Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CPA2015-00002
1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 15- i 3 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, CPA2015-00002, TO REMOVE.12 ACRES OF LOCALLY SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS FROM THE"TIGARD WETLAND AND STREAM CORRIDOR MAP" INVENTORY. WHEREAS, Section 18.775.090 includes Special Provisions for Development within Locally Significant Wetlands and Along the Tualatin River,Fanno Creek,Ball Creek,and the South Fork of Ash Creek;and WHEREAS, Section 18.775.090.A. states in order to address the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources) and the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 666-023-0040) pertaining to wetlands, all wetlands classified as significant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map" are protected. No land form alterations or developments are allowed within or partially within a significant wetland,except as allowed/approved pursuant to Section 18.775.130;and WHEREAS,Section 8.775.130 Plan Amendment Option,provides that any owner of property affected by the Goal 5 safe harbor(1)protection of significant wetlands and/or(2)vegetated areas established for the Tualatin River,Fanno Creek,Ball Creek,and the South Fork of Ash Creek may apply for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment under Type IV procedure. This amendment must be based on a specific development proposal. The effect of the amendment would be to remove Goal 5 protection from the property, but not to remove the requirements related to the CWS Stormwater Connection Permit, which must be addressed separately through an alternatives analysis, as described in Section 3.02.5 of the CWS"Design and Construction Standards;"and WHEREAS, Section 8.775.130.A further provides that the applicant shall demonstrate that such an amendment is justified by an environmental, social, economic and energy (ESEE) consequences analysis prepared in accordance with OAR 660-23-040;and WHEREAS, the applicant prepared an ESEE analysis (Appendix B of Application) prepared in accordance with OAR 60-23-040, to justify removal of Goal 5 protection from 0.12 acres of significant wetlands on the subject property;and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council has considered applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; any applicable Metro regulations; any applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies; and any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances; and WI IEREAS, the Tigard City Council has found the following to be the applicable review criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, Decision Making Procedures;and 18.775 Sensitive Lands;and WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 6, 2015 and recommended approval of CPA2015-00002 by motion with a unanimous vote in favor;and WI WRENS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on July 28, 2015, to consider the request for a quasi- judicial Comprehensive Plan Amendment and determined that the amendment will not adversely affect the health,safety and welfare of the City and meets all applicable review criteria. O rd Certified to be a True Copy of Pro . 15 ') Original on File By: /114 / ORDINANCE No. 15-f3 Deputy Recorder-City .J$gaud Page I Date: i t. ,i NOW,THEREFORE,"111E CITY OF TIGARI3 ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Comprehensive Plan Amendment,CPA2[115-00002,is hereby approved. SECTION 2: The attached findings (Exhibit A) are hereby adopted in explanation of the Council's decision. SECTION 3: The ESEE analysis (Exhibit B) shall be incorporated by reference into the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the "Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map" shall be amended to remove the site from the inventory,as approved. SECTION 4: This ordinance shall be effective 3(1 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By &neral/nu)LiC vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this 421ay of q ii I)) _ ,2015. C4/rA- 442Gy "... Carol A. Drager,City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this PI g+day of Lel ,2015. n Jo L. Cook,Mayor Approved as to form: '4=4-6/:L6 / izz......____ City Attom ars) , s Date 7/RK5t-i . Ng juwt w,k c p6,2,0 e. ORDINANCE No. 15- Page 2 +1 Agenda Item: 5 - Hearinj Date:Iub 6.2)l5 Timc:7:00PI4 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION !NI FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD 120 DAYS = NA SECTION I, APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: DIRKSEN NATURE PARK WETLANDS EDUCATION CASE NOS.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2015-00002 REQUEST: The City of Tigard is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amtndment to remove 0.12 acres of Tigard significant wetlands from the Wetlands and Stream Corridor map to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisor Board (PRAB). The boardwalks that would extend into the mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. APPLICANT/ City of Tigard OWNER: c/o Jeff Peck 13125 SW Hall Blvd "Tigard, OR 97223 LOCATION: 11000 Block of SW Tigard Street. 48 acres on Tax Lots l S134DD 900, 1000, 2400, 2500; 2S103AA00200;2S103AB00200; 1S134DC,3000,3001,3002, 3100,3101, 3102, 3300,3400; ZONE/ COMP PLAN DESIGNATION: PR/Public Insutution and Open Space APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapter: 18.775 Sensitive Lands. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Planning Commission find that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the Cit} and meets the Approval Standards as outlined in Section V of this report. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council APPROVAL of the proposed amendment. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. CP\3us-u uoI)IRKSI:N?.NICRF PARK(1,.\ --- t'.\('J:IOF6 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Proposal Description.. The City requests removal of 0.12 acres from the City's Local Wetlands Inventory and from Sensitive Lands Review provisions of the Tigard Development Code, to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB). The boardwalks that would extend into mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. This comprehensive plan map amendment will enable the future installation of the boardwalks. The park improvements themselves are not a part of this application. Context of the Request The Park System Master Plan outlines the need to acquire park property and construct park improvements to preserve open spaces, enhance water quality and provide recreational opportunities. On November 2, 2010, Tigard voters passed a $17 million general obligation bond to fund the purchase of real property for parks and to fund a limited amount of park development. The Dirksen Nature Park (formerly known as the Summer Creek or the Fowler property) is a high priority project in the Park System Master Plan, the adopted City of Tigard CIP and the Notice of City Measure Election provided to voters regarding the 2010 parks bond. Dirksen Nature Park contains a mix of mature forests,wetlands, open space and existing active recreation facilities. The majority of the property will remain a natural area as approximately 35 acres, about 70%,are protected under a conservation easement with Metro. Dirksen Nature Park is designated as a community park and will become a unique environmental education resource for the City. This amendment includes an economic, social, environmental, and energy (ESEE) analysis of the proposed removal of 0.12 acres from the Local Wetland Inventory to accommodate two planned boardwalks, consistent with TDC 18.775. In 2013, the two boardwalks were included among other park improvements in the Conditional Use Permit (CPA2013-00001) and Sensitive Lands Review that was reviewed by the Hearings Officer. The Hearings Officer approved the proposed improvements except for the installation of the boardwalks and expressly noted the potential for an exception via a comprehensive plan amendment, which is the subject of this application. Vicinity Information: Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street, immediately north of Fowler Middle School. The subject site also includes an existing, paved section of the Fanno Creek Trail. The project site is located in the Tigard Area 3 neighborhood. SECTION IV. NOTICE AND COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES The city sent notice of a Public Hearing to interested parties and posted the request on the city's website on May 6, 2015. The city published notice of the Planning Commission and City Council hearings in the May 14, 2015 issue of the Tigard Times. The city received written comments from the Tualatin RiverKeepers and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in support of the requested comprehensive plan amendment. These letters are included within the land use application materials,which is attached to this staff report. SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The following review criteria apply to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) to the City of Tigard 'Wetland and Stream Corridors" map. CP,12015-rxxx)1)IRKSENNATUREPARI:CPA PAGE 2OF6 18.775.090 Special Provisions for Development within Locally Significant Wetlands and Along the Tualatin River, Fanno Creek,Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek A. In order to address the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources) and the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 666-023-0030) pertaining to wetlands, all wetlands classified as significant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map" are protected. No land form alterations or developments are allowed within or partially within a significant wetland,except as allowed/approved pursuant to Section 18.775.130. The subject property includes locally significant wetlands that are identified as locally significant wetlands on the City of Tigard `Wetlands and Stream Corridors" map and are, therefore, protected. The applicant has applied for the Plan Amendment Option in Section 18.775.130 to remove Goal 5 protections from 0.12 acres of significant wetlands to allow the proposed boardwalks for habitat enhancement and educational purposes. 18.775.130 Plan Amendment Option Any owner of property affected by the Goal 5 safeharbor (1) protection of significant wetlands and/or (2) vegetated areas established for the Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek may apply for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment under Type IV procedure. This amendment must be based on a specific development proposal. The effect of the amendment would be to remove Goal 5 protection from the property, but not to remove the requirements related to the CWS Stormwater Connection Permit, which must be addressed separately through an alternatives analysis, as described in Section 3.02.5 of the CWS "Design and Construction Standards." The applicant shall demonstrate that such an amendment is justified by either of the following: A. ESEE analysis. The applicant may prepare an environmental, social, economic and energy (ESEE) consequences analysis prepared in accordance with OAR 660-23-040. The applicant has chosen to demonstrate the amendment is justified through an ESEE analysis, rather than a demonstration that the wetlands are not significant. The applicant submitted an ESEE analysis dated 2-24-15 (Appendix B of Application) prepared in accordance with OAR 60-23-040, to justify removal of Goal 5 protection from 0.12 acres of significant wetlands on the subject property. This provision is met. 1. The analysis shall consider the ESEE consequences of allowing the proposed conflicting use, considering both the impacts on the specific resource site and the comparison with other comparable sites within the Tigard Planning Area; As described in the ESEE analysis, the applicant has considered the ESEE consequences of allowing the conflicting 1 use, in this case the two trail boardwalks, and considered the impacts on the specific resource site as well as other comparable sites within Tigard. As described in the applicant's analysis, the consequences of allowing the proposed conflicting use provide a net positive benefit to the resource through enhancements and the controlled access to the resource area. Since the proposal is specific to environmental education opportunities within these unique wetlands at Dirksen Nature Park,no other comparable sites exist within the Tigard Planning Area. This provision is met. 2. The ESEE analysis must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Tigard City Council that the adverse economic consequences of not allowing the conflicting use arc sufficient to justify the loss, or partial loss, of the resource; The ESEE analysis outlines the predominantly positive economic benefits of limiting the conflicting use by allowing the construction of the boardwalks to provide resource enhancement and access for educational purposes. C PA2t11s-d'm 12 r1IR KSEN NATUREP.11UC CP 1 PAGE 3 01:6 The ESFF analysis indicates that the " City of Tigard spent $3.3 million on the acquisition of Dirksen Nature Park. Planning for the initial phase of park development is underway,and according to the adopted park master plan, the cost estimate for full development of the park was in the range of$2 to $2.3 million. Passive uses, such as walking and wildlife observation, are important aspects to the park. Additionally, the site is intended to serve as an outdoor classroom and a center for environmental education and experiential learning. The proposed boardwalks are an integral element of the environmental education and interpretive program for the park, since these boardwalks yin allow visitors to experience two different and unique wetland ecosystems in the park in a safe, environmentally sound and ecologically sensitive manner." As identified in the ESF.F analysis, based on a US Fish and Wildlife Service report in calculating economic benefits of "refuge" visitation, "it is reasonable to assume that a clear, positive economic benefit exists for installing the boardwalks to not only enhance safe access into the wetland areas for wildlife observation, photography and environmental interpretation, but also as a means to further improve and enhance the quality of those unique wetlands by controlling visitor access." In addition, "The focus of the Washington County Visitor's Association toward the promotion of nature-based experiences reinforces the relative importance of providing and enhancing these opportunities for local residents and visitors. The development of Dirksen Nature Park will provide opportunities for increased tourism and visitation. The environmental education and experiences at the park will be enhanced by the installation of the proposed boardwalks." The proposed comprehensive plan amendment supports the city's investment of park acquisition fundsand enhances and improves access to the resource to provide opportunities for increased visitation for tourism and environmental education. The Tigard City Council may find that the economic benefits are sufficient to justify partial loss (0.12 acres,or 5,227 square feet) of the wetland resource. This provision is met. 3. In particular, ESEE analysis must demonstrate why the use cannot be located on buildable land, consistent with the provisions of this chapter, and that there are no other sites within the Tigard Planning Area that can meet the specific needs of the proposed use; The applicant states in their ESEE analysis that"The conflicting use (two trail boardwalks)is specific to the wetland resources at Dirksen Nature Park, and is actually less conflicting than the existing rogue trails. The park is designated as a community park and will become a unique environmental education resource for the City. The installation of the planned boardwalks can occur nowhere else on the site, other than in the wetland areas. Functionally, the boardwalks are required as an environmentally-sensitive, accessible extension of the park trails into the wetland habitats. The boardwalks will provide managed and controlled access near and into the wetland areas with the aim to eliminate rogue, off-trail passage through the wetland resources and to enable the successful restoration of the wetlands in those areas where past trail walking has occurred and damaged the immediate wetland environment. The boardwalks will further the environmental education opportunities for park users and provide safe, accessible platforms for community groups, students and classes to view and begin to understand and appreciate the nature and importance of these wetland habitats without damaging them and disturbing wildlife." Because of the unique nature of these wetland resources within Tigard and the unique education and access management control functions provided by the boardwalks, there are no alternative sites within the Tigard Planning Area that can meet the specific needs of the proposed use. This provision is met. 4. The ESEE analysis shall be prepared by a team consisting of a wildlife biologist or wetlands ecologist and a land use planner or land use attorney, all of whom are qualified in their respective fields and experienced in the preparation of Goal 5 ESEE analysis; The ESEE Analysis provided in Appendix B was prepared by a qualified team consisting of a land use attorney with Jordan Ramis, PC and environmental scientists with WH Pacific, qualified in their respective fields with experience CP: .t s-Ofli2 DIRKSEN NA• I:RE PARK CPA P.AGF a OF compiling such analyses. This provision is met. 5. If the application is approved, then the ESEE analysis shall be incorporated by reference into the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the "Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map" shall be amended to remove the site from the inventory. On approval of this request, the ESEE analysis will be incorporated by reference into the Tigard Comprehensive Plan,and the "Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map"will be amended to remove the sites (Appendix C: Survey `[ of Proposed Exclusion Areas) from the inventory. FINDINGS: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of TDC Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands. SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City Police Department reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it. The City Public Works Department was notified of the proposal and did not provide comment. SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) commented in a letter dated March 2,2105 in support of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment. The letter also includes recommendations for further protecting fish and wildlife and their habitats. This letter is included as an attachment to this staff report. Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL),Washington County, and Metro were notified of the proposal but provided no comment. SECTION VIII. STAFF ANALYSIS,CONCLUSION,AND RECOMMENDATION ANALYSIS: As shown in the analysis above, the applicant's ESEE analysis addresses the requirements of the Tigard Development Code, Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands. The subject property contains locally significant wetlands protected under Goal 5 safeharbor. The applicant has applied for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment under a Type IV procedure. The application is based on a specific development proposal for two boardwalks for habitat enhancement and environmental education. The applicant has demonstrated that such an amendment is justified by an ESEE analysis consistent with OAR 660-23-040. The ESEE analysis concludes that limiting the conflicting use to the proposed boardwalks would result in the most positive consequences of the three decision options. A decision to limit the conflicting use will avoid many of the negative consequences attributed to either allowing or prohibiting the conflicting uses. Through the application of site design and development standards to conflicting uses, the impacts on the significant wetland further can be minimized, and the remaining resource can be enhanced. There will be a relatively high level of economic, social, environmental and energy benefits achieved. Limiting the conflicting use offers the most benefit to the wetland (through controlled access and enhancement) and to the community (access for all and education opportunities), and it strikes a balance between conflicting uses and planning goals for the services provided in this public park. CONCLUSION Based on the findings and analysis, staff finds that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is consistent (:PA31IS.-ius,2 DIRKSF.N N\TURF PARI:LP 1, PAGE S OF 6 with applicable provisions of the Tigard Development Code, Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands. Staff agrees with the conclusion of the applicant's ESEE Analysis and recommends modifying the decision from prohibiting conflicting uses to limiting conflicting uses within the 0.12 acre significant wetland areas fot resource enhancement and environmental education purposes. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment modifying the current resource protection decision from prohibiting conflicting uses to limiting conflicting uses and removing 0.12 acres from the significant wetlands inventory described in the ``Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map". Attachments; Exhibit A City's Application dated February 14, 2015. June 29. 2015 PREPARED BY: Garyagenstecher DATE Associate Planner July 30.2015 APPROVED BY: Tom McGuire DATE Assistant Community Development Director CPA2015-00002 DFR.KSEN NATURE PARK CPP.1 PAGE 6 OF 6 ESEE Analysis for the Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks City of Tigard, Oregon Submitted to: City of Tigard, Oregon February 24, 2015 Prepared by: WHPacific Jordan Ramis,PC Conservation Technix,Inc. 9755 SW Barnes Rd, Ste 300 Two Centerpointe Drive, 6th Floor PO Box 12736 Portland,OR 97225 Lake Oswego,OR 97035 Portland,OR 97212 Phone: (503)626-0455 Phone: (503)598-7070 Phone:(503)989-9345 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Economic, Social, Environmental & Energy (ESEE) Consequences Analysis Introduction The City of Tigard proposes to remove the significant wetland designation from a portion of two wetlands located within the 48-acre Dirksen Nature Park,which is the City's newest community park and a unique environmental education resource. The Applicant is pursuing a comprehensive plan map amendment that includes an environmental,social,economic and energy(ESEE) consequences analysis to request to remove 5,254 square feet (0.12 acres) of wetland from the Local Wetland Inventory in two discreet areas of the park,thereby removing this land from sensitive lands protections as provided by the Tigard Development Code (18.775.130). These two exclusion areas are planned to be utilized for the development of two boardwalked trails associated with future park improvements.These boardwalks represent critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities,consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB). Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street,immediately north of Fowler Middle School. The two areas proposed for removal from the Local Wetland Inventory are located within wetlands designated as "significant" (i.e. a Statewide Planning Goal 5 resource) on the City of Tigard's "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map"and are protected.The City does not allow any landform alterations or developments within or partially within a significant wetland,except as approved pursuant to TDC 18.775.130. As described in the Plan Amendment Option section (CDC 18.775.130), the Code allows applicants to impact significant wetlands if the amendment is justified under one of two options. The first option is to conduct an Economic,Social,Environmental,and Energy (ESEE)analysis that considers the consequences of allowing the proposed conflicting use. The second option is to demonstrate the wetland's "insignificance."WI-IPacific reviewed the significance thresholds included as an addendum to the City of Tigard's Local Wetlands Inventory and determined that the quality of the wetlands and the connections to Summer Creek and Fanno Creek are significant. As such,the Applicant is submitting an ESEE analysis for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan map amendment via a Type-IV review. This report includes an analysis of the ESEE (economic,social,environmental and energy) consequences of three potential alternatives regarding a conflicting use impacting previously documented and protected significant lands located within the Dirksen Nature Park in Tigard. This ESEE analysis has been prepared in accordance with applicable provisions of Statewide Planning Goals (Goal 5) and the Goal 5 Rule (OAR Chapter 660, Division 023).This document focuses on the significant wetland and does not include a significant habitat evaluation. It is understood the significant habitat evaluation is an incentive based,non-regulatory element within the City's regulatory framework. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 2 of 24 ESEE Analysis Requirements The analysis is based on a highly refined and targeted removal of limited portions of two small wetlands areas from the local wetland inventory at Dirksen Nature Park that extend into a Goal 5 resource considered significant(e.g. a forested wetland north of Summer Creek and a wetland associated with Fanno Creek). The Goal 5 ESEE analysis involves evaluating the trade-offs associated with different levels of natural resource protection. As required by the Goal 5 rule,the evaluation process involves identifying the consequences of allowing,limiting or prohibiting conflicting uses in areas containing significant natural resources. Specifically, the rule requires the following steps: • Identify conflicting uses—A conflicting use is "any current or potentially allowed land use or other activity reasonably and customarily subject to land use regulations that could adversely affect a significant Goal 5 resource." [OAR 660-023-0010(1)1 • Determine impact area—The impact area represents the extent to which land uses or activities in areas adjacent to natural resources could negatively impact those resources.The impact area identifies the geographic limits within which to conduct the ESF-F analysis. • Analyze the ESEE consequences—The ESEE analysis considers the consequences of a decision to either fully protect natural resources; fully allow conflicting uses;or limit the conflicting uses.The analysis looks at the consequences of these options for both development and natural resources. • Develop a program—The results of the ESF.E analysis are used to generate recommendations or an"ESEE decision."The ESEE decision sets the direction for how and under what circumstances the local program will protect significant natural resources. Existing Local Protections The entirety of Dirksen Nature Park is within Tigard's Parks and Recreation (PR) zone.This zone classification defines permitted and prohibited uses,as well as development standards including = setbacks and building height restrictions. Sites in the PR zone with overlay zones,plan districts, inventoried hazards,and/or sensitive lands are subject to additional regulations. Conditional uses are subject to a Type-Ill review,and development in or near sensitive lands trigger review under the City's Sensitive Lands chapter(18.775). Sensitive lands are defined as lands potentially unsuitable for development because of their location within: • The 100-year floodplain or 1996 flood inundation line,whichever is greater; ■ Natural drainageways; • Wetland areas which are regulated by the other agencies including the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of State Lands,or are designated as significant wetland on the City of Tigard 'Wetland and Stream Corridors Map"; ' Steep slopes of 25% or greater and unstable ground;and • Significant fish and wildlife habitat areas designated on the City of Tigard"Significant Habitat Areas Map." ESEE Analysis 02/24115 DIrksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 3 of 24 The Sensitive Lands chapter outlines the permitted and regulated activities and uses within sensitive lands, as well as defines the review and approval processes for development consideration based on the type and intensity of the impact. The chapter further outlines processes in instances for requests for variances or plan amendments. With regard to wetlands,sensitive lands were mapped following a wetland inventory. Site Description & Project History Dirksen Nature Park is located within the Fanno Creek sub-watershed of the Lower Tualatin Watershed. Fanno Creek flows along the eastern boundary of the site. Summer Creek flows along the southern boundary of the site to its confluence with Fanno Creek. Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels (Tax Map: 2S103AA,Lot 200;2S103AB,Lot 200; 1 S134DC,Lots 3000, 3001,3002, 3100, 3101,3102,3300,3400; 1S134DD,Lots 900, 1000, 2400,2500) consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street. The site contains approximately 17 acres of wetland in total. Wetlands associated with Fanno Creek along the eastern edge of the property are predominately freshwater emergent marshes and account for approximately 8 acres of wetland.The likely water sources include flood water from Fanno Creek and groundwater flowing east across the site. A forested wetland is located along the western edge of the center of the site and is likely fed by rainwater that collects in flat areas during winter rains and held by poorly drained silty loam soils. Some of these forested wetlands extend to Summer Creek, where they are fed from flooding along the creek and groundwater. Portions of the property include other mapped environmental features including sensitive lands and riparian zones. A conservation easement with Metro protects 35 acres of the most sensitive areas on the property. Trails, boardwalks,interpretive signs and other educational elements are permitted within the conservation easement.The previously approved land use application and development plan is consistent with the conservation easement and has been ren iewed favorably by Metro, the easement holder. The development plans for Dirksen Nature Park include two trail boardwalks that extend into mapped wetlands and will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. Under consideration in this ESEE analysis is the request is to remove 0.12 acres from the City's Local Wetlands Inventory and from Sensitive Lands Review provisions of the Tigard Development Code to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks at Dirksen Nature Park to serve environmental education purposes. In 1994, the City of Tigard contracted with Fishman Environmental Services (FES) to prepare its Local Wetland Inventory (LWI). Expanding upon a wetlands inventory previously completed by another firm (SRI, 1989),FES developed an approach for completing the Goal 5 inventory and conducting the ESEE analyses that identified stream corridor segments as resource units.The study was completed in 1994 and approved by DSL in 1997. It is the basis for the adopted "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map". The wetland boundaries depicted on the Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map are approximate. A formal wetland delineation would be required prior to any site development in order to satisfy the ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 4 of 24 legal requirements of DSL and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. As required by Tigard's development code,a land use application for the development of the Dirksen Nature Park was submitted in 2013 as a Type-III Conditional Use Permit and Sensitive Lands Review.The park site analysis and land use application included a wetland delineation,natural resources assessment, stormwater report,geotechnical report and a no-rise certification.The Hearings Officer conditionally approved the project and released the final decision in late 2013.The two proposed boardwalks were included in the Conditional Use Permit and Sensitive Lands Review. The Hearings Officer did not approve the installation of the boardwalks and expressly noted the potential for an exception via a comprehensive plan amendment,which necessitated this ESEE analysis. The sensitive lands within Dirksen Nature Park will be protected and/or enhanced as described and approved in the land use approval for the park,which also took into consideration the various requirements related to Clean Water Services,Oregon Department of State Lands and the U.S. Corps of Engineers. Figure 1 shows the location and approximate size of local significant wetlands and creeks within Dirksen Nature Park.The wetlands are identified with the unit and identification number from the 1994 Local Wetlands Inventory. Figure 1:Mapped Significant Wetlands near Dirksen Nature Park Oirksan Nature Park ?,/ ' :r rH Local Significant Wetlands r Tigard Local Wetland inventory OSignitiara ��'� ,�¢ Ekon-Significant 4162): % Jurisdictional J . "� llnil&Wetland Invent resale to the lnventpryry assessments conducted by Fishman Environmental Services 1994) J' f7/' C Iotz i - L4;, t�1 ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 5 of 24 • Figure 2 provides summary data from the Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory of the quality (functions) and size of both relevant wetlands (totaling 19.37 acres)inventoried by FES. Figure 2:Summary Data from the Tigard Local Wetland Inventory for the Affected Wetlands Unit — Wetland. Acres Wildlife Fish Linkage Unique WQ Hydra Roc Ed Aesth 3 B-5 8.0 H M H L M H L L M 4 8-17 11.37 H L H H L M M L H H=High Wildlife=Wildlife Habitat Hydro=Hydrotagic Control M=Medium Fish=Fish Habitat Rec=Recreation L=Low Linkage=Linkage Ed=Education Unique=Uniqueness Aesth=Aesthetic Quality Upon review of the wetland data sheets from the Local Wetlands Inventory, the following was noted about these wetlands: a Wetland B-5: o Plant species identified included a mixture of invasive reed-canary grass, native spiraea, Oregon ash,and native willows. o Wetland classification of feature identified palustrine emergent,palustrine forest, and riverine habitat types. o Soil identified as Cove silty clay loam. ■ Wetland B-17: o Plant species dominating the feature included Oregon ash and slough sedge. Plant community dominated by natives. o Wetland classification identified palustrine forest and riverine habitats. o Yard debris dumping by area residents noted along impromptu trail. o Soil identified as Cove silty clay loam. As a component of the site development application for Dirksen Nature Park, a wetlands inventory and natural resources assessment were completed in 2013.The map shown in Figure 3 illustrates the "sensitive areas"identified within the Park,which consist of mixture of wetlands and their associated vegetative corridor. Due to the nature of the site specific wetland assessment,the naming convention used for Dirksen Nature Park is different than that of the Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. In comparing the older data from LWI to the newer and more detailed wetland study from 2013, the B-17 (LWI) wetland is referenced as Wetland 1,and B-5 wetland is referenced as Wetland 4. ESEE Analysis - 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 6 of 24 Figure 3:Delineated wetlands and Sensitive Areas within puksen Nature Park a A ' • v. ` + r •t .. % , , .1._______L. -...... ii i % 7: , 1 - V. . - t « , 4u :.--7 I 1; .P,ZI.‘ i'5 c3 f.-.7 1 - \--J -\\: � . i1 1 1 1 I - 4r. 1 k . I r'y 4t f 1 la Cir- — 1 eV 1 CLII i [SEE Analysis D2/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 7 of 24 As described in the Natural Resources Assessment for Dirksen Nature Park, the following are descriptions of the two wetlands where the planned boardwalks are proposed. Wetland 1 (7.27 acres within study area)is an extensive"Slope"wetland that runs south of SW Tigard Street and extends across to the western boundary of the site.The northern portion is mostly an open slope with shrubs and saplings. The remainder is an extensive forested wetland in a level to gently sloping basin with a relatively undisturbed native plant community. Forested wetland vegetation consists of Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa),Douglas spiraea (Spiraea douglasii),peafruited rose (Rosa pisocarpa), red osier dogwood (Cornus sericea), slough sedge (Carex obnupta),short scale sedge (Carex leptopoda),common camas (Camassia quamash),and corn lily (Veratrum californicum).Areas of standing water are evident,with the water table at or dose to the surface through much of the area during the winter and spring months. The open area vegetation consists of various introduced grasses,including meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis) and tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea),and patches of small Oregon ash. Large areas of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procerus)have been mowed. The water table is at or close to the surface during the wet season through most of this area. Wetland 4 (small part, 1.11 acre within the study area) is an extensive wetland in the Fanno Creek floodplain.The southern part of this wetland is forested. Vegetation consists of Oregon ash,pea-fruited rose,Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capitatus),red osier dogwood,and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). Other non-native dominants include English hawthorn and Himalayan blackberry.This forested wetland is well-developed and dense in cover.The northern part is more open with extensive areas of reed canarygrass. Shrub plantings have been established along the western edge of this area,consisting mostly of twinberry (Lonicera involucrata) and red osier dogwood. There are Oregon ash trees along the banks of Fanno Creek near the eastern property line. ESEE analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 8 of 24 pI" v, A m t.ntm CD a „ 7 Jat at -0 AIMS ,,....,.........„,,,„,„. . 1 .,_ .,,..„,,,,a,-.., „imam._ _..., .. . ... 0 ,. 1P1 41111104 _ - ons- 4?-0_ - ._ ft • nl - rirru,so2 JMlRA1f3a ...-_ ,q t J Ft,F M1 rn ri v / �. n.' 1,11E-664 1 to - - '4=1,7T~+[Sr• - - •I _ , . . .1 p^rpy--. va, ly ., r, lp v � — ! ...if %. ,t,-4._4-,,,r . - — ifctier-*ot y" n.-r c d• ar Ar- i R!_ d TRACT 2 r• +.. , - L. _ • ' r VSW. .1!.I r.,l , t^ / N 11. ! P— / WH Paci liC Figured(sheet 1.1) 4 PRCPCSED:.EvLiCR.rrENt ENC�WACnIENTAND kn7rGATFGv N -. i - C Ave krrm Park,CRT b'Nan!,OR 1 m at v ft N l0 '� O A A L, Removal Area #1: This wetland area is located in Wetland 1 (as identified on Figure 4, above) and will remove 2,447 square feet from the City's Local Wetland Inventory Map. Removal Area #2: This wetland area is located in Wetland 4 (as identified on Figure 4, above) and will remove 2,807 square feet from the City's Local Wetland Inventory Map. Description of the Conflicting Use An important step in the ESEE analysis is identifying conflicting uses that"exist,or could occur" within regionally significant resource areas and identified in the impact area.The Goal 5 Rule (OAR 660-023-0010) defines conflicting uses as follows: (1) "Conflicting use" is a land use,or other activity reasonably and customarily subject to land use regulations,that could adversely affect a significant Goal 5 resource (except as provided in OAR 660-023-0180(1)(b)). Local governments are not required to regard agricultural practices as conflicting uses. The Goal 5 Administrative Rule (OAR 660-023-0040) describes how conflicting uses are identified: (2) Identify conflicting uses. Local governments shall identify conflicting uses that exist,or could occur,with regard to significant Goal 5 resource sites. To identify these uses, local governments shall examine land uses allowed outright or conditionally within the zones applied to the resource site and in its impact area. Local governments are not required to consider allowed uses that would be unlikely to occur in the impact area because existing permanent uses occupy the site.The following shall also apply in the identification of conflicting uses: (a) If no uses conflict with a significant resource site,acknowledged policies and land use regulations may be considered sufficient to protect the resource site.The determination that there are no conflicting uses must be based on the applicable zoning rather than ownership of the site. (Therefore,public ownership of a site does not by itself support a conclusion that there are no conflicting uses.) (b)A local government may determine that one or more significant Goal 5 resource sites are conflicting uses with another significant resource site.The local government shall determine the level of protection for each significant site using the ESEE process and/or the requirements in OAR 660-023-0090 through 660-023-0230 (see OAR 660-023-0020(1)). As per the project description,only one conflicting use is under consideration - the planned installation of a trail boardwalk in two discrete locations within existing resource areas.The intent is to allow the boardwalks to extend into mapped wetlands and provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas.The installation of off-street,multi-use trails within the Tigard's PR zone is permitted outright; therefore, the intended project is allowed outright within the underlying PR zone.The planned boardwalks are integral components of the multi-use trail at Dirksen Nature Park,and they would be defined as "multi-use trails". ESEE Analysis — 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page SO of 24 The PR zone would allow a variety of conflicting uses to occur on the site but because of the focused nature of the proposed development request and the limited amount,and odd shape of land requested to be removed from the inventory,the practical effect of the request is to limit the conflicting uses to just the trail boardwalks.The remainder of the ESEE analysis will focus on the impacts of the removal of wetland areas from the inventory based on the one proposed conflicting use. The primary purpose of trail boardwalks is to further the environmental education opportunities for park users and provide safe,accessible platforms for community groups,birders, students and Tualatin RiverKeepers classes to view and begin to understand and appreciate the nature and importance of these wetland habitats without damaging them and disturbing wildlife. In the area of both of these proposed trail boardwalks,numerous existing rogue trails traverse the sensitive lands as a result of historic, uncontrolled access and have caused significant damage to the wetlands.The secondary benefits of the boardwalks are to aim to eliminate rogue, off-trail passage through the wetland resources,to provide managed and controlled access near and into the wetlands and to enable the successful restoration of the wetlands in those areas where past trail walking has occurred and damaged the immediate wetland environment.The proposed boardwalks will help save and protect the wetland resources; they are the single most important component of restoration plans for the wetlands in this urban nature park because without them, people interested in entering the wetlands will continue to lack an alternative to the rogue trails. Figures 5 and 6 show the impact areas for the two planned boardwalks. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 1] of 24 Figure 5:Enlargement of Removal Area 1 „e,.. E-Pst 1UL fo lc OEcawssalm 15 ./ '' \ ( •: r 5.5 [ a&�s ‘ \ �s 3 \ 1 244120F 'S\ Int IS if --\"- :iii118:114 \ / \, , \ G.. - *um Imo., / ....... (�17 f s r�� \ �✓ 54 �`•_!..�— 1611t �1j9L4 fir, , 4 0110I S.1110[5011 SYR1 ACC '4ALL DIM 14AD[t \ IC)n 'N0' N o lA 0081Arf M - . SCALE • 10 0S 10 RE1 1 t . lets ..);(mil, 111104 • 10 r1. I 7�� 72 055475-C-01050116 02/45/15 ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 12 of 24 Figure 6:Enlargement of Removal Area 2 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1111" \ 1 ,/T1y ; A `� 1 A �s , .10 -Ir / -, K' F f r 110 .- 1 - , ,........„.......\ 0..„..„...... s it, ‘.........01:„.... yy 4 \Oh \ 1-,,,, \ \ ♦ \ \ \ \ ♦ \ \\ N \ �rZ� \\1, N' z a i N *.` ULf R �X SS a ESEE Analysis ` 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 13 of 24 Figure 7 summarizes relevant acreage information about the park,its wetlands and the potential impact areas associated with the two planned boardwalks. Figure 7;Resource and Impact Area Summary Site Area(Dirksen Nature Park) 48.04 ac. On-Site Sensitive Lands Area 29.5'ac. Specific Resource Area(footprint of both boardwalks) 0.033 ac. Specific Impact Area Acreage(10'temporary 0.088 ac. construction buffer around boardwalks) Combined Resource and Impact Area 0.12 ac. Number of Parcels Affected 2 'estimated based on combrnatbn of mapped wetlands/vegetative corridors and LIAR data As noted in the table above, the proposed removal of 0.12 acres from the Local Wetlands Inventory represents 0.4% of the overall sensitive lands on site and 0.02%of the total park acreage. The requested removal of the 0.12 acres of wetland area enable the installation of two elevated boardwalks will provide a single access entry into each wetland with high quality views, will enhance the experience of the wetland,and will have far less impact to the resource than the uncontrolled use that exists today. Site Specific ESEE Analysis This section details the three alternatives and discusses the Economic,Social, Environmental and Energy (ESEE) impacts to the relevant portions of two wetlands located within Dirkscn Nature Park, addressing the following: • Prohibit conflicting uses providing full protection of the resource site; • Limit conflicting uses offering limited protection of the resource site (balance development and conservation objectives); ▪ Allow conflicting uses fully with no local protection for the resource site. The action to 'limit conflicting uses'within this context of this ESEE Analysis is defined as allowing only the limited intrusion of the boardwalks as proposed into the wetland and minimizing impacts to the extent practicable through strict construction management.The action to'allow conflicting uses' in this case is to allow the development of the full range of permissible uses noted in the underlying Parks and Recreation (PR) zone,which includes such amenities as playgrounds,picnic areas, shelters,structures, sport courts and fields and other related items. Economic Consequences The following describes the economic consequences for each of the three protection scenarios. Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection) The economic consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses would be mixed,because the acreage occupied by wetlands could not be used to promote and support on-site environmental ESEE Analysis ------ 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 14 of 24 education activities and programming that either have a direct local economic benefit or provide an offset to on-going operating expenses incurred by the City. Prohibiting the conflicting use would avoid a modest capital construction expenditure by the City of Tigard for the costs of the boardwalks,but City maintenance crews will incur on-going operating expenses related to monitoring unwanted activity and hiking in the wetlands,installing trail blockages to attempt to minimize through-passage along the existing rogue wetland trails, and on-going replacement costs for wetland restoration and vegetation management.There may be a reduction in short term construction jobs necessary to complete the development of the park and planned boardwalks. Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) Limiting the conflicting use to the two trail boardwalks and relying on the State's fill and removal permit and Corps of Engineers 404/401 regulatory processes would,generally, have positive consequences. DSL and Corps regulations set enhancement and mitigation thresholds based on documented impacts and allow some flexibility to allow conflicting urban uses where no reasonable alternative exists. Additionally,the City of Tigard spent$3.3 million on the acquisition of Dirksen Nature Park. Planning for the initial phase of park development is underway, and according to the adopted park master plan, the cost estimate for full development of the park was in the range of$2 to $2.3 million. Passive uses,such as walking and wildlife observation,are important aspects to the park. Additionally,the site is intended to serve as an outdoor classroom and a center for k environmental education and experiential learning. The proposed boardwalks are an integral element of the environmental education and interpretive program for the park, since these boardwalks will allow visitors to experience two different and unique wetland ecosystems in the park in a safe, environmentally sound and ecologically sensitive manner. The US Fish and Wildlife Service published a report in 2013 called Banking on Nature: The Economic Benefits to Local Communities of National Wildlife Refuge Visitation This report detailed the economics related to refuge (park) visitation. The Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge was one of the case study examples in the report. It is worth noting that the Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge is not only very close to the City of Tigard,but the Refuge offers a similar experience to those planned at Dirksen Nature Park. In calculating economic benefits,the USFWS grouped visitation into two categories: consumptive and non- consumptive. Consumptive includes those activities that utilize the site's resources,such as • fishing and hunting. Non-consumptive uses include passive activities,such as cycling, walking/hiking,photography and interpretation. Based on the report, the Tualatin River Refuge had over 100,000 visits in 2011,and all visits were for non-consumptive activities.A figure for economic value was estimated by multiplying net economic values for hunting, fishing,and non- consumptive recreation use (on a per-day basis) by estimated refuge visitor days for that activity, which was then divided by the refuge budget for 2011.The report estimated that the total economic effects of the Tualatin River Refuge was $3.87 for every$1 of budget expenditures. Applying this value to the planned development expenditures for Dirksen Nature Park results in a potential economic benefit of the park as between$7.7 and $8.9 million.While it is not reasonable to assign 100%of that potential economic benefit to the installation of the two proposed boardwalks,it is reasonable to assume that a dear, positive economic benefit exists for installing the boardwalks to not only enhance safe access into the wetland areas for wildlife (SEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 15 of 24 observation,photography and environmental interpretation,but also as a means to further improve and enhance the quality of those unique wetlands by controlling visitor access. The Washington County Visitors Association (WCVA)is the primary destination marketing organization for Washington County and markets the destination,its attractions and activities to leisure and business travelers around the globe and locally via several media channels.The Tourism 2015 Strategic Plan,prepared by the WCVA,is the organization's guiding document and sets the focus on high-yield,niche markets to expand recreational and leisure opportunities for visitors and residents.The Tourism 2015 Plan identified the key tourism attractors for Washington County and identified outdoor recreationalists,nature enthusiasts and birders (among others) as niche market segments. According to the Plan,"nature-based experiences are at the core of the Oregon tourism experience.While the county does not have the coastline, mountains,and raging rivers of other areas of Oregon,it does have forests,wetlands and meandering rivers that support diverse flora and fauna and opportunities for visitors to discover and learn in comfort. A distinguishing aspect of these natural features is their proximity to Portland and major population centers. Nature-based attractions throughout Washington County include Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge,among others."The focus of the WCVA toward the promotion of nature-based experiences reinforces the relative importance of providing and enhancing these opportunities for local residents and visitors.The development of Dirksen Nature Park will provide opportunities for increased tourism and visitation.The environmental education and experiences at the park will be enhanced by the installation of the proposed boardwalks. Negative economic consequences include the possible necessity to construct expensive stormwater infrastructure to manage increased runoff with decreased natural control mechanisms. Allow Conflicting Uses£no local protection). The economic consequences of allowing conflicting uses are mostly negative.Allowing most of the permissible uses from the underlying PR zone would not only further deteriorate the wetland resources, but the relative costs would be high for capital construction, on-going management and related and required mitigation and enhancement.The only likely benefit of allowing the conflicting use is a short-term boost for construction,but this would not be in balance with or exceed the costs of the infrastructure and required mitigation. Social Consequences The following describes the social consequences (education,recreation,aesthetics, etc.) for each of the three protection scenarios. Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection) The social consequences of prohibiting the conflicting uses are mixed. Prohibiting the conflicting use would not substantially protect the resources from the existing unregulated uses occurring within each wetland area.. Additionally,prohibiting the conflicting use would indirectly result in the development of only permitted upland trails at Dirksen Nature Park,without controlled access to Wetlands 1 and 4 and without specific environmental education opportunities at the wetlands. Pedestrian access and use would be concentrated in upland habitats with associated affects to local flora and fauna. People with mobility challenges would ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 16 of 24 be effectively prohibited from enjoying any activities in the wetlands. The wetlands would not be (formally) accessible for educational purposes;however,without the controlled access that the boardwalks provide,people may continue to pass through the wetlands on rogue trails to experience these environments,while continuing to degrade the wetland habitat. Opportunities for passive recreation (e.g.,bird watching,environmental learning) would be diminished; however, the social benefits afforded from living near intact wetlands and open space would remain. Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) The social consequences of limiting the conflicting uses in Wetlands I and 4 to the boardwalks and associated wetland enhancement are generally positive.The grant funding received by the City requires on-site environmental education to occur. Also, the conservation easement with Metro allows environmental education,interpretive opportunities and the development of trails - consistent with the planned boardwalks. Limiting the conflicting uses to the installation of the planned boardwalks will not negatively impact the wetlands, since their construction will include low-impact helical screw piers and metal grate decking that allows light,air and water movement through the boardwalk to the wetlands. Limiting the conflicting uses will provide significant social benefits in the form of direct exposure to the wetlands for outdoor education,environmental interpretation and passive recreation, including for people with limited mobility.The provision of the boardwalks will reinforce appropriate trail usage and help control against unwanted and undesired off-trail passage into or through the wetland habitats. Dirksen Nature Park, as a whole, will continue to provide visual relief from the surrounding urban environment,and the conflicting uses are sheltered from view from the park edge and will be visually unobtrusive. Wetland function will remain intact and provide opportunities for urban quiet and solitude. Urban aesthetics and connection to nature are not eliminated by allowing the identified conflicting uses,and the planned,controlled access via the boardwalks to the wetlands and their proximity to a relatively large population would establish new connections for people to the outdoors. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local protection The social consequences of allowing the conflicting uses are generally mixed.The development of additional park amenities or gathering places for recreation,park visitors and family usage may benefit park users and wider the range of recreation opportunities in the park. However,the development of non-resource oriented amenities may not fit within the context of the site as a nature park or within the immediate context of the wetland resources,and the City offers other areas on dry land more suitable for active recreation.While social benefits may exist for the installation of different amenities on-site,they may be out of place with the character of the park and reduce recreational and social opportunities for other park users who are interested in enjoying the passive,natural resources of the site. Environmental Consequences The following describes the consequences to water quality, hydrologic control,wildlife and fish habitat (as well as other relevant factors) for each of the three protection scenarios. BEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 17 of 24 Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection) The environmental consequences of prohibiting the conflicting uses are mixed. If the conflicting uses are prohibited,then the wetlands would remain in their current condition.The City of Tigard Development Code aims to protect significant lands by allowing no impact to them. This restriction, taken in the context of the Dirksen Nature Park where public access and use is encouraged,actually causes greater impact to the resources. In their current state, the wetlands are impacted by human use in the form of rogue (demand) trails,periodic homeless camping activity and uncontrolled passage through these lands. The prohibition of the conflicting uses will still allow for specific restoration activities,but these efforts would be diminished or limited by continued uncontrolled access and the inability to fully pursue an on-site education program regarding the health and benefits of urban wetlands. The wetlands provide functions and values,but these are degraded due to past disturbances to the site. Habitat quality for fish species is limited within each wetland area based on limited availability and limited canopy coverage. Wildlife habitat value within each wetland is high with varied structures and habitat complexity.Wetlands 1 and 4 provide runoff and flood storage control and trap sediment and nutrients.These wetlands help to protect life and property during floods by storing and absorbing water,a necessity exemplified by significant storms in recent years. j,.itnit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) The environmental consequences of limiting the conflicting use to the trail boardwalks are positive.The conflicting use is specific to the wetland resources (Wetland 1 and 4) at Dirksen Nature Park,and installing short these boardwalks can occur nowhere else on the site,other than in the wetland areas. Currently,Wetlands 1 and 4 are criss-crossed with rogue trails and heavily impacted by human use resulting from the lack of direction offered to the public. Limiting the conflicting use to the boardwalks ultimately will lead to greater resource enhancement and protection of sensitive lands.The boardwalks that would be placed in the removed wetland areas will enable focused and controlled public access,versus unrestricted and unsustainable access without the boardwalks (rogue trails). As the City's future community park and outdoor education resource, efforts to restore and protect the wetlands at Dirksen Nature Park will require carefully planned boardwalk overlooks that allow,but control,access to the wetlands.The proposed boardwalks will help save and protect the wetland resources. They are the single most important component of restoration plans for the wetlands in this urban nature park. These short elevated walkways will provide a single access entry to each wetland,with high quality views,will enhance the experience of the wetland,and will have far less impact to the resource than the uncontrolled use that exists today. Additionally, as elevated boardwalks, these trail routes minimize soil disturbance as compared to a surface trail Installing controlled access and environmental experiences with boardwalks in both locations will allow park users to experience and understand the special qualities of both of the significant wetlands without damaging them and disturbing wildlife. Dirksen Nature Park is a unique site within the City of Tigard inasmuch as it contains 7 habitat zones within the 48-acre park. These habitat zones and their associated wetlands are the primary reason the park is home to the'Tualatin RiverKeepers' summer camps and experience-based environmental learning programs. Low impact design and unobtrusive construction techniques ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 18 of 24 for the planned boardwalks will be employed,such that the installation is environmentally- sensitive. The design and installation of the boardwalks will be completed without any excavation.The boardwalk piers are to be set with screw anchors,The boardwalk decking also is designed to be sensitive to the wetland resource.The decking will be metal grating,which has two significant benefits. I) The grating is not opaque;it allows air,light and water to pass through the boardwalk in support of the ecology of the wetland. Wetland plants can live underneath,and animal species can pass without obstruction. 2) As opposed to traditional wood decking,the metal grating is non-slip and will not allow the formation of the surface moss and algae that wood decking enables,thus creating a safer platform for park users and wildlife observers. Tigard's Development Code allows the restoration of significant wetlands,and the proposed boardwalks are part of the restoration strategy for the wetland resources,which will limit and control human access to the wetlands and reinforce efforts to re-vegetate and restore the functions and qualities of the wetlands. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local protection) The environmental consequences of allowing many of the permissible conflicting uses of the underlying PR zone are negative. Wetlands I and 4 fall under the jurisdiction of DSL and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers administrative rules,which regulate the removal and fill of wetlands. The development of park amenities, such as playgrounds,shelters or structures,will trigger DSL and Corps review and mitigation due to the likely ground disturbing activities. Such impacts to the existing wetland resources may be severe. Depending upon the success of implementation of required mitigation strategies,mitigation and/or enhancement to compensate for the development disturbance would likely occur in a different and potentially unconnected area of the site,which may further diminish the quality and character of the remaining wetland resources. Energy Consequences The following describes the energy consequences (transportation connectivity,efficient urban development,etc.) for each of the three protection scenarios. Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full projection) The energy consequences of prohibiting both conflicting uses would be mixed but slightly negative. The installation of the boardwalks will not necessitate the removal of trees,so no impact on natural shading or cooling are anticipated.This option,however,limits trail connectivity to the unique habitat zones within the park,which will have energy-related effects. Tigard residents will drive farther to experience similar natural environments (e.g.,Jackson Bottom Wetlands Preserve,Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge). Students will need to be bussed to more distant parks for environmental education.Tualatin RiverKeepers will not be able to take full advantage of the environmental education values of the park without direct access to the wetland habitat and will drive to other sites for such experiences.These create inefficiencies in energy usage,as well as indirect energy expenditures related to lost or inefficient environmental educator staff time and student learning time. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 19 of 24 Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) The energy consequences of limiting the conflicting use to the trail boardwalks generally would be positive.The installation of the boardwalks will not necessitate the removal of trees, so no impact on natural shading or cooling are anticipated.The shading and cooling potential Wetlands l and 4 have will be preserved.The provision of the boardwalks and associated environmental/interpretive displays will enable enhanced on-site outdoor education and environmental learning. This,in turn,will accommodate access and usage by residents, students and Tualatin RiverKeepers classes for local environmental education without the need to drive to distant or remote parks and natural areas with similar habitat features. Allow Conflicting User: (no fool protection) The energy consequences of allowing the conflicting uses and relying on state and federal regulations are generally negative. Since the proposed impact areas are wetlands and development will trigger mitigation, more energy will be used for the construction and required mitigation efforts related to the installation of recreational amenities, such as playgrounds, shelters and structures. If unregulated, the potential development of conflicting uses may result in an inefficient use of available parkland,especially if the conflicting uses are not wetland- dependent amenities. Conclusions/Recommendation The wetland resources of Dirksen Nature Park are valuable to the City from an economic,social and environmental perspective, and the opportunity to expand environmental education and outdoor learning is significant. Past grants awarded to the City for the development of Dirksen Nature Park support the creation of an environmentally-sensitive urban park and natural area with trails and access to the site's varied habitat zones. The following summarizes the anticipated impacts of the three alternatives related to the conflicting use,and the table in Appendix A provides scores for each of the 1 SEl.criteria. Prohibiting the conflicting use would avoid a modest capital construction expenditure by the City of Tigard for the costs of the boardwalks or other amenities,but City maintenance crews will incur on-going operating expenses related to monitoring unwanted activity and hiking in the wetlands,installing trail blockages to attempt to minimize through-passage along the existing rogue wetland trails,and on-going replacement costs for wetland restoration and vegetation management. Tualatin RiverKeepers will not be able to take full advantage of the environmental education values of the park without direct access to the wetland habitat and will drive to other sites for such experiences. In their current state, the wetlands are adversely impacted by human use in the form of rogue (demand) trails,periodic homeless camping activity and uncontrolled passage through these lands.The prohibition of the conflicting uses will still allow for specific restoration activities,but these efforts would be diminished or limited by continued uncontrolled access and the inability to fully pursue an on-site education program regarding the health and benefits of urban wetlands. Limiting the conflicting uses to the two trail boardwalks will positively impact the wetlands, since the planned construction of the trail boardwalks will include low-impact helical screw piers BEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 20 of 24 and metal decking/grating to accommodate light,air and water movement through the boardwalk to the wetlands,which is a substantial improvement over existing surface trails. Limiting the conflicting uses will provide significant social benefits in the form of direct exposure to the wetlands for outdoor education,environmental interpretation and passive recreation,especially for persons with limited mobility.The provision of the boardwalks will reinforce appropriate trail usage and help control against unwanted and undesired off-trail passage into or through the wetland habitats. Dirksen Nature Park, as a whole, will continue to provide visual relief from the surrounding urban environment,and the conflicting uses are sheltered from view from the park edge and will be visually unobtrusive. Wetland function will remain intact and provide opportunities for urban quiet and solitude. Allowing most of the permissible uses from the underlying PR zone would not only further deteriorate the wetland resources,but the relative costs would be high for capital construction, on-going management and related and required mitigation and enhancement. Since the proposed impact areas are wetlands and development will trigger mitigation, more energy will be used for the construction and required mitigation efforts related to the installation of recreational amenities,such as playgrounds,shelters and structures. Additionally,the development of non- resource oriented amenities may not fit within the context of the site as a nature park or within the immediate context of the wetland resources. Decision The analysis concludes that limiting the conflicting use to the proposed boardwalks would result in the most positive consequences of the three decision options. A decision to limit the conflicting use will avoid many of the negative consequences attributed to either allowing or prohibiting the conflicting uses.Through the application of site design and development standards to conflicting uses, the impacts on the significant wetland further can be minimized, and the remaining resource can be enhanced.There will be a relatively high level of economic, social, environmental and energy benefits achieved. Limiting the conflicting uses offers the most benefit to the wetland (through controlled access and enhancement) and to the community(access for all and education opportunities),and it strikes a balance between conflicting uses and planning goals for the services provided in this public park. The recommendation is to limit conflicting use (i.e. the removal of two areas from the City's Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map in order to accommodate the future development of two boardwalks within the significant wetland). ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 21 of 24 V Appendices / Figures ESEE Analysis 02/24/13 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page f 2 of 24 Appendix A: Site-specific ESE Scoring Sheet Criteria Scores on o Scale of l to s I =very negative impact. Scoring Criteria 3=no/balanced impact, 5=very positive impact SITE: Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Prohibit Limit Allow Conflicting Conflicting Conflicting Uses Uses Uses Economic Efficient urban development _ - __ _ 3_ v� 3 3 Cost of installation/maintenance of public infrastructure 3 5 1 (roads,stormwater, utilities) I q Development potential for property owners _ 3 f 3 --_ _a . ..3 -- J Amount of employment land 3 I 3 3 Amount of residential land 3 3 a _ 3 N Housing development costs 3—— 3 1 3 Employment development costs 3 _ 3 3 Economk Subtotal 21 23--_t-_ - 19 1 Social I Aesthetic Value _- —- ` - - —1 - 5- —L - 5 Imo- 1-- �- Recreational Value _ 3 ; 5 4 3 l Contribution to local quality of life3 l S 31 Housing Costs -- 3 3 — -� 3 I Social Equality - — ` — — _-- 1 5 3 Social Subtotal . 15 I 23 i 13 li I Environmental e _ --- �Water quality:Filtration and removal of pollutants + 3 3 _ I 3 L___Hydrologic control:Water collection and storage - , 3 3 - 1 3 - - i Wildlife habitat -__ —_—— __-1 5 0 3 3 " Fish Habitat I 3 l 3 I 3 -_ Environmentally-sensitive design - - - - I -— -- — 3 5 1 r ��- Environmental Subto- tal 17 17 13 1 - - -- ____ __-_ r- _ { p-- - - - J Energy i I _ ;- _ Transportation Connectivity_-- 1 5 3 — - - - EfficientUrban development 3 I 3 3 Shading and cooling Y - 3 3 1 , - Energy Subtotal 7 IT 11 i- - 7 1 — 1 Average Overall Rating 1 60 ' 74 I 52 I ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 23 of 24 ESEE Analysis -- 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 24 of 24 MEETING RECORDS Agenda Page 2 of 4 CABLE VIEWERS: The regular City Council meeting is shown live on Channel 28 at 7:30 p.m. The meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28: Thursday 6:00 p.m. Sunday 11:00 a.m. Friday 10:00 p.m. Monday 6:00 a.m. ISM City of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD - ala-,,.r.,-.....-1,......- ....rs•.ras�_s--xaa..-_____e...� ...ar..; ,wu0he TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE AND July 28, 2015 - 6:30 p.m. Study Session; 7:30 p.m. Business TIME: Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard- Town Hall- 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION A. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 6:30 p.m. estimated time B. BRIEFING ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) PROJECTS 6:45 p.m. estimated time C. BRIEFING ON AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH CLEAN NVATER SERVICES REGARDING EROSION CONTROL SERVICES 7:00 p.m. estimated time • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. 1 Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS I 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 7:30 PM r 1. BUSINESS MEETING b A. Call to Order http://agendas.tigard-or.gov/agenda_publish.cfm?id=0&mt=ALL&get_month 7&getear... 7/28/2015 • fgenda Page 3 of 4 B. Roll Call C. Pledge of Allegiance D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less, Please) A. Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication B. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce C. Citizen Communication--Sign Up Sheet 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council) These items are considered routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: A. APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: • April 14, 2015 • May 26, 2015 • June 15, 2015 • Consent Agenda-Items Removedfor Separate Discussion:Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda far separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council/City Center Development Agency has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 4. APPROVE APPOINTMENTS OF THREE LIBRARY BOARD MEMBERS AND TWO AI.TE LUNATES 7:35 p.m. estimated time 5. LEGISLATIVE AND QL:"(SI- t;Il 1C l I.PUBLIC HEARINGS: DIRKSEN NATURE PARK WI:TLANDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 7:40 p.m. estimated time 6. CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS APPROVING SUBMITTAL OF PROPOSED CITY OF TIGARD CHARTER AMENDMENTS TO THE VOTERS 8:10 p.m. estimated time 7. CONSIDER RESOLUTION APPROVIN(; Sl.BMI'ITAL OF PROPOSED COMMUNITY AND RECREATION (:INTER.MEASURE TO THE VOTERS 8:40 p.m. estimated time 8. NON AGENDA ITEMS http://agendas.tigard-or.gov/agenda_publish.cfm?id=0&mt=ALL&get_month=7&get_year... 7/28/2015 • ,agenda Page 4 of 4 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session, If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 10. ADJOURNMENT 9:15 p.m. estimated time AgendaQuick©2005- 2015 Destiny Software Inc.,All Rights Reserved http://agendas.tiga:rd-car.govfagenda publish.cfm?id=0&mt=ALL&get _month=7&getyear... 7/28/2015 • agenda Page 1 of 2 Print Back to Calendar Return Previous Next 5. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 07/28/2015 Length (in minutes):30 Minutes Agenda Title: Leg. & QJ Public Hearings: Dirksen Nature Park Wetlands Education Prepared For: Gary Pagenstecher, Community Development Submitted By: Gary Pagenstecher, Community Development Item Type: Ordinance Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Public Hearing- Quasi-Judicial Main Public Hearing:Yes Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall the Council approve the City's request to remove 0.12 acres from the City's Local Wetlands Inventory to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that City Council approve the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to remove 0.12 acres of wetlands from the Tigard Significant Wetlands Inventory. The Planning Commission recommended,by a unanimous vote at a public hearing held on July 6, 2015, that City Council approve the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to remove 0.12 acres of wetlands from the Tigard Significant Wetlands Inventory. The proposed boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and site plan concepts approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB). The boardwalks that would extend into mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas and help to control access and the use of rogue trails that degrade the resource. This comprehensive plan map amendment will enable the future installation of the boardwalks. The park improvements themselves are not a part of this application. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Context of the Request The Park System Master Plan outlines the need to acquire park property and construct park improvements to preserve open spaces, enhance water quality and provide recreational opportunities. On November 2,2010, Tigard voters passed a$17 million general obligation bond to fund the purchase of real property for parks and to fund a limited amount of park development. Dirksen Nature Park (formerly known as the Summer Creek or the Fowler property) is a high priority project in the Park System Master Plan, the adopted City of Tigard CIP and the Notice of City Measure Election provided to voters regarding the 2010 parks bond. Dirksen Nature Park contains a mix of mature forests,wetlands,open space and existing active recreation facilities. The majority of the property will remain a natural area as 70% of the land (approximately 35 acres), are protected under a conservation easement with Metro. Dirksen Nature Park is designated as a community park and will become a unique environmental http://agendas.tigard-or.gov/agenda_publish.cfm?id=0&mt=ALL&get_month=7&get fear... 7/28/2015 'Agenda Page 2 of 2 education resource for the City. This amendment includes an economic, social, environmental, and energy (ESEE) analysis of the proposed removal of 0.12 acres from the Local Wetland Inventory to accommodate two planned boardwalks, consistent with Sensitive Lands Chapter (18.775) of the Tigard Development Code. In 2013, the two boardwalks were included among other park improvements in the Conditional Use Permit (CPA2013-00001) and Sensitive Lands Review that was reviewed by the Hearings Officer. The Hearings Officer approved the proposed improvements except for the installation of the boardwalks and expressly noted the need for an exception via a comprehensive plan amendment,which is the subject of this application. Vicinity Information: Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street,immediately north of Fowler Middle School. The subject site also includes an existing paved section of the Farina Creek Trail. The project site is located in the Tigard Area 3 neighborhood. OTHER ALTERNATIVES 1) Not approve the request,which would maintain current Goal 5 prohibition on development. Educational purposes would not be achieved; continued use of rogue trails and uncontrolled access could further degrade the wetland resource. 2) Modify the proposal to reduce the amount of land removed from the inventory. Council could allow boardwalks in one area, but not both. Educational purposes and resource enhancement benefits would be reduced. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS The proposed controlled access to the unique wetland resource in Dirksen Nature Park wouldimprove the trail network in the City and provide exceptional education and recreation destinations in support of the City's Strategic Plan. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION NA Attachments Ordinance l'.lhibit A, Staff Report Exhibit B. ESEE Analysis PC Minutes, July 6. 2015 Testimony Recieved After PC Hearing Stie Map from [SIT, analysis Application AgendaQuick©2005- 2015 Destiny Software Inc.,All Rights Reserved http://agendas.tigard-or.govlagenda_publ ish.c fm?id=0&mt=ALL&get_month-7&get rear... 7/28/2015 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 15- AN ORDINANCE APPROVING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, CPA2015-00002, TO REMOVE .12 ACRES OF LOCALLY SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS FROM TII) "TIGARD WETLAND AND STREAM CORRIDOR MAP" INVENTORY. WHEREAS, Section 18.775.090 includes Special Provisions for Development within Locally Significant Wetlands and Along the Tualatin River, Fanno Creek,Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek; and \1�'I1EREAS, Section 18.775.090.A. states in order to address the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources) and the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 666-023-1)040) pertaining to wetlands, all wetlands classified as significant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map" are protected. No land form alterations or developments are allowed within or partially within a significant wetland,except as allowed/approved pursuant to Section 18.775.130; and WI IEREAS, Section 8.775.130 Plan Amendment Option, provides that any owner of property affected by the Goal 5 safe harbor (1) protection of significant wetlands and/or (2) vegetated areas established for the Tualatin River,Fanno Creek,Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek may apply for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment under Type I\' procedure. This amendment must be based on a specific development proposal. The effect of the amendment would be to remove Goal 5 protection from the property, but not to remove the requirements related to the CWS Stormwater Connection Permit, which must be addressed separately through an alternatives analysis, as described in Section 3.02.5 of the CWS "Design and Construction Standards;" and WHEREAS, Section 8.775.130.A further provides that the applicant shall demonstrate that such an amendment is justified by an environmental, social, economic and energy (ESEE) consequences analysis prepared in accordance with OAR 660-23-040; and WI IEREAS, the applicant prepared an ESEE analysis (Appendix B of Application) prepared in accordance with OAR 60-23-040, to justify removal of Goal 5 protection from 0.12 acres of significant wetlands on the subject property; and WIIFRF.AS, the Tigard City Council has considered applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; any applicable Metro regulations; any applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies; and any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council has found the following to be the applicable review criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390, Decision Making Procedures; and 18.775 Sensitive Lands; and Will REAS, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 6, 2015 and recommended approval of CP A2015-00002 by motion with a unanimous vote in favor;and WI IEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on July 28, 2015, to consider the request for a quasi- judicial Comprehensive Plan Amendment and determined that the amendment will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and meets all applicable review criteria. NOW,TI IEREFORE,TIE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE No. 15- Page 1 SECTION 1: Comprehensive Plan Amendment,CPA2015-{)0002,is hereby approved. SECTION 2: The attached findings (Exhibit A) are hereby adopted in explanation of the Council's decision. SECTION 3: The ESEE analysis (Exhibit B) shall be incorporated by reference into the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the "Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map" shall be amended to remove the site from the inventor-.as approved. SECTION 4: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By _ _ vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of ,2015. Carol A. Krager,City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of ,2015. john L. Cook, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date ORDINANCE No. 15- Page' 2 Agenda Item: Hearing Date:Iuiv 6.2015 Time:7:00PM STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD 120 DAYS = NA SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: DIRKSEN NATURE PARK WETLANDS EDUCATION CASE NOS.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2015-00002 REQUEST: The City of Tigard is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to remove 012 acres of Tigard significant wetlands from the Wetlands and Stream Corridor map to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisor Board (DRAB). The boardwalks that would extend into the mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. APPLICANT/ City of Tigard OWNER: c/o Jeff Peck 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97223 LOCATION: 11000 Block of SW Tigard Street. 48 acres on Tax Lots 1S134DD 900, 1000, 2400, 2500; 2S103AA00200;25103AB00200; 1S134DC,3000, 3001,3002,3100, 3101, 3102,3300, 3400; ZONE/ COMP PLAN DESIGNATION: PR/Public Institution and Open Space APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapter: 18.775 Sensitive Lands. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Planning Commission find that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the Cita and meets the Approval Standards as outlined in Section V of this report. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council APPROVAL of the proposed amendment. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. cr.\3115.- iK12I)1RKti1'.N NATURE PARK CPA PAGE I OF 6 - SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Proposal Description: The City requests removal of 0.12 acres from the City's Local Wetlands Inventory and from Sensitive Lands Review provisions of the Tigard Development Code, to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB). The boardwalks that would extend into mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. This comprehensive plan map amendment will enable the future installation of the boardwalks. The park improvements themselves are not a part of this application. Context of the Request The Park System Master Plan outlines the need to acquire park property and construct park improvements to preserve open spaces, enhance water quality and provide recreational opportunities. On November 2, 2010, Tigard voters passed a $17 million general obligation bond to fund the purchase of real property for parks and to fund a limited amount of park development. The Dirksen Nature Park (formerly known as the Summer Creek or the Fowler property) is a high priority project in the Park System Master Plan, the adopted City of Tigard CTP and the Notice of City Measure Election provided to voters regarding the 2010 parks bond. Dirksen Nature Park contains a mix of mature forests, wetlands, open space and existing active recreation facilities. The majority of the property will remain a natural area as approximately 35 acres, about 70%, are protected under a conservation easement with Metro. Dirksen Nature Park is designated as a community park and will become a unique environmental education resource for the City. This amendment includes an economic, social, environmental, and energy (ESEE) analysis of the proposed removal of 0.12 acres from the Local Wetland Inventory to accommodate two planned boardwalks, consistent with TDC 18.775. In 2013, the two boardwalks were included among other park improvements in the Conditional Use Permit (CPA2013-00001) and Sensitive Lands Review that was reviewed by the Hearings Officer. The Hearings Officer approved the proposed improvements except for the installation of the boardwalks and expressly noted the potential for an exception via a comprehensive plan amendment,which is the subject of this application. Vicinity Information: Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street, immediately north of Fowler Middle School. The subject site also includes an existing, paved section of the Fanno Creek Trail. The project site is located in the Tigard Area 3 neighborhood. SECTION IV. NOTICE AND COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES The city sent notice of a Public Hearing to interested parties and posted the request on the city's website on May 6, 2015. The city published notice of the Planning Commission and City Council hearings in the May 14,2015 issue of the Tigard Times. The city received written comments from the Tualatin RiverKeepers and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in support of the requested comprehensive plan amendment. These letters are included within the land use application materials,which is attached to this staff report. SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The following review criteria apply to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) to the City of Tigard 'Wetland and Stream Corridors" map. f:PA2>15-0(xx)2©IRKSEN NATURE PARK C;PA PAG F.2 OF 6 f 18.775.090 Special Provisions for Development within Locally Significant Wetlands and Along the Tualatin River, Fanno anno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek III A. In order to address the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources) and the safe harbor provisions of the Goal S administrative rule (OAR 666-023-0030) pertaining to wetlands, all 1 wetlands classified as significant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map" are protected. No land form alterations or developments are allowed within or partially within a significant wetland, except as allowed/approved pursuant to Section 18.775.130. r The subject property includes locally significant wetlands that are identified as locally significant wetlands on the 1 City of Tigard "Wetlands and Stream Corridors" map and are, therefore, protected. The applicant has applied for the Plan Amendment Option in Section 18.775.130 to remove Goal 5 protections from 0.12 acres of significant 1 wetlands to allow the proposed boardwalks for habitat enhancement and educational purposes. 18.775.130 Plan Amendment Option Any owner of property affected by the Goal 5 safeharbor (1) protection of significant wetlands and/or (2) vegetated areas established for the Tualatin River, Fauna Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek may apply for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment under Type IV procedure. This amendment must be based on a specific development proposal. The effect of the amendment would be to remove Goal 5 protection from the property, but not to remove the requirements related to the CWS Stormwater Connection Permit, which must be addressed separately through an alternatives analysis, as described in Section 3.02.5 of the CWS "Design and Construction Standards." The applicant shall demonstrate that such an amendment is justified by either of the following: A. ESEE analysis. The applicant may prepare an environmental, social, economic and energy (ESEE) consequences analysis prepared in accordance with OAR 660-23-040. The applicant has chosen to demonstrate the amendment is justified through an ESEE analysis, rather than a demonstration that the wetlands are not significant. The applicant submitted an ESEE analysis dated 2-24-15 (Appendix B of Application) prepared in accordance with OAR 60-23-040, to justify removal of Goal 5 protection from 0.12 acres of significant wetlands on the subject property. This provision is met. 1. The analysis shall consider the ESEE consequences of allowing the proposed conflicting use, considering both the impacts on the specific resource site and the comparison with other comparable sites within the Tigard Planning Area; As described in the ESEE analysis, the applicant has considered the ESEE consequences of allowing the conflicting use, in this case the two trail boardwalks, and considered the impacts on the specific resource site as well as other mii comparable sites within Tigard. As described in the applicant's analysis, the consequences of allowing the proposed rl conflicting use provide a net positive benefit to the resource through enhancements and the controlled access to the resource area. Since the proposal is specific to environmental education opportunities within these unique wetlands l' at Dirksen Nature Park, no other comparable sites exist within the Tigard Planning Area. 1,1 This provision is met. 2. The ESEE analysis must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Tigard City Council that the adverse F � economic consequences of not allowing the conflicting use are sufficient to justify the loss, or partial loss, of the resource; iliThe ESEE analysis outlines the predominantly positive economic benefits of limiting the conflicting use by allowing V the construction of the boardwalks to provide resource enhancement and access for educational purposes. CPA2115-d U)I 12 T)IRKSI N NATURE PARK CPA P.1CI?3 OF 6 The ESEE analysis indicates that the " City of Tigard spent $3.3 million on the acquisition of Dirksen Nature Park. Planning for the initial phase of park development is underway, and according to the adopted park master plan, the cost estimate for full development of the park was in the range of$2 to $2.3 million. Passive uses, such as walking and wildlife observation, are important aspects to the park. Additionally, the site is intended to serve as an outdoor classroom and a center for environmental education and experiential learning. The proposed boardwalks are an integral element of the environmental education and interpretive program for the park, since these boardwalks will allow visitors to experience two different and unique wetland ecosystems in the park in a safe, environmentally sound and ecologically sensitive manner." As identified in the ESEE analysis, based on a US Fish and Wildlife Service report in calculating economic benefits of "refuge" visitation, "it is reasonable to assume that a clear, positive economic benefit exists for installing the boardwalks to not only enhance safe access into the wetland areas for wildlife observation, photography and environmental interpretation, but also as a means to further improve and enhance the quality of those unique wetlands by controlling visitor access." In addition, "The focus of the Washington County Visitor's Association toward the promotion of nature-based experiences reinforces the relative importance of providing and enhancing these opportunities for local residents and visitors. The development of Dirksen Nature Park will provide opportunities for increased tourism and visitation. The environmental education and experiences at the park will be enhanced by the installation of the proposed boardwalks." The proposed comprehensive plan amendment supports the city's investment of park acquisition fundsand enhances and improves access to the resource to provide opportunities for increased visitation for tourism and environmental education. The Tigard City Council may find that the economic benefits are sufficient to justify partial loss (0.12 acres, or 5,227 square feet) of the wetland resource. This provision is met. 3. In particular, ESEE analysis must demonstrate why the use cannot be located on buildable land, consistent with the provisions of this chapter, and that there are no other sites within the Tigard Planning Area that can meet the specific needs of the proposed use; The applicant states in their ESEE analysis that"The conflicting use (two trail boardwalks) is specific to the wetland resources at Dirksen Nature Park, and is actually less conflicting than the existing rogue trails. The park is designated as a community park and will become a unique environmental education resource for the City. The installation of the planned boardwalks can occur nowhere else on the site, other than in the wetland areas. Functionally, the boardwalks are required as an environmentally-sensitive, accessible extension of the park trails into the wetland habitats. The boardwalks will provide managed and controlled access near and into the wetland areas with the aim to eliminate rogue, off-trail passage through the wetland resources and to enable the successful restoration of the wetlands in those areas where past trail walking has occurred and damaged the immediate wetland environment. The boardwalks will further the environmental education opportunities for park users and provide safe, accessible platforms for community groups, students and classes to view and begin to understand and appreciate the nature and importance of these wetland habitats without damaging them and disturbing wildlife." Because of the unique nature of these wetland resources within Tigard and the unique education and access management control functions provided by the boardwalks, there are no alternative sites within the Tigard Planning Area that can meet the specific needs of the proposed use. This provision is met. 4. The ESEE analysis shall be prepared by a team consisting of a wildlife biologist or wetlands ecologist and a land use planner or land use attorney, all of whom are qualified in their respective fields and experienced in the preparation of Goal 5 ESEE analysis; The ESEE Analysis provided in Appendix B was prepared by a qualified team consisting of a land use attorney with Jordan Ramis, PC and environmental scientists with WH Pacific, qualified in their respective fields with experience CP,\11ida-(NIoF2DlpKSENN, IVREPAM CPA r.AGE 40I,6 compiling such analyses. This provision is met. 5. If the application is approved, then the ESEE analysis shall be incorporated by reference into the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the "Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map" shall be amended to remove the site from the inventory. On approval of this request, the ESEE analysis will be incorporated by reference into the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the "Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map"will be amended to remove the sites (Appendix C: Survey of Proposed Exclusion Areas) from the inventory. FINDINGS: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of TDC Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands. SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City Police Department reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it. The City Public Works Department was notified of the proposal and did not provide comment. SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) commented in a letter dated March 2, 2105 in support of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment. The letter also includes recommendations for further protecting fish and wildlife and their habitats. This letter is included as an attachment to this staff report. Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL), Washington County, and Metro were notified of the proposal but provided no comment. SECTION VIII. STAFF ANALYSIS, CONCLUSION,AND RECOMMENDATION ANALYSIS: As shown in the analysis above, the applicant's ESEE analysis addresses the requirements of the Tigard Development Code, Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands. The subject property contains locally significant wetlands protected under Goal 5 safeharbor. The applicant has applied for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment under a Type IV procedure. The application is based on a specific development proposal for two boardwalks for habitat enhancement and environmental education. The applicant has demonstrated that such an amendment is justified by an ESEE analysis consistent with OAR 660-23-040. The ESEE analysis concludes that limiting the conflicting use to the proposed boardwalks would result in the most positive consequences of the three decision options. A decision to limit the conflicting use will avoid many of the negative consequences attributed to either allowing or prohibiting the conflicting uses. Through the application of site design and development standards to conflicting uses, the impacts on the significant wetland further can be minimized, and the remaining resource can be enhanced. There will be a relatively high level of economic, social, environmental and energy benefits achieved. Limiting the conflicting use offers the most benefit to the wetland (through controlled access and enhancement) and to the community (access for all and education opportunities), and it strikes a balance between conflicting uses and planning goals for the services provided in this public park. CONCLUSION Based on the findings and analysis, staff finds that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is consistent (:VA21}15-00002 DHRxs1:N NATURE P-1R1(C1'.' PAGE 5 OF 6 I with applicable provisions of the Tigard Development Code, Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands. Staff agrees with the conclusion of the applicant's ESEE Analysis and recommends modifying the decision from prohibiting conflicting uses to limiting conflicting uses within the 0.12 acre significant wetland areas for resource enhancement and environmental education purposes. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment modifying the current resource protection decision from prohibiting conflicting uses to limiting conflicting uses and removing 0.12 acres from the significant wetlands inventory described in the "Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map". Attachments: Exhibit A City's Application dated February 14, 2015. ---,- June 29,2015 PREPARED BY:a--tilGarygensteeher DATE Associate Planner f 4p t _____zc--- r- .,....,,,... ...... 'tom July 30, 2015 APPROVED BY: Tom McGuire DATE Assistant Community Development Director CPA2015-(x)302 DIRICSEN NATURE PARK CP.1, PAGE 6 OF 6 III U TIGARD City of Tigard Planning Commission Agenda MEETING DATE: July 6, 2015; 7:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard —Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard,OR 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:0°P-1 2. ROLL CALL 7:00 P.m. 3. COMMUNICATIONS 7:°2 p.m. 1, 4. CONSIDER MINUTES 7:05 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 7:°6 pin. DIRKSON NATURE PARK WETLANDS EDUCATION—CPA2015-00002 REQUEST: Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval is requested to remove 0.12 acres of Tigard significant wetlands from the Wetlands and Stream Corridor map to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park.These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities,consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisor Board (PRAB). The boardwalks that extend into the mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. APPLICANT: City of Tigard c/o Jeff Peck LOCATION: 11000 Block of SW Tigard Street. 48 acres on Tax Lots 1S134DD 900, 1000, 2400, 2500; 2S103AA00200; 2S103AB00200; 1S134DC, 3000, 3001, 3002, 3100, 3101, 3102, 3300, 3400 APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.390 Decision Making Procedures; 18.540 Parks and Recreation Zone; 18.775 Sensitive Lands. Comprehensive Plan Goals: Goal 5 Natural Resources,Goal 8 Parks Recreation and Open Space,and Goal 9 Economic Development;Statewide Planning Goals 5,8,and 9. 6. OTHER BUSINESS 8:06 p.`n' 7. ADJOURNMENT 8:10 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA—JULY 6, 2015 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of I .11111 Tigard Planning Commission TIGARD Agenda Item #_ Page of Date of Hearing�-AA Co 2C) i c Case Number(s) C ?f 2D c - ()coo Case Name6 ; K Gtr. Location 11000 '`--& \o c_l . - S ye,,I S y +-f` rc 5 If you would like to speak on this item, please PRINT your name, address, andzipsode below: Proponent_ for tie proposal): Opponent (against the proposal): Nam-:- krer 104Y4 Uv" Name: 1 A.. ess: PC Ix)), 3,,q, Address: PC I City, tate, Zip: (, �1 X21 City, State, Zip: Name: Name: II Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: L r CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes July 6,2015 CALL TO ORDER President Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Ilan, at 13 125 SW Hall Blvd. ROLL CALL Present: President Rogers Vice President Fitzgerald Alt. Commissioner Enloe Commissioner Lieuallen Alt. Commissioner Mooney Commissioner Muldoon Commissioner Schmidt Absent: Commissioner Feeney; Commissioner Middaugh; Commissioner Smith Staff Present: Tom McGuire, ,Assistant Community Development Director; Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner; Doreen Laughlin, Executive Assistant; Steve Martin, Parks; Carla Staedter, Project Coordinator Engineering COMMUNICATIONS — CONSIDER MINUTES May 18 Meeting Minutes: President Rogers asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the May 18 minutes; there being none, Rogers declared the minutes approved as submitted. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING President Rogers opened the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING DIRKSON NATURE PARK WETLANDS EDUCATION—CPA2015-00002 REQUEST: Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval is requested to remove 0.12 acres of Tigard significant wetlands from the Wetlands and Stream Corridor map to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB). The boardwalks that extend into the mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. APPLICANT: City of Tigard LOCATION: 48 acres - 11000 Block of SW Tigard Street. QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING STATEMENTS July 6, 2015 Page 1 of 6 i 1 t President Rogers read the required statements and procedural items from the quasi-judicial hearing guide. There were no abstentions; there were no challenges of the commissioners for bias or conflict of interest. Ex-parte contacts: None. Site visitations: Commissioners Fitzgerald, Rogers, and Muldoon. No one wished to challenge the jurisdiction of the commission. STAFF REPORT Associate Planner, Gary Pagenstecher went over the staff report. Staff reports are available on- line one week in advance of the meeting. Gary explained that a draft staff report dated.June 29th went out with the original mailing but that they now had before them the final/approved version dated June 30th. He said there were only some minor clarifying languages between the two and nothing substantively different. The City, as the applicant, requests removal from the wetlands and stream corridors comprehensive plan inventory map, Goal 5 prohibition. They have conflicting uses on a total of.12 acres — about 500t) sq ft, located on two sites within the Dirksen Nature Park. This is for the purposes of public education and resource enhancement. The location of the proposed boardwalks are required to be in the resource to be effective — to provide effective access for educational purposes. Gary compared this with the most recent Goal 5 review that had been before the commission with A&O Apartments. lie reminded them that they'd received an education on Goal 5 protections then. In comparison — that was about four times the size (.41 acres); it was for the purposes of private development to ostensibly avoid increased development costs of structured parking or taller buildings. It was a discretionary impact —it didn't have to go there. It wasn't the nature of the development that required the impact like it is for this proposal. Ike said he mentions this because he wants to point out that it's very different this time and wanted to highlight the difference. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and meets the Approval Standards as outlined in Section V of the staff report. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council APPROVAL of the proposed amendment. QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS —None APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Steve Duh of Conservation Techniques Land introduced himself as a land use planner assisting the City. I ie gave the following history and context regarding the project: Voters approved a S17M Park Bond back in 2010. Immediately? thereafter, in December, the City was in a position to purchase the Dirksen Nature Park from the School District and intended to have that property become a future Community Park. The City was awarded about $2.5M in grants from multiple sources supporting the acquisition of the site. One grant was from Metro which required a conservation easement be tied to the property as a funding condition. That easement protects 35 of the 48 acres of Dirksen Nature Park. Trails, boardwalks, interpretive _July 6, 2015 Page 2 of 6 signs and other environmental education elements are permitted within the conservation easement. Steve said he mentions that because the two boardwalk locations are within the conservation easement. Another grant was from the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board which also had a stipulation that required that the site be used for environmental education. So as a Community Park that has a focus on environmental education with a conservation easement in place —there were a lot of layers that the city had to consider as it considered how to design and develop the future park. With these in mind, the Parks Division led preparation of a site Master Plan to guide the future design elements. The master planning process engaged many local residents, stakeholders, included public meetings - as well as had review and approval by the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board. It took about a year to go from their approval in July 2012 to July of 2013 to have the project mature enough to be in a position to move forward with land use reviews and permitting. The City submitted a land use application in July 2013 to permit the development of the park. The land use submittal is a Type III Conditional Use — so it went before the Hearings Officer. The hearing occurred in October, 2013 and the Hearings Officer conditionally approved the project. The decision did not approve the two planned wetland boardwalks that were included in the project and defined them as "development activity within the significant wetland" thus necessitating the current application that's before you tonight through a Comp Plan amendment. The proposal before you is to request the removal of 0.12 acres from the City's local wetlands inventory and from sensitive lands review provisions of the Development Code and to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks within Dirksen Nature Park. The proposal is consistent with as public feedback and the Park Master Plan regarding the design of the site that was approved by the Parks & Rec Advisory Board. The primary purpose of these boardwalks is environmental education for park users and to provide safe and accessible platforms for community groups, students, Tualatin Riverkeeper classes to view and begin to understand and appreciate the quality and nature of those wetland resources - so the boardwalks themselves arc a venue for outdoor education. It's important to note that the installation of the boardwalks, if approved, would also further reduce past damage that has occurred within those wetland areas through rogue trails or other human uses. Today, numerous existing rogue trails cross the site because of historic uncontrolled access through the property. These prior uses pre- exist the City's purchase but the intent with the site to be a community nature park is to provide outdoor education and environmental opportunities such that a small encroachment into the wetlands will provide a big benefit for education and other opportunities to teach people about the value of those resources. Another benefit of the boardwalk is to aim to eliminate those rogue trails and provide for managed and controlled access at discreet points; make sure folks have a pointed way to get to the resource - without damaging the resource. Steve pointed out that support letters for this action were provided from Tualatin Riverkeepers, Tualatin River Watershed Council, and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Approval of the original land use packet discussion for the whole park that was processed by the I Iearings Officer also was reviewed and approved by Clean Water Services, Oregon Department of City Lands, and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. As part of the ESEE Analysis and staff report in favor of the proposal we ask that the Planning Commission approve the requested Comp Plan Amendment and forward it to City Council for approval. July 6, 2015 Page 3 1,16 i 1 Carla Staedter, Project Coordinator for the City of Tigard came up and explained that the site is well utilized by many people and that the Master Plan allows for controlled access on a single loop trail. The goal is to make that as interesting as possible. It also provides opportunities for the folks using the site and the folks taking tours through the site - as well as the Tualatin Riverkeepers who are leading these tours — to provide the richest experience of the seven ecosystems that exist on that site. The goal is to take something out of protection in order to proteel it. She said that seems ironic, but it's necessary, as nearly 2000 children go through the site per year now. They go with guides leading them through the area - but that's a lot of people to move through the site and a lot of people to experience that site; having the infrastructure in place to do that is important. Dirksen Nature Park is considered a regionally significant facility. Carla noted that the proposed boardwalks will not be situated in the middle of the wetlands, but rather at the edges, where they'll do the least damage while also allowing a good view in. QUESTIONS How will you redirect or close the existing cut-through trails to get people to stay on the single loop? The single loop trail that's going to go through the site is going to be the easiest way to move through the site. That alone will catch a good 95 — 98•"0 of the people. Then we're looking at weaving plant material along the edge of that trail so that the only places that are easy to enter the resource are the areas where we have infrastructure in place. The same type of strategy will also apply to our Oak Savanna. Are benches being considered for the boardwalk? Right now we're looking at just the basic pieces; however, as part of our interpretive plan, I'm sure we'll be looking at those kinds of opportunities _. ways to wait and linger quietly. I'm interested in long term management question. I'm for the trails and more dedicated trails, connectivity, etc., but I worry about the long term management —I worry about people tossing trash over these boardwalks, etc. Is there a management plan for these new platforms? It'll be part of our overall maintenance of the park in general. As infrastructure comes on board, our staff will know what maintenance activities take place at each of those pieces of infrastructure. Because it's part of the system, trash pickup and watching over it are all part of managing our parks. This is our second largest park —only behind Cook Park; so it's not a park that's considered insignificant. It will be very carefully watched by our park staff. We also have ongoing restoration that's going on. We're partnered up with many different agencies in order to do that. Clean Water Services is working with us; Tualatin Riverkeepers are working with us; we have a lot of corporate groups that support this site - Intel is one big one. Last year one of Intel's groups comprised of 322 people carne out and cleared over six acres of non-native vegetation. So there's a huge community interest in restoring the resources that are onboard there. Our Parks Crew augments that with the ongoing weekly maintenance activities that will happen. Please talk about the building phase --how many trees are we knocking out, what are the size of the trees that we're knocking out, what will we do to impact the environment that we're supposed to be protecting? I know there's a couple of people that we'd expect to be July 6, 2015 Pape 4 of 6 in the audience tonight that aren't here - but I believe those are the questions that they would ask. Yes, this particular construction methodology is very low impact. It's called a pin piling. The actual footprints of the pins are very, very small. They're basically screwed in and they flare out—and that's what provides the structural support. It doesn't take a giant piece of equipment to get those into place. As far as losing trees —we might have to cut one or two Willows on the edge of the emergent wetland. No trees will be impacted on the forested wetland. The only thing that will happen there is the boardwalk will go in— all the trees will stay in place as they are. My concern is that over the past 20 years we've been buying a lot of property at the City of Tigard and we've been denying access to vast tracts on that property. For example, the library property is great— great trails, great paths —but my kid can't walk to the edge of the water. Cooks Park— same thing. It sounds like what you're really wanting to do with this boardwalk is exactly that— limit access to large parts of this property we've all paid for. The forested wetland boardwalk actually is up and it's so close to the trees that you'll be able to touch the trees. It's designed so that kids can peek through and literally sec the water under their feet. I would say that it's a totally different experience than what you're talking about. It's controlled access but a great deal of thought is given as to how you're going to experience that. Unfortunately, we can't offer unlimited access or we would lose the resource. Our strategy is not to keep people out, but to allow them to experience it in a way that's very dynamic. So in your estimation, these boardwalks give the greatest enjoyment to the greatest number of citizens in Tigard? Absolutely! That's what the goal is. It will not be a boring experience —it will be a really cool experience of what this site offers. And how do we treat people who leave these boardwalks or paths — these controlled li areas?Are there park exclusions? Are there fines for leaving the path? No. We just make it tougher so that it's not all that fun to leave it. To leave it,you'd either have to climb over rocks, plant materials, and various things that are in place to gently guide people off the area. It's super pleasant, open and flowing. People won't go in and say, "Oh! People are controlling my access!" What they're going to do is walk in there and say "Wow! This is cool!" TESTIMONY IN FAVOR —April Albrecht, PO Box 338, Hillsboro, OR— Coordinator of the Tualatin River Watershed Council said the Council was very pleased to submit a letter of support for this project and that she, personally, was pleased to be able to provide testimony in support of it. She said the Council was very interested in instilling a sense of stewardship in the young people of Tigard and the Tualatin Basin. These young people will take care of this resource after some of us end up retiring. We hope we have great support out there and people who are interested and willing to take that on. We think this is a great solution where the wetland area is protected because of these pathways and being able to get around without causing damage —and also providing the educational experience so that folks can appreciate and know how to take care of things in the future. QUESTIONS —None. TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION —No one was present to personally testify; however, testimony in opposition came in by way of an email from Ms. Sue Beilke (Exhibit A). July 6, 2015 Page 5 of 6 i APPLICANT REBUTTAL - None PUBLIC HEARING — CLOSED No further testimony or questions from the audience are allowed. DELIBERATION There was a short deliberation with everyone on the commission speaking in favor of this project. MOTION Commissioner Fitzgerald made the following motion: "I move the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to City Council of application CPA2015-00002 and adoption of the findings in the staff report and based on the testimony received." Commissioner Schmidt seconded the motion. ALL IN FAVOR — None opposed — No abstentions. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY OTHER BUSINESS — Assistant Community Development Director Tom McGuire gave a brief rundown of what would be coming up on the Commission calendar. ADJOURNMENT President Rogers adjourned the meeting at 7:48 p.m. Doreen Laughlin, Planning Commission Secretary ,VII I1S"1': President Jason Rogers July6, 2015 Page 6of6 Testimony received after July 6, 2015 Planning Commission hearing. Original Message From: sue beilke [mailto:beilkesue@gmail.comj Sent: Monday, July 06, 2015 3:49 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher Cc: johnbenassu@comcast.com Subject: Gary, Please forward these comments to the Planning Commission members for tonight's hearing. Thank you. Sue Dear Planning Commission: Regarding the proposal for the removal of 0.12 acres of Tigard's significant wetlands from the Wetlands and Stream Corridor map: As a board member of the Fans of Fanno Creek, we urge the Commission NOT to remove these wetlands from having protection and shown on the current WSC map for several reasons. 1) The city of Tigard bought this property and PROMISED the citizens they would protect ALL of the site including the wetlands. If they remove the protections currently afforded to this 0.12 acres, they will have voided the agreement and the bond measure passed for the acquisition of this site. This will lead the city into "hot water" with citizens. 2) The placement of the proposed two boardwalks is NOT the original placement agreed upon by CWS, Metro, Fans, and a number of other entities that walked the site and came up with the boardwalk idea. Hence why Fans is opposed to the current placement. 3) The boardwalk placement proposal near Fanno Creek is in a wetland that is protected by a conservation easement for a mitigation site, and is protected by state and federal wetland mitigation laws. Therefore, this wetland CANNOT be removed from the Tigard WSC map. Fans worked for over 15 years with local citizens and Fowler students to protect and preserve this site. The city needs to be on board with the full protection of the property, that includes NO wetland loss, NO habitat loss, and protection of the existing wildlife on the site. That means no more trails and no more development on the site, period. Fans of Fanno Creek will continue to work toward full protection and preservation of this unique site so that habitats and wildlife are protected as was originally agreed upon prior to the acquisition of the site when Trust for Public Lands became involved and helped with the acquisition. Fans pointed out to TPL that native turtles and red-legged frogs occurred on the site and it is primarily because of this that TPL became involved and invested in protecting this property some years ago. As stated previously, the city of Tigard should be working to protect ALL of the site and should NOT be working toward destroying valuable wetlands for any reason. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Sue Beilke, Board member, Fans of Fanno Creek REQUEST FOR COMMENTS • CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS TIGARD DATE: May 6.2(0 5 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher.Associate Planner Phone: (503) 718-2434 Fax: (5113) 718-2788 E-Mail: _Garypgtigard-or.gov DIRKSEN NATURE PARK WETLAND EDUCATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2015-00002 REQUEST: Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval is requested to remove 012 acres of Tigard significant wetlands from the Wetlands and Stream Corridor map to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisor Board (PILO). The boardwalks that extend into the mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. ZONE: PR/ Public Institution and Open Space. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.390 Decision Making Procedures; 18.540 Parks and Recreation Zone; 18.775 Sensitive Lands. Comprehensive Plan Goals: Goal 5 Natural Resources, Goal 8 Parks Recreation and Open Space, and Goal 9 Economic Development; Statewide Planning Goals 5, 8,and 9. Attached arc the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will hi prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR WRITTEN COMMENTS BACK BY: WEDNESDAY MAY 20, 2015. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. It you are unable to respond by the above date,please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. _ Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. - Written comments provided below: Name&Number of Person Commenting: UPI CITY OF TIGARD TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: May 6.2015 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher.Associate Planner Phone: (503) 718-2434 Fax: (503) 718-2788 E-Mail:_Garyp@tigard-or.gov DIRKSEN NATURE PARK WETLAND EDUCATION , COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2015-00002 REQUEST: Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval is requested to remove 0.12 acres of Tigard significant wetlands from the Wetlands and Stream Corridor map to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, I consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisor Board (PRAB). The boardwalks that extend into the mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. ZONE: PR/ Public Institution and Open Space. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.390 Decision Making Procedures; 18.540 Parks and Recreation Zone; 18.775 Sensitive Lands. Comprehensive Plan Goals: Goal 5 Natural Resources, Goal 8 Parks Recreation and Open Space,and Goal 9 Economic Development;Statewide Planning Goals 5, 8,and 9. Attached are the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR WRITTEN COMMENTS BACK BY: WEDNESDAY MAY 20, 2015. You may use the space provided below or attach a h separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard,OR 97223. PL SE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed thebj ro osal and have no objections p l coons to it. Please contact of our office. — ` . . Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. Written comments provided below: E Name& Number of Person Commenting: 6. e So 119). 454)\ RECEIVED FEB 2 8 2015 City of Tigard � ` Administration P.O.Boz 338 1110 Hillsboro,OR 97123-0338 503-846-4810; www.trwe.org Engaging the community to sustain our watershed February 24,2015 Mayor John Cook Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor Cook and Tigard City Councilors: Re: Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalk Comprehensive Plan Amendment The Tualatin River Watershed Council(TRWC)is writing to offer our support for the Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalk Comprehensive Plan Amendment. We recognize that the preservation and protection of wetland habitat within the City of Tigard is vital to our watershed's health. TRWC's mission is to foster better stewardship of the Tualatin River resources;address natural resource issues; and ensure sustainable watershed health, functions and use. TRWC recognizes that Dirksen Nature Park is a special natural area where educating our residents on the Tualatin River watershed's natural resources without causing damage to these resources is a primary focus. Because of a high interest in wetland areas, casual trails onsite are being used that result in harmful impacts to the Dirksen.Nature Park wetlands. These harmful impacts include trampling valued native wetlands plants,compacting delicate wetland soil,and disturbing wildlife. We support a solution to resolve this problem,which is to develop and construct wetland elevated boardwalks. This solution decreases these harmful wetland impacts as well as provides observation opportunities of these special habitats. We recognize that these proposed elevated boardwalks can be sited and implemented in such a way to protect wetland resources and allow park users the opportunity to observe the wetland areas without causing damage. Providing this controlled wetlands access supports the mission of the nature park that includes natural resource protection and engagement of Tualatin River watershed residents in learning about the value and function of wetlands, riparian and upland areas. Sincerely, y � Ap (Olbrich Council Coordinator MAILING / NOTIFICATION RECORDS "FOR COUNCIL NEWSLETTER" (Sent on 5/6/2015) 11111 LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION TIGARD 120 DAYS = NA FILE NOS.: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2015-00002 FILE TITLE: DIRKSEN NATURE PARK WETLANDS EDUCATION APPLICANT/ City of Tigard OWNER: c/o Jeff Peck 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 REQUEST: Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval is requested to remove 0.12 acres of Tigard significant wetlands from the Wetlands and Stream Corridor map to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisor Board (PRAB). The boardwalks that extend into the mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. LOCATION: 11000 Block of SW Tigard Street. 48 acres on Tax Lots 1 S134DD 900, 1000, 2400,1, 2500; 2S103AA00200; 2S103AB(H 1200; 1S134DC, 3000, 3001, 3002,3100, 3101, 31()2,3300, 3400; ZONE/ COMP PLAN DESIGNATION: PR/ Public Institution and Open Space APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.390 Decision Making Procedures; 18.540 Parks and Recreation Zone; 18.775 Sensitive Lands. Comprehensive Plan Goals: Goal 5 Natural Resources, Goal 8 Parks Recreation and Open Space, and Goal 9 Economic Development; Statewide Planning Goals 5, 8, and 9. DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW: ❑ TYPE I ❑ TYPE II ❑ TYPE III ® TYPE IV] COMMENTS WERE SENT: May 6,2015 COMMENTS ARE DUE: May 20,2015 ❑ HEARINGS OFFICER (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: TIMI 1: 7:00 PM ® PLANNING COMMISSION (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: July 6,2015 TI'S f I 7:00 PM ®CITY COUNCIL (TUES.) DATE OF HEARING: July 28,2015 1 i\tI 7:30 PM ❑ STAFF DECISION (TENTATIVE) DA FE OF DECISION: ' COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION ® VICINITY MAP ❑ DRAINAGE PLAN ❑ IMPACT STUDY •i4 SITE PLAN El STORM WATER ANALYSIS ❑ TRAFFIC STUDY ® NARRATIVE ❑ TREE PLAN OTHER: 1 EEE Analysis STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner (503) 718-2434 DLCD FORM 1 NOTICE OF A PROPOSED CHANGE FOR DLCD USE ,117411 TO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR File No.: LAND USE REGULATION Received: Local governments are required to send notice of a proposed change to a comprehensive plan or land use regulation at least 35 days before the first evidentiary hearing. (See ()\1t 6W-018-0020 for a post-acknowledgment plan amendment and ( ; for a periodic review task). The rules require that the notice include a completed copy of this form. Jurisdiction: Tigard Local file no.: CPA2015-00002 Please check the type of change that best describes the proposal: ❑ Urban growth boundary (UGB) amendment including more than 50 acres, by a city with a population greater than 2,500 within the UGB '❑ UGB amendment over 100 acres by a metropolitan service district E Urban reserve designation, or amendment including over 50 acres, by a city with a population greater than 2,500 within the UGB ❑ Periodic review task—Task no.: ❑ Any other change to a comp plan or land use regulation (e.g., a post-acknowledgement plan amendment) Local contact person (name and title): Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner Phone: 503-718-2434 E-mail: garyp@tigard-or.gov Street address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd. City: Tigard Zip: 97223- Briefty summarize the proposal in plain language. Please identify all chapters of the plan or code proposed for amendment (maximum 500 characters): Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval is requested to remove 0.12 acres of Tigard significant wetlands from the Wetlands and Stream Corridor map to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisor Board. Date of first evidentiary hearing: 07/06/2015 Date of final hearing: 07/28/2015 ❑ This is a revision to a previously submitted notice. Date of previous submittal: Check all that apply: n Comprehensive Plan text amendment(s) PI Comprehensive Plan map amendment(s)— Change from Goal 5 Safe Harbor Protected to Unprotected Change from to ❑ New or amended land use regulation ❑ Zoning map amendment(s)— Change from to Change from to ❑ An exception to a statewide planning goal is proposed—goal(s) subject to exception: ❑ Acres affected by map amendment: 0.12 acres http1/www.oregon.gov/LCD/Pages/forms.aspx -1- Form updated November 1,2013 Location of property, if applicable (site address and T, R, Sec.,TL): 11000 Block of SW Tigard StreetStreet;Tax Lots 1S134DD 900, 1000 List affected state or federal agencies, local governments and special districts: City of Tigard http://www.oregon.pov/LCD/Pdp,esiforrns..Aspx -2- Form updated November 1,2013 NOTICE OF A PROPOSED CHANGE - SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS 1. Except under certain circumstances,' proposed Include this Form 1 as the first pages of a combined amendments must be submitted to DLCD's Salem file or as a separate file. office at least 35 days before the first evidentiary 5. File format: When submitting a Notice of a hearing on the proposal. The 35 days begins the day of Proposed Change via e-mail or FTP, or on a digital the postmark if mailed, or, if submitted by means other disc, attach all materials in one of the following than US Postal Service, on the day DLCD receives the formats: Adobe .pdf(preferred); Microsoft Office (for proposal in its Salem office. DLCD will not confirm example, Word .doc or docx or Excel .xls or xlsx); or receipt of a Notice of a Proposed Change unless SSRI .mxd, .gdb, or .mpk. For other file formats, requested. please contact the plan amendment specialist at 503- 2. A Notice of a Proposed Change must be submitted 934-0017 or plan.amendo L. �s. by a local government (city, county, or metropolitan 6. Text: Submittal of a Notice of a Proposed Change service district). DLCD will not accept a Notice of a for a comprehensive plan or land use regulation text Proposed Change submitted by an individual or private amendment must include the text of the amendment firm or organization. and any other information necessary to advise DLCD 3. Hard-copy submittal: When submitting a Notice of the effect of the proposal. "Text" means the specific of a Proposed Change on paper, via the US Postal language proposed to be amended, added to, or deleted Service or hand-delivery, print a completed copy of from the currently acknowledged plan or land use this Form 1 on light green paper if available. Submit regulation. A general description of the proposal is not one copy of the proposed change, including this form adequate. The notice may be deemed incomplete and other required materials to: without this documentation. Attention: Plan Amendment Specialist 7. Staff report: Attach any staff report on the Dept. of Land Conservation and Development proposed change or information that describes when 635 Capitol Street NE, Suite 150 the staff report will be available and how a copy may Salem, OR 97301-2540 be obtained. This form is available here: 8. Local hearing notice: Attach the notice or a draft 'I) lorms.shtml of the notice required under ORS 197.763 regarding a 4. Electronic submittals of up to 20MB may be sent quasi-judicial land use hearing, if applicable. via e-mail. Address e-mails to phut., l . 9. Maps: Submittal of a proposed map amendment titatc. gr.tis with the subject line"Notice of Proposed must include a map of the affected area showing Amendment." existing and proposed plan and zone designations. A Submittals may also be uploaded to DLCD's FTP site paper map must be legible if printed on 81/2" x 1 I" at paper. Include text regarding background,justification 17tt tr�4'�r,orr���z�n,t7ov;'LCl)-1'ae�'pdpa submittal.�i; for the change, and the application if there was one p C I� i accepted by the local government. A map by itself is x. not a complete notice. E-mails with attachments that exceed 20MB will not be 10. Goal exceptions: Submittal of proposed received, and therefore FTP must be used for these amendments that involve a goal exception must include electronic submittals. The FTP site must be used for the proposed language of the exception. all .zip files regardless of size. The maximum file size for uploading via FTP is 150MB. 660-018-0022 provides: (I) When a local government determines that no goals,commission rules,or land use statutes apply to a particular proposed change. the notice ofa proposed change is not required [a notice of adoption is still required, however];and (2) If a local government determines that emergency circumstances beyond the control of the local government require expedited review such that the local government cannot submit the proposed change consistent with the 35-day deadline,the local government may submit the proposed change to the department as soon as practicable. The submittal must include a description of the emergency circumstances. http://www.Oregon.gov/LCD/Paf es/forms.aspx -3- Form updated November 1, 2013 If you have any questions or would like assistance, please contact your DLCD regional representative or the DLCD Salem office at 503-934-0017 or e-mail pk►n.aincildnmcimts [ate.or.us. Notice checklist. Include all that apply: Completed Form 1 fl The text of the amendment (e.g., plan or code text changes, exception findings,justification for change) ® Any staff report on the proposed change or information that describes when the staff report will be available and how a copy may be obtained el A map of the affected area showing existing and proposed plan and zone designations ® A copy of the notice or a draft of the notice regarding a quasi-judicial land use hearing, if applicable i ►1 Any other information necessary to advise DLCD of the effect of the proposal , fr}1KftTrvE http://www_ore_gon.gov/LCD/Pages/forms.aspx -4- Form updated November 1,2013 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING .111 TIGARD I, Gary Pagenstecher,being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Associate Planner for the City of Tigard,Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: ;Check.1ppr priate Box(s)Relent; wl NOTICE OF Notice of a Public Hearing FOR: CR-U015-00002 I)irksen Nature Park Wetlands Edication ❑ AMENDED NOTICE- ❑ City of Tigard Community Development Director ` ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ® Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit "A",and by reference made a part hereof,was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit "B", and by reference made a part hereof, May 6,2015,and deposited in the United States Mail on May 6,2015 ,postage prepaid. 5L7 - P / 01111" ary Pagenstecher STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 291 day of TUri C., ,2015. 0 . OFFICIAL STAMP '+ BETSY GALICIA NOTARY COMM SS ON NO. 25741N is ,4W 1`--P MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MARCH 09,2018 1 NOTARY PFBLIC OF OREGON My Commission Expires:4:?/.0/1/8/ Ev:(1mrnunirvDerclopmcrit\l.a11dL1sc-ApplicatinnsVI1ti_.11tiJarits o1Arif\Isulin 1)1)R20I5-i MW)2_(;arstCI)71s.6c� EXHIBIT A Notice of a Public Hearing - Type IV Comprehensive Plan Amendment T1G11RD Dirksen Nature Park Wetlands Education- Case ID: CPA2015-00002 Tigard Community Development Contact Information Date of Notice: Wednesday,May 06, 2015 120 days NA To: Interested Persons Staff Contact: Gary Pagenstecher 503-718-2434 GarGp@tigard-or.gov Development is proposed in your neighborhood that requires a land use review. The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing beginning at 7:00 pm on Monday, July 06, 2015 in the Town Hall of the Tigard Civic Center at 13525 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon 97223. Anyone wishing to present written testimony on this proposed action may do so by sending it in writing to Gary Pagenstecher. We need to receive your written comments by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 20, 2015. Please mail or deliver your comments to 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon 97223. Include the Case ID Number: CPA2015-00002. Please address your comments to the appropriate staff person: Gary Pagenstecher. Anyone wishing to present oral testimony may do so at the hearing. Information About the Proposal Description of the Proposal: Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval is requested to remove 0.12 acres of Tigard significant wetlands from the Wetlands and Stream Corridor map to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. `Mese boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisor Board (PRAB). The boardwalks that extend into the mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. Applicant/ City of Tigard Owner: 13125 SW I Tall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Location And Legal 11000 Block of SW Tigard Street. 48 acres on Tax Lots 1S134DD 900, 1000, 2400, Description: 2500; 2S103AA00200; 2S103AB00200; 1S134DC, 3000, 3001, 3002, 3100, 3101, 3102, 3300, 3400; Zoning: PR, Parks and Recreation Approval Criteria: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.390 Decision Making Procedures; 18.540 Parks and Recreation Zone; 18.775 Sensitive Lands. Comprehensive Plan Goals: Goal 5 Natural Resources, Goal 8 Parks Recreation and Open Space, and Goal 9 Economic Development;Statewide Planning Goals 5,8,and 9. City of Tigard,Community Development Division•13125 SW I Jail Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 97223 pg. 1 I What You Should Know About This Type IV Proposal This proposal requires a quasi-judicial Type 1II-PC land use review where the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to City Council as the approval authority. The goal of this notice is to invite interested parties to participate early in the decision-making process by submitting comments in writing during the open comment period or through oral testimony at the public hearing. The Community Development Department will be making a recommendation to the Planning Commission on this proposal; our staff report and recommendation will be available for review at least seven days before the hearing. The final decision will be made by the City Council after consideration of the Planning Commission recommendation, relevant evidence and public comments received during the open comment period and at the hearing. The City Council's decision will be mailed to the applicant and anyone who submitted written comments or is otherwise entitled to a decision notice. Public Information Requests: A copy of the application, documents and evidence considered will be contained in the public record and available for public review. If you would like to review this material at no cost, please schedule an appointment with Lora Garland, Records Management Specialist, 503-718- 2483. If you wish to receive copies of the materials, city records will prepare them for you at a reasonable cost. Public Comment and Hearing Process Information The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the Tigard Development Code, Chapter 18.391) and rules of procedure adopted by the Tigard City Council which arc available online or by request at City Hall. At the hearing, the Planning Commission will receive a staff report presentation from the city planner, open the public hearing and invite both oral and written testimony. The Planning Commission may continue the public hearing into an additional meeting in order to obtain more information or may close the public hearing and take action on the application. If evidence in support of the application is submitted less than seven days prior to the public hearing, any party is entitled to request a continuance of the hearing. If there is no continuance granted at the hearing, any participant in attendance may request that the record remain for at least seven additional days after the hearing. Appeal Information Failure to raise any issue regarding this proposal, either in person or in writing prior to the close of the public hearing, or failure to provide testimony or sufficient evidence to allow the Planning Commission and City Council to respond to the issue, precludes an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals based on that issue. Failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Comments directed at the relevant approval criteria (Tigard Development Code) are what constitute relevant evidence. Details regarding the appeal process and requirements are contained within Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.390. There is a fee charged for appeals. Attachments Included in this Notice Vicinity Map City of Tigard,Community Development Division•13125 SW I hill Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 97223 pg.2 I Notice to Mortgagee, Lienholder, Vendor, or Seller The Tigard Development Code requires that if you receive this notice it shall be promptly forwarded to the i purchaser. I Final Written Comment Deadline is at 5 pm Wednesday, May 20, 2015 120 days = NA Assistive Listening Devices and Interpreters: Assistive listening devices are available by request. The city will also endeavor to arrange for a qualified sign Language and bilingual interpreters upon request. Please call 503-639-4171, extension 2438 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD—Telecommunications Device for the Deaf). Please make these arrangements at least one week prior to the public hearing. ' wail-1 -j-i . i J i ■ r f VICINITY MAP yi —id. a Jar .'i CPA2015-00002 1 J 3 10 Dirksen Nature Park ata 'm Wetlands Education —i 1 id r, , iNa I I I w._ II flirie KO 1—,.. Ai 111 aall fiJaru4r .- r �► wy .1( Subject Site • of P "1 —1 1 - Via_ .., .1.; _. ....4:5"--,. . r .1 sok w MYc.441«woo.1 6•rR w _-P x .1' J / .u'wnf WA rt aNj t , so. ,ALN 4 :i RI N.A. '- 00,00irZ%.w Cin-of Tigard,Community Development Division •13125 SW I tall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 9-223 pg.3 a ,r EXHIBIT B AI.BERTSON,BARRY BEACH,DAYLE D.& EVELYN O. 15-145 SW 150T1 I .\\ 1: 11530 SW 72ND AVENUE TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 BE1LK I 5I. 5 \N BEILS FEIN,ELLEN 11755 S1\ 114111 PLACE 14630 SW 139TH AVE 'TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 BRENNEMAN,HEIDI BU'EHNER,GRETCI IEN 1168()SW TIGARD DRIVE 13249 SW 136TH PLACE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 CAFFALL,REX CAROL RENAUD-\V.\CO CPO NEWSLETTER COORD. 13205 SW VILLAGE GLENN OSU EXT.SVC-CTTI%IINVOLVEMENT FACULTY TIGARD,OR 97223 155 NORTH 1ST AVE LE SUIT 200 MS48 I IILLSBORO,OR 9-124 CONNI;RY, STACY CR\GHE D,ALEXANDER 12564 SW MAIN STREET 12205 SW HALL BOULEVARD 17GARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223-6210 DEFIJJPPIS,VICTOR ERDT,DON& DOROTHY 13892 SW BRANDON CT 13760 \\ 121ST A�ENUE TIGARD,OR 97224 •11(BARD,OR 97223 FOSTER,VANESSA FROUDE,BEVERLY 13085 S\X'HOWARD DR 12200 SW BULL MOUNTAIN ROAD TIGARD,OR 97723 TIGARD,OR 97224 GALLUCCI, N.\OMI GOODHOUSE,JOHN 11285 SW 78111 AV NUE 9345 SW MOUNTAIN VIEW LANE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 HAMILTON,LISA CPO 4B VICE CI LAIR HARDING,TODD&HERING JR,BLAKE. 13565 SW BEEF BEND ROAD NORRIS BEGGS&SIMPSON TIGARD,OR 97224 121 SW MORRISON,SUI TE 200 PORTLAND,OR 972114 HOGAN,KEVIN HOWLAND,HAROLD AND RUTH 14357 SW 133RD AVENUE 13145 SW BENISH TIGARD,OR 97224 '1'IGARD,OR 97223 JULIE RUSSELL CHAIR CPO 4B CHAIR JULIE RL'SSE MI., CPO 4B CHAIR 16200 SW PACIFIC HWY SUITE H BOX 242 12662 SW TI:RR.IVIEW DRIVE 'IIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224 KEERINS,PATRICIA KIMMEL,DAVID 15677 SW OREGON ST. AP'I'209 1335 SW 66TH SUITE 201 TIGARD,OR 97140 PORTLAND,OR 97225 KNAPP, MONA LONG,JIM CHAIR,CPO 4M 9600 SW FRE\X1NG STREET 10730 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 hIILDRE .A. (;1_A1: MURDOCK, NATI IAN AND ANN MILDRI•1v 1)1.SIGN GROUP 7415 SW SPRUCE STREET 7650 SW MAI 1..1ND ST,STE 120 TIGARD,OR 'r223 TIGARD,OR 97223 NEAL BROWN. GRI NEAT'',P.\'ITY MEADOWS INC REALTORS 12180 SW MI':RESTONE COURT 12655 SW NOR'I]I DAKOTA STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 RORMAN,SUE SPRING,BRAD 11250 SW 82ND AVE 7555 SW SPRUCE STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 STALZER,CHARLIE AND LARIE SUNDBERG,ROSS 14781 SWJULIET TERRACE 16382 SW 104TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224 '11IOMPSON,GLENNA WALSH,DAVID 1366 S\\ HALL BLVD UNIT 2 10236 SW ST(.1RT COURT TIGARD,OR 97223 'TIGARD,OR 97223 WEGENER,BRIAN 9830 SW KIMBERLY DRIVE TIGIRD,OR 97224 Gary Pagenstecher From: LFaxon@CommNewspapers.com Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 9:54 AM To: Gary Pagenstecher Subject: RE: Publish Notice for CPA2015-00002 Good Morning Gary. Notice received. I \kill get this notice. with map and logo, in the May 141'' edition of The Times. Once published. I will send affidavits of publication to your attention. Thank you. Louise Faxon Legal Advertising Community Newspapers/Portland Tribune 6605 SE Lake Rd, Portland 97222-2161 PO Box 22109, Portland OR 97269-2 L09 (503)546-0752; fax(503)620-3433 Leguls Notices are online at. luip: publicnotices.portlun llrrbune.com From: Gary Pagenstecher [mailto:Garyp@tigard-or..govj Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 6:41 PM To: Louise Faxon Subject: Publish Notice for CPA2015-00002 Louise, Please publish the attached notice and vicinity map in the May 14, 2015 edition of the Times and send a copy for our files. Thank you, Gary Gary Pagenstecher,AICP Associate Planner Community Development City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Phone: 503-718-2434 Fax: 503-718-2748 Email:garyp@tigard-or,gav DISCLAiMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules "City General Records Retention Schedule " 1 k • , COMMUNITY .., NEWSPAPERS II 6605 SE Lake Road, Portland, OR 97222 T I G/�Ft Il PO Box 22109 Portland OR 97269-2109 Phone:503-684-0360 Fax: 503-620-3433 E-mail: legals@commnewspapers.com NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELLER: AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION THE TIGA}U3 DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT Ir YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Accounting NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING ' Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, WILL BE HELD BEFORE THE TIGARD PLANNING Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of COMMISSION ON MONDAY, July 6. 2015 AT '7Q general circulation, published at Tigard, in the per, AND BEFORE THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ON aforesaid county and state, as defined by TUESDAY. JULY 28. 2015 AT 7:30 PM, THE PUBLIC ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that HEARINGS WILL BE CONDUCTED IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER AT 13125 SW HALL BQULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. THESE City of Tigard HEARINGS ARE FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING Notice of Public Hearing—Dirksen Nature TESTIMONY FROM THE PUBLIC. Park—CPA2015-00002 TT12042 FILE NOS.: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA)2015-00002 A copyof which is hereto annexed, was FILE TITLE: DIRKSEN NATURE PARK WETLANDS EDUCATION published in the entire issue of said APPLICANT! newspaper for OWNER: City of Tigard 1 clo Jeff Peck week in the following issue: 13125 SW Hall Blvd May 14, 2015 Tigard, OR 97223 REQUEST: Comprehensive Plan Amendment approval is requested to remove 0.12 acres of Tigard C I iCt'1Hp ,- .La z f significant wetlands from the Wetlands and '� L/U Stream Corridor map to accommodate the Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Manager) future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as Subscribed and sworn to before me this environmental education facilities,consistent May 14, 2015. with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisor Board (PRAB). The • 0 . A0,-“,i, boardwalks that extend into the mapped NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON wetlands will provide overlooks into these My commission expires +va\02/?l 9 unique habitat areas. LOCATION: 11000 Block of SW Tigard Street.48 acres Acct#10093001 - - -- on Tax Lots 1S134DD 900, 1000, 2400, OFFICIAL STAIN 2500; 2S103AA00200; 2S103AB00200; Attn: GaryPagenstecher DESIRAE ANN MARGLIN 1 S 134DC, 3000, 3001, 3002, 3100, 3101, City of Tigardi`--- ,. NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON 3102, 3300, 3400; 1S134DD 900, 1000, 13125 SW Hall Blvd f COMMISSION NO.936708 2400,2500. 