The URL can be used to link to this page

UFR2017-00002 NOTICE OF TYPE I DECISION URBAN FORESTRY REVIEW (UFR) 2017-00002 MODIFICATION OF URBAN FORESTRY PLAN FOR PROGRESS LANDING SUB2016-00006 TIGARD 120 DAYS = August 18, 2017 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: Progress Landing—Urban Forestry Modification CASE NO.: Urban Forestry Review(UFR) UFR2017-00002 PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to modify the Urban Forestry Plan approved under the Progress Landing 12-lot subdivision (SUB2016-00006). This modification request is to remove four lodgepole pines located on the northern property boundary, which were originally planned for preservation. Removal is now needed due to the amount of damage that would occur as the result of installation of public sanitary and storm lines and associated utility access. APPLICANT: Riverside Homes,LLC OWNER: Sunamoto Trust Niki Munson 2740 SW Bucharest Court 17933 NW Evergreen Parkway Portland, OR 97225 #370 Beaverton, OR 97006 LOCATION: 12050 SW 135th Avenue;2S104AB00100 ZONE: R-4.5: low-density residential district. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapter 18.790 SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section IV. UI:R2017-00002 Progress Landing Urban Forestry Plan Modification 1 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site and Vicinity Information The applicant previously received approval for a 12-lot subdivision of a 2.66 acre site located on the east side of SW 135th Avenue, south of Morning Hill Drive. The site includes multiple structures and a single family residence that will be removed. A new public street is proposed terminating in a cul-de-sac in the middle of the site. A storm water treatment facility will be located on a tract on the north edge of the site. The site is zoned R-4.5. Properties to the north, south, and east are all zoned R-4.5. The property to the west across SW 135th is zoned R-25 and is developed as an apartment complex. The adjacent R-4.5 zone is primarily single family neighborhoods with minimum lot sizes ranging from 5,000 square feet to 7,500 square feet. Proposal Description The applicant proposes to modify the Urban Forestry Plan approved under the Progress Landing subdivision review (SUB2016-00006). This modification request is to remove four lodgepole pines between 12 to 18 inches in diameter located on the northern property boundary. The removal is requested due to site plan changes to the proposed public storm, sewer, and utility access,which makes it no longer possible to provide adequate protection. A proposed retaining wall, pavement, and underground utilities are too close in proximity to the four trees. The applicant has stated that moving the utilities is not feasible. These activities are not exempt from the Type I modification review outlined in the Tigard Community Development Code section 18.790.090 (Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of an Approved Land Use Permit). SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS 18.790 Urban Forestry Plan: 18.790.030 Urban Forestry Plan Requirements A. Urban forestry plan requirements.An urban forestry plan shall: 1. Be coordinated and approved by a landscape architect (the project landscape architect) or a person that is both a certified arborist and tree risk assessor(the project arborist),except for minor land partitions that can demonstrate compliance with effective tree canopy cover and soil volume requirements by planting street trees in open soil volumes only; A revised Urban Forestry Plan that was coordinated and approved by certified arborist/tree risk assessor, Morgan Holen (the project arborist)has been submitted.This standard is met. 2. Meet the tree preservation and removal site plan standards in the Urban Forestry Manual (UFM); A revised tree preservation and removal site plan that meets the standards set forth in the Urban Forestry Manual has been submitted.This standard is met. 3. Meet the tree canopy site plan standards in the Urban Forestry Manual;and A revised tree canopy site plan that meets the standards set forth in the Urban Forestry Manual has been submitted. In addition, the project landscape architect has included a signature of approval and statement attesting that the revised tree canopy site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual.This standard is met. 4. Meet the supplemental report standards in the Urban Forestry Manual. The site is zoned R4.5; accordingly, the minimum required effective tree canopy for the entire site is 40 percent (Section 10,Part 3,Subsection M of the Urban Forestry Manual).The revised supplemental report (date stamped May 25,2017) showed a site effective canopy of 46.6%. This standard is met. UFR2017-00002 Progress Landing Urban Forestry Plan Modification 2 18.790.070 Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of an Approved Land Use Permit C. Application procedures. Modifications to the urban forestry plan component of an approved land use permit that are not exempted by subsection B of this section shall be processed as a Type I procedure, using approval criteria contained in subsection D of this section. The proposed modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of the approved Progress Landing Subdivision (SUB2016-00006) does not meet the exemptions listed under subsection B; therefore, this modification shall be processed as a Type I procedure using the following approval criteria: D. Approval criteria. The director shall approve the modification to the urban forestry plan component of an approved land use permit upon determining: 1. The project arborist or landscape architect has provided a report and statement certifying that the previously approved urban forestry plan did not account for the circumstances that lead to the proposed modification; The project arborist provided a report and statement certifying that the previously approved Urban Forestry Plan did not account for the circumstances that led to the proposed modification. The original plan assumed that adequate protection would be possible for the trees and paving would not be required for the utility access road. However, after engineering was done on the 14-foot wide access road it was determined a retaining wall and paving would be required. Due to the lack of adequate protection the Arborist has recommended the trees be removed. This criterion is met. 2. The project arborist or landscape architect has provided a report and statement certifying that there is no practicable alternative to the proposed modification; and The project arborist states that the previous plans did not account for the paving of the access road and retaining wall required for access to the sanitary sewer and storm lines. Therefore, the Arborist has stated there is no practicable alternative to the proposed modification. This criterion is met. 3. The project arborist or landscape architect demonstrates through a revised urban forestry plan, compliance with Section 18.790.030. The project arborist submitted revised effective tree canopy cover data and tree removal plan to demonstrate compliance with Section 18.790.030. This criterion is met. FINDING: As demonstrated in the analysis above, the proposed modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of the approved Progress Landing (SUB2016-00006) meets all applicable approval criteria, and can be approved. SECTION V. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was mailed to: X The applicant and owners Final Decision: A Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of an Approved Land Use Permit is a Type I Procedure. As such, the Director's decision is final on the date it is mailed or otherwise provided to the applicant, whichever occurs first. The Director's decision may not be appealed locally and is the final decision of the City. UFR2017-00002 Progress Landing Urban Forestry Plan Modification 3 THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JUNE 5, 2017 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON JUNE 6, 2017 Questions: If you have any questions, please contact Monica Bilodeau at (503) 718-2427 or monicab@tigard- or.gOv. ( � J June 5,2017 APPROVED BY: Monica Bilodeau Associate Planner UFR2017-00002 Progress Landing Urban Forestry Plan Modification 4 RECEIVED City of Tigard MAY 2 5 2017 . ® r COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF TIGARD TIGARD Minor Modification I Type I Appii t o NEERING PRPOSAL SUMMARY (Brief description) ikit 'Olt- 1 , 01.1 U 4 fZt 5 , Q I REQUIRED SUBMITTAL N' ELEMENTS �] Owner's Signature/Written / Authorization ❑ Title Transfer Instrument or Deed 4 Site Plan(2 large plans drawn to scale and one reduced to 8.5"x111/2") Property address/location(s): (Z.-CAO S 0 1 3S4i, AR- Applicant's Statement/Narrative (2 copies)Address criteria in: TDC 18.360.050.B.1-11 Tax map and tax lot #(s): Zs1 oorg I (10 7 Filing Fee Site size: 7 .C::.(., f t- 1 OR SI'ti I I 'l: om.V Applicant': (WV-41a OtiMt c - N I r., ,tieNSG`T.i Case No.: _E/2____ 10/ _ Address: 17133 1J(.J PAPKIA)H' 37c, U Related Case No.(s): City/state: G kV&fe1'U7-I OR Zip: `r b 6 4-71)5 Application Fee: Phone: 5()1 4.=I‹'Oki(' Email: NMJ4504(9 r1 Ars i thuhi,-c:e,,,t Application accepted: 444-- By: sDate: PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER(S)* El Same as Applicant Name: 5 0 rrn flv )G' 'Mow ow Application determined complete: l Address: 120)60 S i..) I�S-k Alit By: 1/t1 8 Date: S7 Z c I t-7 City/state: T1(Ny.1 ( (L Zip: CO V-3 I:\CURPLN\Masters\Land Use Applications Rev.11/24/2014 Contact name: Phone number: *When the owner and the applicant are different people,the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written 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. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT The applicant's statement must include a summary of the proposed changes.Criteria in either 18.360.050(B)or 18.330.020(B)(2) must be addressed with a detailed response to each criterion. Failure to provide the information needed to process the application would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. In addition,the Director must find that the proposed change is in compliance with all applicable requirements of Title 18 of the Tigard Development Code.To complete this review,the Applicant's proposal must include a discussion indicating how the site expansion/change will continue to comply with the maximum setback,building height,parking,and landscaping standards. Other requirements of this title such as clear vision, solid waste storage,non-conforming situations,signs,and tree removal may also be applicable depending on the type and location of the proposed modifications. City of Tigard • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • www.tigard-or.gov • 503-718-2421 • Page 1 of 2 • APPLICANTS To consider an application complete,you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTALELEMENTS as described on the front of this application in the"Required Submittal Elements"box. 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 found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application,including the policies and criteria,and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. SIGNAT 'ES of each owner of the subject property required. 2 — 7 A �li,(U /ll�� s/ f So �!. f Applicant's sig ure Print name Date _L 40" _�. 20,gEJ T PC. SUNIAVfGTG dsash 7 Owner's signature Print name Date S/2S i/ Owner's signature Print name Date ADDITIONAL OWNER/DEED HOLDER INFORMATION Name: Name: Address: Address: City/state: Zip: City/state: Zip: Signature: Signature: MINOR MODIFICATION APPLICATION City of Tigard • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • wwwtigard-or.gov • 503-718-2421 • Page 2 of 2 CITY OF TIGARD RECEIPT a g • 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD Receipt Number: 410850 - 05/25/2017 CASE NO. FEE DESCRIPTION REVENUE ACCOUNT NUMBER PAID UFR2017-00002 Modification to Plan of Approved Land 100-0000-43116 $703.00 Use-Type I Total: $703.00 PAYMENT METHOD CHECK# CC AUTH.CODE ACCT ID CASHIER ID RECEIPT DATE RECEIPT AMT Check 36070 LSMITH 05/25/2017 $703.00 Payor: RIVERSIDE HOMES, LLC Total Payments: $703.00 Balance Due: $0.00 Page 1 of 1 NW Engineers,LLC N ■ENGINEERS 3409 NW John Olsen Place Hillsboro,OR 97124 ■ Engineering Phone(503)601-4401 &Planning Fax(503)6014402 Website www.nw-eng.com May 24, 2017 SUB2016-00006 RECEIVED APPLICANT ' S STATEMENT MAY 252017 CITY OF TIGARD APPLICANT/CONTRACT PLANNING/ENGINEERING PURCHASER: Riverside Homes, LLC Niki Munson 17933 NW Evergreen Parkway, #370 Beaverton, Oregon 97006 APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: Matthew Newman NW Engineers, LLC 3409 NW John Olsen Place Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 REQUEST: Type I Modification to SUB2016-00006 12-lot Subdivision "Progress Landing" relative to the Urban Forestry Plan SITE LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tax Lot 100;Tax Map 2S1 04AB Tigard, Oregon SIZE: 2.66 Acres LOCATION: 12060 SW 135th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 LAND-USE DISTRICT: R-4.5 (Low Density Residential) Engineering . Planning Managers: Matt Newman Steve White,PE I. