ 1 . Scale equaling 30,50,100 or 200 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per sheet 2. The proposed name of the subdivision Er 3. Vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial and collector streets 4. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner, developer, engineer, surveyer and designer (as applicable) 5. Date of application 6. Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided t� 7. Names of adjacent subdivision or names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of un-subdivided land Err 8. Contour lines related to a City-established benchmark at 2-foot intervals for 0-10% grades greater than 10% 9. The purpose, location, type and size of all the following (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): (a) Public and private right-of-ways and easements (b) Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines (c) Domestic water mains including fire hydrants (d) Major power telephone transmission lines (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ (e) Watercourses (f) Deed reservations for parks, open spaces, pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ 10. Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated on the plans 11 . Plan of the proposed water distribution system, showing pipe sizes and the location of valves and fire hydrants 12. Approximate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision 13. Scaled cross sections of proposed street right-of-way(s) 14. The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm water overflow t' 15. Location, width & direction of flow of all water courses & drainage-ways V* 16. The proposed lot configurations, approximate lot dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such lots. 17 The location of all trees with a diameter 6 inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level, and the location of proposed tree plantings 18. The existing uses of the property, including the location of all structures and the present uses of the structures, and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting czr 19. Supplemental information including: (a) Proposed deed restrictions (if any) (b) Proof of property ownership (c) A proposed plan for provision of subdivision improvements 20. Existing natural features including rock outcroppings, wetlands & marsh areas 21 . If any of the foregoing information cannot practicably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application ❑ LAND USE APPLICATION J LIST PAGE 4 OF 5^/ I J) Solar Access Calculations: ❑ K) Other Information No. of Copies ❑ h:Uogin\patrlmasters\I{klist.mst May 23, 1995 LINO USE APPLICATION J LIST PAGE 5 OF 5 `I AppevicUx D 1997,02-10 14: 11 #071 P.01/12 FROM : First American Title Insurance Company of Oregon An assumed n een.m.of TITLE W9uPa»CE CaUdPANY Of OREGON 1700 S.W. FOURTH AVE. PORTLAND, OR 97201-5512 (503)222-3651 FAX(503)790-7872 ALPHA ENGINEERING February 10, 1997 ATTN: MIKE MILLER 9600 SW OAK PLAZA WEST SUITE 230 PORTLAND, OREGON 97223 CONSUMER INFORMATION REPORT - .1 A rtii F . r Y 1 y C ":C '11"....,..11:,--::'' ,.. . *1/4.1/4.. . .�- cam,_-_", rr�� • �� We appreciate This opportunity to be of service to you. Please remember First American Title Insurance Company of Oregon for your Escrow and Title insurance needs. Agents and offices in the following counties in Oregon: Benton, Clackamas, Coos, Crook, Curry, Deschutes, Douglas, Gilliam, Hood River, Jackson,Jefferson, Josephine, Klamath, Lane, Lincoln, Linn, Malheur, Marion, Multnomah, Polk, Sherman, Tillamook, Umatilla, Union, Wallowa, Wasco, Washington,Wheeler and Yamhill. This title information has been furnished, without charge, in conformance with the guidelines approved by the State of Oregon Insurance Commissioner.The Insurance Division cautions intermediaries that this ser- vice is designed to benefit the ultimate insureds;indiscriminate use only benefitting intermediaries will not be permitted. Said services may be discontinued, No liability is assumed for any errors in this report. Ti-73m ]::;) -] 8/90 1997,02-10 14: 14 #2071 P.06/12 FROM * THANK YOU FOR USING FIRST AMERICAN TITLE * Washington County ****************************************************************************** ==w== * * OWNERSHIP INFORMATION * , = * Reference Parcel #: 1S134DA 03400 * * Parcel Number :R0269676 TRSQ: 01S-01W-34-SE NE * * Owner : PASCUZZI INVESTMENT * * CoOwner * * Site Address : *NO SITE ADDRESS* * * Mail Address : 10250 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 * * Telephone :Owner Tenant * * * * SALES AND LOAN INFORMATION * * * * Transferred: 06/02/95 Loan Amount * * Document # : 37908 Lender * * Sale Price : Loan Type * * Deed Type :QUIT CLAIM Interest Rate: * * V Owned : 100 Vesting Type : * * --_=S... * * ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATION * * * * Land : $4, 680 Exempt Amount : * * Structure : Exempt Type * * Other V Improved * * Total : $4, 680 Levy Code :02374 * * 96-97Taxes : $63 . 74 School Dist :TIGARD * * * * PROPERTY DESCRIPTION * r * k Map Grid: Class Code: * Census :Tract Block * NbrhdCd :KR57 MillRate : 13 . 6149 * Sub/Plat : * Land Use: 1002 VACANT,RESIDENTIAL * Legal :ACRES 1 . 10 * * * * PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS * =,... * -Bedrooms Lot Acres : 1 . 10 Year Built : * 3athrooms Lot SqFt :47, 916 EffYearBlt : * _seat Method: BsmFin SF : Floor Cover: * Pool BsmUnfinSF: Foundation : * .ppliances : Bldg SqFt : Roof Shape : * )ishwasher : lstFlrSqFt : Roof Matl : * Hood Fan UpperFlSF : InteriorMat: * "eck Porch SqFt: Paving Matl : * arage Type: Attic SqFt : Const Type: * _arage SF Deck SqFt : Ext Finish: * r******-*************************4*****k**************************************** The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. 'Pl 1997,02-VD y14 15 #071 P.09/12 P-C:.' _ _1 Y: fY'.'\•Pr 'S :�S .YY/� • ti, �. ;,Z}�' ',�ytis'•!.tit.;C]i _.,..-r. C '+ :Vii:~( s�c►?' 1 r +'t r :If '�i••t"` '_l'i• -a r_ Y'• :i,i.`:. 7.....v 2.›..�•:4,.�+._S'•-••,.: a 0;77'� ..."P 'Z'..i•' �f` , ' �' •� 1 _It�)t fA / Ir''•-).:''. r:: '.:;; Z.t;.)-a.).•_n^.:.+; ..d. ;q'S•....1.1..06.". , } 1: `0,1.44, 1a., HST...%.,...G `.,.,R►4'�. -♦I . .!' .� -� .i r,,; '^;•'•;?' �S'. :;3•�r'.�,!:';q,-.,�%v •+1'i.�f.`�•'�4 :�. ~I.�. �' 1 alt s ++�iY�.e-i.. ' STATE OR OREGON. •y .County of Washington' •S8 • - • ; :• �•x . , . .. ;;' di ., •'S• . I,Jerty A;Ndn r ipr of I1 ;. ment o and.. ourif E7�+4idc�o Courtly Clerk!or ;d cpicnCy,.d4. Y that . the wllhlilnittvigeptaf v t6catved . ., end.npoMid:Uoo¢fe.bt> oprds_.of said :'' county. . -/.s :-:';:.a:, ;i tiR. • • • : •. Jcrry 4.'I•aneoi.cClrectoh of•• • •. :Fseeesmeret g4'iaxatfon.Ex- , Of7bfq C,o+rrn5'Gerk n nr' i Doc• ,95037908• : i EY• `• • . ' Rect:.. 144'638• • ' ' •48.0.0 :4"• • • • • 06/0?./1995 10.50:27AM •• ' t: - t : 'a, • ' . AFTER RECORDING, AlO •l •AN TO:` UNTIL A CHANGE••••20• 'RZQUE3TED, s, • • •' ••" • • . , .ALL TAX STATEMENTS SHALL 3X ••. r:q,•. Attn: • Dominic..G;•.Collette.' BENT TO TEE FOLLOWI�1G•ADDRESS t V • , •O'Donnell, Remis,, Crew; • ' .. : • ' • .s• AI.: • • Corrigan•& Bachrach• • , ' ' . :'Pascuzzi' Investment••L.L.,C:",•.•' ' Attorneys' at Law' ... •10250.�SW:.North Dakota • ' • ° Viz•4; . • 1727 NW'.Hoyt..Street •• • • , Tigard;• Oregon: 97223 ; , • . • •N:':4l 4:� - Pcretland, 'OR. 97.2C19 ...'•'*. • ' • ,' •. QVI•TCLAIX•DEED STATUTORY PORE: '1 ' • `: sf.3.• fir• . , .. .. ate• • • .. ••ARTHUR' PASCUZZI:,? E U1EST..PASCUZZI, and i.PASQUALE._PASCUZZI; • • - •,..•a...:x,,.1• ` as tenants'in coumon, '(hereinafter collectively called "Gra;itor'! F - • releases;and 'quiitcla.ims to PASCUZZI .INVESTMENT L,L.C: (hore�,naftar . ' '• . :` • • called ".Grantee");. all •right;.. title .and. interest. in' and do the following' described real property':• ' : •'See . !Exhibits, '. "A",:`• :.attached ,'hereto and . _ ' .•:. • ' ' :incorporated'herein.,by •this reference. ' ' ' • • • •'}.T'& The,'true consideration paid for•this transfer•'is'•:Zero:.$0. • ' • '`2, A. • However,.'.the: 'actual' consideration 'consists: ol'• Or.• includes'•other • :',. • • '3 ..,`.: ..a �'.: • property, or•, •value • given or ' .promi'52d••.i:which :•.is•1•'"the.' • whole,• `'; i : ' ,consideration: . .. , . . .. ',,' • ' • r €.a ' :, • ' • ' THIS'•' 'INSTRUMENT. :WILL' NOT •ALLOW. USE •OF THE PROPERTY. ... ::� DESCRIHED'•IN.ITHIS.. INSTRUMENT IN :VIOLATION' OF APPLICABLE•LAND USE: •• • • : , :.'LAWS• AND REGULATIONS.: ••BEFOP.E ,SIGNING.OR ACCEPTING.THIS.INSTRUM_ ENT, '- :• •:•, , •'':•'I: . • .THE.•PERSON 'ACQUIRING 'FEE 'TITLE.:±O..THE .PROPERTY .SHOULD• CHECK WITH , i ' ' . THE APPROPRIATE• CITY;:: OR •:COUNTY` PLANNING,'-DEPARTMENT', TO VERIFY;' ,••• :.Page:'1.- QUITCU IM 'DEED .• , • .. , . • • . • i.:' . • • 'XII' ' • • {;: , , .. . . .. . •. .. :.. . ' . , . i. • rj, .- :r 7.r a+� .5 ,�,r.r,r::F,ri'v ::' i?6i•l.}y;;.: t:•nh•6;.12•�:•:r:,;s•..4-.C':yv.'�. .'::'�• +:.a.r ' om•. .--:.-..-..^_: ' ' .. :�T;•.,;,Z. ..i�•r •.. •: w ti•1 : ; i:•i•+, . -:... r^ • •i, - .�. .( 3; t: �7 t•::• ,,..i...... ....:. .:,,.•w .;44.:::::i../1:::•%.:;:-,!:',..,%:.;.::>.:: :::.....:•;:' 1 L' . iw'•j. :ti i• 14 16 tt071 P.10/12 1997,02-10 . .._ • - P4.-.0.1-ti, -ter' -o'f,r7*--• P i--,-", -",.? --.-.. FROM : - ' ' -. • " csc ,•••-•,, ,-X.r• .• - ..,. :re% ---,--•-:. ...,10-_ -•„,*.i.vmwf.,„,--ifsArr:413,74;-tars104.%"C - ' ..,11-1-4A-itritt -Ntle,1/4.,i4a-, -- 1 . k.• - - -0:,'701,'Mratt7.....-e4... ...i.•-•:-...,./s.,-Aii-4.4k.fl -2t--Am-4 ....1.V. • t A tAPV4S1.e., :PS•"..oir.l. 1,i, 5+, p-,--. `7•:";!t.. ■.;- . : 'Er...:1-.••••■',I, _••••14.;41-r'7-0. ...'0.1.7K"-, .4.'.......o.;/ ..,,,. ...5.•-•,...,...... ...1:11.44.-at,.:..xeiei."-e/vzis, -,TAItt*,:gx„,,k . 14. .,f1.41?.:,.. .,,i•-•7,g,i4.., -13.0.-1,4, . -• ,...;::-.-.: „ 7...-,i, . -• -)V.41-c--Skift-nif-Wdri;;;sk• -P....x.1- '''"-:•2-40;ti :',..,..1.•..-;:,.;!••••:•u.••;,!••:11.•I• .: •r*' ''''"'. '0.'...-4-•■••-raltgig".1.''. 44/11.7._.....t.t•._..,..;=,..:::......4.;---. "' • -7 . • . ( ' : 1.. •:. . . .:/`: -.-: "•••_ 'l •, '..-' :..:.....';;'. 7 , . • ...L.,:' :I:73;`?". - ''"...-7. " ■ • • ''-'.1+:7-• 1. . . . . • APPROVED USES AND..:TO DETERMINE..AliY LIMITS. ON .LAWSUITS AGAINST. .• •..,• • •••• ' •_. 's ili V :30 .. .. ,• . ., . • '• *FARMING ..OR.FOREST•PRACTICES AS •DEFIND IN ORS E .930.. ::• .- • .... .: ,..•, ..... ..... . : • . . . . .. .. . . . . . • •. • . • . . .. • • • • • • •• • . . • . . .. . . • . •• •:.•-• '' • Datid: .iej • 22; day a f May,:•I495.,.. : ••••••.f.: .. . . . .., ,. .,.. ... . . . ...• ' " • --.,.4,-. • ---... • ' - • .: . , „ , .••„. . . . . • 4 ' .• .. • ,,.•• •. • • .. . .• . . • • • • . .. . •. • .... • . . • . •• IP • • ".* ......... •,:e •• •::* • •4.7•T."- ASCt•ZZt •••• •• • • i •: •::. • •: • . ... •. • .• ,. . . ..•••' • • I•:.•:•. .*:••••••••IS..••• ...••• • . 1/.4X27:,;* • •••. . . ... : • . .. . I- . - . -,.. • • • ..• ....... ' •i • .;‘Vedee • • . • V.:•• • . , . * •• 4.112h... • ..,_ ., IrP f,"Ar • ...: ••:•1• E-T. P- - AI- , . :. . ' .' . •'. • • . . • ... • • ., . . :'. ijo, - .•: - • ' Pe OG...i..., •• • • - "••.. 1.-. • . - .: :- ',-• :p Teu t P T-CO th.. . . . • • •. • " . . ..-- , •.. • • % .•. • • .. ),..:,1 ., .••• : ::.:.•;. . ..• .- . . : .. .. . . .. • • • : _ STATE. OF. OREGON. • ' ' • ) • - . •-.: •• • ,,.:-.:- ....• . •• • •• , 4. - •' • : • • "7." •': ... .•7 'C:i. ! Couility. of.. • • •): .• - ' . • .-, ' - ',. The.,forelding%instrument was ackn•.o W•Ia4 ge l C ore tae th i. . "..2.:...t:..•..._•_:, •...*-:,..• . .'. . -.•.,A.0.,.,,.';...-,:.;,...•..1.7, . - ' ' ' •. .• ....4'..,:ne. 5- :•••.•••;•‘.•... ..1.•••-dali. of...iii11,:•.'1995.7'' by .ARTHUR PASCUZEI. .•: .• ',.. . ... , : . • . • •• .• .: .. . • •••• ••• •: ., . hy.... ., '.,.i... ,.. / A. • •••- •• • • - ••• ' •••• . .' •• -7:•-p:Atr-1 . - .. ••• . • ,• ... ••• .• :•• .•. •. , . • ... .•• •...• . ... ..• . •. - .....:-.11.4.; , • . • ••• .. ••... •• - - 'J.,. t .:;..: .....:...: .. ..•, ' : (NOTARIAL'..SEAL). : ....• ,. •••,. . ..,01 .---- " •' . .. • . .. , ••• . . •• . .• • • . . •-... ••.. . • •• • ••,:. • ••••.• -.• .• • '. ', • .- •'•••• • '.• Notary. PubIdo• for•Oregon• . . .•.: ,_••,,,.. ..,• • •• •:':',••'.7*. .. • .: .. ,• • . • :1;t.:".';.,:g Yi,i.•-.........: . ••••••- ' .••••:•...• ;• •••••••:.......': •.• ,..• •••••••• • •:•• •••• -•• My Comm.' issicri' FJ:piret:... . • -/lr-Aar •.• • • .• •: •• ..?:::_-:s.4; • • •• .. . •• . • ,. ,:'.....:.•:. .•'..••n•:.••'•••••..S:•T'AT'E O.•F.• .O RE GON..' : •• •.. . ;e••: OFA FIC AL.SEAL • • '• -.•• •••• .'.••.•.. ..•. •: ) ESi PM RENN ...••••• • •••• • ...'.-•, -,'•':‘;..-..-.!,'..;.:7.•,7"..:.--*•. County of A NOTAY PUBL OREGON .-::"...'.,:1:;•;•, . •commiestott 140.031041 • ' •• . •• • • •• • • • ..• .. . , ,. ...•-•'. , ... •.. , ... . ' •• ,. ' ' • 'MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAR.14.105€. '• ..', . .;.• " • , . - -?•:.:•••••••:' •'.i * • ''• ..' •• 'The* foregoing":instruzitent vai...a n w a. .. - is'• . 2-;2-- --.'. • : • .!... • • ' day of.'May, :199 .1'.bylERNEST PAscUz ZI.:.. "::• ••••• •• ••••• ; • .... . .. . -. ' . •••... - • ‘-• •....• ;.:-...•,?..,..: .. :•,,-7-,:, .. .. . . . • : ... :. " •• • . (gOTARIAL SEAL) •• . ' ' • • • Of...--.—;•••• • •••• • ••• • •• .• - • •• . •,••••. . ....: ...-.. 2••: • .:,.?t•.:;.• . . :• •• -•• ••• • • ,.•.• ... • „.- . .:•••, :. • ... .• .. ... ...•..s Notary Pu.blic. for OregOn. . ....• ••• -..:. • •• .... .',.• ' . :- .;.::,.: •• .. • . - . • • •• • • • - .- • - --' . • • ••, ••,. . ,••... • . .' • ..* ••„ ... •• . . • My .CommiSsiOn'Expires:• •• • •.. •-7Y,, ' .. ... . . ..,. , .! •.:,••;:,;:, ., :I. 7..:4.!1•-.; -- • . . • . , -. • . • 'il•-•11..: • . • .• . 4.. .•.::PAI AENepti. . •.. ... . . .•, ...... : ., • ... .. -.,,Z.i.i. •• • . • . . • • .. • . . • \ - .NOTAR'f 1.1..aLiC-OREGON. % .. .• ,...: ,: , ,,•,.. ,".., •!. ,7,..:•Ft•I.; .,..,1 •:••••:'••• •." :". ,• .,; •'.' ::: ••• ,—. -. . . , . • MY.COMMISSION EXPIRES MAR.14.1998 ' - • ' • '. ' ••• • "' •.; ''..i:'...-;•:7: • • • ••.•' •• " .••••`.":••.",".;•• . .. . . . . .. • .. . - • -.. • It •••-•:••••1 4 . . • •.. ... . • • • • • • • • • • •. . •-• . • •' ' ' •• '• ' . t 7, ::•:•?....: ••• •• " • ' ••• • • ••.• . - • ..• • • •'.- ., - ••• . ••.: • •• • • •• • • . • . • • • • • •. • • •.• • • '•• ''• •.'••• • ' .•t::. •`••• • ,.. • .• *. 1- ''.•:.:::'•: .. . •'• • • • . •; • .•'''•7.1 ::e':. . • • .•• Page. 2. QUITCLAIM.:nEED '.•.• -'' . • . .. • • :•XTT ••'. . ••. .. •• ' :r --, ,.:.c-ii . . - . .. .. . :-. .• . .- . . , . . , • . . .. . . .. . ._ . .. . . .. • .• • . • . ... . . . . . .,. ., •• • . . . • • • • •. . .• ". .. . 1 ...',.... . .,• .. • • . . . , . - • t* • • . . , ' • •• . • • ...--P3 ., • . • • • •. , . . • • • • . . . . . . . ... . . . . • • ./....i.... . • • • ' • •- -- .• .. . • . • ... . .... • : % • ' •• ' • • . ...: , . •• -•.*:1•.;.,:-.1 • .,.. . . . • ..•. •. • .f,...1.• .. . .. • • • • • ••• • r.Y f':'..:r■ '"■••:; •"'"----“: 77:•"7••'7""nr•r-43r°141‘4"410'igq.:'Z.V"474ii.i.i7i7ti".fri-citlirc4liZ;V: .(...414:$4 .""',...'.. .:"...."7" ...7.47ir.".■":"..'rt1.7./..t.t7r•':.7:787..11•4,17/Fr3IFF77:7777t" '•',.. :i • ■...g..r•••ier....•,:, .:7.1*;:•:?;.;:',...,'A..4.1:," ••'..Iv.t.,....'• -..7,rzt,..,". ':.•.*:q,,.',,..".,, -•',:, ..0.,...•,„.......••• P...1.1,&•.:i'./.•,..7.:.:.,',,;••:••••,2;:'?...1•1,...1:•;.....;.'..,••••;•:;•,s.41,;-;,_:01,1'4::;.•:.•:+4.■„:1.?: ;••';.,Z.::.7.';':,,,;:....:.:., ..4 .;::•:,..9.0',..c•tl.r),%:,..V.'.,,:g...?.:VC.:..:t.4.,,q,.::,`: .7........' 3'.'"?.s"'.e•'-""..''...."..7-...... .''''.''.•''''V'''''."'..".•".....‘:.".'',Vr.:.'"'...%a l••4.:'"qi"s,..",Te .Y>c•LIATer-...k2;:o s‘a,*sx....A.,.k •.....,.• i...:A...;::::-.....,,,..•••....::,;:.,-.. z...)47:,,,,:r).•'::::,1*,!•*.i,v*.....1.;;:t,,,,I..4,..,....,,,;.::,•:-.••,..•...'-',-::.••...••-V•E,•‘t• •,..4...t.....•••-•••••:..t.r/0.-"■•A• s...&••••1,t-a•-•-•......--. -•••$.•1.0,••.••••••J:•■■. . •••.. • . "' FROM 1997,02-10 14: 19 #071 P.11/12 H , i. '`:rrl[,/ry•' gi:hY'•'�'�r:ii:aG:ir• 1:•-•••:':•'1',4:.%7.--x: • 1:11%0.%` ' '1.7,%•:%..r;;"•.::o:.`,� '. 3, -+Q .4.f.;170,. arv���:•"' ' : 4`* 71 TC.��WItF�"'d'�:" t L41 • : � A' p•- ,�•l:/s.•Nl•..:;�k R..r„. •'-r�,., . :J t.,-••�.;'.+t,E p,• / !- y,�:r -;Fai - is y=h l _r �f_.". ,,; ✓• .F�:, rr t S%S„ ,a, Ytt L . . �"7 �- _' ..•� R►:/►.J{� .ii ::'3 . ' 1- . ,yf rt ., � t ` �T }, i is i .om A y !{• .-,14-:7'', 'A: i i AJ:”!ii-; t'-��: � �,.s l •1.J:� C., "r .- 1.. •o 1 = •,• �• _ c.- -:;' '.d::rte . • ::-� i f Alts .c( ••F... l t.� _ . .t• N,:f• , .�: _ia ,,Kt� , _4 1S-=? ,a ' ' • .. STATE OF.. OREGON' ).. . • •• .,•: • ' . .• - .•l/ fie..:• • .- Th>i torso inatrt ent was 'ackt..).algid'befare , • • •• . • • ” q ing 11io.this . • day of•Hay, 1995; :by PASQUALE • SS X•.• • ;.(NOTARIAL SEAL).. _; ./. . ■• • •.1 • " • ••Notary. •Ptitiiic•-.tor Oregon' ' _' ' • • ••• My Commi,osion Expires: 2 •/ 2 • ' . a-•• .' is r' G5F1EtAl'SERI: " =?!a-` a •• • • •t• = ha: `■-..;4A_IC-OREGOAI , • •• .•; •• • NJ/, CO►Ah!ISSION NO.031041 • . ;.i.:.%;,.....;:...,..,?,-.-_'. FAY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAR:1 4,•1968 ;�, ` ,. • • • .. • 1• 1 1. „ • .S J '-_-•t' is .. •s?�;� '1• , _ S.:•; '4.4'44_ ..• . Page•.3 -• QUITCLAIM DEED •• . • XII•• • - -,, `•''.• -•-. �.^.� t— •-,-",— --9.7•'�-••Ylemz•vir;• to ram== aw,tnfli•.,.r�--4-••••••:- ,-•-.7. 7- Ttr 'T.:••mil, ' r=,. . ArrtT"L�i^?;'•`i:;.te� �4:•4.'•.••- ..... `.'!••...ci..:i:••,:;i:5•.. +'..,:,. s•�!;' r.. M1 1�'Y.,7r.•.,•'•..r•••r`•••:.ti'.s� qb•,.,•..^!• Zl• •--{ ± `7.+iwr'. •F zft ++..\y....rt�a+:�:�Ift} FROM 1997,02-10 14: 19 #071 P. 12/12 •i' 2.-Y '{ tt, u'l 1,.i44 ,e J'r'ex YP�.{�y,} lx 1;:•r• 'K4. •) ''t•' •. A*10 tV" ♦'• . •..4:-...1:;`%.---^•I.?y::� '•t•.r 4l:, h�4: rll• O $11.1,',..41J1;!'.' r.l+ qL":1.• �tif��•y,Y`':::u' .�t rV ? ;_ Sr a r ��i. `�'s.�5 a... : ! 3� .,,,+=b. --i . .1,, ..4;6•4••• ti' ti 'rt0T.,t '1 anti' . i tir wil T t'• 3',•. tr.r r _;L. ∎<.♦I' 1 X. nj:, 'v,lri,? � ,«�� r"tr.� •«-r.J'• s,l�',x C_ �j" / !� •f'M: y� ri� �I�!�j;..at t �• . . •�. 'Y!:` :l�.i^t�.•: e 4♦ -s 2f'./TC`.. �1i;,, r%' .••i�it•:.•• 41., ••Cf :1:•Jj�J'FM. •yylvi ,•'\N',1-� •-.r! -4,,. `. {,,• .IP 1 1 .'�.%+`4'''_t�l4• yf' •" ...t�l '.•' _ "1''. At '.ieY,'l�+./�{t=: ,+I-.•I t• .•( "••�o w•'iH �•�' r'•4 E :. - .IJR �.•- { X9 1 ..r.,■'r♦ ! ia+.'. . . .r::%,..,r. • :'f!•; ,-.�. «. . ,,r;"• „ f • . ./.". r•Kt•... L..hCbi...).• ..1••• ...AT' '1`'t-?J�i � ''.'.:^7r�;•L', '.:-,�t.�-• ' • ' •EXHIBIT. "A"• • . A parcel of landsin the Southwastqurtrter of Section 35,.Townshlp 1.South;FtdtTge•I.West;of the Willamette • ' " j •• Meridian, In the County of Washington and.Slate:of Oregon; bean "a N g. portion of that Certain tract'.of.la :. '• "• • '•r•• described•(n the conve nce from Willi nd' , Ya am:end Frtinces. C:.'.White'ta.•Wililam V. end.Batty,L Cookson,. - husband andwife;by deed recorded'In Book 462,page.18r,.Washin :on.Coun Deed Records and bean r ;s:`•".more particutarfy described. follows;o " . . 9 •••• • '• • as w i3egtnning at',ihe•Northeast corner••of•the saki Cookson Tract; said..point of beginning also.being. '' i4orthwest corner ofthatcertaln tract of:land conva ed to Pasciw,l tnv 9 g•ded • , _ i Y estm4nt Company bXDeed.recorded '; ; • •" • '''n 600k:655; page 561,Washington,Coui'ty Deed Records;thence South O'02'••Wes 'al • `_ :.% - • •• t: ong:the;EasE-line,' • , a -`' of the.said Co kso o n Tract; and:also'along•the West line of the said'Pas.cuizF Tract"495.02 feet. • '• 4r: .. ''', •• Southwest.dorntrr of the said'Pascuizi Tract;tho•- t. uth .- ' 4'tine oCthe.sai a 89 30 West,slang the Wts{ern extension uf.ilia South r :.+ ; -• d PascuzzlTract, 100.00 feet to a point;thence North 0.02'East `-' .,'T„ ' the said c+ k' e. 1, , parallel with the East I:ne of; _e � ' C o soriTract,495.02 feet o,a oint on the.North line:of t'=•John L"Hlcklin:DonatiOn Land Claim < , No.54:thence`So rtti,89'3o'.East, l ♦+" - of be ,nn •a ong•thesaid Donation C"Iainfs North Ilse'100,0.feet'to the of '' ' -=T'+ `# fc. • t' r, t' i .i .. •'t • .it 'tiv7A.• YfF 3 • ! _• «t• - • • , , • '. • • , •. .•t.' . •• •.•t•�',•• • •, i•• • • • •• • •try «�� 'fir}-,Tl,�, :f r , •♦ •` ••, ;', it 111'4 a;•2: • • ,.. .,• '.. •, ,,t .. ••r. .. - ..tie • , t:r •••i • • •Page'.1.•... .EXHIBIT.?"&' ! ;.:1•• ♦ ! 5 ! ' • • •, .. t,, '!: ''Y•Sri • ., • • • • • rt • • t. • : t .,I.•' :rr•'• - ^r .. lf♦+'�w�w�4. ,!�ttty�_i1:.V T�..ti �-,^ }Z ."� - .. . r � ...r•.. .l ..... { + ww�:y.:�=iY'�i:�"nom! 'rW.I IS I 34AD Istr , O t I/4 1.eno. mwlo. }{��\\�l ..,N.. t, v...* i.„.a•. •: --I �- `a, ■ ■ - _ W1. _ __. — to 1904 1 IOQS lam n ±, IODO ( / 900 Mfu► .• �3 .w�d�'• •at• 1 3 I 1 .fl At .f6AG uk 7 SEE MAP 00 IIOOI W !!u. (200 j_ F (, 3 700 - +�ti 1390 D 601% LOT 3 • •�1ri1 4 m 9.00 AC. 6200 '7 600 �� E erc -- 10 A,�, 1400 ti P.1 :S. •.ir R•lr 9. 3 40 —xi_ + SOD 11 p 1'. 4 1900 a 1500 r , raA.. .e+ ...-r 6 _ u i .bAal i / 400 �I 1600 F 1Y - F �F: I �t r .SrAr. 0 y YirLC tl.• .. I 1 �3 — 39CR� 4300 iy II jilim a l�ui NI sv Ul ; 302 9 1 4 1> ,C 9 r 'A .• :� .w T . /.-. 1 T.NOR 1 f7T" A X11 V�V/. �TT1it's -.. /rr a.•.- a Nu A4F 2000 �{� n �� w ✓�Ma17N cJM[ JgMn L IIGIIR OIC. 7A� TSTREET^-- >< 2ZQQ 25 L••OI 10�r 1/•KN .J4 44 2400 2800 4100 8000 ..,u .. +• 01 NNf _•E7.1C. . 4900 3000 0 . 5300 .SeAC .AAIC .31AC. :.1160 ,WWAC IMAC. .SWAG _Aue 390. 3300 ww .7 L - 3400 I Q pp 23- 74 2 a i.ro k wn1 S i J 4i 11NS•n I I 50 00 Q. ' r 4500 r � •• .. ✓ 2 4 '� 2 + a. ; a a � ` b i 4 CO i .'--�=� a•• - 4600 hi 5100 1—, r /io .r . .. ,Irr SEE MAP •y 3 LL, R . .r .. tn `' 16 I 35CB• 6 _ 3 e"1 5900 1 N 4700 Cr_. 5000 2 3 i 4 p 0 a r v,Th 5600 N 4 80 L 3 4900 U f 5500 1 r y VS d i rL,_. lrtpt .ncn ... 9 4 3 ,r --n.3• rrw•. _130 ..+oti 1 L•acll ...•cn wm�~ ••h Mti r• nu• 1.1‘00 •o N A cri SEE MAP r I S 1 3400 FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY u 00 1407 RELY ON FOR ANY OILIER UfiE B .1 r B 0) r N 1997 02-10 14 11 #071 P.03/12 =ROM : * THANK YOU FOR USING FIRST AMERICAN TITLE * Washington County * r*****z**fir********i **********y t*********************************************** * a:_ * * OWNERSHIP INFORMATION * * * * Reference Parcel # :1S134DA 03300 * * Parcel Number :R0269658 TRSQ: 01S-01W-34-SE NE * * Owner :BEACON HOMES INC * * CoOwner * * Site Address : 10520 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 * * Mail Address :1865 NW 169TH PL #200 BEAVERTON OR 97006 * * Telephone :Owner Tenant * * _ * * SALES AND LOAN INFORMATION * * * * Transferred:11/06/96 Loan Amount : $227, 500 * * Document # : 99760 Lender :STERLING SVGS * * Sale Price : $265, 000 Loan Type :CONVENTIONAL * * Deed Type :WARRANTY Interest Rate:ADJUSTABLE * * % Owned : 100 Vesting Type :CORPORATION * * ASSESSMENT AND TAX INFORMATION * * * * Land * : $69, 000 Exempt Amount : Structure : $66, 030 Exempt Type * * Other :$2, 310 % Improved :49 * ` Total : $237, 340 Levy Code : 02374 * "' 96-97Taxes : $1, 869 . 89 School Dist :TIGARD * F * PROPERTY DESCRIPTION * t * , Map Grid: 655 D3 Class Code : * Census :Tract 319 . 03 Block 3 * NbrhdCd :4TIG MillRate :13 . 6149 * Sub/Plat: * ' Land Use:5034 AGR, FARM DEFERRAL * Legal :ACRES 4 . 47, UNZONED * : FARMLAND-POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL TAX * :LIABILITY * a... * PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS * * Bedrooms :3 Lot Acres :4 .47 Year Built : 1950 * 3athrooms : 1 . 00 Lot SqFt : 194, 713 EffYearBlt : 1970 * Heat Method:FORCED BsmFin SF : Floor Cover:CARPET * nool BsmUnfinSF: Foundation :CONCRETE FTG * appliances : Bldg SqFt : 1, 122 Roof Shape :HIP * )ishwasher :YES lstFlrSgFt :1, 122 Roof Matl :COMP SHINGLE * Hood Fan UpperFlSF : InteriorMat :DRYWALL * )eck : Porch SqFt : Paving Matl :CONCRETE * 7arage Type :DETACHED Attic SqFt: Const Type:WD STUD\SHTG * uarage SF :396 Deck SqFt : Ext Finish: * ******************************************************************************* The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. PC-° 1997.02-10 14: 12 #071 P.04/12 ROM : .-,::- -••-.--- - l'..4-51-...... -......;.—...; '-'-' :---1 *- .--:.:- . •-•4-.1 _ . . ..." 4.. srroaRT ins oompANyt40. 47, 7)9c,"7/....4.) ..: CS:AuTEnty0aFt wO.eRiEhOinOgNton ) ss ,• ' .. . , - . . • -- - .. RETURN OCCUMENT ID DESIGNEE EIELOW&I_JV •:.•t . I.Jerry ;', Anteni ijz.k. es moo". ',•• .- - - --'- , •. • 1D ' % . •. o •• • • ? ..rtry Ind. • •'.. •"" ..... CU '• .. . .. . . . .• •• ' and re- read. • •-‘-•474?.. . •..1.) g • \ --- . .... . _ ,, . .... it,. :- 2, • • . AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO , •', ..• • .. •• • • -.: \, , .. • •„ BEACON.HOMES.,. INC. ••• - .. • : . . • . • . .• „„ . - - • ft '14!4 -", , c,,, .,• .,. . tg.' . ' • 1865 .144.A69TH-PLACE •*200. • . .: • ',_ • , ••• •• • -•',. t .•••••-- .',••'• •• •;' • •• •- _• • '. • • .. . . evnY, '• - o -nicer et ••.•'' - - ' '- -.' .• • . 0• " ' BEAVERTON;''OR' • .9.7096 . . .., • : • ' ' : .•• ' ei'• — Son,Es- ••: •' - : .- . •• . . ., . -' -'; .11 . • • tack • • . • . - „UNTIL' FURTHER NOTICE, :ALL FUTURE Doe : 96099760 •. • .-.. - - •. - - • •' •• ' •TAX STATEMENTS SHALL BE SENT TO: •• ... Rects 174991 • • •313,,.00 • - . • •. - :- ..- •••- -- • . ..BEACON HOMES; INC. • • . .. . . , ' 11/06/1296 09: I 30 5 7 C - • •• " 1865 NW-169TH PLACE• *200'. •• • ..." • •• ■' - ' • .• BEAVERTON, OR 97006' •••• •• •••• .• • : . . • • ' •• •• •• • •• . •• ,•••• •`. ' - - . - .. . . ..- . . . ... . . , • - . • ' - . .. .. •' TAX ACCOUNT NO • . ... . • . ,..„. • * . . . : .• ._ , .. • .... , • . . . __. _ . • • . • . . - . . • -%TATUTOIlY •WARRANTY DEED • • • ' ••••••• *, • •••••• ... _-.. . .. . . . • . .• . • • . . • . • . ' , C W •• • TLLIAM V. COOKSON and•BETTY L.-COOKSON; husband and wife, ' • ' . • • • . . .. .ij • . • '. Gr-ntor,, cOnveYhT and warranti..to-BEACON HOMER,: INC. , an Oregon •. .• .. . • _ •-• • __. _ •:. . - -- .. . . ...'• Corporation, Grantee,,, the Ea I towing 'described real property l';' ..•• ..... 1." . . .. .. . ' • free of.eneueb.ranceat except•asspecifical:ly:set forth herein . ' • . ' .•,-; . . .. ... . - ' -..41c4ited:ip .WASHIGTQN Cotinty. .Cregon; t.uwi. :. • . . . • I.,. • . .., .. . . . . . . , ... .. , . • .. . . ... • . • •• - •• ... . . . •:. `•..!..• ,' ••,Als••fully•desCribeii. on Exhibit.. "A" attached and by••reference .' . .:•• • ,: ..• • snide a part hereof. . . . , •• . •• • . . . • .., - • . . - . . • . . . • . . .• . .. . . . .„. .... .• ••. . .• *. •The said:property ti free Erom..eneunderances 'except: Statutori....• ,. .• ... .. .. _ ... - •• • ' -•poWera. of •Unified. Sekarage Ageney:- rights of the pubkic...in and ..1,... • ••• . •••• _.. •• • . to any•Portion of the herein described premises lying iftithin,..e110.:', • . '`. .. . ., - .• :. ••:. .boundaries of North. Dakota:Street.: .. ••• . :. •.•••• •-•• •• : - •• . .. -- ....- ... . •• . • '' '.• . THIS INSTRUMENT,WILL.NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN .. . . ,, •-... " . -'_-_:". .. . ." •• ••• • • • . THIS INSTIIUMENT- P VIOLATION OF APPLICABLF:'• LAND USE LAWS AND ; •.•••• . • -- . . • . • • REGULATIONS: BEFORE'SIGNTNG OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT. THE • ••• ' • - - ••• •• :. • . .• PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE..TO THE PROPERTY. SHOULD CHECK WITH:.:NE. • ' ' - • - , " • . ... .... . . _ .... .. : • APPROPRIATE CI,TY. 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. . ••• : : • - . - • .. • " . . •... • • . . - - • - ' • ••.• ' . •Tfie•tue r '•cOnildera I:Ion' for •Chm•i 6.opk7ea xnce Is $7;0.5,000-GO- ' •• ' ., • ' '• ' _ $ . .. . - : . • • • . . • , • . . • • • •.• . .• • " . . . • • • • ' • Dateci thil::L1 • 'd'Aty 'of NOvariber, ..1996k" - ' .. . - , •. : ••• • • .. •,..,. - - . . ,. . . . . ••• . .• • - . •. . • :. , .... _ ... .,• . ... . . Y. * •''. .-. . • :.' .. ...::* •••••:•.*.4.• • •:,,i. .:4,;% e. • -•". "' :' .: 4.. '- I " "••••.'. •• • . t . . ' wILLIA;.t V. CoOKSoN • • ...• - •• BETTY . .COOKSON • •• • . • •• . •. • .. •• •• • • • • . .... . . . . ' . •• . . .• .... . . . .. . -.• .. •. • . ,_ - .-.. ...•. -• ••. - , ••. ''.: • ••.•.. • ,••••• •STAT E • • '.• ' -•- ;• 49'4 ,VC11). nar; : .. ... • - • . • • • '.$ 5 —.1 I. 0r:fr4IX t d, -... COu.T • •,.:.:••• ..*- -.• ' ,.•.i... .' OF.WASH rNGTON. • . •..• , ...• . .. . . . • . FEE•PAID . . ' . . . .- , , .. .' • .• On.Xoveruber 1996 p.rion-illy Ippeared• the above maimed • ..... . •.•,.... .. .• .• — f .' l• . : : •'W 1 LLIA:1 V- C oRSON and•UETTY I.; COOKSON,. 'and.•acknoi..r I edged• 1:bei•*. • . - .. . .•. . ,. ..... . . • .foregoing inetrumeni to h. their voluntary:aet• . nd. deed.. . %. . • .. •••• •: • . • .. - - " ' • ' ' • • . . . • . . . . • • • . • • • • .• •••0 •cHanLcr.s:,..1u91.:•1 ' * • • Notary Pnb i Lc, En r.:.. •• ,.. •• . .".. • .1 . -., , •*. n. '•I'V:,!"..1 •:• :ty:r"....x--.1.■..^1?..• - . 5 OF- OREGON••• •••. ' . •• '.:•• :••• ," : . .• •••• • -• '. -- ' . ••••' •• ••• • • kf.....-.:.:.•,•04.4.,..:::,:,-1.,-...p.-1.re. :-..-• .••• • .. .. •My eurrAnikeiori .P: p.lres: 5/21/9.7• ••• '. ' ..: .4 e• , . , .....---...--.., .. • , . • . • •" ' • • . , • • •• • .• • • .. . . ..,. , . • . ..•• • • . . : • • • . . . .. • . , . . . . • • '" ' • . . • ... • •• •• .• • • , •• ' • • • . • . . • . • "*. • • • • . .'• •••••• .., . ' = - • . . • • • • •' • • • . . . . . , • . • •• , •,..• . • . • . .. • . • . • . . . . . ' • .. . . . • • . • • • - • .. .. .• .• • • • • • •• "• •• . . • . • , •• . . . .• . •• • .• • . . •. % . . . ■•••4 •t:. ••7'i,:• ... . • .. " • • • • • . ... .. . . := . . . ' •,,t' ':,■•• • ..,Ar •:•-•!•, • •••' ••••• ••• . ' • . • 7 1. c• • • • . . • . . •• • • • .. . • • • • . • . • .•.. FRO : 1997.02-1e 14:13 *071 P.05/12 AMMO, , - -• • tali' 95099471-N• t r _ - - •• The following described tract of land. in Sections 34 and 35, ' Township 3. South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the County Of Washington and. State of Oregon: ' :, Commencing at a point in the North, line"of. the John L. Hicklin. -: . ;. . Donation. Land. Claim NO 54, which is 38.96 chains East of the - Northweet corner of said Hicklin D.L.C. and which point is the • • ' : " , I - . . ,';.•:• Northeast corner of that certain tract of land conveyed to C.M. Robbins by, deed recorded February 1, 1916, in Book 106,• page . ' 't'• 168,. Deed Records; thence, South along the. Easterly boundary of • ','' - :-. .:, • said Robbins tract and on a line parallel to.the West line of •': -- ' • - said D.L°.C.• 249.15 feet to the Southeast.corner of said Robbins . ' tract, which point is. the Northeast corner of that tract of land ' • - ' ' •• conveyed to Raymond Evaaeon by deed recorded March 21, 1962 in . ' •• 1- •• • • soak.459, page 458, Deed Records; thence continuing South along••• . ; '.1O the East line of the Evanson tract 250.70 feet to the Southeast ' ' • - : corner thereof, which point is on the.North•line of that certain , . • - tract of land ,conveyed to W.A. Root,:. et ux, by deed recorded•- : - - July 26, 1941 in Book 22, page 607, Deed Records; thence.East•.on . • ,, • the North line of said Root tract 506.52 'feet to the East line .: , •: '• . • of that certain- tract of land conveyed to Gustaf Linden by deed'... •a recorded September 24, 1906, in Book 72, page 287, Deed Records; . .' .. • • thence North on. said East line of the Linden tract and parallel•'•.'• •'.:•-•• - to the West..line of said:D.L.C: 498.3 feet to the Northerly ... - •• ' line of said D:L.C., thence West 506.55 feet along said D.L.C. • • • • ' line to the place of beginning.: ~'. . , EXCEPT that portion conveyed to<Pascuzzi Investment.'Co•:,"an • • Oregon corporation, by deed. recorded December 9, 1968'.in•Book : •, . '., . 726 • Page 373 described,as follows ;; - , • ' A parcel of land in the Southwest quarter of Section 35, . ' '• -- ' •• . Township 1 South,: Range 1 West;of the Willamette Meridian, = , • Washington County, Oregon, being a portion of that certain. tract • ' • of land described in the conveyance from William and Frances C. . t • '. - - White to William,V. and Betty L. Cookson, husband and wife, by. ,' ' • , • _-• • . Deed recorded in Book 462, .Page .167,'.Washington County Deed v,. '. Records, and being more particularly described as follows Beginning at the Northwest corner of the said Cookson tract, ;,..7-. •-.4 said point of beginning also. being. the Northwest corner of that ,:t� certain tract-•of land conveyed to Pascuzzi Investment Company. by T.•41.1 ' _•• • Deed recorded in Book 655, Page 567, Washington County Deed • • • • tp` : ` Records; thence South 0'02' west,•.along the East line of said Cookson. tract,. and. also' along the West line, of the said Paecuzzi ,, .. • tract, .495:02 feet to the. Southwest corner of the said•Pascuzzi <. '., •• • : '• • tract; thence :89.30' West, along the Westerly extension of the . ' • . South line of the said Pasouzzi tract, 100.00 feet to a point; thence North 0''02' East, parallel with the East line of the said i, a •, Cookson.tract; 4.95.02 feet to a point on the.North line of the • -'- ` •• John• L. Hicklin D:L.C. .NO.: 54 thence South 89.30' .East, along. . 1 . t . • the said D.L:C. Ts North line, 100.00 feetta the point of :•, .. • •. : beginning. _ ' lki - 11,41.419 2 0 .g0 f4 NORTH LINE JOHN L. !11CKLlN DIC. 44 -�� TSTREE s 3 44.23 ��,. 7534 37.02 p �` 590• v '�"53C0� 3300 500.55 loo — i Q g 1 4,t7AC. 3400 A 7 N O► a /./d AC, J�J r t K NO I a/ 90.10 ri 4- . tiO 0 5800 0 ° 0 I 10'To e. w 0 h. Of 6 N CO • b ° ` s SEE MA"t,0001, N A is I 3e. 57001 • � iAr 5404 0 r 0 r S N N 2 n/r r ... o co r 75.50 —� 1 0 tD 5600 I e.-74JZ —^ 5500 0 ,i N r 4 0 . 0 o0 // NIT:A111 PT. Sir 51)291 se _`�`� le7�s 60/.75 �Ll\ — 506.32 N u 0 r 0 r N AppevicUx E =16 Stewart Title/Washington • aner:WASHINGTON SQUARE INC RefParce1 : 1S135BC 01200 ou.te : 10785 SW CASCADE AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 03/29/95 Mail : 700 5TH AVE #2600 SEATTLE WA 98104. SalePrice : $153 , 077 ;e : 3002 VACANT, INDUSTRIAL LandAV : $19, 950 gal :ACRES 7 . 98 , CODE SPLIT ImprvmtAV: TotalAV : $19, 950 • 95-96 Taxes : $273 .40 dephone : MapGrid: 655 D2 LotSF: 8 , 276 Bedrm: Bth: YB : Class : B1dgSF : Ac : 7 . 98 - =17 Stewart Title/Washington • iner :WASHINGTON SQUARE INC RefParce1 : 1S135BC 01200 --te : 10785 SW CASCADE AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 03/29/95 Mail : 700 5TH AVE #2600 SEATTLE WA 98104 SalePrice : $153 , 076 ;e : 3002 VACANT, INDUSTRIAL LandAV : $1, 900 gal :ACRES . 19, CODE SPLIT ImprvmtAV: TotalAV : $1, 900 95-96 Taxes : $26 . 39 lephone : MapGrid: 655 D2 LotSF : 8 , 276 Bedrm: Bth: YB : Class : BldgSF : Ac : . 19 —18 Stewart Title/Washington • tner:LUSK LINDA D RefParce1 : 1S134DA 00100 __te : 10485 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 06/05/96 Mail : PO BOX 425 WEST LINN OR 97068 SalePrice : $2 , 080 , 000 ;e : 7014 RES, MULTIPLE HOUSING, IMPROVEMENTS LandAV : $212 , 000 gal :ACRES 6 .38 ImprvmtAV: $1, 580 , 480 TotalAV : $1, 792 , 480 95-96 Taxes : $24, 563 .43 !lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: 277, 912 nedrm: Bth: YB : Class :A35 B1dgSF: Ac : 6 . 38 0=19 Stewart Title/Washington • iner :COOKSON WILLIAM V RefParcel : 1S134DA 03300 _te : 10520 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd Mail : 10520 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : ;e : 5034 AGR, FARM DEFERRAL LandAV : $40, 250 gal :ACRES 4 .47 , UNZONED ImprvmtAV: $59, 730 : FARMLAND-POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL TAX TotalAV : $102 , 150 :LIABILITY 95-96 Taxes : $1, 399 . 83 lephone : 503-639-5069 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : l94 , 713 _ �drm:3 Bth : 1 . 00 YB : 1950 Class : B1dgSF : 1, 122 Ac :4 . 47 ■=20 Stewart Title/Washington • aner :BROWN REBECCA E RefParcel : 1S134DA 04300 _te : 10551 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 04/16/92 Mail : 10551 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $74, 000 ;e : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20, 850 ga1 :VENTURA COURT, LOT 8 ImprvmtAV: $56, 310 TotalAV : $77, 160 95-96 Taxes : $1, 057 . 35 lephone : MapGrid: 65E 1D3 LotSF : �drm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF: 1, 104 Ac : The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. =31 Stewart Title/Washington ■ aner : PASCUZZI ARTHUR RefParce1 : 1S135CB 00400 bite : 11535 SW TIEDEMAN AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd M-til : 10250 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : ;e : 2312 MISC, NON-MFG, IMPROVEMENT, IND ZONE LandAV : $193 , 870 _!ga1 :ACRES 1 . 87 ImprvmtAV: $15, 180 TotalAV : $209, 050 • 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 864 . 73 Jlephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 81, 457 Bedrm: Bth : YB : Class : BldgSF : Ac : 1 . 87 :32 Stewart Title/Washington ■ mer :RICHARDS JAMES E; SHARON S RefParce1 : 1S134DD 00100 bite : 10635 SW TIGARD ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 11/28/89 :44 W KENSINGTON AVE ASTORIA OR 97703 SalePrice : $3 , 442 , 994 ;e : 7014 RES, MULTIPLE HOUSING, IMPROVEMENTS LandAV : $418 , 700 !gal :ACRES 6 . 08 ImprvmtAV: $2 , 872 , 060 TotalAV : $3 , 290 , 760 • 95-96 Taxes : $45, 095 . 