9 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MARCH 02,2019 ZQNEI Tigard, OR 97223 c..�- ti- -..—..- --- -- .-�zf COMP PLAN Size: 2 x 19" DESIGNATION:PR, Public Institution and Open Space Amount Due: $317.30* 'P6ease remit to address above. 4 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING TIGARD I, Gary Pagenstecher,being first duly sworn/affirm,on oath depose and say that I am an Associate Planner for the City of Tigard,Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: ;hcck-lpg n>priatc Box(s)&Inw - r NOTICE OF Notice of Ordinance No. 15-13 FOR: CPA2015-I)0002 Dirksen Nature Park Wetlands Education ❑ AMENDED NOTICE )i ❑ City of Tigard Community Development Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ® Tigard City Council A copy of the said notice being hereto attached,marked Exhibit "A",and by reference made a part hereof,was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit "B", and by reference made a part hereof, August 5,2015,and deposited in the Ut ' el States Mail on August 5,2015 , postage prepaid. pGa `Pagenstecher STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 1c2 411 day of iqUq �J.0 ,2015. U *.r,454 OFFICIAL STAMP BETSY GALICIA ;14 54.; NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.925741 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MARCH 09,2018 NOTARY PUBLI' 01{OREGON My Commission 1_<xpires: 3 /y// I:1,(�nrrvnunt% )cl'zLal.rrenii\Isuid I sc \pr1ie.uinns'^i)1_Afriday tt.ri1\ "3i15\.Aflit;tvitn 1 A6ailing_DDR2tiI54ltl44)2j iary061191.5.docx ► EXHIBIT A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 15- 13 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING (:ONIPRI:I IENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, CPA2015-0 X112, TO REMOVE .12 ACRES OF LOCALLY SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS FROM TIIE"TIGARD WETLAND AND S'IREAM1 CORRIDOR MAP" INVENTORY. WHEREAS, Section 18.775.090 includes Special Provisions for Development within Locally Significant Wetlands and Along the Tualatin River, Fanno Creek,Ball Creek,and the South Fork of Ash Creek;and WHEREAS, Section 18.775.090.A. states in order to address the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources) and the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 666-023-0040) pertaining to wetlands, all wetlands classified as significant on the City of Tigard 'Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map" are protected. No land form alterations or developments arc allowed within or partially within a significant wetland,except as allowed/approved pursuant to Section 18.775.13(1;and WHEREAS,Section 8.775.130 Plan Amendment Option,provides that any owner of property affected by the Goal 5 safe harbor(1)protection of significant wetlands and/or(2) vegetated areas established for the Tualatin River,Fanno Creek,Ball Creek,and the South Fork of Ash Creek may apply for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment under 'Pepe IV procedure. This amendment must be based on a specific development proposal. 'The effect of the amendment would be to remove Goal 5 protection from the property, but not to remove the requirements related to the CWS Stormwater Connection Permit, which must be addressed separately through an alternatives analysis,as described in Section 3.02.5 of the CWS "Design and Construction Standards;"and WHEREAS, Section 8.775.130.A further provides that the applicant shall demonstrate that such an amendment is justified by an environmental, social, economic and energy (ESEE) consequences analysis prepared in accordance with OAR 660-23-040;and WI IEREAS;the applicant prepared an ESFJi analysis (Appendix B of Application) prepared in accordance with OAR 60-23-040, to justify removal of Goal 5 protection from 0.12 acres of significant wetlands on the subject property;and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council has considered applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; any applicable Metro regulations; any applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies; and any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances; and WI IEREAS,the Tigard City Council has found the following to be the applicable review criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390,Decision Making Procedures; and 18.775 Sensitive Lands;and WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Comumission held a public hearing on July 6, 2015 and recommended approval of CPA2015-(1(X102 by motion with a unanimous vote in favor;and WHEREAS,REAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on July 28,2015,to consider the request for a quasi- judicial Comprehensive Plan Amendment and determined that the amendment will not adversely affect the health,safety and welfare of the City and meets all applicable review criteria. 0 ra Certified to be a True Copy of N Original on File By: /v ORDINANCE No. 15./3 Deputy Recorder-City •;�'$ Page 1 ard Date: / - l; d/'6 ��r i 1 NOW,THERI "11 IE CI'IY OF'1'1(i.IRD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I: Comprehensive Plan Amendment,CPA20l 5-00002,is hereby approved. SECTION 2• The attached findings (Exhibit A) arc hereby adopted in explanation of the Council's decision, SECTION 3: The ESEE analysis (Exhibit B) shag be incorporated by reference into the 'Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the "Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map" shall be amended to remove the site from the inventory,as approved. SECTION 4: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor,and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By 2[n4n i malt,. vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, tht5 ?ii*Flay of S).N•?cj ,2015. Carol A. Krager,City Recorder APPROVED: By l'igard City Council this $4 dati of 9 l.41- ,2015. Jon I..Cook,Mayor I Approved as to form: zz.....___ ' '.61.--6 City Attomt "119.`6) / S- 1).2ri til ORDINANCE No. 15- Page 2 4 • Agenda Item: Heating Date:'Ay 6.2015 Time:7:04WM STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION c FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD 120 DAYS = NA SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: DIRKSEN NATURE PARK WETLANDS EDUCATION CASE NOS.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2015-00002 REQUEST: The City of Tigard is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to remove 0.12 acres of Tigard significant wetlands from the Wetlands and Stream Corridor map to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisor Board (PRAB). The boardwalks that would extend into the mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. APPLICANT/ City of Tigard OWNER: c/o Jeff Peck 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tgard,OR 97223 LOCATION: 11000 Block of SW Tigard Street. 48 acres on Tax Lots 1S134DD 900, 1000, 2400, 2500; 2S103AA00200;2S103AB00200; 1S134DC,3000,3001,3002,3100,3101, 3102,3300,3400; ZONE/ COMP PLAN DESIGNATION: PR/Public Institution and Open Space APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapter. 18.775 Sensitive Lands. SECTION II. STAFF RECOM1fENDATION Staff recommends that Planning Commission find that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment will not' adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the Cit} and meets the Approval Standards as outlined in Section V of this report. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council APPROVAL of the &to i osed amendment. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. CP t il5 111002 DIRK:Q.:N PARK CP;t, p tt;i 1(-u 6 3 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Proposal Description: The City requests removal of 0.12 acres from the City's Local Wetlands Inventory and from Sensitive Lands Review provisions of the Tigard Development Code, to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (DRAB). The boardwalks that would extend into mapped wetlands will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas.This comprehensive plan map amendment will enable the future installation of the boardwalks. The park improvements themselves are not a part of this applica tion. Context of the Request The Park System Master Plan outlines the need to acquire park property and construct park improvements to preserve open spaces, enhance water quality and provide recreational opportunities. On November 2, 2010, Tigard voters passed a $17 million general obligation bond to fund the purchase of real property for parks and to fund a limited amount of park development. The Dirksen Nature Park (formerly known as the Summer Creek or the Fowler property) is a high priority project in the Park System Master Plan, the adopted City of Tigard CIP and the Notice of City Measure Election provided to voters regarding the 2010 parks bond. Dirksen Nature Park contains a mix of mature forests, wetlands,open space and existing active recreation facilities. The majority of the property will remain a natural area as approximately 35 acres, about 70%, are protected under a conservation easement with Metro. Dirksen Nature Park is designated as a community park and will become a unique environmental education resource for the City. This amendment includes an economic, social, environmental, and energy (ESEE) analysis of the proposed removal of 0.12 acres from the local Wetland Inventory to accommodate two planned boardwalks, consistent with'f DC:: 18.775. In 2013, the two boardwalks were included among other park improvements in the Conditional Use Permit (CPA2013-00001) and Sensitive Lands Review that was reviewed by the Hearings Officer. The Hearings Officer approved the proposed improvements except for the installation of the boardwalks and expressly noted the potential for an exception via a comprehensive plan amendment,which is the subject of this application. Vicinity Information: Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street, immediately north of Fowler Middle School. The subject site also includes an existing, paved section of the Fanno Creek frail. The project site is located in the Tigard Area 3 neighborhood. SECTION IV, NOTICE AND COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES The city sent notice of a Public Hearing to interested parties and posted the request on the city's website on May 6, 2015. The city published notice of the Planning Commission and City Council hearings in the May 14,2015 issue of the Tigard Times. The city received wntten comments from the Tualatin RiverKeepers and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in support of the requested comprehensive plan amendment. `these letters are included within the land use application materials, which is attached to this staff report. SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The following review criteria apply to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) to the City of Tigard "Wetland and Stream Corridors"map. rl', iliS,4t002 t)IRKSE?J Th.\l'UR}•:]'ARK CPA -- - PAGE 2 OF t r 18.775.090 Special Provisions for Development within Locally Significant Wetlands and Along the Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek A. In order to address the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources) and the safe harbor provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 666-023-0030) pertaining to wetlands, all wetlands classified as significant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map" are protected. No land form alterations or developments arc allowed within or partially within a significant wetland,except as allowed/approved pursuant to Section 18.775.130. - The subject property includes locally significant wetlands that are identified as locally significant wetlands on the City of Tigard 'Wetlands and Stream Corridors" map and are, therefore, protected. The applicant has applied for the Plan Amendment Option in Section 18.775130 to remove Goal 5 protections from 0.12 acres of significant wetlands to allow the proposed boardwalks for habitat enhancement and educational purposes. 18.775.130 Plan Amendment Option Any owner of property affected by the Goal 5 safeharbor (1) protection of significant wetlands and/or (2) vegetated areas established for the Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek may apply for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment under Type IV procedure. This amendment must be based on a specific development proposal. The effect of the amendment would be to remove Goal 5 protection from the property, but not to remove the requirements related to the CWS Stormwater Connection Permit, which must be addressed separately through an alternatives analysis, as described in Section 3.02.5 of the CWS "Design and Construction Standards." The applicant shall demonstrate that such an amendment is justified by either of the following: A. ESEE analysis. The applicant may prepare an environmental, social, economic and energy (ESEE) consequences analysis prepared in accordance with OAR 660-23-040. The applicant has chosen to demonstrate the amendment is justified through an ESEE analysis, rather than a demonstration that the wetlands are not significant. The applicant submitted an ESEE analysis dated 2-24-15 (Appendix B of Application) prepared in accordance with OAR 60-23-040, to justify removal of Goal 5 protection from 0.12 acres of significant wetlands on the subject property. This provision is met. 1. The analysis shall consider the ESEE consequences of allowing the proposed conflicting use, considering both the impacts on the specific resource site and the comparison with other comparable sites within the Tigard Planning Area; As described in the ESEE analysis,the applicant has considered the ESEE consequences of allowing the conflicting use, in this case the two trail boardwalks, and considered the impacts on the specific resource site as well as other comparable sites within Tigard. As described in the applicant's analysis,the consequences of allowing the proposed conflicting use provide a net positive benefit to the resource through enhancements and the controlled access to the resource area. Since the proposal is specific to environmental education opportunities within these unique wetlands at Dirksen Nature Park, no other comparable sites exist within the Tigard Planning Area. This provision is met. 2. The ESEE analysis must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Tigard City Council that the adverse economic consequences of not allowing the conflicting use are sufficient to justify the loss, or partial loss, of the resource; The ESEE analysis outlines the predominantly positive economic benefits of limiting the conflicting use by allowing the construction of the boardwalks to provide resource enhancement and access for educational purposes. CP.121115-mmtptlm DIRKSI N N.VI"UR1.PARK CI'\ r ic,i i 01 s • The ESEE analysis indicates that the " City of Tigard spent$3.3 million on the acquisition of Dirksen Nature Park. Planning for the initial phase of park development is underway,and according to the adopted park master plan, the cost estimate for full development of the park was in the range of$2 to $2.3 million. Passive uses, such as walking and wildlife observation, are important aspects to the park. Additionally, the site is intended to serve as an outdoor classroom and a center for environmental education and experiential learning. The proposed boardwalks arc an integral element of the environmental education and interpretive program for the park, since these boardwalks will allow visitors to experience two different and unique wetland ecosystems in the park in a safe, environmentally sound and ecologically sensitive manner." As identified in the ESEE analysis, based on a US Fish and Wildlife Service report in calculating economic benefits of "refuge" visitation, "it is reasonable to assume that a clear, positive economic benefit exists for installing the boardwalks to not only enhance safe access into the wetland areas for wildlife observation, photography and environmental interpretation, but also as a means to further improve and enhance the quality of those unique wetlands by controlling visitor access." In addition, "The focus of the Washington County Visitor's Association toward the promotion of nature-based experiences reinforces the relative importance of providing and enhancing these opportunities for local residents and visitors. The development of Dirksen Nature Park will provide opportunities for increased tourism and visitation. The environmental education and experiences at the park will be enhanced by the installation of the proposed boardwalks." The proposed comprehensive plan amendment supports the city's investment of park acquisition fundsand enhances and improves access to the resource to provide opportunities for increased visitation for tourism and environmental education. The Tigard City Council may find that the economic benefits are sufficient to justify partial loss (0.12 acres,or 5,227 square feet) of the wetland resource. This provision is met. 3. In particular, ESEE analysis must demonstrate why the use cannot be located on buildable land, consistent with the provisions of this chapter, and that there are no other sites within the Tigard Planning Area that can meet the specific needs of the proposed use; The applicant states in their ESEE analysis that"The conflicting use (two trail boardwalks)is specific to the wetland resources at Dirksen Nature Park, and is actually less conflicting than the existing rogue trails. The park is designated as a community park and will become a unique environmental education resource for the City. The installanon of the planned boardwalks can occur nowhere else on the site, other than in the wetland areas. Functionally, the boardwalks are required as an environmentally-sensitive,accessible extension of the park trails into the wetland habitats. The boardwalks will provide managed and controlled access near and into the wetland areas with the aim to eliminate rogue, off-trail passage through the wetland resources and to enable the successful restoration of the wetlands rn those areas where past trail walking has occurred and damaged the immediate wetland environment. The boardwalks will further the environmental education opportunities for park users and provide safe, accessible platforms for community groups, students and classes to view and begin to understand and appreciate the nature and importance of these wetland habitats without damaging them and disturbing wildlife." Because of the unique nature of these wetland resources within Tigard and the unique education and access management control functions provided by the boardwalks, there are no alternative sites within the Tigard Planning Area that can meet the specific needs of the proposed use. This provision is met. 4. The ESEE analysis shall be prepared by a team consisting of a wildlife biologist or wetlands ecologist and a land use planner or land use attorney, all of whom are qualified in their respective fields and experienced in the preparation of Goal 5 ESEE analysis; The ESEE Analysis provided in Appendix B was prepared by a qualified team consisting of a land use attorney with Jordan Ramis, PC and environmental scientists with WH Pacific, qualified in their respective fields with experience rl'Ams-Rear_DIRKSIP%I NATUILE PARK CPA PAGI.4(R.6 compiling such analyses. This provision is met. 5. If the application is approved, then the ESEE analysis shall be incorporated by reference into the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the 'Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map" shall be amended to remove the site from the inventory. On approval of this request, the ESEE analysis will be incorporated by reference into the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the "Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map"will be amended to remove the sites (Appendix C: Survey of Proposed Exclusion Areas) from the inventory. FINDINGS: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of TDC Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands. SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City Police Department reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it. The City Public Works Department was notified of the proposal and did not provide comment. SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) commented in a letter dated March 2, 2105 in support of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment. The letter also includes recommendations for Further protecting fish and wildlife and their habitats. This letter is included as an attachment to this staff report. Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL),Washington County, and Metro were notified of the proposal but provided no comment. SECTION VIII. _STAFF ANALYSIS, CONCLUSION,AND RECOMMENDATION ANALYSIS: As shown in the analysis above, the applicant's ESEE analysis addresses the requirements of the Tigard Development Code, Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands. The subject property contains locally significant wetlands protected under Goal 5 safeharbor. The applicant has applied for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment under a Type IV procedure. The application is based on a specific development proposal for two boardwalks for habitat enhancement and environmental education. The applicant has demonstrated that such an amendment is justified by an ESEE analysis consistent with OAR 660-23-040. The ESF.P analysis concludes that limiting the conflicting use to the proposed boardwalks would result in the most positive consequences of the three decision options. A decision to limit the conflicting use will avoid many of the negative consequences attributed to either allowing or prohibiting the conflicting uses. Through the application of site design and development standards to conflicting uses, the impacts on the significant wetland further can be minimized, and the remaining resource can be enhanced. There will be a relatively high level of economic, social, environmental and energy benefits achieved. limiting the conflicting use offers the most benefit to the wetland (through controlled access and enhancement) and to the community (access for all and education opportunities), and it strikes a balance between conflicting uses and planning goals for the services provided in this public park. CONCLUSION Based on the findings and analysis, staff finds that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is consistent cprl$nn5-010 2 DntNSt.1V N,v llttt:PARK CP.\ PACE 5 OI°G SII with applicable provisions of the Tigard Development Code, Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands. Staff agrees with the conclusion of the applicant's ESEE Analysis and recommends modifying the decision from prohibiting conflicting uses to limiting conflicting uses within the 0.12 acre significant wetland areas for resource enhancement and environmental education purposes. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment modifying the current resource protection decision from prohibiting conflicting uses to limiting conflicting uses and removing 0.12 acres from the significant wetlands inventory described in the "Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map". Attachments: Exhibit A City's Application dated February 14,2015. `�� '✓� June 29.2015 PREPARED BY: Gary agenstecher DATE - Associate Planner � Cv Jul)._30,2015 APPROVED BY: Tom McGuire DATE Assistant Community Development Director • CPA015-002 DIRKS1iN NATURE.PARK CP.\ PAGE 6OF 6 • ESEE Analysis for the Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks City of Tigard, Oregon Submitted to: City of Tigard, Oregon February 24, 2015 Prepared by: WHPacific Jordan Ramis, PC Conservation Technix,Inc. 9755 SW Barnes Rd,Ste 300 Two Centerpointe Drive,6th Floor PO Box 12736 Portland,OR 97225 Lake Oswego,OR 97035 Portland,OR 97212 Phone:(503)626-0455 Phone:(503)598-7070 Phone:(503)989-9345 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Economic, Social, Environmental & Energy (ESEE) Consequences Analysis Introduction The City of Tigard proposes to remove the significant wetland designation from a portion of two wetlands located within the 48-acre Dirksen Nature Park,which is the City's newest community park and a unique environmental education resource.The Applicant is pursuing a comprehensive plan map amendment that includes an environmental,social,economic and energy (ESEE) consequences analysis to request to remove 5,254 square feet (0.12 acres) of wetland from the Local Wetland Inventory in two discreet areas of the park, thereby removing this land from sensitive lands protections as provided by the Tigard Development Code (18.775.130).These two exclusion areas are planned to be utilized for the development of two boardwalked trails associated with future park improvements.These boardwalks represent critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities,consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB). Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street,immediately north of Fowler Middle School. The two areas proposed for removal from the Local Wetland Inventory are located within wetlands designated as"significant" (i.e. a Statewide Planning Goal 5 resource)on the City of Tigard's "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map"and are protected.The City does not allow any landform alterations or developments within or partially within a significant wetland, except as approved pursuant to TDC 18.775.130. As described in the Plan Amendment Option section (CDC 18.775.130), the Code allows applicants to impact significant wetlands if the amendment is justified under one of two options.The first option is to conduct an Economic,Social, Environmental,and Energy (ESEE) analysis that considers the consequences of allowing the proposed conflicting use. The second option is to demonstrate the wetland's "insignificance."WllPacific reviewed the significance thresholds included as an addendum to the City of Tigard's Local Wetlands Inventory and determined that the quality of the wetlands and the connections to Summer Creek and Fanno Creek are significant. As such,the Applicant is submitting an ESEE analysis for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan map amendment via a Type-IV review. This report includes an analysis of the ESEE (economic, social,environmental and energy) consequences of three potential alternatives regarding a conflicting use impacting previously documented and protected significant lands located within the Dirksen Nature Park in Tigard. This ESEE analysis has been prepared in accordance with applicable provisions of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Goal 5)and the Goal S Rule (OAR Chapter 660,Division 023). This document focuses on the significant wetland and does not include a significant habitat evaluation. It is understood the significant habitat evaluation is an incentive based,non-regulatory element within the City's regulatory framework. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 2 of 24 ESEE Analysis Requirements The analysis is based on a highly refined and targeted removal of limited portions of two small wetlands areas from the local wetland inventory at Dirksen Nature Park that extend into a Goal 5 resource considered significant (e.g.a forested wetland north of Summer Creek and a wetland associated with Fanno Creek). The Goal 5 ESEE analysis involves evaluating the trade-offs associated with different levels of natural resource protection. As required by the Goal 5 rule,the evaluation process involves identifying the consequences of allowing,limiting or prohibiting conflicting uses in areas containing significant natural resources.Specifically,the rule requires the following steps: * Identify conflicting uses=-A conflicting use is"any current or potentially allowed land use or I' other activity reasonably and customarily subject to land use regulations that could adversely affect a significant Goal 5 resource." PAR 660-023-0010(1)) • Determine impact area—The impact area represents the extent to which land uses or activities in areas adjacent to natural resources could negatively impact those resources. The impact area identifies the geographic limits within which to conduct the ESEE analysis. * Analyze the ESEE consequences—The ESEE analysis considers the consequences of a decision to either fully protect natural resources; fully allow conflicting uses;or limit the conflicting uses. The analysis looks at the consequences of these options for both development and natural resources. ■ Develop a program—The results of the ESEE analysis are used to generate recommendations or an"ESEE decision."The ESEE decision sets the direction for how and under what circumstances the local program will protect significant natural resources. I) Existing Local Protections II The entirety of Dirksen Nature Park is within Tigard's Parks and Recreation(PR)zone.This zone classification defines permitted and prohibited uses,as well as development standards including setbacks and building height restrictions. Sites in the PR zone with overlay zones,plan districts, i' inventoried hazards,and/or sensitive lands are subject to additional regulations. Conditional uses are subject to a Type-111 review,and development in or near sensitive lands trigger review under the City's Sensitive Iands chapter (18.775). Sensitive lands are defined as lands potentially unsuitable for development because of their location within: ■ The 100-year floodplain or 1996 flood inundation line,whichever is greater; ■ Natural drainageways; ■ Wetland areas which are regulated by the other agencies including the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of State Lands,or are designated as significant wetland on the City of Tigard"Wetland and Stream Corridors Map"; ■ Steep slopes of 25%or greater and unstable ground; and ■ Significant fish and wildlife habitat areas designated on the City of Tigard "Significant Habitat Areas Map." ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 III k; Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 3 of 24 lu The Sensitive Lands chapter outlines the permitted and regulated activities and uses within sensitive lands, as well as defines the review and approval processes for development consideration based on the type and intensity of the impact.The chapter further outlines processes in instances for requests for variances or plan amendments. With regard to wetlands,sensitive lands were mapped following a wetland inventory. Site Description Et Project History Dirksen Nature Park is located within the Fanno Creek sub-watershed of the Lower Tualatin Watershed. Fanno Creek flows along the eastern boundary of the site. Summer Creek flows along the southern boundary of the site to its confluence with Fanno Creek.Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels (Tax Map: 2S103AA,Lot 200;2S103AB,Lot 200; 1 S134DC,Lots 3000, 3001,3002, 3100,3101,3102, 3300,3400; 1S134DD,Lots 900, 1000, 2400, 2500) consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street. The site contains approximately 17 acres of wetland in total. Wetlands associated with Fanno Creek along the eastern edge of the property are predominately freshwater emergent marshes and account for approximately 8 acres of wetland.The likely water sources include flood water from Fanno Creek and groundwater flowing east across the site.A forested wetland is located along the western edge of the center of the site and is likely fed by rainwater that collects in flat areas during winter rains and held by poorly drained silty loam soils. Some of these forested wetlands extend to Summer Creek, where they are fed from flooding along the creek and groundwater. Portions of the property include other mapped environmental features including sensitive lands and riparian zones. A conservation easement with Metro protects 35 acres of the most sensitive areas on the property. Trails,boardwalks,interpretive signs and other educational elements are permitted within the conservation casement. The previously approved land use application and development plan is consistent with the conservation easement and has been tea icwed favorably by Metro, the easement holder. The development plans for Dirksen Nature Park include two trail boardwalks that extend into mapped wetlands and will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. Under consideration in this ESEE analysis is the request is to remove 0.12 acres from the City's Local Wetlands Inventory and from Sensitive Lands Review provisions of the Tigard Development Code to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks at Dirksen Nature Park to serve environmental education purposes. In 1994, the City of Tigard contracted with Fishman Environmental Services(FES)to prepare its Local Wetland Inventory (IMI). Expanding upon a wetlands inventory previously completed by another firm (SRI, 1989),FTS developed an approach for completing the Goal 5 inventory and conducting the ESEE analyses that identified stream corridor segments as resource units.The study was completed in 1994 and approved by DSL in 1997. It is the basis for the adopted "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map". The wetland boundaries depicted on the Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map are approximate. A formal wetland delineation would be required prior to any site development in order to satisfy the ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwa4ks Page4 of 24 legal requirements of DSL and the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers. As required by Tigard's development code,a land use application for the development of the Dirksen Nature Park was submitted in 2013 as a Type-ID Conditional Use Permit and Sensitive Lands Review.The park site analysis and land use application included a wetland delineation,natural resources assessment, stormwater report,geotechnical report and a no-rise certification.The Hearings Officer conditionally approved the project and released the final decision in late 2013. The two proposed boardwalks were included in the Conditional Use Permit and Sensitive Lands Review. The Hearings Officer did not approve the installation of the boardwalks and expressly noted the potential for an exception via a comprehensive plan amendment,which necessitated this ESEE analysis. The sensitive lands within Dirksen Nature Park will be protected and/or enhanced as described and approved in the land use approval for the park,which also took into consideration the various requirements related to Clean Water Services,Oregon Department of State Lands and the U.S. Corps of Engineers. Figure 1 shows the location and approximate size of local significant wetlands and creeks within Dirksen Nature Park.The wetlands are identified with the unit and identification number from the 1994 Local Wetlands Inventory. Figure 1:Mapped Significant Wetlands near Dirksen Nature Park v/ r (. / Mason Nun Park- /' Local S ncant Wetlands Vl� / !T Tiiatd Local Wetland (Irn��entor agniticant /J�/ a J Odi tos-Signcent � i/! /��•f Jurisdictional /•J� - Zior Unit:Wetland''�!, numbering relate In the V°���� e / inventory assessments ,/�j / rottducted bM Fishman /! Environments;Strncts tt P 11994) fJ f/' tAltien ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 5 of 24 Figure 2 provides summary data from the Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory of the quality (functions) and size of both relevant wetlands (totaling 19.37 acres)inventoried by F]-S. Figure 2:Summary Data from the Tigard Local Wetland Inventory for the Affected Wetlands Unit Wetland Acres Wildlife Fish Linkage Unique WQ Hydro He Ed Aesth 3 B-5 8.0 H M H L M H l t M 77"i"--' B-17 i 11.37 H L H H 1 t M M 1 H H=High Wildlife=WiIdliie Habitat Hydro Hydrologic Control M=Medium Fish=Fish Habitat Rec=Recreation t=Low Linkage Linkage Ed=Education Unique=Uniqueness Aesth=Aesthetic Quality Upon review of the wetland data sheets from the I.ocal Wetlands Inventory,the following was noted about these wetlands: • Wetland B-5: o Plant species identified included a mixture of invasive reed-canary grass,native spiraea, Oregon ash,and native willows. a Wetland classification of feature identified palustrine emergent,palustrine forest,and riverine habitat types. o Soil identified as Cove silty clay loam. • Wetland B-17: n Plant species dominating the feature included Oregon ash and slough sedge. Plant community dominated by natives. O Wetland classification identified palustrinc forest and riverine habitats. a Yard debris dumping by area residents noted along impromptu trail. o Soil identified as Cove silty clay loam. As a component of the site development application for Dirksen Nature Park, a wetlands inventory and natural resources assessment were completed in 2013.The map shown in Figure 3 illustrates the "sensitive areas" identified within the Park,which consist of mixture of wetlands and their associated vegetative corridor. Due to the nature of the site specific wetland assessment, the naming convention used for Dirksen Nature Park is different than that of the Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. In comparing the older data from LWI to the newer and more detailed wetland study from 2013, the B-17 (LWI) wetland is referenced as Wetland 1,and B-5 wetland is referenced as Wetland 4. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 6 of 24 p r^ F T N • a a • Z GI _ C S"L l alq:/STG:a f a 1 c—_ __, " — – __ - - w ". d N` - — — _ — `-- j �r •1 r — — - '- -- .- r. . f7 12 �.. z a OM , — m ca.. t r 03 r. d / t� M a r I l n 4 006 LE GENID IV VI :;; ra F. 13 1 r.triM0.1 i re m re 1 it w - , • ......,....oiro........\.......7.\ i., - Yip . .-- _ - WRFigure3(sheet 1.1) - P 4 ,Irgr'aioc Cotnr-, Efirsiira Cametc-n ar4 5 tqo}vain, N Mt • C rkWI Vr.ra Prig CIh C t' d.CR I . at o r•• V M a. A N w+ is Vi As described in the Natural Resources Assessment for Dirksen Nature Park,the following are descriptions of the two wetlands where the planned boardwalks are proposed. Wetland 1 (7.27 acres within study area)is an extensive"Slope" wetland that runs south of SW Tigard Street and extends across to the western boundary of the site.The northern portion is mostly an open slope with shrubs and saplings. The remainder is an extensive forested wetland in a level to gently sloping basin with a relatively undisturbed native plant community. Forested wetland vegetation consists of Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa),Douglas spiraea (Spiraea douglasit),peafruited rose (Rosa pisocarpa),red osier dogwood (Comus sericea),slough sedge (Carex obnupta),short scale sedge (Carex leptopoda),common camas (Camassia quamash),and corn lily (Veratrum californicum).Areas of standing water arc evident, with the water table at or close to the surface through much of the area during the winter and spring months.The open area vegetation consists of various introduced grasses, including meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis) and tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea),and patches of small Oregon ash. Large areas of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procerus)have been mowed.The water table is at or close to the surface during the wet season through most of this area. Wetland 4 (small part, 1.11 acre within the study area) is an extensive wetland in the Fanno Creek floodplain.'Ihe southern part of this wetland is forested. Vegetation consists of Oregon ash,pea-fruited rose,Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capitatus),red osier dogwood, and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). Other non-native dominants include English hawthorn and Himalayan blackberry.This forested wetland is well-developed and dense in cover.The northern part is more open with extensive areas of reed canarygrass. Shrub plantings have been established along the western edge of this area, consisting mostly of twinberry (Lonicera involucrata) and red osier dogwood. There are Oregon ash trees along the banks of Fanno Creek near the eastern property line. ESEE Analysis _ — 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 8 of 24 li L E LI I Figure 4:Mapped Significant Wetlands near Dirksen Nature Park I F'1 .i . 1 _ ' '•• / i • f: ) . . i a f ,1 �' 1 - . • — 7 4 , fry _ _ � .� x z tr ; ii :1 k '4 1 I E; v I .bi , ..... a 1 III e I,. .11 n rg . ',.;-‘- ..‘,. ?...• Z t f ' k A A f 1 r 1 ., 1 ( -_,---..'t ,' r , s ; ., il . a' il ill 1 , . '')\ .141I:: i i''/1%114W°• -- _ -�- - _ r -- - ; ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 9 of 24 Removal Area #1: This wetland area is located in Wetland 1 (as identified on Figure 4,above) and will remove 2,447 square feet from the City's Local Wetland Inventory Map. Removal Area #2: This wetland area is located in Wetland 4 (as identified on Figure 4,above)and will remove 2,807 square feet from the City's Local Wetland Inventory Map. Description of the Conflicting Use An important step in the ESEE analysis is identifying conflicting uses that "exist, or could occur" within regionally significant resource areas and identified in the impact area. The Goal 5 Rule (OAR 660-023-0010) defines conflicting uses as follows: (1) "Conflicting use" is a land use, or other activity reasonably and customarily subject to land use regulations, that could adversely affect a significant Goal 5 resource (except as provided in OAR 660-023-0180(l)(b)). Local governments are not required to regard agricultural practices as conflicting uses. The Goal 5 Administrative Rule (OAR 660-023-0040) describes how conflicting uses are identified: (2) Identify conflicting uses. Local governments shall identify conflicting uses that exist,or could occur,with regard to significant Goal 5 resource sites. To identify these uses,local governments shall cxanune land uses allowed outright or conditionally-within the zones applied to the resource site and in its impact area.Local governments are not required to consider allowed uses that would be unlikely to occur in the impact area because existing permanent uses occupy the site.The following shall also apply in the identification of conflicting uses: (a) If no uses conflict with a significant resource site, acknowledged policies and land use regulations may be considered sufficient to protect the resource site.The determination that there are no conflicting uses must be based on the applicable zoning rather than ownership of the site. (Therefore,public ownership of a site does not by itself support a conclusion that there are no conflicting uses.) (b)A local government may determine that one or more significant Goal 5 resource sites are conflicting uses with another significant resource site.The local government shall determine the level of protection for each significant site using the ESEE process and/or the requirements in OAR 660-023-0090 through 660-023-0230 (see OAR 660-023-0020(1)). As per the project description,only one conflicting use is under consideration - the planned installation of a trail boardwalk in two discrete locations within existing resource areas.The intent is to allow the boardwalks to extend into mapped wetlands and provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas.The installation of off-street,multi-use trails within the Tigard's PR zone is permitted outright; therefore,the intended project is allowed outright within the underlying PR zone.The planned boardwalks are integral components of the multi-use trail at Dirksen Nature Park,and they would be defined as "multi-use trails". ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 1D of 24 The PR zone would allow a variety of conflicting uses to occur on the site but because of the focused nature of the proposed development request and the limited amount, and odd shape of land requested to be removed from the inventory, the practical effect of the request is to limit the conflicting uses to just the trail boardwalks. The remainder of the ESEE analysis will focus on the impacts of the removal of wetland areas from the inventory based on the one proposed conflicting use. The primary purpose of trail boardwalks is to further the environmental education opportunities for park users and provide safe,accessible platforms for community groups,birders,students and Tualatin RiverKeepers classes to view and begin to understand and appreciate the nature and importance of these wetland habitats without damaging them and disturbing wildlife. In the area of both of these proposed trail boardwalks,numerous existing rogue trails traverse the sensitive lands as a result of historic, uncontrolled access and have caused significant damage to the wetlands.The secondary benefits of the boardwalks are to aim to eliminate rogue,off-trail passage through the wetland resources, to provide managed and controlled access near and into the wetlands and to enable the successful restoration of the wetlands in those areas where past trail walking has occurred and damaged the immediate wetland environment.The proposed boardwalks will help save and protect the wetland resources; they arc the single most important component of restoration plans for the wetlands in this urban nature park because without there,people interested in entering the wetlands will continue to lack an alternative to the rogue trails. Figures 5 and d show the impact areas for the two planned boardwalks. ESEE Analysis - 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 11 of 24 - _ -- - —� - -,� figure 5:Enlargement of Removal Area 1 rEX51^s;19_90 E11.DECCVMSS'sNLD 0 65 \ / \ ...,#° \ 0 v! /I _ .\\ \\\ • . :\\\::,‘ \ 0 (l) \ , 1 • ' r/ r / / MANSE \ rnausF t\ .iffNSF \ \ \ro \ \ \:--, ,,, ,.,,7:-- ,) . \ / \ Ia. t.- • iei 11.1V ax+.ro.rrr / \ ' . N, .69 +16 \I. --- F 0 i4 s ./. / \ *Se s n6 62 r`r{: 5' YWM 5,,R 51110-6CL R,t. BRIDGE 106E9 3D'N{711,1R0 LLIIfRR� / arV 91 -- SCALE 1 10 a s ID nilmigil 1rra'1 *4 6 , *14 4*22 G36i75-G-p105.01RC 02/D9/15 I�� 1/�� W._/__. ,. E5EE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 12 of 24 • Figure 6:Enlargement of Removal Area 2 1y 1{ I 1 I{ 1 I I 1 0 ..''' .1 I 1 \ I / f • b 4 s 5 `r\ 1 1' i 4 /1 1 i 1 r [_ 1 y 1 -1111111111 1,,, I O\ i \ f \ O\ • 'NN, e' '' '' o\ .\°`.*****".,.11 .1 '. f \ \ `t \ \ N ` lz- s VK 5P \ 414 F �e . O ESEE Analysis 42/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 13 of 24 Figure 7 summarizes relevant acreage information about the park,its wetlands and the potential impact areas associated with the two planned boardwalks. Figure 7:Resource and Impact Area Summary Site Area(Dirksen Nature Park) 48 Oh ac. On-Site Sensitive Lands Area 29 5'ac. Specific Resource Area(footprint of both boardwalks) 0 033 ac. Specific Impact Area Acreage(10'temporary 0-088 ac. construction buffer around boardwalks; Combined Resource and Impact Area 0.12 ac. Number of Parcels Affected 2 •estimated based on combmxan of mapped wetlands/weal/Mt corridors and UM data As noted in the table above, the proposed removal of 0.12 acres from the Local Wetlands Inventory represents 0.4%of the overall sensitive lands on site and 0.02%of the total park acreage. The requested removal of the 0.12 acres of wetland area enable the installation of two elevated boardwalks will provide a single access entry into each wetland with high quality views, will enhance the experience of the wetland,and will have far less impact to the resource than the uncontrolled use that exists today. Site Specific ESEE Analysis This section details the three alternatives and discusses the Economic,Social, Environmental and Energy (ESEE) impacts to the relevant portions of two wetlands located within Dirksen Nature Park,addressing the following: • Prohibit conflicting uses providing full protection of the resource site; • Limit conflicting uses offering limited protection of the resource site (balance development and conservation objectives); • Allow conflicting uses fully with no local protection for the resource site. The action to'limit conflicting uses' within this context of this ESEE Analysis is defined as allowing only the limited intrusion of the boardwalks as proposed into the wetland and minimizing impacts to the extent practicable through strict construction management.The action to'allow conflicting uses' in this case is to allow the development of the full range of permissible uses noted in the underlying Parks and Recreation (PR) zone,which includes such amenities as playgrounds,picnic areas, shelters, structures, sport courts and fields and other related items. Economic Consequences The following describes the economic consequences for each of the three protection scenarios. Prohibit Conflicting Uses (fu protection) The economic consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses would be mixed, because the acreage occupied by wetlands could not be used to promote and support on-site environmental ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 14 of 24 education activities and programming that either have a direct local economic benefit or provide an offset to on-going operating expenses incurred by the City. Prohibiting the conflicting use would avoid a modest capital construction expenditure by the City of Tigard for the costs of the boardwalks,but City maintenance crews will incur on-going operating expenses related to monitoring unwanted activity and hiking in the wetlands,installing trail blockages to attempt to minimize through-passage along the existing rogue wetland trails,and on-going replacement costs for wetland restoration and vegetation management.There may be a reduction in short term construction jobs necessary to complete the development of the park and planned boardwalks. Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) Limiting the conflicting use to the two trail boardwalks and relying on the State's fill and removal permit and Corps of Engineers 404/401 regulatory processes would,generally,have positive consequences.DSL and Corps regulations set enhancement and mitigation thresholds based on documented impacts and allow some flexibility to allow conflicting urban uses where no reasonable alternative exists. Additionally, the City of Tigard spent$3.3 million on the acquisition of Dirksen Nature Park. Planning for the initial phase of park development is underway,and according to the adopted park master plan,the cost estimate for full development of the park was in the range of$2 to $2.3 million. Passive uses,such as walking and wildlife observation,are important aspects to the park. Additionally, the site is intended to serve as an outdoor classroom and a center for environmental education and experiential learning.The proposed boardwalks are an Integral element of the environmental education and interpretive program for the park, since these boardwalks will allow visitors to experience two different and unique wetland ecosystems m the park in a safe,environmentally sound and ecologically sensitive manner. The US Fish and Wildlife Service published a report in 2013 called Banking on Nature: The Economic Benefits to Local Communities of National Wildlife Refuge Visitation.This report detailed the economics related to refuge (park) visitation.The Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge was one of the case study examples in the report. It is worth noting that the Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge is not only very close to the City of Tigard,but the Refuge offers a similar experience to those planned at Dirksen Nature Park. In calculating economic benefits, the L'SFWS grouped visitation into two categories: consumptive and non- consumptive. Consumptive includes those activities that utilize the site's resources, such as fishing and hunting. Non-consumptive uses include passive activities,such as cycling, walking/hiking,photography and interpretation. Based on the report,the Tualatin River Refuge had over 100,000 visits in 2011,and all visits were for non-consumptive activities.A figure for economic value was estimated by multiplying net economic values for hunting, fishing, and non- consumptive recreation use (on a perdaybasis) by estimated refuge visitor days for that activity, which was then divided by the refuge budget for 2011.The report estimated that the total economic effects of the Tualatin River Refuge was$3.87 for every$1 of budget expenditures. Applying this value to the planned development expenditures for Dirksen Nature Park results in a potential economic benefit of the park as between $7.7 and $8.9 million.While it is not reasonable to assign 100%of that potential economic benefit to the installation of the two proposed boardwalks,it is reasonable to assume that a dear,positive economic benefit exists for installing the boardwalks to not only enhance safe access into the wetland areas for wildlife • fl ESEE Analysis — ---- 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 15 of 24 th observation, photography and environmental interpretation,but also as a means to further improve and enhance the quality of those unique wetlands by controlling visitor access. The Washington County Visitors Association (WCVA)is the primary destination marketing organization for Washington County and markets the destination,its attractions and activities to leisure and business travelers around the globe and locally via several media channels.The Tourism 2015 Strategic Plan,prepared by the WCVA,is the organization's guiding document and sets the focus on high-yield,niche markets to expand recreational and leisure opportunities for visitors and residents.The Tourism 2015 Plan identified the key tourism attractors for Washington County and identified outdoor recreationalists, nature enthusiasts and birders (among others)as niche market segments- According to the Plan, "nature-based experiences are at the core of the Oregon tourism experience.While the county does not have the coastline, mountains,and raging rivers of other areas of Oregon,it does have forests,wetlands and meandering rivers that support diverse flora and fauna and opportunities for visitors to discover and learn in comfort. A distinguishing aspect of these natural features is their proximity to Portland and major population centers. Nature-based attractions throughout Washington County include Tualatin Rives National Wildlife Refuge,among others." The focus of the WCVA toward the promotion of nature-based experiences reinforces the relative importance of providing and enhancing these opportunities for local residents and visitors.The development of Dirksen Nature Park will provide opportunities for increased tourism and visitation.The environmental education and experiences at the park will be enhanced by the installation of the proposed boardwalks. Negative economic consequences include the possible necessity to construct expensive stormwater infrastructure to manage increased runoff with decreased natural control mechanisms. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local protection) The economic consequences of allowing conflicting uses are mostly negative.Allowing most of the permissible uses from the underlying PR zone would not only further deteriorate the wetland resources,but the relative costs would be high for capital construction,on-going management and related and required mitigation and enhancement.The only likely benefit of allowing the conflicting use is a short-term boost for construction, but this would not be in balance with or exceed the costs of the infrastructure and required mitigation. Social Consequences The following describes the social consequences (education,recreation,aesthetics,etc.) for each of the three protection scenarios. Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection) The social consequences of prohibiting the conflicting uses are mixed. Prohibiting the conflicting use would not substantially protect the resources from the existing unregulated uses occurring within each wetland area, Additionally,prohibiting the conflicting use would indirectly result in the development of only permitted upland trails at Dirksen Nature Park,without controlled access to Wetlands 1 and 4 and without specific environmental education opportunities at the wetlands. Pedestrian access and use would be concentrated in upland habitats with associated affects to local flora and fauna- People with mobility challenges would ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 16 of 24 be effectively prohibited from enjoying any activities in the wetlands.The wetlands would not be (formally) accessible for educational purposes;however, without the controlled access that the boardwalks provide,people may continue to pass through the wetlands on rogue trails to experience these environments,while continuing to degrade the wetland habitat.Opportunities for passive recreation (e.g.,bird watching,environmental learning)would be diminished; however, the social benefits afforded from living near intact wetlands and open space would remain. Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) The social consequences of limiting the conflicting uses in Wetlands 1 and 4 to the boardwalks and associated wetland enhancement are generally positive. The grant funding received by the City requires on-site environmental education to occur. Also, the conservation easement with Metro allows environmental education,interpretive opporturuties and the development of trails - consistent with the planned boardwalks. Limiting the conflicting uses to the installation of the planned boardwalks will not negatively impact the wetlands, since their construction will include low-impact helical screw piers and metal grate decking that allows light,air and water movement through the boardwalk to the wetlands. Limiting the conflicting uses will provide significant social benefits in the form of direct exposure to the wetlands for outdoor education,environmental interpretation and passive recreation,including for people with limited mobility.The provision of the boardwalks will reinforce appropriate trail usage and help control against unwanted and undesired off-trail passage into or through the wetland habitats. Dirksen Nature Park, as a whole,will continue to provide visual relief from the surrounding urban environment,and the conflicting uses are sheltered from view from the park edge and will be visually unobtrusive. Wetland function will remain intact and provide opportunities for urban quiet and solitude. Urban aesthetics and connection to nature are not eliminated by allowing the identified conflicting uses,and the planned,controlled access via the boardwalks to the wetlands and their proximity to a relatively large population would establish new connections for people to the outdoors. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local protection) The social consequences of allowing the conflicting uses are generally mixed. The development of additional park amenities or gathering places for recreation,park visitors and family usage may benefit park users and wider the range of recreation opportunities in the park. However,the development of non-resource oriented amenities may not fit within the context of the site as a nature park or within the immediate context of the wetland resources,and the City offers other areas on dry land more suitable for active recreation.While social benefits may exist for the installation of different amenities on-site,they may be out of place with the character of the park and reduce recreational and social opportunities for other park users who are interested in enjoying the passive,natural resources of the site. Environmental Consequences The following describes the consequences to water quality, hydrologic control,wildlife and fish habitat (as well as other relevant factors) for each of the three protection scenarios. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 D rksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 17 of 24 Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection' The environmental consequences of prohibiting the conflicting uses are mixed. If the conflicting uses are prohibited,then the wetlands would remain in their current condition.The City of Tigard Development Code aims to protect significant lands by allowing no impact to them. This restriction, taken in the context of the Dirksen Nature Park where public access and use is encouraged,actually causes greater impact to the resources. In their current state, the wetlands are impacted by human use in the form of rogue (demand) trails,periodic homeless camping activity and uncontrolled passage through these lands.The prohibition of the conflicting uses will still allow for specific restoration activities,but these efforts would be diminished or limited by continued uncontrolled access and the inability to fully pursue an on-site education program regarding the health and benefits of urban wetlands. The wetlands provide functions and values,but these are degraded due to past disturbances to the site. Habitat quality for fish species is limited within each wetland area based on limited availability and limited canopy coverage. Wildlife habitat value within each wetland is high with varied structures and habitat complexity.Wetlands 1 and 4 provide runoff and flood storage control and trap sediment and nutrients.These wetlands help to protect life and property during floods by storing and absorbing water,a necessity exemplified by significant storms in recent years. Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) The environmental consequences of limiting the conflicting use to the trail boardwalks are positive.The conflicting use is specific to the wetland resources (Wetland l and 4)at Dirksen Nature Park,and installing short these boardwalks can occur nowhere else on the site,other than in the wetland areas. Currently,Wetlands 1 and 4 are criss-crossed with rogue trails and heavily impacted by human use resulting from the lack of direction offered to the public. Limiting the conflicting use to the boardwalks ultimately will lead to greater resource enhancement and protection of sensitive lands.The boardwalks that would be placed in the removed wetland areas will enable focused and controlled public access,versus unrestricted and unsustainable access without the boardwalks (rogue trails). As the City's future community park and outdoor education resource, efforts to restore and protect the wetlands at Dirksen Nature Park will require carefully planned boardwalk overlooks that allow,but control,access to the wetlands.The proposed boardwalks will help save and protect the wetland resources. They are the single most important component of restoration plans for the wetlands in this urban nature park. These short elevated walkways will provide a single access entry to each wetland,with high quality views,will enhance the experience of the wetland,and will have far less impact to the resource than the uncontrolled use that exists today. Additionally,as elevated boardwalks, these trail routes minimize soil disturbance as compared to a surface trail. Installing controlled access and environmental experiences with boardwalks in both locations will allow park users to experience and understand the special qualities of both of the significant wetlands without damaging them and disturbing wildlife. Dirksen Nature Park is a unique site within the City of Tigard inasmuch as it contains 7 habitat zones within the 48-acre park.These habitat zones and their associated wetlands are the primary reason the park is home to the Tualatin RiverKeepers'summer camps and experience-based environmental learning programs. Low impact design and unobtrusive construction techniques [SEE Analysis --- 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 18 of 24 for the planned boardwalks will be employed, such that the installation is environmentally- sensitive. The design and installation of the boardwalks will be completed without any excavation.The boardwalk piers are to be set with screw anchors. The boardwalk decking also is designed to be sensitive to the wetland resource. The decking will be metal grating,which has two significant benefits. 1) The grating is not opaque;it allows air,light and water to pass through the boardwalk in support of the ecology of the wetland. Wetland plants can live underneath,and animal species can pass without obstruction. 2) As opposed to traditional wood decking, the metal grating is non-slip and will not allow the formation of the surface moss and algae that wood decking enables, thus creating a safer platform for park users and wildlife observers. Tigard's Development Code allows the restoration of significant wetlands,and the proposed boardwalks are part of the restoration strategy for the wetland resources,which will limit and control human access to the wetlands and reinforce efforts to re-vegetate and restore the functions and qualities of the wetlands. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local protection) The environmental consequences of allowing many of the permissible conflicting uses of the underlying PR zone are negative. Wetlands 1 and 4 fall under the jurisdiction of 051.and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers administrative rules,which regulate the removal and fill of wetlands. The development of park amenities,such as playgrounds, shelters or structures,will trigger DSL and Corps review and mitigation due to the likely ground disturbing activities.Such impacts to the existing wetland resources may be severe. Depending upon the success of implementation of required mitigation strategies, mitigation and/or enhancement to compensate for the development disturbance would likely occur in a different and potentially unconnected area of the site,which may further diminish the quality and character of the remaining wetland resources. Energy Consequences The following describes the energy consequences (transportation connectivity,efficient urban development,etc.) for each of the three protection scenarios. Prohibit Conilictiog Uses (full protection) The energy consequences of prohibiting both conflicting uses would be mixed but slightly negative. The installation of the boardwalks will not necessitate the removal of trees,so no impact on natural shading or cooling are anticipated.This option,however,limits trail connectivity to the unique habitat zones within the park, which will have energy-related effects. Tigard residents will drive farther to experience similar natural environments (e.g.,)ackson Bottom Wetlands Preserve,Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge). Students will need to be bussed to more distant parks for environmental education.Tualatin RiverKeepers will not be able to take full advantage of the environmental education values of the park without direct access to the wetland habitat and will drive to other sites for such experiences.These create inefficiencies in energy usage,as well as indirect energy expenditures related to lost or inefficient environmental educator staff time and student learning time. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 19 of 24 Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) The energy consequences of limiting the conflicting use to the trail boardwalks generally would be positive.The installation of the boardwalks will not necessitate the removal of trees,so no impact on natural shading or cooling are anticipated.The shading and cooling potential Wetlands l and 4 have will be preserved.The provision of the boardwalks and associated environmental/interpretive displays will enable enhanced on-site outdoor education and environmental learning.This,in turn,will accommodate access and usage by residents,students and Tualatin RiverKeepers classes for local environmental education without the need to drive to distant or remote parks and natural areas with similar habitat features. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local protection) The energy consequences of allowing the conflicting uses and relying on state and federal regulations arc generally negative. Since the proposed impact areas are wetlands and development will trigger mitigation,more energy will be used for the construction and required mitigation efforts related to the installation of recreational amenities,such as playgrounds, shelters and structures. If unregulated, the potential development of conflicting uses may result in an inefficient use of available parkland,especially if the conflicting uses are not wetland- dependent amenities. Conclusions/Recommendation The wetland resources of Dirksen Nature Park are valuable to the City from an economic,social and environmental perspective,and the opportunity to expand environmental education and outdoor learning is significant. Past grants awarded to the City for the development of Dirkscn Nature Park support the creation of an environmentally-sensitive urban park and natural area with trails and access to the site's varied habitat zones. the following summarizes the anticipated impacts of the three alternatives related to the conflicting use,and the table in Appendix A provides scores for each of the ESEE criteria. Prohibiting the conflicting use would avoid a modest capital construction expenditure by the City of Tigard for the costs of the boardwalks or other amenities,but City maintenance crews will incur on-going operating expenses related to monitoring unwanted activity and hiking in the wetlands,installing trail blockages to attempt to minimize through-passage along the existing rogue wetland trails,and on-going replacement costs for wetland restoration and vegetation management.Tualatin RiverKeepers will not be able to take full advantage of the environmental education values of the park without direct access to the wetland habitat and will drive to other sites for such experiences. In their current state, the wetlands are adversely impacted by human use in the form of rogue (demand) trails,periodic homeless camping activity and uncontrolled passage through these lands.The prohibition of the conflicting uses will still allow for specific restoration activities,but these efforts would be diminished or limited b) continued uncontrolled access and the inability to fully pursue an on-site education program regarding the health and benefits of urban wetlands. Limiting the conflicting uses to the two trail boardwalks will positively impact the wetlands, since the planned construction of the trail boardwalks will include low-impact helical screw piers ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 20 of 24 and metal decking/grating to accommodate light,air and water movement through the boardwalk to the wetlands,which is a substantial improvement over existing surface trails. Limiting the conflicting uses will provide significant social benefits in the form of direct exposure to the wetlands for outdoor education,environmental interpretation and passive recreation,especially for persons with limited mobility.The provision of the boardwalks will reinforce appropriate trail usage and help control against unwanted and undesired off-trail passage into or through the wetland habitats. Dirksen Nature Park,as a whole,will continue to provide visual relief from the surrounding urban environment,and the conflicting uses are sheltered from view from the park edge and will be visually unobtrusive_ Wetland function will remain intact and provide opportunities for urban quiet and solitude. Allowing most of the permissible uses from the underlying PR zone would not only further deteriorate the wetland resources, but the relative costs would be high for capital construction, on-going management and related and required mitigation and enhancement.Since the proposed impact areas are wetlands and development will trigger mitigation,more energy will be used for the construction and required mitigation efforts related to the installation of recreational amenities,such as playgrounds,shelters and structures.Additionally, the development of non- resource oriented amenities may not fit within the context of the site as a nature park or within the immediate context of the wetland resources. Decision The analysis concludes that limiting the conflicting use to the proposed boardwalks would result in the most positive consequences of the three decision options. A decision to limit the conflicting use will avoid many of the negative consequences attributed to either allowing or prohibiting the conflicting,uses.Through the application of site design and development standards to conflicting uses, the impacts on the significant wetland further can be minimized,and the remaining resource can be enhanced.There will be a relatively high level of economic, social,environmental and energy benefits achieved. Limiting the conflicting uses offers the most benefit to the wetland (through controlled access and enhancement) and to the community (access for all and education opportunities),and it strikes a balance between conflicting uses and planning goals for the services provided in this public park.The recommendation is to limit conflicting use(i.e. the removal of two areas from the City's Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map in order to accommodate the future development of two boardwalks within the significant wetland). ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 21 of 24 Appendices / Figures ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 22 of 24 Appendix A: Site-specific ESEE Scoring Sheet Criteria Scores on 0 score j 1 to s I ='erg.negative+n*•ca-t Scoring Criteria 3 = noroalanced v.-pi-4 v,s.-iv crosto,e ,r"ii;.,: SITE_Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Prohibit Limit Ariow Conflicting Conflrctrcg Confhcting Uses uses Uses I Economic _ i ° Efficient urban development 3 3 3 ' Cost of installation/maintenance of public infrastructureI 3 5 1 (roads,stormwater,utilities) i Development potential for property owners 1 - 3 I 3 I 3 1 Amount of employment land 1 3 3 i 3 I Amount of residential land _ _ _3 3 1 3 ___I I Housing development costs- _ - - --q 1�-3 3 -@ - 3 Employment development costs I 3 I -3 - _ --_. Economk Subtotal 21 23 19 --.y - - -:- -- I Social -f I -- - -- - - - - - - - -- i -- - - --- -- _ Aesthetic Value- -__ . -. - _ 5 _ l 5- _I _ i Recreational Value _ 3 , 5 I 3 -, Contribution to local quality of life -3 i_ _ . _5._ . 3 r Housing Costs - — - - --- 3 '___ 3- --- 3 -- I -- - - - -- - -_ _ -I - - SocialEquality .1 _- _ - l - ' ----- _ y- Social Subtotal . 15 1 23 + 13 -- - - - -- - + - -- - -- r -- _- _ - _- _ ---- � --I Environmental sf Water quality:Filtration and removal of pollutants v 3 3 3 Hydrologic control:Water collection and storage -- , 3 3 3 Wildlife habitat 1 5 - 3 3 Fish Habitat l 3 -i -- 3 s - 3 I Environmentally sensitive design - - - - -3 -- 5 1 -- -__ _ --_ Environmental Subtotail 17 2713 r Energy T 4 i ivi Transportation Connectivity 1 5 - _ - - 3 --1 - Efficient Urban development I 3 3 I 31 Shading and cooling I 3 I 31 l ---- - Energy Subtotal 7 11 i 7- --'1 1 Average Overall Rating 60 I 74 o 52 _._-,_ ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 23 of 24 ESEE Analysis 02/24115 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 24 of 24 a ' • - ! TRAIL'F 1 F" ' d sy�-�` - ---7-_. =.— -. - --' I - TRACT 5 � ' - -`- - :-•-=-; -- -- s- - _ -.�4 i TRAIL'D` TRACT 4 / ` ��� �hTRACT 3,ff - - j Y .,�, ` ate" ^'„ ' :TT 1 � l'i {,. - -_ 'i '' la yer _ f 1� --�-4 — } WETLAND 2 ETLAND 4 . LIJ a TRACT 2 / TRAIL A' i•f r o , / / Exclusion Area#2 / � li / II • (Wetland Overlook) I LEGEND ir__...,/ ---/ \�,�r / . - I _ TAX LOT/PROPERTY LINE • / I ,,_ �v • - / 7 —•-•— STiIDY AREA WETLAND 1 ti L VEGETATED CORRIDOR ,`---``" \ (GOOD CONDITION) - - Exclusion Area 41 (Forested Wetland r ' VEGETATED CORRIDOR • WETLAND 3 '' ''�'� ENHANCEMENT PLANTING (39,294 Overlook) .yiik\ °� ii ( . ,l • ; � j :,', I F.Iwz•:v MITIGATION PLANTING (8,033 sf) �1 � �- F.Sisrr����• �� f �'� `II 4:449i,.:•P VEGETATED CORRIDOR ' ! �� — i •.. *'� (PERMANENT TRAIL & PERMANENT x':'" TRAIL'C GRADING ENCROACHMENT - 8,033 - ! , ( ill \--_____------ • �} r RECREATION AREA VEGETATED CORRIDOR ! I • ) y (APPROX 6.9 AC) (DEGRADED CONDITION) il TRAIL B TRACT 2 z I I 131. iWETLAND tfi. .) • 7 f-7/7:77. STREAM '" • Vbk 1 TRAIL'E'-- .y (TO ORDINARY NIGH WATER LINE) n A "f`1 '= DIRECTION OF FL O W • IPwr 4 r . ,...„ � J TOTAL ENHANCEMENT AREA 39 /� r.�� r \` //�. $„0. TOTAL MI PIGA TION AREA / �_ J \ . /f/ ' .:$„ SUMMER CREEK TOTAL PLANTING AREA 47 d . i r it [Pacilit Figure 4 (sheet 1.1) 4 150 0 97225 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, ENCROACHMENT AND MITIGATION N ( FEET ) he Or. Dirksen Nature Park, City of Tigard, OR I 1 INCH - 15C CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS EXHIBIT B NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND LSE CO`. II NITY DEVELOP II_.N'l APPLILAIici v FM'.NOS: FILE NAME: 0I K�� 11) 4 -/'/9 26 ilf — CO 1 Mark the block to the left of the name of each person or organization that needs to be notified. CITY OFFICES CD Administration/Kenny Asher,CD Director CD Administration/Tom McGuire,Asst CD Director City Administration/Carol Krager,City Recorder Development Services/Planning-Engineering Techs. (except annexations) Development Services/Development Eng. Greg Berry (Copy on all Notices of Decision) _ Building Division/Mark VanDomelen,Building Official Police Department/Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer(Copy on all Notices of Decision) Public Works/Michelle Wright l^ 1/7 Public ly'arks �iittrt1'ctrneer `ccli 1 � �z � cCft. Y Hearings Officer(2 sets) Planning Commission (12 sets) Cin-Attorney File/Reference(2 sets) LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS City of Beaverton,Planning Manager, POB 4755,Beaverton OR 97076* City of Beaverton,Steven Sparks,Dev Svcs Mgr,POB 4755,Beaverton OR 97076' City of Durham City Manager, 17160 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd,Durham OR 97224* City of King Cit}-Cin'Manager, 15300 SW 116th Ave,King City OR 97224* City of Lake Oswego,Planning Director,PO Box 369,Lake Oswego OR 97034' City of Portland,Planning Bureau Director, 1900 SW 4th Ave,Suite 4100,Portland OR 97201 City of Tualatin Planning Manager, 18880 SW Martinazzi Ave,Tualatin OR 97062* Metro-Land Use and Planning,600 NE Grand Ave,Portland OR 97232-?736,Joanna Mcnsher,Data Resource Center (ZC.a-Adopted)' Metro-Land Use and Planning,600 NE Grand Ave,Portland OR 9723?-2-36,Paulette Copperstone, (ZCA-RFC Only)* ..9L' ' Metro-Land Use and Planning,600 NE Grand Ave,Portland OR 97232-2736,Brian Harper,PhD,(CPA/DCA/ZON)* ODOT,Rail Division,Dave Lanning,Sr.Crossing Safety Specialist,555 13th Street NE,Suite 3,Salem OR 97301-4179 (Notify if ODOT R/R l lwy Crossing is only access to land). Email: Regionl_DEVREV_Applications@odot.state.or.us ODOT,Region 1 -Development Review Coordinator Carl Torland,Right-of-Way Section, 123 NW Flanders,Portland (0 OR 97209-4037 (Vacations)' Email: Rcgionl_DEVR.E\'_Applications@odot.state.or.us _ kLtIji vr ODOT Region 1 Development Review Program, 123 NW Flanders St,Portland OR 97209 Email: Regionl_DE.VREV_.applications@odot.statc.or.us OR Dept of Energy,Bonneville Power Administration,Routing TTRC-Attn: Renae Ferrera,POB 3621,Portland OR )72(18-3621 (powerlines in area) OR Dept of Aviation,Tom Highland,Planning,3040 25th Street,SE,Salem OR 97310 (monopole towers) OR Dept of Environmental Quality(DEQ),Regional Administrator,2020 SW Fourth Ave,Suite 400,Portland OR 97201- 4987 OR Dept of Fish &Wildlife,Elizabeth Rusher,Habitat Biologist,North Willamette Watershed District,18330 NW Sauvie Island Road,Portland OR 97231 OR Dept of Geo. &Mineral Ind.,800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 965, Portland OR 97232 (, R Dcpt of Land Conservation&Dev.,Mara Ulloa,635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150,Salem OR 97301-2340 (Comp Plan ,tQ, Amendments&Measure 37) -You have the option to send electronic copies.See DLCD website for online rJU submittal procedures �f OR Division of State Lands,Melinda Wood(WLUN Form Required),775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100,Salem OR 97301- 1279 Documents should be emailed/do not send hard copies it IICURPLN/MASTERS/REQ FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST(UPDATED 03/30/15) Page 1 of 2 CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION I l' FOR LAND USE COMMI 'EI.OP'\1l'.N 1 :APPLICATIONS OR Parks and Rec Dept State Historic Preservation Office, 725 Sumner St NE,Suite C,Salem OR 97301 (Notify if property has HD overlay) OR Public Utilities Commission,PO Box 1088,Salem OR 97308-1088 US Army Corps of Engineers,Kathryn Harris,Routing CENWP-OP-G,POB 2946,Portland OR 97208-2946 (Maps and CWS letter only) Washington County Consolidated Communications Agency(WCCCA) "911",Dave Austin,POB 6375,Beaverton OR 97007-0375 (monopole towers) Washington County,Dept of Land Use&Trans,Naomi Vogel-Beattie,1400 SW Walnut St MS 51 Hillsboro OR 97123- '5625 (general apps)* Washington County,Dept of Land Use&Trans,Brent Curtis, 155 N First Ave,Suite 350,MS 13,Hillsboro OR 97124 CPA)* Washington County,Assessment&Taxation, 155 N First Ave,Suite 350,MS 9, Hillsboro OR 97124(ZCA)" Washington County,Dept of Land Use&Trans,Doria Mateja,Cartography, 155 N First Ave,Suite 350,MS 14, Hillsboro OR 97124(ZCA)* - UTILITY PROVIDERS,SPECIAL DISTRICTS&AGENCIES Beaverton School District#48, Jennifer Garland,Demographics, 16550 SAA"\lcrlo Rd,Beaverton OR 97006-5152 Century Link,Right-of-Way Department,Qwest Corporation dba Century Link QC, 1208 NE 64th St,4th Floor,Seattle WA 98115 Century Link,Attn: John Pfeifer, 1600 7th Ave,4th Floor,Seattle,WA 98191-0000(proposed and approved Annexation notices) _ - Century Link,Karen Stewart,Local Government Affairs Director,310 SW Park Ave,Portland OR 97205 (proposed and approved Annexation notices) - Clean Water Services,Development Services Department,David Schweitzer/SWIM Program,2550 SW E Iillsboro I Rev.. Hillsboro OR 97123* Comcast Cable Corp.,Gerald Backhaus,14200 SW Brigadoon Court,Beaverton OR 97005 (See map for area contact) Metro Area Communications Commission (MACC),Fred Christ,15201 NW Greenbrier Parkway,C-1,Beaverton OR 97006-4886 (annexations only) NW Natural Gas Company,Brian Kelley,Engineering Coord.,220 NW Second Ave,Portland OR 97209-3991 .NW Natural Gas Company,Account Services,.AITN: Annexation Coordinator 220 NW Second Ave,Portland OR 9721i" 3991 (Annexations only) Portland General Electric,Lorraine Katz,2213 SW 153rd Drive,Beaverton OR 9'006 Portland General Electric,Tod L. Shattuck,2213 SW 153rd Drive,Beaverton OR 97006 Portland Western R/R,Burlington Northern/Sante Fe R/R,Oregon Electric R/R, (Burlington,Northern/Sante Fe R/R predecessor),Bruce Carswell,President and GM, 200 Hawthorne Ave SE,Suite C320,Salem OR 97301-5294 Union Pacific Railroad,Director of Public Affairs,301 NE 2nd Ave,Portland OR 97232(currently the PA Dir is Brock Nelson, 503-249-3079) Tigard/Tualatin School District#23J,Teri Brady-,Administrative Offices,6960 SW Sandhurg St,Tigard OR 97223-8039 Tigard Water District,POB 230281,Tigard OR 97281-0281 Tualatin Hills Parks and Rec District. Planning Mgr, 15707 SW Walker Rd,Beaverton OR 97006' Tualatin Valley Fire &Rescue, John Wolff, DcputrFire Marshall, 11945 SW 70th Ave,Tigard OR 97223-9190' Tualatin Valley Water District,Administrative Office, 1850 SW 17+It1i Ave,Beaverton OR 97006' Tri-Met Transit Development,Ben Baldwin,Project Planner, 1800 SW 1st Ave #300,Portland,OR 97201 (If project is within 1/4 mile of a transit route) Verizon,John Cousineau,OSP Network,4155 SW Cedar Hills Blvd,Beaverton OR 97005 *Indicates automatic notification in compliance with intergovernmental agreement if within 500'of the subject property for any/all city projects(Project Planner is Responsible for Indicating Parties to Notify) This document is password protected. Please sec Joe or Doreen if you need updates to it. Thank you. BICURPLN/MASTERSIREO FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST(UPDATED 03730115) Page 2 of 2 DLCO FORM 2 NOTICE OF ADOPTED CHANGE FOR DLCD USE nal TO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR File No.: LAND USE REGULATION Received: wows... Local governments are required to send notice of an adopted change to a comprehensive plan or land use regulation no more than 20 days after the adoption. (See OAR 660-018-0040). The rules require that the notice include a completed copy of this form. This notice form is not for submittal of a completed periodic review task or a plan amendment reviewed in the manner of periodic review. Use Form 4 for an adopted urban growth boundary including over 50 acres by a city with a population greater than 2,500 within the UGB or an urban growth boundary amendment over 100 acres adopted by a metropolitan service district. Use Form 5 for an adopted urban reserve designation, or amendment to add over 50 acres, by a city with a population greater than 2,500 within the UGB. Use i Form 6 with submittal of an adopted periodic review task. l' Jurisdiction: Tigard Local file no.: CPA2015-00002 Date of adoption: July 28,2015 Date sent: 8/5/2015 Was Notice of a Proposed Change (Form 1) submitted to DLCD? Yes: Date(use the date of last revision if a revised Form 1 was submitted): May 6, 2015 No Is the adopted change different from what was described in the Notice of Proposed Change? Yes No If yes, describe how the adoption differs from the proposal: No Local contact (name and title): Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner Phone: 503-718-2434 E-mail: garyp@tigard-or.gov Street address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd. City: Tigard Zip: 97223- PLEASE COMPLETE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS THAT APPLY For a change to comprehensive plan text: Identify the sections of the plan that were added or amended and which statewide planning goals those sections implement, if any: For a change to a comprehensive plan map: Identify the former and new map designations and the area affected: Change from Goal 5 Safe Harbor Protected to Unprotected 0.12 acres. A goal exception was required for this change. Change from to acres. A goal exception was required for this change. Change from to acres. A goal exception was required for this change. Change from to acres. A goal exception was required for this change. Location of affected property(T, R, Sec., TL and address): { The subject property is entirely within an urban growth boundary The subject property is partially within an urban growth boundary 1 http:/[www.oregon.gov/LCD/Pages/forms.aspx -1- Form updated November 1,2013 i' If the comprehensive plan map change is a UGB amendment including less than 50 acres and/or by a city with a population less than 2,500 in the urban area, indicate the number of acres of the former rural plan designation,by type, included in the boundary. Exclusive Farm Use—Acres: Non-resource—Acres: Forest—Acres: Marginal Lands—Acres: Rural Residential— Acres: Natural Resource/Coastal/Open Space Acres: Rural Commercial or Industrial —Acres: Other: —Acres: If the comprehensive plan map change is an urban reserve amendment including less than 50 acres, or establishment or amendment of an urban reserve by a city with a population less than 2,500 in the urban area, indicate the number of acres, by plan designation, included in the boundary. Exclusive Farm Use—Acres: Non-resource—Acres: Forest—Acres: Marginal Lands—Acres: Rural Residential—Acres: Natural Resource/Coastal/Open Space— Acres: Rural Commercial or Industrial—Acres: Other: —Acres: For a change to the text of an ordinance or code: Identify the sections of the ordinance or code that were added or amended by title and number: For a change to a zoning map: Identify the former and new base zone designations and the area affected: Change from to Acres: Change from to Acres: Change from to Acres: Change from to Acres: Identify additions to or removal from an overlay zone designation and the area affected: Overlay zone designation: Acres added: Acres removed: Location of affected property(T, R, Sec., TL and address): Tax Lots 1S134DD 900, 1000 List affected state or federal agencies, local governments and special districts: DLCD, Metro Identify supplemental information that is included because it may be useful to inform DLCD or members of the public of the effect of the actual change that has been submitted with this Notice of Adopted Change, if any. If the submittal, including supplementary materials, exceeds 100 pages, include a summary of the amendment briefly describing its purpose and requirements. http://www.orex -2- Form updated November 1, 2013 NOTICE OF ADOPTED CHANGE - SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS 1. A Notice of Adopted Change must be received by DLCD no later than 20 days after the ordinance(s) E-mails with attachments that exceed 20MB will implementing the change has been signed by the not be received, and therefore FTP must be used for public official designated by the jurisdiction to sign these electronic submittals. The FTP site must be the approved ordinance(s) as provided in used for all .zip files regardless of size. The ORS 197.615 and OAR 660-018-0040. maximum file size for uploading via FTP is 2. A Notice of Adopted Change must be submitted 150MB. by a local government (city, county, or metropolitan Include this Form 2 as the first pages of a combined service district). DLCD will not accept a Notice of file or as a separate file. Adopted Change submitted by an individual or private firm or organization. 5. File format: When submitting a Notice of Adopted Change via e-mail or FTP, or on a digital 3. Hard-copy submittal: When submitting a disc, attach all materials in one of the following Notice of Adopted Change on paper, via the US formats: Adobe .pdf(preferred); Microsoft Office Postal Service or hand-delivery, print a completed (for example, Word .doe or docx or Excel .xls or copy of this Form 2 on light green paper if xlsx); or ESRI .mxd, .gdb, or. mpk. For other file available. Submit one copy of the proposed change, formats, please contact the plan amendment including this form and other required materials to: specialist at 503-934-0017 or Attention: Plan Amendment Specialist plan.amendnients[ustate.or.us. Dept. of Land Conservation and Development 6. Content: An administrative rule lists required 635 Capitol Street NE, Suite 150 content of a submittal of an adopted change (OAR Salem, OR 97301-2540 660-01 - - ,4 l 1. By completing this form and This form is available here: including the materials listed in the checklist below, hitp:/.www.oregon.gov/LCD/1onns.shtml the notice will include the required contents. 4. Electronic submittals of up to 20MB may be Where the amendments or new land use regulations, sent via e-mail. Address e-mails to including supplementary materials, exceed 100 plan.amendments(a state.or.us with the subject line pages, include a summary of the amendment briefly "Notice of Adopted Amendment." describing its purpose and requirements. Submittals may also be uploaded to DLCD's FTP 7. Remember to notify persons who participated in site at the local proceedings and requested notice of the http://www.oregon.gov/LCD/Pageslpapa_submittal.as final decision. (ORS 197.615) p. If you have any questions or would like assistance, please contact your DLCD regional representative or the DLCD Salem office at 503-934-0017 ore-mail plan.amendments@state.or.us. Notice checklist. Include all that apply: Completed Form 2 A copy of the final decision (including the signed ordinance(s)). This must include city and county f decisions for UGB and urban reserve adoptions The findings and the text of the change to the comprehensive plan or land use regulation If a comprehensive plan map or zoning map is created or altered by the proposed change: A map showing the area changed and applicable designations, and Electronic files containing geospatial data showing the area changed, as specified in OAR 660-018- 0040(5), 60-018-0040(5), if applicable Any supplemental information that may be useful to inform DLCD or members of the public of the effect of the actual change http://www.oregon.gov/LCD/Pages/forms.aspx -3- Form updated November 1,2013 APPLICANT MATERIALS . RE 4""' —'1. 1ED City of Tigard r i si 711 _ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT s Cr" ...,RD TIGARD Master Land Use ApplicatiorPLANNi;„... L,•,.-!olEEAlNG LAND USE APPLICATION TYPE ❑ Adjustment/Variance(II) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) N Comprehensive Plan Amendment(IV) ❑ Planned Development(III) ❑ Conditional Use (III) ❑ Sensitive Land Review(II or III) • Development Code Amendment(IV) ❑ Site Development Review(II) E ❑ Downtown Design Review(II,III) ❑ Subdivision (II or III) ❑ Historic Overlay(II or III) ❑ Zone Change (III) 1 ❑ Home Occupation (II) 0 Zone Change Annexation (IV) NOTE: For required submittal elements,please refer to your pre-application conference notes. PROPOSAL SUMMARY (Brief description) Type 1V-Comprehensive Plan Amendment that includes an environmental, social, economic and energy (ESEE)analysis to remove 0.12 acres of wetland in and around the area of two planned trail boardwalks from the Local Wetland Inventory,thereby removing this land from sensitive lands protections as provided by TDC 18.775. 1 II H PROPERTY INFORMATION (where proposed activity will occur) Location (address if available): Dirksen Nature Park; 11000 blk of SW Tigard St Tax maps and tax lot #s: 2S103AA,Lot 200;2S103A8,Lot 200;1S134DC,Lots 3000,3001,3002,3100,3101,3102,33.00,3400; 151340D,Lots 900,1000,2400,2500) p Total site size: 48 ac Zoning classification: PR - I-OR STAFF USI: ON1.5 APPLICANT INFORMATION 0, PA 0I,5- c)0032 Case No.: Name: City of Tigard Related Case No.(s): Mailing address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd L/ _ Application Fee City/state: Tigard, OR zip: 97223 Phone number: 503-718-2466 Application accepted: i Primary contact name: Jeff Peck By —'�. L Date 0/0-4//15 Phone number: 503-718-2466 Application determined complete: Email: jeffp@tigard-or.gov By: Date: i'\CURFII W.,ters\lend Use Appkallafs Rev.11/25/2014 City of Tigard • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • wwwtigard-or.gov • 503-718-2421 • Page 1 of 2 PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER INFORMATION (Attach list if more than one) Name: City of Tigard Mailing address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd City/state: Tigard, OR Zip: 97223 Phone: 503-639-4171 Email: •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 owners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan,attachments,and exhibits transmitted herewith,are true;and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued,based on this,application,map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application,including the policies and criteria,and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). Applica is signature Print name Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's signature Print name Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's signature Print name Date SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property required Owner's signature Print name Date Owner's signature Print name Date Owner's signature Print name Date Owner's signature Print name Date MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION City of Tigard • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • wwwtigard-or.gov • 503-718-2421 • Page 2 of 2 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Type 1V Submitted to City of Tigard Current Planning Division February 24, 2015 c TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 . Summary of Proposal 1-1 Section 2. Current Conditions 2-1 Section 3. Application Narrative 3-2 Appendix A. Pre-Application Conference Notes A-1 Appendix B. ESEE Analysis B-1 Appendix C. Survey of Proposed Exclusion Areas C-1 Appendix D. Support Letters D-1 FIGURES Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Zoning Map Figure 3. Aerial / Recreation & Trails Development Plan Figure 4. Site Photos Section 1 . Summary of Proposal Applicant: Jeff Peck, Senior Engineering Technician City of Tigard Engineering Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Phone: (503) 718-2466 Fax: (503) 624-0752 Email: jeffp(tigard-or.gov Applicant's Representative: Steve Duh Conservation Technix PO Box 12736 Portland, OR 97212 Phone: (503) 989-9345 Email: steve@conservationtechnix.com Project Request: Type IV-Comprehensive Plan Amendment to approve the removal of Goal 5 protection from 0.12 acres for two wetland boardwalks. The Pre-Application Conference notes are included in Appendix A. The ESEE analysis is in Appendix B. Location: 11000 Block of SW Tigard Street Site Size: 48 acres Tax Lot Description: 1 S 134DD, Lots 900, 1000, 2400, 2500 2S103AA, Lot 200 2S103AB, Lot 200 1S134DC, Lots 3000, 3001, 3002, 3100, 3101, 3102, 3300, 3400 1 S 134DD, Lots 900, 1000, 2400, 2500 Comprehensive Plan Designation: Public Institution and Open Space Current Zoning: PR Applications Submitted For: Type IV Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Neighborhood: Tigard Area 3 Summary: The Park System Master Plan outlines the need to acquire park property and construct park improvements Section 1 1-1 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24,2015 to preserve open spaces, enhance water quality and provide recreational opportunities. On November 2, 2010, Tigard voters passed a S17 million general obligation bond to fund the purchase of real property for parks and to fund a limited amount of park development. The Dirksen Nature Park (formerly known as the Summer Creek or the Fowler property) is a high priority project in the Park System Master Plan,the adopted City of Tigard CIP and the Notice of City Measure Election provided to voters regarding the 2010 parks bond. Dirksen Nature Park contains a mix of mature forests, wetlands, open space and existing active recreation facilities. The majority of the property will remain a natural area as approximately 35 acres, about 70%, are protected under a conservation easement with Metro. Dirksen Nature Park is designated as a community park and will become a unique environmental education resource for the City. This amendment includes an environmental, social, economic and energy (ESEE) consequences analysis of the proposed removal of 0.12 acres from the Local Wetland Inventory to accommodate two planned boardwalks, consistent with TDC 18.775. Section 1 1-2 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 Project Team for City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park Comprehensive Plan Amendment & ESEE Analysis Land Use Planner: Conservation Technix PO Box 12736 Portland, OR 97212 Phone: (503) 989-9345 Environmental Sciences: WHPacific 9755 SW Barnes Rd, Ste 300 Portland, OR 97225 Phone: (503) 626-0455 Land Use Attorney: Jordan Ramis, PC Two Centerpointe Drive, 6th. Floor Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Phone: (503) 598-7070 Section 1 1-3 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 Section 2. Current Conditions Vicinity: Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels (Tax Map: 2S103AA, Lot 200; 2S 103AB, Lot 200; 1 S 134DC, Lots 3000, 3001, 3002, 3100, 3101, 3102, 3300, 3400; 1 S 134DD, Lots 900, 1000, 2400, 2500) consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street, immediately north of Fowler Middle School. The subject site also includes an existing, paved section of the Fanno Creek Trail. The project site is located in the Tigard Area 3 neighborhood. Site History: The City purchased the Dirksen Nature Park through multiple transactions beginning in December 2010 with over$2.5 million in grant support from multiple sources. The property contains a mix of mature forests, wetlands, open space and existing active recreation facilities. The majority of the property will remain a natural area (approximately 35 acres, about 70%, are protected via a conservation easement). A short history of the site follows. • In 2001, the City of Tigard developed the Fanno Creek Trail which extends through the site along the eastern property boundary adjacent to Fanno Creek's outer riparian zones. • In 2006, the School District declared the open space portion of the property surplus. • In 2007, the Trust for Public Land negotiated with the District for an exclusive option-to- purchase agreement. • With the passage of the Parks Bond in 2010 and subsequent grant awards supporting this acquisition, the property was acquired by the City from the Trust for Public Land in two transactions beginning in December 2010. • A conservation easement was finalized between the City and Metro in early 2011 to protect a 35-acre area in the center of the site containing significant woodlands and wetlands. Also, a draft Natural Resource & Management Plan was completed and provided to Metro in January 2011 to document how each of the different habitat areas will be managed within the conservation easement. • The Parks Division led the preparation of a park master plan to guide the future development of the park. The master planning process engaged local residents and stakeholders, and it included two public meetings. The City of Tigard's Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) reviewed, considered and recommended the adoption of the conceptual master plan at a regularly scheduled PRAB meeting on July 9, 2012 at which public comment and testimony was welcomed. • The City submitted a land use application in July 2013 to permit the development of the park. The land use submittal was a Type-III Hearings Officer review for a Conditional Use Permit and Sensitive Lands Review for the project. The land use hearing occurred on October 28, 2013. The Hearings Officer conditionally approved the project and released the final decision on