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A. Tigard Comprehensive Plan B. 2016 Tigard Community Development Code: Chapter 18.390 Decision Making Chapter 18.430 Subdivisions Chapter 18.790 Urban Forestry Plan II. AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS Domestic Water: City of Tigard Water Drainage: City of Tigard Erosion Control: City of Tigard Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue Parks: City of Tigard Police Protection: City of Tigard Schools: Beaverton School District Sewer: City of Tigard Streets: City of Tigard Water Quality/Quantity: City of Tigard III. BACKGROUND: The applicant/contract purchaser, Riverside Homes, LLC, is requesting Type I Modification to Case#SUB2016-00006, a 12-lot Subdivision "Progress Landing," relative to the Urban Forestry Plan. The 2.66 acre property located in the R-4.5 zone is identified by the Washington County assessor as Tax Lot 100 of Tax Map 2S1 04AB, and is further defined as 12060 SW 135th Avenue, Tigard 97223. Project Status Case # SUB2016-00006, dated January 18, 2017 authorized development of a 12-lot subdivision. Final engineering plans have been submitted and reviewed. Redlines are now being resubmitted for review. One redline comment required submittal of this Modification since the Urban Forestry Plan has been changed since approval due to engineering requirements. Condition 3 is as follows: 3. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall provide a fee in the amount of$938 for the city's cost of collecting and processing the inventory data for the entire urban forestry plan of four retained open grown trees, and 25 planted trees($154 first tree +$784($28 x 28)=$938). This revision results in the retention of only three trees and the planting of 27 trees. The revision also requires removal of off-site trees on the north side of the site due to utility (sanitary sewer and storm) installation, construction of a retaining wall and access requirements. The updated Urban Forestry Plan with the background information and finding dated March 12, 2017 is attached. Type I Modification Progress Landing Page 2 of 7 IV. FINDINGS A. CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMENT: Except where required by the City of Tigard Community Development Code, this application is not required to address the city's goals and policies related to the development of land, since the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan is implemented by the code. B. CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 18.390: DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES 18.390.020 Description of Decision-Making Procedures A. General. All development permit applications shall be decided by using one of the following procedure types. The procedure type assigned to each action governs the decision-making process for that permit, except to the extent otherwise required by applicable state or federal law. The director shall be responsible for assigning specific procedure types to individual permit or action requests, as requested. Special alternative decision-making procedures have been developed by the city in accordance with existing state law, and are codified in Section 18.390.070. B. Types defined.There are four types of decision-making procedures, as follows: 1. Type I Procedure. Type I procedures apply to ministerial permits and actions containing clear and objective approval criteria. Type I actions are decided by the director without public notice and without a public hearing. C. Summary of permits by decision-making procedure type. Table 18.390.1 summarizes the various land use permits by the type of decision-making procedure. I (18.390.030) Urban Forestry Plan - Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of an Approved Land Use Permit 18.790.070 COMMENT: This request for preliminary review for Type I Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan approved per Case # SUB2016-00006, dated January 18, 2017. Required findings are provided under Chapter 18.790.070 of this report. Type I Modification Progress Landing Page 3 of 7 18.390.030 Type I Procedure A. Preapplication conference. A preapplication conference is not required for a Type I action. B. Application requirements. 1. Application forms. Type I applications shall be made on forms provided by the director as provided by 18.390.080.E.1. 2. Application requirements.Type I applications shall: a. Include the information requested on the application form; b. Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action;and c. Be accompanied by the required fee. C. Administrative decision requirements. The director's decision shall address all of the relevant approval criteria. Based on the criteria and the facts contained within the record,the director shall approve, approve with conditions or deny the requested permit or action. D. Final decision. The director's decision is final for purposes of appeal on the date it is mailed or otherwise provided to the applicant, whichever occurs first. The director's decision is not appealable locally, and is the final decision of the city. E. Section not used. F. Section not used. G. Effective date.The director's decision is effective on the day after it is final. COMMENT: The required materials,forms, written findings and fees are submitted with this application. CHAPTER 18.790: URBAN FORESTRY PLAN 18.790.030 Urban Forestry Plan Requirements A. Urban forestry plan requirements.An urban forestry plan shall: 1. Be coordinated and approved by a landscape architect (the project landscape architect) or a person that is both a certified arborist and tree risk assessor (the project arborist), except for minor land partitions that can demonstrate compliance with effective tree canopy cover and soil volume requirements by planting street trees in open soil volumes only; Type I Modification Progress Landing Page 4 of 7 2. Meet the tree preservation and removal site plan standards in the Urban Forestry Manual; 3. Meet the tree canopy site plan standards in the Urban Forestry Manual; and 4. Meet the supplemental report standards in the Urban Forestry Manual. COMMENT: Morgan Holen & Associates, has prepared an urban forestry plan in accordance with the above standards. The plans are attached as Exhibits 10 & 11 of the land use application and has been revised for the civil engineering construction set (Sheet 7). The supplemental report included in the land use application has been revised dated March 12, 2017. The applicable standards and approval criteria of this Chapter are found in that report. 18.790.070 Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of an Approved Land Use Permit A. General provisions. Except as exempted in subsection B of this section,any modification to the urban forestry plan component of an approved land use permit shall be processed as a Type I land use decision as described below. B. Exemptions. The following activities shall be exempt from the Type I modification to the urban forestry plan component of an approved land use permit process: 1. Removal of any tree shown as preserved in the tree canopy site plan (per 18.790.030.A.3) and supplemental report (per 18.790.030.A.4) of a previously approved urban forestry plan provided: a. The project arborist or landscape architect provides a written report prior to removal attesting that either the condition rating or suitability of preservation rating (per the supplemental report requirements in the Urban Forestry Manual) of the tree has changed to a rating of less than two;and b. A revised tree canopy site plan and supplemental report are submitted for review and approval prior to removal that reflect the proposed changes to the previously approved urban forestry plan. The revised tree canopy site plan and supplemental report shall demonstrate how the effective tree canopy cover requirements will be provided by tree planting, preservation and/or payment of a tree canopy fee in lieu of planting or preservation. COMMENT: This project is not exempt from a Type I modification since the proposed tree removal was necessary due to requirements related to utility installation and access road design Type I Modification Progress Landing Page 5 of 7 2. Modification of the quantity, location or species of trees to be planted in the tree canopy site plan and supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan provided: a. The modification results in the same or greater amount of future tree canopy through tree planting as the previously approved urban forestry plan for the lot or tract where the modification is proposed; b. Payment of a tree canopy fee in lieu of planting is not proposed as part of the modification; and c. A revised tree canopy site plan and supplemental report are submitted for review and approval prior to planting that reflect the proposed changes to the previously approved urban forestry plan. COMMENT: A revised tree canopy site plan and supplemental report has been submitted with this application. The plan results in overall tree canopy cover increasing due to the planting of two additional trees. 3. Modification of the tree protection fencing location in the tree preservation and removal site plan (per 18.790.030.A.2), tree canopy site plan and supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan provided: a. The project arborist or landscape architect provides a written report prior to modification of the tree protection fencing describing how the proposed modification will continue to protect the viability of the trees shown as preserved in the previously approved urban forestry plan; and b. A revised tree preservation and removal site plan, tree canopy site plan and supplemental report are submitted for review and approval prior to modification of the tree protection fencing that reflect the proposed modifications to the previously approved urban forestry plan. COMMENT: Tree protection fencing is shown on Sheet 7 of the civil engineering construction plans. The fencing plan has been modified due to the revised plan. Specifically, fencing has been removed due to the removal of the on-site and off-site trees on the north side of the site. 4. Modification of any other site elements that do not require any modification of the tree protection fencing location or trees to be planted or preserved in the tree preservation and removal site plan, tree canopy site plan and supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan; and 5. Maintenance of any trees in accordance with tree care industry standards. COMMENT: The site plan was modified due to the requirement for access in the area of the proposed sanitary sewer and storm lines on the north side of the site. Type I Modification Progress Landing Page 6 of 7 C. Application procedures. Modifications to the urban forestry plan component of an approved land use permit that are not exempted by subsection B of this section shall be processed as a Type I procedure, using approval criteria contained in subsection D of this section. COMMENT: This application is being submitted through a Type I Procedure as required. D. Approval criteria. The director shall approve the modification to the urban forestry plan component of an approved land use permit upon determining: 1. The project arborist or landscape architect has provided a report and statement certifying that the previously approved urban forestry plan did not account for the circumstances that lead to the proposed modification; COMMENT: The project arborist, Morgan Holen provided a revised Supplemental Report dated March 12, 2017 stating the reasons for the modification - installation of sanitary sewer and storm lines along with access road and retaining wall construction adjacent to the on-site and off-site trees. 