25 !lephone : 503 -325-8448 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 264, 844 Bedrm: Bth: YB : Class : B1dgSF : Ac : 6 . 08 The Information Provided Is Deemed. Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. =31 Stewart Title/Washington • iner : PASCUZZI ARTHUR RefParce1 : 1S135CB 00400 Site : 11535 SW TIEDEMAN AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd "qil : 10250 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : ;e : 2312 MISC, NON-MFG, IMPROVEMENT, IND ZONE LandAV : $193 , 870 _Jgal :ACRES 1 . 87 ImprvmtAV: $15, 180 TotalAV : $209, 050 • 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 864 . 73 !lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 81, 457 Bedrm: Bth: YB : Class : B1dgSF : Ac : 1 . 87 :32 Stewart Title/Washington • Tner :RICHARDS JAMES E; SHARON S RefParce1 : 1S134DD 00100 site : 10635 SW TIGARD ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 11/28/89 :44 W KENSINGTON AVE ASTORIA OR 97103 SalePrice : $3 , 442 , 994 ;e : 7014 RES, MULTIPLE HOUSING, IMPROVEMENTS LandAV : $418 , 700 ;ga1 :ACRES 6 . 08 ImprvmtAV: $2 , 872 , 060 TotalAV : $3 , 290 , 760 • 95-96 Taxes : $45 , 095 . 25 !lephone : 503-325-8448 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 264, 844 Bedrm: Bth: YB : Class : B1dgSF: Ac : 6 . 08 The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. 26 Stewart Title/Washington • aner : FITZGERALD SANDRA J RefParce1 : 1S134DA 03600 . ite : 10587 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd mail : 10587 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $37, 500 se : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20, 850 .ga1 :VENTURA COURT, LOT 2 ImprvmtAV: $56, 500 TotalAV : $77, 350 • 95-96 Taxes : $1, 059 . 97 .lephone : 503-620-2542 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : Bedrm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF : 1, 104 Ac : - =27 Stewart Title/Washington • rner : POWELL MONICA LEA RefParcel : 1S134DA 03500 ..).mote : 10593 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 04/10/96 Mail : 10593 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $109, 000 se : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20, 850 gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 1 ImprvmtAV: $56, 500 TotalAV : $77, 350 95-96 Taxes : $1, 059 . 97 .lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : rsedrm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF : 1, 104 Ac : --=28 Stewart Title/Washington • rner : PATECKY KENNETH F RefParcel : 1S134DA 03000 —te : 10600 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 01/12/94 Mail :4014 ROSE ST VANCOUVER WA 98660 SalePrice : ;e : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $47, 380 gal :ACRES . 87 ImprvmtAV: $113 , 690 TotalAV : $161, 070 • 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 207 . 23 .lephone : 360-695-6598 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: 37 , 897 nedrm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1961 Class :R13 B1dgSF: 2 , 420 Ac : . 87 ■-29 Stewart Title/Washington • rner : PATECKY KENNETH F RefParcel : 1S134DA 02900 _te : 10630 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 01/12/94 Mail :4014 ROSE ST VANCOUVER WA 98660 SalePrice : se : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $47, 380 gal :ACRES . 86 ImprvmtAV: $35, 330 TotalAV : $82, 710 95-96 Taxes : $1, 133 .42 lephone : 360-695-6598 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: 37 , 461 ��drm: 2 Bth: 1 . 00 YB : 1930 Class :R13 B1dgSF : 768 Ac : . 86 11=30 Stewart Title/Washington • rner:MERLO STATION PARTNERS RefParce1 : 1S135CB 00300 _te : 11445 SW TIEDEMAN AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd Mail : PO BOX 23516 TIGARD OR 97281 SalePrice : $225 , 000 se : 2312 MISC, NON-MFG, IMPROVEMENT, IND ZONE LandAV : $103 , 790 _ga1 :ACRES . 74 ImprvmtAV: $106 , 020 TotalAV : $209 , 810 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 875 . 15 .lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 32 , 234 _ 2drm: Bth: YB : Class : B1dgSF: Ac : . 74 The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. =21 Stewart Title/Washington • aner :BROOKS SUSAN RefParce1 : 1S134DA 04200 _ite : 10557 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 12/02/92 Mail : 10557 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $80, 000 3e : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20, 850 .gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 7 ImprvmtAV: $56, 930 TotalAV : $77, 780 95-96 Taxes : $1, 065 . 87 .lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: nedrm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF : 1, 104 Ac : ■=22 Stewart Title/Washington • rner :WILLIAMS JAMES ESSEL RefParcel : 1S134DA 04100 _te : 10563 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 04/08/93 Mail : 10569 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $77, 000 3e : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20, 850 .gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 6 ImprvmtAV: $63 , 490 TotalAV : $84, 340 • 95-96 Taxes : $1, 155 . 77 Jephone : 503-684-6577 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : L�drm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF: 1, 360 Ac : 0=23 Stewart Title/Washington • Jner :WILLIAMS JAMES ESSEL RefParce1 : 1S134DA 04000 _te : 10569 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 04/08/93 Mail : 10569 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $72, 000 ;e : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20, 850 gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 5 ImprvmtAV: $62, 100 TotalAV : $82, 950 95-96 Taxes : $1, 136 . 70 ;lephone : 503-684-6577 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : _ 3drm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF: 1, 176 Ac : 1=24 Stewart Title/Washington • rner :THALER TODD A RefParcel : 1S134DA 03900 Lte : 10575 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 08/19/96 Mail : PO BOX 230813 TIGARD OR 97281 SalePrice : " ;e : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20 , 850 :gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 4 ImprvmtAV: $63 , 330 TotalAV : $84, 180 95-96 Taxes : $1, 153 . 60 dephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : �drm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF : 1, 180 Ac : ■=25 Stewart Title/Washington • aner:KHIZHNYAK DMITRIY;ALLA RefParcel : 1S134DA 03700 _te : 10581 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 06/13/96 Mail : 10581 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $100 , 000 T'3e : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20, 850 ..gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 3 ImprvmtAV: $62 , 810 TotalAV : $83 , 660 95-96 Taxes : $1, 146 .48 :lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: °drm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF : 1, 180 Ac : The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. - 11 Stewart Title/Washington • ner:DAILEY DALE E;SONDRA L RefParce1 : 1S134DA 05600 „�te :11343 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 12/01/95 Mail :11343 SW 105TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $159, 000 e : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 gal :NODAK, LOT 4, ACRES .23 ImprvmtAV: $118 , 690 TotalAV : $156 , 590 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 145 . 85 lephone : MapGrid:655 D3 LotSF: 10, 018 rsedrm:3 Bth: YB: 1991 Class :R14 B1dgSF: 1, 728 Ac: .23 --12 Stewart Title/Washington • ner:CATMULL DENNIS B;PAULA RefParce1 :1S134DA 05500 __te :11348 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd :11/22/93 Mail :11348 SW 105TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $145 , 500 e :1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 :gal :NODAK, LOT 3 , ACRES .21 ImprvmtAV: $131, 620 TotalAV : $169, 520 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 323 . 01 :lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: 9, 147 Dedrm:3 Bth: YB : 1992 Class :R14 B1dgSF:1, 920 Ac : .21 ■-13 Stewart Title/Washington • mer:WITHROW PAMELA JEAN RefParcel :1S134DA 00400 to :11150 SW 106TH AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 06/20/95 Mail :11150 SW 106TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : ;e : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $32, 590 !gal:NORTHERN PINE, LOT 12 ImprvmtAV: $83, 690 TotalAV : $116, 280 • 95-96 Taxes : $1, 593 .45 !lephone : MapGrid:655 D3 LotSF: Ludrm:3 Bth:2 . 00 YB :1979 Class :R13 B1dgSF: 1, 528 Ac: ■=14 Stewart Title/Washington • iner:WEIS C L RefParcel :1S134DA 00300 _te : 11180 SW 106TH AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 08/31/95 Mail : 11180 SW 106TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $50, 000 ;e :1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $24, 640 ;gal :NORTHERN PINE, LOT PT 13 ImprvmtAV: $50, 790 TotalAV : $75, 430 95-96 Taxes : $1, 033 . 65 ;lephone:503-620-3516 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: _ adrm:2 Bth:2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 BldgSF: 960 Ac : ■=15 Stewart Title/Washington • uner:VENABLES JOHN V RefParcel : 1S134DA 00302 ite :11190 SW 106TH AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 07/13/90 Mail :7120 SW 60TH AVE PORTLAND OR 97219 SalePrice : " 3e :1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $24, 640 agal :NORTHERN PINE, LOT PT 13 ImprvmtAV: $50, 790 TotalAV : $75, 430 • 95-96 Taxes : $1, 033 . 65 alephone:503-246-7544 MapGrid:655 D3 LotSF: adrm:2 Bth:2 . 00 YB :1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF: 960 Ac : The Information Provided Is Deemee. Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. 11=6 Stewart Title/Washington • aner:REID MICHAEL EVAN;JAN MICHELL RefParce1 : 1S134DA 05900 ite : 11221 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 07/22/91 Mail : 11221 SW 105TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $74, 500 "se : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 agal :NODAK, LOT 7, ACRES .25 ImprvmtAV: $49, 640 TotalAV : $87, 540 95-96 Taxes : $1, 199 .58 alephone :503-598-9325 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF:10, 890 adrm:2 Bth: YB : 1943 Class :R13 B1dgSF:1, 344 Ac : .25 ■=7 Stewart Title/Washington • vner:NEWCASTLE HOMES INC RefParce1 : 1S134DA 05300 Lte : 11252 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 04/18/91 Mail :PO BOX 23291 TIGARD OR 97281 SalePrice: "se : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 agal :NODAK, LOT 1, ACRES .33 ImprvmtAV: $181, 760 TotalAV : $219, 660 95-96 Taxes : $3 , 010 . 14 slephone :503-639-3608 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: 14, 374 adrm:3 Bth: YB :1991 Class : B1dgSF:2, 706 Ac : .33 •=8 Stewart Title/Washington • Miner:MARTIN SHARI R RefParcel :1S134DA 05800 Lte : 11293 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 05/01/92 a•,aii : 11293 SW 105TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $118 , 000 "se : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 agal :NODAK, LOT 6, ACRES .21 ImprvmtAV: $108 , 110 TotalAV : $146, 010 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 000 . 87 alephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: 9, 147 adrm:3 Bth: YB :1991 Class : B1dgSF:1, 418 Ac : .21 ■=9 Stewart Title/Washington • -wner:MILLS DONALD R;NANCY ANN RefParcel :1S134DA 05400 Lte : 11310 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 09/26/91 .-.ail : 11310 SW 105TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $119, 500 Use :1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 agal :NODAK, LOT 2, ACRES .21 ImprvmtAV: $116, 130 TotalAV : $154, 030 95-96 Taxes : $2, 110 . 77 :lephone :503-684-4979 MapGrid:655 D3 LotSF: 9, 147 adrm:3 Bth: YB: 1991 Class : B1dgSF:1, 605 Ac: .21 ■=10 Stewart Title/Washington • ^wner:LEW MONIKA J RefParce1 : 1S134DA 05700 Lte :11315 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 06/20/96 _ ail :11315 SW 105TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $161, 250 Use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 :ga1:NODAK, LOT 5, ACRES .21 ImprvmtAV: $117, 180 TotalAV : $155, 080 95-96 Taxes : $2, 125 . 14 -alephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: 9, 147 adrm:3 Bth: YB : 1991 Class :R14 B1dgSF:1, 574 Ac: .21 The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. ■=1 Stewart Title/Washington • aner:PASCUZZI INVESTMENT RefParcel : 1S134DA 03400 Lte : *NO SITE ADDRESS* Xferd : 06/02/95 •,ail : 10250 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : use : 1002 VACANT, RESIDENTIAL LandAV : $4 , 680 !gal :ACRES 1 . 10 ImprvmtAV: TotalAV : $4 , 680 95-96 Taxes : $64 . 11 dephone : MapGrid: LotSF:47 , 916 'drm: Bth: YB : Class : B1dgSF : Ac : 1 . 10 •=2- Stewart Title/Washington • iner :GUNDERSON JOHN M;CARMEN A RefParcel : 1S134DA 00500 .te : SW 106TH AV TIGARD Xferd : 04/26/96 sail : 11120 SW 106TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $50 , 000 Use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 !gal :NORTHERN PINE, LOT 11 ImprvmtAV: $98 , 680 TotalAV : $136 , 580 95-96 Taxes : $1, 871 . 64 :lephone : 503-639-2923 MapGrid: LotSF : :drm: 3 Bth: 3 . 00 YB : 1978 Class :R14 BldgSF : 2 , 030 Ac : ■=3 Stewart Title/Washington • ^•rner:TIGARD CITY OF RefParcel : 1S134DD 00103 .te : *NO SITE ADDRESS* Xferd .....ail : 13125 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : Use : 9154 GOV, CITY LandAV : $11, 400 !gal :ACRES 2 . 28 , NON-ASSESSABLE ImprvmtAV: TotalAV : $11, 400 95-96 Taxes : :lephone : 503-629-0111 MapGrid: LotSF: 99, 316 :drm: Bth: YB : Class : BldgSF : Ac :2 . 28 Stewart Title/Washington • nwner:SCHAEFER DONALD M;MILYNN 0 RefParcel : 1S134DD 00102 .te : *NO SITE ADDRESS* Xferd : 04/30/93 Lil :PO BOX 23697 TIGARD OR 97281 SalePrice : Use :2314 MISC, NON-MFG, IMPROVEMENT, IND ZONE LandAV : $86, 040 !gal :ACRES 1 . 75 ImprvmtAV: $84, 690 TotalAV : $170 , 730 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 339 . 62 "' :lephone : MapGrid: LotSF : 76 , 230 :drm: Bth: YB : Class : I15 BldgSF : Ac : 1 . 75 -=5 Stewart Title/Washington • nwner :PASCUZZI INVESTMENT RefParcel : 1S135CB 00200 .te : 10250 SW N TIGARD Xferd : 06/02/95 Lit : 10250 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : Use :3012 IND, IMPROVED LandAV : $465 , 490 :gal :ACRES 4 .49 ImprvmtAV: $1, 380 , 480 TotalAV : $1, 845 , 970 95-96 Taxes : $25, 296 .43 Telephone : MapGrid: LotSF : 195, 584 :drm: Bth: YB : Class : I2 BldgSF : Ac :4 .49 The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. ■=16 Stewart Title/Washington • ner :WASHINGTON SQUARE INC RefParcel : 1S135BC 01200 te : 10785 SW CASCADE AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 03/29/95 nail : 700 5TH AVE #2600 SEATTLE WA 98104 SalePrice : $153 , 077 TT^e : 3002 VACANT, INDUSTRIAL LandAV : $19, 950 gal :ACRES 7 . 98 , CODE SPLIT ImprvmtAV: TotalAV : $19, 950 95-96 Taxes : $273 .40 lephone : MapGrid: 655 D2 LotSF : 8 , 276 drm: Bth: YB : Class : B1dgSF : Ac : 7 . 98 ■=17 Stewart Title/Washington • - ner :WASHINGTON SQUARE INC RefParcel : 1S135BC 01200 te : 10785 SW CASCADE AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 03/29/95 vi it : 700 5TH AVE #2600 SEATTLE WA 98104 SalePrice : $153 , 076 TTge : 3002 VACANT, INDUSTRIAL LandAV : $1, 900 'gal :ACRES . 19, CODE SPLIT ImprvmtAV: TotalAV : $1, 900 • 95-96 Taxes : $26 . 39 lephone : MapGrid: 655 D2 LotSF: 8 , 276 drm: Bth: YB : Class : B1dgSF : Ac : . 19 1=18 Stewart Title/Washington • ' 'ner :LUSK LINDA D RefParce1 : 1S134DA 00100 te : 10485 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 06/05/96 ..-il : PO BOX 425 WEST LINN OR 97068 SalePrice : $2 , 080 , 000 Use : 7014 RES, MULTIPLE HOUSING, IMPROVEMENTS LandAV : $212 , 000 'gal :ACRES 6 . 38 ImprvmtAV: $1, 580 , 480 TotalAV : $1, 792 , 480 95-96 Taxes : $24, 563 .43 !lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 277, 912 !drm: Bth: YB : Class :A35 B1dgSF : Ac : 6 . 38 0=19 Stewart Title/Washington - • ^•7ner :OOOKSON WILLIAM V RefParce1 : 1S134DA 03300, .te : 10520 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd g� �""� __Al : 10520 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : _.=s ,c . .- .. !, .. .. Use : 5034 AGR, FARM DEFERRAL LandAV : $40 , 250 !gal :ACRES 4 .47 , UNZONED ImprvmtAV: $59, 730 : FARMLAND-POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL TAX TotalAV : $102 , 150 :LIABILITY 95-96 Taxes : $1, 399 . 83 - !lephone : 503-639-5069 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 194 , 713 :drm: 3 Bth: 1 . 00 YB : 1950 Class : BldgSF : 1, 122 Ac : 4 .47 -=20 Stewart Title/Washington • nwner :BROWN REBECCA E RefParcel : 1S134DA 04300 _te : 10551 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 04/16/92 Ill : 10551 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $74 , 000 Use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20 , 850 .gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 8 ImprvmtAV: $56 , 310 TotalAV : $77 , 160 95-96 Taxes : $1, 057 . 35 --- lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: drm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF: 1, 104 Ac : The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. V°----9 ■=11 Stewart Title/Washington • aner:DAILEY DALE E; SONDRA L RefParce1 : 1S134DA 05600 Lte : 11343 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 12/01/95 vial]. : 11343 SW 105TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $159 , 000 use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 ..ga1 :NODAK, LOT 4 , ACRES .23 ImprvmtAV: $118 , 690 TotalAV : $156, 590 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 145 . 85 .lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 10 , 018 °drm: 3 Bth: YB : 1991 Class :Rl4 B1dgSF: 1, 728 Ac : . 23 0=12 Stewart Title/Washington • " iner :CATMULL DENNIS B; PAULA RefParcel : 1S134DA 05500 _te : 11348 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 11/22/93 -ail : 11348 SW 105TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $145 , 500 use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 ?.gal :NODAK, LOT 3 , ACRES .21 ImprvmtAV: $131, 620 TotalAV : $169, 520 • 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 323 . 01 lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: 9, 147 :drm: 3 Bth : YB : 1992 Class :R14 B1dgSF: 1, 920 Ac : . 21 0=13 - Stewart Title/Washington • ^-aner :WITHROW PAMELA JEAN RefParcel : 1S134DA 00400 _te : 11150 SW 106TH AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 06/20/95 ..ail : 11150 SW 106TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : Use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $32, 590 • ga1 :NORTHERN PINE, LOT 12 ImprvmtAV: $83 , 690 TotalAV : $116 , 280 95-96 Taxes : $1, 593 .45 lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : �drm:3 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1979 Class :R13 B1dgSF : 1, 528 Ac : -=14 Stewart Title/Washington • nwner :WEIS C L RefParcel : 1S134DA 00300 _te : 11180 SW 106TH AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 08/31/95 dl : 11180 SW 106TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $50 , 000 + Jai Use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $24, 640 I gal :NORTHERN PINE, LOT PT 13 ImprvmtAV: $50 , 790 TotalAV : $75 , 430 • 95-96 Taxes : $1, 033 . 65 -- lephone : 503-620-3516 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : :drm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF : 960 Ac : 15 Stewart Title/Washington • Owner :VENABLES JOHN V RefParce1 : 1S134DA 00302 _te : 11190 SW 106TH AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 07/13/90 , lil : 7120 SW 60TH AVE PORTLAND OR 97219 SalePrice : �� }\. \Use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $24 , 640 `�' ,_ ga1 :NORTHERN PINE, LOT PT 13 ImprvmtAV: $50 , 790 TotalAV : $75 , 430 • 95-96 Taxes : $1, 033 . 65 Thlephone : 503-246-7544 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : �drm:2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF: 960 Ac : The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. m Stewart Title/Washington • ^wner : PASCUZZI INVESTMENT RefParcel : 1S134DA 03400 ite : *NO SITE ADDRESS* Xferd : 06/02/95 ..ail : 10250 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : Use : 1002 VACANT, RESIDENTIAL LandAV : $4, 680 gal :ACRES 1 . 10 ImprvmtAV: TotalAV : $4 , 680 • 95-96 Taxes : $64 . 11 °lephone : MapGrid: LotSF :47 , 916 �drm: Bth: YB : Class : B1dgSF : Ac : 1 . 10 •=2 Stewart Title/Washington • ^•vner :GUNDERSON JOHN M;CARMEN A RefParcel : 1S134DA 00500 Lte : SW 106TH AV TIGARD Xferd : 04/26/96 __ail : 11120 SW 106TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $50 , 000 Use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 ?.gal :NORTHERN PINE, LOT 11 ImprvmtAV: $98 , 680 TotalAV : $136 , 580 • 95-96 Taxes : $1, 871 . 64 - lephone : 503-639-2923 MapGrid: LotSF : �drm: 3 Bth: 3 . 00 YB : 1978 Class :R14 B1dgSF: 2 , 030 Ac : -=3 Stewart Title/Washington • nwner :TIGARD CITY OF RefParcel : 1S134DD 00103 Lte : *NO SITE ADDRESS* Xferd 1i1 : 13125 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : Use : 9154 GOV, CITY LandAV : $11, 400 .ga1 :ACRES 2 . 28 , NON-ASSESSABLE ImprvmtAV: TotalAV : $11, 400 • 95-96 Taxes : r"-lephone : 503-629-0111 MapGrid: LotSF : 99, 316 drm: Bth: YB : Class : B1dgSF : Ac : 2 . 28 =4 Stewart Title/Washington • Owner : SCHAEFER DONALD M;MILYNN 0 RefParcel : 1S134DD 00102 Lte : *NO SITE ADDRESS* Xferd : 04/30/93 iil : PO BOX 23697 TIGARD OR 97281 SalePrice : Use : 2314 MISC, NON-MFG, IMPROVEMENT, IND ZONE LandAV : $86, 040 .ga1 :ACRES 1 . 75 ImprvmtAV: $84 , 690 TotalAV : $170 , 730 • 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 339 . 62 telephone : MapGrid: LotSF : 76 , 230 °drm: Bth: YB : Class : I15 B1dgSF : Ac : 1 . 75 5 Stewart Title/Washington • Owner : PASCUZZI INVESTMENT RefParcel : 1S135CB 00200 Lte : 10250 SW N TIGARD Xferd : 06/02/95 iil : 10250 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : Use : 3012 IND, IMPROVED LandAV : $465 , 490 - ..gal :ACRES 4 .49 ImprvmtAV: $1, 380, 480 TotalAV : $1, 845 , 970 • 95-96 Taxes : $25 , 296 .43 Telephone : MapGrid: LotSF : 195 , 584 °drm: Bth: YB : Class : I2 B1dgSF : Ac :4 .49 The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. �� I ■=26 Stewart Title/Washington • vner: FITZGERALD SANDRA J RefParcel : 1S134DA 03600 Lte : 10587 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd ' ail : 10587 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $37, 500 TTse : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20, 850 .gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 2 ImprvmtAV: $56, 500 TotalAV : $77, 350 95-96 Taxes : $1, 059 . 97 lephone : 503-620-2542 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : �drm:2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 BldgSF : 1, 104 Ac : 0=27 Stewart Title/Washington • aner :POWELL MONICA LEA RefParcel : 1S134DA 03500 _te : 10593 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 04/10/96 mail : 10593 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $109, 000 TTSe : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20, 850 :gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 1 ImprvmtAV: $56, 500 TotalAV : $77, 350 95-96 Taxes : $1, 059 . 97 dlephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : :drm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF : 1, 104 Ac : 11=28 Stewart Title/Washington • ^-iner :PATECKY KENNETH F RefParcel : 1S134DA 03000 .te : 10600 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 01/12/94 ..ail :4014 ROSE ST VANCOUVER WA 98660 SalePrice : Use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $47, 380 gal :ACRES . 87 ImprvmtAV: $113 , 690 TotalAV : $161, 070 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 207 . 23 Jlephone : 360-695-6598 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: 37 , 897 :drm:2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1961 Class :R13 BldgSF: 2 , 420 Ac : . 87 11=29 Stewart Title/Washington • nwner:PATECKY KENNETH F RefParcel : 1S134DA 02900 _te : 10630 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 01/12/94 ►il :4014 ROSE ST VANCOUVER WA 98660 SalePrice : Use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $47, 380 :gal :ACRES . 86 ImprvmtAV: $35, 330 TotalAV : $82 , 710 95-96 Taxes : $1, 133 .42 "" lephone : 360-695-6598 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 37 , 461 :drm: 2 Bth: 1 . 00 YB : 1930 Class :R13 B1dgSF : 768 Ac : . 86 --30 Stewart Title/Washington • nwner :MERLO STATION PARTNERS RefParcel : 1S135CB 00300 _te : 11445 SW TIEDEMAN AVE TIGARD 97223 Xferd : PO BOX 23516 TIGARD OR 97281 SalePrice : $225 , 000 Use : 2312 MISC, NON-MFG, IMPROVEMENT, IND ZONE LandAV : $103 , 790 :gal :ACRES .74 ImprvmtAV: $106 , 020 TotalAV : $209, 810 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 875 . 15 "-!lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 32 , 234 :drm: Bth: YB : Class : B1dgSF : Ac : . 74 The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. ,-;77e-t27./ •=21 Stewart Title/Washington • vner :BROOKS SUSAN RefParcel : 1S134DA 04200 Lte : 10557 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 12/02/92 Mail : 10557 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $80, 000 se : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20, 850 ..gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 7 ImprvmtAV: $56, 930 TotalAV : $77, 780 95-96 Taxes : $1, 065 . 87 �lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : ,adrm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF: 1, 104 Ac : 0=22 Stewart Title/Washington • oner :WILLIAMS JAMES ESSEL RefParcel : 1S134DA 04100 .te : 10563 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 04/08/93 Mail : 10569 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $77, 000 se : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20, 850 ..gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 6 ImprvmtAV: $63 , 490 TotalAV : $84, 340 • 95-96 Taxes : $1, 155 . 77 .lephone : 503-684-6577 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : _adrm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 BldgSF: 1, 360 Ac : •=23 Stewart Title/Washington • ener :WILLIAMS JAMES ESSEL RefParce1 : 1S134DA 04000 Lte : 10569 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 04/08/93 Mail : 10569 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $72 , 000 se : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20, 850 gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 5 ImprvmtAV: $62 , 100 TotalAV : $82 , 950 • 95-96 Taxes : $1, 136 . 70 .1.ephone : 503-684-6577 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: _drm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :Rl4 B1dgSF : 1, 176 Ac : ■=24 Stewart Title/Washington • vner :THALER TODD A RefParcel : 1S134DA 03900 Lte : 10575 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 08/19/96 Mail : PO BOX 230813 TIGARD OR 97281 SalePrice : — se : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20 , 850 gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 4 ImprvmtAV: $63 , 330 TotalAV : $84, 180 95-96 Taxes : $1, 153 . 60 dephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : drm: 2 Bth : 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 BldgSF : 1, 180 Ac : ■=25 Stewart Title/Washington • vner :KHIZHNYAK DMITRIY;ALLA RefParcel : 1S134DA 03700 Lte : 10581 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 06/13/96 mail : 10581 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $100 , 000 "se : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $20 , 850 gal :VENTURA COURT, LOT 3 ImprvmtAV: $62 , 810 TotalAV : $83 , 660 • 95-96 Taxes : $1, 146 .48 ?.lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : °drm: 2 Bth: 2 . 00 YB : 1980 Class :R14 B1dgSF: 1, 180 Ac : The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. r� ��V ■=6 Stewart Title/Washington • '- ner :REID MICHAEL EVAN;JAN MICHELL RefParce1 : 1S134DA 05900 te : 11221 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 07/22/91 ,,ail : 11221 SW 105TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $74 , 500 TTe : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 gal :NODAK, LOT 7, ACRES .25 ImprvmtAV: $49, 640 TotalAV : $87, 540 95-96 Taxes : $1, 199 . 58 ' lephone : 503-598-9325 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 10 , 890 drm: 2 Bth: YB : 1943 Class :R13 B1dgSF : 1, 344 Ac : . 25 ■=7 Stewart Title/Washington • " ner :NEWCASTLE HOMES INC RefParcel : 1S134DA 05300 te : 11252 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 04/18/91 ..uil :PO BOX 23291 TIGARD OR 97281 SalePrice : TTse : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37 , 900 gal :NODAK, LOT 1, ACRES .33 ImprvmtAV: $181, 760 TotalAV : $219, 660 95-96 Taxes : $3 , 010 . 14 lephone : 503-639-3608 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 14 , 374 drm: 3 Bth: YB : 1991 Class : B1dgSF:2 , 706 Ac : . 33 ■=8 Stewart Title/Washington • r`••ner:MARTIN SHARI R RefParcel : 1S134DA 05800 te : 11293 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 05/01/92 ___il : 11293 SW 105TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $118 , 000 Use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 gal :NODAK, LOT 6 , ACRES . 21 ImprvmtAV: $108 , 110 TotalAV : $146 , 010 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 000 . 87 lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: 9 , 147 drm: 3 Bth: YB : 1991 Class : BldgSF : l, 418 Ac : . 21 --9 Stewart Title/Washington • owner :MILLS DONALD R;NANCY ANN RefParce1 : 1S134DA 05400 te : 11310 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 09/26/91 it : 11310 SW 105TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $119, 500 Use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37, 900 gal :NODAK, LOT 2 , ACRES .21 ImprvmtAV: $116 , 130 . TotalAV : $154 , 030 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 110 . 77 :lephone : 503-684-4979 MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF : 9, 147 !drm: 3 Bth: YB : 1991 Class : B1dgSF : 1, 605 Ac : . 21 :10 Stewart Title/Washington • Owner :LEW MONIKA J RefParcel : 1S134DA 05700 to : 11315 SW 105TH PL TIGARD 97223 Xferd : 06/20/96 .il : 11315 SW 105TH PL TIGARD OR 97223 SalePrice : $161, 250 Use : 1012 RES, IMPROVED LandAV : $37 , 900 !gal :NODAK, LOT 5 , ACRES .21 ImprvmtAV: $117 , 180 TotalAV : $155 , 080 95-96 Taxes : $2 , 125 . 14 m2lephone : MapGrid: 655 D3 LotSF: 9, 147 !drm: 3 Bth: YB : 1991 Class :R14 B1dgSF: l, 574 Ac : . 21 The Information Provided Is Deemed Reliable, But Is Not Guaranteed. (-IV- i4ppei' dix F I I I DAKOTA MEADOWS I WATER QUALITY AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS I SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 1S, RANGE 1W JOB # 141-018 I February 12, 1997 I I I I I Prepared by: Alpha Engineering, Inc. 9600 SW Oak, Suite 230 I Portland, OR 97223 I I I r I Table of Contents 1. Water Quality and Hydrology Report 1-2 2. Vicinity Map 3 3. Isopluvial Map 4 4. Soil Survey 5 5. Soil Information 6 6. SCS Curve Numbers 7 7. Watershed Map 8 8. Storm Sewer Design Form 9 9. Water Quality Calculations 1 0-1 1 r� DAKOTA MEADOWS WATER QUALITY AND HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION: This analysis addresses the storm water run-off of Dakota Meadows, which is adjacent to SW North Dakota Street near SW Greenburg Road. These calculations are for the on-site water conveyance and water quality systems proposed for the Dakota Meadows subdivision. SITE CHARACTERISTICS: This development is a single family residential subdivision containing 25 lots, with an approximate average impervious area of 42 percent. Based on the Soil Survey of Washington County the site consists of Quatama Loam, which is designated in the urban hydrologic soil group C. The contributing area to the proposed on-site conveyance system is approximately 1.87 acres (See attached Watershed Map on page 8). HYDROLOGIC METHODOLOGY: All hydrographs were determined using the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH), Type IA Method. The SBUH method is based on the curve number (CN) approach, and also uses SCS equations for computing soil absorption and precipitation excess. A value of 90 was used for the runoff curve number for the pervious area and a value of 98 was used for the runoff curve number for the impervious area. The calculations to size the storm drain sewer conveyance system is based on the 25 year, 24 hour storm event. The isopluvial map used to determine precipitation for this storm event was provided by the Storm Water Management Design Manual for the Portland Metropolitan Area, and is attached. The calculations for the storm water quality facility are based on a 0.36 inch,4 hour storm event. 1:\14 1-0181HYDRO\SDRPT.W PD 1 CONVEYANCE METHOD OF ANALYSIS: The Uniform Flow Analysis Method was used to size the pipe system to convey the peak rate of runoff for the 25-year design storm event. This method makes the following two assumptions. The first assumption is that flow is uniform in each pipe. The second assumption is that friction head loss in the pipe barrel alone controls capacity, other head losses and any backwater effects or inlet control conditions are not specifically addressed. Each pipe within the system is sized and sloped such that its barrel capacity at normal full flow is equal to or greater than the 25-year design flow. The continuity equation Q = AV is used to determine full flow capacity. STORM WATER QUALITY: Storm water quality is provided by a bio-filtration swale. The flow control manhole will divert high flow to the wetland area. The design discharge to the bio-filtration swale was determined to be 0.17 cfs. The normal depth and velocity in the swale was determined to be 0.17 ft and 0.21 fps respectively. The length of the swale needed to treat the water quality flow was determined to be 111.68 feet at a slope of 0.015 ft/ft. I:\141-018\HYDRO\S DRPT.W PD 9 .E HAP ODD r.,V.37:i!,iri41rn{'' ?{;"n. �1_ a:s.s ..'- .i-:, :U 4et,lii►` MF = °'w .......-` '• 7'''.°1 �".R7�16' __�_ — Mu.. O I Jt3t� .� ��.� ` 1 ���EAA wfa�Cl��� ' .� t'i.. r ° . • ri IACN '� •t E ;o rA--,11,o 1 � A..fN1117A6.4 e Y s rM+ �(, I S �� r JdMAEJ - #r"• S/Ar ar.+ SW RS'N ! 1 A .IG'CfMiER j $ £ 7. 1509!• i A .YYII.,• N ; `� �.P. .•IF... d - .. • < lui°n © b� 1 `gA OI:.IM/T ST 1: fiRED Y w ••o' , i28�1 'ia �' °�• �, '`. a} alp SW EJHODQ_ °' ...01" � ;�y. lC o• li ' ''�•1Et�� M SW BORDERS �: � 1 ,,,V+. ^^'/71 L,} '".; 2 9100 8900—li ! ,, 7700 1E I u. �. �1�c��[1 , �' 1° `.. r ° :1: ` m :.. a y s '± ' �" . �� -I1 „.,A);- 5 4.TT ter E _ �I L:Y ' YAIHII �) Si _ 1� �• Vita �, •i411 I3t, + hNip ri•�.., , r9 T 11 • Nil 1 = 7 ,-_t�•1! fib sr dl i l., A SI, • t .` � 'lA .�1 Y� S 1 "I,cFt� ' \ r'f.� �q�4F- .• j�j MAPIEIUE _ Si �,j li A y A ji�,�r.. 1 �_ / / 210; �' 7 * 217 ]c.'s. „ s,1u I I Q Oli:ii VV` �5� 13 � �i , 35 + �€fr�F._ � sr �� Aar ' Ft. �Ac 1''�M'K F` ��`{;��j,.'.�Iyy.. �Dl/1” �'S�, •r+, `gyp e� Fyt:S-l' rW �i PIN � . /'�, i r•. r{$'. � I,� l.. `F7�f�.y�,." b. +1�: lk y 't:•/ '[�j�., Ki;A.' � �.. ,c r, ltibjl;,t��, �Y• Y _ ® SP E A '� . ..2., „,,ii[..•• � 1f':I[•l E't7••� .°EPr4�i ,'1� R{'y lira Rf""'t is,1iF "�;i p,}�If'.yz`•A's'y,#: ."4)v.,. .?�J1MyiIOWY 1 '.7 �l �1�' #:� i , A 1 T ••.�1 5.e'!¢se !7�jiPp�y+�i'{. 'e te, �yy'P._ : j ,,.. a' )r h f :1 f- A ,L. ��:.1' .yi ' -n''.'i .q'+d •P ,� i •, 4 ,� _ su (� '�:'LI/�5+ 'fa iM1 Rrlrit +`."f$, ..•∎..; `E!rh- • S5`' ' "x0. +'• . III%r K�'...thy •7R ., .I�' •,, .n S'• , .�'� �+�. /[W� C r !410.210 ,, b o. y t�Ali��!. No.i. a /r u� c ;4. r f 11/ 31 't?.i 4(1,,..'i+,'t[ , ..,*.j 111," EI[[ ij;�ififl'+ZlTf�f�S� li Kx"( ' : r•'∎' .d,.•;;. f4 s .''1 7; v '.ss 99'l )• 1, Jrl-; ,' • j. i�. ,,,,•1' i:ra fi*cr4 .a ►' I[!�39',(' A:.;#� ,i;' yl..A. �T�t���/ 1�, :...; _ 1pr{e1 - ,�, rt. �( f•}#' y, +t' I .•q!# i. r ,A : 1: .:1 '.4, '/.a rf R9 bt :t,:, �� ;g ‘� �,;7 PAIL cT •� -r. I f.5 ; f `C•. .r,, :]:iE1F'JO it " ••• •i5 _'! 1{r / 4 ,... F, I. ',..{ ^• •'.s. q iC Rr •A `sN Iu E. 1 :I 11':i!C r '' ' p.� ..A k•I,• `� f �'{E"�.1 ;Z •,(41,e'f` i4. . N\ - : r•', .00a 1 lii L•' 1 �.'I.,i�•4'``d 1�{�jt'r! '�,.�`��y{u,,}. .,j.. * q1�. ,� �' f�;r'..: Fitt /� � � � �, iJ�1,�M , 6090 �G1y{� { :1 Owt,li .. ti{" r„�~i' jv� N`._-YT t! ') .,, 15 ` p 1 �.„, g . •in \y,( .ire q ? 3`� t „ �i{p l P'`):;��7..T.,,fmt j)t � r ';01 Y.4,-;•> Ir c` ,•t` I q, `��r +1 'ffli „ ( , .u,. •8V 7�'t l _4 ;? i. ), ,.1.•'f7:�t N”.5+1 A �!i. 7(�.. i„ + l' fll If�b�. Y} - LLiill7711.l ,,k9G" ; + .,..4:j;�vS7� ..a a:Z:' r - r r.,' _ ero�!' . >i� �P �' 611040,1 ' ,,,,�.� i A:; •. ,ji `4i a: !y s4Y.l z- r_ J%-'r7',',g..1:; r cu6�.P r�&-N.,,. 'Ad:- + �..-,_+s3� . f%/.�+A� l.- r I. 4;,,_G•1 ✓911- t,.44,95 �i `!iC-+g•..F1 IA..„ - ,,. :X'1'77' ,A, Ti"r..'!1+t, /y"+i4e, ;/1. - 30.44.•' v - -i'j',{> , �G ti ```r"'w•�! hr ..J 'tii:0' , k • "r'�t,6'1'14'.u.rD 4...o/ft,. 't'1,.. ./R'%r0 rf941IIri','' 3, - '9 •n•. -.ay 15r!=� ? 4r 5y'' r',.,N,..... m a -7frF7'' .• l2 1 �'.r�--• ∎in' r' ,1. 1 , y '�'�7 T •7r"��a:L r�.p `L% 11 N 4 ,, r v. r S t (��1j •i I ,.• .. P.�y'11T � � I' w ' '6� 1'T' T� .