December 30, 2013. The decision did not approve the two planned wetland boardwalk and overlooks and defined them as development activity within a significant wetland as per the Local Wetland Inventory, thus necessitating the current application request through a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment pursuant to Section 18.775.130. Section 2 2-1 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 Zoning & Plan Designations: The site is zoned Parks and Recreation (PR), and "Community Recreation" is either permitted outright or as a conditional use according to subsection 18.540.050.0 - D of the Tigard Development Code. Nearby parcels on the north side of Tigard Street have R-12 zoning. The riparian and floodplain areas have comprehensive plan designations of Open Space. Fowler Middle School is adjacent to the site on the south. Site Characteristics: The Dirksen Nature Park is located within the Fanno Creek sub-watershed of the Lower Tualatin Watershed. Fanno Creek flows along the eastern boundary of the site. Summer Creek flows along the southern boundary of the site to its confluence with Fanno Creek. In addition to Fanno and Summer Creeks, the property is notable for its riparian forest, oak/pine woodland, forested wetlands, emergent wetlands and open meadows. The site topography consists of gentle 5 percent slopes along the northern property boundary at Tigard Street which level out approximately 500 feet from the northern site boundary. The center of the site includes an existing ball field and is nearly flat—spanning 650 feet (north to south) by almost 1,600 feet (east to west). Elevations range from a high point of 195' to a low of 150' where Fanno Creek passes under Tiedeman Avenue. The site contains approximately 17 acres of wetland in total. Wetlands associated with Fanno Creek along the eastern edge of the property are predominately freshwater emergent marshes and account for approximately 8 acres of wetland. The likely water sources include flood water from Fanno Creek and groundwater flowing east across the site. A forested wetland is located along the western edge of the center of the site and is likely fed by rainwater that collects in flat areas during winter rains and held by poorly drained silty loam soils. Some of these forested wetlands extend to Summer Creek, where they are fed from flooding along the creek and groundwater. Portions of the property include mapped environmental features including sensitive lands and riparian zones. A conservation easement with Metro protects 35 acres of the most sensitive areas on the property. Trails, boardwalks, interpretive signs and other educational elements are permitted within the conservation easement. The previously approved land use application and development plan is consistent with the conservation easement and has been reviewed favorably by Metro, the easement holder. The paved Fanno Creek Regional Trail runs along the eastern portion of the site, and three soft- surfaced trails run through the property. The southern (main) trail is a route that is heavily used by the park visitors and provides the main, east-west route into and through the park. The other two soft surface trails (the wetlands and upland loops)both currently serve as access for the environmental education and for the public to view the different habitats on the property. Decommissioning or modifications to the alignment of the existing soft surface trails within the property will occur to reduce or minimize impacts to sensitive lands. In addition, significant habitat restoration will occur on the property to re-establish and/or strengthen the qualities of various woodland and wetland habitat types. Section 2 2-2 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 Summary of Proposed Request: The proposed request removes 0.12 acres from the City's Local Wetlands Inventory and from Sensitive Lands Review provisions of the Tigard Development Code, to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. These boardwalks are critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (DRAB). The boardwalks that extend into mapped wetlands and will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. The primary purpose of these boardwalks is environmental education for park users and to provide safe, accessible platforms for community groups, students and Tualatin RiverKeepers classes to view and begin to understand and appreciate the nature and importance of these wetland habitats without damaging them and disturbing wildlife. In the area of both of these proposed boardwalks, numerous existing rogue trails traverse the sensitive lands as a result of historic, uncontrolled access and have caused significant damage to the wetlands. The secondary benefits of the boardwalks are to aim to eliminate rogue, off-trail passage through the wetland resources, to provide managed and controlled access near and into the wetlands, and restore areas damaged by rogue trails. The proposed boardwalks will help save and protect the wetland resources; they are the single most important component of restoration plans for the wetlands in this urban nature park. The two boardwalks were included in the Conditional Use Permit and Sensitive Lands Review that was reviewed by the Hearings Officer in 2013. The Hearings Officer did not approve the installation of the boardwalks and expressly noted the potential for an exception via a comprehensive plan amendment. The Hearings Officer provided the following comments: "6. The hearings officer finds that the Code prohibits the proposed boardwalks/viewing areas within the wetlands on the site. TDC 18.775.090.A prohibits land form alterations or developments within, "[a]11 wetlands classified as significant on the City of Tigard 'Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map,'except as allowed/approved through a quasi- judicial comprehensive plan amendment pursuant to Section 18.775.130 [emphasis added]. The wetlands where the boardwalks are proposed are designated as significant wetlands on the City's "Wetlands and Stream Corridors" map. See the "Supplemental Figures" tab of the application. Therefore development within these wetlands is prohibited by 18.775.090.A. b. The hearings officer finds that the placement of the helical piers and construction of the proposed boardwalk/overlook structures is a "land form alteration" as defined by TDC 18.120.030.A(102). Placement of the piers is a, "[m]an-made change to ... real estate ... " The proposed boardwalk/overlook is a "structure" or "building" as defined by TDC 18.120.030.A(160) and (36). TDC 18.775.090.A prohibits any land form alteration or development within significant wetlands. Therefore the boardwalk/overlook facilities are prohibited within the significant wetlands on the site. The Code does not provide a "de minimis" exception to the development prohibitions of TDC 18.775.070.E(2) and 18.775.090.A. The applicant should be required to modify the development to eliminate the proposed boardwalkloverlook Section 2 2-3 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24,2015 structures within the significant wetlands on the site. A condition of approval is warranted to that effect."' As described by the Hearings Officer, any land form alteration or development is prohibited, regardless of the non-invasiveness of the installation method or any social or community benefit potentially derived from such development. The Applicant is pursuing a comprehensive plan amendment that includes an environmental, social, economic and energy (ESEE) analysis to remove 0.12 acres of wetland in and around the area of the two boardwalks from the Local Wetland Inventory, thereby removing this land from sensitive lands protections as provided by TDC 18.775. This comprehensive plan map amendment will enable the future installation of the two boardwalks. The boardwalks will enhance environmental education opportunities and safe and accessible passage into unique wetland habitats. Controlled access to the wetlands will reinforce planned restoration efforts and help protect the wetland resources. Section 2 2-4 City of Tigard Darksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 fl "' T_ CP O O P lr, -1 ` W I " A Dirksen Nature Park - `° 9a r� .3`i E2DtTONWO00r a m ? .. 1--� a Z Vicinity Map ii < p �M1r .4 s i e o •C t f - o r = V r? n `C yZ W NORTH DAKOTA SI g lkA 'CS rrn _r a -0 .•-, Gr\sitibi 0 Trails C., o ' Multi-Use r- _ 0 —Pedestrian 7 Bus Stops - HeBus Lines\\IS IMO 7.7 ,i ERIHE T PTJ,"rsR is cL A — A"'��..'��s� _ ; JOhwS NOV primed■i U9u auto 1040001 T Q 0� tairmuip C- .. _o w l I QJ o ak ori OQ1(y 'gyp;C ♦' rr NJ 90 ST 1Q DCT Qpm �t sIIat] _..r. G Tigr d.fNZ 9T:?3 a. 1.1"14S°14.5 R' 1.1..1 334-4171 Eir 1-• f. 4. QN _T DO -+ ti R-7 (PD) Dirksen Nature Park - N R-4.5 (PD) Zoning Map I EL - , M E-4 0 1a am m w - -- R-7 Zoning -General s o Residential cidR-3'S R-z R fixed Use Residential "'Mixed Use Central Bus R-12 Dist R-12 (HD) ■Commercial Uktixed Use Employment Industrial 111.\\'A-CNT1' I-P r 11°-)VA' R-25 (PD) ...pc,...,03 3'ktA on 19-Nov.1 e m III R-4.5 ..- , 7 - ro P. _epi er pS .312SS\Y1aI�No n�Jl T�ga•d Oti 9743 'G0f; r 'F 5O353s-1171 aIV + 0 %w.0 tgaid.or WV t,NRt) na .., - - ,.-,,,—, • C"—c-rFPTD, . I .A 1 ,...._ - 4--,_. . ,. 7. "(A: IL' *1''41.-‘4 ;C2'.•-• 4,'IITIP - '` -.' r4. I ' t-9` * % ilk • rx""1'- 1 ••L N it EU _.,ir,:r1-11 •J1 - - -2,-- 0 -.."-- •'e, ' 1..., 11,0 L. ' '- .. .....'. • r‘ere,- , .....„„„ r - .0-..- , _ . ,. • - - __..w.--, ' . / ,—L__ ..,- s, , r , ..t,,,. .., ...,,, - ,_, • - /, t . , . ., , , ,.......-, ,,, • ,,, rn , e-13 in, , . , t• ..1„Ap. _. ro •4 X it fr e L••Nte,—..ee , 4,it 11.- ,,, , . Nr• i ac- 4,1.. -4., " . I • • / f At., •Ii." • r *. ..-7;•-itit ,,iyo \Egpitk 4 Proposed Boardwalk: fr , LEOEND 90 . -4 sa-s...-.) — -. , —I L ' _1 •z.),.. ‘c, , ,„.,,.• o. 1 .. — sr -- Fanno Creek wetland _ , me.444 7 S nommr 1.1.1,42C,X911. V su I .;;. ).'... 4 4,, , :• - s-- , • 4" ' • ,; , .....NETtAND OvElkC1C4 -• ...... '• Er/S1,40;AMMO CkEEK Ma ‘ 417 . .......FX,5`41G KAU' 1.C1 VW,. /it , ' 4 • _-, ' ' liv ' .4- - - lil!--"rr' 4 1 EXtrlIG FCEr MR,t 9f'E=..Y.31544/27 < .4,-.1. ",- • rfr WI/ Z-L••••• • 1'• • ..i 't =- **. • 40 e • al mo_sesernim.•Ncer&F,r- ' , 0 iiiyfr 4 3 r. , * ef 4•D = *4- •.e -- Proposed Boardwalk: ,,, 4 0 jp. 4c., _ -0 TIF , • ..,. • .viir :4 a) forested wetland ,F AMC/800:131 FEW , ... t 1.... • M • , 11‘ "N. . . , ...„. ,,,,,, .... ,r. ,*,----. ; I I, /I 1 0 4,1•. • ,_ .., •. ...... 4 . 6,..A It.. Pl‹.,e - ..../,/, -4 iver •- -,--.... - 1 I e , tr; -,1• , 4 '..:' . ,A -...._ °1r4V-•Oef* • 11110( 'Pk P:,••:: itIF.," .' ALI — it, / - • , . • , ,,,,,, _.\ .1.,t,, t,-ice,ok c. . ,0,: - ,,- 't - .i,-,0,47-4.,„„„....- - • :AS Vt. :41, 1 ' .' ' e -i.s.• • , • u fir. .1:1 ...itirof • _ _ .1r4rx,t v ... ... • -.‘ ,:. ‘:.' ' Y•C'' ra , - 41'.., •-:- • , - i r - .. ail•---- ...„.. . lig WHPa-at Recreation&Trails 4 ---2 DIRKSEN NATURE PARK iniiefile N N., 4.. _ NJ 0 ,s_,_ ,-- ( -...r J Figure 4: Site Photos ey • F" +� r r 4 , Oa .i• ..'2 '- ,.: r •tt , ,t .1, .,0- • Vit- ,. q+ 4.f 7iifr„. .. ..'3, } 1 C; t. - i - is r t V Figure 4A—View into forested wetland Figure 4B—Rogue trail in forested wetland 1I I.• r :_ r_ 0 1 f i' II, F �' t `rH. r Figure 4C—Rogue trail in forested wetland Figure 4D—View into Fanno Creek wetland ` 5 'Y /! 1, Y ..-;r...-`,,,c � 1. w, 'r?6, '7 a 4 rt.'-'‘A. 'K •`fir �" Sa+ � i_ '�F -+��c-' f' 1 Jj .x 'rt , .1. •ii,r, , �0,, fir.... 1 , ',,, - -, .' � l �r+l , , , r ,,,„• ,...,..„.„,.....„, ..., • ... ........ „tor . .„,.. ...., •• MMM .- ♦ 1. , _ . , .... .. , ,1 ,,,,,,,. ... . 46,...,„ ..._?:-..,..1,:, , „-„, : y � t . - t, Figure 4E—Rogue trail in Fanno Creek wetland Figure 4F—Rogue trail in Fanno Creek wetland Section 4 2-1 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 Section 3 . Application Narrative The purpose of this section is to demonstrate that the proposed project meets all the applicable standards and requirements of the Tigard Development Code, Title 18. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 18.390—Decision Making Procedures 18.540—Parks and Recreation Zone 18.775 — Sensitive Lands Decision-Makin;t Procedures (Chapter 183901 Section 18.390.060 Type IV Procedures A. Pre-application conference. A pre-application conference is required for all Type IV actions. The requirements and procedures for a preapplication conference are described in 18.390.080.C. Finding: The PAC notes for this application are contained in Appendix A. B. Timing of requests. The director shall receive proposed Type IV actions twice yearly. A completed application shall be submitted not inure than 75 days and not less than 45 days before the first commission meeting in April and October. The director may waive any of the above periods. Finding: The Applicant requests that the director waive the submittal periods, as this condition historically has not been enforced or applied. C. Application requirements. 1. Application forms. Type IV applications shall be made on forms provided by the director as provided by 18.390.080.E.I. Finding: The appropriate application materials have been submitted. 2. Submittal information. The application shall: a. Contain the information requested on the form; b. Address the appropriate criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; c. Be accompanied by the required fee; and d. Be accompanied by 18 copies of the narrative. Finding: All of the relevant approval criteria are addressed. Documentation of compliance has been achieved as demonstrated by the completeness letter. Section 4 3-2 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 G. Decision-making considerations. The recommendation by the commission and the decision by the council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: I. The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; Finding: Statewide Planning Goals and Objectives were reviewed regarding the proposed comprehensive plan amendment. The excerpted text below highlights relevant policy language for this proposal (emphasis added where appropriate). Goal 5: Natural Resources, Scenic And Historic Areas, And Open Spaces A. Planning 2. Criteria should be developed and utilized to determine what uses are consistent with open space values and to evaluate the effect of converting open space lands to inconsistent uses. The maintenance and development of open space in urban areas should be encouraged. Finding: The boardwalks are consistent with open space values, and are intended to preserve the natural integrity of the existing open spaces which currently experience the adverse impacts of rogue trails. Those adverse impacts increase maintenance costs for the City, and will be alleviated by providing new accessible boardwalks, elevated above the ground surface, that provide an alternate means of enjoying the open space. B. Implementation 5. Stream flow and water levels should be protected and managed at a level adequate for fish, wildlife, pollution abatement, recreation, aesthetics and agriculture. Finding: The existing rogue trails compact the wetland soils and disrupt the natural flow of waters within the wetland, whereas the proposed boardwalk, elevated on piers, will reduce soil compaction. By directing wetland access onto the elevated boardwalks, this application facilitates limited recreation and aesthetic use of the wetland, consistent with protection of water flows above and below the ground surface. 6. Significant natural areas that are historically, ecologically or scientifically unique, outstanding or important, including those identified by the State Natural Area Preserves Advisory Committee, should be inventoried and evaluated. Plans should provide for the preservation of natural areas consistent with an inventory of scientific, educational, ecological, and recreational needs for significant natural areas. Finding: The Parks Master Plan identifies educational and recreational needs, and this application implements that plan. Dirksen Nature Park has been inventoried and evaluated, and the educational and recreational needs are well known and documented. The vast majority of the wetland will remain undisturbed, and substitution of the elevated boardwalks for the existing rogue trails will actually reduce the disturbance area, ensuring that the carrying capacity of the resource is not exceeded. Section 4 3-3 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24,2015 Goal 8: Recreational Needs A. Planning 4. The planning for lands and resources capable of accommodating multiple uses should include provision for appropriate recreation opportunities. Finding: Currently the wetland area only accommodates rogue trails. The proposed boardwalks will accommodate additional uses, including access to the wetland for people with disabilities and many others, who though not disabled, are not capable of trekking through the natural areas. This access will provide both recreation and education opportunities. Because the boardwalks are elevated, the proposed uses have a de minimus impact and thus the wetland resource can accommodate them. 5. The State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan could be used as a guide when planning, acquiring and developing recreation resources, areas and facilities. Finding: The State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan notes the importance of pedestrian trails suitable for nature study activities. This application proposes precisely that, and thus supports this policy. 7. Planning and provision for recreation facilities and opportunities should give priority to areas, facilities and uses that (a) Meet recreational needs requirements for high density population centers, Finding: Dirksen Nature Park is near the commercial and residential urban areas of Tigard, and adjacent to Fowler Middle School, and thus is an appropriate location for the proposed recreation use. (b) Meet recreational needs of persons of limited mobility and finances, Finding: The accessible boardwalk will be open free of charge and thus will create a new opportunity for visitors of limited mobility who currently are unable to access the interior of the wetland areas. (c) Meet recreational needs requirements while providing the maximum conservation of energy both in the transportation of persons to the facility or area and in the recreational use itself, Finding: The boardwalk is accessible from Tigard St. and the existing parking lot adjacent to the nature play area, minimizing energy consumption to reach the facility. The boardwalks are not designed for motorized recreation and thus the recreational use itself does not consume energy. (d) Minimize environmental deterioration, Finding: The park currently suffers environmental deterioration from the rogue trails which compact soils and interrupt natural water flows. The elevated boardwalks substantially reduce these adverse impacts because water can flow Section 4 3-4 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 underneath them and soil compaction is limited to the small areas supporting each post, and thereby minimize environmental deterioration. (e) Are available to the public at nominal cost, and Finding: The City does not propose to charge admittance fees to the boardwalks. (f) Meet needs of visitors to the state. Finding: Dirksen Nature Park is popular with area residents and their families, who frequently bring out-of-state guests to enjoy its active and passive recreation amenities. 11. Plans that provide for satisfying the recreation needs of persons in the planning area should consider as a major determinant, the carrying capacity of the air, land and water resources of the planning area. The land conservation and development actions provided for by such plans should not exceed the carrying capacity of such resources. Finding: This large wetland area has long been identified for both preservation and passive recreation. The conservation easement, for example, expressly allows the type of use being proposed. The elevated boardwalk is a well known method for constructing trails that have fewer adverse impacts than traditional surface trails. The elevation reduces surface impacts, soil compaction, and obstructions to the natural water flows. In addition, the boardwalks are limited in length and do not penetrate all areas of the wetland. As a result, the proposal does not exceed the carrying capacity of the resource, especially when compared against the current rogue trails. 2. Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; Finding: The development of the Dirksen Nature Park was previously described and approved by the Tigard Hearings Officer as CUP2013-00001 on December 30, 2013. The review of the Conditional Use Permit for this future community park included the consideration of federal and state statutes pertinent to the development of the park. Although the Hearings Officer excluded the two boardwalks in question in this comprehensive plan amendment, no other federal or state statutes were triggered. Upon further consideration of the proposed impacts related to this comprehensive plan amendment, no additional federal or state statutes are applicable to this case. The Applicant has confirmed in writing with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of State Lands that permits are not required. 3. Any applicable METRO regulations; Finding: Metro regulations (Metro Code, Title X) were reviewed during the compilation of this CPA application. No Metro regulations are applicable to this application. Additionally, Metro has supported the Dirksen Nature Park through several past actions. • Metro supported the acquisition of the property with SI million commitment. Section 4 3-5 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 • Metro staff review and favorably commented on the park master plan, which was approved by the PRAB in July 2012. • Metro is a beneficiary with the City of Tigard of a conservation easement over 35 acres of the Dirksen Nature Park. The primary intent of the conservation easement is to protect the center of the park property containing significant woodlands and wetlands. Also, trails and environmental education are expressly permitted in the conservation easement. As per the conservation easement, a draft Natural Resource& Management Plan was completed by the City of Tigard and provided to Metro in January 2011 to document how each of the different habitat areas within the conservation easement will be managed by the City. • As recently as June 2014, Metro provided additional financial support for the development of Dirksen Nature Park. The City was awarded $390,000 from Metro's competitive Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Grant program, and the funds are intended to enhance visitors' experiences of Northwest ecosystems including: restoring a forested wetland and installing a boardwalk; restoring an oak savannah and installing an overlook; and building two nature play areas. 4. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies; and Finding: Planning policies from the Tigard Comprehensive Plan (2008) were reviewed regarding this proposed comprehensive plan amendment. The excerpted text below highlights relevant policy language for this proposal (emphasis added where appropriate). Goal 5: Natural Resources and Historic Areas Policies 1. The City shall protect and, to the extent feasible, restore natural resources in a variety of methods to: A. contribute to the city's scenic quality and its unique sense of place; B.provide educational opportunities, recreational amenities, and buffering between differential land uses; C. maximize natural resource functions and services including fish and wildlife habitat and water quality; and D. result in healthy and naturally functioning systems containing a high level of biodiversity. 2. The City shall demonstrate leadership in natural resource protection through the use of sustainable building practices and low impact development strategies, to the extent feasible, on all City projects. 3. The City shall provide options to conventional construction and site planning techniques, and incorporate sustainable and low-impact building and site planning technologies into City codes and standards as they become available. 7. The City shall protect and restore riparian and upland habitats to the maximum extent feasible on public and private lands. Section 4 3-6 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24,2015 8. The City shall protect and, to the extent feasible, restore the diverse ecological and non-ecological functions and services of streams, wetlands, and associated riparian corridors. 13. The City shall identify, preserve, and create linkages between wildlife habitat areas, to the extent feasible, as a key component of parks, open space, and surface water management plans. Recommended Action Measures ix. Protect and restore natural resources through a variety of methods including, but not limited to, the use of land management regulations and incentives that encourage habitat friendly development and provide flexibility in meeting state and regional land use goals. xii. Identify and implement measures to maintain and, where possible, restore hydrologic systems and regimes that support fish and wildlife,provide flood control, and enable natural recharge of groundwater and other ecological and community benefits. Goal 8: Parks, Recreation, Trails and Open Space Goal 8.l: Provide a wide variety of high quality park and open spaces for all residents, including both: A. developed areas with facilities for active recreation; and B. undeveloped areas for nature-oriented recreation and the protection and enhancement of valuable natural resources within the parks and open space system. Finding: Dirksen Nature Park is just that, a public park devoted to nature. This application is to facilitate passive, nature-oriented recreation. The elevated boardwalk will have lesser impacts on the natural resources than the current unmanaged rogue trails, and will allow persons of limited mobility to enjoy areas previously inaccessible to them. Policies 2. The City shall preserve and, where appropriate, acquire and improve natural areas located within a half mile of every Tigard resident to provide passive recreational opportunities. Finding: This application proposes the boardwalks as the best form of passive recreation suitable for the wetland environment. Walking, birding, and education all can occur there, which is an improvement to the natural area that will be accessible to all. Community parks are desired because of their high capacity for use and multiple programs and often include developed facilities for organized group activity, as well as facilities for individual and family activities. This is important as infill and higher density development continues in Tigard. Community parks are intended to provide a variety of active and passive recreational opportunities for all age groups and are generally larger in size and serve a wider base of residents than smaller neighborhood parks. Section 4 3-7 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 6. The City shall acquire and manage some open spaces to solely provide protection of natural resources and other open spaces to additionally provide nature-oriented outdoor recreation and trail-related activities. Finding: The Parks Master Plan supports the Dirksen Nature Park and the nature- oriented outdoor recreation and trail-related activities of the type provided by the boardwalks. The existing conservation easement anticipates the boardwalks and activities will be limited to those which do not threaten the natural resources in the park, 9. The City shall integrate green concepts into park and open space design, maintenance, and operations. Finding: Though elevation of the boardwalk is more expensive, the basic design has gained in popularity in recent years because of its green features. This design allows water and wildlife to pass freely underneath, and thus has much less impact than traditional surface trails. 13. The City shall build and maintain partnerships with other governmental and private agencies and organizations to optimize funding and facility resources, and improve park and recreational opportunities. Finding: The City has cooperated expensively with Metro and private agencies to acquire the park, and the conservation easement allows the proposed use. This cooperation is manifest in the mutual support for the boardwalks and will improve the recreational opportunities in the park. 16. The City shall continue to encourage and recognize the important role of volunteers and community groups in meeting City park, trail, open space, and recreation needs, and in building stewardship and promoting community pride. Finding: Tualatin RiverKeepers is an active community group with innumerable volunteers that has long been a partner with Tigard and other nearby cities in building stewardship of natural resources. In this instance, they will provide education opportunities focused on the wetland habitats within the park, in addition to other park activities. 17. The City shall maintain and manage its parks and open space resources in ways that preserve,protect, and restore Tigard's natural resources, including rare, or state and federally listed species, and provide "Nature in the City" opportunities. Finding: The wetland areas are currently being degraded by rogue trails, and that occurs in part because there are not carefully designed alternatives that allow people to enter the wetland. Those trails present an ongoing maintenance challenge that can be alleviated by an elevated design that keeps visitors out of the actual wet soils. Getting the visitors up off of the surface will facilitate the natural restoration of degraded areas. 20. The City shall continue to improve access to neighborhood parks and other facilities in order to serve all citizens, regardless of ability. Section 4 3-8 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 Finding: People with mobility limitations are currently unable to enter the wetland areas. The proposed boardwalks will be fully accessible to everyone, including those reliant on wheeled devices. Goal 9: Economic Development Goal 9.3: Make Tigard a prosperous and desirable place to live and do business. Policies 2. The City shall adopt land use regulations and standards to ensure a well designed and attractive urban environment that supports/protects public and private sector investments. Finding: This investment is an important element of the larger park plans, which invite city residents and others to enjoy the natural environment in a passive manner that preserves the natural functions of the wetland. 3. The City shall commit to improving and maintaining the quality of community life (public safety, education, transportation, community design, housing, parks and recreation, etc.) to promote a vibrant and sustainable economy. Finding: The quality of life includes nearby parks and recreation opportunities of all types in order to serve the diverse needs of the population. Access to natural areas with passive recreation opportunities is a key element of that, especially for those who are unable to participate in active types of recreation. A high quality community life requires recreational opportunities of different types, include trail access into wetland areas. This promotes vibrant people who are the foundation of our sustainable economy. S. Any applicable provisions of the city's implementing ordinances. Finding: No other implementing ordinances are pertinent to this proposal; however, City Council approved a resolution in 2010 that was the impetus for this proposal and, in general, the acquisition and development of Dirksen Nature Park. The Tigard City Council approved a resolution (#10-40) in July 2010 to send a measure to voters in support of park acquisitions and development. On November 2, 2010, Tigard voters passed a $17 million general obligation bond to fund the purchase of real property for parks and to fund a limited amount of park development. The passage of the 2010 Parks Bond provides funding to enable the planning, design and limited development of the recently acquired Dirksen Nature Park. This park project was identified as a high priority project in the Park System Master Plan, the adopted City of Tigard CIP and the Notice of City Measure Election provided to voters regarding the parks bond. The implementation of the proposed project is consistent with the will of the voters in support of improving the City's parklands. Section 4 3-9 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 Parks and Recreation Zone (Chapter 18.540) 18.705.020 Applicability of Provisions A. When provisions apply. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures (see Section 18.360.050), and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. Finding: The proposed application is for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment in response to the Sensitive Lands criteria. This application does not include the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures or a change of use that would affect access or loading requirements. This requirement does not apply. Sensitive Lands (Chapter 18.775) Section 18.775.130 Plan Amendment Option Any owner ofproperty affected by the Goal 5 safe harbor(1)protection of significant wetlands and/or(2) vegetated areas established for the Tualatin River, Fanno Creek, Ball Creek, and the South Fork of Ash Creek may apply for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment under Type IV procedure. This amendment must be based on a specific development proposal. The effect of the amendment would be to remove Goal 5 protection from the property, but not to remove the requirements related to the CWS Stormwater Connection Permit, which must be addressed separately through an alternatives analysis, as described in Section 3.02.5 of the CWS "Design and Construction Standards. " The applicant shall demonstrate that such an amendment is justified by either of the following: A. ESEE analysis. The applicant may prepare an environmental, social, economic and energy (ESEE) consequences analysis prepared in accordance with OAR 660-23-040. 1. The analysis shall consider the ESEE consequences of allowing the proposed conflicting use, considering both the impacts on the specific resource site and the comparison with other comparable sites within the Tigard Planning Area; Finding: An Environmental, Social, Economic and Energy (ESEE) analysis is provided in Appendix B of this application. As described in the ESEE analysis, the Applicant has described the consequences of the proposed conflicting use and has noted that, since the proposal is specific to environmental education opportunities at Dirksen Nature Park, that no other comparable sites exist within the Tigard Planning Area. This provision can be satisfied. 2. The ESEE analysis must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Tigard City Council that the adverse economic consequences of not allowing the conflicting use are sufficient to justify the loss, or partial loss, of the resource; Finding: The economic consequences of not allowing the exclusion of wetland areas from the Local Wetland Inventory and the planned development of two boardwalk trails sufficiently justifies the partial loss of the wetland resource. The ESEE analysis also describes that the proposed boardwalks will reinforce appropriate trail usage and help control against unwanted and undesired off-trail passage into or through the wetland habitats, which increases maintenance costs. This provision can be satisfied. Section 4 3-10 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 3. In particular, ESEE analysis must demonstrate why the use cannot be located on buildable land, consistent with the provisions of this chapter, and that there are no other sites within the Tigard Planning Area that can meet the specific needs of the proposed use; Finding: The conflicting use (two trail boardwalks) is specific to the wetland resources at Dirksen Nature Park, and is actually less conflicting than the existing rogue trails. The park is designated as a community park and will become a unique environmental education resource for the City. The installation of the planned boardwalks can occur nowhere else on the site, other than in the wetland areas. Functionally, the boardwalks are required as an environmentally-sensitive, accessible extension of the park trails into the wetland habitats. The boardwalks will provide managed and controlled access near and into the wetland areas with the aim to eliminate rogue, off-trail passage through the wetland resources and to enable the successful restoration of the wetlands in those areas where past trail walking has occurred and damaged the immediate wetland environment. The boardwalks will further the environmental education opportunities for park users and provide safe, accessible platforms for community groups, students and classes to view and begin to understand and appreciate the nature and importance of these wetland habitats without damaging them and disturbing wildlife. This provision is met. 4. The ESEE analysis shall be prepared by a team consisting of a wildlife biologist or wetlands ecologist and a land use planner or land use attorney, all of whom are qualified in their respective.felds and experienced in the preparation of Goal 5 ESEE analysis; Finding: The ESEE Analysis provided in Appendix B was prepared by a qualified team consisting of a land use attorney and environmental scientists qualified in their respective fields with experience compiling such analyses. This provision is met. 5. If the application is approved, then the ESEE analysis shall be incorporated by reference into the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the "Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridor Map"shall be amended to remove the site from the inventory. Finding: Advisory. This provision can be satisfied. Section 4 3-11 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24,2015 Appendix A. Pre-Application Conference Notes Appendix A A-1 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 ■ City of Tigard TIGARn Memorandum To: Steve Duh and Gary Pagenstacher From: Carla Staedter,Environmental Coordinator Tigard Engineering Re: Pre-Application Summary for Dirksen Nature Park Comprehensive Plan Amendment allowing the use of Boardwalk Overlooks at 2 Locations in the Park Date: September 18, 2014 Gary Pagenstacher, Senior Planner with Tigard, and 1 met July 7, 2014,to discuss the challenges of developing wetland interpretation at Dirksen Nature Park. Funding used to purchase the park property came with caveats requiring exposure of the public to the unique local ecosystems housed at the park. The park, by its nature,will attract people into sensitive resources. Staff believes that to restore and protect two significant wetlands at the park, carefully planned boardwalk overlooks allowing but controlling access to the wetlands will be required. These short elevated walkways will provide a single access entry to each wetland,with high quality views,will enhance the experience of the wetland, and will have far less impact to the resource. Currently, the two significant wetlands in questions are crisscrossed with demand trails and very much impacted by the lack of direction offered to the public. Our discussion outlined how the intent of City of Tigard code is to protect significant wetlands by allowing no impact to them. This restriction, taken in the context of the wetlands at Dirksen Nature Park, actually causes greater impact to the natural resource. Staffs' strategy is to bring the public into the unique and sensitive environments at the park by providing"Experience Points" at each unique ecosystem. These experience points are tied together with a single loop trail which connects to the regional Fanno Creek trail. The experience points highlight what makes each ecosystem special. For example, the wide open nature of the oak savannah will be viewed from a high point which allows park users a panoramic view over the moving wet meadow grasses and an opportunity to see statuesque native oaks. Creating experience points at each of the significant wetlands will allow park users to experience and understand the special qualities of both significant wetlands without damaging them and disturbing wildlife. Tigard code allows restoration of significant wetlands. The boardwalks proposed at both the forested wetland and the Fanno Creek floodplain wetlands are part of the restoration strategy for the resources and as such should be allowed with the use of a comprehensive plan amendment for only the area actually occupied by the boardwalk overlooks. Gary Pagenstacher felt there was merit to this position and allowed staff to move forward with the comprehensive plan amendment process. Appendix B . ESEE Analysis Appendix B B-1 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24,2015 ESEE Analysis for the Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks City of Tigard, Oregon Submitted to: City of Tigard, Oregon February 24, 2015 Prepared by: WHPacific Jordan Ramis, PC Conservation Technix, Inc. 9755 SW Barnes Rd, Ste 300 Two Centerpointe Drive,6th Floor PO Box 12736 Portland, OR 97225 Lake Oswego,OR 97035 Portland,OR 97212 Phone:(503)626-0455 Phone: (503)598-7070 Phone: (503)989-9345 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Economic, Social, Environmental & Energy (ESEE) Consequences Analysis Introduction The City of Tigard proposes to remove the significant wetland designation from a portion of two wetlands located within the 48-acre Dirksen Nature Park,which is the City's newest community park and a unique environmental education resource. The Applicant is pursuing a comprehensive plan map amendment that includes an environmental, social, economic and energy (ESEE) consequences analysis to request to remove 5,254 square feet (0.12 acres) of wetland from the Local Wetland Inventory in two discreet areas of the park, thereby removing this land from sensitive lands protections as provided by the Tigard Development Code (18.775.130). These two exclusion areas are planned to be utilized for the development of two boardwalked trails associated with future park improvements. These boardwalks represent critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (DRAB). Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street,immediately north of Fowler Middle School. The two areas proposed for removal from the Local Wetland Inventory are located within wetlands designated as "significant" (i.e. a Statewide Planning Goal 5 resource) on the City of Tigard's "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map" and are protected. The City does not allow any landform alterations or developments within or partially within a significant wetland, except as approved pursuant to TDC 18.775.130. As described in the Plan Amendment Option section (TDC 18.775.130), the Code allows applicants to impact significant wetlands if the amendment is justified under one of two options. The first option is to conduct an Economic,Social, Environmental, and Energy (ESEE) analysis that considers the consequences of allowing the proposed conflicting use. The second option is to demonstrate the wetland's "insignificance."WHPacific reviewed the significance thresholds included as an addendum to the City of Tigard's Local Wetlands Inventory and determined that the quality of the wetlands and the connections to Summer Creek and Fanno Creek are significant. As such, the Applicant is submitting an ESEE analysis for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan map amendment via a Type-IV review. This report includes an analysis of the ESEE (economic, social, environmental and energy) consequences of three potential alternatives regarding a conflicting use impacting previously documented and protected significant lands located within the Dirksen Nature Park in Tigard. This ESEE analysis has been prepared in accordance with applicable provisions of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Goal 5) and the Goal 5 Rule (OAR Chapter 660,Division 023). This document focuses on the significant wetland and does not include a significant habitat evaluation. It is understood the significant habitat evaluation is an incentive based,non-regulatory element within the City's regulatory framework. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 2 of 24 ESEE Analysis Requirements The analysis is based on a highly refined and targeted removal of limited portions of two small wetlands areas from the local wetland inventory at Dirksen Nature Park that extend into a Goal 5 resource considered significant (e.g. a forested wetland north of Summer Creek and a wetland associated with Fanno Creek). The Goal 5 ESEE analysis involves evaluating the trade-offs associated with different levels of natural resource protection. As required by the Goal 5 rule, the evaluation process involves identifying the consequences of allowing,limiting or prohibiting conflicting uses in areas containing significant natural resources. Specifically, the rule requires the following steps: • Identify conflicting uses -A conflicting use is "any current or potentially allowed land use or other activity reasonably and customarily subject to land use regulations that could adversely affect a significant Goal 5 resource." [OAR 660-023-0010(1)] • Determine impact area-The impact area represents the extent to which land uses or activities in areas adjacent to natural resources could negatively impact those resources. The impact area identifies the geographic limits within which to conduct the ESEE analysis. • Analyze the ESEE consequences-The ESEE analysis considers the consequences of a decision to either fully protect natural resources; fully allow conflicting uses; or limit the conflicting uses. The analysis looks at the consequences of these options for both development and natural resources. • Develop a program-The results of the ESEE analysis are used to generate recommendations or an "ESEE decision."The ESEE decision sets the direction for how and under what circumstances the local program will protect significant natural resources. Existing Local Protections The entirety of Dirksen Nature Park is within Tigard's Parks and Recreation (PR) zone.This zone classification defines permitted and prohibited uses, as well as development standards including setbacks and building height restrictions. Sites in the PR zone with overlay zones, plan districts, inventoried hazards, and/or sensitive lands are subject to additional regulations. Conditional uses are subject to a Type-III review, and development in or near sensitive lands trigger review under the City's Sensitive Lands chapter (18.775). Sensitive lands are defined as lands potentially unsuitable for development because of their Iocation within: • The 100-year floodplain or 1996 flood inundation line,whichever is greater; • Natural drainageways; • Wetland areas which are regulated by the other agencies including the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of State Lands, or are designated as significant wetland on the City of Tigard "Wetland and Stream Corridors Map"; • Steep slopes of 25% or greater and unstable ground; and • Significant fish and wildlife habitat areas designated on the City of Tigard "Significant Habitat Areas Map." ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 3 of 24 The Sensitive Lands chapter outlines the permitted and regulated activities and uses within sensitive lands, as well as defines the review and approval processes for development consideration based on the type and intensity of the impact. 'lie chapter further outlines processes in instances for requests for variances or plan amendments. With regard to wetlands, sensitive lands were mapped following a wetland inventory. Site Description a Project History Dirksen Nature Park is located within the Fanno Creek sub-watershed of the Lower Tualatin Watershed. Fanno Creek flows along the eastern boundary of the site. Summer Creek flows along the southern boundary of the site to its confluence with Fanno Creek. Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels (Tax Map: 251031., Lot 200; 2S103AB,Lot 200; 1S134DC,Lots 3000, 3001,3002, 3100, 3101, 3102, 3300,3400; 1 S134DD,Lots 900, 1000,2400, 2500) consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street. The site contains approximately 17 acres of wetland in total.Wetlands associated with Fanno Creek along the eastern edge of the property are predominately freshwater emergent marshes and account for approximately 8 acres of wetland. The likely water sources include flood water from Fanno Creek and groundwater flowing east across the site.A forested wetland is located along the western edge of the center of the site and is likely fed by rainwater that collects in flat areas during winter rains and held by poorly drained silty loam soils. Some of these forested wetlands extend to Summer Creek,where they are fed from flooding along the creek and groundwater. Portions of the property include other mapped environmental features including sensitive lands and riparian zones. A conservation easement with Metro protects 35 acres of the most sensitive areas on the property. "Trails, boardwalks,interpretive signs and other educational elements are permitted within the conservation easement. The previously approved land use application and development plan is consistent with the conservation easement and has been reviewed favorably by Metro, the easement holder. The development plans for Dirksen Nature Park include two trail boardwalks that extend into mapped wetlands and will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. Under consideration in this ESEE analysis is the request is to remove 0.12 acres from the City's Local Wetlands Inventory and from Sensitive Lands Review provisions of the Tigard Development Code to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks at Dirksen Nature Park to serve environmental education purposes. In 1994, the City of Tigard contracted with Fishman Environmental Services (FES) to prepare its Local Wetland Inventory (LWI). Expanding upon a wetlands inventory previously completed by another firm (SRI, 1989), FES developed an approach for completing the Goal 5 inventory and conducting the ESEE analyses that identified stream corridor segments as resource units. The study was completed in 1994 and approved by DSL in 1997. It is the basis for the adopted "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map". The wetland boundaries depicted on the Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map are approximate. A formal wetland delineation would be required prior to any site development in order to satisfy the ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 4 of 24 legal requirements of DSL and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. As required by Tigard's development code, a land use application for the development of the Dirksen Nature Park was submitted in 2013 as a Type-III Conditional Use Permit and Sensitive Lands Review. The park site analysis and land use application included a wetland delineation, natural resources assessment, stormwater report,geotechnical report and a no-rise certification. The Hearings Officer conditionally approved the project and released the final decision in late 2013. The two proposed boardwalks were included in the Conditional Use Permit and Sensitive Lands Review. The Hearings Officer did not approve the installation of the boardwalks and expressly noted the potential for an exception via a comprehensive plan amendment,which necessitated this ESEE analysis. The sensitive lands within Dirksen Nature Park will be protected and/or enhanced as described and approved in the land use approval for the park,which also took into consideration the various requirements related to Clean Water Services, Oregon Department of State Lands and the U.S. Corps of Engineers. I Figure 1 shows the location and approximate size of local significant wetlands and creeks within Dirksen Nature Park. The wetlands are identified with the unit and identification number from the I1994 Local Wetlands Inventory. I Figure 1:Mapped Significant Wetlands near Dirksen Nature Park N 'A , 0 Pg Dirksen Nature Park- - it J1// Local Significant Wetlands NUH IM OAMU7A s.