2. The project arborist or landscape architect has provided a report and statement certifying that there is no practicable alternative to the proposed modification; and COMMENT: Ms. Nolen states that there is no alternative due to the need for the installation so close to those trees. 3. The project arborist or landscape architect demonstrates through a revised urban forestry plan, compliance with Section 18.790.030. COMMENT: The revised urban forestry plan demonstrates compliance with Section 18.790.030. Specifically, three off-site trees and one boundary tree in the area of Lot 9 are being removed. Two additional trees are proposed to be planted on Lots 11 & 12 resulting in the effective tree canopy cover increasing for the entire site. V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Based upon the findings of this report and the submitted graphics material, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the requirements of the relevant sections of the City of Tigard Community Development Code for the requested Type I Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan; therefore, the request should be approved. Type I Modification Progress Landing Page 7 of 7 RECEIVED I ___ TREE PRESERVATION AND REMOVAL KEY NOTES: V) / - MAY 2 5 2017 o ETa6,MD NEE CREPT. W Q EIosNNO ARE To BE RFJ101ED. Crw I Q]PRONDE BEE PROTECBON FENCE Z N Y CITY 1 r o PROPC®LOT UNE z a TRACT"A" O maDsn malt STaN,SANTMY SEVER,ACCESS t Ilettll PLANNINGIENGINEERING mRHADNUEASBOT • w mm : I I ,dun mlF 0 PROPOSED BUILDING SETBIAI IME. TREE PROTECTION SPECIFICATIONS I Iaarao °oA,u,aMON OM_ R:n " Ima O PRS olawne. Sa; 1.TREE PROTECTION ZONE.THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL -a z'n _e�'/a )UT ''.111 Q FRaDSED PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY EAEEYINT. ■6PE DESIGNATE THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE(TPZ).WHERE I 11 _ ` FEASIBLE,THE TPZ SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AT THE 1 Y ,I�. _�' �� ,�= � -8;laa ®1,gsypaJlp EASEMENT ORI PLINE OF PROTECTED TREES AS A MINIMUM.IF V.,.• I, • _,. L INFRASTRUCTURE MUSTER INSTALLED CLOSER TO THE /BBB+rrr` Q --'- DOPLITTHE MEAIMAY BE ESTABLISHED WITHINDETER I NN ✓ imai 10 i.:-i GENERAL NOTES: DRIPLITH IF THE PROJECT ARBORIST DETERMINES �E� THAT THE TREES WILL NOT BE UNDULY DAMAGED.THE `•JAE` t1 9 I t, SEE SHEET 4.S t B ba6Ntc WORMS'Ea(AWING FEATURES LEGEND. CONSTRUCTION OF THE TP25RAS.BE SHOWN ON I I 3 CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS. I F_ / Q/ � S2.M,E70t�TREE CANOPY PER MORGAN HOEx k ASSOOATEs TREE DATA MAY 2ik g. .PROTECTION FENCING.ALL TREES TO BE RETAINED SHALL , I t/ mole,st.err.a1'_E IMI ]. REFUTE TREES REQUIRE PROPERTY ON.DT'S NRTTETJ,WTHaItAMIN FOR �E BE PROTECTED BY S.CHAIN UNK FENCING OR OTHER A F�. REMOVAL FENCING ASAPPROVED BYTHE CITY.PROTECTION FENCING I �I a® /- aA0 Ueys aPA _i a '.�U 5 SHALL BE SECURED TO STEEL POSTS PLACED NO FURTHER �,,,�r� I\ ¢�F S_ TRERASE REFER m A OORIOT RD'ORT FOR WREA D HFORIIAM RFGNAN4 W g o 5 THAN R-FEET APART AND SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE EDGE tuuM��a� � I / L ,, 110 . -- ..r Zi •+8S OF THE TPZ . �a�r- --�-�RFt �� 1isaiw `:Y A\i4 't i'IaM p i o n..o ,.....;,...:„.4 O 1 X%%�JJ/�. \\�z,.�� + SYMBOL LEGEND: m^ a 3.PRECONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE THE PROJECT TREE SHALL BE ON SITE TO DISCUSS METHODS OF I ' R. OVAL 1 G >Nw z�, 8]ow - IM ¢w m j TREE REMOVAL AND TREE PROTECTION PRIOR 10 ANY I ,1 �� COONMAIE NM TIE PRDECT ARtbRISi PRIOi roCPEINNL CONSTRUCTION. I � 3aeN 11 MN �BIy♦t � �_- 0r' alra ®� TECTON ipONG fpl URJtt tlrtllLlaH4 NRpNST - A.PRUNING.THE PROJECT ARBORIST CAN HELP IDENTIFY IF I CO`_ : +�8,� I'. '1. ' friiv'�FM mTEYS RITCAL MENTROOTS ROOTPRANGWING FFA NNEUNC'TOOL.m LL h AND WHERE PRUNING IS NECESSARY ONCE TREES Q M �) '4IA; _ �- InX PRESERIE CRITICAL ROOTS INTACT nMH THE TRENCH. RECOMMENDED FOR REMOVAL HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND I TT. t��il, IaM / CDDanATE NAI PRUECT ARBORS,PRIOR TO CRaNG THE SITE IS STAKED AND PREPARED FOR CONSTRUCTION. 1 F'�, -- - f\�'-' .,�)Q�qY '1/ B PROTECTION mFERO<MI k00AINAGE DITCH CORSTRUCTION. ROOT waNNck OPER PRUNING SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED TREE En 'F-• =-RN,—_�-- r4�11 ai lra q AMORISEMlSmala ALIGNMENT TO PROTECT CRITICCIAL SERVICE. M-I R�� il Dols,E ANY,AMORIST TO COONONAIE ADJUSTMENTS ro Z r' AIM 4!a I O ala ALIORTINT NM PROEM.FROMM Q S.TREE PROTECTION ZONE MAINTE NANCE.THE ' PROTECTIONED RVEFENCING SHALL NOT BE MOVED.REMOVED. I F �• .'I- �:1 - S -�� z Q z OR ENTERED BY EQUIPMENT EXCEPT UNDER DIRECTION OF 1 I 1 ams �� v1 �_.A PROPOSED UTLITIES LEGEND THE PROJECT ARBORIST. ,uu.s E © !{■S INVP-, aB P.a 6.STORAGE OF MATERIAL OR EQUIPMENT.THE T Toow ' r _� ��1 ---- W +;,jl 'MBR UIE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT STORE MATERIALS 00. I `[,,/_ I I/ J, �,L�I saws ME RYgkWr En Z W F EQUIPMENT WITHIN THE IPL. I I a ----`-J�,la f.1 I �IY� I *�.,/p GATE VAASE col 7) co_. 7.EXCAVATION.EXCAVATION WITHIN THE TPZSHALL BE I .1'44 4 " r:'� \'�,. Ij lilt" 6 I1 "nv /`aO ,a{ LOpF VALE 0 Q] d 1 AVOIDED IF ALTERNATIVES ARE AVAILABLE.IF EXCAVATION I =Ol�� V+ 2I" CD 0 Q] O WITHIN THE TP2IN UNAVOIDABLE,THE PROJECT _ SWUM OYER INE 0 CO en ARBORIST SHALL EVALUATE THE PROPOSED EXCAVATION Isola'. EL 1\TT�E1110-- Q 0 0 I-W TO DETERMINE METHODS TO MINIMIZE IMPACTS TO TREES. I "" •*• ''r SNATNFY KIM MOUE d to Z I- CC ALLCONSTRUCTIONWITHIN THE TP25HALL BE UNDER M THE ON-SITE TECHNICAL SUPERVISION OF THE PROJECT I , ARBORIST. I ieol I --- ��, nor --_� _�___^ C STDIM SERER YIVNIaE 8.TREE PROTECTION INSPECTION.THE PROJECT ARBORIST \IR,SlI 7r ®` •"/ 414111, d.'411ii D STAY SERER CATs MSN on maa 1 II E SHALL INSPECT AND VERIFY THE LOCATION Of , •� �41r f1 — �, �r,I�� 5 PROTECTION MEASURES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, - , me ��(TI+ i'I `\ r\�`. f MONITOR TREE PROTECTION MEASURES REGULARLY,AND I Y _ if I• Y` PROVIDE BIWEEKLY WRITTEN REPORTS TO THE CITY ; I I,Morgan Helen,attest that this Tree enInInatbn and m a9 DURING PERIODS OF ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION, I arc. I -baa- `\`, Removal Slte.Plan meets the tegulremenrs In Settbn 10, 9.OFFSITE TREE REMOVAL OFFSITE TREES REQUIRE PROPERTY • �'7.: 4E t'aI' panl,.ithe[tT P(Tigard Urban Forestry Manwl. Pv OWNERS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FOR REMOVAL I :�°f �__-- I 10.FINAL REPORT.AFTER THE PROJECT HAS BEEN � , �� ' 1 Morgan Nolen z0COMPLETED,THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL PROVIDE A 1F ,I ISA Board Certified Master Arborist PN-61458 FINAL REPORT THAT DESCRIBES THE MEASURES NEFOEDTO Ire» 1 2 V 3 L �� ISA Tree Risk ASSesimeM QUM,. ¢- MAINTAIN AND PROTECT THE REMAINING TREES, I I 1 ♦�� Date:March 8,2011 fl 4 -------a I a i I ARBORIST —n I la 4 CITY OF TIGARD ; R4#I 0R« ' -- W E W Approved 1, ,I n ) N Morgan�lolen Q a r- A/•ouATT Conditionally Approved ( I ,... in: J.." e 3MONRMORGAE PARKLEN ASSOCIATES FS For only the work as described ER I� I 3MONROE PARKWAY,SIXTEP 220 PERMIT NO. VG 2v11-0000 Z PIC NE 9 WE O,,OREGON RIOTS17x N•�F See Letter to: Follow _-- I i ; I i Felva. 6/30/20,8 Attach. j I I.a_aP n CT Job Add ess• l LC7 0 s►e[ ge3'ZF►f A SU02016-00006 �' N By: M a 1\o Date: Cn/ C / ('? I // _ _ TREE PRESERVATION AND REMOVAL KEY NOTES: V) / Q7 E705TING TREE CANOPY. ► ' / LU 0 EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED. LUBECEtVEDI Oj PROVIDE TREE PROTECTION FENCE. ? c bt I MAY 2 5 20174Q PROPOSED LOT UNE. u L � TRACT "A" IC)PROPOSED PUBLIC STORM, SANITARY SEWER,ACCESS& LU m a 4 I WATER TURNAROUND EASEMENT. w di I DUALITY AND ■ , ✓. Si CITY OF TIGARD I DETENTION n,6 ©PROPOSE)BUILDING s�TBACI(UNE. g FACILITY „ S n TREE PROTECTIOP�IS �I9uINEERING � 12215 12 � ,me 12277 ,2276 ' O7 PROPOSED DRIVEWAY. ,:.,.. Q ��, ,275 �'' r ,22� Q. $ 2 II ®PROPOSED SIDEWALK. • 1. TREE PROTECTION ZONE.THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL ; ✓ 1 & g PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY EASEMENT. IV * 20015 DESIGNATE THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE(TPZ).WHEREI j4:43O I : : . : � 2222 . = • (10 TURNAROUND EASEMENT FEASIBLE,THE TPZ SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AT THE E _ Av � �� •f DRIPLINE OF PROTECTED TREES AS A MINIMUM.IF I �� , . . ��w INFRASTRUCTURE MUST BE INSTALLED CLOSER TO THE • 'ter I —` _ TREES,THE TPZ MAY BE ESTABLISHED WITHIN THE I 2ow14114.1010591o 1O ' -; ; • ; ; GENERAL NOTES: DRIPLINE AREA IF THE PROJECT ARBORIST DETERMINESITHAT THE TREES WILL NOT BE UNDULY DAMAGED.THE '.' •` 9 I 1. SEE SHEET 4.5 k 6 DOSTING CONDITIONS FOR E10STING FEATURES LEGEND. yLOCATION OF THE TPZ SHALL BE SHOWN ON 2000) __- .: < 3CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS. I 4 __ �� O 2. E2016.G TREE CANOPY PER MORGAN HOLEN&ASSOCIATES TREE DATA,MAY �, 5TH,2016. 20000 aoft 2. PROTECTION FENCING.ALL TREES TO BE RETAINED SHALL I I �sw0z nsi Q.< z �' 200,0 200,2 lr - 3. OFFSITE TREES REQUIRE PROPERTY OWNER'S WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FOR w o z BE PROTECTED BY 5'CHAIN LINK FENCING OR OTHER 063 REMOVAL J o LI DC N- FENCING AS APPROVED BY THE CITY.PROTECTION FENCING I _fes 20066 a006a 20073 �►� zo06s w C7 ch a p 20072Er �O �►/'�_, 4. PLEASE REFER TO ARBORIST REPORT FOR DETAILED INFORMATION REGARDING ¢ '0 o SHALL BE SECURED TO STEEL POSTS PLACED NO FURTHER •�,�1R.�1 /��` Qfls?� - TREES. 0 o 0 20036 ,k_- ♦4 I i•a>.1lIA r C!.. '.;4,,':I.�I;':'- • 2 "'i O cc THAN 8-FEET APART AND SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE EDGE ;� �I - + �.{, t'.� * % z y Lk__, _ ---- ! �; 1.140`•_: 1&r.;A W ., OF THE TPZ. , (• 1''gt.+\� 121900 o z r' a n 20038 «��'''w'� Q ..+ ` `/ Z0306 n,,:� 230„ 11 \iA�� SYMBOL LEGEND: a �1 rO cc < o 0 .t.1 , ►- 2007) 20607 I�"d.,: 20669 \ M W > J 3. PRECONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE.THE PROJECT a,�. \ 1 �1_ 20013 zaa6520067 W ch ARBORIST SHALL BE ON SITE TO DISCUSS METHODS OF I • CLQ' i •0005 7 20062 8 12165 a• N- o vV {� 20037 D: ,-I Co 00 I- I- U TREE REMOVAL AND TREE PROTECTION PRIOR TO ANY I (/ -2(p39 `\ `, . I ,. r COORDINATE WITH THE PROJECT ARBORIST PRIOR TO OPENING CONSTRUCTION. • I �1 20018 1rs6 PROJECTION FENCING FOR UTILITY TRENCHING. ARBORIST I'I n 11 �` 2007��L. , __�� J I 1n67 TO MONITOR&DOCUMENT ROOT PRUNING&TUNNELING Tci O W 20040 2007e j PRESERVE CRITICAL ROOTS INTACT WITHIN THE TRENCH. 4. PRUNING.THE PROJECT ARBORIST CAN HELP IDENTIFY IF D �• 2o➢n \ •_ /11�y - - -- .r 12168 AND WHERE PRUNING IS NECESSARY ONCE TREES «p , 20 76 ,I r 20026 —Mow r RECOMMENDED FOR REMOVAL HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND I r.. , Mill( 7 7 ®~ COORDINATE MATH PROJECT ARBORIST PRIOR TO OPENING .4, 20093 t`_ J 4r r �'I�� 20g. PROTECTION FENCING FOR DRAINAGE DITCH CONSTRUCTION. THE SITE IS STAKED AND PREPARED FOR CONSTRUCTION. I 'x '� 20061 e�y.� � If /� X16 A ARBORIST TO MONITOR&DOCUMENT ROOT PRUNING&DIRECT PRUNING SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED TREE lF -,,r .:7$.7A -—-- iiij ,cam) © ADJUSTMENTS TO DITCH ALIGNMENT TO PROTECT CRITICAL 0 SERVICE. C+'D I 1 rS�� -•„_ 1 `* I J ROOTS,IF ANY. ARBORIST TO COORDINATE ADJUSTMENTS TO Z ti L 2Qµ2' 140 z009i .''6..+1 -I 1011 I`= _ 7 - 7 DITCH ALIGNMENT%ITN PROJECT ENGINEER. Q 5. TREE PROTECTION ZONE MAINTENANCE.THE I I ./ip +�1 �'� 2°°26 0 Z PROTECTION FENCING SHALL NOT BE MOVED,REMOVED, I ' v�V�”' •• I11� 70021 UP e Z 0 z OR ENTERED BY EQUIPMENT EXCEPT UNDER DIRECTION OF I O 2ooss • �4', ;,Q g yo 4% PROPOSED UTLITIES LEGEND I 12 ♦' •i:l .:. THE PROJECT ARBORIST. Q I ,lr,€_'Li.` . 20022 _ O Q 0_ 26045 �i lit zaou r ,■A:'��,�I - -- AC WATER UNE QZ 6. STORAGE OF MATERIAL OR EQUIPMENT.THE ® / Is I:�,l;�f•�IrF T ZEr LLJ H CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT STORE MATERIALS OR I ! I _ 20023 i I','r �i'ii k W,� 20025 (11:1) 12160 FIRE HYDRANT w EQUIPMENT WITHIN THE TPZ. I It f _ 2 I '^ 1 rl� O W _1 • t, 20363 e2_ _ 25,40 zoo 2159 0 GATE VALVE (1)U-I In CC Q 7. EXCAVATION.EXCAVATION WITHIN THE TPZ SHALL BE I '�. elvs+I+ ��' / \� 6 Iati *2158 •« BLOWOFF VALVE CC O d AVOIDED IF ALTERNATIVES ARE AVAILABLE.IF EXCAVATION I ..JT :ZI�� {� CD O O W O e WITHIN THE TPZ IN UNAVOIDABLE,THE PROJECT �� SANITARY SEVER UNE 0 CO Cr) W ARBORIST SHALL EVALUATE THE PROPOSED EXCAVATION 20046 I 1::7� II�IIA'd I / : , CC D 0 Ir LJJ — i i OO SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE •• (/) Z I— CC TO DETERMINE METHODS TO MINIMIZE IMPACTS TO TREES. I __ • _ " _ �' (� J : ALL CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE TPZ SHALL BE UNDER {w4 _j / -H— STORM SEWER UNE THE ON-SITE TECHNICAL SUPERVISION OF THE PROJECT I �__w ARBORIST. 