� ! l'� y s �'I�,�VylI�7T^ • "�fl A G 7 3 i. i III • I I ri e- ' cl,; sY- Tao' 3y f!P� �, ",j .�% s 2fll rCA E3 .( -PT 4- }�Cl;jm 'tl� �'y. F�'r��;i 5�- rt.. _ .t o f „h..,: ? , Ar 4l y,s• 1� .�{ 1 r' E��pr4rll�'7E ,' ( 7 tO :.r],r,_� " &,w_1.•y.l +y.. A ; • c. I 1.gi,'rf'>Cr ;,;,,,'''.44,n,, t . �.� SY♦ i` $,'°z s. ,,;'a I '.. 1.. . -S,. f *•ati a Y0o 7%7` Sti -,• a_ t, :4 . 104,,,, `�Ili •^ R+4,,'+4 N,$ ,sEE 'al.'- 9 i i lr.1Y n ' p _ . t i sw" 1 ry •;'i 'jE � 71,4 P "tf, "'"�y� y, 7toi4m li#,'i r� t � ►i1 �J` y 1 I f�,6 r�["h- ,qc' sN AIBERI ,i E t •+ N. ',Jr.'"•�r4'• n.r j' 1 7)tit' 1`�,'�f T-2..'.',-= _ " .'c ti.„,.. •�: f1 1...-..;I�i l' '7� 11500 ....A Sr 'i y'. �. !• Q}�fE''y r" + l =-+j l .' '1".4.-•!i' f „e r 3.��7 ' _ .'��'••/w ^ ;• y�C 1Mark =77�.•i A ` ' S •_i K''• — /pn ' .r.ls�.20•, ,, .. dz sW MARION sT' --, »,.' 1, 0 'S,' , �l, -'.4s) --iV,..if Vii:, b= : c r<,r -. visits- ®3. �� •_ '•+ �'" w ,� C ' r�� •' .y �' t`�t,�. ' .'• + B`°�y H,' . 9@ loni /h/ wk 1' 4 . iii r r"{ I._ 8, ,�4' !/• •_' ottaa,... f, d.L'7Ne .Y 'r�Yi ' l�AIi 4 {•vl.. 1.'f.•'s, 4 v � 1,;s;'.J. „r_, d '` y'9 �(. ,#., 1 .# �� i z _ ,;k,- e' i., DE 'rE� .� 21 r R. ;s � 11/1► '�1 +t.rti b3 ,'tsfir: .>"a br, . f _ ,J ] �1 �'+ ,,.�-' s. i+."-- C I.� �-' r N t y .P }' ` M ��?'�►•.4'42�••4• L y �A'#tit ,e �, 7on1' ,.:Z: 'm .A�_. _ L l• !`' '� s■ t `EI A .e. .`,y.,a r.1. � -� '�' p.i•i•: r g,-•.iyr, ' HIi ..'a,h l,* 7 ft l::.} 4 �'4,. Pry. < .."-'. ' p[a gi - .•"'-... 1 rqy� w____IL. : ...'i;.. ,;',.!",,',,..:,1". sc „,y .„}5 , Y�I.•-.:�L i1:397;x.�t11' k�].I� G �c•:•._. If (•LDw�'1Li: 1;!r, ii•'+�r! '.t: ,�• �'i ' eln + L p �t? 1�1•MES It., 00. T v,E6�a'f r Z r. 1P` •i c , •`7 711!ICMl4 '11 r-'' ��fo����,�� M _t► 2RE41...... FiSlflarAMan.+.. p'. II r f)r i# a` LT,..s 'F.r ��2'.s•• 9 4w�A1 I p■]F1AIP]RMY� //�1' ♦ .iOry•��J/Y ti ♦1 4 ►� , r(r P,, ,; 'I• +I:„. : 24 lett 4 '' S� y 1r 0 .' .if. t� „ '' . 'rf,i'✓C'i> ® _ �{: I� r 't r yU� _.4c,t P C� 5 r,, '�`r(N'f� ; 'Y 1 w,,.,, • lif,`,..144.1 i I '#_ 6 i.-,, •••, R:; rt• �`• Kl• e _1 R7IR --- �EfK 1 9 r -,.` ,r. r;. !, ( 4 �/t y, �•w�I 111 p i I , sV � CR I 1>> i 6.S i1'4�_PA�'`-A,,.rr1si' ♦GL:l '/ '�`y �nX.LS oliall 1 C:'7� _1s P�ru ,•j'r11,i1 , 1E , l,l 1� ..) Ar �VPri _ sil BDNITA • , ��A C :< a1,11,111 Eu , .:'':tltl a� i r 4:9', it. ..,`' T�q{}� i � ,C In % >'-y @� F� - ��, ' 1• ._. � ._. ■ 'rr. M'.�! 'i1:� L19:.1 •,...,.. 'Wi .... ['c.5, �,• -F`,Egill tiow,- ),,. .; `''.-L ER --- `, .Yn P..: ��.1 �9, Yt 1 t 99W S. 0,1:.,,,,,,„,..‘c..t4'iL��y]�Rf 7 Y.. 1*E� 'a� A tl� !r! ) < .•A ruin A(! „ �- .1, � ottid,: t• .-L' !. I�• ail{'1 'e ..*,''7. .`r '' �� >'17,'f 3 �Q S'!}u•„- i aI � fi .y.. RD i 1 'Y r � yyl '1 1 IM[f SPFMF 110 1 1 '.ti.{� ■ I 1 d. /��/ '4' i ,}, I�` �1LI:i,T. ,:u.i ,�r'(1,12I"p;{�,� A v__gy�p n n 1 -i 1= wd_-•• 7r, �!:�`'y'G �� 1�h' y Irl s.+tlr.'uM6�11':•1LL •W��klf/- GROSS -.."'� a',{ °5Y I #""� `�>: ��. .fi . i �•.-. }" t , ly'rtnal f -, , g. G 3'' ,r.A 5 �y t 7 1-,'''.:**'*. � r, I1nr -�4l1�t, , r iPii x � e. 9i kT �•. w' ,,igv ti's .t, 4,„„. . ,� P � . A'` FjN f / _ A g 0�� , , , �. 6�,1t<"'"T ”' .,,∎0 ;;.�1,',gC �r . SY.. }E¢� II .I -1'1 �D .. 1 . t 1 „i ,„. '/f „,¢a1yN. • ...•t,1.„�t qui 43,,,,^�".0 :'E .I I. .'6.,e ' AY:, 1 i _ a.''' Sl'�!� i°r„iA•M s�•• ���/,�•{' I ( i• .11.. rr 1. •.; k::%: �_ B." =r, 'S ITL: ' '`: iY'-'.'=' r. . -). 4:I " Q■ n.1 t'et T,' Jt ♦ ., : ,,, -y `elrif r i• [•;�,� $•r u ,� �. 0,,. _ sevuu F ��' ' r'�i1 C.AJ ....,../01 i2tt?�'1 ,:: �a9 Rw. r;�"A1 t .PTPp.� pr .;. a 'AA:.tA.LF {` a� ' '�• F� .•`�' AAA a� A` t C�O „1•• • .4.- t L W M ouW ✓'T '�1i a .R}w� ..Rn ¢,®�j r i ill' R .a �in+ _ "� " ' Ilti"7R'�h1mw � �� (1 -- �cl�ta/�.• . .�. err 1. 3.5 1 � 4.0 IE �'.r �t z X.° g 615 . . IN ". 3.5 11 iOs 4.0 .. r V: ncouver _ I It1Hl4 I 2.. __• L c ri _,•• • Hillsboro Portland I r ...f-.). 1 Gres am i•I. z LTNa H CO. "' ( ,, ACKAM S CO -1 E. )... ; ii-.5 _I 1,.. I to I j�os j Orei on — .� 1.... ......,...f....� .� j City L_. • . .ks 1 T �` �.0 Figure D-12 •iS.' - 1 25-Year 24-flour •7 Precipitation ( In) :"..-T t 4s ISOPLUVIAL MAP 1.33J WU 099 . (,t 1::••,i, ■ e • • .: Ar - ,, rn ... . .,),••I v ' .4'r , 1.E ..e...p.. f.7.1rop.ft, Id- .. ..-7,,,,:;'"4f.10,-/;"7'..r.,,,7.',,-,....;-.. .( '. : Ill' . : -•,%.t`-1 fr,sri.?./. .../,:it , .' "•.!;!0.if;•4',`Tg• :','• AY: '. .. -'4,:ii /41,11- i.;i,,..:;. /•:\ ,.. ."1,404, ' ..v.,',4‘„„,,,... ,4,mitl?,.. 1.-r''',•'‘'' .1../11,0 zi• Air &T. 1 - •,•' .- t t vil:- • . -, ,-/ :'-::`4. r.7•2••..1 .-4'.`•.-',.:-'' ••I .' ..',.*t 714.,i, Al,. .„ 1 iri'' , 7. • ' ,,f• -:7. •'',', '' "' -•P,t,q• 11'.1.,?!..t•',1•1- -. ' . ,•:. -,4•1r1,1`.'i *t:t•-•'•?-,;-•)ir, ' - .!, ----t.. 4_, , --- • r •• ,•.i, -1•:1 ,-,-.:vs( :4' .':,'4,, 0 i. .,:t? ' ,_x• ,C-7.L.,4.16, t. . . , , , . .'( ,. ,r-opL......4,: -1 o•Vr.oi!...,iritr-: IN-12 - "..•ititt-,.% .. 't,tii....,4- '''',,,,v,t.,.511,11:1•Xt.'il..,...1 :•.:,,,,,1",,,z1.4.,;::,48-.•...,..7,,1:,:i.;10,,...4.4:.%,.P ..' 1.‘,..7-.,,,,..!.,rc,,,171..5.-:,.,. .f.trtA,.. iiiita..;4 ',.;.•...vv,'.1..1,1,--,--:-:,:?;, . ' f ,•• .„ 6, ,I,, % . : ,,-.8 r , ---.,,- r -140 . r '3 t" -O _ : , .1 - • .. ss..,.. • .- 4FZI. :.•. - lif •1 , . •• ••••;-. •,., 34,.:thm:*•-•,,a44.,,t.,,,,f,:t.r.,.., . ,,..,. , 0,, , ,....... ,...1.,:,,,, ,ici.i.,.?, 4,...11, 1.411.„1,4,its,.1..,:,,,,,....1.4.);r.,:....,,i..._:: : „. : ." :4•Ji•.„•••A.,-;°-... 1 .. • , ‘, , . ........ • ; •"%•• ' ',,,- i'L. •14.:1).„ • . • -- -:;• - i • • i rjiir, •- - ' ' -.— ' ' ' ' • ' '' i..'Fol. ' - i '2'... . .4'. ' . . ' • '1.1 1•frit.t,..--4--.); .,i' ,..,... f.,-.. . ...,.frs-,,. ,-, 'I r-- - .....,.. .-„,‘,„--;-,,,,,,.. . ,-,. ,..io,. - - .... .:,,k,..:-,2.„."- /..... .. ...,.),6 ei# .. .1. "4,I'''.' ,r 1 I'l . •,,,,---.41,,.-.9 rt-t);7•04.4.;•;,,,,i...1, .:- ._- - 'r,, . ,,. . , f SN'.. - •-...; . ', ) .' •,. '.. Au.',, . , 4, • ,. •.••••,,••.,••• /;-,.._---.7.- •.„ ,.. , .' ' - ..4 • ,,r.".'•I ..,k , '-'• - . -.44A''',4' ":` ' . .:' fit .- „0.' - rr'r 4 rai Tfir•-•' ''',1f: '• • 'r . . / ' • ••- ,''• '-‘,"I'gf,1-iiri4 !`f...`,:orkf4.---. `IN'. ,, .; --:- • : : , ,. 1,, _,i 01, ITT 1 * ., 1..,..,- .„ ,±-,.. i . . . .;0.1., , togi..i. 4,4*i-J,(, ,.. ,-,. , -, , - :, ;4y,,,.., - .. , -,,,,:4 6,4,.,ft.:!-..,,:,, ........;._-,,;. .-:., ,:.4,,,A...:. Ile,. . . ..., 0.-:...i4, ..,, , ....1,i ..„„ , .1.:,...,....., .. , ..i-,..,. 3•,. v__, •. .._to.s.„,,,..,.„ , ,, .,.,,..:,-,., F..,ye. a 4:4. Ti !1•7■'1,.:1■,,Y,' '1, ', ' 1 .1,.cs.. 41r,r4.4•-.-- ;4:L. tee ir :,-;,Oft,. .... ...,7.4.....40:0-.i.'4;'-';'1 ... ...._".-.:,•!...F7,s7.;• .. . ,,, .,, likit., cg-,.it• ikh,vto,*, ,.0.„,,,, ,, 4, ,, .4 ,,. ':.,,r1;-0,:■.,...4.7.0 .. - . - .i- - .. ,• •. •• -1)\,, 4 41,-....t,„,..,7.::,441.. ..7..:; , ., :„„. • ,,f J. 7,ir..-..,'n rf.liiitsi, .,11,41,`7,,.•. , „, ,,,,,r, 94 „I)•„;-.:,,,,,,:..t:'.:,•24."•1 1..4 7'. ..IS'S. .:. ,6.''4,411/61114i .1 '4 ,,7.: - . . ', ,. IF.,i .• ,)0 ie i. f ■-) ,., . ,,-- ,' 41.,..- ./.1. .,., v.v., ‘4 '- ,• - ',,..1.,-• ,,triilApS'ir';•,,':.-,s--. -07,-.,..t.-41NR,...''‘, A ..'•., ,• . . . , •• '.1.11 ''... ,,.; •'N•r. r• ' .,. 4 r -,' .... ' .11. 7. 6 -Nu,At •-,.. ..r. .1 ..1 ' ' - II4 • !okLtai.t . tr. ., , r 1 i_ji. -110-a 111; . ,,,,,..ak. .,,ti• . , its-It )\- --t,r,,,... _., ...,,?.../."..7.7;loie•-",„0-r* ..- .-?-r.—S,,,i,i-;;..-;.-10-timpb, 0, Lteiti-7-•,- ' .6-,•. 7•,,, ,0 ,..,-.1.:',,...,ci-'...„•..1., •-,,itkiv.,. ,„. -a...... ..._ ......r.....,.J. ;,-,.., . . '- • ,..-. .). -''' ' ...• • •••‘"'. :' ;1-ill ' ). •" ' ''1•11•.-'1° •1i;te-Ac• 4:47-1 '.3-:714.1 ifl 7... l' •.‘;k•,:: 1.1t,4"-i7:•/.17'.:::;::.;:ii4t4'1 ,1/214v: :. %'-titailf...•••' ;_■'..°Artfill•-•,:•(41DeL.L.L,4,.„11...77,,,-.:..., 'S$4.'4A.NA7s.'" ' •. :, • ' . ''' ! .• :41),7:,t,V t '' ..1.1.-t t.,,.'7',V • r4,-• ', tri.:4■:;1.7,,t , _1! ,...i.,,,. ., ;;:- k. ifl,, ''...--'- LI, #.' r . . ":40.ii, .,,,j.air '., 'Mr° ' ".. , • .'4,,,v,.ei . -- -..' "j: ei4.1'.: .,•• t....f.. 41.4. iLk„,..s., 44- :y...1,4i._,,,,_,-..1.,„ •lki • .. .■i iti'1,411.4'114 :011*a' .1,, 4,1,_ '„■., It , .r , .., -, i. . ..., ,. j. ,,40.4, ,;1,..,.-c..- ,,., : ,,(11,-,.. ...... ,.. ..\ ..,., ..v..• .4.4;,:,-.-- ,,... •4-4•• **-.St...R.)4-s • " - ' ',- —r-• 1 sr.' 41- -lif . . .6 ....f...w . •- •,,, -tilt 3 it i. ...„x,,,11.1 , ,4,044 .. ,,,..: .," A. • . ; ,..-- .. „,,,, ..,,.._ :,.,.. ...., .•_...,,„ . . ,,,,-1,' ';4 ''(•' li'mrlicii ' rA,,A, ..- • -e,..A.s41„.. • , , .4' it :4.,,,, , 31.•., ..,. v, . ,, i. , i, 0 tt., . ,._!, tit-% , ,..04;,i •, .. ...• ..1 • ..t ...t.L.-__..• '''.4,, Irill••' -PAO '‘ ''' '.,?.; ...q . v.: . . 3 -if;.''....! - '1! • ...:Wit ' 'i 2-'t,', c ..,-. . . , -.„-.,.. -5 iki .9'-'• -aiv'',,, .,','life 2 •-,,_.11-'.1t;r -,''', ,•:)„ i•',. ,,..b._••, -, . , '• ''n'tlf--_,.•,_ -,. . •%'•;, -,•,,•1: str- ■ . , . - i • • 1••••• mci' • 4%.',•-'4,,,‘...‘.'. - •". "4 A 4,9 .. • ,.' II f4:71 ,..i. , -_,.....' ,P.Xlit,,• 11,,* it:',A.1.,..... ,.. '74114,,.-'.....',4 4. s•-•.. f -.- 01,.'. '7:41r,: ,.,,-. '„ ,,. ,4'4: ,, ,, f.5 ..... 44 , k t.••64i.„...,4 4.:T.,4-I.. - -% i ''...'1% ., 6411.d.'„,:,,M.',. , 0:.:.,'!. .,,....... .1. ...., . s -.<....., ... •t; ,., ..,!.1. .7.•".. ... - ' :,,,.,..,, el . 1.1■,..-' .' ,.....,11. t• .1., , ,,, "P. It•• • '," - itir• ..-4.:, ' • tn it..: ..z ., ... 14,/*;,,,_44,e ipl:''-.1":,' ...- ''',10.V.4,:7, ' 1 r4rt-i' '1.1 - *•• ;-4...c'tc -.•1.14'6,' r‘-1v,...'1 14‘,3s,',r/ irt,"-4,14..,°.'r".,:''..s" . '. '.. •• 4 •••• ' Mi.."'-'--', .-- '\ ,- .-41:-.:‘ if ':'. ='."..,'"t" ,-. ..,......- 4-..-f,,,,, --, 7 ..6, ,...,. r, - ;6- e fi,4 7',.• 4..,. ' ..,,,•-a.r.;•-„.lei.,yi •,- ... --;•,,, '- .1 .., .,.'.4.se , .• ".,. -... fi, ... , 6?.t..:11,1..i,...... , ,.4.:1.6.....!• 'i. , . .• ... '.. -e, 4, f•'.,:,.., %., — . ...• ..,, . 6,171.' I- ;, ...' IA ,L. . _..... ,,a i: I t.,, .1,,... ,,./, A We.i.., 17.1 , .17,, ik•14i,..tio:. „..-s,,...„. ...4,..,,,u14 ,,e5t. ./.., , ..., .„ e.'„,......4:400 iitr,,,,o,,,.•IN '„,',",I if ,..... .,r !7 -4/( „..-tic,.„,g,-k-., ....-k—.,,-iv .pfl(- .., , ,....... ..} .,,_ .. , . „, •. , . .i.".,,.. .i.=:, i 7.-, ,...ik ,....,4,.....y ,,,, g,,,,.. . , & er. ?t,041:7 774-..., „., -,„•,'''' •- ,,,- ,_,0,'-' 'KA.••-i, -:'•:.,,,,,.• A ,_.,,, „ir A ‘,„ . iR,r...i. , . : • ' ....ri.1.- ' -.' l'.Y... ' if64'. ;4it'7!‘ ' ktri''''. '.'4/..$°T.....itijj tO-r''.. utrai'i ' liC: ' A .1kX4'''',:1-' 'Alid. ;‘.. r f. ,.;. it, „It°,_1•.• .. ii,_•+••ir 1,•:. ...•* ' _ •,, •, ‘,.,. • et ., •Agl. ','S.. r , . .. . ,k,.! .v,-. -,. 1,__/_ti.,,,,•. .4 N,),..-, PY i . • 'Ls', ' ••• I ,,ii,"t• Art' ti.. '-,' itt At: -,.cit. .. , i'L.-\., ' ,.',14. .. '<'.,4r''. • .y. (.! . ,s.a.**-,'"kJ-1i-s-41-•-, -' •.,•-. •- ;,44-• . 1.1 Pir .4. . ,„ .. .. ; 1r(i:4', .4 Vs-CIO‘414'. ' -1-•i•-•`-!'• - 4-. , , „ . , v-,,,,., ••.„/”-,.. . ..'• 'i. 'or I.V"• • '0,te,"1-,‘ Alik-r l';' ' .. .- - ' r.- ' '4' A", . **-6' . i 44 rk-1.: t• .41 •I •,1.7•,,,'• ,./i ,,L.,. i ' -.171)&fic!!4 .4. t, ob.%f•.;4,(1. ' .•71$:.' - .1124' dee_ i ,t*,!•:••.-- cc.a. :.:4, j•••6;., ?,.,''.2.* ''.' '. /-„',i4.1 I 6•!.411 17:.tk . . 114 '1:•;•....,,,,r,‘ .....„ ..,. .,.,,,•,. • . 1, ;..i: ...411: .,,,. i • ,.% --N, .):„ 44, ,,,,.. 4,, v.; /.4 4 -"r„:,; :,/,..,..0.e -7,- . 4•;, . .• Aie...It''-i-.11, . - --, •"" ''' ? - -; -4:-f-i-'' .4,11T,-:. .' , ' .1 ,f.iltia, i . v.. A\•;11111 ., /''4 - •1.6...'•rtf-4 • ' 't1 \ , , . ,. , .-1 . ,' A. ,t, .wt. ,,,, 4; il:.*:. - 6 ,.rtti fli 'I'kr i ' ,. - *- 4v' i.' .- ' 15' '.■. 4•76ilti• ... .* "' .- '-•.. '''..•I r -L.•I 4,.11i,-•, ,i,.---. •;6 .,i--.-. . ,....... ,.. : , ,o,.,,A.; ; .- - •,,,- ,,, 4, ,,,,„._,• '-..444' r,7...t",' 1,... ,',.,•‘A. s ‘.1,.. ii,,,,(•., 'mo',.".■ s -.p.m"' 69,: 'a' .••'•■•) FA".„ '.r'4(,...,' . r.' . . Si. ttItlifi54,. 1 I.'•!1 AVIkZ.It -''' 'A:''''-i'r‘ .;.i f'e4 •071:r4-7.:•./1 l•i•u•--.•••• -s%. •Vor$7.4-,ai .- ., ,- Jf."-_,..• - .1 .. ' ---- el, -•), .1- ', 1 7. i.11.! 4 i' . '' ‘'.., . 1 ' .• •ei'',,''p , , . q11111V-,14_1i' ••4‘. 1 ' • •? • .,,,- • -•-■ , .x-^ f`• -,7 414,, i'''' P• - ':',1,.• , •r ■ 1.-4-•'' • • }-7, !-.1*f '', t---• `•••• , , , ‘i . •4,..i. t' 1A,:a. :V • •• --N.V k),-.4. & ,rAerlif--'•-. -.•• . S.. .'' A. ' . ' ' ..::. -1.001E.„ ••,• :;j.-',..."/". .-r ,'■„;‘•1;7,•" •:).)1, ''--- ' .`■., -•„e, ;r4.4,f;,: .1,/,,(•,-,:..,-.- --,'4:-;;Jkl% ',1,1'.1••,1 _,f'if-4-••'- ..,. -4 --v. ., . 4 4' , •2, ,$1,) 7,, 6'. ..‘,44, ra, • '4"i ,• '1•1 1 16, #.7.,,,,-. ., ,, .i.,... .. ..-.: -,,I• •t-s' - 1 .' 44; i,16_ s,',\ ,A,,,,t 7.-7+2,4P-0 ..,2:-..,,,,,-.',` 1---' .,. t-•*-.._ -.•••".• ''4- .'',''"4 S.3f A.'A, • :t f-4 •---Th tie r :'..1‘ 4-‘-''' iltii.e. '''.* f: , 1 •::),2. :: :„<„:, • ,1 13 W i 44LW ' lk Of' 11'..I.0 , ' '''' ' .'''.;.'k/ . ' -et.', v‘ii,"4,301 • ;c...Iii-N.-.A• Y"'ii, i', • • .7j 14',,i;:i• , ,/e.--'" Ica'p.',. 1;4,3,,-„"c.11.. ,'a j• -,1,), ' ,..,• -i,, tV.*);:i;i.. ,li,, ' VI/ ' t ,•.'do-J.4 taf ''.N,A, •• 4 :116k....e 1 ki)., :...4.. ,,,...,t ,..,_ _.,,,,,„...,,..„ _.1'141, ,,Ipi!z4' . 4?. „ ,"4., 4 ....... , -. ..-:,\ . -.;\ - - ,- -.. ', • •-•41.4-eii''..) If-:r: •,s' ( .1. - .,714"-,---0.".'d ,'! . ) ' 7.,..eriti' - "?',- fg,-1?-‘ixr-AFf.y4:t.._7(.4:iboYy'IP' 4- u--..--- -14c' .-,it iit. -- .,::-.rii,i4,:A, '.'.I.0%, . '- k, I $1/44,* . trir=4,--i,':4'• 7 iifil••• ' S;1,f';'1. -f-' ..t,-. '-..... F1 6 i .^-tkr - 41/. ' -'4 ' •V,'- t . 4141,el...4‘' ••-•6• •' ..-6r-. t A4410.;1.,11)11,41'.f., ,4t, .. ,i-,„ ,•Ti. '-''' kte• 7'..4( kcitit.%- .-.- ••T ;fa. 1 Iti ,,?... : •(.0 '' • ' . V''''f • A,'-7' • ,; '' ''''f• a 4 • . , .• • ••.• , •,e;- ', 'Jfttri f ;7'1'r..;1...f -.10'44:: //il ,4 .. yzi).;i•11/114,...r.-. ,, .t'i ' ,41.! -. ' ,-.1,1•3•S AN:It■%• 4 : '-:-.t.N4 k.. •,..i.„1- ..',.N. .4.../.: :- ......, ,k-iy .- ,,. .. .. . ,, ,,.„....„....,• ... .3., ..4, ...,.. ••....„ ,„, . ...... •. ..,;.% , . -1A.,,,, , ,,rk ,,, .r a t. • . ‘._ ‘, c 1 i„.\ 1_1■ i . .' 1 fr.-. •/ . :s".".•_.;1i••...,•:• '•.`•.c.•,)kifo- ''-y,., . I ,., tt. ; ,,, ,,,,y, ,..-- f.0 1 i.:,-k -,,....;\, - .. . ":,..:-....-'-. .1 -I \4?.-4,..4:\. , 1....!.., ...,t-.„ , , f :: ,, /.. ..-:‘,1- .,..LA : ..dr•if _,,, -,:., •,.,. ,,,,, 1. . ..1,•„. ., ..--,-..-4.• , . -ILI, .i.„, vs),,,,,,,a, . I- ttlik ‘ .2.,• • — ,,1 .' •li ■ . ,, - . ■ , 1 o. ,v. ,!,4 . ,,., , ii .ii.i., . , ..„,,;•,:',•'', ' t pc,,t4*..,.t e/-rri, .. ■.,417,-•Atit.q ,41,- '.. '.44:4,...t,s,A14..... , .',,\ ,.., ..., - 4,,., . - e 4 , ,, ' I i■..• ,.. 1,.. 1 •'■ 1L.Ar ,Y,„1.7 •i ,,..... .... 'V.). ‘E4 11, " '?rf IN;ta * ' . '' ,..1 ...' ' *yr' la, -'''!' ','-0--•Nk It__.' -1 • '44-,,-;.•••••"'t* 4 ••••',•1,--\,' _' , •- 1.;/.t. \i.''.. •- '411rii-'!, ) 11.4.1•,47„,,, I,'4 4 i ii'? .,'Illt' L ...."- !,t,6 -.A. ....ITV, .. r.•4., i)g-wq:iit?e ity 1(.....-1",-'A:10p, v•--. 1 rt.61.46 1: '.:463, -94.1,-v! riii* " : ;,r tA41 111".,77: 1.7.....i'• . 7 p. 4,,,,i ., ,Paqp!o.,ss.,.:...4 _41 _. , -.1..,14' .... • ' " 4 ',.,E-•. 4.,..T..'5,'. .4: '.416., t,11: :4,4,7, 1,7,..". .x.Z.'4',,tb; . . !•,(-1, ' a 'Ik - • ' 744 4,41,..11/. ,T.',1/1,C.4.4:-.17W„I% .liricAr'•_^.. .''' Y...''" '''',h41,'. - : k.. '714,74 :*4.i:;-,311.,* ....„ ---4'. N.., 'Y•1qr-itt'•.-,.'1' .14.9.....: .:,.V.; t'l t ' -• ;--n.ft- , , , • -'Zi..it ... .._,, 'AA.,' '''' A.-,--:...6',:4 1 ii.„--,-di -,,,,..,ti....4 , • .:. -,:.p( t 4 ' ',-.44..,_:.... • . .',-.7.-,7i,IV.ii 44..444 .,D : at.. .'....„', I.. .. -I T...71 IV -"'t hi.. „of•- -.if r t,41-s t't ' ,„ i •). - :4`,1":.‘4fi - ' , ''.-r- ''•('-',.';;Iit '.i., l' A 14 ,, ..-, 4 '.4*.lr..t• - - ,,fir.',F,,-... 1- .4,:ie -.1. ...4ft,„... -..-,1' . .1„-.4. --- ,,,., . : ..,! ?......4 f. .,,„,1 • . .- 1 ,,f fro••,., _,. ,. .... ,,:•,11.,:, . ,, ., . - • --,,, ....,- • - -.-- •.. •••••-••••• ..-• — •• 1 • -•••, '' - • •-'I i` •-•-•,''. 'L''''7''-'''''''_:-,;.'-`,. . (ilf.•••••ri Tt - ' '''' - f•-1 eit-1,41; - -,,,,e,''4.•- -. -P1**I t• • .i.sai4.11-A • ;g * .116.: • ielf,:, ...Afty ''1,14 4 '14.'0*:•••4 -..■.''.....'''-.`...• .5:r,---.11,1$141!..'''' ',,,-7:n.- X P'r. %/4*eibik.--' .‘'•''';•'N•'''titi.4'11.01.-1‘; 1^. • •.--- --. - ...a._ .....t. ,..64... ...., - , 111 .,3,'00 E.''' - , .1;,'.),'....o'• .... 4 •••,,-...,_ • .1.1-1%.• , t, orxp;,, *-7--.41..t. i . 'r'.1,A*,,;,',•41. ••.:. t-* •:.•-,..---.•••---, •.a• . • ,,---• ••••“,.4.1--,): / - C -a•' ...? it' - k■ , r.‘16.1.-Vii.,••. . .,.44,1, ,I„, _ „, s•-‘4. • ,_•'Apii....;•%.1 - .'------ .:'---"--.......-..-----"irrpliti+''',r,.. • X * ,,...■-•":1.1" ...".!' '.-"Y.,' ,•. .4?6 44.1 u. ..f w-.... .‘• . w -..ilif,ai' ill'• ^ r' ' :#A•";.) lorww,..r,;ktv4111/4 - --,,• 7"--;-'.'-'VW--,i 441...*-:.--411,t7••.11"."-';N.. fr- .1.4,. .-Y 4 - -A,•,,,----.,•-•••-ry......-. ...--F,,,F..--I.. A':'7',' '-i. ".. ir. 4.*4.,. . ;71:' . ',''.1'... rt.- ••„t'• : p;' AL.. ' . . 41t, -"a.'."irf 1 I'" Tr.i'lg.&44, ••••1"--i!'••;:-.• ': .51^Nr--,•.111,,,.. 7 ifig !Jul,—(!-;''',;t1r-, -.-1.1.,:4-•.', '' -3/4,t. -'*-7'.-• .'.1*, 7.7--r.-.C---,--""`;), 1: 1"'•':'-..:- '.4ri:' ' 4,04,64, . ••• .. ,g... r:—..—...tct:—. t., s, ;$6 c. :, 7-1.s.- r....; "7:-",,:--r 414:1-.112.**‘‘-f4N, -kil;.A."S:}* 1 . : i '''°- -- -W.',,■. , ,_A If .. 1'4. ) '''a.,• ift,y-4.4„.4• -'... .,•:.':,',„- ,ii: . .._ , - • _ • •• V-3,, .4 ,..,,, , .„A.. . ...to..;• ....„ 74..,.. ,..- Ci •...";-401,6-..k li-611110 r• ' 't•'^- . - •'nel]• 1.--••••• -') ^ •''"' -6%-..•• 4,r-L, .6' r. '?'.40'; k‘■ -' litt L '1•1,-V11 ••• 4 • :-•, •P1 .•,.i.,- -,.-T, 'i. -7.'‘-‘,Ar. .. .: — -•r If 7 r-,-=-,-..--7,ii,......,. .- : , .-•, ...-•,,,L•- •,•--...,____ ,- ,,- - • '.4.- , .... :,....1.80.,' ',,,. pi:" „ '....i •t;.1 .,,:! :- ..,.. ' '. '' A 1... ... •.1 -•-Jr+ i ''',,1 r i ',grylk.."'Is• *- . ' ' t Ii....,:.•.',.• ',;-•,,,-,te-,..t1.4,:.i.., • '1 4 1.', - il , ...;;t:7, r- ,, 0 •-- - V....:a , •'• 1 .i,"'. pt.-T.'orsax‘ r .4' .., !.e•Iii ki,,,t• ..,•-,),-,..• .,, . - 7 -"P,4. i ,t.' 1,S,'','.$ '.1,.4, '1.A' , 1 '',1: /^...,..... • r■,+1„, ii.-27:$1 a 0.1 s 4',,1 '.. , . ,,:''':..41 1. • 4.--,,e- . 1- 4.,'.. '--. :4,,,..,-rl- re1,,- ::,' -...06.r...1.1 • r if"-", f'2"-;;;,iv'i i-li't• : _To 4; 1 .. . 7 '. . .' I i°.---4.•l'r . '•,..,r---....14. " '.:1 '''''..-"4.\ :,,o3c,r:t...• ,'.*-lif)5, 7 • ".•. i'' . • 1 -- '- -.•' 1..di„ 1 A's --ty -i.4 ,,i,' . tvi. 'V[.tn"-"r' -1.4-1,.4 _•,• .1,,,,filki,, • i •Jr-1.1 ••.• • , , -•!,'•:01 -4,6;'•,,_,, •4, -,, • , .• •. 1. .-. . -1,-7 ii-1711-, 'itiA i'3.'1 '4'.:T.}:= ' 1-. I - -..' -- ,.....,-41: "; r.:4`;;, . .'""'"7;•.:19•-t -."-:.'- -1-'-- ' --f>ri+ •,.,.:,_,...t.,1 il.c,(F.. :., - ,,,...‘.-.4,-,-, ,F - - • k '1/4'01 ti •1;1-44-4-.2 .. - 'A.',.e.; I.'. - ' , T■ -,1'1";,'.1' "-: ' 4—iti‘,, ., .. v........4, -...--..-.„-.4.-......,. .‘ ,,,•, i,- - ‘•4 -..trkk, .-1.....,kr --:„-t,., .0 i A.- , .'c----v,- .‘,. . - I . ,., liw,.. .,. . ,--.., 41, „I'Llr.II:Z ; •' 71 r•et'''...... . . . .-1.1) --; . -—, - , i r k."'t ‘.'1 ' • . I •411 .: . P..''1 ' . . . ' ''''. •47;7'1 ' i,, ,,.41.r---,-Itv , , ',, Jiltr,r-. . .„..,..c?,., .. . ,:ri;11 ,.1 .. •,/ . r , -.., i, c ,2..,, . „r.:v . •., .., ...„..- .. .,7,..r.-. .:, ,:;.4.,• . .6 4,... - . . - . , . ,,.. ,,. .., la. • ,,, *: .L• • - f r ' ik t W ' -. .A . , I . , e , 1!... kt.:. :, , - r- . , i• %••il r•:. "- __ . . , . ..- „, .. , ,3..t...s... pt • . •_•'''•,' . .N.' • "0" :(*- .'.' ' '4!\\ ca. .. _.j.• • •, • 0 , 4 -a ..„ a.,• 4; ..,. • ..g• 7,4•.;' ., -•Vit.;119J.P.. ,• , . .. .• • , ' -V., 4 4 ,.' -. -4-)} mir ;-t;•, *•••- 4344141 ••• 04-4,).. I / -. I ..,kikri. '.. .-•`'- ,. ...- , ,i_ ' '-, • . .. \•• - Lafit4 . a, -•"'" r -. '. `.?'-': 7• ti- -,- , • ,iPfsi - -. ..,-•;4•3-- : • • . z-z., . . , 122 SOIL SURVEY TABLE 13.-Soil and Hydro- FIooding Soil name and logic map symbol group Frequency Duration Months Klickitat: 25E, 25F, 25G B None Knappa: None 26 B N - Labish: 27 D Frequent Very long Dec-Apr Laurelwood: 288, 28C, 280, 28E, 29E, 29F B None McBee: 30 B Frequent Brief Nov-May Melbourne: 318, 31 C, 31D, 31E, 31F - B None Melby: 32C, 32D, 32E, 33E, 33F, 33G - C None Olyic: 34C, 34D, 34E, 35E, 35F, 35G B None Pervina: 36C, 360, 36E, 36F C None Quatama: 9 None Saum: 388, 38C, 38D, 38E, 38F C None Tolke: 39E, 39F B None Udifluvents: 40 B Frequent Very brief Nov-Apr Verboort: 42 D Frequent Brief Dec-Apr Wapato: 43 D Frequent Brief Dec-Apr Willamette: 44A, 448, 44C, 440 B None Woodburn: 45A, 45B, 45C, 45D C None Xerochrepts: ' 46F: Xerochrepts part B None Haploxerolls part C None '470: Xerochrepts part D None Rock outcrop part. 'This mapping unit is made up of two or more dominant kinds of soil. See mapping unit description for the composition and:-=. behavior of the whole mapping unit. z.. ';. fY oar. - KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL :ABLE 3.5?B SCS WESTERN WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS SCS WESTERN WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS (Published by SCS in 1982) Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural, suburban and urban land use for Type 1A rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration. CURVE NUMBERS BY HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP LAND USE DESCRIPTION AB C D * Cultivated land(1): winter condition ( 86 91 94 95 Mountain open areas: low growing brush and grasslands 74 82 89 92 Meadow or pasture: 65 78 85 89 Wood or forest land: undisturbed 42 64 76 81 Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 86 Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, landscaping. good condition: grass cover on 75% or more of the area 68 80 86 90 fair condition: grass cover on 50% 1. • • . I •.S •2 Gravel roads and parking lots 76 85 89 91 f Dirt roads and parking lots 72 82 87 89 Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs, etc. Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds, etc. 100 100 100 100 Single Family Residential (2) Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre % Impervious (3) 1.0 DU/GA 15 Separate curve number 1.5 DU/GA 20 shall be selected 2.0 DU/GA 25 for pervious and 2.5 DU/GA 30 impervious portion 3.0 DU/GA 34 of the site or basin 3.5 DU/GA 38 A�U�GA 42 4.5 DU/GA 46- 5.0 DU/GA 48 5.5 DU/GA 50 6.0 DU/GA 52 6.5 DU/GA 54 7.0 DU/GA 56 Planned unit developments, % impervious condominiums, apartments, must be computed commercial business and industrial areas. (1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve numbers refer to National Engineering Handbook, Section 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, August 1972. (2) Assumes roof and driveway runoff is directed into street/storm system. (3) The remaining pervious areas (lawn) are considered to be in good condition for these curve numbers. • 1/90 3.5.2-3 7 ..__ ,.., STAWINCS CI •0.-•••■-............4...4winariapirt■orarJ "naur2...$114°'.....r:LE.A.....,,-.-2Kwm IL-wv...--.■-a-a-1 d......4261111...4e -'SS . , . I liptl,0111110111110111a1111111rM7gralln MN I Ilan MI/ e den I 'Irri ,. . , . ; , , • II i .1 i. r, i 1711 IN . 1 I 11 . 1 . . i hi , . , . , , i I ' .. V . . on 1 . . ' I • • I . I 1 . ow . ' •---: ' a . I AREA - , I I 1 ' , i a • I ' 1 _ I 1:12 AC 1__, -, , ,, 1 ..., I I : : / • • I C • . . . . . - a I , i. • ir C : ' 1—(L ' 1 p -. j 1... l r.- 1 filIl . "7 % : ' '/ .i. ' 1 I . ' .' 1 / .• ' :.. • , . . A , 1 27 . Fi,. ..,,,, ,•./.. . . .... .:: . • I •i a /1 •---css -fa 1 , , • ,.. 1 ! :I • .. ., II' , ..-: I .il ' I / .. :.404;40 .. % . , : / • • • /I : p . , ' IL - - , AREi( . . . II A 0,.D 2 •I /,. , l• .0 , i • ,I 0.75 AC , • ,. : . e . 1 I ; ; I SINN #1 • 1 i.MI i • r . i rf . . ,./ ,,,e-f-i IE IN - 155.88 • ! I . • i ./ ri IE OUT = .155.68 r : „ • N.T.S PI ii 4, • , ; :/ I . : ii \ ."...:ev - '. .: i iii A.D. #1 Mil 1 — ....- . /i .. ,4 ' • , /CR = 1. .4. , LI . • / • • • / . . : . - • • :sell /IC.- -1111Imiodli$6.V /.. / ____./• / • '• ‘. I .41 -■=110 alleo!o•-■0111.1, vv.__ L_ -A, : • • <-2/ •" 4 \.,,Lic,"1,- ---, ---4 , • .. • , . . , , ... , , SDMH 2 N / . RIM = 1. . ± . . , • IE IN(N W) = 15765 ' ' . . . • • ' I ' , : 1 . —.11 ' aL2 _ , rli,, / , ,___ 'I. IE OUT N.E. - 157.45 IE OU14S.E. = 157.55 , • • ...I „ ... - k ilr--- . OUTFALL ,.. . . ...I \ r • ''. 1 ) \ . , i ■ I \ : IE = 156.0± sa ,if...„, \ 1 ' - 1 ( . ni p , ‘ - a ' - \ 1 ' _ _ _ .. , ! I I. , • 14, \ ., . ... s • . J'\, ;\ . . . i" ,, ; \ . , , _ • , ,: • , • , • --LwaHlwwwwwmpagewiwalowil E w a oilman um 1 1 Ns 1 mown in Imo II ano I 1 1 1 1 1 ww 1 1 1 1 II I am t. :a anwrar w ■ 4 ... t,, '•. .ft. - , I ; c, ..;,,■ i . . .P. , ze .. i , ie. i ',,,-. - -... ■ WATERSHED MAP F—fo 8 STORM SEWER DESIGN FORM JOB#: 141-018 PROJECT: DAKOTA MEADOWS KING COUNTY WASHINGTON, SANTA BARBRA URBAN HYDROGRAPH, TYPE IA SCS METHOD MH- MH INCR. ACCUM % AREA CN AREA CN TIME Q SIZE SLOPE Q Q/Qf VEL. VNf ACT. LENGT INCR. AREA AREA IMP. PERV. PER. IMP. IMP. (MIN) (CFS) PIPE (FT/FT) FULL (%) FULL (%) VEL (FEET) TIME (ACRES) (ACRES) (ACRES) (ACRES) (CFS) (FPS) (FPS) (MIN) AD#1- MH #2 0.75 0.75 80 0.15 90 0.60 98 10.00 0.68 12 0.0050 2.53 0.27 3.22 0.47 1.50 127.00 1.41 AD#2- MH #2 1.12 1.12 80 0.22 90 0.90 98 10.00 1.01 12 0.0050 2.53 0.40 3.22 0.60 1.93 55.00 0.48 MH #2- OUTFALL 0.00 1.87 80 0.37 90 1.50 98 11.41 1.65 12 0.0574 8.56 0.19 10.90 0.39 4.28 22.00 0 09 *MH #2- MH#1 0.00 1.87 80 0.37 90 1.50 98 10.48 0.17 12 0.0050 2.53 0.07 3.22 0.27 0.86 100.00 1.94 'MH #1 - SWALE 0.00 1.87 80 0.37 90 1.50 98 11.49 0.17 12 0.0050 2.53 0.07 3.22 0.27 0.86 137.00 2.66 Storm water quality discharge of 0.17 cfs. MANNING N = 0.013 PEAK DISCHARGE 1.653428 Area = 1.87 pt = 4 dt = 10 tc= 11.41 Pervious Area 0.37 cn = 90 s = 1.11 0.2s = 0.222 Impervious Area 1.5 cn = 98 s = 0.20 0.2s = 0.041 CO -- ALPHA ENGINEERING INC. 10-Feb-97 9600 SW OAK, SUITE 230 PORTLAND, OR. 97223 JOB NAME: DAKOTA MEADOWS JOB NO.: 141-018 DER: I:\141-018\HYDRO\WQSWALE WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS: REFERENCES: 1. Controlling Urban Runoff, Thomas R. Schueler, July 1987. 2. Surface Water Quality Facilities Technical Guidance Handbook by Brown and Caldwell. 3. Unified Sewer Agency R&O 91-47 and R&O 91-75. 4. Discussions with Unified Sewer Agency. REQUIRED WATER QUALITY TREATMENT: 65% Phosphorus Removal. PROPOSED TREATMENT METHODS: 1. Sumped Catch Basins 15% 2. Bio-Filtration Swale 50% total 65% DESIGN STORM: Precipitation: 0.36 inches Storm Duration: 4 hours Storm Return Period: 96 hours Storm Window: 2 weeks IMPERVIOUS AREA: Watershed: 4.45 acres Percent imp: 42 % Impervious Area 1.869 acres Design Storm = (1.944 ac)*(43560 sgft/ac)*(.36")/(4 hours) Design Discharge = 0.17 CFS -FP/ 1 I DESIGN CRITERIA: Max Velocity: 0.90 fps Side Slopes: 4:1 (treatment area) Base: 4 feet (recommended) n Factor: 0.25 (high grass) SWALE CHARACTERISTICS: Q= 0.17 DESIGN STROM DISCHARGE N= 0.25 MOWED 2/YEAR SWALE B= 4.00 BASE WIDTH OF CHANNEL Z= 4.00 SIDE SLOPES SLOPE= 0.015 BOTTOM SLOPE OF CHANNEL ASS. Y= 0.50 ASSUMED DEPTH IN FT. ITERATIVE SOLUTION OF MANNING'S EQUATION FOR NORMAL DEPTH: ITER. Y (FT) P (FT) A (SQ. FT) R Q (CFS) % ERROR V (FPS) 1 0.50 8.12 3.00 0.3693 1.1272 564.2894 0.38 2 0.16 5.32 0.75 0.1400 0.1466 -13.5807 0.20 3 0.18 5.44 0.82 0.1513 0.1707 0.5984 0.21 4 0.17 5.44 0.82 0.1508 0.1696 -0.0256 0.21 5 0.17 5.44 0.82 0.1508 0.1697 0.0011 0.21 6 0.17 5.44 0.82 0.1508 0.1697 -0.0000 0.21 7 0.17 5.44 0.82 0.1508 0.1697 0.0000 0.21 8 0.17 5.44 0.82 0.1508 0.1697 -0.0000 0.21 9 0.17 5.44 0.82 0.1508 0.1697 0.0000 0.21 10 0.17 5.44 0.82 0.1508 0.1697 -0.0000 0.21 11 0.17 5.44 0.82 0.1508 0.1697 0.0000 0.21 12 0.17 5.44 0.82 0.1508 0.1697 -0.0000 0.21 13 0.17 5.44 0.82 0.1508 0.1697 -0.0000 0.21 14 0.17 5.44 0.82 0.1508 0.1697 0.0000 0.21 15 0.17 5.44 0.82 0.1508 0.1697 -0.0000 0.21 NORMAL DEPTH = 0.17 FT VELOCITY = 0.21 FPS TREATMENT TIME = 9.00 MIN TREATMENT LENGTH = 111.68 ft 11 Appeiidix 6-- LEGEND DAKOTA M ,......77-1 DI•T.M mrrtaw n 6„911YAU [•-.-• L•1,••/V••/•A•R•000ku•I••coda.. A TOWN HOME PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 1--....1 L66T•9'1.1`A,AMA neAeo R7R■ BEACON HOMES 0000 sw 14616 Aw•36•7..7%09 97003(300)696-19• Wimp swot n••1 - f - _ - — DIAL"NORT DAKO A STREE - - APPLICANT/CONSULTANTS — - - - -.' _• - _-- - _ —S` _ - - - — ■Lrai— -- — — •—__— — APPLICANT/OILNER « .. 6*•�. . ...1.7... « . •«- .', �. - �_ . 0 Newsman.OR 11001 \ / 16011,WA P. I• PLANNER/ENGINEER/SURVEYOR 1 ` \ I / 1% S I f I APRA OeM•M•NS NC. 1 I :/ LOPE ,II .••,�•. .'1�:-�•• rf. i Poo•I•OAK Sara DO lw.113.11006 03 -6046 \ ‘ 1 f I I f 1 y .r. 1 ENVIRONMENT AL /BIOLOGY \� \` II 1 100 YEARII 11 II •'/,,_.WET•LAND /• $ •••/r_.lETt.• / a •6•PR.�w w RN \ \ \ 'I I ) FLOOD PL�INI •L•,wIFFEB •it l fl'M1s,�•.•1•,,110,71u.6114e•'�^ - / LIMITS 1 A I • .• - - - - Q SERVICES/UTILITIES F` � 1- J NOM CRYO MVO - 1 / 1 POOR C*YO,MVO : r \I PROM.Pa1n.w 0.014 WC,IK d 1 • 7I11 I• .1144 MORTAR*,1.110.61.OAR rw�on a,MVO 0I •� / • 1 KUM CRY CO RAMO ra.O.a,YOTNVO Ll '/• 1 :. J PAI.4 CRY c•,MVO ' / • ' -" ~ ._ / 7J / NOTES Iy I I -/ -. :�:':�/• �a. : r 1 . •, 4/3...............•,... • un S4 R41 ... I l ) f ' / �1 EXI8TIN6 5 •f • - � •:f �s� roa6s•.9 ' HOUSE ;E r 'r 1•COT.PLAN 7.0.11.PROI.PI TA>,LON•„6DA I ' / r•/< >;4'.1:f :i• =1:• - 111 I / WIWI L!M.0 M D! )1 SHEET INDEX I },,,s l ,1,•...1..-;..r W I (� 1 TITLE 64Y1T/317E ANAL�'616 �• • [. .�♦ % f 1 r fn x bre PLAN/MASTER PLAN 1 ^ �`- •- �( .•� � '/ Y.• ' .i 1- 1 3 PRELMMART PLAT/OU6DIN61CN PLAN �1 l - •1 -••4 LANDSCAPE PLAN = \ f'• ••L•f/' ••. ••. r. \ < 9 GRADING I VTILITR6 PLAN • I- `-)� ,•).�• •�({1`' J Z •'...•,j•6%..%.•.Z♦•/. .1..'•.i •.I"7•.•••.1.41.\ZA. . 1'I N <• VICINITY MAP J \� \ •�''' /.-r1.'f'. .f L. : F' i 1 PROJEC' .� 1 \ \ �.�` �� ,�. ft,Novena OrroA SITE ••,b I \ •'1•/\• •�•A. ••r.. ,i%.••, r -. ••f l.' i .41 A. IL.. I 0 ITTj • T «ti•L6i �i�•. : 1!�• / r • o >r u 4.' I N 69'/ 26 _ 466 62• (T •�•- 4• ^'/ ,� NOT TO OGALE /.c/ ,�/ / .1 Y I I-'I — . i � -1 /`AAA / r b In 1 rat Orr rr •n N-r6 TM I.fMA0 E LEGEND: DAKOTA MEADOWS il II ■•G .•Na,.cr,..NCN.Nato.. .a I f----H1°11.••• A TOWN HOME PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ill T 'O""1° FlBAA®FOR. BEACON HOMES 0600 ew 0M A...5....+a,co VOW(800)624-668 NOTES. SW NORTHIDIAKOTA STREET �, In aT4Tl0'l LOTS I -ZS RESIDENTIAL r •■• _A _ .•w . _!' + • ■ - ■ -•■-. _• _ f _ TRACTS'A'AND'•• PRIVATE STREETS _`' I •i IL,6063TSIF 1 • I • _ TRACTS. 'C'-V OPEN SPACE �� I `- 'TRACTS• 'AI'AID 'N' TO BE DEDICATED TO THE GTY 111 111 •■■ _,.` LQ 5b E1-._o 1V • .. I !{r LOT 8■I U ; • I I" • 1277 5 F 1 1 __ _ `1 111 • 1g-1 LOTs7.11 11 1 ■ !I16252 F. j ' I-- I III LOT 3 1 --4 5 I I a ■ 1679 S.F. 5 LOT 9 ,y II i LOT 4 LOT 10 `:� I ' ' 1 f 1• 1 1630 S.F. / 1150 S F _ kll • ■ `%RACT •F LOT si` II TUCTx TOr A,n TOT■cnv or ■ ' a d '¢ y�26ruu4 •uuc. LLirw_ . _ TRACT •N• • q x;� `•`W I`� •r ISOT �. �" 57.200 5.E ' C g t • C'I II,� ! NOT MI0.IA®MA MAX • S [S TRADCTF & LOT 1 ! • 12005.E■. • .Nw�r. I T 7 r-% _ LOT 14 _ • . ♦•��, 3 1226 SF I __—--—- • 1 -f''i I iL l` A OT 15 11 i I • '� i II r • TRACT •H; •s. Ino SF. I • 1 I 1 ■ 4580 S F. a � L , TT ' ; I ` __ =L9 s2k�!.T. LOT 17 Al , I • ? 1100`,-F. i•lig *430 5 a; I poi' /' TRACT 'M• I I I ':II-SF 416e0 sF _ `I I•'-� /• TRACT x TO M D 016 TO T.CITY a TWA. m• I�▪ TRACT �L SO 74 /' •4 J ' • ( LOT 2 Niri # / 1 •Aii,L J • I 19165F'• ~/ • 1' •LOT 24.1 ' 1 d• • ' I 1936 SF'■ , ' ' ■ ' • cc 'I ;LOT 26'•e I I K ■ ` '} I 2,845 5.F 1 I 1 ■ 1 L•• .•...... ••_••_••_••_••_■• • a ��/�/j•����\\ • I •*MMTN.• )d 4f, 404.86 J /v A ae • a X X 6 1I cV e In Gl iw[a Oa 4.4.4. N.) No 141-a4 ,Trl 1..-441740 �LEGE"�-.IaLl.0Y0A.tL.. DAKOTA MEADOWS ! 4 �°• tor amp A TOWN HOME PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ` 1!` T� 4D14YLU!..•WOW 'WARM P 6 I BEACON HOME- woo ow—Aft,804V64011,on./oo6 ow 53.-... it imomm I WIMP DENNif twarrtol twa 11111 .. W VIM R000L4 Ll.t. -—_ -—-—-—-—-—- __. . ._._ _. _ .. _ _ �. . - S -NC H-BAKAX-i4 STREET-- ! YTL..0 70.110.••LMry ..: .. ,• (_ .. — •�" —r _ - "r — ar YILOr LW. "�` _� t t�:� rlaLC 41IOTVJ.A.ONYtM.4 ` I /t� l- h • :"aNM'rIl'C'^.•• rw.w 4�M • - i /� • • • •Rr rtlr• . . . .. nroro.w�a>r • A •.I . oorr.n.sr O. ,' �•' •p p :i'.).:).;.:,..1'.1.•)...i., ) ) • . f. . . . W Y..a�eotatiar • I M , g. • i. . g 111)1 1 — — � I I . . .. . :� . . . . . . . . . . . - I1 I • iii i. �. NOTE& I 4��A�� \i.; 1' . . . . ItIh i j f\��// i. /% \ • .� •.•.•.• !• 7 f:!7 � 1 . P....Mot ...4. •!1 '7' l�7:1. I .• t. ,.. To.PUN II MIRY oar \ �� . � .l • ,a,a �W • ri .•�' .•. 10 • A• SUSS w ■ % ■ Vo q 53e$3 Ir/3M0 • Mace 21W115 — — — I ��f::1. j• \ i I ' r . °..^. III \\ . • Y .;'� �. .' . . . . f it .. p"1 ... . .YR ,r;__:,:•.•-4-.'. .'.'.'.'.'.'.'.Z •• z III rr 1. w . • 22 yam. I I I • . .'.'l •.'. .'.'. ..•.........'� a 0 • �•— 1 ■ .■�■■ate•• ..∎:■•1•11O■■am=••wisoa1•mow.■ •�11! .••r.r• /A 1 400.. H //v If y N 1Mbin J 0 WI MI•.M G%\ ,nt w.-MIA• •f E LEGEND: DAKOTA M E A D 0 W S iii PLANT UN SCINTMG MANI COMM NAME MU 011�� rx A TOWN HOME PLANNED DEVELOPMENT mimeo KM I BEACON HOMES 0600 rw Mal Ave./.1..IIOM ea 97006(500)624-■o1 11 O...... lrnw .war 1...W YM T a. AI., ;,r.: ! II o . -ATM.» :...Yam rr;"` SW NORTH D u.' Yrwr...l V. Allft, .��f UMW pa - • wr.. w Ira ■••• •• .r ;�w..�.l%1111 �. 1. . • �E MI fW/. I...rrr lr I• la. 1r` "•-rtwo..+ ``; 4,' �''Ii.I 4.it = '>',��,;f J, /�'.. Yn.w s•r N. MrJe 1 \ e C. St��,a 7777 ■iv§ rN rrrti1r....ti.•. a S ♦♦ i ?uru IN km mmi..iIa..a°" ; \ 1 is / :.f P c.i' \\ \\ ► € Yak,\; I44'A.•O , \ \ t '/ I Ornem Ing Are= .,Ky . ��y ' ,Ier.,04❖,.:•:' NATIVE AREA PLANTING LEGEND. \ \ R ,p1 wig, • -^ `" (1 ..'';•''•••f•'• 91.99.. ..•�Yr ♦—• _ • , ❖.•r❖.10 i �' yM SU, off..♦>4 WV PLANT UPI 1Cd/rllO NA1■CCM10M MAN■ MU I ...•••••,.•r. ® 9 i�' F,a�1� I I��,f L4•f❖.•��f•.i�X .1 Ji 1 •b•r"'.... .uw.r u. ��.r.�rr 1,:w �. ` „ ".."...•QO a.N 1 j Y •��• .1, . TiV4 . i "1.11. r .r. �, ` � •.•7I•, \\ Ma/r Warr balm/Mesh,fm. -'• / ,N.:.)::....:,.., L � ,. ° `''�• \\ •04,04 ` .el. .. j4.»: {.,.., b a / • i❖•4•i,�• 147 •••••Wrr� r./0 imi•..��� .............. a 1 tip){;7:.'.7:7' ' �•*•�.��%��� RANT Ulf 10/MIrIC NAI■CdYON NAM WE 7' .,i'•t�i i`.•7;1•• t� �:+:'f S f c....rw.. ti•..arrw 'r 1_T ' P 147.0 ` ..•4,..i mlwrlosarl► °a an....r. ' � ' i\+ (4,y l+r.•�•�.�;'f i� r'�1 MOPE•QOM 79.19 z-�--I- f K r:a {� "�� 'irJe'i:!�,r':: i 101=. > _ 1111---I` ,.�ffJ''a�,� •••.•.♦ ...��rwo.r.rr..w Y•rrr.......... �•7� R r� '1 .`I r/,:' -.Y aH'�,�� �•••.:.1•�. Z PLANT NMI�r Y/gMlrl6 MAW CC.NON NAY! 1121 ; 0 an • l0• , ,•,�.�,,�,,„.Y11� /.:❖:.•:::..:• 1111_ .r -... - _l cp'0 >a�,YnFir , .�'�/:❖:•:��:r:•: • M1. w r•.1. 4,.w r... �.+� • .t `• •- 4- f 0 .... .• � 3 .m O �A \ 4,4 1 f••.. ,•. r.m* •rmmb* Ir ! f .� •� �f J.f 1111, •• •...a.rr ..r.In II. I ii....li 4,0 • 1 .'! 1r- J• /...♦ •. r.- .Mt...iv tiro.f.r m./... C■�� 1-.4 , �1' , �/' /.g p "mJ•❖:$l %∎::• V w•s.r..f.r -! %F.✓A - I#5f' •:::�::4,•i RsIo1/•WM.Iar.•rw *Ea i ■Id`, ` .r \ r"5I •••:':•ii':•%4.p IOW fr `, t .• ♦1111• '',, ow.. a,Q !,. , . -,AA'i i�J`j t•r a�f. f❖119!1 a� i I .; •• .i �.I �i-,--.,,•AT"+,F�i �I' f. n.0::1(0',9.1M.?'� o•.. .�•r�•�`+ f'.. yr; :::::: ' N worm.■ .a.1r Or _ (i t e to J 1'lM17..11— lr,t 1..wwU1 • 6 , , DAKOTA MEADOWS illi A TOWN HOME PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ?` PREPARED Fon. BEACON HOMES woo 8W 12.411 A..,a.....kn ai 07006(307)824-1008 !! I -�y.,43W NORTH DAKOTA STerEET V , LEGEND __ �* _ -:'-=_ ,am*.t1..11:u.t.t "i.•��.• .imi.!. I .ti. ! 15.∎ , 1T�a•,'r-II ,1'.'T."_ - :; exa,w r.,ew t.. ' , r f, f�. _ A, I I •xa,.o ur.,.w,.ww n.r..o4. • I ■ •i , -J I �' .I I I / �i'- / S 11.844444 COG,11.•.1 • .xar.°wnw v..,* '1 1 1 1 -. I I 6.'I+F �'•-- - axan .u°w.ow..n 1 � I I _ I . 111 ■614061 LIMN Lot 1L1..1 _ u w -oa.e. I L t : I�nan w +n.r... 1 I' ' f' y r - — IJ I JI) J ft WIp vJLM I I . I 1- •. C • r-1-_•. ..._._. I ' 1..1 1 i of ! , • `� I ;r_ ,J % •' n � 'I IL r'r •i • CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION �l FILE NO.(S): SUBDIVISION (SUB) 97-0002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 97-0001 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 97-0001 VARIANCE (VAR) 97-0001 ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 97-0001 FILE TITLE: DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION APPLICANT: Alpha Engineering OWNER: Beacon Homes Attn: Mike Miller 9500 SW 125th Avenue 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 Beaverton, OR 97005 Portland, OR 97223 (503) 452-8003 FAX: (503) 452-8043 (503) 524-1999 REQUEST: 1. The applicant has requested Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 4.45 acre parcel into 25 lots ranging between 950 square feet to 2,848 square feet; 2. Planned Development Review to allow lot sizes less than the minimum required by the zone; 3. Sensitive Lands Review to allow the construction of a sanitary sewer and storm drainage line within the 100-year floodplain; 4. Variance approval to allow a cul-de-sac to serve 25 lots, whereas, the Development Code states that the maximum number of lots served by a cul-de-sac shall be 20 lots; and 5. Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. LOCATION: 10520 SW North Dakota Street; WCTM 1S134DA, Tax Lot 03300. The property is situated west of the intersection of SW Tiedeman Street and SW North Dakota Street, on the south side of SW North Dakota Street. ZONE: Residential, 12 Units Per Acre; R-12. The R-12 zone allows single-family attached/detached residential units, multiple-family residential units, residential care facilities, mobile home parks and subdivisions, public support services, family day care, home occupation, temporary use, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40, 18.54, 18.80, 18.88, 18.84, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.134, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. CIT: Central CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request PHONE NUMBER: (503) DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW: DATE COMMENTS DUE: Monday - AriI1,1991 X PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: 4/21/97 TIME: 7:30 HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PROJECT RELATED COMPONENTS AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION X VICINITY MAP LANDSCAPING PLAN X NARRATIVE X X ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SITE PLAN X OTHER: Tree Plan and Wetlands STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea, Planning Division(503)639-4171 x315 Determination/Delineation Rpt, SUB 97-0002 DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL CITY OF TIGARD OREGON March 12, 1997 Mike Miller Alpha Engineering, Inc. 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 Portland, OR 97223 Re: Notice of Complete Submittal Dear Mr. Miller: This letter is to inform you that your application for Subdivision Review of Dakota Meadows (SUB 97-0002) is considered complete and has been accepted by the Planning Division. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171. Sincerely, (xJt,,14( D6v"06x. William D'Andrea, Associate Planner, AICP i lcurpin\will\sub97-02.It2 c: SUB 97-0002 land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 February 21, 1997 Mike Miller CITY OF TIGARD Alpha Engineering Inc. OREGON 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 Portland, OR 97223 Re: Notice of Incomplete Submittal Dear Mr. Miller: The Planning Division has conducted a preliminary review of Subdivision (SUB) 97-0002, an application for a 25 lot subdivision, and have found that certain application materials were not provided with the submittal. The Planning Division is unable to continue processing the application pending submission of the following items and plan notes: 1.) Additional application fee of $149.00. The submittal includes a Sensitive Lands Review for construction of a sewer line within the 100-year floodplain. A narrative addressing the criteria in Chapter 18.84.040.A shall be submitted. 2.) Signature of the adjoining property owner (tax lot 3400) authorizing involvement in the proposed subdivision, if this property is involved in the ▪ • wY := application. 3.) Tree plan, in accordance with Community Development Code, 18.150.025. ▪ •;:, The plan shall specify the preservation and/or mitigation plan proposed for the subdivision. 4.) Four(4) copies of the wetland delineation. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171. • Sincerely, William D'Andrea, Associate Planner, AICP i:\cu rpl n\wi l I\su b97-02.Itr c: SUB 97-0002 land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 ALPHA ENGINEERING, d 7TIAL (113' 4RAY @PAN :a Engineering•Development Services•Surma, , 9600 S.W. OAK SUITE 230 PORTLAND, OREGON 97223 DATE q JOB NO. (503)452-8003 FAX (503)452-8043 - ` 1 `-1 ^ ` , / ( c41 - Q I ATTENTION L /� /�I (,t),1 TO 0,r ,t^ 'k 'c( RE: Ti)A <O+A I-� C_L n( t7 S WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑ Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: > ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION l av P i 3 , S-O0 -no (� r i Ih KI 1,-c I.+ -t c,� C :C � 5 bD s � �� '-� J l Z. 6 v✓ 141 t- J S S 2 5S1- 0C-5— P1Rns . THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ❑ For approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ For your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return_ • corrected prints > ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO �, /� SIGNED: hQA 0,---6P If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once. ALPHA ENGINEERING, INC. March 5, 1997 Mr. Will D'Andrea City of Tigard Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall, PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Dakota Meadows (City SUB 97-0002) Job No.500-245 Dear Will: The following letter along with attachments addresses your letter of February 21, 1997 which requested additional application materials be submitted to the City in order to make our submittal complete. In accordance with the City's comments, we have attached the following: 1) Additional application fee of$149, and a narrative addressing Sensitive Lands Review for construction of a sewer line in the flood plain. 2) List of corrected tax Lot numbers. Please note that this application does not encompass tax lot 3400: only 3300 of Map 1S1 34DA. 3) A plan depicting trees to be preserved and removed (revised Sheet 1 of submittal) 4) A report prepared by Arborist Walt Knapp. 5) A revised Landscape Plan (revised Sheet 4) which depicts Planting mitigation as required by City Code. 6) A revised Preliminary Plat/Subdivision Plan (Revised Sheet 2). A minor realignment of the bicycle trail to preserve an existing tree necessitated a slight realugnment of the trail and hence the associated lot lines. As you are aware, four copies of the requested Wetland Delineation report as prepared by Shapiro have already been submitted to your office under separate cover. We hereby request that the attached addendum be incorporated into the application for Dakota Meadows. Plaza West•Suite 230.9600 SW Oak•Portland,Oregon 97223 Office 503-452-8003•Fax 503-452-8043 We anticipate that with this addendum, that staff can recommend this project for approval in the Staff Report due to be distributed. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation on this project. Sincerely, ALP GINEERING, INC. Mike Miller Project Planner cc: Peter Kusyk SECTION 18.84.040: SENSITIVE LANDS APPROVAL STANDARDS As the proposed public utility line crosses through the 100 year flood plain it is necessary to determine findings addressing criteria as listed in this section. The criteria and the applicants response and findings are as follows: 1) Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero foot rise floodway shall not result in any narrowing of the floodway boundary. RESPONSE: As only a sewer line is being proposed to be installed and buried, and no changes in ultimate grading are proposed there will be no change in floodplain storage or floodway boundaries. 2) Land form alterations or developments within the 100 year,flood plain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial.... RESPONSE: No land form alteration is being proposed so this criteria is not applicable. 3) Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the,floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100 year,floodplain. RESPONSE: No ultimate land form alteration is proposed, and as such no increase of the elevation of the 100 year floodplain will result. 4) The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan, unless construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely. RESPONSE: Although no land form alteration is proposed, a bicycle/pedestrian pathway is accommodated within the land to be dedicated to the City. This pathway will be built by the City. 5)The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of the average annual flood. RESPONSE: The bicycle pathway to be built by the City will be well above the elevation of the average annual flood. 6) The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineer's and State of Oregon land Board, Division of State Lands approvals shall be obtained. RESPONSE: The necessary permits will be obtained. 7) Where land form alterations are allowed... RESPONSE: This criteria is not applicable to this application. FACTS: Applicant: Beacon Homes 9500 S.W. 125th Avenue Beaverton, OR 97005 Owner: Peter Kusyk Owner: Beacon Homes 9500 S.W. 125th Avenue Beaverton, OR 97005 Owner: Peter Kusyk Development Consultant: Alpha Engineering Inc. 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 Portland, OR 97223 Project Manager: Mike Miller Location: 10520 SW North Dakota Tigard, OR Tax Lot: Tax Lot 3300 of Map 1S1 34DA Applicable Code Criteria: Community Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40,18.54, 18.80, 18.84, 18.88, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106,18.108, 1..8.44-4; 18,1.44, 18.150, 18.160, 18.164 Dakota Meadows Tree Protection & Removal Plan Prepared for: Beacon Homes 9500 SW 125th Beaverton 97005 Prepared by: Walter H. Knapp Certified Silviculturist Certified Arborist-ISA 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone(503) 646-4349 March 3, 1997 D �12 _ 5 1997' • Walter H. Knapp _ Silviculture and Forest Management Urban Forestry Dakota Meadows Tree Protection & Removal Plan Background and Purpose This Tree Protection and Removal Plan describes the activities that will affect trees on the Dakota Meadows Planned Unit Development(PUD) in the City of Tigard, Oregon. The Plan is responsive to the requirements of the Tigard's Municipal Code, Chapter 18.150, Tree Removal. Site Description Dakota Meadows PUD encompasses an area located south of SW North Dakota Street, and immediately west of Fanno Creek. The previous land use was primarily rural-residential. Most of the site includes open grassland that had been grazed by horses. Trees are growing along the driveway, adjacent to the house,and scattered elsewhere throughout the site. Many of the trees are Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia) growing in association with wetlands. Tree Protection& Removal Plan and the Tree Map As required by the City,this tree protection and removal plan and the tree map for Dakota Meadows include the location, size, and species of existing trees as well as a program to mitigate tree removal. Tree Inventory and Tree Code Requirements The City of Tigard has recognized the importance of trees in a municipal code that addresses tree removal and mitigation. The Tree Code generally requires"no net loss" for trees over 12 inches in diameter.' It specifies that"the number of replacement trees required(to mitigate tree removal) shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged by the caliper size of See City of Tigard,OR Municipal Code,Chapter 18.150. Tree Removal for specific requirements and definitions. 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane,Beaverton,OR 97007 Phone(503)646-4349 Dakota Meadows Page 2 the largest reasonably available replacement trees." As shown in the following table,the code makes additional requirements based on the percentage of trees retained. Amount of Trees Retained Mitigation Required Less than 25%of trees over 12 inches No net loss of trees as defined by Section in diameter 18.150.070.D Retention of 25-50% of trees over 12 Two-thirds of the trees to be removed must be inches in diameter mitigated as defined by Section 18.150.070.D Retention of 50-75% of trees over 12 Half of the trees to be removed must be mitigated as inches in diameter defined by Section 18.150.070.D Retention of 75%or more of trees over No mitigation required 12 inches in diameter Quantifying the Tree Inventory A total of 38 trees over 12 inches in diameter is present at Dakota Meadows. Twelve of these trees will be removed during construction,and 25 will be retained. Mitigation As shown on the enclosed table,these 12 cut trees represent 32% of the trees larger than 12 inches in diameter. Since the remaining 68% will be retained,mitigation is required for 50% of the trees removed. Using the City of Tigard's Municipal Code process, this will require planting of 52 two-inch trees. Alternative locations for planting these trees are being developed, but the specific planting sites will be determined later. Retaining and Protecting Trees Most of the trees retained on the site are located in designated wetlands,where equipment and construction activities will be excluded. These trees will not need special considerations during construction. However, where trees are retained in construction areas, several measures should be followed to assure protection: • Retention trees located in the vicinity of equipment operations will be protected by installation of orange plastic construction fencing to prevent injury to tree boles or soil compaction within the root zone. • Dakota Meadows Page 3 • If it is necessary to have any vehicle or construction equipment drive or maneuver within the root zone of a retained tree, a layer of gravel or other suitable mulch at least 6 inches deep will be placed in the path of the equipment as protection for the root system of the tree. • Construction equipment will be stored in suitable locations away from retained trees. • The stripping of topsoil around retained trees will be restricted. • Excavation immediately adjacent to roots larger than 2 inches in diameter within the tree root protection zone of retained trees will be by hand to ensure that roots are not damaged. Where feasible, major roots will be protected by tunneling or other means to avoid destruction or damage. • A certified arborist will supervise proper execution of this plan through construction of all buildings that may encroach on retained trees. Summary Almost 70%of the trees larger than 12 inches in diameter will be retained at Dakota Meadows. A series of safeguards are provided to ensure protection of these trees. In addition,a total of 52 two-inch caliper trees will be planted on the site to mitigate tree removal. f4e) Walter H. Knapp Certified Silviculturist Certified Arborist, ISA Dakota Meadows Tree Protection and Removal Plan • Project No: 9708 • Name: Dakota Meadows Client: Beacon Homes Eng.&Pln: Alpha Engineering Tree Mitigation Evaluation Remove Retain Total DBH No.Trees Dia.Equiv. No.Trees Dia.Equiv. No.Trees Dia.Equiv. 12 2 24 1 12 3 36 13 0 0 0 0 14 4 56 1 14 5 70 15 0 5 75 5 75 16 2 32 4 64 6 96 17 1 17 4 68 5 85 18 1 18 2 36 3 54 19 1 19 0 1 19 20 0 2 40 2 40 21 0 3 63 3 63 22 0 1 22 1 22 23 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 29 0 1 29 1 29 30 0 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 32 0 1 32 1 32 33 0 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 36 0 1 36 1 36 37 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 0 0 39 0 0 0 0 40 1 40 0 1 40 Sum 12 206 26 491 38 697 32% 30% ' 68% 70% Mitigation required = 50% of diameter equivalents removed= 103 Number of 2" trees = 52 Explanation of Table: DBH: Diameter(in.) at breast height, 4.5 feet above ground level. Number of Trees: From tree inventory. Diameter Equivalents: DBH x Number of Trees. See Tigard Code. Number of 2-inch Diameter Replacement Trees: Diameter Equivalents divided by two. 21-1-1 1•- 1W 7 - `V 134.28 v --- T3— — I 3500 4300 % ct. )2 0 1 ° I> -- `° 8 115.29 ' 72.99 24 73 �S O J �� 0, c?,‘""--NORTH LINE JOHN L. HICKLIN DLO. 54 1.325CH 04423 �i� 73.98 ,, 57.021, 100 _ 3000 0 qi 3eo'53000 3y 3 , 506.55 3400 I / .96,4C.. 5900 0 cf4 Q °m 4.47AC. 1 1.10AC. �4 .4- 7 0. - \/' 4. I N O I p 90.50 0 w a SO 0 (I f / 5800 0 o .4 w 0 \\// \ 0 < 2 . - W ire /m 6 m '; I'M /4 V0 m 3 -0.1 _ ► * Cl) o • In I Say/ �+�*" ' S' 6' V SEE MAP • 0 r iS I 35CB / 5700 za' 4e N N o c:1 0 5400 5 ft' N m l / N N O; r 0 rs 0 —" 0 5600 74.72 5500 r2 4 �' /— 3 5 CH. �INITIAl1 PT. N 89°51'28�W ■ CEI 33 1.323Cn. .. ��111 ` 07 Eo __ 506.52 100— PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES CITY OF TIGARD • PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES 1 "��'!' City of Tigard,Oregon RESIDENTIAL CATE 1 Z— (o- 9(0 STAFF. t') vE APPLICANT: AGENT: Phone: ( ) Phone: ( PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS: TAX MAPITAX LOT: NECESSARY APPLICATION(S): 5V8,b1v1Slt70 7/A1wNE:b DEVELoPM,EA/T 141.1 v.1cE 644/i Ts ca-c%-5''- PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING DESIGNATION: CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT FACILITATOR: TEAM AREA: PHONE: (503) ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size:305aq. ft. Average lot width: / ft. Maximum building height: 35- ft. Setbacks: front J5.-- ft. side S ft. rear /5 ft. corner /0 ft. from street. Maximum site coverage: % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: Z.0 % (Refer to Code Section 18. 5'-( ) Goft44►E zo ,F¢. 'r ► g'.4T7,ywHa *0SO FdR- D rTs c,4 lc 64TfA) a/A4EG t? , ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot frontage: 25 feet, unless lot is created through the Minor Land Partition process. Late -. .: :: -• _• - _ • . - p•I.l um . - • • .e- • - _ • •• "'.- a t. /t¢TT.v/c.6, O S.F /5 .41, <zo"rl r4 The depth of all lots shall not exceed 21/2 times the average width, unless the parcel is less than 11/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. (Refer to Code Section 18.164.060 Lots) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 10 Residential ApplicationtPlammng Department Section RECYCLING Applicant should contact franchise hauler for review and approval of site servicing compatibility with Pride Disposal's vehicles. CONTACT PERSON: Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal at (503) 625-6177. (Refer to Code Section 18.116) ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: 1c, gO . I Zv .1' - c. y-f o 50%. -7'•9RKW4 M y be , V Gonvnrfc i /a S. 13 ' ,¢z/A.A'ct RiTER - I: 1(414. c730 . Li I 5-r „/ ..>. -, 3 44' N-k4L*e C�eQo re_MIENT -1)RE' 00S ?Re-,4PP. U- ' gA41-[) Sv// V4-6/D. PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All applications must be accepted by a Planning Division staff member of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other week days. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 10 Residential AppricationiPlannmg Department Section 0 Z P N AWOL, i.9LXV.00 i 151 `�. s■—saui�I sss�s s/ss�■smessrss—■s—sa—a rasps I ssss sssssslse—s ssss■ss—ssssmasssws sss-s sssls s�ssas-/sssslssss-sst�I z a O ' — k ii . J 1911- X x x I I 1 O 03 4 I?: E— , II " gig Eh .0 K., a r IF .. . ........ ......,, 01 I 1 R r i... .iiik . ......i . . r c). r)/ .... ....".................1 I 11111‘ 1M W ,A 1 `' ? i 1 7 ...,s .....) L__. Li ".1 ; , < . m m m m i A#Gi_ — - 0 . .'■1 2 CC .G O Gam,. •'I•ill : L p al — U C 1 1 _ _ JCL7 ' rl as ' L� •Mi�''''''-ii • • t • t - 0. ■EM■■ ■E■M■ 'Men Cauilig • X 0 . L.._ \VV,T-4-.7. 0 m o I %la ■mmiro■ ■s■ ■.■ ■��ss*��� \s;s s; ; % ■ 0b+=+ Al saawla 2 < E �.+s.�..,vs'aLP A.YL=4,00 9 — I I to w= 1 r "',` I I K. • F ' a: i avo°o a'a • ;1,..., 0...m • f (= ,_1__1 From: "Brian Rager" <FINANCE/BRIAN> To: Will, JimH Date sent: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 13:30:22 +0000 Subject: Dakota Meadows Talked with Gus and found out the North Dakota bridge IS on the CIP list, but not scheduled to be up for construction for another 3 or 4 years. We plan to start Engineering design next year, but funds will need to build up for a few years before it could be completed and the project built. Gus said that the bridge may raise 2 or 3 feet. No matter what, he said to plan on an approach to the bridge of at least 200 feet to provide a good, smooth approach. If I measure back to the west 200 feet on the Dakota Meadows plan, that puts us basically close to their proposed "cut off' point for their improvements. Our suggestion is that we require the applicant to pay the City a sum of money to cover a standard 1/2 street improvement (not including t6 any adjustments for the bridge) along the frontage of the piece they (_.00r r/►� plan to dedicate. This money will go into a special account flagged ,O specifically for the bridge project. We would use those funds at the 10;‘1" time we build the bridge. I believe this is more than fair. Their engineer would need to submit a proposed engineer's estimate for the cost of the 1/2 street; we will review it and come to an agreement on the value. Mike Miller at Alpha has called me asking for feedback. I plan to relay this info to him, but want to hear back from you first as to whether or not you agree. Thanks. 18,814,040 ©R DEVE1, e. ce c=aAwy 4. 1E-. Eca, ,ovc/thp,gs Svc „GM vNRy R 4r REc1 14 i7 ,"'4 soaff, c2 A4c)/71/)vqto5e U 5 /c4-i/ .1 SSoc, te✓/? X Si 7i Yff6/o , 90�,c co.'f3rs, c mium ate. /g: FL/. 017/0 65J r1.4A1S Fc-,G 7"7 p1071'-/ • 'I7 T�•4r %8' r—roc/(ni w// be &/01,-1 E/t=1/'-rn v o� 114 4-A//411/44 C J/aO q , may. 741,6,2 rA (Ai/Ai 16 aL�Ci✓ j Lk/'/J, 6 f G44071. -a5 P--\1 1 I ! ;m 1 WA1SH ING_ T01J . � 1 —" `` 1 —�1 ilo I 1 _ -,i ��. 1i S Q U;%ARE t :17_ . . i_-I • j l I� g- , ���-7—' 7 \ , V I l 1 ,\ I �EJhMANN I L_1-_.L_I. .L_ I `-`iF dT J ),j tt I i / \ - __- Li-: I I CORW4__—.J l •:____2 '7 1 • 2 2 6 "- - - -- -- • �-1 r'- —-� rl T — r 26 A.• "1 33 ;34 I it + .//�f' 34 35 ' - y� • , r ' ---- - •- `-- - -- - s 435 9■ [__________ . BEAVERTON �► Tl �� ��\. L 04.,•44.A.L�F'_ , . - _ `•/� //� VA40 �� �_-1—L 1 � ' —! - X71 < a L T Y'/ /////// 16414 WI' \ — Ly ! ' C•_— pA0 , `w# // 01* C \\ /\III ., ..,' I. 0 \. I 1 _ - _ _- �`� — r ' Y ,// 1 _ - _ _ i_. 7,-E.' j f i J��//,_�, . +�.N.v .l'-`JVr�'/ I � i 'w ,',19Gr/'�I�/�\ -%, \ .-_� —. _ VV � ' L i .:. ,,„... ,.L „, ...--iy_- • FE. -.1 -\ // //,/f:'. --1 _'- \ _ `--� 1.*'—' \-.�_-..-, //il�/i s\ 1\ ^. f. .. , Al qt. t. - , .., 4,,„ t. \ \\:__ \\.,.":---z- I, 7 77 ,_t 1 , -)=_-__. :__ --I ,. 1.171., .1.AU 03, , ______ , , .. i _ i . . _ . \\ ,,,,- --; - , .--,:*_,..:_____ „ ,.._ , ,� amiF` ' j _mot r--- I -: r_• 1 sW ��°�.1�:..:' Sw '+EA_ _'� ..,,,.•,,,,,, I / ,4. `' 1\• e" i ►;'/• _�h - — _ /1y`! Is__.1 r. \ \ .,..------ 4/ r , _, [ ____ \ i c _ Wa;F ILr pRCI \ `\ � As E. .e ` DcNn►A ,L r ;i /. i DAKOTA 3r,K F. `, r .- �&1;r* �;r7. . `\�I E w OW M l miff;7 i \ -rr- I — 1. - -I? It• IMIII=MINIIIIIMIE V. , : . Li 1 I _1 I lkni d . /N i ; i1� eE► �- H'q ,—, . '— V - - - - • - grifili a - ,i4,,, .�t- -_-w m1► I __ .... - i I - :\N`x'pol 's- -1 s `— �I 1 y I m - 1{ ! -_ ___ ` • neuo ETR=E� 1 \ 11___ - --4 I --_ -'- /�. e ... 7•e :- - -- --t_______, 1 1 .4.5-1 IA----7. i tik al.-11N,,- ' rET$UT I \ / OAP ST I �. ,T „� ' A44.--' lE'. \// \ It 141 _ r I `�t. 3d` N4TNERiINE STREET 4`\` - ' J F- _ _r-' _ `, •�.15 §� ,\ \7P:lL'L�G�t�/.'c!'✓//dJi�sf u '.5 a ri. 3 2 �,� - • I►� \ ��� a�` ' ' �1 1` Q FOWL � l- i s __ ■ n� A s. a'i1' �$ iIIEE SCHOOL �'''����I,� s, t� //////,,,����00�- - �I `NN PL fr_ ,_ _7:;)it,,„0 :I l -41 , I MI --._--1, 1 WALNUT l 1 �■ ZSI dO haON: \ - S .,o . ` ♦.♦ '-- ,Is ste , , . 1 i • •. :olasfe. ,i1 1 _ y , .. ..A. de - or .. /1 r l. ,- m S.W. ; EIIOL I , 31 1141 3• :// 4..- i' 4 4 I \4. S/MI�e'J �� - CAR N T — �. le 6t 4 ve ? `r \ ;/ ,III I „ , , I r -' .-.'• - 1- f `1-1 I' ----;. Er --t . i'.7 ., . -, : N I I sW IFO LAMER. fi4CCEP r sore-1E OYe vnrp ,woe /ivipio vEE*7E NT.5 ,oti -16E-ii)o)/y fi 6e LA),1/ T,ioe GrqN,e0 -Fri /�rr,•��-r,�. r n%7 D • /,►p tr v,E eN rs, _ •-- -) A K o L_ _L A TOWN HOME ALTERNATIVE 3 UNIT TABULATION LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN uNrr TY'PE FOOTPRINT S.F., NO. A SO' X 4Cr 7 PREPARED FOR. PREPARED BY. DATE. 1-10-97 x Beaqon Hones AEI (Alpha Engineering Inc.) D600 SW 126th 9600 SW Oak, Ste. 230 C 20' x 40' 3 (4.7 Beaverton, OR Portland, OR i TOTAL 26 . 411..... ... "Ilifireviw., .... 4/11a.,,00lor ama.........,. .. :44Weandlay..slr 4:41Aw,alsowle.:-.••malhiallm• br,d•fil•miliiimillmilmillimillnigniims --_ 111,414111.i.i e, ,Y.6.-'10NPVZ,mi.'7.'=MOW SR.;4104■4=4 Cr.* ..a .A.. .....■■ it , ,..r; .-...,....-..-e vs-40 TA:7mm 6. =Is-:14,--51-1 .ivy.0,11 Vt. u.44p,k olnii A jr B mitr,)A„,.71 N.•••.to....*V 014'4 4•••• \ r4:tig 440-: 1 01 -........i..-. i . .4.-4.......N. 1 t AI A 4g., •- Cv."1,1 A.•■•■••Vi.4%0.., PROPOSED BIKE PATH B i 0,..1i... :4., I 11*.„,.,,V.1 .:44•••44•4M •:+:44'0 1'..••••• a ITO BE CONSTRUCTED BY THE CITY I 1 ';,,:t., t,:.■4_ ::.0.-b-lw-„,„„„st,t, B 1 ' Wm :....■■A '..titottoti. • AFIEA PROPOSED ..ftVitn ...." ift ia: }14..:11q .4-'11..4.147.4 :;V.WA g TO BE DEDICATED -)--* I ;■ft-'-.. (pi.- .10,1". 0,-<.---,......, .•1,;.„ mon< ::,,40" __,,,Ic" , 1 4:i:::::** TO THE crry OF TIGARD 2.26 ACRES 498.156 SF) . -,-,- .°11.- .-kar..• . 'I—Mcl. i • NrAr7 _,--*0 wir, A::•:•:•:0 •■■••••■••,4•4 he .•■ar ••••4•I 4 r . - FANNO CREEK FLOW LINE . _OR ,,,,,, 11.1.:11:••••111•.! 1 - -,••• ..:Cia B IIN.trW, VAIN'4■••!..s. I 4t,-. • "I' 4%4 Er" p—a t,„7,,,,,.. ••••••••4.0.4.4 v:-e.-47....ire LIMITS OF wrrt.AND Tt. . .., .,.. .:„ • SURVEY 12/9110 4 ,1,-, ' 174, ir„,' 10-.:,-,::,.c.,,:•,^`,` K4:::::::::::: t-47,1. .ISEEN •* ,...1:0,4,....:!.''olk ..5., ,••••■-..^ .4 4.1s4-:4A4 I I'4. AS*44:4.44 LIMITS OF WETLAND BUFFER i LIM .... ■I B "" Ott. f".. A:41, ..M 5 ,If" 4.-i• ,V' ''. -*rit'-. - #r do'' 0- .. 4/*/-"Nr. "^:ii lim, ,.. -.....-0,-1 - 1 .• l • e I r go, S:047. ri" 1-`,4 .`efirg*.ii•::it•••• EXISTING TREES /46:1(4 t..100:.):•*:* MeV 4 7% -4-e.."-------,----- :i5; • . - - .7 16, 4tt. 1 7 I SiWe:Kai:g:$1 bda a Ifjk ,410:1 Tr,i les'':!,:`,>?: •:+:•:., III reevi, '-.J.:0'' ,,:."..,`".:' .,,:•'.444•:4 .- -,MK SII:•;"..•..,•■••••■••%.• 4g P t11474 1 rifit'o:. i%1 .,,,O,,,i:-#J,'.1..-.*•."4.:r• 4 44°4' 4k.. ' ''1#"•,:ii-li•;s4.:%=:et.:', *4,,A.,,,...••■ote.,14•4t w„,-.4111 4..r,LI 71 111 A91.10:/4t■tWtT4*,!: -....::, -1:-,40,4,-__-,. ---t,-16 I Al ' '6.--711.P°01414;*"1•64.4.•;, 4 .....hiqd■le."4,414,1:t/6.40. i *nom.. 7/ , ORNA AL PLANTING LEGEND. NATIVE AREA PLANTING LEGEND. OA Street Trees G Existing Trees W ,‘ Specimen Trees Wetland Butte( / Transition Zone .41 kW, 7 Auto-Court Trees Open Meadow /Upland Riparian Zone • 411k 0";•;•;•■ .***•M Riparian Meadow :-...-11,-.:_, Turf 'MAJA Shrubs / Groundcovers O CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES 1'''`�t'�! City of Tigard,Oregon RESIDENTIAL DATE /O/T 5/rZo STAFF: Gc)/// D AAJMEA - APPLICANT: AGENT: MIKE M(IIFI/ 64472/44) Phone: ( ) µ Phone: ( ) 145Z- SC3C73 PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS: /05 ZO St.i /) xC;r4 TAX MAPITAX LOT: P5/ 3WDA 3300, 34/00 NECESSARY APPLICATION(S): 7O Th\\b 15)0IJ /P M1VA' !/e'(.p7"/Voi r PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: 3a (C7- 5073/ /U/510A/ S/tuCt/E f4-Mi/y .4T7,4CNE'l, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: MED10/11 ZONING DESIGNATION: R /Z CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT FACILITATOR: TEAM AREA: PHONE: (503) ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size:3050sq. ft. Average lot width: / ft. Maximum building height: 3 ft. Setbacks: front /55 ft. side S ft. 'r "'rear /S ft. corner /O ft. from street. 64e/P65 Zt ' Maximum site coverage: % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: ?e::' % (Refer to Code Section 18. '511 ) ,r 3c" L✓N6ee ABr/'r Ma,Z. Re5r,ei477 ro ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot frontage: 25 feet, unless lot is created through the Minor Land Partition process. 3GCC 3 cO3cWcnt. 4774c.h/E 5r /5 FEET aF E o1J774GE The depth of all lots shall not exceed 21/2 times the average width, unless the parcel is less than 11/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. (Refer to Code Section 18.164.060 Lots) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 10 Residential ApplicationlPlanning Department Section Pos uting request pad 7664 ROUTING - REQUEST Please 'READ To DB / b� I I HANDLE M62.�� `" I 1 APPROVE �-{ O`�^ and�/ �S I 'I FORWARD I� RETURN 1113'l 1113'I KEEP OR DISCAR irj1/-5 I REVIEW WITH ME 4-D Li" 6/1,Pv Date 1612°l1 g& From 01 i( RECEIVED PLANNING OCT 1719 10 ALPHA ENGINEERING, INL . October 8, 1996 9 ,111A Mr. Will D'Andrea City of Tigard Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall, PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 RE: 10520 SW Dakota Street Job No. 141-018 Dear Will: In accordance with the city of Tigard's procedure for requesting a preapplication conference we are submitting the attached materials including a site plan and assessor's map. The applicant, Beacon Homes, is proposing to subdivide property located at 10520 SW North Dakota Street into 30-lots. The subject site,specifically identified as Tax Lots 3300 and 3400 of Tax Map 1S1 34DA, is approximately 5.57 acres in size and is zoned for residential uses(R-12). The newly created lots will be developed with "for-sale" multi-family attached dwelling units. Arranged in clusters, the lots are configured to create a common central courtyard in which automobile access will be provided to each dwelling unit. The lots located in the southwest portion of the site deviate slightly from this configuration in response to environmental constraints. A new street will be created to provide access to all of the proposed dwelling units. The new street will access SW North Dakota Street and will feature a landscaped parkway,parking on both sides, and a five-foot ciriewaI on one side. The proposed site plan responds to both environmental and regulatory conditions which have significantly constrained the design potential of the site. The eastern two-thirds of the site is located within a 100-year flood plain. This area will be designated as open space and will not be developed. In recognition of potential view opportunities,the adjacent lots have been oriented towards the flood plain area. Approximately half of the remaining (developable)third of the site is constrained by residential density transition requirements. These requirements call for a 100-foot wide density transition zone,a 30-foot setback,and a 10-foot landscape buffer. Development within the transition area, includes seven dwelling units, a new local street and a 10-foot landscape buffer. We hereby request that a preapplication conference be scheduled for this property as soon as possible. If you require any additional materials please lets us know. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation on this project. Sincerely, ALPHA ENGINEERING, INC. Mike Miller Project Planner Plaza West•Suite 230.9600 SW Oak•Portland,Oregon 97223 Office 503-452-8003-Fax 503-452-8043 • . - • 11 COUNTY OREGON • • SCALE I". 1001 _ t N SEE MAP - 13 1 34AD • THIS MAP IS FURNISHED AS A CONVENIENCE BY: V4 SECTION C°„Na� STEWART TITLE f°� DSO THIS MAP IS NOT A SURVEY AND DOES NOT i, • }\�\tt tl.tt 1.-.101..-1-`1. L�ltt�i ` 1000 % V 990 L PT. INITIAL PT i seed y W 0 107 f SNOW THE LOCATION OF ANY IMPROVEMENTS. I W �T r THE COMPANY ASSUMES NO LIABILSTY FOR al 100 ERRORS THEREIN. I 100 1114 z Ist:� TRACT ��" ' 6.39 C. MAP # L�`(' -- 2 W 800 _• FOR STORM CRAIN r PURPOSES ll Lt1 Q , 8 F.b LPL, s, - - — — - • 2200 tZ4 I 3 —� J 700 I '# 9 •1300 f GOV. LOT 3 4 I N 600 LEA 9.00AC. \ 1400 5 10 0 4 4 01 \N o 0500 ��pie II /73 z 4 6 5 t' 62:44 N. 1300 z 6 44"11, " . o ) ._ 400 Tiff/ , W 77 W 1600 12 3600 .f/e .4 -774c. 2"1.-1 i n 13..14 U r OP r ]� 0 300w ) m 3 - - - j 3 4300 In fists o Cr). 0 302 T3 ; IA2 I Zia 8 V - r � I i_�,,, II 7 liixs II 7_1* ,24'.:1 71 4 .���Y,.f,( DRTH— ' cll. No.4't" �C'�`� a 2.411C/I °�� Iua� 'go`Q.NORTH } E JOHN L. HICKLIN OLC. 54� rSTREET 100 r / 0 3500 2900 3000 �0 i v 5300 3300 501 75 (C. L26AG ,96AC. .36AC. 3400 T, d T. ' 4.47AC, i 23- 74 � � ; r� r • H • --\-. r 7.• r ,0.e° I N� r 5800 4 ra - _0e 6 K 3 Z r '° � r " 4., 7 1 S ,C3, , P 6000 5 \ SEE r. 5700 zy 7r .. I S I 0 I$ 5400 i 0' 5 � �� 2 _o i r • a / r 5600 . 74.72 0 P, 5500 I �/ r8 4 3 / r- r 2.116CK I t•sa<H, ` INITIAL, P.. Mfrsri.•r 1, yl I.32SCK »}s IV 1.,z1 sa 1.33 r-- Z06.52 /00- 12- i z- ( SEE MAP IS I 34DD • FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY DO NOT RELY ON FOR ANY OTHER USE SPECIAL SETBACKS • Streets: 34 feet from the centerline of N•,D1}`hb'(' • Established areas: /00 " feet from we57- PRoPOcra LJN,e • Lower intensity zones: feet, along the site's boundary. • - _• • . % -- - • - • - • - • • - : -- - - _ •• _: --.: _ - • -- • gs. • Multi-family residential building separation: (Refer to Code Section 18.96.030) Accessory structures up to 528 square feet in size may be permitted on lots less than 2.5 acres in size - 5 foot minimum setback from side and rear lot lines. Accessory structure up to 1000 square feet on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size (See applicable zoning district setbacks for primary structures.) BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS • Maximum height of 30 feet in R-1, R-2, R-3.5 and R-4.5 zones. • Maximum heig t o 5 feet in an. zo - . • Maximum height of 45 feet in the R-25 zone. • Maximum height of 60 feet in the R-40 zone. FLAG LOT BUILDING H T PROVISIONS Maximum height of 1'/2 s • or 25 feet, whichever is less in most zones; 21/2 stories, or 35 feet in R-7, R-12, R-25 or R-40 zones provi that the standards of Code Section 18.98.030(B) are met. (REST TIAI ❑FNSITY CALCULATION (See example below The Net Residential Units allowed on a particular site may be calculated by dividing the net 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: 1. All sensitive lands areas including: a. Land within the 100 year floodplain. b. Slopes exceeding 25%. c. Drainageways. 2. Public right-of-way dedication. a. Single-family allocate 20% of gross acres for public facilities. b. Multi-family allocate 15% of gross acres for public facilities. (Refer to Code Section 18.92) 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) = 11.4 Units Per Acre = 12.1 Units Per Acre * The Development Code requires that the net site area exist for the next whole dwelling unit. NO ROUNDING UP IS PERMITTED. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 10 Residential ApplicationiPlanning Department Section Cr3LOCKS) The perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1 800 feet measured along the right-of-way g e r ght-of way 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 600 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. 6REEti)1JAk-1 CoM,JEC-T101 - (Refer to Code Section 18.164.040) Woo 1D 5,1775/r: RESIDENTIAL DENSITY TRANSFER The City of Tigard allows a Residential Density Transfer of up to 25% of the units that could otherwise have been developed on sensitive lands areas listed in the density calculations that may be applied to the developable portion of the site. .DEFIt4E ALRE4 /,,J F/oo Dpk,A/ (Refer to Code Section 18.92.030). It is the responsibility of the applicant for a residential development application to provide a detailed calculation for both the permitted residential density and the requested density transfer. RESIDENTIAL DENSITY TRANSITION Regardless of the allowed housing density in a zoning district, any property within 100 feet of a designated established area shall not be developed at a density greater than 125 percent of the maximum Comprehensive Plan designation (not zoning) of the adjacent parcel. Transition area applies to any property which is a designated established area. The subject ro erty is designated as an D6've/oP/Aiel- area. The subject property is adjoined b established efareas to the —I+efOt, - _ - -, _ UTURE STREET PLAN AND EXTENSION OF STREET 1. A future stree p an s a : a. 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. b. Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and pedestrian facilities on or within 500 feet of the site. 2. 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. (Refer to Code Section 18.164.030) RESIDENTIAL DEVELO" ENT SOLAR ACCESS REQUIREMENTS All subdivisions and linor partitions are subject to solar access requirements. These requirements state that a minimum of 80' • of all lots created must be oriented for solar accessibility. The basic standard, which determines solar . cessibility, requires that 80% of total number of pr..osed lots: 1. Demonstrate a north-s,"uth dimension of at least 90 feet. 2. Demonstrate a front lot e orientation within 30 degrees of a true east-west axis. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 10 Residential Application/Planning Department Section The total or partial : emption of a site from the solar access requirement may be :pproved for the following reasons: 1. East, west or n•rth slopes steeper than 20%. 2. Off-site shade s•urces (structures, vegetation, topography). 3. On-site shade so, rces (vegetation). Adjustments allowing a resuction of the 80% solar lot design requirement may be made •r the following reasons: 1. Reduced density or a increased cost of at least five percent due to either: a. East, west or n•rth slope greater than 10%. b. Significant natur:I feature. c. Existing road or I•tting pattern. d. Public easement • right-of-way. 2. Reduction in important dev= opment amenities. 3. Pre-existing shade (vegetati•n). PLEASE NOTE: Maps and text are re• ired which are sufficient to show that the development complies with the solar design st.t ndards, or that specific lots should be exempted or adjusted out. The following items shal be included in the analysis: 1. The north-south lot dimension an' front lot line orientation of each proposed lot. 2. Protected solar building lines and elevant building site restrictions, if applicable. 3. For the purpose of identifying tree related to exemption requests, a map showing existing trees which are at least 30 feet tall and •ver 6 inches diameter at a point 4 feet above grade shall be submitted. This map shall include th- following: a. Height. b. Diameter. c. Species. d. A statement declaring that they ar; to be retained. 