* etra 'l i,ard l.UUcal 11 etLind /// �. If',enti+n w ,� � f- P + %Significant •f ��� j {► D\tin-Significant I/ a, t; VrO Uri Sllltfl011a1 �foft. "' ti Unit&Wetland 4,0 �j�! � numbering relate a the 11/ �cAlufN.Yt5inVentOrY assessments condu�r Environment& t Fishman _ rnvironmenta!Services FaMMYR O . P (1994) !War • s F y q�H U. cK. - - I F �t s1 4' r+4 mo +1:03t . L7 1000 :t/ 'm e�a,nn D _ ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 5 of 24 f' Figure 2 provides summary data from the 'Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory-of the quality (functions) and size of both relevant wetlands (totaling 19.37 acres) inventoried by FES. Figure 2:Summary Data from the Tigard Local Wetland Inventory for the Affected Wetlands Unit Wetland Acres Wildlife Fish Linkage Unique WQ Hydro Rec Ed Aesth 3 B-5 8.0 H M H L M H L L M 4 B-17 11.37 H L H H L M M L H H=High Wildlife=Wildlife Habitat Hydro=Hydrologic Control M=Medium Fish=Fish Habitat Rec=Recreation L=Low Linkage=Linkage Ed=Education Unique=Uniqueness Aesth=Aesthetic Quality Upon review of the wetland data sheets from the Local Wetlands Inventory, the following was noted about these wetlands: ■ Wetland B-5: o Plant species identified included a mixture of invasive reed-canary grass, native spiraea, Oregon ash, and native willows. o Wetland classification of feature identified palustrine emergent, palustrine forest, and riverine habitat types. o Soil identified as Cove silty clay loam. ■ Wetland B-17: o Plant species dominating the feature included Oregon ash and slough sedge. Plant community dominated by natives. o Wetland classification identified palustrine forest and riverine habitats. o Yard debris dumping by area residents noted along impromptu trail. o Soil identified as Cove silty clay loam. As a component of the site development application for Dirksen Nature Park, a wetlands inventory and natural resources assessment were completed in 2013.The map shown in Figure 3 illustrates the "sensitive areas" identified within the Park,which consist of mixture of wetlands and their associated vegetative corridor. Due to the nature of the site specific wetland assessment, the naming convention used for Dirksen Nature Park is different than that of the Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. In comparing the older data from LWI to the newer and more detailed wetland study from 2013, the B-17 (LWI) wetland is referenced as Wetland 1, and B-5 wetland is referenced as Wetland 4. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 6 of 24 Q m m T 3 r.gwer ri) II I cu rd K r 1 y 7b a, arp r 77 i074, Vic TWO, y �.;' I (EG NIf p f �� I :e. ' i •" '• ` _ . �. .;-�-NAY t'.CTit:43 rd R''NiH NR'()f'/'RTY; u, T liA,Ly P[ ANu' J4lUTiFTY A01JkAARY 0 O la.�y,ma I �I)£G>b FED comas ce - woo CONL1rGNJauifittb f ' IRW�",lir wr„ETATEC c (kat -= GE RAcc0 C4eJ VION� nw{ IAt ftAJrD v uxcm.orrwro.ar 1 )(1111111e1"1111111116-� /3"Nic..$: E Fsyprr WiSINFLOIN I (TO A?DI AR+MCH *A7ER tINF) v - 7- ' ,,,, *PLOT A2 V.....__L„,.._ - -2 . -,r vEGf TA TED CORROOR cON ''TIM PL0T y ''11P FMf0T4 RCY+47 AMC WEC7ItMr rlMiIn . y 4o tom ' 0 comornore v.0 .. 1.39.350 Sr (31 AC)• SIM A CRUA ! I Yr r6TAJ. 'DCGR. ED GYi�&IRON' YC..__ 118 Sr (IS AC) ll1 �.41L[Cure3 (sheet 1.1) _ Ta o n so 1..: �- Vegetated cor1.iet a. Condomsand Sava zil N (rat) z, 1 '°°'°"^ Main Name Palk.City at T,gerd,OR I ,Pas. 150++ n1 UQ p M N O A t NJ I' A in As described in the Natural Resources Assessment for Dirksen Nature Park, the following are descriptions of the two wetlands where the planned boardwalks are proposed. Wetland 1 (7.27 acres within study area) is an extensive "Slope"wetland that runs south of SW Tigard Street and extends across to the western boundary of the site. The northern portion is mostly an open slope with shrubs and saplings. The remainder is an extensive forested wetland in a level to gently sloping basin with a relatively undisturbed native plant community. Forested wetland vegetation consists of Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia),Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa),Douglas spiraea (Spiraea douglasii),peafruited rose (Rosa pisocarpa), red osier dogwood (Cornus sericea), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), short scale sedge (Carex leptopoda), common camas (Camassia quamash), and corn lily (Veratrum californicum). Areas of standing water are evident,with the water table at or close to the surface through much of the area during the winter and spring months. The open area vegetation consists of various introduced grasses, including meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis) and tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea), and patches of small Oregon ash. Large areas of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procerus) have been mowed. The water table is at or close to the surface during the wet season through most of this area. Wetland 4 (small part, 1.11 acre within the study area) is an extensive wetland in the Fanno Creek floodplain. The southern part of this wetland is forested. Vegetation consists of Oregon ash, pea-fruited rose, Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capitatus), red osier dogwood, and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). Other non-native dominants include English hawthorn and llitnalayan blackberry.This forested wetland is well-developed and dense in cover. The northern part is more open with extensive areas of reed canarygrass. Shrub plantings have been established along the western edge of this area, consisting mostly of twi nberny(Lonicera involucrata) and red osier dogwood. 'There are Oregon ash trees along the banks of Fanno Creek near the eastern property line. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 8 of 24 q 47 , rri rn > r _MAL 7 cia-c = z _ rti al ...7 -. .-.11MMIL=7, -.. 1111isslitt._ —-----: E ".*- fir . — 11W.!i • -.. _ _. a, -la ..„---;'''''."`. ---..": ' -o 4.v __----- - .i..n. ro F _ crTi ,-, ---- • . .453 ...... qiT.; ',',1-",..AS"..;. • m 1.".2 ....... ' )r,trusion Area xi cu .0 aD ; , t,Welland OverkleC I LEGEND rD 0_ A H . / v.E.71_0.0 1 , ." 4- :4:' 1 ( 1-----,-1 —--— TA%LOT/PROPERTY LINE 7 9II .rD tu GI 5 o.., 1..:,...__44..,..14--J1 74.15,:ococcaral?EA axiritc- ':Avccom,0407000,000) -- ix, 11—•--- - - ENCIL/%.1011 ARIA 41 I (Forested Welloni I jil I 1 At-IMO 3 till! ;1. _________ t v.fikaia iisEi4 i ALAN DM.. (.39,294 se) ... I / /----- Overto(*) *".4 . -- II_ 111 ' 0 _ 1 ..: , v 1GA Tx.%PL AN TANG IA 0.35 s r) Z ( _.-.77\ -\, , . \ ..--"'-' . --'''. 0 ....3-e7 .1 ------- -...j ' 1 r...- • TM C -- .- .L._ • i EMI (4PERClur4ArINEDN T MAIL & PERI/Anffil 7 CRAVNS e.wr_ceoa;myth,r - 3,033 af) cu ,-,- c ria -la ,, _,.. r 1 rl, t] ) , RECREATION AREA 1,, LAPPROX i 9 AC) E---1 via MU COR4VCO1 ) 1 \ . -TRAL* TRACT 2 [ OE?L_Ask, . , . swt, o - L.. ....... TRAIL r Thi r- ' (r)mart**v.HON IAA ITP? LAW) -•• •• -.._ 1116,.. ..ot ,. <-- Otqf•VION Or FLOw • • ...._ % --- __ ' ' -. / • -.- -- 120r7-- . .----- .-.'•• : \ • '''''':- ',..1 TOTAL Isim4LNCEISEN r AREA__.... ..................39_294 Sr amain., 1 ,, tom LI?ICA ION AgrA , „ , . ,. 0.033 Sr I ......../1 %.,.........._ t"....\\' I V- "::' "1\,_ . - • ,.... I r •,. '... WHP 't five 4(sheet 1.1) 4 ,00 ....__ _ 0 ,0 40 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.ENCROAC14MENT AND MITIGATNION (FUT} , ••••011.1111..••1.1.711-5", i NO. • 19,1 1 7 17 : ____ Dirkson Nato!Pork,City ci Tvard,OR I ___ _ DJ Crq 0 r7 NJ up --.... r..) a p. - ......„ n.... to tri Removal Area #1: This wetland area is located in Wetland 1 (as identified on Figure 4,above) and will remove 2,447 square feet from the City's Local Wetland Inventory Map. Removal Area #2: This wetland area is located in Wetland 4 (as identified on Figure 4, above) and will remove 2,807 square feet from the City's Local Wetland Inventory Map. Description of the Conflicting Use An important step in the ESEE analysis is identifying conflicting uses that"exist, or could occur" within regionally significant resource areas and identified in the impact area. The Goal 5 Rule (OAR 660-023-0010) defines conflicting uses as follows: (1) "Conflicting use" is a land use, or other activity reasonably and customarily subject to land use regulations, that could adversely affect a significant Goal 5 resource (except as provided in OAR 660-023-0180(1)(b)). Local governments are not required to regard agricultural practices as conflicting uses. The Goal 5 Administrative Rule (OAR 660-023-0040) describes how conflicting uses are identified: (2) Identify conflicting uses. Local governments shall identify conflicting uses that exist, or could occur,with regard to significant Goal 5 resource sites. To identify these uses,local governments shall examine land uses allowed outright or conditionally within the zones applied to the resource site and in its impact area. Local governments are not required to consider allowed uses that would be unlikely to occur in the impact area because existing permanent uses occupy the site. The following shall also apply in the identification of conflicting uses: (a) If no uses conflict with a significant resource site, acknowledged policies and land use regulations may be considered sufficient to protect the resource site.The determination that there are no conflicting uses must be based on the applicable zoning rather than ownership of the site. (Therefore,public ownership of a site does not by itself support a conclusion that there are no conflicting uses.) (b) A local government may determine that one or more significant Goal 5 resource sites are conflicting uses with another significant resource site. The local government shall determine the level of protection for each significant site using the ESEE process and/or the requirements in OAR 660-023-0090 through 660-023-0230 (see OAR 660-023-0020(1)). As per the project description, only one conflicting use is under consideration - the planned installation of a trail boardwalk in two discrete locations within existing resource areas. The intent is to allow the boardwalks to extend into mapped wetlands and provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. The installation of off-street, multi-use trails within the Tigard's PR zone is permitted outright; therefore, the intended project is allowed outright within the underlying PR zone. The planned boardwalks are integral components of the multi-use trail at Dirksen Nature Park,and they would be defined as "multi-use trails". ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 10 of 24 1 The PR zone would allow a variety of conflicting uses to occur on the site but because of the focused nature of the proposed development request and the limited amount, and odd shape of land requested to be removed from the inventory, the practical effect of the request is to limit the conflicting uses to just the trail boardwalks. The remainder of the ESEE analysis will focus on the impacts of the removal of wetland areas from the inventory based on the one proposed conflicting use. The primary purpose of trail boardwalks is to further the environmental education opportunities for park users and provide safe, accessible platforms for community groups, birders, students and Tualatin RiverKeepers classes to view and begin to understand and appreciate the nature and importance of these wetland habitats without damaging them and disturbing wildlife. In the area of both of these proposed trail boardwalks, numerous existing rogue trails traverse the sensitive lands as a result of historic, uncontrolled access and have caused significant damage to the wetlands. The secondary benefits of the boardwalks are to aim to eliminate rogue,off-trail passage through the wetland resources, to provide managed and controlled access near and into the wetlands and to enable the successful restoration of the wetlands in those areas where past trail walking has occurred and damaged the immediate wetland environment. The proposed boardwalks will help save and protect the wetland resources; they are the single most important component of restoration plans for the wetlands in this urban nature park because without them,people interested in entering the wetlands will continue to lack an alternative to the rogue trails. Figures 5 and 6 show the impact areas for the two planned boardwalks.. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 11 of 24 Figure 5:Enlargement of Removal Area 1 DUSTING TRAIL 10 BE DECOYM1590h1ED 66 4 4 0 -6 \ 093 00 /4 4 C) - 4 •. ''. \ r 2446.92V 1770.13SF - ,-- --1411781F-_ \ c. rt \ 44 (/7 ` 1„J - WETLAND BOUNDARY r f 4 16].64 0 141 1 - 1 1 1 �!(.. •76 .62 ..-,- �` 5'1110E 50F1 SURFACE TRAIL I BRIDGE HEADER 7Q'1EGETAIEO BUFFER - ( X1 12 ` SCALE 4 , .. 10 0 5 10 l FEET / I INCH . Io FT. i 46 .47 - '"': r2 03I173-G-O10&011 i 021W15 ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 12 of 24 Figure 6:Enlargement of Removal Area 2 1 -- i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 .....-, , „„,, \ 1 • • , Ss \\\\ 1 ` 1. l 1 1 ---------S . -.•"'. 3 e` , , 1 i <;\ kir ......F'..... '.. '''. \... ''''' ,'' ic, 41*\ a \ \ 1 \ N I \\ N N !z+ \ \ V o T ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 13 of 24 1 Figure 7 summarizes relevant acreage information about the park,its wetlands and the potential impact areas associated with the two planned boardwalks. Figure 7:Resource and Impact Area Summary Site Area(Dirksen Nature Park) 48.04 ac. On-Site Sensitive Lands Area 29.5*ac. Specific Resource Area(footprint of both boardwalks) 0.033 ac. Specific Impact Area Acreage(10'temporary 0.088 ac. construction buffer around boardwalks) Combined Resource and Impact Area 0.12 ac. Number of Parcels Affected 2 .estimated based on combination of mapped wetlands/vegetative corridors and LWI data As noted in the table above, the proposed removal of 0.12 acres from the Local Wetlands Inventory represents 0.4% of the overall sensitive lands on site and 0.02°%o of the total park acreage. The requested removal of the 0.12 acres of wetland area enable the installation of two elevated boardwalks will provide a single access entry into each wetland with high quality views, will enhance the experience of the wetland, and will have far less impact to the resource than the uncontrolled use that exists today. Site Specific ESEE Analysis This section details the three alternatives and discusses the Economic,Social,Environmental and Energy (ESEE) impacts to the relevant portions of two wetlands located within Dirksen Nature Park, addressing the following: • Prohibit conflicting uses providing full protection of the resource site; ▪ Limit conflicting uses offering limited protection of the resource site (balance development and conservation objectives); • Allow conflicting uses fully with no local protection for the resource site. "Ilse action to 'limit conflicting uses'within this context of this ESEE Analysis is defined as allowing only the limited intrusion of the boardwalks as proposed into the wetland and minimizing impacts to the extent practicable through strict construction management. The action to 'allow conflicting uses' in this case is to allow the development of the full range of permissible uses noted in the underlying Parks and Recreation (PR) zone,which includes such amenities as playgrounds,picnic areas, shelters, structures, sport courts and fields and other related items. Economic Consequences The following describes the economic consequences for each of the three protection scenarios. Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection) The economic consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses would be mixed, because the acreage occupied by wetlands could not be used to promote and support on-site environmental ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 14 of 24 education activities and programming that either have a direct local economic benefit or provide an offset to on-going operating expenses incurred by the City. Prohibiting the conflicting use would avoid a modest capital construction expenditure by the City of Tigard for the costs of the boardwalks, but City maintenance crews will incur on-going operating expenses related to monitoring unwanted activity and hiking in the wetlands,installing trail blockages to attempt to minimize through-passage along the existing rogue wetland trails, and on-going replacement costs for wetland restoration and vegetation management. There may be a reduction in short term construction jobs necessary to complete the development of the park and planned boardwalks. Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) Limiting the conflicting use to the two trail boardwalks and relying on the State's fill and removal permit and Corps of Engineers 404/401 regulatory processes would,generally, have positive consequences. DSL and Corps regulations set enhancement and mitigation thresholds based on documented impacts and allow some flexibility to allow conflicting urban uses where no reasonable alternative exists. Additionally, the City of Tigard spent $3.3 million on the acquisition of Dirksen Nature Park. Planning for the initial phase of park development is underway, and according to the adopted park master plan, the cost estimate for full development of the park was in the range of$2 to $2.3 million. Passive uses,such as walking and wildlife observation,are important aspects to the park. Additionally, the site is intended to serve as an outdoor classroom and a center for II environmental education and experiential learning. The proposed boardwalks are an integral element of the environmental education and interpretive program for the park, since these boardwalks will allow visitors to experience two different and unique wetland ecosystems in the park in a safe, environmentally sound and ecologically sensitive manner. The US Fish and Wildlife Service published a report in 2013 called Banking on Nature: The Economic Benefits to Local Communities ofNational Wildlife Refuge Visitation. This report detailed the economics related to refuge (park) visitation.The Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge was one of the case study examples in the report. It is worth noting that the Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge is not only very close to the City of Tigard,but the Refuge offers a similar experience to those planned at Dirksen Nature Park. In calculating economic benefits, the USFWS grouped visitation into two categories: consumptive and non- consumptive. Consumptive includes those activities that utilize the site's resources, such as fishing and hunting. Non-consumptive uses include passive activities, such as cycling, walking/hiking,photography and interpretation. Based on the report, the Tualatin River Refuge had over 100,000 visits in 2011, and all visits were for non-consumptive activities. A figure for economic value was estimated by multiplying net economic values for hunting, fishing,and non- consumptive recreation use (on a per-day basis) by estimated refuge visitor days for that activity, which was then divided by the refuge budget for 2011. The report estimated that the total economic effects of the Tualatin River Refuge was $3.87 for every$1 of budget expenditures. Applying this value to the planned development expenditures for Dirksen Nature Park results in a potential economic benefit of the park as between$7.7 and $8.9 million.While it is not reasonable to assign 100% of that potential economic benefit to the installation of the two proposed boardwalks,it is reasonable to assume that a clear,positive economic benefit exists for installing the boardwalks to not only enhance safe access into the wetland areas for wildlife ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 15 of 24 observation,photography and environmental interpretation,but also as a means to further improve and enhance the quality of those unique wetlands by controlling visitor access. The Washington County Visitors Association (WCVA) is the primary destination marketing organization for Washington County and markets the destination,its attractions and activities to leisure and business travelers around the globe and locally via several media channels. The Tourism 2015 Strategic Plan,prepared by the WCVA,is the organization's guiding document and sets the focus on high-yield,niche markets to expand recreational and leisure opportunities for visitors and residents. The Tourism 2015 Plan identified the key tourism attractors for Washington County and identified outdoor recreationalists, nature enthusiasts and birders (among others) as niche market segments.According to the Plan, "nature-based experiences are at the core of the Oregon tourism experience. While the county does not have the coastline, Mountains,and raging rivers of other areas of Oregon,it does have forests, wetlands and meandering rivers that support diverse flora and fauna and opportunities for visitors to discover and learn in comfort. A distinguishing aspect of these natural features is their proximity to Portland and major population centers. Nature-based attractions throughout Washington County include Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge, among others." The focus of the WCVA toward the promotion of nature-based experiences reinforces the relative importance of providing and enhancing these opportunities for local residents and visitors. The development of Dirksen Nature Park will provide opportunities for increased tourism and visitation. The environmental education and experiences at the park will be enhanced by the installation of the proposed boardwalks. Negative economic consequences include the possible necessity to construct expensive stormwater infrastructure to manage increased runoff with decreased natural control mechanisms. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local protection) The economic consequences of allowing conflicting uses are mostly negative. Allowing most of the permissible uses from the underlying PR zone would not only further deteriorate the wetland resources,but the relative costs would be high for capital construction, on-going management and related and required mitigation and enhancement. The only likely benefit of allowing the conflicting use is a short-term boost for construction,but this would not be in balance with or exceed the costs of the infrastructure and required mitigation. Social Consequences The following describes the social consequences (education, recreation,aesthetics, etc.) for each of the three protection scenarios. Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection) The social consequences of prohibiting the conflicting uses are mixed. Prohibiting the conflicting use would not substantially protect the resources from the existing unregulated uses occurring within each wetland area. Additionally,prohibiting the conflicting use would indirectly result in the development of only permitted upland trails at Dirksen Nature Park,without controlled access to Wetlands 1 and 4 and without specific environmental education opportunities at the wetlands. Pedestrian access and use would be concentrated in upland habitats with associated affects to local flora and fauna. People with mobility challenges would ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 16 of 24 f be effectively prohibited from enjoying any activities in the wetlands. The wetlands would not be (formally) accessible for educational purposes; however,without the controlled access that the boardwalks provide, people may continue to pass through the wetlands on rogue trails to experience these environments,while continuing to degrade the wetland habitat. Opportunities for passive recreation (e.g., bird watching, environmental learning) would be diminished; however, the social benefits afforded from living near intact wetlands and open space would remain. Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) The social consequences of limiting the conflicting uses in Wetlands 1 and 4 to the boardwalks and associated wetland enhancement are generally positive. The grant funding received by the City requires on-site environmental education to occur.Also, the conservation easement with Lw Metro allows environmental education,interpretive opportunities and the development of trails - consistent with the planned boardwalks. Limiting the conflicting uses to the installation of the planned boardwalks will not negatively impact the wetlands, since their construction will include low-impact helical screw piers and metal grate decking that allows light, air and water movement through the boardwalk to the wetlands. Limiting the conflicting uses will provide significant social benefits in the form of direct exposure to the wetlands for outdoor education, environmental interpretation and passive • recreation,including for people with limited mobility. The provision of the boardwalks will reinforce appropriate trail usage and help control against unwanted and undesired off-trail passage into or through the wetland habitats. Dirksen Nature Park,as a whole,will continue to provide visual relief from the surrounding urban environment, and the conflicting uses are sheltered from view from the park edge and will be visually unobtrusive. Wetland function will remain intact and provide opportunities for urban quiet and solitude. Urban aesthetics and connection to nature are not eliminated by allowing the identified conflicting uses, and the planned, controlled access via the boardwalks to the wetlands and their proximity to a relatively large population would establish new connections for people to the outdoors. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local protection) The social consequences of allowing the conflicting uses are generally mixed. The development of additional park amenities or gathering places for recreation, park visitors and family usage may benefit park users and wider the range of recreation opportunities in the park. However, the development of non-resource oriented amenities may not fit within the context of the site as a nature park or within the immediate context of the wetland resources, and the City offers other areas on dry land more suitable for active recreation. While social benefits may exist for the installation of different amenities on-site,they may be out of place with the character of the park and reduce recreational and social opportunities for other park users who are interested in enjoying the passive, natural resources of the site. Environmental Consequences The following describes the consequences to water quality, hydrologic control,wildlife and fish habitat (as well as other relevant factors) for each of the three protection scenarios. BEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 17 of 24 Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection) The environmental consequences of prohibiting the conflicting uses are mixed. If the conflicting uses are prohibited, then the wetlands would remain in their current condition. The City of Tigard Development Code aims to protect significant lands by allowing no impact to them. This restriction, taken in the context of the Dirksen Nature Park where public access and use is encouraged, actually causes greater impact to the resources. In their current state, the wetlands are impacted by human use in the form of rogue (demand) trails, periodic homeless camping activity and uncontrolled passage through these lands. The prohibition of the conflicting uses will still allow for specific restoration activities, but these efforts would be diminished or limited. by continued uncontrolled access and the inability to fully pursue an on-site education program regarding the health and benefits of urban wetlands. The wetlands provide functions and values,but these are degraded due to past disturbances to the site. habitat quality for fish species is limited within each wetland area based on limited availability and limited canopy coverage. Wildlife habitat value within each wetland is high with varied structures and habitat complexity. Wetlands 1 and 4 provide runoff and flood storage control and trap sediment and nutrients. These wetlands help to protect life and property during floods by storing and absorbing water, a necessity exemplified by significant storms in recent years. Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) The environmental consequences of limiting the conflicting use to the trail boardwalks are positive. The conflicting use is specific to the wetland resources (Wetland 1 and 4) at Dirksen Nature Park, and installing short these boardwalks can occur nowhere else on the site, other than in the wetland areas. Currently,Wetlands 1 and 4 are criss-crossed with rogue trails and heavily impacted by human use resulting from the lack of direction offered to the public. Limiting the conflicting use to the boardwalks ultimately will lead to greater resource enhancement and protection of sensitive lands. The boardwalks that would be placed in the removed wetland areas will enable focused and controlled public access,versus unrestricted and unsustainable access without the boardwalks (rogue trails). As the City's future community park and outdoor education resource, efforts to restore and protect the wetlands at Dirksen Nature Park will require carefully planned boardwalk overlooks that allow, but control, access to the wetlands. The proposed boardwalks will help save and protect the wetland resources. They are the single most important component of restoration plans for the wetlands in this urban nature park. These short elevated walkways will provide a single access entry to each wetland,with high quality views,will enhance the experience of the wetland, and will have far less impact to the resource than the uncontrolled use that exists today. Additionally, as elevated boardwalks, these trail routes minimize soil disturbance as compared to a surface trail. Installing controlled access and environmental experiences with boardwalks in both locations will allow park users to experience and understand the special qualities of both of the significant wetlands without damaging them and disturbing wildlife. Dirksen Nature Park is a unique site within the City of Tigard inasmuch as it contains 7 habitat zones within the 48-acre park. These habitat zones and their associated wetlands are the primary reason the park is home to the Tualatin RiverKeepers' summer camps and experience-based environmental learning programs. Low impact design and unobtrusive construction techniques ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 18 of 24 for the planned boardwalks will be employed, such that the installation is environmentally- sensitive. The design and installation of the boardwalks will be completed without any excavation. The boardwalk piers are to be set with screw anchors.The boardwalk decking also is designed to be sensitive to the wetland resource. The decking will be metal grating,which has two significant benefits. 1) The grating is not opaque;it allows air,light and water to pass through the boardwalk in support of the ecology of the wetland. Wetland plants can live underneath, and animal species can pass without obstruction. 2) As opposed to traditional wood decking, the metal grating is non-slip and will not allow the formation of the surface moss and algae that wood decking enables, thus creating a safer platform for park users and wildlife observers. Tigard"s Development Code allows the restoration of significant wetlands, and the proposed boardwalks are part of the restoration strategy for the wetland resources,which will limit and control human access to the wetlands and reinforce efforts to re-vegetate and restore the functions and qualities of the wetlands. Alley_Conflicting Uses (no local protection) The environmental consequences of allowing many of the permissible conflicting uses of the underlying PR zone are negative. Wetlands 1 and 4 fall under the jurisdiction of DSL and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers administrative rules,which regulate the removal and fill of wetlands. The development of park amenities, such as playgrounds, shelters or structures, will trigger DSL and Corps review and mitigation due to the likely ground disturbing activities. Such impacts to the existing wetland resources may be severe. Depending upon the success of implementation of required mitigation strategies,mitigation and/or enhancement to compensate for the development disturbance would likely occur in a different and potentially unconnected area of the site,which may further diminish the quality and character of the remaining wetland resources. Energy Consequences The following describes the energy consequences (transportation connectivity, efficient urban development, etc.) for each of the three protection scenarios. Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection) The energy consequences of prohibiting both conflicting uses would be mixed but slightly negative. The installation of the boardwalks will not necessitate the removal of trees, so no impact on natural shading or cooling are anticipated.This option, however,limits trail connectivity to the unique habitat zones within the park,which will have energy-related effects. Tigard residents will drive farther to experience similar natural environments (e.g., Jackson Bottom Wetlands Preserve,Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge). Students will need to be bussed to more distant parks for environmental education. Tualatin RiverKeepers will not be able to take full advantage of the environmental education values of the park without direct access to the wetland habitat and will drive to other sites for such experiences. These create inefficiencies in energy usage, as well as indirect energy expenditures related to lost or inefficient environmental educator staff time and student learning time. ESEE analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 19 of 24 Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) The energy consequences of limiting the conflicting use to the trail boardwalks generally would be positive. The installation of the boardwalks will not necessitate the removal of trees, so no impact on natural shading or cooling are anticipated. The shading and cooling potential Wetlands l and 4 have will be preserved. The provision of the boardwalks and associated environmental/interpretive displays will enable enhanced on-site outdoor education and environmental learning. This,in turn,will accommodate access and usage by residents, students and Tualatin RiverKeepers classes for local environmental education without the need to drive to distant or remote parks and natural areas with similar habitat features. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local protection) The energy consequences of allowing the conflicting uses and relying on state and federal regulations are generally negative. Since the proposed impact areas are wetlands and development will trigger mitigation, more energy will be used for the construction and required mitigation efforts related to the installation of recreational amenities, such as playgrounds, shelters and structures. If unregulated, the potential development of conflicting uses may result in an inefficient use of available parkland, especially if the conflicting uses are not wetland- dependent amenities. Conclusions/Recommendation The wetland resources of Dirksen Nature Park are valuable to the City from an economic, social and environmental perspective, and the opportunity to expand environmental education and outdoor learning is significant. Past grants awarded to the City for the development of Dirksen Nature Park support the creation of an environmentally-sensitive urban park and natural area with trails and access to the site's varied habitat zones. The following summarizes the anticipated impacts of the three alternatives related to the conflicting use, and the table in Appendix A provides scores for each of the ESEE criteria. Prohibiting the conflicting use would avoid a modest capital construction expenditure by the City of Tigard for the costs of the boardwalks or other amenities, but City maintenance crews will incur on-going operating expenses related to monitoring unwanted activity and hiking in the wetlands,installing trail blockages to attempt to minimize through-passage along the existing rogue wetland trails, and on-going replacement costs for wetland restoration and vegetation management. Tualatin RiverKeepers will not be able to take full advantage of the environmental P g education values of the park without direct access to the wetland habitat and will drive to other sites for such experiences. In their current state, the wetlands are adversely impacted by human use in the form of rogue (demand) trails,periodic homeless camping activity and uncontrolled passage through these lands. The prohibition of the conflicting uses will still allow for specific restoration activities,but these efforts would be diminished or limited by continued uncontrolled access and the inability to fully pursue an on-site education program regarding the health and benefits of urban wetlands. Limiting the conflicting uses to the two trail boardwalks will positively impact the wetlands, since the planned construction of the trail boardwalks will include low-impact helical screw piers ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 20 of 24 it and metal decking/grating to accommodate light, air and water movement through the boardwalk to the wetlands,which is a substantial improvement over existing surface trails. Limiting the conflicting uses will provide significant social benefits in the form of direct exposure to the wetlands for outdoor education, environmental interpretation and passive recreation,especially for persons with limited mobility. The provision of the boardwalks will reinforce appropriate trail usage and help control against unwanted and undesired off-trail passage into or through the wetland habitats. Dirksen Nature Park, as a whole,will continue to provide visual relief from the surrounding urban environment,and the conflicting uses are sheltered from view from the park edge and will be visually unobtrusive. Wetland function will remain intact and provide opportunities for urban quiet and solitude. Allowing most of the permissible uses from the underlying PR zone would not only further deteriorate the wetland resources, but the relative costs would be high for capital construction, on-going management and related and required mitigation and enhancement. Since the proposed impact areas are wetlands and development will trigger mitigation, more energy will be used for the construction and required mitigation efforts related to the installation of recreational amenities, such as playgrounds, shelters and structures. Additionally, the development of non- resource oriented amenities may nor fit within the context of the site as a nature park or within the immediate context of the wetland resources. Decision The analysis concludes that limiting the conflicting use to the proposed boardwalks would result in the most positive consequences of the three decision options. A decision to limit the conflicting use will avoid many of the negative consequences attributed to either allowing or prohibiting the conflicting uses.Through the application of site design and development standards to conflicting uses, the impacts on the significant wetland further can be minimized, and the remaining resource can be enhanced. There will be a relatively high level of economic, social, environmental and energy benefits achieved. Limiting the conflicting uses offers the most benefit to the wetland (through controlled access and enhancement) and to the community (access for all and education opportunities), and it strikes a balance between conflicting uses and planning goals for the services provided in this public park. The recommendation is to limit conflicting use (i.e. the removal of two areas from the City's Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map in order to accommodate the future development of two boardwalks within the significant wetland). I ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 21 of 24 Appendices / Figures ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 22 of 24 Appendix A: Site-specific ESEE Scoring Sheet Criteria Scores on a Scale oft toy 1=-rery negative impact, Scoring Criteria 3=no/balanced impact, 5=very positive impact SITE: Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Prohibit I Limit Allow Conflicting p Conflicting Conflicting Uses Uses Uses Economic _ li Efficient urban development 3 3 3 PI Cost of installation/maintenance of public infrastructure 3 5 1 (roads, stormwater, utilities) - L Development potential for property owners 3 3 3 N Amount of employment land 3 3 3 Amount of residential land 3 3 3 1 Housing development costs 3 3 3 Employment development costs 3 3 3 Economic Subtotal 21 23 19 J i Social I Aesthetic Value 5 5 1 Recreational Value 3 5 3 Contribution to local quality of life 3 5 3 Housing Costs 3 3 3 Social Equality 1 5 3 Social Subtotal 15 23 13 Environmental Water quality: Filtration and removal of pollutants 3 3 3 Hydrologic control:Water collection and storage 3 3 3 Wildlife habitat 5 3 - 3 Fish Habitat 3 3 3 Environmentally-sensitive design 3 5 1 Environmental Subtotal 17 17 13 Energy i Transportation Connectivity _ 1 5 3 Efficient Urban development 3 3 3 Shading and cooling _ 3 3 1 Energy Subtotal 7 11 7 Average Overall Rating 60 74 52 ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 I Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks. Page 23 of 24 ) ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 24 of 24 Appendix C. Survey of Proposed Exclusion Areas Appendix C C-1 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24, 2015 WHPaufi5 Boardwalk Easement EXHIBIT "A" Sheet 1 of 3 PROJECT: Dirksen Boardwalks LOCATION: Tax lot 1000 DOCUMENT: City of Tigard PREPARED BY: WH Pacific 9755 S.W. Barnes Road Portland, Oregon 97225 (503) 626-0455 BOARDWALK EASEMENT: A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 7 AS RECORDED IN GALLO'S VINEYARD, BOOK 58, PAGE 9 WASHINGTON COUNTY PLAT RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 73°51'54" EAST, 1354.38 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE BEIGINNING OF A 161.16 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE ON SAID CURVE 28.01 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°57'28" AND A CHORD THAT BEARS NORTH 49°33'01" EAST, 27.97 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 25°17'39" EAST, 47.93 FEET; THENCE NORTH 64°42'21" EAST, 6.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 25°17'39" EAST, 40.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 64°42'21"WEST, 40.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 25°17'39"WEST, 40.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 64°42'21" EAST, 6.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 25°17'39"WEST, 40.61 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THIS PARCEL CONTAINS 2807 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 7. i':1City of Tigard10359751.Survey\Docurncnls1RAST BOARDWALK l.EGAL.doc 9755 SW Barnes Road, Suite 300 • Portland, OR 97225 • 503.626.0455 • 503.526.0775 - www.whpacific.com WHPa II1 Sheet 2 of 3 REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR )- cJi—. N. KA (,..._ OREGON JULY 13. 2004 SCOTT M. GRUBBS 54728 RENEWAL: 06-30-15 P:1City of Tigard10359751Survey\Documents\EAST BOARDWALK LEGAL,doc vii -- — — . # =i$ 1111 --_. i i 12 4 III 6 e P L=26.01' g R=161.16' A=957'28" • I CH. N49'33'01"E S2517'39"E 47.93' CH. LEN.27.97' I .- N64'42'21'E 6.50' c i ' _ POINT OF BEGINNING �low' � N25-17'39'W 40.61' S2517'39'E 40.00' LOT 7 GALLO'S VINEYARD BOOT( 58 PAGE 9 N64'42'21"E 6.50' PARCEL ,,,, � WASHINGTON COUN�� i MIM CONTAINS N88'32'14'W 431.56` 2807 SQ. FT.± BASIS OF BEARINGS POINT OF COMMENCEMENT N2517'39'W 40.00' 564'42'21"'W 40.00' Id m© z> Wo 2Nr WUa mai NumBER 3 ©F3 WHPauti e Boardwalk Easement EXHIBIT "A" Sheet 1 of 3 PROJECT: Dirksen Boardwalks LOCATION: Tax lot 900 DOCUMENT: City of Tigard PREPARED BY: WH Pacific 9755 S.W. Barnes Road Portland, Oregon 97225 (503) 626-0455 BOARDWALK EASEMENT: A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 7 AS RECORDED IN GALLO'S VINEYARD, BOOK 58, PAGE 9 WASHINGTON COUNTY PLAT RECORDS; THENCE SOUTH 79°47'40" EAST, 405.44 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 60°46'20" EAST, 37.73 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 29°13'40" EAST, 40.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 60°46'20"WEST, 4.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 29°13'40" EAST, 16.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 60°46'20" WEST, 14.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 29°13'40" EAST, 10.98 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 83°05'34"WEST, 26.48 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 59°59'34" WEST, 1.51 FEET; THENCE NORTH 29°13'40" WEST, 40.95 FEET; THENCE NORTH 60°46'20" EAST, 6.27 FEET; THENCE NORTH 29°13'40"WEST, 16.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THIS PARCEL CONTAINS 2447 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 7. P:ICity of Tigard10359755Survey\Documents\WEST BOARDWALK LE;AI..doc 9755 SW Barnes Road,Suite 300 • Portland, OR 97225 • i 503.626.0455 • ' 503.526,0775 • www.whpacific.com WHPa ili Sheet 2 of 3 REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL 4LAND SURVEYOR )1L,J(711. 24._ OREGON JULY 13. 2004 SCOTT M. GRUBBS 54728 RENEWAL: 06-30-15 P:1City of Tigard1035975LSurvey\Domumeats\WEST BOARDWALK LEGAL.doc 15. � F p.r 112. g _ LOT 7 GALLO'S VINEYARD 000K 58 PAGE 9 WASHINGTON N COUNTY BASIS OF BEARINGS6" S79'47'4O 405.44' N60.46'201 37.73' POINT OF COMMENCEMENTPONT OF BEGINNING 529'13'40"E 40.00' N2913'40"W 16.00' N60"46`20"E 6.27 PARCEL CONTA NS 560'46'20"W 4.00' 2447 SQ. FT.± S2913'4O"E 16.00' N291 3'40-W 40.95' 360'46'20"W 14.00' 52913'40"E 10.98' S83.05`34"W 26.48' 559'59'34"W 1.51' tn co00 mo6o SWAT Nii.ER 3OF3 o. / oxv r /:// ://, 41. \ \ a tv �g�rA / /1 ,°5 r / cce. /4* / / 2048.75 SF 2806.87 SF /BRIDGE HEADER r / / r r / / 1. / / / r / / rr / e / \ 11111411111A11‘ r / / / / r / / ccjI , A. r%1116:\r // 110 / \ / SCALE 414416"-quiliw".4 10 0 5 10 ok aais co , ,-.A r«.o0 9 i , ( FEET ) ,g 4 . . ••••••''' j r _ j I el .•- - 1 (NCH = 10 FT. r l • 035975-C-DT05.DNC 02/05/15 DOSING TRAIL TO BE DECOMMISSIONED 768 0.93 ...:(,, ,,....,..,,,,,.....„.\ \ R 167ZOW. 16. .ft1 0.79 \ 16 .53N \ 'S. 141111111W• ... ' "c'5. VP*, \ 2446.92 SF 1770.13 SF Ilik , • \ (%, ,Np41' Niw...401 EL167.60 •i 6 .44 / 46 ,., \ WETLAND BOUNDARY \\ CAIN& ---\----\, / ------ 014 .ki lkikk IllellAk ..--- 11%L, 84 5 16 .62 f 10 170.30 V001_, fl 160240 5' VIDE SOFT SURFACE TRAIL BRIDGE HEADER 50' VEGETATED BUFFER ,....&*� 4 •iGJ1.22 SCALE 4 10 0 5 10 FEET / 4] 1 INCH = 10 FT. 1 *.D6 *72 035975—C-0T05.DWG 02/05/15 r Appendix D. Support Letters Appendix D D-1 City of Tigard Dirksen Nature Park February 24,2015 s „/„..000,„----..,__ 11LATI N RIVERKEEPERS,. 6755 SW Hazelbrook Road • Tualatin, Oregon 97062 .000,001111 d phone 5013-218-2580 • fax 503-218-2583 www.tualatinriverkeepers.org February 18, 2015 Mayor John Cook Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalk Comprehensive Plan Amendment Dear Mayor Cook and City Council, Tualatin Riverkeepers would like to state our support for the Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalk Comprehensive Plan Amendment. We recognize that the preservation and protection of wetland habitat within the City of Tigard is extremely important. Wetland and water resource protection is our organization's mission here in the Tualatin River watershed. Dirksen Nature Park is a special area where teaching about our natural resources without damaging them is a primary focus. There are currently many demand trails that cross the wetlands in questions. These trails are very impactful to the wetlands. People traveling through the wetland trample valued native plants, compact delicate wetland soil, and disturb wildlife. For this reason, it is our opinion that the proposed wetland boardwalks will actually provide resource protection. The public's desire to view these resources is clear. By providing an elevated boardwalk sited at the far end of the resource, Tigard allows park users to view the area without damage. This controlled access better supports the mission of the nature park. Dirksen Nature Park is a special place for Tualatin Riverkeepers. Each year we bring over 1000 students to the park on field trips to experience diverse habitats in a compact location close to home. Wetlands are fragile. This boardwalk project enabled by the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment allows these students to experience the wetlands, their diverse plants and wild creatures without damage. Thank you for consideration of our support for the Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalk Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Sincerely, , . A /1/(—"av12—. -IrtA 1 Brian Wegener, Riverkeeper Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon �� North Willamette Watershed District 17330 SE Evelyn Street Kate Brown.G \ern w /0 9 Clackamas, OR 97015-9514 March 2, 2015 (971) 673-6000 (971) 673-6070 odfw.com Mayor John Cook OREGON Tigard City Council /V4alirb 13125 SW Hall Blvd. FI444 Wildlife Tigard, OR. 97223 Re: Dirksen Nature Park Boardwalk Comprehensive Plan Amendment& Recommendations Dear Mayor Cook and City Council, The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) is supportive of an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan to allow construction of elevated boardwalks in Dirksen Nature Park. The proposed boardwalks with viewing platforms would better protect fish and wildlife habitat values while providing public access at chosen locations. The existing network of unregulated demand trails throughout the park is degrading riparian, wetland, and Oregon white oak habitats, high priority habitats as per the Oregon Conservation Strategy(ODFW 2006). Uncontrolled access is resulting in trampled vegetation, soil compaction, and disturbance to wildlife. Rogue trails are also likely negatively affecting water quality and contributing to the spread of invasive plants. Elevated boardwalks and associated mitigation plantings and decommissioning of demand trails are expected to improve soil health, decrease disturbance to wildlife, enhance wildlife movement, and benefit overall habitat conditions by targeting public access to specific locations. Dirksen Nature Park provides the local community with wonderful natural resource education opportunities, yet it is important to protect and minimize harm to natural resource values in the process of providing access. The proposed boardwalks with viewing areas will achieve both objectives. In addition to the above statement of support, ODFW would like to take this opportunity to offer several suggestions for protecting and enhancing fish and wildlife and their habitats at Dirksen Nature Park. Recommendations include: 1. Deter future off-trail use with a combination of fencing, native thorny vegetative plantings (e.g.,Nootka rose, stinging nettle, tall Oregon grape), and educational signage. 