20047 I �--- �� 20062— ® STORM SEWER MANHOLE d, ..1 �.w�. `` < a STORM SEWER CATCH BASIN o 8. TREE PROTECTION INSPECTION.THE PROJECT ARBORIST 006 4207101 �,0.' `�r/' 0 SHALL INSPECT AND VERIFY THE LOCATION OF I `• d s • �\ -�� \ 5 HPROTECTION MEASURES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, 1 030 ,jMONITOR TREE PROTECTION MEASURES REGULARLY,AND 1�\ ' r `1 1 I 1� ' I,Morgan Holen,attest that this Tree Preservation and a PROVIDE BIWEEKLY WRITTEN REPORTS TO THE CITY I I \ m DURING PERIODS OF ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION. I i 20050 ; 2w52 '�� ' \ 73Removal Site Plan meets the requirements in Section 10, : 2005341100....., Alli',4. ```` lly� z°u part 1,of the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual. x 9. OFFSITE TREE REMOVAL.OFFSITE TREES REQUIRE PROPERTY J w OWNER'S WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FOR REMOVAL. I (MIA zC> �1'^ i _20337 \ ----- �1 t.46.4` `.11r 'oO,` 11 4.1•' 200)1% ,200}2 1.( `1 _ cI I .� 4 , a 1 10.FINAL REPORT.AFTER THE PROJECT HAS BEEN 20022 �� if Morgano Holen COMPLETED,THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL PROVIDE A I �°5720051 I I ISA Board Certified Master Arborist PN-6145B 5 ,,, 3 FINAL REPORT THAT DESCRIBES THE MEASURES NEEDED TO I + zI 20056 1 I I ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified MAINTAIN AND PROTECT THE REMAINING TREES. 1 E I I 0�� 4 Date: March 8,2017 I 2 3 I • ' � � 1 _ ' ARBORIST � NmwtInCOi- I ► WZ0Q3 • CITY OF TIGARD r I l 21 6, - 308 C�12697 ; < I Approved [({ I I 1102 Morgan 1 lolen 0 cc N Conditionally Approved I I I 1 .2,° For only the work escri ,,51 in: Alf OCIaTu ' cfl, ,-- PERMIT PERMIT NO. 1) ��C oho o z 1 . n MORGAN HOLEN&ASSOCIATES , See Letter to: Follow I t 3 MONROE PARKWAY,SUITE P 220Attach �y LAKE OSWEGO,OREGON 97035 t �Job Addre 1Z,�/�0'�$,O Sw , 3 t x, PH: 971-409.9354 By: • I'&►1 o d_e Am-Date: (o / S / I'-1 I 30 Y I6 30 p $ RENEWAL 6/30/2018 0 I s / 1 inch= 30 ft. t l 11,17 SCALE: 1 inch-60 II. X '` CO N / I SUB2016-00006 LU e 5 RECEIVED MAY 252017 Morgan i�olen CITY OF TIGARD 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P 220 QLAl�lI�llNG NrIRIFEI?II�I 971.409.93 54 ; Lake Oswego,Oregon 97035 —6,—AfjOCIATL(LL Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management morgan.holen@comcast.net Urban Forestry Plan Supplemental Report July 21 , 2016 Revised: March 12, 2017 Progress Landing Subdivision 12030 SW 135th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 971.409.9354 Morgan Holen 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P 220 Lake Oswego,Oregon 97035 — AJf OCIATtJ'«< Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management morgan.holen@comcast.net Table of Contents— Purpose 1 Scope of Work and Limitations 1 General Description 2 Effective Tree Canopy Cover 2 Specifications 4 A.Tree Protection Specifications 4 B. Soil Characteristics and Specifications for Improvement 5 C.Tree Planting Specifications 5 Signature of Approval 5 Enclosures— Attachment A: Existing Tree Inventory Data Attachment B: Effective Tree Canopy Cover Summary Attachment C: Planted Tree Inventory Attachment D:Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan Attachment E:Tree Canopy Site Plan Not Applicable— Existing Stand Inventory Data Planted Stand Inventory Stand Preservation Specifications Stand Planting Specifications Tree Canopy Fee Calculation 971.409.9354 Morgan Nolen 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P 220 Lake Oswego,Oregon 97035 f;-- AJJOCIIATE.f Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management morgan.holen@comcast.net Urban Forestry Plan - Supplemental Report Progress Landing Subdivision, 12030 SW 135th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon July 21, 2016 Revised: March 12, 2017 MHA16024 Purpose This Urban Forestry Plan for the Progress Landing Subdivision project located in an R-4.5 zoning district in Tigard, Oregon, is provided pursuant to the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual. The subject property is located at 12030 SW 135th Avenue in Tigard, Oregon.This report describes the existing trees located on the project site, provides arborist recommendations for tree removal, retention and protection, and describes the effective tree canopy cover needed to meet City requirements. This report is based on observations made by International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Board Certified Master Arborist (PN-6145B) and Qualified Tree Risk Assessor Morgan Holen during a site visit conducted on May 6, 2016, and coordination with Riverside Homes and NW Engineers. This report was revised on March 12, 2017 based on site plan changes to the proposed public storm, sanitary sewer,access and turn around easement;trees 12275—12278 are no longer suitable for preservation because adequate protection is not possible due to proposed retaining wall construction, pavement,and underground utilities in such close proximity to these trees.The previously approved Urban Forestry Plan did not account for these circumstances and there is no practicable alternative to the proposed modification because the City is requiring that the access road be paved.This revised Urban Forestry Plan remains in compliance with Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.790.030. Modifications to this report are identified with bold and underlined type.Attachments A through E have also been updated. Scope of Work and Limitations Morgan Holen &Associates, LLC,was contracted by Riverside Homes to visually assess existing trees measuring six inches in diameter and larger in terms of general condition and suitability for preservation with development and prepare an Urban Forestry Plan to satisfy City of Tigard code requirements.The site is planned for residential development, including 12 lots, a water quality facility tract, and a new street. A site plan was provided by NW Engineers illustrating the location of trees and tree survey point numbers, and potential construction impacts. Visual Tree Assessment (VTA1)was performed on individual trees located across the site.Trees were evaluated in terms of species, size, general condition, suitability for preservation, and potential construction impacts, and treatment recommendations include remove, retain, or protect off-site. Limited visual assessment was performed for off-site trees located directly adjacent to the project site because access for complete assessment was not authorized on adjacent private properties. Following the inventory fieldwork, we coordinated with Riverside Homes and NW Engineers to discuss and finalize treatment recommendations based on the proposed site plan. The client may choose to accept or disregard the recommendations contained herein, or seek additional advice. Neither this author nor Morgan Holen &Associates, LLC, have assumed any responsibility for liability associated with the trees on or adjacent to this site. Visual Tree Assessment(VTA):The standard process of visual tree inspection whereby the inspector visually assesses the tree from a distance and up close,looking for defect symptoms and evaluating overall condition and vitality. Urban Forest Plan—Supplemental Report Progress Landing, 12030 SW 135'Avenue,Tigard,OR March 12,2017 Page 2 General Description The complete site includes three existing homes, which will be demolished along with existing accessory buildings and sheds. Trees are scattered across the site and include several dense groups of unmaintained trees that are overgrown with invasive vegetation. In all, 119 existing trees measuring six inches and larger in diameter were inventoried, including 30 different species and 27 trees located off- site within 25-feet of the development impact area. Of the 92 on-site trees,42% received condition ratings of less than two and 84% received suitability for preservation ratings of less than two. Twenty-four of the 27 off-site trees can be protected during construction and three of the 91 on-site trees are recommended for retention, including:tree 20089 along the eastern property boundary in the rear of proposed lot 9; and trees 20058 and 20059 along the western property boundary of proposed lot 1.Tree protection fencing is recommended at the dripline of off-site trees to be protected where the canopy overhangs the project site, and at the dripline of the on-site trees planned for retention. Removal of off-site trees 12275, 12277, 12278,and boundary tree 12276 requires prior written authorization from the adjacent property owner.The contractor should be responsible for coordinating with the project arborist prior to opening protection fencing for utility trench excavation in the northeast corner of the site and drainage ditch construction along the eastern boundary;the arborist should monitor and document tree protection measures during this work. If tree roots are exposed,the project arborist may recommend pruning of roots determined to be non-critical based on size, condition, and quantity, but roots determined by the arborist to be critical to the health and/or stability of protected trees should remain intact;this may require hand-digging to tunnel beneath roots for sewer and storm line installation or adjusting the drainage ditch alignment in coordination with the project engineer. A complete description of individual trees located on and adjacent to the project site is included in the enclosed existing tree inventory data (attachment A).The trees to be retained will require special consideration to assure their protection during construction;tree protection recommendations are provided in this report and have been incorporated onto construction drawings. Effective Tree Canopy Cover In the R-4.5 zoning district,the minimum required effective tree canopy for each lot is 15%and the minimum required effective tree canopy for the overall development site is 40%. A summary of the effective tree canopy cover by lot and across the overall development site is included as attachment B. The three on-site trees planned for retention received condition and preservation ratings greater than 1 and will provide double canopy cover credit totaling 2,091 square feet;this includes two trees on proposed lot 1 and one trees on proposed lot 9. The required quantity of street trees is determined by dividing the total linear street frontage by 40. In this case, 20 street trees are required along proposed Street A with a frontage of 793.44 linear feet. The required quantity of street trees is satisfied and provides the closest and best spacing possible. The proposed street trees comply with the street tree planting standards in Section 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual and with the soil volume standards in Section 12. In addition to the 20 required street trees and in order to satisfy the 40%effective tree canopy cover requirement for the overall development site,five additional trees are planned in the yard at each of Urban Forest Plan—Supplemental Report Progress Landing, 12030 SW 135th Avenue,Tigard,OR March 12,2017 Page 3 proposed lots 4, 5, 6,7 and 10.At the request of Riverside Homes,one additional tree is also proposed on each of lots 11 and 12. Attachment C,the planted tree inventory, describes the 27 trees proposed for planting,which include eight katsuras (Cercidiphyllus japonicum),ten Pacific dogwoods (Cornus nuttallii), and nine Oregon white oaks (Quercus garryana). The following table provides a summary of the effective tree canopy cover for each lot and the overall development site, demonstrating that the minimum effective tree canopy cover requirements are satisfied. Lot Size Tree Canopy Effective No. (ft2) Area (ft2) Canopy Cover 1 6,903 1,914 27.7% 2 6,778 1,256 18.5% 3 6,033 2,454 40.7% 4 8,452 2,454 29.0% 5 7,058 2,512 35.6% 6 7,048 4,594 65.2% 7 7,205 4,594 63.8% 8 6,290 2,140 34.0% 9 10,425 3,515 33.7% 10 8,310 3,338 40.2% 11 7,195 5,477 76.1% 12 8,738 7,937 90.8% Tract A 2,014 884 43.9% Total 92,449 43,060 46.6% The March 12,2017 revisions reduced the canopy credit on lot 9 since boundary tree 12276 must be removed for construction. It is not practical to plant any additional trees on this lot because there is no additional growing space.Therefore,the effective tree canopy cover for lot 9 dropped from 53.2% to 33.7%. However,the effective tree canopy cover for lots 11 and 12,and the overall effective tree canopy cover for the entire development site increased because two additional trees were added at the request of Riverside Homes. The Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan and Tree Canopy Site Plan are enclosed as attachments D and E as required by Section 10 of the Urban Forestry Manual,which illustrate how the Urban Forestry Plan requirements are met. Urban Forest Plan—Supplemental Report Progress Landing,12030 SW 135th Avenue,Tigard,OR March 12,2017 Page 4 Specifications A. Tree Protection Specifications 1. Tree Protection Zone.The project arborist shall designate the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ).Where feasible,the TPZ shall be established at the dripline of protected trees as a minimum.The location of the TPZ shall be shown on construction drawings. If infrastructure must be installed closer to the trees,the TPZ may be established within the dripline area if the project arborist determines that the trees will not be unduly damaged. The contractor is responsible for coordinating with the project arborist prior to working beneath protected tree driplines. 