4. Copies of all private restrictions relating to solar access. The design characteristics of a developed solar-orie ted lot are high levels of wintertime sun striking the south walls and roofs of the house, house orientation aximizing south window area, and a south-sloping roof area. To achieve this, one may utilize the followin•: 1. Protected Solar Building Line - The solar buil•.ng line must: a. Be oriented to within 30 degrees of a true =.st-west axis. b. Provide a minimum distance of 70 feet from`the middle of the lot to the south property line. c. Provide a minimum distance of 45 feet frorl\i the northernmost buildable boundary of the subject lot to the north property line. 2. Performance Options - There are two performance options which may be utilized as follows: a. The house to be oriented within 30 degrees of a east-west axis and have at least 80% of the ground floor's south wall protected from shade b. At least 32% of the glass and 500 square feet of th roof area face south and be protected from shade. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 10 Residential ApplicationIPlannmg Department Section PLEASE NOTE Regardless of the option(s) used through the design of the Subdivision or Minor Land Partition. all one and two family. single-family residences are reviewed through the building permit process for compliance with Solar Balance Point standards Please contact the Building Division for further information regarding the Solar Balance Point standards and the options that are available related to building height and construction. PARKING AND ACCESS All parking areas and driveways must be paved. • Sin•le famil : : -•uires 2 off-street parking spaces per dwe I'n• uni • Multiple family: Requires 1.5 parking spaces per unit for 1 bedroom. Requires 2 parking spaces per unit for 1+ bedrooms. Multi-family dwelling units with m an 10 required spaces shall provide parking for the use of guests and shall consist of 15% of otal required parking. (Refer to Code Section 18.106.030) No more than 40% of required spaces may be designated and/or dimensioned as compact spaces. Parking stalls shall be dimensiopetras follows: • Standard parking space dimensions: 8 ft. 8 inches X 18 ft. • Compact parking space •• ensions: 8 ft. X 15 ft. • Handicapped parkin.. All parking areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned disabl-. person parking spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces t• •e provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapp=. parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropr'. e sign shall be posted. BICYCL,FKS Bicycle racks a equired for multi-family, commercial and industrial developments. Bicycle racks shall be locate areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Bicycle parking spaces shat a provided on the basis of one space for every fifteen (15) required vehicular parking spaces. Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: Maximum access width: Minimum pavement width: REQUIRED WALKWAY LOCATI• 'Tit in all attache. 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. CLEAR VISION AREA The City requires that clear vision areas be maintained between three and eight feet in height at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification. (Refer to Code Section 18.102) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 10 Residential ApplicationiPlanning Department Section BUFFERING AND SCREENING In order to increase privacy and to either reduce or eliminate adverse noise or visual impacts between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Community Development Code. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.100) The required buffer widths which are applicable to your proposal area are as follows: ft. along north boundary. ft. along east boundary. ft. along south boundary. Mier' /o ft. along west boundary. In addition, sight obscuring screening is required along CTREET TREED 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 feet of the right-of-way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two inches when measured four 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 tree for every seven par g spaces must be planted in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canop ect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen th arking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, de ative walls, and raised planters. For detailed information on design requirements for parking ar s and accesses. (Refer to Code Chapters 18.100, 18.106 and 18.108) REE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS A tree pan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, major partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. The tree plan shall include the following: Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.150.070.D. according to the following standards: Retainage of less than 25 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; Retainage of from 25 to 50 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D; CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 10 Residential ApplicationiPlanning Department Section • Retainage of from 50 to 75 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D; Retainage of 75 percent or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. Trees removed within the period of one (1 ) year prior to a development application listed above will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.150.070.D. (Refer to Code Section 18.150.025) MITIGATION Replacement of a tree shall take place according to the following guidelines: i A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. In lieu of tree replacement under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. (Refer to Code Section 18.150.070 (0) SIGNS Sign permits must be obtained prior to installation of any sign in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for review before the Hearings Officer. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 10 Residential ApplicatronlPlanning Department Section SENSITIVE LANDS The Code provides regulations for lands which are potentially unsuitable for development due to areas within the 100-year floodplain, natural drainageways, wetland areas, on slopes in excess of 25 percent, or on unstable ground. Staff will attempt to preliminarily identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify -n itiv- I.nd .r-. .n. h-ir boun..ri- i h- r- ..n ibili .f h- . ..li .n Ar-. m-- in. h- defini ions of sensi ive lands mus b- 1-arl indi a -d on .Ian •mit-. wi h h- .-v-I..men application. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.84) Chapter 18.84 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. _ > Residential development is prohibited within floodplains. - . - , • •• . '- - :: . : T.7. _ _ ttevelejaixleat-application. RR A ATIVE The applicant shall submit a narrative which provides findings for all 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. Applicant should review code for applicable criteria. CODE SECTIONS _✓18.80 18.98 _ 18.114 _ 18.150 18.84 _/18.100 18.116 /18.160 18.88 .../18.102 18.120 18.162 /18.92 l 18.106 18.130 18.108 18.134 IMPACT STUDY As a part of the application submittal requirements, applicants are required to include impact study with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.32 Section .050) When a condition of approval requires transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.32 Section .250) EIGHBORHOOD MEETIN The applicant shall notify all property owners within 250 feet and the appropriate CIT Facilitator of their proposal. A minimum of 2 weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 10 Residential ApplicationlPlanning Oepartment Section RECYCLING Applicant should contact franchise hauler for review and approval of site servicing compatibility with Pride Disposal's vehicles. CONTACT PERSON: Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal at (503) 625-6177. (Refer to Code Section 18.116) ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: • •PO AP///G c)RVE • 1/E'R/F Op- ' /Go„� ,J F/ /4 /QiV (� DEi crTy 4/CrJ/ft7 ,/. BR,E. .KboW&) OF DEvE6o-l31E/F/c DP/9i.4)C744► fe4 ,95EMEIJ T /� /AA/ i✓n�E r/OAJ A'f47,/ 7o TIM 500711) 4;10o5 av7N') Flolol�pl t i 4CC� 8 ( AUTD Gooier' Gv/D7,/S To GaMP/ Wire, /8 /G61,670 faP ?A'/ 7E S7 °Rive SE-RVilVer to vAit75 4-7P2O v,EO Tr1,co v4►h/ nI A.),VtD l tf/ylyrt' .4ppew6Z 73, Cr-Ty ,Frvll,�eerz Sc>x lob = sa000 - /./4,4e,ce DENS,T y 7/2.41-I0SMO.AJ /C 1f). ' 5X i.zs -teters 6)r14„Y - eci,urs 1Er/4rt. ) D £4'77ow ( OSR MALk EXC ED FLCxozc\a∎ o tip, ovex CtifittlF1 eARRW+F ,i oWA) pAer'E( , RES A. 3s c„- kc 564, O3 4 f alt Wnn/ thy. pcuk • Md � L4 icutatklf..e. 30 kcal) " ourytiu t p. sw ahk d d. c4:4.uuc(' adAk iuct end 164 a e2 i 4 �t �6 p- ,ud i4-4,014 PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All applications must be accepted by a Planning Division staff member of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3:00 P.M. on Fridays or 4:30 on other week days. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 10 Residential ApplicationiPlammng Department Section Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches,_ One 8.5 inch by 11 inch map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment t4 the staff report or administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Division will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10, to 20 day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard err{/ COUNC// . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. This pre-application conference and the notes of the conference are intended to inform the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of good site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. Additional pre-application conference(s) is/are required if an application(s) is/are to be submitted more than six months following this pre-application conference, unless the additional conference(s) is deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division. PREPARED BY: Wl /I be/INCR.& PLANNING DIVISION Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 h:logi n\pattylprea pp-r.mst (Engineenng section:preapp eng) July 19. 1996 CITY OF TIGARD Pre•Application Conference Notes Page 10 of 10 Residential ApplicationiPlannmg Department Section 2p3/ 5 City of Tigard, Oregon PRE-APPL1CATION CONFERENCE NOTES ENGINEERING SECTION PUBLIC FACILITIES The purpose of the pre-application conference is to: (1.) Identify applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and ordinance provisions. (2.) To provide City staff an opportunity to comment on specific concerns. (3.) To review the Land Use Application review process with the applicant and to identify who the final decision making authority shall be for the application. The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of- way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: (1.) to 20 feet from centerline. (2.) -91?B to feet e. n ts-►►w.�N. (3.) to feet from centerline. I\U q;14-4A69-Ec-- iD A gi AA3 2DS k GAP-f=, gARJ— Street improvements: (1.) Z, street improvements will be necessary along I` cr( (2.) street improvements will be necessary along OGJJ STP---GS—c (3.) Street improvements shall include �`� _ feet of pavement from centerline, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of utility wires (a fee may be collected if determined appropriate by the Engineering Department), a five-foot wide sidewalk (sidewalks may be required to be wider on arterials or major collector streets, or in the Central Business District), necessary street signs, streetlights, and a two year streetlighting fee. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 3 Engineering Department Section In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the street improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development ' approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to execute a non-remonstrance agreement which waives the property owner's right to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district formed to improve: (1.) . (2.) Pedestrianways/bikeways: Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) inch line which is located in 44 _. —c• P 9 � -'Cc►.1 ce. wT-The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the ddveloper's responsibility to -ttti, _ -- "6 l elo N,1 1-• �. W,,,.-- f.,� QC` ,i ,- 1., ,..... -,..J I . Water Supply: The 1ua' Water - Phone:(503) C)41- n( provides public water service in the area of this site. The District should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (Contact: Gene Birchill, (503) 526-2469) provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Other . 0 o X -4+ -4p 'best. 0.146". u—vrq u�6 S 8444 .04wc- alt- (2#11 C Z7.s�jVF F�►.—wc . I Afb Nn ■/kv«.. iW T ¶ s (Bk, v `c st," rc is At \o o - •• . i> -, a -r. -11ws s► t CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 3 Engineerrng Department Sec dnn Storm sewer improvements: 11 � "^ • {r V Jul ,� �LJ W 25 -- A►.A ASP cAS ( .� L 'A - (Hci69) STORM WATER QUALITY The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of new impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $180.00. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. , rki TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. STREET OPENING PERMIT No work shall be performed within a public right-of-way, or shall commence, until the applicant has obtained a street opening permit from the Engineering Department. FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONS All projects that require a grading plan also require that the applicant shall submit a typical floor plan for each lot. This floor plan shall indicate the elevations of the four corners of that plan along with elevations at the corner of each lot. PREPARED BY: � kJ' ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 h Uoginlpatty\preapp.eng (Master section:preapp-r mst) April 23,1996 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 3 Engineering Department Section • I i . I I I L. I I I �_! I I I I 0 PROPOSED COOKSON DEVELOPMENT PR 1 pIVE 1 Jai • ' I1i 7 October 1994 I I II a I i 11.111W lier _- i u , ! mow. _T.., �� l s - - 1111' { - I ��� A 37 - 3 b 4 Bedroom Row Houses i r w h *• Two parking spaces per unit plus 24 1 p I visitor parking spaces . 1 (60 c , — r..,vr ifi hi . � ;:.� _' • : ), .. I Developed area 2.5 Ac.+ 1 I' I j __I ,• I I ,. Undeveloped Greenway 2 .0 Ac + P4IYA1'E DR + TOTAL SITE AREA 4. 5 Ac.±im- 0 'kw.�ti.� R •� �� ��� ����� I the project anticipates filling of m>I� wls �R ,� than acre th n the 100 year ��._ p �# }F - A Itisw proposed ethat all 4 loo plain fill material placed in the flood j50 � x - plain will a obtained by excavating ‘,.. .„,. .,;���:� ,�� E not less than 110% by volume from the I Is- . •r �Y�,,i - �; g _ .1......1-..k_ _ 5.1, r _ r z flood plain so that. the total storage .. i \ : .p- capacity of • the flood plain will 11P I --' increased. The excavated area will be ^`-' ti ye '' � ''�'_' '4 J►-- -a.- \ n "".. .191104041410-4*" tw.7 T.t±, :rn m !_ T...._ I`� graded and landscaped to provide a — wet- and type environment to enhance • the creek environment. -144 $yIC 4 - I� 160 Half street improvements will be made ' r- , � to the portion of North Dakota street „;. :::_________ fronting upon the developed areas of.. ...,,..; .. 74tu--ftm--..%---Kump4mmiumnimmimmw•w.00.00-0----' the project. t'• . ' } The drives and exterior areas of the ii' " j.,..,:.....,, � Y project will be maintained by a NI, - ^ ►, homeowners association with each unit . . , ...�` ms ^ being individually owned. _________ _ , ' . BRUCE R. SCHNEGLER 11 A_ _'r_ ARCHITECT /� . .r 1117 S. E. 122nd #2 ''� ` f Portland. Oregon 97233 -+� . ` Phone ( 503) 254-7206• _— __ N./ —� - 'r,'.- /- • —44 li-- * 5O, \ I _ - Jill , ii tj1i4It. Ihit& ©ZiFI 1 >R 1639 I 1 1180 I )., ›J %... • X s►KOTA ST _ p' 178 0 /2_,_, _i_ lir� � � �� 11 b I t\k\ ( v . t,,, .r-, Q II i 1 I j � t � 1 a 1 x 1\ t:44111■11=11.14111141 O # $11 © �v PH ` 17/ I 1111 .. 1 Wi , 1 r; 162 9• X . / j .'" V p x j 0 . 1 i I I . wit . I: 1 D/ 1 I 1 ill , . . . � tea• ► �i �� � � . = I \ I i I Ilf \ t I a . ... .-46 , \\ i 4GD\ z)/Q 1 , , -1--,, ■ \ . II .\ ' I I ) / '' \ . ° IA tb• ) X Op . I „eir mi 4.IF.4 .� - , �. - Jim_ - •.. ICI 'Mir-r 4 S� f� �� ��� ��� K x Oix / / y163 i D P ° S � . � ,I / / l l / / ( ( ( (_i _`1 . i \ ( o I/ 7///' (( (11' /. , 7 40 © g : 7/D b9 9 © e � a ' � o a © \ \ .. . . l .. . . : ) 1 \ �� I / % I / / 77 i \\ ,/yr/ f' 0, - -.y / I \ ( ‘60), I I 4 PP in ....ori ,...,._ . . . g ' ) ‘4..) Qa Q � _ � � : ® • II 8 : / I W4> 4t, A 1 9a ? m � N J, ii 5715 r t 2s 6 * a � ' j c �ji.,1 II .... it ' 114 x ~ \I "�tom. fls o© \ 0 I pip ; " '-.' I , lift mi. ) J(. : D .,...i ..; _. . . _... . . , ..., , -_... _4\11\ . r __-- -_-‘ , .::-1„,__-HR 0' ..�. ,- ' � i i I r i I + ; LJ I 1 1 '-'`J gum annum 11111•■■■1111111► .. atasioureihorlina t.6.1 I ppmnom Eirsp.. ■ i■IVE ■■■■■■■ _�;a �i����■■■■■■ II! �w - - _ rml �- ■��pa L 171lEiir. ' I N �- F L O R EIN mi"■ ■■IU N _ 1 1 '4-- I 011""Iiiiiraiminuiitirifi i 7zi r-- .. �11:11110A.711; • ■el >■■r UI ' ;� ��44:41 1 R lam k , mo ,' MI= ENE 1 ■� 1 EN = JI; �■ u■ =bill g; !1■ ■�A______ p M E ' ■ iwaa /►off _ r1+ U 1 E - 1111 ... ©©�s�►.' ��� LIII I. o ©0∎ �ru�r■r �t.... ,...P 0 ►AN311111 -ij MUIR S T 172-7 =Is fakk. 4111111111 1 i Ilan s,j 1 m- 6'ffi4iii$I'JiIL tt�is;ty "'0///II R--A- -R-5.--T- t Imo_ k,.4:4---.. -,,'.x $r at 1!11„ 3is I II I I I MI 1 r1 ■I' s�,mnim�� b- �L' I • l JPQ� 1 nin1�J !� F X11> BUILDABLE VA CA :mum it E �\� � It L s' C A L H I ■11■" 111,111141r-r- __ I --- IIO■� mu■,1 i �p ■ .i _., 1111�1� r Residential a ■ ��s �� I�z��r fir, _ ,►T.,�: � R - 1 , r ■111!1 iij - . ' Ji � r�1�r■ ■E �� -1- __l __ IIIIr •_ ' 1�App 30 , 000 S Q FT M NIMUM "--�•L�11�■!■ f a m i - I1 � R - 2 _ / 20 , 000 SQ FT MINIMUM ■ .IM -uiL1 NMI minim 'I R - 3 . 5 I maims ii. '!7� 10 , 000 SQ FT MINIMUM .� � � , ��! � R - 4 . 5 F ' 7 , 500 SQ FT MINIMUM l ,_-/- nil-_ �p : 5 , 000 SQ FT MINIMUM l Jim r:&—s----= ----__ � `— t �°- ,... Lr'a R2 1UNITS / ACRE ( 3 . 050 x R - 25 II ---.-=. � aiv+ • ',o\ 25 UNITS / ACRE ( 1 . 480 ``_. Y :r i • - ; ..; 1 R - 40 ill 4 f ^-^- :_ _ ,= ." {7J 40 UNITS / ACRE ` ' p A......,...._ Y ---� - X31 '� �- /ti.i' Commercial .2' '''l ` �� ■ ■I •� C - N �,, �, •'. � NEIGHBORHOOD CORY I h - " ,. , . -a . --,,.V, � - ' I � ,� , te ; , i r, ,/ I --___;41- , ' - z''''',,,,,,,,:i\--]„\k _../ *.# 04,4811111 ' '' , 1_,4 F j 4.4' • ■ • 4.460 1m D R C P. • NW•�. .I ' p lib, SC ;_. p H G, ENWav �� 111111� '�,�� R EC C REATION 4i, 41/41:01141 i 1 ri, ar WgYe44 lj,��• . ` m 4 :� tr�� hiii■■■S ��• H o WASH • G T O N /I �i►i 1 1 i t t I M I L N►1 f / ti . • R E i IN r �U ♦' MALL rr e III CI Illp '/ ‘ ( A� MIN I,,, ►�I '�,� ‘RESCENTC IR WE 3i 'a y� ,��� .1 �■ CEMETE--- .)Off' ��� � �` 1 11111 �, �� , R-4.5 ffp �� 6E, BUSINE S �4 • KOLL �� ^ CENTER SOUARE ID It '616.P 0°694 ,,,.------' illkill%S*- 1011 ' '4r •4116. 1:11110:11 rrl so 16D ,12, cift, 4A1111 C-G al ip©� ,•• .�., `f1l111■■ges "O.< oA ) Him moo o,:!i'f44j ttlTi`1►!P! •� i �ND uR " ,.-, 1it4 :=i l. �i�� 1■r = � A m �:- sewI ■ ■■iuuiii■iS E�j■e�i■u ■rte rata wah1 ` \ i " fil�alttiil li Fa . - Ia■% �y 21 D∎�_- ; � - a iii/iiiiiii ice -_ = . J •` �;J \. _ ' r ate/ ■! '� NOR H '■ M 'I I,1,1006 ._ _..__. R -- ■W■■■■11■■■�■■ I— ,g.,-....r I/ — — -....,-_,- -,,..r2?-,-, ,.,-L.1 ....---', -- -- - ri , ! : ; '---- ---.\-- . c..,.-.-':-( ..--',, .---'—i ,_______,-- ' . ;...- , - R-12_ , , Ai.- N t:: 11____' l__'_ i • y7+ •T•iZq •,. "y4t sV 1 ::. r ti i ' ~'r'— . .. > 1 .a • -•mac kt� �`.:'\ -- 'D= ' RD � -IIIII . ..........-..."- p....--„,,, -=--X4'1-f C I►� _\ rely:igr ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS . _ iticEfii4iANNiNG AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE , , . WITHIN SEVEN(7) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE SIGN POSTING,RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT TO: Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard' , • Tigard,OR 97223 I, '.. ,,:t 1.— • f .b affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed 2 6 t,v f 5ci bah v+5 I a h affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) I0 52,0 5 vu JO and did on the 27+1' day of Novev"�� 19 ()6pelsonally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a 5'c/Adr vr5 i cn application, and the time. date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at 10520 SW DAkota (Tax Mato 1S1 34DA. Tax Lot 3300 & 3400) (state location you posted notice on property) ;#00,. gnature (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON,NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and swom/af rmed before me on the c-CQ day of Neill , 191k OFFICIAL SEAL BOBBIE J PFENNING ! ■��/ ��L. CO:{N SSPON NO ORSa4ON NOTARY ' IC •P OREG,O MY COMMISSION E:;F'IRES OCT 13, 100p � I ?Co()My Commission Expires: (e-. I (Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) rN AME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: -r1���/ J I ° !TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMEN F7EVIRM ' 6 611Ml igt 1:. - NameofApplicantiOwner. ji • �vl I Address or General I �o of Subject A Property: �_ _ 3 ,O Al LSubject Proper:Tax Map(s) and Lot T(s): J n.logmrpaayr.asc«su+rpost.rnst ALPHA ENGINEERING, INC. November 25, 1996 City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Neighborhood Meeting Dear Sir: Alpha Engineering is representing Beacon Homes who is proposing a 26 lot single family attached subdivision at 10520 S.W. North Dakota Street (tax map 1S1 34 DA, tax lots 3300 and 3400). Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, we would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with you and other surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Wednesday, December 11, 1996 7:00- 9:00 PM at Fowler Middle School, Room 2 10865 S.W. Walnut Tigard, OR Please note that this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 452-8003 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ALPHA ENGINEERING, INC. 0 Michael Miller - Project Planner Plaza West•Suite 230.9600 SW Oak•Portland,Oregon 97223 Office 503-452-8003•Fax 503-452-8043 • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING RECEIVED PLANNING ; 0 21996 STATE OF OREGON ) )ss. City of Tigard ) frt& • M 1 , being duly sworn, depose and say that on Povew►be/fr/j k , 19°J1,, I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the attached list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at (or Weary /oSZv w a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at fi\ 6/42-C) with postage prepaid thereon. / Signature (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and swom/affirmed before me on the A day of Al OV - , 19 OFFICIAL SEAL" BOBBIE J PFENNING NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGCN /�014 COiJMISSION NO.053471 i Ala /deal _, I�t /l frAt COMMISSION E:Cr1RES OCT 13, 200 . 1 NOTARY •' :Ll OREGO- ', My Commiss •n Expires: - (A pplicart. please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) Nr��M OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME: 1641L W N (�_ _ TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: I—C N �ilarrAlrinla• Name of A.pplicantrOwner: • -�ddrress or General Lacauon of Subject3e ,r �] • ' 't AMIIIIBELVAIMM.IIIMIErrak%L uoject Property Tax Mapis) and Lot#(s): n.'Jogmtaartyvrasrers alrrtad.r:Z Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Cookson Property on S.W. North Dakota Street in Washington County, Oregon _ Ioli cZzOoiV C '`.41/ 11114 `li_�d�/. KtO•. gi, rizi4,124 A AAP em - hall,Null i t% !{ F�; w.t ' r t 1,001/4 ',Y'^ J,' t 1- -7.,,,i,.-----,,,—x.i.e„-,,,4.. - i with�,� 'iq > 6 ® a «i`r 1 1 V.` . �> ' 'd, mil �'..��� ''t�`is Y \ 4�" iir��l ; `fit C� �� ..-. ©xtati- o `,,� ":4.-V11777—i. �<. •1 �PR'lue^ e V Ia S� .: 4• '�!n. fir: — TT i'" i.R ft ;11".''''''..f.etill*If )•111t440,•11:"W�IpC Y:. ; : . : i ;,� Yrw`IC4e}s q,:'. iiii1 .„- ad.•511 I ' _ Y'-1 ...-:U:' &x'..34'% .i '' �� Prepared pared for•' i-:� �'-{ ' kir-�`" �':; Beacon Homes, Inc. 1111`127i8+c6 • Prepared by WINffor- SRI/SHAPIRO/AGCO, Inc. • • December 18, 1996 or SLB 97-Q Q, R 97-0001/a v 97 1/5-R 97-0001 Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Cookson Property on S.W. North Dakota Street in Washington County, Oregon Prepared for Peter Kusyk Beacon Homes 9500 S.W. 125th Avenue Beaverton, Oregon 97005 Prepared by Rita Mroczek SRI/SHAPIRO/AGCO, Inc. 1650 N.W. Front Avenue, Suite 302 Portland, Oregon 97209 SR /SHAPIRO/AGCO Project #4961111 December 18, 1996 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 METHODS AND SOURCE MATERIALS 1 2.1 The Federal Manual 1 2.2 Field Methods 2 3.0 EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS 2 3.1 Physical Setting 2 3.2 Topography 3 3.3 Hydrology 3 3.4 Soils 3 3.5 Vegetation 4 4.0 PROJECT FINDINGS 5 5.0 CONCLUSIONS 5 6.0 REFERENCES 6 Appendix Wetland Delineation Data Sheets List of Figures Figure 1. Location and generalized topography of the project site Figure 2. Soil mapping units Figure 3. National Wetlands Inventory designations Figure 4. Potentially jurisdictional wetlands and sample sites 1.0 INTRODUCTION Beacon Homes, Inc. is proposing to develop a residential neighborhood on an approximately 5.5-acre ranch site located next to Fanno Creek. Because the anticipated project may affect wetlands on the site, SRI/SHAPIRO/AGCO, Inc. (SHAPIRO) performed a wetland determination and delineation to identify their location. The project is located on the southern side of S.W. North Dakota Street approximately 80 feet east of its intersection with S.W. 105th Place, in Washington County, Oregon (Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Section 34DA) (Figure 1). The study area includes tax lots 3300 and 3400. 2.0 METHODS AND SOURCE MATERIALS 2.1 The Federal Manual The primary document used in SHAPIRO's investigation was the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1 (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). This manual is currently recognized by both the Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) for delineation of wetlands within Oregon. The 1987 Manual (Manual) provides technical criteria, field indicators, and recommended procedures to be used in determining whether an area is a jurisdictional wetland and the location of the boundaries of the wetland. The Manual requires three technical criteria be met in undisturbed situations before areas can be considered wetland under federal or state jurisdiction. These criteria are hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and wetland hydrology. Hydric soils are those that have formed exclusively under wet conditions (soils that characteristically have high water tables, are ponded or frequently flooded, or are otherwise saturated for extended periods during the growing season). Hydrophytic vegetation consists of those plant species that have adapted to growing in substrates that are periodically deficient of oxygen due to saturated soil conditions. Five basic groups of vegetation are recognized based on their frequency of occurrence in wetlands. These categories, referred to as the "wetland indicator status," are as follows: obligate wetland plants (OBL) are estimated to occur almost exclusively in wetlands (>99%); facultative wetland (FACW) plants are estimated to occur 67-99% of the time in wetlands; facultative (FAC) plants occur equally in wetlands and non-wetlands (34- 66%); and facultative upland (FACU) plants usually occur in non-wetlands (67-99%). If a species is not assigned to one of the four groups described above, it is assumed to Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Cookson Property on S.W. North Dakota Street Page- 1 - 1;—;1°'T.(..7;Will 4 Oil i iWit, —Itri'• !1 14).4. ‘ ,_.r, Egli Low --, lettlwif mi,. 45045. 411,74c, ,,,,,i; ii\,/ ..pw ill got. , 1_72 gi;,-4,_roxiivii.-.-..- -•••(% vA'l .4115-(W/G3 ' C5° AVIIKVW(Irel[: - -L'-'-- ' IVIWTTIV lr ir" -Pr-.4,1 1 if 6 0-$,--\_ i ye t.,, , r 1 '!... ...----* , 1 ,,., III � ��R L � � 1 ' I .n' : 1 :ter ' . �•1 . 1, ^ IN I c i • r, l i /"I ' = II �ri. a2 e ow _. ��0 1 II�� .. ,� :rte 1,•�l .. . :( _-Am__\, ' 1-_,_—_-- ..., ,,., --,1. - - 1 Ct ActAif II. 1031/..W.••!•GO";Z:r?Sl. ,'i• : •--'-! .P/i. 4 17_- , , :: : \■ • 5 s.$ �� !. [ailINEV -log - .\y 4i� i--. y , • .14 :•--.- --- Aar WM= ,7%0 i li' , —- ..: .../ :,•-.:';.:\ ---•:-., • r2037: .N. -..=-,<:. . ,:.! .1::'•ic" ..-:Alltralt 1 • i I: - \-�h\ ,,4"a i Cookson •I MTAK4:�r p;� , ,;r,a ice+ !�� :,,,,.., _\�• i, \ .=.,i� s I. Property ` .54 It`d� �1�"I�®1t._ I� \' , a,d i 8 1, , '• • ''�inl� -.,,,..a�+� _ a �„ _ I ,4��i!! ) t 1''ii I '54tex i• •• '••••••_•,71;:. , il < er4: k :113.1501ftriAllt le\ 11-01#0 :)r- , q01 ✓�� e� af ",,I .• _=_€_..,,.:,,. "7":j,-.1)..,," =\�'' � �y'�X0 U. !I mo:• •r. wru �� �� Ik- --`�J-�i �, '��L AO����r\��� �/r � � 11 v� -.....,- ,- c_..-:• w� 24440,1,(1; :r4 a � „f s •_,,u\4 firtivivkit , • risi,:i7,,e , 2.0.4----40_, F % : ‘.1 all ! it,� �/}�,�I ..�II/+ r :�.•�``�//,� �� .. o �'>. -.' , I fir. II !��j�p�/�.�; ���77 ., • .., - •.., -.- 4-4,:-- -7----.VV"-- • 1 tip,- ��-ter. _ � , ` ir,�S`I 1••;.on r ;/ 1 , I ,, l r,' 1. •,11 4961111 12/18/96 Location and generalized topography of the Cookson property,south FIGURE of S.W. North Dakota Street at Fanno Creek, in Tigard, Oregon i (U.S.G.S. Beaverton,Oregon,7.5-minute quadrangle, 1:24000, 1961, I photorevised 1984). SRI/SHAPIRO/AGCO INCORPORATED be an obligate upland (UPL) plant, which is estimated to occur almost exclusively in non-wetlands (>99%). In addition, plants designated "NI" have not yet received a wetland indicator status, but are probably not obligate upland. An asterisk (*) preceding a regional indicator identifies a tentative assignment based on either limited information or conflicting reviews. The asterisk is intended to encourage submission of additional field review information. The Manual defines wetland hydrology as saturation within a major portion of the root zone (usually above 12 inches), typically for at least 12.5% of the growing season. The wetland hydrology criterion can be met, however, if saturation within the major portion of the root zone is present for only 5% of the growing season, depending on the wetland status of the plant community. The growing season for any given site or location is determined from U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS; formerly Soil Conservation Service [SCS]) data and information. 2.2 Field Methods Field work was conducted on October 1, 1996, by Jack Parcell, Soil Scientist, and Colin MacLaren, Wetland Scientist. Prior to beginning field work, available information and data were compiled and reviewed. This included a review of: NRCS soil survey for Washington County, Oregon (1982); the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Beaverton and Sherwood, Oregon topographic quadrangles (1961, photorevised 194 and 1985); and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Beaverton and Sherwood, Oregon maps (1981). This information was used to develop a preliminary indication of where potential wetland may exist and to facilitate on-site gathering of data. Observations of soils, vegetation, and hydrology were made using the "Routine Onsite" method of the Manual. Soil pits were excavated to a depth of 18 inches in selected locations. The soil profiles were examined for hydric soils and wetland hydrology field indicators. In addition, a visual percent-cover estimate of the dominant species of the plant community for a 30-foot-radius area was performed using soil pit locations as a center of reference. Data were recorded in the field and subsequently transferred to standard wetland delineation data sheets (included in the appendix of this report). Data were collected for representative sampling locations, with numerous soil pits excavated between these data points to verify changes in the three parameters. 3.0 EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS 3.1 Physical Setting The site is located on the southern side of S.W. North Dakota Street, approximately 80 feet east of its intersection with S.W. 105th Place. A single-family residence and Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Cookson Property on S.W. North Dakota Street Page- 2 - outbuildings are located on the west-central portion of the site. Horses are kept in three fenced areas surrounding the residence. The study area for this project included the easternmost field, and part of a fenced paddock on the south-central portion of the site. Fanno Creek, located on the eastern edge of the site, curves gradually west to cross the eastern property boundary, flowing north to south across the site. Fanno Creek is the major drainage feature for the area. Both 50-year and 100-year floodplain boundaries associated with Fanno Creek extend west from the creek onto the site. New residential neighborhoods are located north and south of the site. 3.2 Topography Surface elevations cross the site range from approximately 148 to 156 feet above NGVD. The site slopes gradually to moderately to the east towards Fanno Creek. A low, flat bench above the creek channel extends west to the foot of the slope, a distance of approximately 40 feet. West of the bench, site elevations increase to a high of 156 feet on the western portion of the site. 3.3 Hydrology Site hydrology is influenced by Fanno Creek, surface runoff, and possibly a shallow water table. The relatively flat, low-lying portion of the site west of Fanno Creek is historically flooded during unusually wet periods. According to the property owner, Mr. Cookson, Fanno Creek topped its banks and flooded the low-lying field in February 1996. Evidence of wetland hydrology includes saturated conditions, a shallow water table, and oxidized rhizospheres. In upland areas, soils were dry during field work. 3.4 Soils Three soil types have been mapped by the NRCS (formerly the SCS) for the site, as shown in Figure 2. These include Aloha silt loam (map unit 1), Huberly silt loam (map unit 22), and Wapato silty clay loam (map unit 43). Huberly silt loam and Wapato silty clay loam are classified as a hydric soils (SCS, 1989). Aloha silt loam consists of somewhat poorly drained soils formed in alluvium or lacustrine silt on broad valley terraces. Slope is 0-3% and elevation is 150 to 200 feet. Typically, the surface layer is dark brown (10YR 3/3) silt loam to a depth of 8 inches. The subsoil is dark brown (10YR 4/3) and dark yellowish-brown (10YR 4/4) silt loam with common, medium to fine, dark grayish-brown, brown, and dark-brown (10YR 4/2, 5/3, and 7.5YR 3/2) mottles that extends to a depth of approximately 46 inches or more. Runoff from this soil is slow and permeability is moderately slow. Aloha silt loam is classified as a fine-silty, mixed, mesic Aquic Xerochrept. Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Cookson Property on S.W. North Dakota Street Page-3- K far f t p „ £ f'�u'I•mom • T ' - .. r r'','.'': '''I.i�� ,r� ,- % rt • �tsY i ������l"1• t,J + t " o �T re 8..:i t�::, r r f .t.*�i�;y it �n °.'a " ':"* ,ts• ,k t4. ', C?,)y�� , ..,-�K f r.r�rtyr1 KN `.. , r ;fit �:r.. •,.a• w .,• • ��'•. _ 1t�. yr;� x�' d r k�' '�ft„�-''Y.�aS. •!#. r�� 3G.�a". �il+rr�� �Q , , `, k y -a rl 'y, �to .: a;F ,�'^. r �j..• ?j A )7"..4 ,' 1 �sr y , A Y 0,. 1•1 „i...VIP- a �f; s4Gr< -"Mir,r- l'a rr rc '� s' " • �� Y u t �N 4- g`� \ � "" Vii••.( �5t ~'r `4J' -�.;T'r` �,. ! c .7(j1� ...Jib * ;r• r 15, ' • ,''''' ' '{ 'i45 9L 41;:j Ff4.: ;,n �, /._ F aS rs';'�r ` A f' � .. c .. :° •i'{x,_'k� 1 t, .!F r,'#k:,;9 1 `��,i•" • .E ,�,ls.-,r .1 t�3 � i•_ '4,'.....; 'rl ,,,,,,...4. Y ;`fi {_. i- �,h ♦';h J - .,x�Y"' a, r d f ' 1` ""�� 'ar Syr „.,1' 1 .": i,; r�' 't �� �� PPS t ,al SRr': � ii>,J,.I�■ t � sr. w i:- r'r- r rC..y 1_A e � Lr.+y�, tr.'AA'. d» 5 ' 3^;\ i� — '`)!. ''�}� . ' +i„t i ,'. .. f'IA�`:ill':' r� 'Cookson , y ��,al('�� , ,rF` ' �� �r r l; t :� F Property ` . �te� v = - ••` "' � s Y .:''�N� . 5 , 1. r■.'t l {/ " fit'= • '• ♦� ; rX i ., t � - <� 1�,r i g,,_� c , ms's 1.. yKt 'e " v rr 9"N. J�,{y' TS 1,!' �y1�• is iii %,4't'�!r 'w "s�vS Zl ...-tom"',x� '_�JS/.Y i• ill, s, 3' ',r � •,p: �., '..,`gyp• ;,., �. �"' *�� t w � Sa,c;`�v .� � _��_�;i �k `�d ,4.11,!,...,,,,i,,,�g';�` =iF '+.,. ;:,. ri x]PN . •` 11 x, -'„q.. z� . +rl: i 1��. •' ..vs A, \A,,,.... t i r Wr�• i„�y, , ,-. lc_. .f 1,':.:1'.';', r..;..'N4'4 ,.', a.„it - eft ..' 4' ,tse "y+Y��ru D'' rrM`�'�/ f Y.}1'.'i * , 4',,,..e. � ,# S'•/Z _ y ra i i tC S :, . r. s try- p. e m. ' / � sa�J• tr• .� • •,'° i ` '.r:S3'�'. • ,'di A'`„.4,E r,t 17` ✓ 4 1 % ,.( t�� t ^ ' *r ` ' ad;.6 . s ✓ �,S( ., r '' .0795;0 9\x `•3 ci. st. ,.., y 1, ;' ' ''r 4‘4&- '*'; ' se f'. 'a.'AM W. m ,�!At . •�i , .ice L -WI y S"yam "v*.` t � � �+ �a1•f .41..`41--,, YSf, 'A' ' -4' ► i• r � f yy.' � , rt_ ����. i:�2 "fi t✓ a:;4 �. r y. ,.�" g a.z a;- II,t°A ..*; ,,t e 1,''� ° �.,�1� j n ui•' fi Y y .: " rY t • 1ir`"a/`; s 3 • i .2 ♦ 9�iS'i`��,` f•� - ;� �� b +J�`,�I, , .,. e- '"': a• : rt ,3, • mar_.,. .' / A S'- ..-' g.• 1(4—. .,..r'''''',41' Cr'. , ,„•_--'.- ii `,t +• 1,kiln .