2. Protection Fencing.All trees to be retained shall be protected by 5-foot tall metal fencing unless otherwise approved by the city manager or designee. Protection fencing shall be secured to steel posts placed no further than 8-feet apart and shall be installed at the edge of the TPZ. 3. Preconstruction Conference.The project arborist shall be on site to discuss methods of tree removal and tree protection prior to any construction. 4. Pruning.The project arborist can help identify if and where pruning is necessary once trees planned for removal have been removed and the site is staked and prepared for construction. Pruning shall be performed by a Qualified Tree Service. 5. Tree Protection Zone Maintenance.The protection fencing shall not be moved, removed,or entered by equipment except under direction of the project arborist. 6. Storage of Material or Equipment.The contractor shall not store materials or equipment within the TPZ. 7. Excavation. Excavation beneath protected tree driplines shall be avoided if alternatives are available. If excavation is unavoidable,the project arborist shall evaluate the proposed excavation to determine methods to minimize impacts to trees.All construction beneath the dripline of protected trees shall be under the on- site technical supervision of the project arborist. 8. Landscaping. Following construction and where landscaping is desired, apply approximately 3-inches of mulch beneath the dripline of protected trees, but not directly against tree trunks. Shrubs and ground covers may be planted within tree protection areas. If irrigation is used, use drip irrigation only beneath the driplines of protected trees. 9. Tree Protection Inspection.The project arborist shall inspect and verify the location of protection measures prior to construction, monitor tree protection measures regularly,and provide biweekly written reports to the City during periods of active construction. 10. Final Report.After the project has been completed,the project arborist shall provide a final report that describes the measures needed to maintain and protect the remaining trees. Urban Forest Plan—Supplemental Report Progress Landing,12030 SW 135th Avenue,Tigard,OR March 12,2017 Page 5 B. Soil Characteristics and Specifications for Improvement Native soils at the project site consist of somewhat poorly drained Cascade silt loam (^'65%)and poor drained Wapato silty clay loam (^'35%),which are both capable of supporting healthy tree growth when drained and not frequently flooded. Prior to planting,the landscape contractor should excavate to a depth of 36-inches and backfill with amended top soil.Topsoil amendments should be determined by the landscape contractor. If soil compaction occurs during construction,the project arborist should provide additional recommendations as needed. C. Tree Planting Specifications New trees that are planted to meet the effective canopy requirements should conform to the applicable standards in the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual and be planted in accordance with the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)standards for tree planting(A300, Part 6) and additional standards adopted by the Oregon Landscape Contractors Board. Nursery stock should meet the requirements of the American Association of Nurserymen for nursery stock(ANSI Z60.1)for Grade No.1 or better. Double stake trees if needed for stability during the establishment period. Root barriers shall be installed according to manufacturer's specifications when a street tree is planted within five feet of any hard surface, paving,or utility box. If needed, irrigation should be design/build by the landscape contractor. Signature of Approval We hereby attest that,to the best of our knowledge: ✓ The attached Tree Preservation and Removal site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual; ✓ The attached Tree Canopy site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual;and ✓ This Supplemental Report meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual. Thank you for choosing Morgan Nolen &Associates, LLC,to provide consulting arborist services for the Progress Landing Subdivision project in Tigard. Please contact us if you have questions or need any additional information. Thank you, Morgan Holen &Associates, LLC: f Morga E. Nolen, Owner/Member ISA Board Certified Master Arborist, PN-6145B ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Forest Biologist Enclosures: Attachment A: Existing Tree Inventory Data Attachment B: Effective Tree Canopy Cover Summary Attachment C: Planted Tree Inventory Attachment D:Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan Attachment E:Tree Canopy Site Plan Attachment A:Existing Tree Inventory Data Morgan Nolen MHA16024 Progress Landing-Tree Data 5-6-16 Rev.3-5-17.xlsx L--AJfOCIAT[ Pagelof5 No. Lot No. Common Name Species Name DBH' C-Rad2 Canopy3 0/S4 HT5 Cond6 Pres' Comments Treatment 10591 10 camellia Camellia japonicum 2x6 10 0 N 2 2 large shrub remove 12073 off-site Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 11,12 15 0 N n/a n/a protect 12074 off-site Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 11 0 N 1 n/al n/a no dripline overhangs site protect 12097 off-site cherry Prunus spp. 6 6 0 N n/a n/a protect 12099 off-site hinoki cypress Chamaecyparis obtusa 8 0 N n/a n/a no dripline overhangs site protect 12101 off-site pine Pinus spp. 9 3 0 1 N n/a n/a no dripline overhangs site protect 12102 off-site pine Pinus spp. 14 0 N n/a n/a no dripline overhangs site protect i 12103 off-site pine Pinus spp. 16 0 N n/a n/a no dripline overhangs site protect 12158 off-site western redcedar Thuja plicata 7 0 N n/a n/a no dripline overhangs site protect 12159 off-site pine Pinus spp. 9,11 0 N n/a n/a no dripline overhangs site protect 12160 off-site pine Pinus spp. 11 0 N n/a n/a no dripline overhangs site protect 12165 off-site ipine Pinus spp. 6,9 10 0 N n/a n/a protect 12166 off-site 'pine Pinus spp. 11 0 N n/a n/a no dripline overhangs site protect 12167 off-site ,pine Pinus spp. 10 0 N n/a n/a no dripline overhangs site protect 12168 off-site European white birch Betula pendula 18 15 0 N n/a, n/a protect 12169 off-site European white birch 'Betula pendula 21 15 0 N n/a n/a protect 12190 off-site European white birch Betula pendula 13 10 0 N n/a, n/a protect 12191_off-site European white birch Betula pendula 12 11 0 N n/a n/a protect 12215 off-site Austrian pine Pinus nigra 22 18 0 N n/a n/a protect 12216 off-site lodgepole pine Pinus contorta 20 12 0 N n/a n/a protect 12222 off-site lodgepole pine Pinus contorta 18 0 N n/a n/a no dripline overhangs site protect 12275 off-site lodgepole pine Pinus contorta 14 16 0 N n/a n/a remove off-site 12276 9 (.lodgepole pine Pinus contorta 12 18 0 N 2 2 in group with off-site trees remove on boundary 12277 off-site ,lodgepole pine Pinus contorta 16 16 0 N n/a n/a remove off-site 12278 off-site lodgepole pine Pinus contorta 6,13 12 0 N n/a n/a remove off-site 12298 off-site flowering pear Pyrus spp. 6 0 N n/a n/a no dripline overhangs site protect 12299 off-site Japanese maple Acer palmatum 6 0 N n/a 1 n/a no dripline overhangs site protect 12300 off-site Japanese maple Acer palmatum 6 0 N n/a n/a no dripline overhangs site protect Morgan Molen &Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220, Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 'illfr Attachment A:Existing Tree Inventory Data Morgan NolenMHA16024 Progress Landing-Tree Data 5-6-16 Rev.3-5-17.xlsx —6--AJJOCIATE/ ,. Page 2of5 No. Lot No. Common Name Species Name DBH1 C-Rad2 Canopy3 0/54 HTs Conde Pres' Comments Treatment 20000 10 plum Prunus spp. 15 14 0 N 1 1 remove 20001 10 catalpa Catalpa speciosa 14 10 0 N 1 1 remove 20002 10 European white birch Betula pendula 14 16 0 N 2' 1 remove 20003 10 cherry Prunus spp. 3x7 16 0 N 2 1 remove 20005 ROW holly Ilex spp. 9 8 S N 1 1 remove 20006 ROW holly Ilex spp. 6 8 S N 1 1 remove 20007 ROW holly Ilex spp. 6 8 S N 1 1 remove 20008 ROW holly Ilex spp. 6 8 S N j 1 1 remove 20009 ROW holly Ilex spp. 6 8 S N 1 1 remove 20010 8 fruit unknown 7 8 S N 1 1 remove 20011 8 holly Ilex spp. 8 8 S N 1 1 remove 20012 8 holly Ilex spp. 8,2x9 8 S N 1 1 remove 20013 8 holly Ilex spp. 6 8 S N 1 1 remove 20014 9 scots pine Pinussyvelstris 7 12 0 N 3 2 remove 20015 9 ponderosa pine Pinus ponderosa 27 22 0 N 2 2 remove 20016 7 European white birch Betula pendula 7 7 0 N 2 1 remove 20017 7 ,curly willow Salix matsudana 6,3x9 13 0 N 1 1 remove 20018 8 lodgepole pine Pinus contorta 15 6 0 N 2 1 remove 20019 7 plum Prunus spp. 6,2x9 15 0 N 2 1 remove 20020 7 deciduous unknown 7 5 0 N 1 1 1 remove 20021 6 curly willow Salix matsudana 6 10 S N ' 11 1 remove 20022 6 curly willow Salix matsudana 6 10 S N 1 1 remove 20023 6 curly willow Salix matsudana 1 15 10 S N 1 1 remove 20024 6 curly willow Salix matsudana 12 10 S N 1 1 remove 20025 6 curly willow Salix matsudana 17 10 S N 1 1 remove 20026 7 dogwood Cornus spp. 6 14 0 N 2 1 remove 20027 ROW deciduous Prunus spp. 6,2x9 14 0 N 2 1 remove 20028 7 European white birch Betula pendula 6 12 0 N 2 1 remove Morgan Nolen &Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220,Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net I 971.409.9354 Attachment A: Existing Tree Inventory Data Morgan Nolen f MHA16024 Progress Landing-Tree Data 5-6-16 Rev.3-5-17.xlsx — tom--AJJOCIATLJ L. Page 3 of 5 No. Lot No. Common Name Species Name DBH1 C-Rad2 Canopy3 0/S4 HT5 Cond. Pres' Comments Treatment 20029 6 mimosa Albizia julibrissin 13 10 ' 0 N 2 1 remove 20030 2 tuliptree Liriodendron tulipifera 16 14 0 N 2 1 remove 20031 2 ponderosa pine Pinus ponderosa 24 22 S N 2' 1 remove 20032 3 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 24 24 S N 21 1 remove 20033 3 ponderosa pine Pinus ponderosa 22 22 S N 2, 1 remove 20034 3 ,Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 33 26 S N 2 1 remove 20036 ROW l European white birch Betula pendula 11 14 0 N 2 1 remove 20037 11 magnolia Magnolia grandiflora 13 12 0 N ' 2 2 remove 20038 ROW European white birch Betula pendula 14 14 0 N 2 1 remove 20039 ROW European white birch Betula pendula 12 14 0 N 2 1 remove 20040 ROW European white birch Betula pendula 18 14 0 N 2 1 remove 20041 ROW European white birch Betula pendula 12 14 0 1 N 2 1 remove 20042 ROW lodgepole pine Pinus contorta 12 10 0 N 2 1 remove 20044 12 golden chain tree Laburnum spp. 2x12 12 0 N 11 1 remove 20045 ROW lodgepole pine Pinus contorta 10 10 0 N 1 1 remove 20046 ROW European white birch Betula pendula 8 0 0 1 N 0 1 remove 20047 ROW European white birch Betula pendula 12 16 0 N 2 1 remove 20048 1 European white birch Betula pendula 13 16 0 N 2 1 remove 20049, 1 cherry Prunus spp. 24 20 0 N 2 2 remove 20050 1 cherry Prunus spp. 8 6 O N 0 1 remove i 20051 2 spruce Picea spp. 22 20 0 N 2 1 remove 20052 1 fruit unknown 10,11 14 S N 2 1 remove 20053 1 holly Ilex spp. 6 9 S N 2 1 remove 20054 1 holly Ilex spp. 2x6 9 S N 2 1 remove 20055 1 holly Ilex spp. 6,7 9 S N 2 1 remove 20056 1 holly Ilex spp. 7 9 S N 2 1 remove 20057 1 holly Ilex spp. 6,7 9 S N 2 1 remove 20058 1 Norway maple Acer platanoides 8 8 201 0 N 2 2 retain Morgan Nolen &Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220, Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 - .* Attachment A:Existing Tree Inventory Data Morgan Nolen MHA16024 Progress Landing-Tree Data 5-6-16 Rev.3-5-17.xlsx AJJOCIATLf r Page4of5 No. Lot No. Common Name Species Name DBH1 C-Rad2 Canopy3 0/S4 HT5 Cond5 Pres' Comments Treatment 20059 1 Norway maple Acer platanoides 14 10 314 0 N , 3 2 retain 20062 8 fruit unknown 7 8 S N 1 1 remove 20063 8 holly Ilex spp. 7 8 S N 1 1 remove 20064 8 holly Ilex spp. 6 8 S N 1 1 remove 20065 8 fruit unknown 8 8 S N 1 1 remove 20066 8 fruit unknown 2x8 8 S N 1 1 remove 20067 8 fruit unknown 8 8 S N 1 1 remove 20068 8 holly Ilex spp. 7 8 S N 1 1 remove 20069 8 fruit unknown 9 8 S N 1 1 remove 20070 8 holly Ilex spp. 6 8 S N , 1' 1 remove 20072 ROW fruit unknown 6 8 S N 1 1 remove 20073 ROW fruit unknown 10 8 S N 11 1 remove 20074 11 cherry Prunus spp. 15 14 S N 2 1 remove 20075 11 Japanese maple Acer palmatum 7,2x8,9 6 S N 2 1 remove 20076 ROW cherry Prunus spp. 12 6 S N 1 1 remove 20077 ROW fir Abies spp. 12 12 S N 2 1 remove 20078 ROW vine maple Acer circinatum 2x7,8 14 S N 2 2 remove 20079 ROW plum Prunus spp. 7 8 S N 2 2 remove 20080 ROW lodgepole pine Pinus contorta 11 6 S N 1 1 remove 20081 12 cherry Prunus spp. 8,2x10 16 S N 2 1 remove 20082 12 deciduous unknown 7 6 S N 1 1 remove 20083 12 deciduous unknown 6x7 6 S N 1 1 remove 20084 ROW Austrian pine Pinus nigra 7 8 0 N 2 1 remove 20085 ROW deciduous unknown 15 12 0 N 2 1 remove 20089 9 pin oak Quercus palustris 7 13 531 0 N 2, 2 retain 20090 ROW deciduous unknown 8 6 0 N 11 1 remove 20091 ROW arborvitae Thuja spp. 6x7 0 N n/a n/a shrub remove 20092 12 fir Abies spp. 10 6 0 N 1 1 remove Morgan Nolen &Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220,Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net l 971.409.9354 Attachment A:Existing Tree Inventory Data Morgan Holen MHA16024 Progress Landing-Tree Data 5-6-16 Rev.3-5-17.xisx fes--AJJOCIATrJ Page5of5 No. Lot No. Common Name Species Name DBHI C-Rad2 Canopy3 0/S4 HTS Condb Pres7 Comments Treatment 20093 11 Austrian pine Pinus nigra 7 4 0 N 2 2 remove 20094 12 hinoki cypress Chamaecyparis obtusa 6 4 0 N 2 1 remove 20095 12 'cherry Prunus spp. 7 6 S N 2 2 remove 301 10 fruit 'unknown 2x6 20 0 N 21 1 remove 302 ROW dogwood Cornus spp. 6 12 0 N 2 1 remove 303 12 Japanese maple Acer palmatum 6 9 0 N 2 2 remove 304 off-site pine Pinus spp. 9 3 0 N n/a n/a protect 1DBH is tree diameter measured at 4.5-feet above the ground level in inches;trees with multiple trunks splitting below DBH are measured separately and individual trunk measurements are separated zC-Rad is the average crown radius measured in feet. 3Canopy is the average tree canopy area(ft2)for on-site trees to be retained with Condition and Preservation ratings>2,calculated as:Canopy=(Average Tree Canopy Spread/2)2 x it. 40/S identifies the trees as either Open Grown or Stand Grown. 5HT identifies whether or not the tree is a Heritage Tree(either V for yes or N for no). 6Cond is the numerical condition rating(0-3)for on-site trees as defined in the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual: RATING VIGOR CANOPY DENSITY DEADWOOD FAILURE HISTORY PESTS DECAY 0 dead to severe decline <30% major scaffold branches >1 scaffold Infested major conks and cavities 1 declining 30-60% twig and branch dieback scaffold branches Infested one to a few conks;small cavities 2 average 60-90% small twigs small branches Minor present only at pruning wounds 3 good to excellent 90-100% little or none none None absent to present only at pruning wounds 'Pres is the numerical suitability for preservation rating(0-3)for on-site trees as defined in the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual: RATING CONSIDERATIONS The tree is a"hazard tree"as defined in chapter 18.120 of the Tigard Development Code and"hazard tree abatement"as defined in Chapter 18.120 in the Tigard Development Code cannot be 0 completed in a manner that results in tree retention consistent with tree care industry standards. The tree is dead,in severe decline,or declining but may still be retained if desirable for wildlife or other benefits because it is not considered a"hazard tree"or"hazard tree abatement"could be 1 performed. The tree has average health and/or structural stability that could be alleviated with treatment;the tree will be less resilient to development impacts and will require more frequent management and 2 monitoring after development than a tree rated as a"3". The tree has good to excellent health and structural stability;the tree will be more resilient to development impacts,and will require less frequent management and monitoring after development 3 than a tree rated as a"2". Morgan Nolen&Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220,Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 lit Attachment B: Effective Tree Canopy Cover Summary Morgan 1=lolen MHA16024 Progress Landing-Tree Data 5-6-16 Rev.3-5-17.xlsx AJJOCIATLJ-Lc Page 1 of 1 2x Canopy Area(sq.ft.) 2x Canopy Area(sq.ft.) 1.25 x Mature Mature Canopy 1.25x Mature Effective of Preserved Trees of Preserved Stands Canopy Area Area (sq.ft.)of Canopy Area Tree Canopy Canopy Lot Area (w/condition and (w/condition and (sq.ft.)of Native Non-Native (sq.ft.)of Area(sq.ft.) (Canopy Area Lot No. (sq.ft.) preservation rating>2) preservation rating>2) Planted Trees Planted Trees Planted Stands per Lot /Lot Area) Lot 1 6,903 1,030 - 884 - - 1,914 27.7% Lot 2 6,778 - - - 1,256 - 1,256 18.5% Lot 3 6,033 - - 2,454 - - 2,454 40.7% Lot 4 8,452 2,454 - 2,454 29.0% Lot 5 7,058 - - - 2,512 - 2,512 35.6% Lot 6 7,048 - - 3,338 1,256 - 4,594 65.2% Lot 7 I 7,205 - - 3,338 1,256 - 4,594 63.8% Lot 8 6,290 - - 884 1,256 - 2,140 34.0% Lot 9 10,425 1,061 - 2,454 - - 3,515 33.7% Lot 10 8,310 - - 3,338 - - 3,338 40.2% Lot 11 7,195 I 0 1 4,221 1 1,256 5,477 176.1% Lot 12 8,738 0 - 6,675 1,256 I 7,931 90.8% Tract A 2,014 - - 884 - - 884 43.9% Total Development Site 92,449 2,091 0 30,921 10,048 0 43,060 46.6% Notes:Effective tree canopy cover is required to be calculated on a lot/tract by lot/tract basis only in the R-1,R-2,R-3.5,R-4.5 and R-7 districts. The standard percentage of effective tree canopy cover for each lot or tract in the R-1,R-2,R-3.5,R-4.5 and R-7 districts shall be at least 15 percent. The standard percentage of effective tree canopy cover for the overall development site shall be at least: i.40%for R-1,R-2,R-3.5,R-4.5 and R-7 districts,except for schools(18.130.050(J)); ii.33%for R-12,R-25,R-40,C-N,C-C,C-G,C-P,MUE,MUE-1,MUE-2,MUC,MUR and I-P districts,except for schools(18.130.050(J));and iii.25%for MU-CBD,MUC-1,I-L and I-H districts,and for schools(18.130.050(1))in all districts. Morgan Molen &Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220, Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 ,r. Attachment C: Planted Tree Inventory Morgan 1=lolen ' MHA16024 Progress Landing-Tree Data 5-6-16 Rev. 3-5-17.xlsx Ai}OCIAT .J he Page 1 of 1 Mature Mature Available Structured Tree Canopy Spread Canopy Area Soil Volume Soil Volume Lot No. Species Name/Common Name Size (ft.) (sq.ft.) (cu.ft.) (cu.ft.) Location No. 1 Cornus nuttallii / Pacific dogwood 1.5" 30 707 600+ n/a Street A 12 _2 Cercidiphyllus japonicum / katsura 1.5" 40 1,256 600+ n/a Street A 12 3 Quercus garryana /Oregon white oak 1.5" 50 1,963 600+ n/a Street A 12 4 Cornus nuttallii /Pacific dogwood 1.5" 30 707 600+ n/a Street A 12 5 Cornus nuttallii /Pacific dogwood 1.5" 30 707 600+ n/a Street A 11 6 Cercidiphyllus japonicum / katsura 1.5" 40 1,256 600+ n/a Street A 11 7 Cornus nuttallii / Pacific dogwood 1.5" 30 707 600+ n/a Street A 11 8 Cornus nuttallii / Pacific dogwood 1.5" 30 707 600+ n/a Street A 10 9 Cornus nuttallii / Pacific dogwood 1.5" 30 707 600+ n/a Street A Tract A 10 Quercus garryana /Oregon white oak 1.5" 50 1,963 600+ n/a Street A 9 11 Cercidiphyllus japonicum /katsura 1.5" 40 1,256 600+ n/a Street A 8 12 Cornus nuttallii / Pacific dogwood 1.5" 30 707 600+ n/a Street A 8 13 Cercidiphyllus japonicum /katsura 1.5" 40 1,256 600+ n/a Street A 7 14 Cornus nuttallii / Pacific dogwood 1.5" 30 707 600+ n/a Street A 7 15 Cercidiphyllus japonicum /katsura 1.5" 40 1,256 600+ n/a Street A 6 16 _Cornus nuttallii / Pacific dogwood 1.5" 30 707 600+ n/a Street A 6 17 Cercidiphyllus japonicum / katsura 1.5" 40 1,256 600+ n/a Street A 5 18 Quercus garryana /Oregon white oak 1.5" 50 1,963 600+ n/a Street A 3 19 Cercidiphyllus japonicum / katsura 1.5" 40 1,256 600+ n/a Street A 2 20 Cornus nuttallii /Pacific dogwood 1.5" 30 707 600+ n/a Street A 1 21 Cercidiphyllus japonicum / katsura 1.5" 40 1,256 600+ n/a Yard 5 22 Quercus garryana /Oregon white oak 1.5" 50 1,963 600+ n/a Yard 6 23 Quercus garryana /Oregon white oak 1.5" 50 1,963 600+ n/a Yard 10 24 Quercus garryana /Oregon white oak 1.5" 50 1,963 600+ n/a Yard 7 25 Quercus garryana /Oregon white oak 1.5" 50 1,963 600+ n/a Yard 4 26 Quercus garryana /Oregon white oak 1.5" 50 1,963 600+ n/a Yard 11 27 Quercus garryana /Oregon white oak 1.5" 50 1,963 600+ n/a Yard 12 _ Notes:Twenty(20)street trees are required along Street A with a frontage of 793.44 linear feet.Seven additional yard trees are proposed which exceeds the 40%effective tree canopy cover requirement for the overall development site. Morgan IlOIen & Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway, Suite P220, Lake Oswego, OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 1 TREE PRESERVATION AND REMOVAL KEY NOTES: V) -- 0 ERRING TREE CANOPY. E■snMC TREE TO BE REMOVED. CC LWLI I l7 PROVIDE TREE PROTECTION FENCE Z 1 ` Q PROPOSED LOT ERE ' _ I TRACT"Aa OO PROPOSED PUBLIC STCRM,SANITARY SERER,ACCESS B L a 1 IURNARWND EASEMENT. W ti,�`Ea^ I 1 .77 ,m. O PROPOSED ENLo NG SETBACK IME ■ TREE PROTECTION SPECIFICATIONS I ,m,r0 90 ,mN 'm„ Inn s T PMDPG�D ORVENAY T- 0 N1,f 44 Alp.� � �PROPOSED SDEIFAIK �N I�$ 1.TREE PROTECTION ZONE.THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL •��1 B — \'_ m 0 PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PATUBAY EASEMENT. ..-c` z' DESIGNATE THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE ITPZI.WHERE ♦i rm � '.�I --.-- • TURNAROUND EAgyENT � FEASIBLE,THE TPZ SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AT THE I I �. __., S ��' "R' l� • TREES,THE TU MAY BE ESTABLISHED WITHIN THE THE 'as -' I INF RE MUST BE INSTALLED SER TO DRIPLINE OF PROTECTED TREES AS A MINIMUM.IF ,®, � I _ O 10 I I --- -cb GENERAL NOTES: DRIPLINE AREA IF THE PROJECT ARBORIST DETERMINES '� � - V THAT THE TREES WILL NOT BE UNDULY DAMAGED.THE 1. SEE SHEET A S 1 B USING CONDITIONS'FOR EmiTMG REntERS LEGEND. v. LOCATION DRAWIE TPZ NGS.BE SHOWN ON I �,. • �, 9 � � ; CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS. 1 tilt - +•e _'� 2. EXSIRNG TREE CANOPY PER MORGAN XOLEN k ASSOCIATES TREE DATA,MAY g EM,Z01B. 2.PROTECTION FENCING All TREES TO BE RETAINED SHAH /� \ Xmr N e1 • OFTSIR TREES RERIME PROPERTY OIMER'S RNITTEN AUnrRRZATION FORz oBE PROTECTED BY 5 CHAIN LINK FENCING OR OTNER h : T. '$ fdNOVAL 0" wFENCING AS APPROVED BY THE CITY.PROTECTION FENCING / .� -ZMX moAN PLEASE REFER ro ARBORIST REPRtT DR DETARED MFtlR LRER REGARDING ,d' v 5 SHALL BE SECURED TO STEEL POSTS PLACED NO FURTHER t, T �w�A II SE ,,,...„,,,,‘„,„...31_, TREES. o�e o¢ THAN B-FEET APART AND SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE EDGE //yy]��,,�� ICiGl e OF THE TPZ. ]N� '' ■ N� • gRA'J�\iP��a�c ��\Y •..�!\,. _� 0 2 n O ~F eMN��.1, p `� „ f �1��,•1y� SYMBOL LEGEND: E°�.4 3.PRECONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE.THE PROJECT ra /� 1 , w 0 w f o ARBORIST SHALL BE ON SITE TO DISCUSS METHODS OF �� ` soon mar Tm $� mes ¢,^y y m TREE REMOVAL AND TREE PROTECTION PRIOR TO ANY A ,� • \ I COORDINATE MTX THE PROJECT ARMXIST POOR TO OPENING CONSTRUCTION. �• 11 `�'� i A.!mnF on. ,nM _ PROTEC10N A DOCG FOR BOOTY RUMANMG ARBORIST •IE ♦ aS TO MOIPTRt d'DOCAEXT ROOT T ESTE G r TUNNEf1NG TO 4.PRUNING.THE PROJECT ARBORIST CAN HELP IDENTIFY IF . �" n W /' ��•#,RM MESERSECMnCA ROOTS NTACT MTHM THEmENW AND WHERE PRUNING IS NECESSARY ONCE TREES x �p �.. 