� , ` T' Y �•' _ 1 ;A 0,;-, T) fi.. k+4{,. �,77rP' �]. � i 4961111 12/18/96 Soil mapping units for the Cookson property, south of S.W. North FIGURE Dakota Street at Fanno Creek, in Tigard, Oregon (Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon, 1:20000, 1982). 2 �SRI/SROA/AGCO INCORPORATED Huberly silt loam is mapped on the northeastern two-thirds of the site. This soil generally has a slope of 0-3% and elevation is 150 to 250 feet. In a representative profile the surface layer is very dark gray (10YR 3/1) silt loam with few, faint dark gray (10YR 4/1) mottles. The upper part of the subsoil is grayish-brown (10YR 5/2) silt loam with many, distinct dark brown (7.5YR 4/2) mottles to a depth of approximately 25 inches. Huberly silt loam consists of poorly drained soils that formed in mixed silty alluvium. Runoff is slow to ponded, and permeability is slow. This soil association occurs in concave positions on broad valley terraces. Huberly silt loam is classified as a fine-silty, mixed, mesic, Typic Fragiaquept. Wapato silty clay loam is mapped on the southeastern one-third of the site. This soil generally has a slope of 0-3% and occurs at elevations ranging between 100 and 300 feet NGVD. In a representative profile, the surface layer is very dark grayish-brown (10YR 3/2) silty clay loam about 14 inches thick. The subsoil is dark grayish-brown (10YR 4/2) silty clay loam about 28 inches thick. Wapato silty clay loam is a poorly drained soil formed in recent alluvium on floodplains. Permeability is moderately slow and runoff is slow. This soil typically has smooth topography and is subject to short periods of overflow and ponding. Wapato silty clay loam is classified as a fine-silty, mixed, mesic Fluvaquentic Haplaquoll. Soils sampled on the site were comprised of silt loam except for sample plot WP-7. Soils encountered at sample plot WP-7 consisted of fine sandy loam about 8 inches thick overlying silty clay. Despite the presence of faint mottles, the surface 8 inches at WP-7 appeared to be recent alluvial deposition, most likely a result of recent flooding. Soil colors observed in low-lying areas include very dark gray (10YR 3/1 and 2.5Y 3/1) and dark gray (10YR 4/1). Soils colors observed at higher elevations at the site include dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2), grayish brown (2.5Y 4/3), and brown (10YR 4/3). Soils in sample plots WP-1, WP-3, WP-4, and WP-7 were determined to be hydric. Soils at these locations consist of silt loam and silty clay, and have a chroma of 1 with mottles. Soils determined to be non-hydric had chromas of 2 or greater. 3.5 Vegetation Vegetation at the site has been disturbed by grazing and hoofprints caused by horses kept at the site. In general, site vegetation consists of grasses and forbs with a few mature trees. Grasses observed at the site include redtop (Agrostis alba, *FAC), colonial bentgrass (Agrostis tenuis, FAC), meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis, FACW), tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea, FAC-), and common velvet grass (Holcus lanatus, FAC). Creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FACW) forms dense mats in shallow depressions around the low-lying eastern portion of the site. In areas that have been heavily grazed, white clover (Trifolium repens, *FAC) is the dominant herbaceous ground cover. Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Cookson Property on S.W. North Dakota Street Page-4- Trees located on the site include Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana, UPL) and Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia, FACW). A small number of ornamental hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna, *FACU) occur on the adjacent property to the south, near sample plot WP-7. As expected, tree distribution includes hydrophytic trees (ash) in wetland areas and non-hydrophytes (oak) in drier portions of the site. 4.0 PROJECT FINDINGS The USFWS, as part of the NWI program, has mapped Fanno Creek as palustrine, emergent, persistent, saturated/semipermanent/seasonally flooded (PEM1Y) (Figure 3). The NWI maps were generated primarily on the basis of black and white aerial photographs (scale of 1:58000) with selected "ground-truthing" only conducted to confirm the interpretations. This mapping is consistent with SHAPIRO's field investigation. SHAPIRO's investigation of soils, hydrology, and vegetation determined that wetlands are present on the eastern portion of the site (Figure 4). Wetlands extend from the northern to southern property boundaries, east to Fanno Creek, and west to an elevation of approximately 15 feet NGVD. The wetlands appear to be seasonally wet, influenced by Fanno Creek, a shallow water table, and surface runoff. Wetlands on the site are herbaceous in nature, providing very limited habitat and forage. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS The basis for determining wetland location at the site was primarily topography and soil types. Because the site has been grazed over the years, vegetation is highly disturbed and is not definitive in the upland or wetland site areas; therefore, soil and hydrology data was relied on heavily when determining the wetland boundary. This wetland delineation represents the best professional judgment of SHAPIRO, but a final administrative delineation can only be made by the COE and/or DSL. Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Cookson Property on S.W. North Dakota Street Page-5- _ =c` � J '_j, - --a ' /7 5., ��� J 2 1 / A ' ` -.--- .i _ .-- r ,.4O E �,< / ?)•.. J ce : , ,l °``"',\ / ! 3 FRnrid' ,. / 4 - .. i \ - Y PE d 'cr :�,/ '4' P€M X i' ' REMIYX • I ` \Wetter ` ,- r ( \,, !. .;f -Sisal r`' `,.;• .V" '1 c�•.. , nerd , , p ,7'1 •EMIY Pt�IW 't z5° .. t ,.' 1/ •- t !� , _ t''4. - ,: c '`'.--•i. : s ' lti�imi elyl , A\ f t wove r` ▪ _f,��._ VuY1C= ''''' h •�'1�+OWZ 1� ." POWKzx �i ,, - 0'�p-.r x:., •�ss �.� k •• 4 2 �� •.. PEMtY • R 30WZ t;) ; _ �d \• '�`130iMKZx ••f• j1-, 1' ' �U�I= +�' Pow S {: .1(47 13 rf ,'' �PEM Y _,!VAN t� a� °' •P�►tt• y' • ��► i,Ai :• :1 , >Vri - r: ,- � POWKZh :�.f • ROW x. 4.:,1.1... ,. �1��y1�-- Y . ' I ,N, i E't' PEMIW. \ �{ Greens• . . Pak 1_ . . PE1A1 r5 MAY _ .��• Cook o YE - • son •• ••.. Property ._• ,- • : '''''"G',---•-:- "_ `,. . �-'-� � � •� � : ''' ;,.• � ik:.� +.'.Foor 1. m / ;' • PoWKZA•. i.4 ~t .: -- '.` • ; •? �`• '%�S•/ i�`�• ! ' �w••;,...."11: Y` �.'8� :.41Y P � •'41, 1/ PFOI'Y`+.a c ` t ,;th�nt ': . ... \'.�s�' 1Q P�IY ' � / � C ..j/ i L• :S ;•• --8 •. `• -,.. !IP. ';, ',;...._::-..; '•/••1*-:1;-*/:.-3-.:"----; '-'- r.:-------7:1.:1E;.4:9.1- .. . — * 1,AtAi A• • . ti }-,,.. k _ / 1Y V•Y Y x so ��c`` \• 4 7,, ,:),,,,: , _, .., .:: . - , .•-•150,5•.:-• • ' • ' -• '' ` (-----> '.. ' 4961111 12/18/96, National Wetlands Inventory designations for the Cookson property, FIGURE south of S.W. North Dakota Street at Fanno Creek,in Tigard,Oregon (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Beaverton, Oregon, 7.5-minute quadrangle, 1:24000, based on 1981 color infrared photography). SRI/SHAPIRO/AGCO INCORPORATED NORTH .!, DAKOTA • STREET , •.'• 164 156 --.. . s.■, 154 -152 ,• 50 tP. ••• i ••• -•--.........••• ,...•••••• .. / . ................. .. / .. . ........... .... • .••••• I ( •••. .... .--........... / "..• —-- •••••••••• /50 • I ... ......... . ... ■ . ... ...... !... ..........••••• •... • .. .. . .0'..... ......... .... ... ... ....... . • ....... .... .......1 I. 7 '... ..-•••••••• ' ••— I 11PF : I \ II \ ' \ \ • i •• •••••••••••••••- I ... ..... . ....... 4, - ••-•• .........••• ••.• • .. .... .... ......... . ... \ 1_, • °6\ / 6 / : • 3.1.9_...\ I/ . • '. I- VI • \ • '' . ... ...--. .....•......... i gi • 1.................... ..... ...... ........... . . : 4,.! , I ...................... ......................:::i.i..,.. . : / . ........................ .;•-.-1: _ /• . foo° • ....- .....- / •-•-------• —---.....—••• - - ..---•• ------•••- •••---.....--••- : d V. •' ' • // ./. .... . ............... ........ ...... ........................ ..... ..............• .1 ilk... .....i....... .. ... \ .. .................... .........................1. . . .. . . ..................... ---••••••••--••••••••••••••-••• •••••••• •••• .-. ........................... .. ...... .......... . . . 1~0 .6 i N 8 \ 1 ■ ,%. .- ■• • .. . • .q. '42- ..--• ,....• ,sut. ......• .• ....... .....• ........• I 1111101111 01111111r 1111111 0 75 150 Potentially jurisdictional • • • •• • wetlands Inn IIIIIIIIII .1 Sample sites NORTH IIIIP FEET 4961111 12/18/96 • Potentially jurisdictional wetlands and sample sites at the Cookson FIGURE property, south of S.W. North Dakota Street at Fanno Creek, in Tigard, 4 Oregon. %SRI/SHAPIRO /AGC 0 INCORPORATED 6.0 REFERENCES Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, Technical Report 4-87-1. Reed, Porter B., Jr., 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). Prepared by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, St. Petersburg, Florida. NERC-88/18.37 U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, 1987. Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, 1989. Hydric Soils of Oregon. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory maps (Beaverton and Sherwood, Oregon, 1:24000, 1981, CIR aerial photography, overlaid on 7.5- minute USGS quadrangle). U.S. Geological Survey topographic map (Beaverton and Sherwood, Oregon, 1:24000, 7.5-minute quadrangle, 1967). Wetland Determination and Delineation for the Cookson Property on S.W. North Dakota Street Page-6- wgio ONNEW Appendix Wetland Delineation Data Sheets A. G. Crook Co. Form 1 - Wetlands FIELD DATA SHEET WETLAND DELINEATION (n?r ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD v� / Field Investigator(s): wkin aC/zyP!yl_ Oki O + Il Project/Site: -4 — 11Gf+-n .WA Mr N] �°."{. k-- State: 2F County: 0111.)(51"4)(-.171 ,11 Applicant/Owner:� 'C ��' 1 L' -,Ace,r t'i'C71 1i'' Plant Community #/Name: Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes - No Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No (If yes, explain on back) VEGETATION Dominant Species Status X Cover Dominant Species Status % Cover Tree Stratus,_ Herb Stratus Total Cover ( i Total Cover L265 _ 1. 1. 'Gr rC t'n a M• C 4'' 2. 2. fMros 11 5 -eqr✓' lc/-i' 2C) 3. 3. �� nr'/G7 i!w:i j7 t;t k' 5 r f�Z. 4. 4. .'r? e .:°aL 1/ - 3.0 Sapling/Shrub Stratus 5. i'1-ofoC cIS /2r1.a4V; l-ff /D Total Cover 6. 1. 7. 2. 8. 3. 9. 4. 10. 5. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW and/or FAC 7✓ Other Notable Species: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes 4 No , SOILS (:; ' Series/Phase: (;'t� C Y i 'rt._ Subgroup': Is the soil on the hydric sorts list? Yes_No_ Undetermined e Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No ! A.G. Croo( C;,moany ;s =crm - So 1 Type Hills L LY t,'KE Date AV/At; Step No. Cl ass lf icaticn FRAGfAot.aprS Location 'ANNO GQ N. leg. ;or crop) Parent mater Attu✓t4N7 Drainage 1,00•21Y DQA,NE© Death to Rater Tab NONE oN q`oto/44 Slope 2 2c I Moisture Do, TO zv ' MOisr SZLeal errneaoi i ity sue,) Is So i 1 Hycr;c'. 'ES 'Rhy? SIGN WArMM 7-A61.1 ,N APCY sA4(/N& AN Additional Notes • Color Con- Special 1 Horizon Death D(ry) M(o:st) Texture Mottles sistence Roots Features - - $ z ; 3Y 2/2 as4Y ,itT eel mcw FA iN r Ras: ScINTii.Y s�rKY E 0-.6 M Doe C,.o✓iS P 13004 1 LLW4 _si.. P.r•Qnc, • ieyk •4 Leo.,hic 2.0 M DARK (v(.A/ MANY guST iv LA y1,44134 AV .241-36 -'c et' c,QA/rs},I g oit:4 I R l.sy 4/3 1 LD.nHoN FAINT ieu+7 36' M OLIVE lawN ID M • D D M Notes: BY: Uk) alk1 I) A. G. Crook Co. Form 1 - Wetlands FIELD DATA SHEET WETLAND DELINEATION �.,ff ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(s): 7 V ar`(2'YPi(j- _ Date: mac- -/ �.�/ r Project/Site:�4 c'+�o.-iv— .3-z i +rqC State: c C County: 145,1, Appl i cant/Owner::.:Tr'k:• jai!-bC4A-GCri ji•c')iE,rd- Plant Community #/Name: 2 Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No "'• (If yes, explain on back) VEGETATION Dominant Species Status % Cover Dominant Species Status % Cover Tree Stratus Herb Stratus Total Cover (2 Total Cover J5 2 •1. 1. tf / — c0O 2. 2. ty rF,..; ,_. .or y D 3. 3. 4. 4. Sapling/Shrub Stratus 5. Total Cover (7 6. 1. 7. 2. 8. 3. 9. 4. 10. 5. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW and/or FAC :51) Other Notable Species: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No • SOILS i'� Series/Phase: i -- Subgroupf: x ( - , Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes_ No /- Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No ? Histic epidedon present? Yes No Is the soil: Mottled? Yes_,` No Gleyed? Yes_ No Matrix Color: / L, �%� — 2'r �/ `�%:- Mottle Colors: fi Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No y Rationale: 1 el. ;°" , HYDROLOGY Field Data Depth of Inundation: Depth to Saturation: Depth to free water: Primary Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Hydrology Indicators (2 or more required): Inundated Oxidized root channels (upper 12") Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves Water marks Local soil survey data Drift lines FAC-neutral test ,. r /' Sediment deposits Other: ✓� 2 tC1 -Y t .- Drainage patterns C,[/ Criteria met? Yes No JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yes V No jf / f Rationale for jurisdictional decision: /� 0)4(63.: �( � • 114.,,r C^'t:j n irl 4Lidka — Li ■.G. Crack Comoany cols =arm - Sol i Type AkCrv4 Like, I Date i0/1/g4 I Stao lc. z Classi f icat ion )cEgocmfars Location FAN no GQ. . leg. or crop) Parent material Aid.Liv/y44 OR LAkE AZPOs/rr Drainage coma iNpar POORty Death to Mater Table NONE Slope Moisture pail ro 24.° iyQ,fT BLaud ?ermeao i i it./ tot ODLRArtLY Tact; I s Sc i yur i c? , tlhY' NO SN44-1-64) WATLR 746LE FOR Azwv4 6 voLe44 PlArabS DUCIN4 i NE 61040iN 6 SEASON Add itionai Notes • Color Con- i Scec:ai 1 Hon ton Death D(ry) Moist) Texture Mottles S 1 StenCe l ;cats Features - s — .t� 2.Sy 3/1. YL Y c .r commoN Qyts Sil,Nru' 0-12 MA4QC 640151+ 3Q 4 i 5r►Grp/ s�.Ptts�lc. )j 2.sy 4/2 mAwy /UST i2°JD MDAZY 44A/iviy teci..14 d A$X 444.7 130-34 I L coo 2' 2.S/ 4/3 40401 CCs1Mcly FAH ND ,1 r 36-14 M Oejv4 B�wN I 0 • — 1 D M D M M . 'dotes: �j By: email) A. G. Crook Co. Form 1 - Wetlands FIELD DATA SHEET WETLAND DELINEATION �, ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD 1 i�, Field Investigator(s): O ,� 1�� a'(e/�.. _ Date: a `1 1 ! f i� Project/Site:1q�Yi7 ,n, 47.,-- . ; 1ar'�G�� -WI;f'' t'':.'•' " !:-- State: r 2k" County: ii.L4`i� '��f7`:. J Applicant/Owner:. ,;?C' :-.,-, /l -µCB--, itarrie6 Plant Community #/Name: Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No (If yes, explain on back) VEGETATION Dominant Species Status % Cover Dominant Species Status X Cover Tree Stratus Herb Stratus /�^ Total Cover v / Total Cover /, 1. 1. i 1,./.,? Cv/vs �'e J/5 !ICiti S° 2. 2 s,;t-'1 77: r t''elni.•r-:� c 7D 3. 3. / 4. 4. Sapling/Shrub Stratus 5. / Total Cover i 6. 1. 7. 2. 8. 3. 9. 4. 10. 5. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW and/or FAC /G✓ .:' ;j jj t tt.:-i ' Other Notable Species: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No SOILSca i 1 Series/Phase: 1fi �/1. , pup': f✓fit . Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yeses No Undetermined C.• _ Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No K Histic epidedon present? Yes No Is the soil: Mottled? Yes �'- No _ Gleyed? Yes X. No /� Matrix Color: /2-_271 ^ ,1) >✓ /i Mottle Colors: / 2-.,4. Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes �/< No _ �� / Rationale: (' ,i �� _ _ , ,t i i Al ti/i01' t.C.<} HYDROLOGY Field Data 'f _ Depth of Inundation: Depth to Saturation: -1:- Depth to free water: Primary Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Hydrology Indicators (2 or more required): Inundated Oxidized root channels (upper 12") Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves Water marks Local soil survey data Drift lines FAC-neutral test Sediment deposits Other: Drainage patterns`/ • Criteria met? Yes ., No JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? x Yes _ No ' f.Rationale for jurisdictional decision: (QJ 1•w1C fQ f J 16: 50■ I /o,,,,e . 0,)i(,. , /6 ()f� l; Soils Form - 1 Soil Type H01904), x.,KF Date /0%�q� Stop No. Classification FR46,A >a Ears Location paidNO 64 N. Veg. (or crop) Parent material ALLUV/um Drainage poDQ0, DRA,N4k Depth to Water Taoie NONE ON y/ls/gy Slope Moisture L90 6-12 aey $s feW 274 sA:uaArEA BLLc„) Permeability Is Soil Hydric? ✓Es Why? 1414N iNhlra TA&E iN &RLY 440101Nt 5,6460N� 1,040 4,1100At,e 4 14O7TLL Acid itionai Notes Color Con- Special Horizon Depth D(ry) Moist) Texture Mottles sistence Roots Features .B 2.5Y 3/1 S,t'r ;:Err i- wr as,s-' St.i0/7 r. 0-,2 M VEQv Ave( 4 Ar w�F1 s;rc LAs Ste �.LiAii'<<„ MANY a;iic i2•i7 M I 2-7- 1� 2•s) 4/1 F W L46? pA iJ OAQK 64A1 LY4-4.2. ,{1 56 .5// CAe(t NollE M aIAEA,')s k 661/ D i M D M D M Notes: By: dia., Oa/J A. G. Crook Co. Form 1 - Wetlands FIELD DATA SHEET WETLAND DELINEATION ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(s): 1,ip 6a-Yey Date: 62)C.74-/, � _ �, -Project/Site: 4� �s.c -h' - , •�7l State: County: V1J 5tiliv dfi Applicant/Owner:� ,f.-4 iV//r[�.xGIkCe`� •f10711E,1 Plant Cormmunity #/Name: Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes `- No Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No (If yes, explain on back) VEGETATION Dominant Species Status X Cover Dominant Species Status X Cover Tree Stratus ,� Herb Stratus Total Cover T l Cover Jt/Q 1. 1. r L,C- '::w(% ✓r 1 - + c�U t. 2. 2. F��: - � �;, ..�1 2d 3. 3. 4. 4. Sapling/Shrub Stratus 5. Total Cover J 6. 1. 7. 2. 8. 3. 9. 4. 10. 5. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW and/or FAC /C)(7-17' t-1 Other Notable Species: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes '/ No SOILS • Series/Phase: (� � SubgrOOp': . -t_ Is the soil on the hydric soils Crst? Yes )4 No Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No X Histic epidedon present? Yes _ No ' Is the soil: Mottled? Yes y' No Gleyed? Yes-r-- No _ Matrix Color: 6 -20 - 11) VW. • Mottle Colors: +_..4) C. Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No Rationale: i r 4.+ HYDROLOGY Field Data Depth of Inundation: Depth to Saturation: Depth to free water: Primary Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Hydrology Indicators (2 or more required): Inundated Oxidized root channels (upper 12") Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves Water marks Local soil survey data Drift lines FAC-neutral test /, Sediment deposits Other: A.2-r' ! `L'f t� Drainage patterns Criteria met? Yes No JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? / Yes _ No Rationale for jurisdictional decision: \,L&1. 1' .C,I,-� `• ) SCE! x.v)G ; ��' (15(,x;,1 i r. �).� trotu�3�, ri J ) �J Soils Form - 1 Soil Type Ht ERLv. oi(L Date w /96 4L Stop No. . Classification zcPi4bi40uEprs Location FAMHo ct. N. Veg. (or crop) Parent material ,U,t..Lay/uM Drainage 'way pbswo Depth to Water Table NmNE ph/ 4020 Slope Moisture MC,sr TA 304' ✓LgY eYEALV.1 1 Permeability Sii3,0 Is Soil Hyaric? yas Why? i.1161V iy,IrEe 74181-. IN 4eI 411014.I/7+I Sf.AUN AIIQ 14C7T.Es AND tru.1 614e0MA Aaditionai Notes Color Con- Special Horzon Depth D(ry) Moist) Texture Mottles sistence Roots Features ,t1 ,Dy4 3// sw_r mar R us r 0- 20 M vcaY oAer 6c'Ai a,ACeO Adsivc 2n-d0 M tJv /Pa r7 303- i{0 '� :l►YQ u/l FL;/ IQur ;y&0 M DAY 6.2,ay Fr1.AOiPa�f D I M D M D M D M Notes: By: Q41Kd i A. G. Crook Co. Form 1 - Wetlands FIELD DATA SHEET WETLAND DELINEATION R UTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(s): (mom. a"/a-yP..1. r7t �1/� Date: OI 11 Project/Site: 11,L9 411- 2.v-- , i �G� -c TTl t\1N .J ri State: ;� � County: 4401_51.1)47U1 Applicant/Owner: : 54 f L'?E'- Cd- Plant Community #/Name: J Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No 77' (If yes, explain on back) VEGETATION Dominant Species Status % Cover Dominant Species Status X Cover Tree Stratus Herb Stratus Total C ver ' / /� r� Total Cover _ ` 1. � - --' O. IA 'fir . _ 11`(:!A 1001. 2. 2. 3. 3. 4. 4. Sapling/Shrub Stratus 5. Total Cover _ 6. 1. 7. 2. 8. 3. 9. 4. 10. 5. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW and/or FAC i =1, s j"�A% Other Notable Species: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes /No / 'II/ • � n SOILS Series/Phase: I ;'f32 ! - ,Sabgr-sup': I •-? Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No Histic epidedon present? Yes _ No Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No _ Gleyed? Yes_ No Matrix Color: (,; `/� - � � "� � Mottle Colors: �' v� 7 Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No k Rationale: HYDROLOGY Field Data Depth of Inundation: Depth to Saturation: Depth to free water: Primary Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Hydrology Indicators (2 or more required): Inundated Oxidized root channels (upper 12") Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves Water marks Local soil survey data } ( Drift lines FAC-neutral test�ll Sediment de po sits Other: A ! I Drainage patterns Criteria met? Yes No p? JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No j / I Rationale for jurisdictional decision: 5O / ( VIM glrjc Soils Form - 1 Soil Type At.OHA Z�K� Date /0��/46 Stop No. S' Classification xanc,aQa';s Location FINND G� N. Veg. (or crop) Parent material A n9 Lu/Ju Ode L4KE DEmsl7'S Drainage Soya WNAT 4,0040, Depth to Water "aoie 14044 Slope 3% Moisture D4+' 70 24 MOisr 8.0- ,J Permeability me DuATay SLOw� Is Soil Hydric? NO Why? NO s—mai.Lc►uJ W4TTQ TA& rN4, THE 6tA■ iN6 SE.ASDA, Aaditionai Notes Color Con- Special Horizon Death D(ry) M(cist`, Texture Mot:ies sistence Roots Features D 2.ir 3/2- VELY v,e.r CDMmjiI Q047. SAjt tLy r D2SY 4/Z Pa r' (.4.1AYat r/ Mesa Ai D2.. ' 3/2_ 9"yf7 M b4 Ar'S w 8/Z ' ) D M D M D M D — M Notes: By: 89A7J Qd4f1 ) A. G. Crook Co. Form 1 - Wetlands FIELD DATA SHEET WETLAND DELINEATION ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(s): �`;� at evL Date: pC +f i ll, O ' � 'Project/Site:)46 ti-c.-h'— , in:,-rG{ 'tn1 k- State: 2/ County: (Ui s/ /r16-4` Y Applicant/Owner:t-;:.°C4`-6-}1/"[' ' C,,tj y-t -fj }1E?" Plant Community #/Name: A Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No '74- (If yes, explain on back) • VEGETATION Dominant Species Status X Cover Dominant Species Status X Cover Tree Stratus./ Herb Stratus Total Cover J j Total,Cover /� 1.�1/Pr6 -. :*J!/'?•:'0 l' I --,!� '9^ 1. i 'ruucG- 2Y✓?','. . i IP - .., ,7• 2. " 2./ `=-, 1�,' , -, ); �;. r / 5J 3. 3. 4. 4. Sapling/Shrub Stratus 5. Total Cover ZS 6. ` /- t . • ., 'Ct Y. 1 , • •, %'r 7. 2. v' s,, 8. 3. 9. 4. 10. 5. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW and/or FAC /' - �2�'� Other Notable Species: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No N/, // SOILS ;,,2 Series/Phase: J •�, Subgroup': Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No _ Y s',/ Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes_ No Histic epidedon present? Yes _ No > Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No . Gleyed? Yes_ No ,\ Matrix Color: - 1 C' - /0 -/1 '1'i' — Mottle Colors: . Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes _ No / Rationale: HYDROLOGY Field Data • Depth of Inundation: - Depth to Saturation: Depth to free water: Primary Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Hydrology Indicators (2 or more required): Inundated Oxidized root channels (upper 12") Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves Water marks Local soil survey data Drift lines FAC-neutral test , Sediment deposits Other: y'!.', Drainage patterns ,_ ;,d,,,, Criteria met? Yes No JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? _ Yes )C No Rationale for jurisdictional decision: hp j✓.L e.;-, . .�•;'', r a.''_• i-,1 f::. , `' l Ct ii .,. _ ) 1 C, / 3. .,r:cK •.:,moanv -• Sai i "'ice AiAHA ia Dace 10.4/46 I Stze `IIc. 6 :.lass.; icat:cn XFi20GNREOrs I -7catIon FANNe1 GQ ( '1. lag. :ar cr.oi I ?arenc mater—,a i ALLuv/url OQ Lek'E DEA6SI TS Dr3.naoe SDw1EiNNAT POORLY Deocn xacer "ao i e NONE I , S l one [a ".o l azure AAO1s r re IS va ', MDiSr Q, L&) .-ermeaci i i.y MODaAT&V SLOik) S Sol l 4yor:c' N 4hy' NO 1'NbL1Dk1 WATEF 7461-E Paelf`iG T,t1E 6eOg-iN 5 Eits04 iccas ( ■cr ;r- ' Scec: -cr'_cn sec:" D(, y! .M( sz _e ,.:er.c°I '.cats -ea:::res D 1O v4 4/Z S�1 T Nefq IS��G�'7aY IS TIC k:a' 1. ig I !IDAleu GRA4314 8110, 01.1,44114. i0Y4 4'/3 • S 8120w N , D Z >' 4•/3 m(0/ rya Mci 1. ( I ` D I o 7ac�s: 3y:detd J Qaii.oltJ) A. G. Crook Co. Form 1 - Wetlands FIELD DATA SHEET WETLAND DELINEATION �I ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(s): MM v v�Y(- Date: ri. / c 1r1 f1. (� ',. ) 1 . 1.r", Project/Site: ry� k-c)Jv-- . ; lGy,i�'--f • '\ '4'V() L. i'` ' -- State: t..2Kt} County: �Jt,c-ir.;•t 4`1DA/ Appli cant/Owner:,--„ nk:.:,"1>, /"[w. „it"C 11•x71-1e/' Plant Cortmunity #/Name: 7 Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No -7” (If yes, explain on back) VEGETATION Dominant Species Status X Cover Dominant Species Status X Cover Tree Stratus -' Herb Stratus Tot Cover f _`� 1 Total Cover 0 1,47,7,.k: /Y.1., +g,1 f71G-r� �IT'�� �1 r 1 �[P 1.. F y�l L1 L'A G?r Lc 1.�[.�c( [2 CC.� Pk.t i '2. 2.1V/N5 ' �,rl;4 c f r si• . , I F: - ',: 7,3 3. 3. /V tfkc; '7 - 4. 4. 4--;_,J^.;t.r-tt I, ! ' t.] 1.,,,P- 5 F---;-',(74., ,' 1 ;mod Sapling/Shrub Stratus 5, Y Total Cover 5 6. 1.(.17a1AC: 1. < (�✓i, ^ ,GI eA, t ∎( 1 1+,-(7 7. 2. G+ LI 8. 3. 9. 4. 10. 5. VA— - /� Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW and/or FAC g�./ Other Notable Species: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes '' No ..�-� SOILS , ' a- - Series/Phase: ,7 - Subgroup': Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes 21 No Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No 7' Histic epidedon present? Yes No 1 Is the soil: Mottled? Yes_ No Gleyed? Yes •/1 No _ Matrix Color: •Yf� '1/; Mottle Colors: + Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes > No / Rationale: ' , 4,,„ ' • HYDROLOGY Field Data Depth of Inundation: Depth to Saturation: < Depth to free water: Primary Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Hydrology Indicators (2 or more required): Inundated 7e Oxidized root channels (upper 12") Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves Water marks Local soil survey data Drift lines FAC-neutral test Sediment deposits Other: 41.A11'.07."c-{k',.{ c•,ra.L%'eC ✓� R.C:Q..1 Drainage patterns -1n",(-, — ),e,i.,,? ,-;-�. Criteria met? Yes x No t JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the plant community a wetland? ;4-N. Yes No f 67.,_R ationale for jurisdictional decision: (< )r r% e r� - ' ; �� j(t,_„�: �. .;l t A Earl 7/Pe WAPA76 � 3ace f0/!/46 too G. 7 :lass;; cat,cn NAPLA Quo/..Ls _ocat an F4 rno t1. 1. leg. . or crco; I =arenc later lai Auu✓IuM ur: nacre POORLY Jeocri gazer "aa!a NONE SIN /04/ Slooe s..ure M _ (° M + D sr �ATtq�il i EU 8F1-1)W rerneBa; ; 1=Y YEav 4.pvJ s Sal :c' Mhy? �vArEQ '"'A64. iN EAYI.Y &tow,Nd• s64s- N� YEs H'ib GkleirA A d =acr: ona vc�as I ' -cr•_cn Dec:" ', `I(.3 st! ?X: r ''ct: 3� " S:8.^.c° I cots 2( 2..TY 413 iHu .rt1.1.4v NT aS7 14" . j �6cEJV7` 4 ky C i Mc1;•ciddL l�LiJE £4O'. SAId 449 #av-Aoftrus ,7- 2- L0 ' " DA#k 6I4/ CLAY S7��ry' I^S lL7r 11.0 41 . ?A_ iO j !V i'.LA/ • I - y 1 j 'lazes: ?y: kJ ©4x¢11) A. G. Crook Co. Form 1 - Wetlands FIELD DATA SHEET WETLAND DELINEATION (� ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator(s): Cp�i�1 Date: 0C-74- j- 1 , Jul Lri., Project/Site: l c'.:v-- , i dGfs,r c-t State: oP County: t4 5f '}^I-13,VI Applicant/Owner: r :571 Plant Community #/Name: C, Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. CJ Do norTal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes No Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No (If yes, explain on back) VEGETATION Dominant Species Status % Cover Dominant Species Status X Cover Tree Stratus Herb Stratus Total Cover Total Cover / k,, 1. u� r 2. 2. Pc r 5 3. 4. 4. Sapling/Shrub Stratus 5, Total Cover ( Th 6. 1. 7. 2. 8. 3. 9. 4. 10. 5. t Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW and/or FAC Other Notable Species: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes `� No �1 SOILS '/,. s- /o ' A. Series/Phase: r�` ✓`✓�'`" Subgroup' Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No ' Undetermined Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No )4 Histic epidedon present? Yes No Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No ;\ Gleyed? Yes No Matrix Color: q- I - '2 - L i Mottle Colors: J' hC3°r_C Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes _ No f 11' Rationale: HYDROLOGY Field Data Depth of Inundation: Depth to Saturation: Depth to free water: Primary Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Hydrology Indicators (2 or more required): Inundated Oxidized root channels (upper 12") Saturated in upper 12" Water-stained leaves Water marks Local soil survey data Drift lines FAC-neutral test -4 Sediment Sediment deposits Other: -'\ "�v 2� 1 % Drainage patterns - Criteria met? Yes No JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE • Is the plant community a wetland? \ Yes - - / Rationale for jurisdictional decision: " lC.577—}72--0-1 V-',-& ( (� 4y4 L7/"\ ':.,-L z : '"'� ,ie)( pf 1 .Z. _r cx ;moanv c ':r� - Soii ";ipe �K Jace O/ �tca 4c. { Aco�A ir6 i ! i/9b � 8 :.idSS ;cac.cn xanG,uQEPTS _ocac:on porno 4,e. 4. leg. :;r :rco; I ?arenc ,iiater:ai Ai-LNvWM Oil C.4tE DEA si,. Jr.;naae Jeocn :o gazer 'aoie 19ONE SOmEi'VNAT POORLY I .31aoe 370 I 'ois:ure HO►cT To 24 YErY me Auv& erneaa i i:y MQDEgAray 5c4447 s Sol i '-ycr c' ihy? Np N p s0a1.4.6u1 w4 ra TABLE i-oiQ 20414 44.16i4461 � I PEIC'OO. DuRIN6 THE 620t)iN4 SLAst)AJ , i = ca:: cna: vocal icr i :r- �Jc-.1. L'ec:^ J -y, ..1�v" �:. ?X::r? "CL:.?� s szer.ce j .cots j 25 f 3/2 vEity s,�, 9u(,od 74/. tY d-r w Dave twAyls'N 6,04.1 o sc.f Atria,(., 1,1>, 4/3 (141 v Z 6 4ow&,1 y j t „a MAny ?{tilt P�C�CEs NCN 5riC.k/, '0 NI I i9--LL, a { NCN PLAIrk, 16-b0 14)407 OLIVE 80404 J i .1 ; 0 h Total: I I 3y: 4.hJ Od4Jt) 1 Dakota Meadows Tree Protection & Removal Plan Prepared for: Beacon Homes 9500 SW 125th Beaverton 97005 Prepared by: Walter H. Knapp Certified Silviculturist Certified Arborist-ISA 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane Beaverton,OR 97007 Phone(503) 646-4349 March 3, 1997 IECEOWE — 5 1997 iI) Walter H.Knapp Silviculture and Forest Management Urban Forestry Dakota Meadows Tree Protection & Removal Plan Background and Purpose This Tree Protection and Removal Plan describes the activities that will affect trees on the Dakota Meadows Planned Unit Development(PUD) in the City of Tigard, Oregon. The Plan is responsive to the requirements of the Tigard's Municipal Code, Chapter 18.150, Tree Removal. Site Description Dakota Meadows PUD encompasses an area located south of SW North Dakota Street, and immediately west of Fanno Creek. The previous land use was primarily rural-residential. Most of the site includes open grassland that had been grazed by horses. Trees are growing along the driveway, adjacent to the house, and scattered elsewhere throughout the site. Many of the trees are Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia) growing in association with wetlands. Tree Protection & Removal Plan and the Tree Map As required by the City,this tree protection and removal plan and the tree map for Dakota Meadows include the location, size, and species of existing trees as well as a program to mitigate tree removal. Tree Inventory and Tree Code Requirements The City of Tigard has recognized the importance of trees in a municipal code that addresses tree removal and mitigation. The Tree Code generally requires"no net loss" for trees over 12 inches in diameter.' It specifies that"the number of replacement trees required(to mitigate tree removal)shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged by the caliper size of See City of Tigard,OR Municipal Code,Chapter 18.150. Tree Removal for specific requirements and definitions. 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane,Beaverton,OR 97007 Phone(503)646-4349 Dakota Meadows Page 2 the largest reasonably available replacement trees." As shown in the following table,the code makes additional requirements based on the percentage of trees retained. Amount of Trees Retained Mitigation Required Less than 25%of trees over 12 inches No net loss of trees as defined by Section in diameter 18.150.070.D Retention of 25-50% of trees over 12 Two-thirds of the trees to be removed must be inches in diameter mitigated as defined by Section 18.150.070.D Retention of 50-75% of trees over 12 Half of the trees to be removed must be mitigated as inches in diameter defined by Section 18.150.070.D Retention of 75% or more of trees over No mitigation required 12 inches in diameter Quantifying the Tree Inventory A total of21(trees over 12 inches in diameter is present at Dakota Meadows. Twelve of these trees will be removed during construction,and 25 will be retained. Mitigation As shown on the enclosed table, these 12 cut trees represent 32%of the trees larger than 12 inches in diameter. Since the remaining 68% will be retained, mitigation is required for 50% of the trees LI& removed. Using the City of Tigard's Municipal Code process,this will require planting oj.5-21wo-inch trees. Alternative locations for planting these trees are being developed,but the specific planting sites will be determined later. Retaining and Protecting Trees Most of the trees retained on the site are located in designated wetlands,where equipment and construction activities will be excluded. These trees will not need special considerations during construction. However, where trees are retained in construction areas, several measures should be followed to assure protection: • Retention trees located in the vicinity of equipment operations will be protected by installation of orange plastic construction fencing to prevent injury to tree boles or soil compaction within the root zone. ti • Dakota Meadows Page 3 • If it is necessary to have any vehicle or construction equipment drive or maneuver within the root zone of a retained tree, a layer of gravel or other suitable mulch at least 6 inches deep will be placed in the path of the equipment as protection for the root system of the tree. • Construction equipment will be stored in suitable locations away from retained trees. • The stripping of topsoil around retained trees will be restricted. • Excavation immediately adjacent to roots larger than 2 inches in diameter within the tree root protection zone of retained trees will be by hand to ensure that roots are not damaged. Where feasible,major roots will be protected by tunneling or other means to avoid destruction or damage. • A certified arborist will supervise proper execution of this plan through construction of all buildings that may encroach on retained trees. Summary Almost 70%of the trees larger than 12 inches in diameter will be retained at Dakota Meadows. A series of safeguards are provided to ensure protection of these trees. In addition,a total of 52 two-inch caliper trees will be planted on the site to mitigate tree removal. /f4fir Walter H. Knapp Certified Silviculturist Certified Arborist, ISA Dakota Meadows Tree Protection and Removal Plan Project No: 9708 Name: Dakota Meadows Client: Beacon Homes Eng.&Pln: Alpha Engineering Tree Mitigation Evaluation Remove Retain Total DBH No.Trees Dia.Equiv. No.Trees Dia.Equiv. No.Trees Dia.Equiv. 12 2 24 1 12 3 36 13 _ 0 0 0 0 14 54 56 1 14 ( 5 70 15 0 5 75 '5 75 16 2 32 4 64 6 96 17 1 17 4 68 ✓5 85 18 0 1 18 2 36 Z 3 54 19 ✓1 19 0 A 19 20 0 2 40 1..2 40 21 0 3 63 ✓3 63 22 0 1 22 ,1 22 23 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 29 0 1 29 1 29 30 0 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 32 0 1 32 1 32 33 0 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 38 0 1 36 1 36 37 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 0 0 39 0 0 0 0 40 . 1 40 0 1 40 C—J re" Sum )0 ' I$Z 206 25 _26 491' 38 697 32% 30% 68% 70% Mitigation required = 50% of diameter equivalents removed= 103 Number of 2" trees = 52 Explanation of Table: DBH: Diameter (in.) at breast height, 4.5 feet above ground level. Number of Trees: From tree inventory. Diameter Equivalents: DBH x Number of Trees. See Tigard Code. Number of 2-inch Diameter Replacement Trees: Diameter Equivalents divided by two. P • . , 5EE 5I-I gEt-itovFD 2(4"Pe.movfD ,5 vtr Ot A sop rev, • I — / m LEGEND: ii ; `1i I"` r 't: = , . ORNAMENTAL PLANTING LEGEND' r\\ i �In''A\\�� ,' r ij !.4 it+/ _>, .,,-' ,- !� a. \\,/,' _ /1L\\ ..>J' LJ N1 ,/ .