1' - TONS ` ' COORDINATE RUH PROJECT AMORIST PRIOR TO OPENING LL RECOMMENDED FOR REMOVAL HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND 1 RN men THE SITE IS STAKED AND PREPARED FOR CONSTRUCTION. I 0 PROTECTION FENCING FOR MANAGE DITCH CONSTRUCTION, ��', _ _yNy Ali, e:J�� AMORIST TO MONTOR A DOCUMENT ROOT PRUNNG A DIRECT PRUNING SHAH BE PERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED TREE 1F1 1 7i�A , C Z AD,VSIYENTs TO LOCH AUGMENT TO PROTECT CRITICAL SERVICE. I N Jr ,.R •Mr P�'} ,..1P411440,.! O ] ROOTS,E ANY.ARBORIST TO COORDINATE ADJUSTMENTS TO Z Tye F� Wg. DTCH ALIGNMENT MTN PROJECT ENGINEER. Z S.TREE PROTECTION ZONE MAINTENANCE.THE T ` Ya'A4 `. Vr Z PROTECTION FENCING SHALL NOT BE MOVED,REMOVED, I IA I I I � Qa'• *�� Q6 I Z O Z OR ENTERED BY EQUIPMENT EXCEPT UNDER DIRECTION OF I `` © aoR �1%i /r�401-% 1 PROPOSED UTLITIES LEGEND Fg THE PROTECT ARBORIST, reoa 0'P a Non illt r F••I4rT�'-. >� Z <a. 6.STORAGE OF MATERIAL OR EQUIPMENT.THEIliF4R a, RARER UNE EC W :CD CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT STORE MATERIALS O0. I �1 I I 1I� 1 '„��mm • *No DRE HIDEn y EQUIPMENT WITHIN THE TPZ. 1 ®r ` '� _MT'' �) II,,,, , I "'lE.,.�� ♦ GATE OAK W� LAI_I EC Q 7.EXCAVATION.EXCAVATION WITHIN THE TPZ SHALL BE I 4*4 moi•aeon .rte IA� 6 "A9 .4 BLONDE VASE ISE Cl d AVOIDED If ALTERNATIVES ARE AVAILABLE.IF EXCAVATION I ' W ` N 0 0 61 IE1 0 WITHIN THE TPZ IN UNAVOIDABLE,THE PROJECT m"' I - SANITARY SETN:R UHF 0 CO M W fg-n'� -mss , ARBORIST SHALL EVALUATE THE PROPOSED EXCAVATION edL • r••" I. r. - / X 7 0 d W TO DETERMINE METHODS TO MINIMIZE IMPACTS TO TREES. - -�� _'� ^- ,- I 14 • I♦ SAx TARY SERER MµHOLE d L/)Z I-[C ALL CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE TP2 SHALL BE UNDER I __. ----� 1 --�-_�__ -- — STORM SERER USE THE ONSITE TECHNICAL SUPERVISION OF THE PROJECT I I RA ,��' / / STORM SERER MANHOLE ARBORIST. 01- :ti,i0FiBA��r my ,� l! ,d �_isg%t �. , I • ■ STOMA TENET 01101 BASH R.TREE PROTECTION INSPECTION.THE PROJECT ARBORIST ♦P;,� �I/, o SHALL INSPECT AND VERIFY THE LOCATION OF I _ a_ 1 I�V.:17 .' I — PROTECTIONMEASURESPRIORTOCONSTRUCHON, w� ////// ^ NN' `\ 5 MONITOR TREF PROTECTION MEASURES REGULARLY,AND �;K �,r'. PROVIDE BIWEEKLY WRITTEN REPORTS TO THE CITY ` I `` I,Morgan Nolen,attest that[his Tree Preservation antl e DURING PERIODS OF ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION. I mn �_wJI \ r Removal SNe Plan meets[he rSSI EAI ents in Section l0, l �� part 1,of the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual. 9.OFFSITE TREF REMOVAL OFFSITE TREES REQUIRE PROPERTY �' �� •_- #,m COMPLETED, AFTER ROJECT HAS BE PR VIDEA TO I ',,'pI }ter ,TP EGr. fa 1 OWNER'S WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FOR REMOVAL I :11.:11%1% 'i,s e1 i. T U g Ft FIN HAT ES THE ME NEEDE 10.FINAL REPORT AFTER THE PROJECT HAS BEEN Morgan Nolen COMPLETED,THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL PROVIDER I I F I I'•A Board Certified Master Arborist PN61458 ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified �ss MAINTAIN AND PROTECT THE REMAINING TREES. ({VI 1 I 0� � I 4 I Date:March 8,2017 II C\�I 2 3 F O' i, . ARBORIST -.0.a.0, g d ,i i 3 C I o I Morgan Haien m --A.--A IOCIATC!- rj a� n I MORGAN HOLEN 8,ASSOCIATES - j, _ 3ORGAN H PATHWAY.OCTA P220 LAKE OSWEGO.OREGON 9]D35 h PH: 9]i-009-9356 F I , T , I , PEREBA 6/3o/70e § / H.,, .LL N.a.aP,, 0 ti E0 TREE PLANTING LEGEND � _-— SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME CpM0l1 NNE ALE WAND, w - I CarMp1yMa/AmAaaR KAIANA 1.s•GSL B ? _ _ r.$ TRACT "A" W �a $ 1 O Cams nuftMFR PACIFIC GOGRDOD IS CIL 1D 4 A ErICY" Nm 8F ..0O O.NO , lms (AIRaa 9nrPa OREGON METE OAK 1.5•CIL II1.5. . ,„ &..., 0 .T g.1 1111111111 1 •�, ..� — "tk"a' TREE CANOPY SITE PLAN KEY NOTES: PROPOSED UTLITIES LEGEND r 9 '.: it 3 O --- ---= - --, 7� 0+ EXISTING REMAINING TREE CANOPY. RATER UNE II • L 9' 1 O EXISTING R GANNG TREES(SEE PROTECT p!MEASURES ON 10 \ rl SLEET 7,"PEE PRESERVATION AND REMOVAL SITE PUN). AK DRE HYDRANT I �_ I j-� ifilli10 9 ®PROPOSED LOT UNE i • GALE yAYE I B�// `` .Q PROPOSED wBuc wmlNr SEWER&STORM SERER n 9 BLOYAFF vAVE sm I - EASEMENT. O z SAMTARY SEWER UNE _ I I I , -) atop Q PROPOSED BUILDING SETBACK INE twS g • SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE Lyy � I -- -- ©PROPOSED WEIVFIYAY. O W L_L�__ _T I Ir 1� IFN C PROPOSED SIDEWALK. x Tu N 8 — VON SEWER UNE 5 os !` o=O O n O • STORM SEYEN uAMIOLL •-t- I'-, ,I / ` © Qe PROPOSED PEDESIMAM PATHWAY FORGEST. H E Zo 0■ STCTW SERER CATOI BARN I I`I , \ 11 6 B Le I 12� Oj PROPOYO wTN rn+TDngE. ¢Fm V1I 11 7��it� i'i ,esg{ %A91 GENERAL NOTES: g �. `41 �a E TREE PLANTING NOTES 1 S ' s�,.a lir _________1/2::::::: _ 1� S i` O^' IMO I. SEE SHEET a,s a B'EXISTING cONdnws FOR Ensm+c FEATURES LEGEND. 04 �y 2. E%sTNG TREE CANOPY PER MORGAN NOLEN A ASSCOATES TREE DATA MAY 1.PRIOR TO STREET TREE PLANTING ALONG,LANDSCAPE E. %II - ---- 1110 --- dl l STI2m6 CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE TOADEPTH OF 361NCHES .fir F '_-41111 �C 74. 1 RINSE RDTRNMBOtlST REPORT FOR DETNUIED aKgMAlltll REGARDING Z AND BACKFILL WITH AMENDED TOPSOIL.TOPSOIL AMENDMENTS 11 l {I SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. I I i 1 I WNL. E �S g I IW 0. 2.IRRIGATION 708E DESIGN/BUILD BY THE LANDSCAPE I �_ co �. I I ' 72 (11 1 11 ' Im 11-_ -- O -------- • 2A Z ~ CONTRACTOR IF - aa 3.NEW TREES THAT ARE PUNTED TO MEET THE EFFECTIVE CANOPY B i i` 6 r 3 Z T REQUIREMENTS SHALL CONFORM TO THE APPLICABLE g I d R a STANDARDS IN THE TIGARD URBAN FORESTRY MANUAL THEY R -.;1%�, \\\ f 4 19I� . I CLI U)rn Z SMALL BE PLANTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICAN DSFOR %W �/%O 1 2 ��\ eh Td F) `Y ..{,/} W......— I Q NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE(ANSI)STANDARDS FOR TREE e..� „ill _�\\..,q, ✓ IFN (Y EJ PLANTING(A300,PART 6)AND ADDITIONAL STANDARDS a1 - CJ O O) W ADOPTED BY THE OREGON LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS BOARD. R `_ O CO M Lav AMERICAN ASSOCIATION SHAM MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE I OD I`'!._E 25'IA - O--L I •UN I re 0 0Z cc AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN FOR NURSERY STOCK I .---+_— ' `TED ---.7— - IR� ) a u)Z H- IANSIZ601)FOR GRADE N(f10R BETTER.DOUBLE STAKE TREES I • \y -----�• IF NEEDED FOR STABILITY DURING THE ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD. ZD�l � ` 17 21 I Morgan Haien,attest that this Tree Canopy Site Plan A.ROOT MANUFACTURER'S SHALL REINSTALLED ACCORDING TOT HE I a+�.tilr7t>•j .Sprue' MANUFACTURER'S SPEUFIUTIONS WHEN A STREET TREE IS ,14'N ^� \' meets the requirements In Section l0 part 2,of the City PLANTED WITHIN S'OF ANY HARD SURFACE,PAVING,OR UTILITY I $ �.` `\\` s - Cl) of Tigard Urba'1 Forestry Manual BD%. l '� - .Nam / \ 5 �(fys t. P S.TREES 21,22,24&25 SHALL BE FIELD FIRED ON EACH LOT IN I s I ILEI^ 1 1 Morgan Hokn i COORDINATION WITH THE PROACT ARBORIST. IREL Is\`, t^°I `\ ISA Board CerNRed Master Arborist PN-614511 '7E ISA tree Risk Assessment qualified 1 I 1 2 I 3 •\ YI`_- + Date:March B,2017 h Ir I - I I ARBORIST v-�� 3. I I I I 1• 4 , i $ P-- 1 }� i L i 24 Morgan Molen m r I R**AO vlmn A.-UIOCIATE,/-' I ; E f I MORGAN HOLEN&ASSOCIATES S O E 9 �¢ I IOI7 3 MONROE PARKWAY,SUITE P 220 nI >xw ”` LAKE OSWEGO.OREGON 97034 PH: 971-409-9354 Tj -1BrtRa35/xme(1) BE i t i s / W W/ N C.4 2 2 RECEIVED 71 City of Tigard MAY 2 5 2017 , . .1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF TIGARD TIGARD Minor Modification Type I Appli '� INEERING PROPOSAL SUMMARY (Brief description) I r1 On\OiAtri 01 Frim upw f x'5114 PFJ REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS Owner's Signature/Written Authorization ❑ Title Transfer Instrument or Deed Site Plan(2 large plans drawn to scale I n and one reduced to 8.5"x111 ") Property address/location(s): 120 7 S I 3S !�L /1 Applicant's Statement/Narrative (2 copies)Address criteria in: TDC 18.360.050.B.1-11 Tax map and tax lot #(s): 2.,s1 09 nI(1z:. jzfFiling Fee Site size: 7 •((o AZ, I (Ht S'IAI I l Sl: ONLY Applicant*: (WV-40i ikerMt s - N I r-i otAIINS07•1 _2O f _ Case No.: �F Address: 1133 AJ In) 6,4 fei4C44' ��D ��v��/ p Related Case No.(s): City/state: OR Zip: 17°('t' Application Fee: 91- ti5 Phone: 5a w1s-Orst3 L Email: 14M04501J Q r1 JvS lQ1eho L•Gail Application accepted: �� By: Date: �4' PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER(S)* III Same as Applicant Name: 5 0 r‘A t Application determined complete: / Address: 12060 S i.) I�54k 141/t By: A 8 Date: S7 z-S /7 City/state: T1 NY-) ON- _ Zip: 4)/17-13 I:\CURPLN\Masters\Land Use Applications Rev.11/24/2014 Contact name: Phone number: *When the owner and the applicant are different people,the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written 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. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT The applicant's statement must include a summary of the proposed changes. Criteria in either 18.360.050(B) or 18330.020(B)(2) must be addressed with a detailed response to each criterion. Failure to provide the information needed to process the application would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. In addition,the Director must find that the proposed change is in compliance with all applicable requirements of Title 18 of the Tigard Development Code.To complete this review,the Applicant's proposal must include a discussion indicating how the site expansion/change will continue to comply with the maximum setback,building height,parking,and landscaping standards. Other requirements of this title such as clear vision,solid waste storage,non-conforming situations,signs,and tree removal may also be applicable depending on the type and location of the proposed modifications. City of Tigard • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • www.tigard-or.gov • 503-718-2421 • Page 1 of 2 • APPLICANTS To consider an application complete,you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTALELEMENTS as described on the front of this application in the"Required Submittal Elements"box. 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 found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application,including the policies and criteria,and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. SIGNAT 'ES of each owner of the subject property required. C/2.7/ 7 Applicant's si: • r- Print name Date Rozr,tag !.f. SuNAVf67G 0.-gr a ch 7 Owner's signature Print name Date S1/4S t 7 Owner's signature Print name Date ADDITIONAL OWNER/DEED HOLDER INFORMATION Name: Name: Address: Address: City/state: Zip: City/state: Zip: Signature: Signature: MINOR MODIFICATION APPLICATION City of Tigard • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • wwwtigard-or.gov • 503-718-2421 • Page 2 of 2 CITY OF TIGARD'PI RECEIPT v = 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD Receipt Number: 410850 - 05/25/2017 CASE NO. FEE DESCRIPTION REVENUE ACCOUNT NUMBER PMD UFR2017-00002 Modification to Plan of Approved Land 100-0000-43116 $703.00 Use-Type I Total: $703.00 PAYMENT METHOD CHECK# CC AUTH.CODE ACCT ID CASHIER ID RECEIPT DATE RECEIPT AMT Check 36070 LSMITH 05/25/2017 $703.00 Payor: RIVERSIDE HOMES, LLC Total Payments: $703.00 Balance Due: $0.00 Page 1 of 1 NNW Engineers, LLC ■ENGINEERS 3409 NW John Olsen Place Hillsboro, OR 97124 ■ Engineering Planning Phone(503)601-4401 Fax(503)601-4402 Website www.nw-eng.com May 24, 2017 SUB2016-00006 R L E V s APPLICANT ' S STATEMENT MAY 252017 CITY OF TIGARD APPLICANT/CONTRACT PLANNING/ENGINEERING PURCHASER: Riverside Homes, LLC Niki Munson 17933 NW Evergreen Parkway, #370 Beaverton, Oregon 97006 APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: Matthew Newman NW Engineers, LLC 3409 NW John Olsen Place Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 REQUEST: Type I Modification to SUB2016-00006 12-lot Subdivision "Progress Landing" relative to the Urban Forestry Plan SITE LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tax Lot 100; Tax Map 2S1 04AB Tigard, Oregon SIZE: 2.66 Acres LOCATION: 12060 SW 135th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 LAND-USE DISTRICT: R-4.5 (Low Density Residential) Engineering • Planning Managers: Matt Newman Steve White,PE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A. Tigard Comprehensive Plan B. 2016 Tigard Community Development Code: Chapter 18.390 Decision Making Chapter 18.430 Subdivisions Chapter 18.790 Urban Forestry Plan II. AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS Domestic Water: City of Tigard Water Drainage: City of Tigard Erosion Control: City of Tigard Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue Parks: City of Tigard Police Protection: City of Tigard Schools: Beaverton School District Sewer: City of Tigard Streets: City of Tigard Water Quality/Quantity: City of Tigard III. BACKGROUND: The applicant/contract purchaser, Riverside Homes, LLC, is requesting Type I Modification to Case#SUB2016-00006, a 12-lot Subdivision "Progress Landing," relative to the Urban Forestry Plan. The 2.66 acre property located in the R-4.5 zone is identified by the Washington County assessor as Tax Lot 100 of Tax Map 2S1 04AB, and is further defined as 12060 SW 135th Avenue,Tigard 97223. Project Status Case # SUB2016-00006, dated January 18, 2017 authorized development of a 12-lot subdivision. Final engineering plans have been submitted and reviewed. Redlines are now being resubmitted for review. One redline comment required submittal of this Modification since the Urban Forestry Plan has been changed since approval due to engineering requirements. Condition 3 is as follows: 3. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall provide a fee in the amount of$938 for the city's cost of collecting and processing the inventory data for the entire urban forestry plan of four retained open grown trees,and 25 planted trees($154 first tree +$784($28 x 28)=$938). This revision results in the retention of only three trees and the planting of 27 trees. The revision also requires removal of off-site trees on the north side of the site due to utility (sanitary sewer and storm) installation, construction of a retaining wall and access requirements. The updated Urban Forestry Plan with the background information and finding dated March 12, 2017 is attached. Type I Modification Progress Landing Page 2 of 7 IV. FINDINGS A. CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMENT: Except where required by the City of Tigard Community Development Code, this application is not required to address the city's goals and policies related to the development of land, since the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan is implemented by the code. B. CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 18.390: DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES 18.390.020 Description of Decision-Making Procedures A. General. All development permit applications shall be decided by using one of the following procedure types. The procedure type assigned to each action governs the decision-making process for that permit, except to the extent otherwise required by applicable state or federal law. The director shall be responsible for assigning specific procedure types to individual permit or action requests, as requested. Special alternative decision-making procedures have been developed by the city in accordance with existing state law, and are codified in Section 18.390.070. B. Types defined.There are four types of decision-making procedures, as follows: 1. Type I Procedure. Type I procedures apply to ministerial permits and actions containing clear and objective approval criteria. Type I actions are decided by the director without public notice and without a public hearing. C. Summary of permits by decision-making procedure type. Table 18.390.1 summarizes the various land use permits by the type of decision-making procedure. I (18.390.030) Urban Forestry Plan - Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of an Approved Land Use Permit 18.790.070 COMMENT: This request for preliminary review for Type I Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan approved per Case # SUB2016-00006, dated January 18, 2017. Required findings are provided under Chapter 18.790.070 of this report. Type I Modification Progress Landing Page 3 of 7 18.390.030 Type I Procedure A. Preapplication conference. A preapplication conference is not required for a Type I action. B. Application requirements. 1. Application forms. Type I applications shall be made on forms provided by the director as provided by 18.390.080.E.1. 2. Application requirements.Type I applications shall: a. Include the information requested on the application form; b. Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; and c. Be accompanied by the required fee. C. Administrative decision requirements. The director's decision shall address all of the relevant approval criteria. Based on the criteria and the facts contained within the record,the director shall approve, approve with conditions or deny the requested permit or action. D. Final decision. The director's decision is final for purposes of appeal on the date it is mailed or otherwise provided to the applicant, whichever occurs first. The director's decision is not appealable locally, and is the final decision of the city. E. Section not used. F. Section not used. G. Effective date.The director's decision is effective on the day after it is final. COMMENT: The required materials, forms, written findings and fees are submitted with this application. CHAPTER 18.790: URBAN FORESTRY PLAN 18.790.030 Urban Forestry Plan Requirements A. Urban forestry plan requirements.An urban forestry plan shall: 1. Be coordinated and approved by a landscape architect (the project landscape architect) or a person that is both a certified arborist and tree risk assessor (the project arborist), except for minor land partitions that can demonstrate compliance with effective tree canopy cover and soil volume requirements by planting street trees in open soil volumes only; Type I Modification Progress Landing Page 4 of 7 2. Meet the tree preservation and removal site plan standards in the Urban Forestry Manual; 3. Meet the tree canopy site plan standards in the Urban Forestry Manual; and 4. Meet the supplemental report standards in the Urban Forestry Manual. COMMENT: Morgan Holen & Associates, has prepared an urban forestry plan in accordance with the above standards. The plans are attached as Exhibits 10 & 11 of the land use application and has been revised for the civil engineering construction set (Sheet 7). The supplemental report included in the land use application has been revised dated March 12, 2017. The applicable standards and approval criteria of this Chapter are found in that report. 18.790.070 Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan Component of an Approved Land Use Permit A. General provisions. Except as exempted in subsection B of this section,any modification to the urban forestry plan component of an approved land use permit shall be processed as a Type I land use decision as described below. B. Exemptions. The following activities shall be exempt from the Type I modification to the urban forestry plan component of an approved land use permit process: 1. Removal of any tree shown as preserved in the tree canopy site plan (per 18.790.030.A.3) and supplemental report (per 18.790.030.A.4) of a previously approved urban forestry plan provided: a. The project arborist or landscape architect provides a written report prior to removal attesting that either the condition rating or suitability of preservation rating(per the supplemental report requirements in the Urban Forestry Manual) of the tree has changed to a rating of less than two; and b. A revised tree canopy site plan and supplemental report are submitted for review and approval prior to removal that reflect the proposed changes to the previously approved urban forestry plan. The revised tree canopy site plan and supplemental report shall demonstrate how the effective tree canopy cover requirements will be provided by tree planting, preservation and/or payment of a tree canopy fee in lieu of planting or preservation. COMMENT: This project is not exempt from a Type I modification since the proposed tree removal was necessary due to requirements related to utility installation and access road design Type I Modification Progress Landing Page 5 of 7 2. Modification of the quantity, location or species of trees to be planted in the tree canopy site plan and supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan provided: a. The modification results in the same or greater amount of future tree canopy through tree planting as the previously approved urban forestry plan for the lot or tract where the modification is proposed; b. Payment of a tree canopy fee in lieu of planting is not proposed as part of the modification; and c. A revised tree canopy site plan and supplemental report are submitted for review and approval prior to planting that reflect the proposed changes to the previously approved urban forestry plan. COMMENT: A revised tree canopy site plan and supplemental report has been submitted with this application. The plan results in overall tree canopy cover increasing due to the planting of two additional trees. 3. Modification of the tree protection fencing location in the tree preservation and removal site plan (per 18.790.030.A.2), tree canopy site plan and supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan provided: a. The project arborist or landscape architect provides a written report prior to modification of the tree protection fencing describing how the proposed modification will continue to protect the viability of the trees shown as preserved in the previously approved urban forestry plan;and b. A revised tree preservation and removal site plan, tree canopy site plan and supplemental report are submitted for review and approval prior to modification of the tree protection fencing that reflect the proposed modifications to the previously approved urban forestry plan. COMMENT: Tree protection fencing is shown on Sheet 7 of the civil engineering construction plans. The fencing plan has been modified due to the revised plan. Specifically, fencing has been removed due to the removal of the on-site and off-site trees on the north side of the site. 4. Modification of any other site elements that do not require any modification of the tree protection fencing location or trees to be planted or preserved in the tree preservation and removal site plan, tree canopy site plan and supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan; and 5. Maintenance of any trees in accordance with tree care industry standards. COMMENT: The site plan was modified due to the requirement for access in the area of the proposed sanitary sewer and storm lines on the north side of the site. Type I Modification Progress Landing Page 6 of 7 C. Application procedures. Modifications to the urban forestry plan component of an approved land use permit that are not exempted by subsection B of this section shall be processed as a Type I procedure, using approval criteria contained in subsection D of this section. COMMENT: This application is being submitted through a Type I Procedure as required. D. Approval criteria. The director shall approve the modification to the urban forestry plan component of an approved land use permit upon determining: 1. The project arborist or landscape architect has provided a report and statement certifying that the previously approved urban forestry plan did not account for the circumstances that lead to the proposed modification; COMMENT: The project arborist, Morgan Holen provided a revised Supplemental Report dated March 12, 2017 stating the reasons for the modification - installation of sanitary sewer and storm lines along with access road and retaining wall construction adjacent to the on-site and off-site trees. 2. The project arborist or landscape architect has provided a report and statement certifying that there is no practicable alternative to the proposed modification; and COMMENT: Ms. Holen states that there is no alternative due to the need for the installation so close to those trees. 3. The project arborist or landscape architect demonstrates through a revised urban forestry plan, compliance with Section 18.790.030. COMMENT: The revised urban forestry plan demonstrates compliance with Section 18.790.030. Specifically, three off-site trees and one boundary tree in the area of Lot 9 are being removed. Two additional trees are proposed to be planted on Lots 11 & 12 resulting in the effective tree canopy cover increasing for the entire site. V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Based upon the findings of this report and the submitted graphics material, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the requirements of the relevant sections of the City of Tigard Community Development Code for the requested Type I Modification to the Urban Forestry Plan; therefore, the request should be approved. Type I Modification Progress Landing Page 7 of 7