�—.'b/ V 6 PLANT USE SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE Street Trees , I, n lith.x+ 1 Acer rubrum 'Bowhall': Bowhall Red Maple; 2" cal. TOWN nm— + �� P a I ; ® aid 4,1 rttti o 4 1 Liquidamber atyracitlua: American Sweet Gum; 2" cal. `� '•�� j x`11 ' i 4 c" §d 4,a"I„", I filly y��hy� n p HOMES °' � t PREPARED FOR : BEACON HOMES 9500 SW 125th Ave., Beaverton, OR 97 005 (503) 524-1999 ,- 'N Pseudotsuga menziessii: Douglas Fir', 8' ht. P o wi iI Acer rubrum 'Autumn Radiance': Autumn Radiance Red Maple; 2" cal. t N rp e.t Ornamental Trees FA w t„ �i Cercidiphyllum japonicum: Katsura Tree; 1 1/Y cal. `Wins Zelkova serrate: Sawleaf Zelkovo; 1 1/2 cal. 04 o 0a Pseudotsuga menziessii: Douglas Fir; ‘4)4- Mitigation Trees Acer rubrum 'Autumn Radiance': Autumn Radiance Red Maple; 2" kcal. E E T 4 Cercidiphyllum japonicum: Katsura Tree; 2" cal. Zelkova serrate: Sawleaf Zelkova; T cal. r . F Q®U o�(5P / \ Acer circ,natum: Vine Maple; 5' ht. multi stem. _ �,'■/L, ■ ■ !w f �r� ���� 'p P -� 0 S V11 NORTH D Auto COUrt Trews Chamae e obtuse Gracllls: SlenHio rase t r CwoT cal ,t•;y,,1!1! FWI1 F ' 4 , 'WiIN :461IRT " NCtl q 1' ,i e ,V b w L,i. I Y 1 1! ,' m �w'31� � � ��� .I , ,11@ ,, a INI �. ,�,,, ��� V I , � �!� Ili 11,l ��I I l pile, ; w 411 f41, ' v, i , ql ilq Nli,'I a jl'j1 ��������1r1 �'ti Daphne odora: Fragrant Daphne 3 gal. I • } p al #$q Pieris japonica: Andromeda 3 14! A \ � � � I� Ilh9 "1 l' ° �� ���� � 1,s uoerasus 'Zabeliana' Zabel's Laurel 1 . \ \ '� 'I,;,J I. j 8, 1 \ rl ' ,'ii,': l dy'h M \ c , . �, ° lime Ri' �1�� �i' i�Q� ����� " n 'wti . Arctostaphylos uva-ursi: Kinniklnnick 1 gal, \ �'' ''� ��I ',;I I'll"11116;°, ' y w . ���t i ���� � Cotoneaster 'Lowfast' Lowfast Cotoneaster 1 al. A ll red 161 Pl1 Y+ 11fiI,r1 ����t►� ��� 'd IN \ \\ 1 ? °►'' ! rnm �� 0 ! ! n'iM1PP l %I I �r� '.20 bs/acre \;i: \\ �� dl1 Ik11 �khly h 4 ., s „j ►��`' r►��►�4"` ¢ Enjoy 9 \ V I Id 1 1 i ,/I' �� ��,Q f•\ 11 , ,,1 , rr c UI h, ►� _—. 1 . l; �; i1 v Cell ° +1 �� ����'�} I �r� ��1A1,'1,' 1 �. io1l mN,u 11,- 'n + I �� y,, ', F HI 14491' / IA II e,'' �a4 / , a,'.•i n;{.: E AREA PLANTING LEGENDI I— — — � 01,� ` r 114 a _ ', a� �/ �����i����►i���i��1 sll,,1, ����'►��r. r o IJVl,r, ..ate% 1, 1u11 I , , s Ml plant materials should be removed and replanted with the following landscape palette. le, i : : II -P'p, � il ��� u.Jll Pis .. ,' �., " •• '14#'1,1"; ►��� ��1► r) h d Maintenance should consist of routinely removing non-native and Intrusive ornamental plant materials. In combination with 111;'�ur;' 1 �,1!�,� t i� ,11k',, �, �, I�I °I•;'.ilk!' i 4 �j 111 r t .` ■'. �����.1041 �.r111' •:::: grasses o an acceptable length, � ' H- 1 ii S 1 W W• 0 0 0�� L] ©IP USE SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE �\ lsl,lli III ml ult 4 / ►�, N M1 @I q R ?� ' I 1(�1 pu 111`" Ii'I ( I, , . 4 * RI * K ;y sr ir„.', I I�' i / 9 �'•'11111,it! 1'"I .,a + I ,'. N� i 1"`I"r i4'l I I• ,il�l ll,h 11'lI f —•„ �l •4H� Ui1► 1•� . C I •�' Existing Trees C7 1*. 1 `��� amatlrruRpn,alnResu:aW,mnp6v ow,Ilrulus P'I , . �: ►��� �� y) L5I > ■Hsi ll "4 . IF. ^ ,„ , ^,ir.�A' n,iismokII lM1d III i�, I•�II,� /, 1 - fr;$$3$ y1'RI �- �' cn �.' c IX)• 19 �i •+ .T I AMP'app vI 0+I p ' " N i Ill °'I �VI '� ,ad• ■1. I, M i: , sly � dld'Il'iil'Ii 4yl ' "h' . . / / , 4 Fd, 'r— wl, r•! �t r [1dlrlr nndrivauPll:^u w +.w ai -_ Mitigation Trees/ r p il. \ 1 P ta,` sal o n atl 1 /, 6 / �.� . ..9 �' — 1 lid MII r59NVHd Y la Thuja plicate Western Red Cedar 2" cal. �„ /� •" p k / i� \`_rR W ►'► r r lir lose,, N . ^� ' tlF - ►�� in `� s' 0 <r, \ '�2 Screening Trees Fraxinus oregana Oregon Ash i'tl� o )o•• ' •i ' i�lf'd t11i 1 1. r' "* w W U h at 77. Il a 1 1 as )i'.11',I,� r ► UI F rrl .... . . ...14j11. 11, 441,, 11'110 0114 kt;,4q��,: ��� ►��►r, ~ %wit i .'• • • a P NY y 111 11t I a : 4 ♦:fi:,,iit'� � F ZONE 1r Wetland Buffer / T ransition Zona 4 eY a f' y;r 1 r lyt � '�jl11, •�'.d1, � V��1 'f;o�`� ,` 1 / ►�I • y .. \ ,, ,�µi{�{' q JINw I v I ¢I All non-nalive plant materials should be removed and replanted with the following landscape palette. '• it It,�,��'; Ik IIIJ •�f ,',NY,.�1�'rIr• °j,I,\I� 19Gr kl7s lit ,�, ` '°j � +��♦�.♦�.� V+ N Maintenance *noted consist of routinely removing non-native and iMruslw ornamental plant material. N combination with ) \ t jlj. � ,.,, ii,j ', ,`;wt411''r 1 II(�rll�! N "�,y i �l f,.� pp9 .'�," ,0, 11:1411,'"+�^4tR:. ► �►♦ w ar' °00 � � ''�mowing of grasses to an wuPYable length. _ / i}, 1 i. .1. I�IJ W;," , lib 1i�,,' .� ,.I., W�V�I��I , +�� t ��������►����• 2 If,1. /. � 4 IG:1 ,4t 1 ,@ ililp,- I. i' i o ", (p • Z 0 nP. „1. elk , ki°' 1.1 Iu IlII II;� III V' �•M1 011tl1l7 iC,, ''. r a,. q1 , ' 1►�1► V, tY LWY ¢ PLANT USE SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE j tl °' ' �+ 6►��0�1, /►Ie ” 2 to, tlI �- — _._ -- � I i f4 {4NI y ,r f ' II �" ',1",,,V, P " �n ��p��111 r /n .♦♦♦♦♦3 Ir, f c U,: - -- �II. , ) NlPpppi ` ►tU�♦ t"1„,,,,.."')1, s o� p p Ile �� V' 1 u I , '`" kg0�k3 V / h,. 1 1 th 1 wow rl , ,• s �% J�� pry SHRUBS• Cornus stolonifera Red-osier Dogwood 1 gal. ,riil " rj1{ : g114 � � ��1� w-��'.•��� Ribes sangulneum Red Flowering Currant 1 gal. I� „q;,► �1 Iti; a�, } , :p G1�III �s G� 1. Q 1 R y�.4 I _I f �+,�� •�1 ��"' 111� 1h1f�I�,�l ,,� � I I prl �' ` + / �U `'r '{,h (.q , n 1 , ,— " 4, a�' IL ` -- I Ito 1 ,11I Pro Tme 402: Native Riparian Grass Mix 20 Ibs / acre 0 e III �` r` � � . �'y, _ 60% Blue Wildrye 11 X �y�'1 I$P �;"u ltl r , �'P iP P r .r .%. '� ]4 �GROUNDCOVERSr 30% Fsstuca rubra Er,r � ' u, /,.,�, �..1'rl,+ Inli kti,,gxN `: a �' ;di. // ► 11 i.',T..L.I,! " 1► :'�t •�,:7irJl ,, ,' y,l l x. � '�t.I, "I; ..,,, ql .NI,' 1 pl ul" ,, �,/1 � f ; t►. i► V,10% Deschampsia Caespitosa i 1l ,, Ih ,ply, ■ V:I 1.:,� � 7 ��1j� `�li �1��i � 7! Ill' �''',�� � �i. ����'�lhmnlhl}I�f�kI11110+1e�19IkItIIV' 'I�I�II�'�"I• : 11.,►'b �� �{f� �,Ik , ,+p• . t � e �µ" � 1�� nt�la 41, , ,/; 1J�4jN PaPI � y. \� 7�� / ���`� I�� • �♦♦,���i �I�I�177��� '�� I�� , %6 r �1 Ella 1�• � A`� .� f '���V � •�4w��►�ZONE 2r U land RI arian �I l ;I I I"„ Fiat, Sa 1 ����p p r 11141 I�� I�� i` �Ir"4' �/1� 1y1 k� i N � ��! ���� .a.� // o pI —r—n. w , 1 ' � ,',I „ `�� ,eZ `' • ,,,. I� ♦•1►�'l►*,,,,�, �4►�/ I .. II1 ,p I�LF '9 ♦ ♦ /AO non-native plant rrmtereae shell be removed from ties zone. 'a� MY�”. II1r -<- °r` , } H .,. ., 1,yl. ji4,ya� , e�� ! y%��\,y, '/� I Itl.a,.•' , ;,�;,,':I �•+•♦♦♦.r, ��i►♦IUEII Ili ,r` ��� -nr ,`p Glenerally, new plant materials es listed below shall only be Introduced to areas cleared of nen�nativse. / gy m .'; �� , r.-w„j , . L,�/�t',• . ►♦• •�• ,, 4ti '^III � • F ,_::. y,� .ff '11 ••one,\ , ; i�► :`% / ���i �i , ' � IWia. PLANT USE SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZES . ' i�! - r� .�j: + I ,,.• �'''44,► �4 1. 4:,,,,J,:,1,,11 ♦���t � � Acer circinatum: Vine Maple 4' ht; multi stem ►���� W' ��� <4 SHRUBS. E : &t era: gal. r�, �P 1 ►I '`um: gal. `ii: Douglas Soiree 1 gal. Il'ijl�gl' : • , ` ��� ►��AO�.�,�♦�.�.�+�.4; Pro-Time 402: Native Ri arian Grass Mix 20 Ibs acre �II I•■t ` 1 !'"' t��1 ,e Pt /<! � �•oe��� : , " fot QROUNDCOVER8a 60% Blue Wild rye n 1 ` . 'F , ,�4�� ,*. ry II!. I♦ .- a 30% Festuca rubra 10% Deschampsia caespitosa �� ' �� ie� ��� �� ��� J ��, � I /�, "t►� I. 1► 1� ■ 4111b1 iiiiitsio }I 1 l 1 P itli • t ,My . 4 4 ����� j111F J L I gfyl{ ,t''��,, A �w.��I ��������� ;fffIiffiiw adow d, no new nn s I be rced otl� then the soreenl tress.pls g n0 1. 'ieY� D. ' — „A 4x ,.:Y' I :',.`�1d 1�1 N, ,,,,, *I 4 :I��n, U ,r �y ,' f{ 1 1 ,,. .1" :µµ ,L':. ,I ,f. �.,� d. Ir 1, 'Wh 1 .,, ,.I ,4 N � , 1 1 1 Y1 Ca vl n I I ,� tR4 r 8 a 4••.! N��. FYtq y • ,}1 J -7 C �I �T'i� { @,, .' �(Il IIV 627511°28y ill•/ i kk Y ®l4J S11LSP I," t8 (\ MI-Obi W �1 ,. I/ 0' 15' 30' 60' ,- _ W 1 W ` 1PROJECT Dakota Meadows 1 I ,E1 E IbiI116A-�N l ^ V0. 141-018 vJ LTYPE Pre-Plat/PD / ALPHA ENGINEERING, INC. March 5, 1997 Mr. Will D'Andrea City of Tigard Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall, PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Dakota Meadows (City SUB 97-0002) Job No.500-245 Dear Will: The following letter along with attachments addresses your letter of February 21, 1997 which requested additional application materials be submitted to the City in order to make our submittal complete. In accordance with the City's comments, we have attached the following: 1) Additional application fee of$149, and a narrative addressing Sensitive Lands Review for construction of a sewer line in the flood plain. 2) List of corrected tax Lot numbers. Please note that this application does not encompass tax lot 3400: only 3300 of Map 1S1 34DA. 3) A plan depicting trees to be preserved and removed (revised Sheet 1 of submittal) 4) A report prepared by Arborist Walt Knapp. 5) A revised Landscape Plan (revised Sheet 4) which depicts Planting mitigation as required by City Code. 6) A revised Preliminary Plat/Subdivision Plan (Revised Sheet 2). A minor realignment of the bicycle trail to preserve an existing tree necessitated a slight realugnment of the trail and hence the associated lot lines. As you are aware, four copies of the requested Wetland Delineation report as prepared by Shapiro have already been submitted to your office under separate cover. We hereby request that the attached addendum be incorporated into the application for Dakota Meadows. Plaza West•Suite 230.9600 SW Oak•Portland,Oregon 97223 Office 503-452-8003•Fax 503-452-8043 We anticipate that with this addendum, that staff can recommend this project for approval in the Staff Report due to be distributed. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation on this project. Sincerely, ALP GINEERING, INC. /7Mike Miller Project Planner cc: Peter Kusyk SECTION 18.84.040: SENSITIVE LANDS APPROVAL STANDARDS As the proposed public utility line crosses through the 100 year flood plain it is necessary to determine findings addressing criteria as listed in this section. The criteria and the applicants response and findings are as follows: 1) Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero foot rise floodway shall not result in any narrowing of the floodway boundary. RESPONSE: As only a sewer line is being proposed to be installed and buried, and no changes in ultimate grading are proposed there will be no change in floodplain storage or floodway boundaries. 2) Land form alterations or developments within the 100 year flood plain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial.... RESPONSE: No land form alteration is being proposed so this criteria is not applicable. 3) Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100 year floodplain. RESPONSE: No ultimate land form alteration is proposed, and as such no increase of the elevation of the 100 year floodplain will result. 4) The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan, unless construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely. RESPONSE: Although no land form alteration is proposed, a bicycle/pedestrian pathway is accommodated within the land to be dedicated to the City. This pathway will be built by the City. 5)The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of the average annual flood. RESPONSE: The bicycle pathway to be built by the City will be well above the elevation of the average annual flood. 6) The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineer's and State of Oregon land Board, Division of State Lands approvals shall be obtained. RESPONSE: The necessary permits will be obtained. 7) Where land form alterations are allowed... RESPONSE: This criteria is not applicable to this application. FACTS: Applicant: Beacon Homes 9500 S.W. 125th Avenue Beaverton, OR 97005 Owner: Peter Kusyk Owner: Beacon Homes 9500 S.W. 125th Avenue Beaverton, OR 97005 Owner: Peter Kusyk Development Consultant: Alpha Engineering Inc. 9600 SW Oak Street, Suite 230 Portland, OR 97223 Project Manager: Mike Miller Location: 10520 SW North Dakota Tigard, OR Tax Lot: Tax Lot 3300 of Map 1S1 34DA Applicable Code Criteria: Community Code Chapters 18.32, 18.40,18.54, 18.80, 18.84, 18.88, 18.90, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106,18.108, 18.114, 18.144, 18.150, 18.160, 18.164 March 16, 1998 ma Mr. Walter Knapp CITY OF TIGARD 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane OREGON Beaverton, OR 97007 Re: Tree Mitigation Dear Mr. Knapp: I have reviewed the Tree Mitigation Plan for the Tigard Woods subdivision submitted February 26, 1998. I understand the plan to use the Dakota Meadows subdivision for tree mitigation required of the Tigard Woods subdivision. However, it is not clear that all of the mitigation required has been accounted for on the plans. The Tigard Woods plan called for a total of 212 trees, with 34 being planted on-site, 100 being planted on the Dakota Meadows site, and the remaining 78 trees will be paid ($8,190) into the tree mitigation fund. The Tigard Woods construction drawings show the 34 mitigation trees in accordance with the overall mitigation plan. The Dakota Meadows subdivision required mitigation of 52 trees. Review of the Dakota Meadows Conceptual Landscape Plan shows that a total of 67 mitigation trees are proposed to be planted. The mitigation required of the Dakota Meadows subdivision can be completely satisfied. With only 15 trees counting toward the Tigard Woods mitigation, there arc 85 mitigation trees unaccounted for on the plans. Further clarification is required in order to satisfy the conditions of subdivision approval. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171. Sincerely, William D'Andrea Associate Planner, AICP i:\curptn\wi Illsub97.08.It3 c: SUB 97-0008 land use file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Walter H.Knapp RE:`=t ED Silviculture and Forest Management Urban Forestry FEB 2 "" A February 26, 1998 Mr. Will D'Andrea City of Tigard, Oregon 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Will: Here are mitigation plans and details for the Tigard Woods and Dakota Meadows projects. I hope this clarifies your questions and provides the necessary documentation for your files. If you need more information, please give me a call. Sincerely, firif H. Kna Certified Forester, SAF CerhfiedArborist,ISA Cc: Peter Kusyk, Beacon Homes Tony Righellis, Harper Righellis, Inc. Mike Miller, Alpha Eng., Inc. 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane,Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone/Fax:(503)646-4349 Walter H.Knapp Silviculture and Forest Management Urban Forestry Tree Mitigation Plan Tigard Woods PUD January 20, 19 08' Proj. 9719 Background and Purpose Development of the Tigard Woods PUD will require removal of 35 trees greater than 12 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh). City of Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 18.150 describes the procedure for determining the amount of mitigation required for tree removal. The Tigard Woods Tree Protection and Removal Plan dated September 24, 1997 calculated that a total of 212 two-inch dbh trees would be required for mitigation. Mitigation Planned Mitigation for this project will be done on two sites. The Tigard Woods PUD will be planted to the extent feasible, considering open space not occupied by trees, as well as growth characteristics of the planted species. The Dakota Meadows PUD will be used for planting additional trees to the extent needed to meet the required mitigation amount. Planting locations are shown on respective site drawings. Species descriptions, planting amounts, and planting locations are shown in the following table: Tree Species Species Characteristics Number of 2" dbh Trees _ General Mature Tigard Dakota Mdws. Size Woods Pin oak (Quercus Tolerates wet soils. H-50'; 14 palustris) Good fall color. W-35' Western redcedar Native tree species. H-40'; 40 (Thuja plicata) Good screening. W-30' Hogan cedar Narrow form of native H-40'; 20 (Thuja plicata species. Good W-12' 'Fastigiata) screening. Oregon ash Native deciduous tree, H-40'; 60 (Fraxinus latifolia) adapted to wet areas. W-16' 2 This plan also includes mitigation for the DAKOTA MEADOWS PUD(Proj. 9708) Width shown for Oregon ash is based on typical spacing observed in ash woodlands. 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone/Far(503)646-4349 Note that the Dakota Meadows planting will be done in the native planting area shown on the conceptual landscape plan for the site. The proposed area is within the floodplain of Fanno Creek, and probably was occupied by an Oregon ash woodland prior to agricultural development. The combination of ash and western redcedar will add diversity to the site and provide ecological benefits. Microsites best adapted to ash or cedar species will be identified as a part of the planting project. Bare root planting stock will be used throughout. Standard planting specifications will be followed, and the trees will be maintained for a period of one year. A total of 134 trees will be planted on the two sites, leaving an additional 78 trees required to meet mitigation needs._Where there is not an adequate location for planting the trees, the Tigard Tree Ordinance provides for in lieu payments to the City tree fund. A total of $8190 will be paid to the fund, based on an installed cost per tree of$105.3 The combination of planting four species or cultivars adapted to the two development sites, plus funding c r additional planting through the Tigard tree fund, will meet mitigation requirements of the City. / '14 Walter H. Knapp Certified Silviculturist Certified Arborist,ISA 3 Cost of bare root planting stock plus installation,estimate from Contour Landscaping. • 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane Beaverton,OR 97007 Phone/Fax(503)646-4349 Table 3. Tigard Woods Mitigation Details Representative Number of Activity (Location Species (1) iAttributes 2" Trees planting lon-site western redcedar screening, full foliage, tolerates wet soils 60 planting Ion-site ;pin oak form, fall foliage, tolerates wet soils 40 Subtotal: On-Site Mitigation j • 100 planting ',off-site (2) unspecified IN/A 112 Total: Mitigation Planting 212 (1) Representative species are tree species that would typically be used for mitigation planting to meet site objectives. Actual species will be based on availability from the nurseries as well as specific site conditions that exist following construction. (2) Tigard Code permits planting of replacement trees on other property within the City. Alternative: In lieu of tree replacement, the City may be compensated for its cost in performing tree replacement. Dakota Meadows Tree Protection and Removal Plan . Project No: 9708 Name: Dakota Meadows Client: Beacon Homes Eng.&Pln: Alpha Engineering Tree Mitigation Evaluation Remove Retain To tal DBH`No.Trees Dia.Equiv. No.Trees Dia.Equiv. No.Trees Dia.Equiv. 12 2 24 1 12 3 36 13, 0 0 0 0 14 4 56 1 14 5 70 15 0 5 75 5 75 16 2 32/ 4 64 6 96 17 1 17 4 68 5 85 18 1 18 2 36 3 54 191 1 19 0 1 19 20 0 2 40 2 40 21 0 3 63 3 63 22 0 1 22 1 22 23 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 d 28 0 0 0 0 29 0 1 29 1 29 30 0 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 321 0 1 32 1 32 33 0 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 36 0 1 36 1 36 37 0 0' 0 0 38 0 0 0 0 39 0 0 0 0 40 1 40' 0 1 40 Sum 12 206 26 491 38 697 7 32% 30% 68%_ 70%_ Mitigation required = 50% of diameter equivalents removed= 103 Number of 2"trees = 52 Explanation of Table: DBH: Diameter(in.) at breast height, 4.5 feet above ground level. Number of Trees: From tree inventory. Diameter Equivalents: DBH x Number of Trees. See Tigard Code. Number of 2-inch Diameter Replacement Trees: Diameter Equivalents divided by two. . The use proposed will be the s, ; as permitted under this title . City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting some economic use of the land. The requested variance will in no way affect the permitted use status of the single- family attached residential dwellings allowed. All other City standards will be maintained as discussed in this review process. 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 located as specified in this title. Existing natural systems, traffic, and drainage will not be effected by this variance since the impact of the variance is limited to allowing a slight increase to the length of the cul-de-sac and number of units served by this street. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The variance is not self-imposed as the variance is the result of surrounding development patterns that preclude street connectivity, the lot's depth that precludes the provision of a shorter cul-de-sac design, the location of the 100-year floodplain on the property, and the classification of SW North Dakota Street as a Minor Collector. Surrounding existing development patterns necessitate the provision of a cul-de-sac to serve this subdivision. The floodplain and street classification precludes the provision of another driveway onto SW North Dakota Street. The variance is the minimum variance necessary as the approximately 30-foot extension and allowance of an additional five (5) lots is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Tree Removal: Section 18.150.025 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a subdivision application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. An arborist report has been submitted with this application which identifies the trees on the property and provides recommendations for removal and retention. The report indicates that there are a total of thirty-five (35) trees greater than 12-inch caliper on the site. The proposed plan will be removing ten (1Q) trees greater than 12-inch caliper for a total of 182 calmer inches. The applicant is retaining 72 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper and, is thus, required to mitigate 50 percent of the trees removed according to Section 18.150.025.B.2.c and 18.150.07 D. The applicant shall, therefore, prepare a plan detailing the Ir mitigation of 91 caliper inches. Ctaff found a slight discrepancy between the arborists tree mitigation o chart and sheet 1 of the preliminary plans that identifies the location and size of existing trees. The discrepancy is the with the number of 14-inch, 16-inch, and 18-inch caliper trees on the property and the total numbers being removed. The arborist shall clarify the discrepancy and revise the mitigation plan if necessaryaSection 18.150.045.B states that, any tree preserved or retained in accordance with this section may, thereafter, be removed only for the reasons set out in a tree plan according to Section 18.150.025 or 18.130.B., and shall not be subject to removal under any other section of this chapter. The property owner shall record a deed restriction as a condition of approval of any development permit impacted by this section to the effect that, such tree may be removed only if the tree dies or is hazardous according to a certified arborist. Subdivision Design: Section 18.160.060(A) contains standards for subdivision of parcels into four or more lots. To be approved, a preliminary plat must comply with the following criteria: DAKOTA MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO 97-02 PC SUB 97-0002/PDR 97-0001/ZON 97-0001/SLR 97-0001NAR 97-001 PAGE 18 OF 27 + it ► 7+00 800 I 1 . / I 5. W LANDA ' PLACE ' I q • W �- _ 1 - 1T -- ---1 — —LITTL LEAF LINDENS ;, -. ---- _ _ - -- ..-_- ==-- fir«; �� ,w- tu► �s_=.. / • -> . .... .... �. -- . -- ..«., -_ __ r,.a:�. ..®:e•._'4-� ialsw 'aka "aims �e .- / �IkLGstau %r�■ ��r ` it i►�'rraili f,!sAr`dw'ri►i!?�. llWA: • W. lip- S f=1���� ►'111, d V1111:,�'�1'' , ►-410 ►. a � 1!�►�...al��,.�t� �►:..! 1.. 1'� ► gad ,� .-."� �, ‘4.11 v ► 1 r"' �r� _ ,, _ --,.. ....,_ _ ::_-8 ,:---=-,��., 5 46 • g . 54 a •.Ir:�;1,/1:•.a II 28 ROWER-11 `_ 108 ► ,� �:' 52 • �r • .1 1 — �, ►I 0,92 ' o ',91 : , _ o • '5 I • I$$ I 1‘411' -1 ' '7—• > . II p .. � 4 j- k• •• •. . 05 �`' 3 ��' •�i�r�•i•' ( I 1 , • 1 I x.._.47 •• I I 10 0 ; �. � `; , : MIN. f.f. 233.5 Ii' 'S5 I �:.v��,�•/ 30 I �• \ I i II \\MIN. Ff. 2 �.S i �� x93 `, 7 I 41 !�Irii�11� � er" k.1‘ I! 82 t -Q ".- � I O' 2 _ 9Z I ` ( '�° f: ,� x`I'\; MIN. F.F. 238.5 GRAVEL VEl CONSTRUCTION TRUCT/ON I ., ,.� k,I I I MIN. f.F 238.s III I -�.. , -;, ENTERANCE I 1 14�; '� I I � 94 r . t I 1 �1-- -• 1 15 t 1; �,... I GRAD G WILL NOT I I %° I 1 104 78 I — (I t 1 1 I 79' 76 -. _.,�M/N. f.f. 244.0 It 1 ._= EXTEN PAST BUILDING / , Il I,I 1 17 t - `.' 7, I l �5 - I \ F .,o ,e 59 I ENVELO ES. I '� \3 II 1; _ , I I f 75 „-- J� ;51 1 1 N. 1 I — — — — /;Y 0 • ti` —' J I I - I I I I-PUMP NOUS. . .. , ...„, ,. I \ I I ii — i . , „ • . , 73 il 12 I � I > ,l19 /1- I I - 1 r I I 3/ �� �"� ki �� �� '�J' . fgi 1102 BONG SETBCK I , / NT FENCE " ''"� 1301 00. I ;,.�� 1 �.', I I i 1. ›iiti*/ 12 129 I ���, )::::w 67 I 63 62 -'1 I. I p : I �� 124 128 I 68 N `��� it r� i �� II _ ��, •�<<�. �� .�:. ;lay, 1 ('Q25 N I. I �� 1 °66 .` ,4 40,- I r �� •`lprk i 4. ;1 - I \ I \ E .,∎,U 37 \,•-",{-, �, .� 132 13 7 -� 4r , �� .� r Ii y L— \ u a nliV /IV a a\� /,la ala�� alp iih Gila u,1� !ilal� ila ilii 3 x x ---x- °L ANTING SPECIFICATIONS OF ONE YE • ' Ts JJ ♦ :y .,.\ . ,r ..r :i 7 ��� .�.. , ,.'►Mr•. i e r'Rfi,.�-�1M3^ I�w t: . :ili i.'..4.......i :4: . A001T,br'4 'Pe i PARKS;C.LP.. PROJECTS I GREENSPACES PARK LEVY I SDC FY 1996-97 N. DakotarTigattl trail connection 17,000 Englewood-Fanno Creek '''� park connection 1 00.000 Cook Park expansion Fern St..Greenspace 390,000 1=5,000 Cook Park Greenspace 46.000 Bond St. Greenspace 118,000 Bull Mt Rd Greenspace 293,000 Fanno Ck trail (Iand acquisition) 176.000 200.000 Total for FY 1996-97 758,000 17,000 723,000 FY 1997-98 Cook Park expansion Fanno Creek wail(land acquisition) 200,000 Ash Ave- Fanno Creek path connection _00,000 f 30.000 Total for FY 1997-98 I I 480,000 FY 1998-99 Englewood Park basketball court Fanno Creek park trail lighting 15,000 Cook Park expansion 40,000 Fanno Creek path construction 100,000 100.000 Total for FY 1998-99 I ! I 403.000 FY 1999-2000 Cook Park expansion Fanno Creek path construction 1=0.000 :00.000 Total for 1999-2000 i 2:0.000 Fl 2000-01 Fanno Creek=ail construction � I C:rre ecm =.R:Tcr par`(imo&facl i :=0,000 f 100.000 Total for 2000-01 ; I 220.000 FY 2001-0= j ! Fenno Creek:raii acn_truction 100.000 Gree:ce:, a e. ncor tar: 1 d acc 120.000 Total for 2 001-02 : I :20.000 CAPITAL a..L IMPRO`EMENT PROGRAM Pa'7e 1 APPENDLX A a /2 --/7 /t1/4 / T / c7a Y r LiC, z5o T1F C R' it PAC T = ( 3 0 3 Lz.53 SEINiTNE agAceilAaeE- 4=14 .51-upy>- 515' x f5 ' _ -�-� z5 650 x 15':'1 q 5O i8 Acors `oc 3,c� .4c•4� 16t 5o& t5G,00 VAW E- Z, alto L3C00 4%e-I INTFRovametrrs 150 cc c) L� F: C5°8416-194)416-194) ZOO Cep JL�F 259 / -t- 167 = 1406 �.3ct K I = 35 950 Z3,1iUsto 1 u7,gcc /6;1 A 150 = Z5 060 167 33,q0c tfol-Al 00 > )0 § vALup-noN' 0 Jo' x Ltecc, L060 igt5 'INA T 10 x 1Co z IC7O ' 3,3`-10.C�G veer 4e- . �•- -1)B-LI 'n-J\ Z. 160 gZoo 03c1 0,6a) z3/' 5Z/5e6 ,00 /6-1 / 30 .40 16-7 ' 3CO3'l - O. oa u0(6/ C kocof I ; 3 � c� ,nA L 1JC ?EA s6-A-fE'nrr ( oo.co Z39 r LI , z 3C)c OCR 54,, l gc) 107 ' 31 9°10 o0 161 0 x©,00 Ltoa,' ZZC 7 a / 1-106 / ,I PCB 5 Zo;: O M1T1&421Te) TtATA 13g)AN ,me, --- J-013L , , Omgon April 7, 1997 T DSL F. Colin MacLaren SRI/Shapiro/AGCO 1650 NW Front Avenue Portland, Oregon 97209 DIVISION OF STATE LANDS RE: Wetland Delineation for Cookson property located in T1S, R1W, Section 34 tax lot 3300, 3400 in Tigard, Oregon. Det#96-0602 STATE LAND BOARD JOHN A. KITZHABER Governor Dear Colin_ PHIL KEISLING Secretary of State I have reviewed your wetland delineation report for the above referenced site and JIM HILL the boundary changes submitted based on our further review of on site State Treasurer conditions. Based on the data presented and changes made, I concur with the conclusions of the report. The area of wetland represented in the revised version 775 Summer Street NE of Figure 4 is subject to Oregon's Removal-Fill Law(ORS 196.800-196.990). Salem, OR 97310-1337 (503) 378-3805 Development plans for the site indicate the landscaped area and bike path FAX (503) 378-4 TTY (503) 378-<1615 615 proposed in Tract'D'will impact the western tip of the wetland as currently designed. A state permit is required for 50 cubic yards or more of fill, removal or ground alteration in the wetland area. Revisions to the landscape plan which avoid ground alteration within the wetland need to be explored. Bill Parks, Division Resource Coordinator for Washington County will coordinate any permit reviews. If you have any questions regarding the delineation review, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Annette Lalka Wetland Inventory Specialist Wetlands Program c: William D'Andrea, City of Tigard, Planning Department Jim Goudzwaard, Corps of Engineers Peter Kusyk, Beacon Homes Bill Parks, DSL k:wetla nds/an nette/letters/96-0602.doc , 7 __- • NORTH 4, DAKOTA /, ) STREET 64 AM ..... .••■• ■••••• ..7... 134 .• "*" •••• ...... . ....... -132 150 le° •••r .. ............ . . .. ..■.. N / I / . ... .. • • . .:::•1/411:10::. .. .... ...... • / .. ... . .".. .••••• . iso .:•1.V.,...f,....0.....'. :T::•.•.•.."•.•.••.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•........... .1 .i I1 .:.ZP'. .1-.4...:''.1 ;•.•.•.• ..... :•.•...:;•.•.•.•I:::. : : I .-..1 I \\ ' :-:.•,- :12.,':;.•.:..:.*.:.."...1,*.•..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:•:•..1.:•:.:.:1. \e (.............„..----152 - \ 4i • • . \\\ N •"• ••-.""••••"i •.1 .•• •• ••• • ..•... - , ..... ..........- ... - \ I / , -....• ..... ........ . i . / - • /* ... ......•.-....••.-.-.-.-.•.-...:.• 1- \ \ 6 -•••--•-•••-•-•••-• •.....:a),I. \ 1 \ *c'a:\...: gi ......... ....... ... .. . . . . Si / ,00 .• / •- ....• .....- L., .•- . ,,.."1 /./........... ........ ........ ... 1 rim 5 .- • i • . •- -. \ ••.••• • •• •• •• • •• ••.......•..•....... ........,.. .. ... . .... . . . ..... . . . \ "• • " • -- • ' ' - • ........•••••........••••-• •• •. •• 1 . / • ._. .... / 1 b , i / ,'. ....-• •• ........•• ....,..••"/.../0 •;)° .t,''' 1111110"1111111111 ...... Potentially Jurisdictional wetlands IIII 11111 0 75 150 %.......;... - 111111111 111111111' ,...1;-;...,-, Additional Jurisdictional wetlands NORTH FEET 40 8ample s(tee Base map from A.E.I., 1996 4961111 4/2/97 Potentially jurisdictional wetlands and sample sites at the Cookson FIGURE property, south of S.W. North Dakota Street at Fanno Creek, in Tigard, Oregon. IESRI/SHAPIRO /AGCO INCORPORATED -Wang Walter H. Knapp Silviculture and Forest Management Urban Forestry Combined Tree Mitigation Plan Tigard Woods PUD Dakota Meadows Townhomes January 20, 1998; revised April 28, 19981 Background and Purpose This Tree Mitigation Plan for the Tigard Woods PUD and Dakota Meadows Townhomes meets the requirements set forth in the City of Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 18.150. The intent of this plan is to show the combined mitigation for the two sites. The amount of required mitigation planting is taken from the Tree Protection and Removal Plans for the two areas. Tigard Woods will require the equivalent of 212 two- inch caliper trees, and Dakota Meadows will require 52 two-inch caliper trees for mitigation. The combined mitigation needed for the two projects is 264 two-inch caliper trees. Mitigation Planned Mitigation for the projects will be done on both sites. The Tigard Woods PUD will be planted to the extent feasible, considering open space not occupied by trees, as well as growth characteristics of the planted species. Most of the remaining mitigation needs will be met by planting at Dakota Meadows. The remaining planting obligation will be satisfied by in lieu payments to the City tree fund. Specific planting locations are shown on respective site drawings for the two sites.2 Additional details on species, characteristics, general locations, and number of trees are shown in Table 1. Note that the majority of the Dakota Meadows planting will be done in the native planting area shown on the conceptual landscape plan for the site. This area is within the floodplain of Fanno Creek, and probably was occupied by an Oregon ash woodland prior to agricultural development. Planting of ash and western redcedar will add diversity to the site and provide ecological benefits. Microsites best adapted to ash or cedar species will be identified as a part of the planting project. Bare root planting stock will be used This plan replaces the previous mitigation plan dated 1/20/98 and subsequent revisions. 2 Site drawings are on file with the City of Tigard. 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone/Fax(503)646-4349 throughout. Standard planting specifications will be followed, and the trees will be maintained for a period of one year. As shown in Table 1, a total of 193 mitigation trees will be planted on the two sites, leaving balance of 78 trees to meet mitigation needs. Payment to the Tigard Tree fund is planned to fulfill this obligation. A total of $8190 will be paid to the fund, based on an installed cost per tree of$105.3 Summary The combination of planting four species or cultivars adapted to the two sites, plus funding of additional planting through the Tigard tree fund, will meet mitigation requirements of the City. Walter H. Knapp Certified Forester, SAF Certified Arborist,ISA 3 Cost of bare root planting stock,plus installation,estimate from Contour Landscaping. 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone/Fax(503)646-4349 Table 1. Revised Mitigatioi. .anting Plan, Tigard Woods and Dakota sadows Item 1 Tigard Woods I Dakota Mdws. I Combined Required No. of 2-inch trees I 2191 521 271 Mitigation planting on site: 1 number of mitigation trees...... Landscape Plan -Tigard Woods pin oak (Quercus palustris) 14 14 Hogan cedar(Thuja plicata 'Fastigiata') 20 20 Conceptual Plan -Dakota Meadows Ornamental Trees (see site drawing) 4 4 Mitigation Trees (see site drawing) 25 25 Native Area Planting western redcedar (Thuja plicata) 50 50 Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) 7;) 80 Total Number of Mitigation Trees to Plant 34 152 193 Balance: Off-Site Mitigation (in lieu) 78 Cost of Off-Site Mitigation (to City Tree Fund) _ $ 105 per tree = $ 8,190 Dakota 708 TigWds Mit 719.xls Summary Mitigation - Table 1. Tigard Woods tree inventory: de,. .d listing. Tree HazTree Non-Haz. Retain Remove No. Species DBH DBH>12 DBH>12 DBH>12 >12 >12 Code Scientific Name Common Name inches inches # inches inches inches 1 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 20 20 20 20 2* DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 40 40 1 3 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 36 36 36 4 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 36 36 36 5 M Acer macrophyllum bigleaf maple 10 6 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 24 24 24 24 7 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 10 8 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 8 9 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 38 38 38 38 10 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 30 30 30 30 11 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 26 26 26 26 12 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 13 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 16 16 16 16 14 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 30 30 30 30 15 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 16 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16 16 16 16 17 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 18 18 18 18 18 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 19 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 30 30 30 30 20 M Acer macrophyllum bigleaf maple 8 21 RA Alnus rubra red alder 10 22 C Prunus emarginata bitter cherry 10 23 L Umbellularia californica California laurel 12 24 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 36 36 36 25 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 26 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 27 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16 16 16 16 28 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 36 1 29 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 16 16 16 16 30 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 18 18 18 18 31 LOC Gleditsia triacanthos honey locust 12 32 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 28 28 28 28 33 OA Fraxinus/atifolia Oregon ash 10 34 RA Alnus rubra red alder 14 14 14 14 35 H Tsuga canadensis eastern hemlock 12 36 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 8 37 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 8 38 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 8 39 SM Acer saccharinum silver maple 16 16, 16 16 40 M Acermacrophyllum bigleaf maple 10 41 RA Alnus rubra red alder 8 42 RA Alnus rubra red alder 8 43 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 14 14 14 14 44 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 48 48 1 45 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 30 30 30 30 46 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 8 47 RA Alnus rubra red alder 12 48 RA Alnus rubra red alder 8 49 RA Alnus rubra red alder 14 14 14 14 50 RA Alnus rubra red alder 10 51 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 20 20 20 20 52 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 8 53 RA Alnus rubra red alder 16 16 16 16 54 RA Alnus rubra red alder 16 16 16 16 55 M Acer macrophyllum _bigleaf maple 18 18 18 18 Page 1 4/28/98 Tigwd719.xls TreeList • Table 1. Tigard Woods tree inventory: det. J listing. Tree HazTree Non-Haz. Retain Remove No Species _ DBH DBH>12 DBH>12 DBH>12 >12 >12 Code Scientific Name Common Name inches inches # inches inches inches 56 RA Alnus rubra red alder 8 57 RA Alnus rubra red alder 10 58 M Acer macrophyllum bigleaf maple 18 18 18 18 59 RA Alnus rubra red alder 16 16 16 16 60 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16 16 16 16 61 C Prunus spp. cherry(domestic) 10 62 A Malus apple 12 63 A Malus apple 10 64 C Prunus spp. cherry(domestic) 10 65 C Prunus spp. cherry(domestic) 12 66 C Prunus spp. cherry(domestic) 16 16 16 16 67 A Malus apple 10 68 A Malus apple 10 69 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 12 70 C Prunus spp. cherry(domestic) 10 71 C Prunus spp. cherry(domestic) 10 72 C Prunus spp. cherry(domestic) 16 16 16 16 73 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 12 74 -DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 12 75 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 16 16 16 16 76 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 10 77 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 28 28 28 28 78 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 32 32 32 32 79 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 16 16 16 16 80 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 10 81 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 18 18 1 82 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 14 14 1 83 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 14 14 1 84 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 16 16 16 16 85 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 22 22 22 22 86 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 16 16 16 16 87 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 28 28 28 28 88 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16 16 16 16 89 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 90 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 10 91 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16 16 16 16 92 M Acer macrophyllum bigleaf maple 10 93 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 14 14 14 14 94 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 12 95 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 24 24 1 96 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 10 97 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16 16 16 16 98 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 16 16 1 99 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 18 18 18 18 100 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 36 36 36 101 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 36 36 36 102 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 12 103 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 20 20 20 20 104 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 14 14 1 105 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 24 24 1 106 _WRC _Thuja plicata western redcedar 18 18 18 18 Page 2 4/28/98 Tigwd719.xls TreeList • Table 1. Tigard Woods tree inventory: de, J listing. Tree HazTree Non-Haz. Retain Remove No. Species DBH DBH>12 DBH>12 DBH>12 >12 >12 Code Scientific Name Common Name inches inches # inches inches inches 107 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 10 108 C Prunus emarginata bitter cherry 6 109 C Prunus emarginata bitter cherry 16 16 16 16 110 C Prunus emarginata bitter cherry 18 18 18 18 111 C Prunus emarginata bitter cherry 18 18 18 18 112 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 28 28 28 28 113 C Prunus emarginata bitter cherry 10 114 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 36 36 36 115 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 40 40 40 40 116 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 28 28 28 28 117 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 12 118 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 30 30 30 30 119 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 18 18 18 18 120 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 12 121 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 16 16 16 16 122 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 16 16 16 16 123 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 16 16 16 16 124 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 125 M Acer macrophyllum bigleaf maple 10 126 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 127 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 22 22 22 22 128 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 129 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16 16 16 16 130 M Acer macrophyllum bigleaf maple 8 131 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16 16 16 16 132 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 14 14 14 14 133 C Prunus spp. cherry(domestic) 12 No# DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 30 30 30 30 Total Dia. 2416 1916 1668 792 876 Total # 134 84 10 74 38 36 Percentage Removed/Retained: 51% 49% Percentage Mitigation to Meet Tigard Code Requirement: 50% Required Mitigation(diameter inches): 438 Required Mitigation (#of 2"dia.trees): 219 *Note: Trees listed in bold type are"hazard trees"identified in table 2. This category includes dead, dying, diseased, insect-infested, or hazardous trees. These trees will not require mitigation. Page 3 4/28/98 Tigwd719.xis TreeList May-04-98 01 : 50P Walter H . Knapp 503-646-4349 P_01 Walter H. Knapp 7615 SW Ounarnuir Lane Beaverton,OR 97007 Phone:503-646-4349 Fax 503-6464349 Fax To: Julie Hajduk/City of Tigard From: Walter H. Knapp Fax 684-7297 Oates May 4, 1998 Phone: Pages: 8 Re: Tigard Woods Trees/Dakota Mdws.Mit Julie, I\re attached the revised spreadsheet for Tigard Woods and the combined mitigation plan. FYI, here are my documentation notes: Trees to remove: 19: Already shown as removal 53: Diagnosed 4/30/98 as hazardous 57:(<12in) 88:Already shown as removal 89: Change from retain to removal Changes in tree designations are noted on spreadsheet. Please give me a call if you have questions. Thanks, (itibkk t}1tq2f) Walter H_ Knapp Certified Forester, SAF Certified Arborist, ISA May-04-98 01 : 50P Walter H. Knapp 503-646-4349 P . 02 Walter H. Knapp Silvicuhure and Purest Management Urban furesrry Combined Tree Mitigation Plan Tigard Woods PUD Dakota Meadows Townhomes January 20, 1998; revised May 1, 19981 Background and Purpose This Tree Mitigation Plan for the Tigard Woods PUI) and Dakota Meadows Townhomes meets the requirements set forth in the City of Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 18.150. The intent of this plan is to show the combined mitigation for the two sites. The amount of required mitigation planting is taken from the Tree Protection and Removal Plans for the two areas. Tigard Woods will require the equivalent of 219 two- inch caliper trees, and Dakota Meadows will require 52 two-inch caliper trees for mitigation. The combined mitigation needed for the two projects is 301 two-inch caliper trees. Mitigation Planned Mitigation for the projects will be done on both sites. The Tigard Woods PUD will be planted to the extent feasible, considering open space not occupied by trees, as well as growth characteristics of the planted species, Most of the remaining mitigation needs will be met by planting at Dakota Meadows. The remaining planting obligation will be satisfied by in lieu payments to the City tree fund, Specific planting locations are shown on respective site drawings for the two sites 2 Additional details on species, characteristics, general locations, and number of trees are shown in Table 1. Note that the majority of the Dakota Meadows planting will be done in the native planting area shown on the conceptual landscape plan for the site. This area is within the floodplain of Fanno Creek, and probably was occupied by an Oregon ash woodland prior to agricultural development. Planting of ash and western redcedar will add diversity to the site and provide ecological benefits. Microsites best adapted to ash or cedar species will be identified as a part of the planting project, Bare root planting stock will be used ' This plan replaces the previous mitigation plan dated 1/20/98 and subsequent revisions. 2 Site drawings are on file with the City of Tigard 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone/Far(503)646-4349 May-04-98 O1 : 51P Walter H _ Knapp 503-646-4349 P 0 throughout. Standard planting specifications will be followed, and the trees will be maintained for a period of one year. As shown in Table 1, a total of 93 mitigation trees will be planted on the two sites, leaving balance of 108 trees to met mitigation needs. Payment to the Tigard Tree fund is planned to fulfill t s obligation. total of $11 340 will be paid to the fund, based on an installed cost per ' ee of$105.3 Summary The combination o planting four spe ies or cultivars adapted to the two sites, plus funding of addition:l planting throu the Tigard tree fund, will meet mitigation requirements of the City. Walter H. Kn.pp Certified Pores Certified Arbor s1, 1 ti l Ate t— c o � 113 14. t 1 3 Cost of bare root planting stock,plus installation,estimate from Contour Landscaping, 7615 SW Dunsmuir Lane Beaverton, UR 97007 Phone/Fax(503) 64643.19 May-04-98 01 : 51P Walter H . Knapp 503-646-4349 P . 04 Table 1. Revised Mitigation Planting Plan, Tigard Woods and Dakota Meadows Item I Tigard Woods 1 Dakota Mdws_1 Combined Required No. of 2-inch trees t 2191 52] 301 iMitigation planting on site: number of mitigation trees ~ Landscape Plan -Tigard Woods _ _ _ pin oak (Quercus ealustris) 14 14 Hogan cedar (hula plicata 'Fastigiata') 20 20 Conceptual Plan - Dakota Meadows Ornamental Trees (see site drawing) _ 4 4 Mitigation Trees (see site drawing) 25 25 Native Area Planting _ _ western redcedar`Thufa plicata) 50 50 Oregon ash (Fraxlnus Tahfolia) 80- 80 Total Number of Mitigation Trees to Plant 34 159 193 • • Balance: Off-Site Mitigation (in lieu) 1084 Cost of Off-Site Mitigation (to City Tree Fund) $ 105 per tree = , $ 11,340 4/30/98 Dakota 708 TigWds Mit 4_98 719.xls Summary Mitigation 3 Table 2. Tigard Woods hazard tree assessment a 0 Tree • DBH Recommended A No Species in. Discussion Tree Condition, Causal Agents), Remarks PF PI RC Treatment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I 2 DF Pseudoisuga menziesii Douglas-fir 40 Active pitch seam: suspected failure crack. 4 4 8 Remove 0 N Severe branch and top dieback. Suspected roof rot Root ., 28 DF Pseudolsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 crown excavation - negative. 4 4 8 Remove Double-stem •12 ft. Stern 1 large spike top/ dieback 17 branch mortality Stem 2: Maior branch mortality, crown 4-4 WRC Thula pkcata western redcedar 48 thinning in upper 1/3 3 4 7 Remove a Included bark/upper stem break hazard Diagnosed as J 53 RA 4inus rubra red alder 16 hazard on 4/30/98 4 4 8 Remove . fD 80 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii rpouglas-fir 10 Dead 4� 4 8 Remove 1 Crown Ratio 10%, wind hazard Root crown excavation - _ 81 DF Pseudotsuga menziesir Douglas-fir 18 negative 4 4 8 Remove 82 DF Pseudotsaga menziesii .Douglas-fir 14 Crown Ratio 30%, wind hazard 4. 4 8 Remove 7 83 DF Pseudotsuga menziesir Douglas-fir 14 Crown Ratio 15%, wind hazard. Multiple oonks, red ring rot 4 4 8 Remove a . 17 94 DF Pseudolsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 12 Dead 4 4 8 Remove 17 95�OF Pseudotsuga menziesri Douglas-fir 24 Crown Ratio 10%; wind hazard Suspicious burl 4 4 8 Remove 96 DF Pseudoisuga menzresn Douglas-fir 10 Crown Ratio 30%; wind hazard 4 4 8 Remove 98 WRC Thuja Ocala western redcedar 16 Butt rot, undiagnosed fungus. 4 4 8 Remove• 104 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas•fir 14 Crown Ratio <30%, wind hazard 4 4 8 Remove Crown Ratio 20%; wind hazard. Decay at base. 105 DF Pseudolsuga menziesi ,Douglas-fir 24 undiagnosed fungus. Root crown excavation - negative 4 4 8 Remove 107 DF Pseudolsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 10 Crown Ratio 10%, wind hazard. 4 4 8 Remove N _ _ _ 0 Column 7. PF-probability of failure. 1 very low, 2=low; 3=medium; 4=high Column 8 PI-potential for target impact. 1=nc damage; 2=minor damage 3=medium W damage; 4=extensive damage Column 9' RC-risk class Sum of PF and PI 2-5=loo, 6=moderate, 7=high: 8=very high 1 01 A Stand top height 120 f1 Stand age —75 years 01 1 A Important conditions 6 blowdovm DI Direction of fall east=>west Examination of roots of blowdown trees and root crown excavation did not show presence of 14 laminated root rot More extensive examination should be done during and after site excavation. tD Native shrubs Vine maple, dwarf Oregon grape, sword fern Introduced or noxious species. English ivy, Himalayan blackberry, mountain ash, holly. 1) 0 4/30/98 TIGWD719 4_98 update.XLS N May-04-98 01 : 51P Walter H _ Knapp 503-646-4349 P _ 06 Table 1_ Tigard Woods tree inventory detailed listing Tree HazTree Non-Haz. Retain Remove No Species DBH DBH>12 DBH>12 DBH>12 >12 >12 Code Scient�'fc Name Common Name i + nches inches 4 inches inches inches a Is 1 DF Pseudotsuga menzresii Douglas-fir 20 20 20 20 2 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir • 40 40 1 3 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir • 38 36 36 36 4 OF 4 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir • 36 36 36 36 5 M Ater macrophyllum bigleaf maple 10 6 WRC Thuja pbcata western redcedar 24 24 24 24 7 WRC _Thuja plicate western redcedar _ 10 _ 8 WRC Th4eplicate _western redcedar 8 9 'WRC : Thuja plicate _western redcedar _ 38 38 38 38 10 WRC Thuja pbcata western redcedar 30 30 30 30 11 WRC Thue pbcata western redcedar 26 26 26 26 12 DF Pseudotsuga menzresii Douglas-fir • 28 28' 28 28 13 WRC Thuja plicate western redcedar 16 16 16 16 14 rDF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir _ 30 30 30 30 15 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 16 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii ,Douglas-fir 16 16 16 16 17 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 18 18 18 18 18 OF Pseudotsuga menzresii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 -- 19 OF ,Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 30 304 30 30 20 M Acer macrophyllum bigleaf maple 8 21 RA Alnus rubra red alder 10 22 .C Prunus emargrneta bitter cherry 10 23 L Umbelu/aria californrca California laurel 12 24 _OF .Pseudotauga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 36 36 36 25 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 _ 28 28 26 OF _Pseudotsuga menzresii Douglas-fir 28 2E 28_ 28 27 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16 18 16 16 28 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 36 1 , 29 WRC Thuja plicate western redcedar r 18� 16 16 16 30 WRC Thuja pbcata western redcedar y 18 18 18 18 31 LOC + 8 Gieditsia trracanthos honey locust 12 32 WRC Thuja plicate western redcedar 28 28 28 28 33 OA Fraxinus latifolia Oregon ash 10 34 RA Alnus rubra red alder • 14 14 _ 14 14^ 35 H Tsuga eanadensrs eastern hemlock 12 _ 36 WRC Thuja plicate western redcedar 8 37 _WRC' Thuja plicate western redcedar 8 38 WRC Thuja pbcata western redcedar _ 8 39 SM Acer saccharrnum _silver maple 15- 16 16 16� macrophyllum b 40 M Acer igleaf maple 10 41 RA Thus rubra red alder 8 42 RA Alnus rubra gyred alder 8� 43 WRC Thu`e plrcata _western redcedar 14 14 14 14 44 WRC Thufa plicate western redcedar 48 48 1 45 WRC Thuja plicate western redcedar 30 30_ _ 30 30 46 WRC �Thuje plicate ,western redcedar 8 47 RA AJnus rubra red alder 12 48 RA Alnus rubra ,red alder 8 49 RA AJnus rubra red alder 14 14 14 14 50 RA Alnus rubra red alder 10 _ - 51 OF Pseudotsuga menzresii Douglas-fir 20 20 - 20 20 52 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 8 53 RA AJnus rubra red alder 16 16 16 54 RA A/taus rubra red alder 16 16 — 16 16 55 M _Acer mocrophyllum bigleaf maple 18_ 18 18 18 Page 1 4/30/98 TIGWD719 4_98 update XLS TreeList • May-04-98 01 : 52P Walter H _ Knapp 503-646-4349 P _ 07 Table 1 Tigard Woods tree inventory detailed listing Tree 1 HazTree Non-Haz Retain Remove No _ Species DBH DBH>12 DBH>12 DBH>12 >12 >12 Code Scientific Name Common Name inches inches # inches inches inches 4 r • r 56 RA Anus rubra red alder 8 .__ 57 RA Alnus rubra red alder 10 58 M ,Acer macrophyllum bigleaf maple 18 18 18 18 59 RA Anus rubra red alder 16 16 16 16 60 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir - 18 16 16 16 61 C Prunus spp cherry(domestic) 10 52 A Malus apple 12 , 63 A Malus +apple 10 64 `C . spp cherry(domestic) 10 65 C _Prunus Prunus spp cherry(domestic) 12 86 C Prunus spp _cherry(domestic) 16 16 le 16` 67 IA Me/us apple 10 68 A Malus ,apple 10 r 69 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 12 70 C •Prunus spp. cherry(domestic) 4 10 71 C Prunus spp. cherry(domestic) 10 72 C Prunus spp cherry(domestic) 16 16 16 16■ 73 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 12 74 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 12 75 WRC/Thuje plrcata western redcedar 16 16 16 16 76 WRC Thuje pliceta western redcedar 10 77 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 28 28 28 28 78 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 32 32 32 32 79 WRC rThujapircata western redcedar 16 18 16 16 80 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 10 81 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 18 18 1 82 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 14 14 1 83 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 14 14 14 1 84 WRC Thuja pliceta western redcedar _ 16 16 16 16 85 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 22 22 22 22 86 WRC Thule plrcata western redcedar 16 16 16 16 87 'WRCThje plicate western redcedar 28 28 28 28 -- 88 OF Pseudotsuga menziesu Douglas-fir 16 16 16 15 - 89 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 90 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 10 91 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16 16, 16 16 92 M Acer macrophyllum bigleaf maple 10 _ 93 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar 14� 14_ 14 14 94 DF Pseudotsuga manifest' Douglas41r 12 95 DF Pseudotsuga~Vasil Douglas-fir 24 24 1 _ 96 OF Pseudotsuga monziesll Douglas-flr 10 97 DF Pseudotsuga menziesu Douglas-fir 16 16 16 18 98 WRC+Thulafillcafa western redcedar, 18 18 1 99 WRC Thuje plicata western redcedar 18 18 18 18� 100,DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 36 36 36 101 DI -Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 36 36 36 102 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 12 _ 103 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Dou�las•fir 20 20 20 20. 104 DF Pseudotsuga menzlesll Douglas-fir 14 14 1 105 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 24 24 1 108 WRC Thuja plicate _western redcedar _ 18 18 18 18 Page 2 4/30/98 TIGWD719 4_98 update.XLS TreeList May-04-98 01 : 52P Walter H _ Knapp 503-646-4349 P _ 08 Table 1. Tigard Woods tree inventory detailed listing Tree Haztree Non-Haz Retain Remove No. Species DBH DBH>12 DBH>12 DBH>12 >12 >12 CcdeI Scientfic Name Common Name inches, inches r # inches inches inches 107 OF Pseudorsuya menziesii Douglas-fir 10 108 .C Prunus emarginata bitter cherry 6 109 C Prunus emarginata bitter cherry 16 16 16 16 110 C Prunus emarginata bitter cherry 16 18 18 18 111 C Prunus emarginata bitter cherry 18 18 18 18 112 WRC Thuja plicate ,western redcedar 28 28 28 28 113 C Prunus emarginata bitter cherry 10 114 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 36 36r 36 36 115 WRC Thuja plicate western redcedar 40 40' 40 40 116 WRC Thuja plicate western redcedar 28 28 28 28 117 WRC `Thuja plicate western redcedar 12� 118 'DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 30 30 30 30 119 WRC Thuja plicate western redcedar 18 18 18 18 120 WRC Thuja plicate western redcedar 12 121 WRC Thuja plicate western redcedar 16 16 16, 16' 122 WRC ,Thuja plicata western redcedar 16 16 16 16 123 WRC Thuja plicate western redcedar 16 16 16 16 124 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 125 M Acer mecrophyllum bigleaf maple 10 126 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii ,Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 127 WRC Thuja plicata western redcedar _ 22 22 22 22 128 ,OF _Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 28 28 28 28 129 OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16 16, 16 16 130 M Acer macrophyllum brgleef maple 8 131 DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16 16 16 16 132_WRC_Th 1a plicate western redcedar 14 14 4 14 14 r 133 C Prunus sop_ cherry(domestic) 12 No# OF Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 30 30. 30` 30 . , Total Dia. 2416 1916 1652 748 904 Total $ 134 84 11 73 36 37 Percentage Retained; Percentage Removed 49% 51% Tigard Code Requirement to Mitigate This Removal Percents e• _ 67% Required Mitigation (diameter inches 603 Required Mitigation ($of 2"dia.trees): _ 301 " Note Trees listed In bold type are"hazard trees"identified in table 2 This category includes dead, dying, diseased, insect-infested, or hazardous trees. These trees will not require mitigation. Page 3 4130198 TIGWD719 4_98 update.XLS TreeList Table 3. Tigard Woods Mitigation Pla Mails 1Representative 1Number of Activity Location 'Species (1) Attributes 12"Trees planting on-site western red_cedar screening, full foliage, tolerates wet soils 60 planting ,on-site pin oak iform, fall foliage, tolerates wet soils 40 Subtotal: On-Site Mitigation 1 100 planting !off-site (2),unspecified IN/A 112 Total: Mitigation Planting 1 212 1 1 (1) Representative species are tree species that would typic..Ily be used for mitigation planting to meet site objectives. Actual species will be based on availability from the nurseries as well as specific site conditions that exist following construction. (2) Tigard Code permits planting of replacement trees on other property within the City. Alternative: In lieu of tree replacement, the City may be compensated for its cost in performing tree replacement. ,..y,t,s,.4...•:•;•,-0,,,k7,F7,.1'' :' r.,t,-InPa, t•-f..-..e....•`••••'. ••■1s' \''''. af.: i" ,re s..let■I‘z\,..'t hi.,.K -.•f'11` ti ...k..v., s:i. ,i .` "-,,,-.,"4`,... .v., 4 ••• ••• If,•• 4.1 a-'; :.r, .::,:',t :-,,-'s, *,..,.',;.-. 4,- J;.., •,,,:.,.,„..., .,,..4 iiigr...., ... ;,:..6, ,.::..."ct4 iti. ..,,t`:,„--, ,ii..Ckl.",e•••••••-....",..`•■. ••..'..''..',1., tt• 4', ,••.k• '-',.:Aif''‘ ,,,',1- .1 '1 V-..,. ,kL -: ....-V' •■•,:itAS, i' C.'. - -. i.' ' ''t , •'..,,,-'''''"'1. tol.,,y:•:;';3-.'::,•IN ' •'..;:''''.":. ' .''' :'-r''''.;`"':' ,!•'.'‘.. •:N",.'` :4 'i.' .".`..''''•0'''' ••.• ■:•It''.:.`0-`..,'•.:'. ;,?;,>.,•Al. ,..q.:.•Zi ,fiKi`Al'-`0',1:1_ 1.".,-,ig4-.- `4z..41414,'1 , '',.•:".',.= 1-'4‘...i•,. ' ''•:....,.. 4-'..,- ,‘•4 .-..-..-.',.:'•'...•,,:. - '';'......:ii:'-.;'•*.',..1''.....,'..'''-.4?'.:'`.z':•....";-11;*• .1`,-,N..'...".....I'fi'-, 4.4'1';-A. .- t•.4. /3•i''0'.'' '1.4. 7.,■..f.' • ..: ,_.e,:.. ,, .:•.v1,-,!,,..i,' -,P`' %•..‘,‘I''.``'' • -.. -7.-....00+0,..ti; ::...,....--. ,; ..',.... .n- t ;),..-",e,,,,.1 •-.I .,. jjka4p. t• -;•-',Ae 'ti.'•-• 4. - .',Vt 4::,14,i't 4;4,,i.t it, , ,.:"0:.t.rs.,,,t, ,,,,...00.-•., .!..;,• ,4'.'4.`...i •7•24.,V;' \... ' •-,.. ' ' "., ■•••' • .`- • CI FY OF TIGARD — RECEIPT OF PAYMENT RECEIPT NU. - :98-305888 CHECK AllOUNI CRED I 1 CARD : 0. 00 • CHANGE • 0. 00 NAME : BEACON HOMES INC CASH AMUUNI 7125 :m...14 H A 1YH-'TON PAYMENT DATE : OS/19/98 POR ii_ ii I-31A- ' SUBDIVISIUIA L E OF 17-iYI1 . 47 AMCUNT PAID PURPOSE OF PAYMENT AMOUNT PAID ...-;'.T ..,=-Ii-.. A P•r•-•'..... a.:_, .-1 .. E. 210 M Al( • 4LAT REz; IEW FEE PAID TOTAL AMOUNT PAID — — — —) 1:77.47,r7,--_, .._!r.777.^--_T.—.1r- -- 7— ----ja-in-'sr- -_All-■11■MIMEr -....-........- ............;--- --•---- • •---,--------------, ,-,. --,..-._.. "--,17.-'"--`1"-•-""'-- al' .Mil- Ifirliallealmliftriutatrum.... '..maul*:r •_,..., -_,-. 1-.7% -7.7---_--d---.:7-"^.41.1,i ..' `-i,-;. •---- .* .•,-,y.., -i ---eZinic;."....jaagf.:1,FAr"":7`q....7.."M-t 'o I • ". 'a„ ' '7-4- BEACON HOMES, INC.. .-.7. .- . _ - -----, --..".-1.'T. :-;:.'''.7_;---:?::- -; :1. :,-;:-": :111}M"..1*°011-filttpts,11841F11115„ --*--"----....":::::7-7•1.-7,--7,":..:.. H F C K NO 7'125 SW HAMPTON -.- ... . • -..... .., _ PORTLAND.OR 97223 ... .. . ......-=4--...--7,- ..-.;=::-......•-•,......,,,--.,,..-..:4-----,------..L.::...7, . - - — • •— - - - ---- , _-_,....._.___,-..;.-_--_7:....-_:_- __..--.7-7r--L-(4-4-;-"1---;-.-1+------ ----- --tz------.-•••-7,--' ---,----7,-.,. . .,. ..: ********TWO HUNDRED _NINETY FIVE. DOLLARS AND NOT ' '• ."''''Trtr*-7*..'-'''%....'''.....:74t.'"4:4:-T7'""--'1.:•:.,-..,''''-"-.7:-;1"="'-.-,......1-7:.......T. -' -'•-•- °''''''"'-'-'-' '''-:,:---•'.'...--.27.=:-.7.7::;:7- •`+` '• '..'"Ii".... '4"--.7*"."r". .....=t't:7:-'-•—•-•.''47 ,..- AMOUNT . . . ..... ....._ _. . - • ,...._ " ;2_..,`...°. r'...-.---.."... ...- ,---,::,-.,....,,,,,,-,-- --,:=----.--11111.1=110 ..p+---4.;.1-4-474.-.7...111:Z. m,-4.'" — ' . ....,- _2_1°_ ":..7...°_.-.1.-_•=1 , - --,•-•:,::-7,.1t.:7,-1:..::.....,..,_.- „-. -.,:,-1,i...:1„::,..1:--.-1-. .1.,-.:74.51r1198-'4 ---_____t-7-41,-1,,,,29,5•.00-,„4-4-4=-----,:- To THE -,City of Tigard -:::777. -T.- ---:.-..-. " — ORDER • OF- - -_.7.`.:.`-... . "..:_-,..`.....-_-_:...:._-:...--_;..,-7*-,..`-_-....-;j1..- ;-----..,- -.--:---,-----' -,...;:,*---.- f'-'''":-.-- --;--;;;' ''-..--- . . . ' . -"...----" ,"=.::- - ,-"'-,'"":;--'-..-- - .":- --;.-7,.,`" - •''7,-7---''''':---7- -: ":-.":"''''"":12::::.".+7-7.,7:."":'''''''.---:::::4"---:',;."71::-::-..:7-7-7,1-- .1---7"1.1--=.-- VOI 6 MO AFTER ISSUE DATE -.77_,,,,,,.'!--7,`,.: . . , ... . . , „,„...............-..........,........_-....,,,,.......„,....._.-.....,-,,,,..........„......:,--777,...."7-1.••-r•irr.r.c,--4,7••■••••7,19•■■•••••••77.,••••771:.....774r•mr,PA•7771777:77774•7:77..1.77,71101. •0■777.777 •• • • . .,. ••• • • .' • • . `, - : '''':' - ''':... `‘t•i••• ',.•-••. ,•• '•'..2..'... .1'...#..%•••••• ..t• .•:'•, .•••'4.'1:-:'..-r•.,-:tx::*'' '''.''''.'. ;.:`'•;••1•.''!\:,•-• 1:f • „ . • • • .•' , • • , , - 1' • .. . ••.,..• ''■:-. ..,.',.‘ ..r",‘••• .';`■'.•' '`. <'4).‹.t" •'' ',.'':'.• ...4.'.::•,''.:.•'7!,,;,:• :'''..', : :‘: •''''; • ''!',':• ...,•.i• • . . '. .:' .'.'' - . : .•• 4 ..- .' ..C.‘•''-••f. ).:-.; ,4'.'•••• •'- •.' :'•', ,A,.."...' ...,''' •."..1'.` : ..-.4`. ....7:■•' ..',"'.`• •. •:.2 d • :'•••„•,•-•7 •., , • . : ' )k"`.it. '_NA'*.:.....itzt.iai 9•:`•'' • ;:i•P•14 rilk.•tli.e'1+IQ' *• 1$114,4".4.,,,,evoy‘,t,t_v-r,,k4i4A, .,,-..:!.i......- ..),:,,:K,..,,.., '..',4:4•:.r-ii h' '''c■;.,...!'',e'',..),*i44.601.3ov-i-V'..4,-.';*44,4016101,t''. ivr'.17.zif'rvc-??4•Nrri ''', Are.64), ,...rir^.1$:-Fle.x.,0 . ,q .,',.1,,,.: ■„....j. ,. ...-..i.,. r,',,,--•.''.. 4k.),,t.%,'4("-,.`1`,.....r.,t,'. ';', r A... c'.1.,,f C,!,J...,-, -,'3,, ...-. .,,/e -M,, .)'.,• f, ,/ . •., . .,...,.'•.' .e.:7-,;ii,-''....t...A'/!!.,. '..).,,,,,,:ro;.:i.r:'...,.,e,:::A.i...-.'t.- -,'' ,', ..'',"4''" %; ' ; . '• -• .•:..., .)--,:•:.• • .'., ,. .s '..,1;.,.,,.:. ,'...;:,:-.',.'„'''., ".. ',. '''/;,'.. .-'..7'- '•,, . •P !• .• ','• '',A,...-1:. ., , %.,.°• • . . ., . .■ '. . .., :: .,. ' . ‘. I ` GROUP SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS PERFORMANCE BOND BOND NO: 512152S KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, BEACON HOMES, INC. , as Principal, and Developers Insurance Company , a Corporation organized and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California and duly licensed to conduct a general surety business in the State of Oregon, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON as Obligee in the sum of Thirty One Thousand Six Hundred Five and NO/100 - ($ 31,605.00 - - - - ) Dollars for which payment, well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and successors, jointly and severally firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THE OBLIGATION IS SUCH THAT: WHEREAS, the above named Principal, as a condition of the filing of the final subdivision map of: DAKOTA MEADOWS and TIGARD WOODS SUBDIVISIONS Tree Mitigation Planting entered into an agreement or agreements with said Obligee to complete the improvements specified in said agreement or agreements. NOW THEREFORE, the condition of this obligation is such, that if the above Principal shall well and truly perform said agreement or agreements during the original term thereof or of any extension of said term that may be granted by the Obligee with or without notice to the Surety, this obligation shall be void, otherwise it shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the seal and signature of said Principal is hereto affixed and the corporate seal and the name of the said Surety is hereto affixed and attested by its duly authorized Attorney-in-fact at Portland, Oregon , this 14th day of May , 19 98 - PRINCIPAL SURETY BEACON HOMES, INC. Developers Insurance Company•,r4 ) \I\ ll / Vicki Nicholson, Attorney-in-fact Developers Insurance Company• Indemnity Company of California • Disco Insurance Services. Inc. One Centerpointe, Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 (303) 684-9606 POWER OF ATTORNEY OF INL INITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA AND DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY N2 2 9 21 2 3 P.O.BOX 19725,IRVINE,CA 92713•(714)263-3300 NOTICE: 1. All power and authority herein granted shall in any event terminate on the 31st day of March,1999. 2. This Power of Attorney is void if altered or if any portion is erased. 3. This Power of Attorney is void unless the seal is readable,the text is in brown ink,the signatures are in blue ink and this notice is in red ink. 4. This Power of Attorney should not be returned to the Attorney(s)-In-Fact,but should remain a permanent part of the obligee's records. KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS,that except as expressly limited,INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA and DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY,do each severally,but not jointly,hereby make,constitute and appoint ***JOHN D. KLUMP, VICKI NICHOLSON, PHILIP FORKER, GLORIA BRUNING, JOINTLY OR SEVERALLY*** the true and lawful Attorney(s)-In-Fact,to make,execute,deliver and acknowledge,for and on behalf of said corporations as sureties,bonds,undertakings and contracts of suretyship in an amount not exceeding Two Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars($2,500,000)in any single undertaking;giving and granting unto said Attorney(s)-In-Fact full power and authority to do and to perform every act necessary,requisite or proper to be done in connection therewith as each of said corporations could do,but reserving to each of said corporations full power of substitution and revocation;and all of the acts of said Attorney(s)-In-Fact,pursuant to these presents,are hereby ratified and confirmed. This Power of Attorney is granted and is signed by facsimile under and by authority of the following resolutions adopted by the respective Board of Directors of INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA and DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY,effective as of September 24,1986: RESOLVED,that the Chairman of the Board,the President and any Vice President of the corporation be,and that each of them hereby is,authorized to execute Powers of Attorney,qualifying the attorney(s)named in the Powers of Attorney to execute,on behalf of the corporation,bonds,undertakings and contracts of suretyship;and that the Secretary or any Assistant Secretary of the corporation be,and each of them hereby is,authorized to attest the execution of any such Power of Attorney; RESOLVED,FURTHER,that the signatures of such officers may be affixed to any such Power of Attorney or to any certificate relating thereto by facsimile,and any such Power of Attorney or certificate bearing such facsimile signatures shall be valid and binding upon the corporation when so affixed and in the future with respect to any bond,undertaking or contract of suretyship to which it is attached. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA and DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY have severally caused these presents to be signed by their respective Presidents and attested by their respective Secretaries this 14th day of June,1995. INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY By 0 1 r ! DA4,42eakr By �� 1' ! UAIJD .L r 2• c D.i e F.Vincenti,Jr. �J,PAN'0 D'te F.Vincenti,Jr. co\NSUR,g1, + President �•PORq C President Q(cQl0PP0•4�cc ti ,0 9r' O Z `a OCT.5 °T ATTEST ui` MAR.27 ' 0 y 1967 1979 0 '( P��1- 2 O 4CIFOP�\P By /FO* By Walter Crowell Walter Crowell Secretary Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) On June 14,1995,before me,C.V.Brink,personally appeared Dante F.Vincenti,Jr.and Walter Crowell,personally known to me(or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence)to be the person(s)whose name(s)is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies),and that by his/her/their signature(s)on the instrument the person(s),or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)acted,executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. su.pesi V BRIE NK � / cr COMM.it 1O36712 C7 Signature �) , x 111 NOTARY PUBLIC•CALIFORNIA a "2� �� " ` ORANGE COUNTY I •'zi .r My Comm.Exp.Aug.21,1998 CERTIFICATE The undersigned,as Senior Vice President of INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA,and Senior Vice President of DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY,does hereby certify that the foregoing and attached Power of Attorney remains in full force and has not been revoked;and furthermore,that the provisions of the resolutions of the respective Boards of Directors of said corporations set forth in the Power of Attorney,are in force as of the date of this Certificate. This Certificate is executed in the City of Irvine,California,this14 th day of May _,199 8 . (INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY QN,PANyCo �NNSURq-A, i >O P ORq�.n 4Q p P 0 4�CF, By • I�`/' z? OCT.5 a,-+ B y ? MAR 27 ui L.C.Fiebiger y 1967 a y L.C.Fiebiger 1979 Senior Vice President �Z i /tFoPNNP•4�� Senior Vice President 0 q 'FO? ' \- * * ID-310 REV.(2/96) RECEIVED PLANNING 1nSC RICO L4n)(o)[Uii,,E,_1 17780 Fitch, Irvine, CA 92614 1::::'). 0 1 21701 (949) 263-3300 FAX (949) 252-1955 SURETY COMPANY SUBDIVISION STATUS INQUIRiI'Y OI=TIGARD 02-23-2001 DATE CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW HALL BLVD 512152S TIGARD OR 97223 BOND NUMBER DEVELOPERS SURETY AND INDEMNITY COMPANI COMPANY SUBDIVIDER BEACON HOMES INC Tract: MITIGATION DESCRIPTION Type of Work: TREE MITIGATION - DAKOTA MEADOWS &TIGARD WOODS OF WORK Work to be Completed: Bond Amount: Effective Date: $ 31,605.00 $ 31,605.00 5-21-1998 Without prejudicing your rights or affecting our liability under our bond described above, we would appreciate such of the following information as is now available. Very TrulyYours, 1 0300 BO 35312 The INSCO/DICO Group By: Service Department, Home Office 1. IF THE BONDED IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED,PLEASE STATE: Approximate date of acceptance of work may V D f OO I ATTACH copy of minutes,if possible. 2. IF THE BONDED IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT COMPLETED,PLEASE STATE: Approximate uncompleted portion of work:$ and or %. Anticipated date of completion 3. Are you aware of any unpaid bills for labor or material,stop notices,or mechanics liens? (check) YES ❑ NO, If yes,please give details. 4. Remarks/Comments: (}., 0 q Signature (1.4 /(A Scliotvir.1:r) "q2`V° I Title/Dept. OKOLkLeN.I Cl ^t^7 Date Print Name lo(-\,- 6s,c‘k2 Telephone No. 3-63- 6 - ttI 1 ) _.QAc 3iS • May 13, 1998 (CITY OF TIO� Peter Kusyk OREGON Beacon Homes 9500 SW 125th Avenue Beaverton, OR 97005 Re: Tree Mitigation Bond Dear Peter: This letter is in response to your request for confirmation of required tree mitigation bonding. As a Condition of Approval of the Dakota Meadows and Tigard Woods Subdivisions, the adopted Community Development Code requires that a tree removal mitigation plan be provided. The total caliper inches that are required to be mitigated is 301 inches. Based on the consulting arborists' estimate of $105 to plant a two inch caliper tree, the total cost to complete this planting is equal to 301 (2 inch caliper trees) x $105 or $31,605. To date Beacon Homes has chosen to combine tree mitigation plans for these projects so the total cost for all tree mitigation planting should be paid or guaranteed. To ensure completion of the required tree mitigation planting Beacon Homes will either need to post a bond or cash for $31,605. If Beacon Homes decides to use a bond, it will need to state, in part, that only the City is authorized to allow its release. Please fee free to contact me concerning this information. Sincerely, Mark Roberts, AICP Associate Planner C: SUB 97-0002 Dakota Meadows land use file SUB 97-0008 Tigard Woods land use file is cure W markr/dakmed.doc 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772