2. Protect and enhance Oregon white oak habitat, an extremely rare habitat type that supports a suite of wildlife species also considered at-risk. ODFW suggests protecting all remaining Oregon white oak trees. That said, it may be appropriate to remove certain oak trees to promote growth of more dominant ones. I 3. Several protected amphibian and reptile species are known to occur at and near the park (e.g., red-legged frog, western painted turtle, and western pond turtle). These priority species spend quite a bit of their life cycle on land hiding, foraging, and/or over-wintering in moist shrubby and forest habitats and under leaf litter, making them vulnerable to a variety of on-the-ground activities. ODFW suggests implementing Oregon's Turtle Best Management Practices (ODFW 2015) aimed at conserving native turtles. 4. Habitat values are threatened by non-native invasive plants and animals (e.g., English ivy, Himalayan blackberry, English holly, English laurel, red-eared slider turtle, aquaria contents, etc.). Conduct invasive plant removal with wildlife in mind. Install signage at trail heads and at viewing areas to inform park users how harmful (and unlawful) it is to release nonnative wildlife into the wild. 5. Conduct trail construction, habitat restoration, and other park projects with wildlife in mind. Many on-the-ground projects, even those intended to benefit natural resources, can have unintended harmful impacts, especially to species or species lifeforms that are not able to easily move out of harm's way (e.g., amphibians, turtles, active bird nests). 6. ODFW recommends not allowing dogs on the nature park trail system. The presence of even on-leash dogs is known to disturb wildlife and the reality is that many park users disregard leash laws altogether once they get on the trail. Thank you for considering ODFW's support of an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan to allow construction of elevated boardwalks in significant wetlands at Dirksen Nature Park. I'd be happy to provide City staff with additional recommendations related to conservation of fish and wildlife and their habitats. I can be reached at susan jbarnes(cr)state.or.us or(971) 673-6010. Sincerely, Susan Barnes Regional Conservation Biologist West Region Cc: Don VandeBergh, Tom Murtagh (ODFW) Carla Staedter (City of Tigard) 2 P.O. Box 338 1110 Hillsboro,OR 97123-0338 503-846-4810; www.trwc.org Engaging the community to sustain our watershed February 24, 2015 Mayor John Cook Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor Cook and Tigard City Councilors: Re: Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalk Comprehensive Plan Amendment The Tualatin River Watershed Council (TRWC) is writing to offer our support for the Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalk Comprehensive Plan Amendment. We recognize that the preservation and protection of wetland habitat within the City of Tigard is vital to our watershed's health. TRWC's mission is to foster better stewardship of the Tualatin River resources; address natural resource issues; and ensure sustainable watershed health, functions and use. TRWC recognizes that Dirksen Nature Park is a special natural area where educating our residents on the Tualatin River watershed's natural resources without causing damage to these resources is a primary focus. Because of a high interest in wetland areas, casual trails onsite are being used that result in harmful impacts to the Dirksen Nature Park wetlands. These harmful impacts include trampling valued native wetlands plants, compacting delicate wetland soil, and disturbing wildlife. We support a solution to resolve this problem,which is to develop and construct wetland elevated boardwalks. This solution decreases these harmful wetland impacts as well as provides observation opportunities of these special habitats. We recognize that these proposed elevated boardwalks can be sited and implemented in such a way to protect wetland resources and allow park users the opportunity to observe the wetland areas without causing damage. Providing this controlled wetlands access supports the mission of the nature park that includes natural resource protection and engagement of Tualatin River watershed residents in learning about the value and function of wetlands,riparian and upland areas. Sincerely, ti Ap 1'Olbrich Council Coordinator ESEE Analysis for the Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks City of Tigard, Oregon Submitted to: City of Tigard, Oregon February 24, 2015 Prepared by: WHPacific Jordan Ramis, PC Conservation Technix, Inc. 9755 SW Barnes Rd, Ste 300 Two Centerpointe Drive, 6th Floor PO Box 12736 Portland, OR 97225 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Portland,OR 97212 Phone: (503)626-0455 Phone: (503) 598-7070 Phone: (503)989-9345 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Economic, Social, Environmental & Energy (ESEE) Consequences Analysis Introduction The City of Tigard proposes to remove the significant wetland designation from a portion of two wetlands located within the 48-acre Dirksen Nature Park,which is the City's newest community park and a unique environmental education resource. The Applicant is pursuing a comprehensive plan map amendment that includes an environmental, social, economic and energy (ESEE) consequences analysis to request to remove 5,254 square feet (0.12 acres) of wetland from the Local Wetland Inventory in two discreet areas of the park, thereby removing this land from sensitive lands protections as provided by the Tigard Development Code (18.775.130).These two exclusion areas are planned to be utilized for the development of two boardwalked trails associated with future park improvements. These boardwalks represent critical park infrastructure and will serve as environmental education facilities, consistent with public feedback and earlier site plan concepts regarding the layout and design of the property approved by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB). Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street, immediately north of Fowler Middle School. The two areas proposed for removal from the Local Wetland Inventory are located within wetlands designated as "significant" (i.e. a Statewide Planning Goal 5 resource) on the City of Tigard's "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map" and are protected.The City does not allow any landform alterations or developments within or partially within a significant wetland, except as approved pursuant to TDC 18.775.130. As described in the Plan Amendment Option section (I DC 18.775.130),the Code allows applicants to impact significant wetlands if the amendment is justified under one of two options. The first option is to conduct an Economic, Social,Environmental,and Energy (ESEE) analysis that considers the consequences of allowing the proposed conflicting use. The second option is to demonstrate the wetland's "insignificance." WHPacific reviewed the significance thresholds included as an addendum to the City of Tigard's Local Wetlands Inventory and determined that the quality of the wetlands and the connections to Summer Creek and Fanno Creek are significant. As such, the Applicant is submitting an ESEE analysis for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan map amendment via a Type-IV review. This report includes an analysis of the ESEE (economic, social, environmental and energy) consequences of three potential alternatives regarding a conflicting use impacting previously documented and protected significant lands located within the Dirksen Nature Park in Tigard. This ESEE analysis has been prepared in accordance with applicable provisions of Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Goal 5) and the Goal 5 Rule (OAR Chapter 660, Division 023). This document focuses on the significant wetland and does not include a significant habitat evaluation. It is understood the significant habitat evaluation is an incentive based,non-regulatory element within the City's regulatory framework. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 2 of 24 ESEE Analysis Requirements The analysis is based on a highly refined and targeted removal of limited portions of two small 11 wetlands areas from the local wetland inventory at Dirksen Nature Park that extend into a Goal 5 resource considered significant (e.g. a forested wetland north of Summer Creek and a wetland associated with Fanno Creek). The Goal 5 ESEE analysis involves evaluating the trade-offs associated with different levels of natural resource protection. As required by the Goal 5 rule, the evaluation process involves identifying the consequences of allowing,limiting or prohibiting conflicting uses in areas containing significant natural resources. Specifically, the rule requires the following steps: • Identify conflicting uses —A conflicting use is "any current or potentially allowed land use or other activity reasonably and customarily subject to land use regulations that could adversely it affect a significant Goal 5 resource." [OAR 660-023-0010(1)] • Determine impact area—The impact area represents the extent to which land uses or activities in areas adjacent to natural resources could negatively impact those resources. The impact area identifies the geographic limits within which to conduct the ESEE analysis. • Analyze the ESEE consequences —The ESF.F,analysis considers the consequences of a decision to either fully protect natural resources; fully allow conflicting uses; or limit the conflicting uses. The analysis looks at the consequences of these options for both development and natural resources. • Develop a program—The results of the ESEE analysis are used to generate recommendations or an "ESEE decision."The ESEE decision sets the direction for how and under what circumstances the local program will protect significant natural resources. Existing Local Protections The entirety of Dirksen Nature Park is within Tigard's Parks and Recreation (PR) zone. This zone classification defines permitted and prohibited uses, as well as development standards including setbacks and building height restrictions. Sites in the PR zone with overlay zones, plan districts, inventoried hazards,and/or sensitive lands are subject to additional regulations. Conditional uses are subject to a Type-III review,and development in or near sensitive lands trigger review under the City's Sensitive Lands chapter (18.775). Sensitive lands are defined as lands potentially unsuitable for development because of their location within: • The 100-year floodplain or 1996 flood inundation line,whichever is greater; • Natural drainageways; • Wetland areas which are regulated by the other agencies including the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of State Lands, or are designated as significant wetland on the City of Tigard 'Wetland and Stream Corridors Map"; • Steep slopes of 25% or greater and unstable ground; and " Significant fish and wildlife habitat areas designated on the City of Tigard "Significant Habitat Areas Map." ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 3 of 24 The Sensitive Lands chapter outlines the permitted and regulated activities and uses within sensitive lands, as well as defines the review and approval processes for development consideration based on the type and intensity of the impact. The chapter further outlines processes in instances for requests for variances or plan amendments. With regard to wetlands,sensitive lands were mapped following a wetland inventory. Site Description a Project History Dirksen Nature Park is located within the Fanno Creek sub-watershed of the Lower Tualatin Watershed. Fanno Creek flows along the eastern boundary of the site. Summer Creek flows along the southern boundary of the site to its confluence with Fanno Creek. Dirksen Nature Park is comprised of 14 parcels (Tax Map: 2S103AA,Lot 200;2S103AB, Lot 200; 1 S134DC,Lots 3000, 3001, 3002, 3100, 3101,3102, 3300, 3400; 1 S134DD,Lots 900, 1000, 2400,2500) consisting of 48 acres located along the 11000 block of SW Tigard Street. The site contains approximately 17 acres of wetland in total. Wetlands associated with Fanno Creek along the eastern edge of the property are predominately freshwater emergent marshes and account for approximately 8 acres of wetland.The likely water sources include flood water from Fanno Creek and groundwater flowing east across the site. A forested wetland is located along the western edge of the center of the site and is likely fed by rainwater that collects in flat areas during winter rains and held by poorly drained silty Ioam soils. Some of these forested wetlands extend to Summer Creek, where they are fed from flooding along the creek and groundwater. Portions of the property include other mapped environmental features including sensitive lands and riparian zones. A conservation easement with Metro protects 35 acres of the most sensitive areas on the property. Trails,boardwalks,interpretive signs and other educational elements are permitted within the conservation easement.The previously approved land use application and development plan is consistent with the conservation easement and has been reviewed favorably by Metro, the easement holder. The development plans for Dirksen Nature Park include two trail boardwalks that extend into mapped wetlands and will provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. Under consideration in this ESEE analysis is the request is to remove 0.12 acres from the City's Local Wetlands Inventory and from Sensitive Lands Review provisions of the Tigard Development Code to accommodate the future installation of two trail boardwalks at Dirksen Nature Park to serve environmental education purposes. In 1994, the City of Tigard contracted with Fishman Environmental Services (FES) to prepare its Local Wetland Inventory (LWI). Expanding upon a wetlands inventory previously completed by another firm (SRI, 1989),FES developed an approach for completing the Goal 5 inventory and conducting the ESEE analyses that identified stream corridor segments as resource units.The study was completed in 1994 and approved by DSL in 1997. It is the basis for the adopted "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map". The wetland boundaries depicted on the Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map are approximate. A formal wetland delineation would be required prior to any site development in order to satisfy the ESEE Analysis --- 02f24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 4 of 24 fill legal requirements of DSL and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. As required by Tigard's development code, a land use application for the development of the Dirksen Nature Park was submitted in 2013 as a Type-III Conditional Use Permit and Sensitive Lands Review,The park site analysis and land use application included a wetland delineation,natural resources assessment, stormwater report,geotechnical report and a no-rise certification.The Hearings Officer conditionally approved the project and released the final decision in late 2013. The two proposed boardwalks were included in the Conditional Use Permit and Sensitive Lands Review. The Hearings Officer did not approve the installation of the boardwalks and expressly noted the potential for an exception via a comprehensive plan amendment,which necessitated this ESEE analysis. The sensitive lands within Dirksen Nature Park will be protected and/or enhanced as described and approved in the land use approval for the park,which also took into consideration the various requirements related to Clean Water Services, Oregon Department of State Lands and the US. Corps of Engineers. Figure 1 shows the location and approximate size of local significant wetlands and creeks within Dirksen Nature Park. The wetlands are identified with the unit and identification number from the 1994 Local Wetlands Inventory.. Figure 1:Mapped Significant Wetlands near Dirksen Nature Park birksen Nature Park - .. CF1/:4/7" Local Significant Wetlands //_/. /,' Tigard Local Wetland / inventory /' T IIffASignifican1 'ff�.//`r �P ]IJ\on-Significant %J/I�ia ;r/ ! C Jurisdictional 3` N ,� ��� Unit&Wetland f ,�, / 0numbering relate to the inventory assessments conducted by Fishman / a km* Environmental Services ' nvers al► tt . Its {1994) Nagai • . y va•••NV 1.:'4N+n,.'1..'4 4 "1 il 14 4.6 y� TFtt! 1 C a0 00 ]' •rP( •94:;ala a .-.yrreeo- ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 5 of 24 Figure 2 provides summary data from the Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory- of the quality (functions) and size of both relevant wetlands (totaling 19.37 acres) inventoried by FES. Figure 2:Summary Data from the Tigard Local Wetland Inventory for the Affected Wetlands Unit Wetland Acres Wildlife fish Linkage Unique WQ Hydro Rec Ed Aesth 3 B-5 8.0 H M H L M H L L M 4 B-17 11.37 H L H H L M M L H H=High Wildlife=Wildlife Habitat Hydro=Hydrologic Control M=Medium Fish=Fish Habitat Rec=Recreation L=Low Linkage=Linkage Ed=Education Unique=Uniqueness Aesth=Aesthetic Quality Upon review of the wetland data sheets from the Local Wetlands Inventory, the following was noted about these wetlands: ■ Wetland B-5: o Plant species identified included a mixture of invasive reed-canary grass,native spiraea, Oregon ash, and native willows. o Wetland classification of feature identified palustrine emergent,palustrine forest,and riverine habitat types. o Soil identified as Cove silty clay loam. ■ Wetland B-17: o Plant species dominating the feature included Oregon ash and slough sedge. Plant community dominated by natives. o Wetland classification identified palustrine forest and riverine habitats. o Yard debris dumping by area residents noted along impromptu trail. o Soil identified as Cove silty clay loam. As a component of the site development application for Dixksen Nature Park, a wetlands inventory and natural resources assessment were completed in 2013. The map shown in Figure 3 illustrates the "sensitive areas"identified within the Park, which consist of mixture of wetlands and their associated vegetative corridor. Due to the nature of the site specific wetland assessment, the naming convention used for Dirksen Nature Park is different than that of the Tigard Local Wetlands Inventory. In comparing the older data from LWI to the newer and more detailed wetland study from 2013, the B-17 (LWI) wetland is referenced as Wetland 1,and B-5 wetland is referenced as Wetland 4. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 6 of 24 Figure 3: Delineated Wet'ands and Sensitive Areas within Dirksen Nature Park I , , : P . . • . .. ......-• >. 4.• 4,e 4. 1 1.. . z, ; -:,.; A. ‘'s -, • ;r . . r• ...g , t‘ t I r t 't' • i ,' ,, V_ $ k k '' I 4 % _ A r , I. .{ p ,L, :-. t-.- :, X l' c ,r 4 •qe-Z— .,_ . •- :!. fr . . „.. :1 P 9.: f. , L ,.... t I lirsi. ... 1 __ ....... NH i 1 s A. g il ti , 11 1 .14 i I 4 ILL_ i f__-1 E• . ill ' IL- i --- — — t '1_ 1 - - - ---__ ' 1 , \ -*NN\- \7 \N __.liuN'N_,.,tis i • 4, 1 • li, F, g 0%. .• ,---- - I i 1 •S --., 1 r: 1g _ 4,....,.. t - J. ."-.`• 'ii! ' ' F.I. ,..„ ...- _.,, ---- \ • - If 14,:. u • \\ilk - 4 F k in ,... i g 12 1 1 < r, . •o.f t.,t .. ,.. , s.3.2 ___ r I :. - 1 1 il 4 ... I : 4 . 1 t i 1.117 I , i . 4.‘• ... i i 04 i 1 I 1 1 , 1111111111 vs — Iciv. 3•W I . I ...,, s. _. , I . 1 ., W.'.•., 1 i ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 7 of 24 - -- • - -- - - : _ ___ _ As described in the Natural Resources Assessment for Dirksen Nature Park, the following are descriptions of the two wetlands where the planned boardwalks are proposed. Wetland 1 (7.27 acres within study area) is an extensive "Slope"wetland that runs south of SW Tigard Street and extends across to the western boundary of the site. The northern portion is mostly an open slope with shrubs and saplings. The remainder is an extensive forested wetland in a level to gently sloping basin with a relatively undisturbed native plant community. Forested wetland vegetation consists of Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia),Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), Douglas spitaea (Spiraea douglasii), peafruited rose (Rosa pisocarpa), red osier dogwood (Cornus sericea),slough sedge (Carex obnupta), short scale sedge (Carex leptopoda), common camas (Camassia quamash), and corn lily (Veratrum californicum). Areas of standing water are evident,with the water table at or close to the surface through much of the area during the winter and spring months. The open area vegetation consists of various introduced grasses,including meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis) and tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea), and patches of small Oregon ash. Large areas of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procerus) have been mowed. The water table is at or close to the surface during the wet season through most of this area. Wetland 4 (small part, 1.11 acre within the study area) is an extensive wetland in the Fanno Creek floodplain. The southern part of this wetland is forested. Vegetation consists of Oregon ash, pea-fruited rose, Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capitatus),red osier dogwood, and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). Other non-native dominants include English hawthorn and Himalayan blackberry.This forested wetland is well-developed and dense in cover.The northern part is more open with extensive areas of reed canarygrass. Shrub plantings have been established along the western edge of this area,consisting mostly of twinberry (Lonicera involucrata) and red osier dogwood. There are Oregon ash trees along the banks of Fanno Creek near the eastern property line. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 8 of 24 0 rn ' m , rri • * -n crl* z = ' -O. ,. vl _. -- - -- - - __,___., .______ .7:4T25W:a-,R:33911E - -- — , -2,__ ..-....— _._. -. .. K - ,- ! -..._Fte,,...... i __-_.: • ---.1. -_ -44-14.3,ALLSWIT_______ ' --.-..."",:NO * -- •-•,,--r, j Go 1, -a A r .. to I N , ., aratagfilim" 0M110.,_ - ' '.-. . ...- illiblTh...- WIPP 7 - * . 0....`" .....e---f."" • _ . I C233 01 crio M ,- 40 ' WW1*4 7... .3 „. Mit. 2 =0; Ft; ,.• - - - r, D ..0 -*. rkAcr 2 _ ' o_ .. . = 'f c-..” xclusion Aum rr2 ..-, ...). 1 - - * - _ I Wetland OviR000lk 1 , o 4 _ co ce., 1 I I LEGEND co .-I- a i , ET L., - . —.....,—. -as 10-7,7,47;_sei e?•,", ,,,F = - , A, 0_ 1 c.• • i -- ro %WTI-A.101 11 .11 YLLs'747,`(.; CL'Al-r.7.7V co -,1 °.- — ,- ;i- -\ 1 ----- ..- ,- A7f,-, r ,,-...,,--.? I IF,..... st, :,,1 *cir.1-' - : . ..,,- , %Immo 3. . ' „,. 3 I ,. 1...) "--1.CAC'' 11111,Z.4. f -'' ' ' - Nt-j.' -; , \ H . I I ....... Ti•.A r:x P..1140 r%1 *6 t., t, Z - - - I } t bk ...1. 1 _. i !." - --- AC......5?LC. C'Oclirl.::C.0 _ c __ ,.\--...- I .} rlikll C , LI. 1 IT EguiVrYtt T MA sz & PE Pt/Akre.: -0 } I 1.-- - 1 'If I '!- -.1, kt,f.a 7`,4.:(Cs ,_ I - " RECREATON ARFA PPPROX 6 9 AC, 1 \ -int It TRACT 2 _ — L 1 , G .. 's/' . ' 1 .os TLkV ; I - I 1--- - lcIA.H.r-, , . t---------• ;A:,°Pt'''.01,}ry.41 0. AA.!. 1"1 1.. i...., ••••• Nik. 'L rm.. 7... .111114C.-..: • 0 Mr rfW AV r1 ow ''' ,,..., .a.m.. MA A.A.,. ,... . I .... . - • ,_,_ -yr ......o...r u.*-• "' -9"44 :.., f"-N.\.\ — C^ A. - - . ....-..! ‘ lk.' \'''' !4,.. r .,-•-+41.... % ..- 1 r / /!• WilPa-ciff Figure 4(sheet 1.1) wi..... .• PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.ENCROACPMNE NT AND millGATION Drksett NOrte Park.City 0 Tvard,OR I ,tu Cu p rD 1,,, N.1 0 .b., -... ....„ ,......, 1.-.. .i. La Removal Area #1: This wetland area is located in Wetland 1 (as identified on Figure 4, above) and will remove 2,447 square feet from the City's Local Wetland Inventory Map. Removal Area #2: This wetland area is located in Wetland 4 (as identified on Figure 4, above) and will remove 2,807 square feet from the City's Local Wetland Inventory Map. Description of the Conflicting Use An important step in the ESEE analysis is identifying conflicting uses that"exist, or could occur" within regionally significant resource areas and identified in the impact area. The Goal 5 Rule (OAR 660-023-0010) defines conflicting uses as follows: (1) "Conflicting use" is a land use,or other activity reasonably and customarily subject to land use regulations,that could adversely affect a significant Goal 5 resource (except as provided in OAR 660-023-0180(1)(b)). Local governments are not required to regard agricultural practices as conflicting uses. The Goal 5 Administrative Rule (OAR 660-023-0040) describes how conflicting uses are identified: (2) Identify conflicting uses. Local governments shall identify conflicting uses that exist, or could occur,with regard to significant Goal 5 resource sites.To identify these uses, local governments shall examine land uses allowed outright or conditionally within the zones applied to the resource site and in its impact area. Local governments are not required to consider allowed uses that would be unlikely to occur in the impact area because existing permanent uses occupy the site. The following shall also apply in the identification of conflicting uses: (a) If no uses conflict with a significant resource site,acknowledged policies and land use regulations may be considered sufficient to protect the resource site. The determination that there are no conflicting uses must be based on the applicable zoning rather than ownership of the site. (Therefore, public ownership of a site does not by itself support a conclusion that there are no conflicting uses.) (b)A local government may determine that one or more significant Goal 5 resource sites are conflicting uses with another significant resource site. The local government shall determine the level of protection for each significant site using the ESEE process and/or the requirements in OAR 660-023-0090 through 660-023-0230 (see OAR 660-023-0020(1)). As per the project description, only one conflicting use is under consideration - the planned installation of a trail boardwalk in two discrete locations within existing resource areas.The intent is to allow the boardwalks to extend into mapped wetlands and provide overlooks into these unique habitat areas. The installation of off-street, multi-use trails within the Tigard's PR zone is permitted outright; therefore, the intended project is allowed outright within the underlying PR zone. The planned boardwalks are integral components of the multi-use trail at Dirksen Nature Park,and they would be defined as "multi-use trails". ESEE Analysis - - - - - — -- - 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 10 of 24 The PR zone would allow a variety of conflicting uses to occur on the site but because of the focused nature of the proposed development request and the limited amount, and odd shape of land requested to be removed from the inventory, the practical effect of the request is to limit the conflicting uses to just the trail boardwalks.The remainder of the ESEE analysis will focus on the impacts of the removal of wetland areas from the inventory based on the one proposed conflicting use. The primary purpose of trail boardwalks is to further the environmental education opportunities for park users and provide safe, accessible platforms for community groups,birders, students and Tualatin RiverKeepers classes to view and begin to understand and appreciate the nature and importance of these wetland habitats without damaging them and disturbing wildlife. In the area of both of these proposed trail boardwalks,numerous existing rogue trails traverse the sensitive lands as a result of historic, uncontrolled access and have caused ifi sigsu n cant damage to the wetlands. The secondary benefits of the boardwalks are to aim to eliminate rogue, off-trail passage through the wetland resources, to provide managed and controlled access near and into the wetlands and to enable the successful restoration of the wetlands in those areas where past trail walking has occurred and damaged the immediate wetland environment. The proposed boardwalks will help save and protect the wetland resources; they are the single most important component of restoration plans for the wetlands in this urban nature park because without them, people interested in entering the wetlands will continue to lack an alternative to the rogue trails. Figures 5 and 6 show the impact areas for the two planned boardwalks. GI ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 11 of 24 Figure 5:Enlargement of Removal Area 1 tx1Sim nat.10 K.OECxw159anED C).66 • `I I L •781.93 tiFi'rr � \ EP P � t N \: . \ '' 0 '' 5 53 \ \'' s -_ _ `‘Itz .. \ , ''' 2446.92 SF 117111310 - --- -.6"d)dSF. \- u \\\\ - �.\y ` 7Pf itaru7 b'JJNNi)aRY t r r 069 - - ti` _ (1).14 f 1k Y� 5 t, .62 /r S WOE SOF1 SURFAU N.111, BRIDGE 1IEA0ER ' 9d' VtCtIA110 ROOM - • �` ( •16 .22 _ SCALE4 ' Io 0 5 10 • rEc5 1T I Itmoi . 1 70 FT. I *PE !l." 016975-04105.016 '02/00/15 //''�� ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 12 of 24 Figure 6:Enlargement of Removal Area 2 I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 Ilk- \ 1 r 1 4n Sy // /7 - 1 ...11 i / / ' ' .it." 10 ii / / / _ % \ Ilk . :14,...!, .. .0 !--\ - i i i 0 � \ I \ \ N \ \ \ o \ Il, \ IL \ `\ t, \ V +r\ `r- ofi - ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 13 of 24 Figure 7 summarizes relevant acreage information about the park,its wetlands and the potential impact areas associated with the two planned boardwalks. Figure 7:Resource and Impact Area Summary Site Area(Dirksen Nature Park) 48.04 ac. On-Site Sensitive Lands Area 29.5' ac. Specific Resource Area(footprint of both boardwalks) 0.033 ac. Specific Impact Area Acreage(10"temporary 0.088 ac. construction buffer around boardwalks) Combined Resource and Impact Area 0.1.2 ac. Number of Parcels Affected 2 'estimated based on combination of mapped wetlands/vegetative corridors and Lwi data As noted in the table above, the proposed removal of 0.12 acres from the Local Wetlands Inventory represents 0.4% of the overall sensitive lands on site and 0.02%of the total park acreage. The requested removal of the 0.12 acres of wetland area enable the installation of two elevated boardwalks will provide a single access entry into each wetland with high quality views,will enhance the experience of the wetland, and will have far less impact to the resource than the uncontrolled use that exists today. Site Specific ESEE Analysis This section details the three alternatives and discusses the Economic, Social,Environmental and Energy (ESEE) impacts to the relevant portions of two wetlands located within Dirksen Nature Park, addressing the following: • Prohibit conflicting uses providing full protection of the resource site; • Limit conflicting uses offering limited protection of the resource site (balance development and conservation objectives); • Allow conflicting uses fully with no local protection for the resource site. The action to 'limit conflicting uses'within this context of this ESEE Analysis is defined as allowing only the limited intrusion of the boardwalks as proposed into the wetland and minimizing impacts to the extent practicable through strict construction management. The action to 'allow conflicting uses' in this case is to allow the development of the full range of permissible uses noted in the underlying Parks and Recreation (PR) zone, which includes such amenities as playgrounds,picnic areas, shelters, structures, sport courts and fields and other related items. Economic Consequences The following describes the economic consequences for each of the three protection scenarios. Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection The economic consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses would be mixed,because the acreage occupied by wetlands could not be used to promote and support on-site environmental ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 14 of 24 111 education activities and programming that either have a direct local economic benefit or provide an offset to on-going operating expenses incurred by the City. Prohibiting the conflicting use would avoid a modest capital construction expenditure by the City of Tigard for the costs of the boardwalks,but City maintenance crews will incur on-going operating expenses related to monitoring unwanted activity and hiking in the wetlands,installing trail blockages to attempt to minimize through-passage along the existing rogue wetland trails, and on-going replacement costs for wetland restoration and vegetation management. There may be a reduction in short term construction jobs necessary to complete the development of the park and planned boardwalks. Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) Limiting the conflicting use to the two trail boardwalks and relying on the State's fill and removal permit and Corps of Engineers 404/401 regulatory processes would,generally, have positive consequences. DSL and Corps regulations set enhancement and mitigation thresholds based on documented impacts and allow some flexibility to allow conflicting urban uses where no reasonable alternative exists. Additionally, the City of Tigard spent$3.3 million on the acquisition of Dirksen Nature Park. Planning for the initial phase of park development is underway, and according to the adopted park master plan, the cost estimate for full development of the park was in the range of$2 to $2.3 million. Passive uses, such as walking and wildlife observation, are important aspects to the park. Additionally, the site is intended to serve as an outdoor classroom and a center for environmental education and experiential learning. The proposed boardwalks are an integral element of the environmental education and interpretive program for the park, since these boardwalks will allow visitors to experience two different and unique wetland ecosystems in the park in a safe, environmentally sound and ecologically sensitive manner. The US Fish and Wildlife Service published a report in 2013 called Banking on Nature: The Economic Benefits to Local Communities ofNational Wildlife Refuge Visitation This report detailed the economics related to refuge (park) visitation. The Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge was one of the case study examples in the report. It is worth noting that the Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge is not only very close to the City of Tigard, but the Refuge offers a similar experience to those planned at Dirksen Nature Park. In calculating economic benefits, the USFWS grouped visitation into two categories: consumptive and non- consumptive. Consumptive includes those activities that utilize the site's resources, such as fishing and hunting. Non-consumptive uses include passive activities,such as cycling, walking/hiking, photography and interpretation. Based on the report, the Tualatin River Refuge had over 100,000 visits in 2011, and all visits were for non-consumptive activities. A figure for economic value was estimated by multiplying net economic values for hunting, fishing, and non- consumptive recreation use (on a per-day basis) by estimated refuge visitor days for that activity, which was then divided by the refuge budget for 2011.The report estimated that the total economic effects of the Tualatin River Refuge was $3.87 for every $1 of budget expenditures. Applying this value to the planned development expenditures for Dirksen Nature Park results in a potential economic benefit of the park as between $7.7 and $8.9 million. While it is not reasonable to assign 100% of that potential economic benefit to the installation of the two proposed boardwalks,it is reasonable to assume that a dear,positive economic benefit exists for installing the boardwalks to not only enhance safe access into the wetland areas for wildlife I _ ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 15 of 24 observation,photography and environmental interpretation,but also as a means to further improve and enhance the quality of those unique wetlands by controlling visitor access. The Washington County Visitors Association (WCVA) is the primary destination marketing organization for Washington County and markets the destination,its attractions and activities to leisure and business travelers around the globe and locally via several media channels. The Tourism 2015 Strategic Plan,prepared by the WCVA,is the organization's guiding document and sets the focus on high-yield,niche markets to expand recreational and leisure opportunities for visitors and residents. The Tourism 2015 Plan identified the key tourism attractors for Washington County and identified outdoor recreationalists, nature enthusiasts and birders (among others) as niche market segments. According to the Plan, "nature-based experiences are at the core of the Oregon tourism experience. While the county does not have the coastline, mountains, and raging rivers of other areas of Oregon,it does have forests,wetlands and meandering rivers that support diverse flora and fauna and opportunities for visitors to discover and learn in comfort.A distinguishing aspect of these natural features is their proximity to Portland and major population centers. Nature-based attractions throughout Washington County include Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge, among others." The focus of the WCVA toward the promotion of nature-based experiences reinforces the relative importance of providing and enhancing these opportunities for local residents and visitors.The development of Dirksen Nature Park will provide opportunities for increased tourism and visitation. The environmental education and experiences at the park will be enhanced by the installation of the proposed boardwalks. Negative economic consequences include the possible necessity to construct expensive stormwater infrastructure to manage increased runoff with decreased natural control mechanisms. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local protection) The economic consequences of allowing conflicting uses are mostly negative.Allowing most of the permissible uses from the underlying PR zone would not only further deteriorate the wetland resources, but the relative costs would be high for capital construction, on-going management and related and required mitigation and enhancement. The only likely benefit of allowing the conflicting use is a short-term boost for construction, but this would not be in balance with or exceed the costs of the infrastructure and required mitigation. Social Consequences The following describes the social consequences (education, recreation,aesthetics,etc.) for each of the three protection scenarios. Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection) The social consequences of prohibiting the conflicting uses are mixed. Prohibiting the conflicting use would not substantially protect the resources from the existing unregulated uses occurring within each wetland area. Additionally,prohibiting the conflicting use would indirectly result in the development of only permitted upland trails at Dirksen Nature Park,without controlled access to Wetlands 1 and 4 and without specific environmental education opportunities at the wetlands. Pedestrian access and use would be concentrated in upland habitats with associated affects to local flora and fauna. People with mobility challenges would ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 16 of 24 be effectively prohibited from enjoying any activities in the wetlands. The wetlands would not be (formally) accessible for educational purposes;however,without the controlled access that the boardwalks provide, people may continue to pass through the wetlands on rogue trails to experience these environments,while continuing to degrade the wetland habitat. Opportunities for passive recreation (e.g.,bird watching, environmental learning)would be diminished; however,the social benefits afforded from living near intact wetlands and open space would remain. Limit C nflicting Uses (limited protection) The social consequences of limiting the conflicting uses in Wetlands I and 4 to the boardwalks and associated wetland enhancement are generally positive. The grant funding received by the City requires on-site environmental education to occur. Also, the conservation easement with Metro allows environmental education,interpretive opportunities and the development of trails - consistent with the planned boardwalks. Limiting the conflicting uses to the installation of the planned boardwalks will not negatively impact the wetlands, since their construction will include low-impact helical screw piers and metal grate decking that allows light,air and water movement through the boardwalk to the wetlands.Limiting the conflicting uses will provide significant social benefits in the form of direct exposure to the wetlands for outdoor education, environmental interpretation and passive recreation, including for people with limited mobility.The provision of the boardwalks will reinforce appropriate trail usage and help control against unwanted and undesired off-trail passage into or through the wetland habitats. Dirksen Nature Park, as a whole,will continue to provide visual relief from the surrounding urban environment, and the conflicting uses are sheltered from view from the park edge and will be visually unobtrusive. Wetland function will remain intact and provide opportunities for urban quiet and solitude. Urban aesthetics and connection to nature are not eliminated by allowing the identified conflicting uses,and the planned, controlled access via the boardwalks to the wetlands and their proximity to a relatively large population would establish new connections for people to the outdoors. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local protection) The social consequences of allowing the conflicting uses are generally mixed. The development of additional park amenities or gathering places for recreation,park visitors and family usage may benefit park users and wider the range of recreation opportunities in the park. However, the development of non-resource oriented amenities may not fit within the context of the site as a nature park or within the immediate context of the wetland resources, and the City offers other areas on dry land more suitable for active recreation. While social benefits may exist for the installation of different amenities on-site, they may be out of place with the character of the park and reduce recreational and social opportunities for other park users who are interested in enjoying the passive,natural resources of the site. Environmental Consequences The following describes the consequences to water quality,hydrologic control,wildlife and fish habitat (as well as other relevant factors) for each of the three protection scenarios. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 17 of 24 Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection) The environmental consequences of prohibiting the conflicting uses are mixed. If the conflicting uses are prohibited, then the wetlands would remain in their current condition.The City of Tigard Development Code aims to protect significant lands by allowing no impact to them. This restriction, taken in the context of the Dirksen Nature Park where public access and use is encouraged, actually causes greater impact to the resources. In their current state, the wetlands are impacted by human use in the form of rogue (demand) trails, periodic homeless camping activity and uncontrolled passage through these lands. The prohibition of the conflicting uses will still allow for specific restoration activities, but these efforts would be diminished or limited by continued uncontrolled access and the inability to fully pursue an on-site education program regarding the health and benefits of urban wetlands. The wetlands provide functions and values, but these are degraded due to past disturbances to the site. Habitat quality for fish species is limited within each wetland area based on limited availability and limited canopy coverage. Wildlife habitat value within each wetland is high with varied structures and habitat complexity. Wetlands 1 and 4 provide runoff and flood storage control and trap sediment and nutrients. These wetlands help to protect life and property during floods by storing and absorbing water, a necessity exemplified by significant storms in recent years. Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection.1 The environmental consequences of limiting the conflicting use to the trail boardwalks are positive. The conflicting use is specific to the wetland resources (Wetland 1 and 4) at Dirksen Nature Park, and installing short these boardwalks can occur nowhere else on the site, other than in the wetland areas. Currently,Wetlands 1 and 4 are criss-crossed with rogue trails and heavily impacted by human use resulting from the lack of direction offered to the public. Limiting the conflicting use to the boardwalks ultimately will lead to greater resource enhancement and protection of sensitive lands. The boardwalks that would be placed in the removed wetland areas will enable focused and controlled public access,versus unrestricted and unsustainable access without the boardwalks (rogue trails). As the City's future community park and outdoor education resource, efforts to restore and protect the wetlands at Dirksen Nature Park will require carefully planned boardwalk overlooks that allow, but control, access to the wetlands.The proposed boardwalks will help save and protect the wetland resources.They are the single most important component of restoration plans for the wetlands in this urban nature park.These short elevated walkways will provide a single access entry to each wetland, with high quality views,will enhance the experience of the wetland, and will have far less impact to the resource than the uncontrolled use that exists today. Additionally, as elevated boardwalks, these trail routes minimize soil disturbance as compared to a surface trail. Installing controlled access and environmental experiences with boardwalks in both locations will allow park users to experience and understand the special qualities of both of the significant wetlands without damaging them and disturbing wildlife. Dirksen Nature Park is a unique site within the City of Tigard inasmuch as it contains 7 habitat zones within the 48-acre park. These habitat zones and their associated wetlands are the primary reason the park is home to the Tualatin RiverKeepers' summer camps and experience-based environmental learning programs.Low impact design and unobtrusive construction techniques BEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 18 of 24 for the planned boardwalks will be employed,such that the installation is environmentally- sensitive.The design and installation of the boardwalks will be completed without any excavation. The boardwalk piers are to be set with screw anchors. The boardwalk decking also is designed to be sensitive to the wetland resource. The decking will be metal grating,which has two significant benefits. 1) The grating is not opaque;it allows air,light and water to pass through the boardwalk in support of the ecology of the wetland. Wetland plants can live underneath,and animal species can pass without obstruction. 2) As opposed to traditional wood decking, the metal grating is non-slip and will not allow the formation of the surface moss and algae that wood decking enables, thus creating a safer platform for park users and wildlife observers. Tigard's Development Code allows the restoration of significant wetlands, and the proposed boardwalks are part of the restoration strategy for the wetland resources,which will limit and control human access to the wetlands and reinforce efforts to re-vegetate and restore the functions and qualities of the wetlands. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local.rotection) The environmental consequences of allowing many of the permissible conflicting uses of the underlying PR zone are negative. Wetlands 1 and 4 fall under the jurisdiction of DSL and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers administrative rules,which regulate the removal and fill of wetlands. The development of park amenities, such as playgrounds, shelters or structures,will trigger DSL and Corps review and mitigation due to the likely ground disturbing activities. Such impacts to the existing wetland resources may be severe. Depending upon the success of implementation of required mitigation strategies, mitigation and/or enhancement to compensate for the development disturbance would likely occur in a different and potentially unconnected area of the site,which may further diminish the quality and character of the remaining wetland resources. Energy Consequences The following describes the energy consequences (transportation connectivity, efficient urban development, etc.) for each of the three protection scenarios. Prohibit Conflicting Uses (full protection) The energy consequences of prohibiting both conflicting uses would be mixed but slightly negative. The installation of the boardwalks will not necessitate the removal of trees, so no impact on natural shading or cooling are anticipated. This option,however,limits trail connectivity to the unique habitat zones within the park,which will have energy-related effects. Tigard residents will drive farther to experience similar natural environments (e.g.,Jackson Bottom Wetlands Preserve,Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge). Students will need to be bussed to more distant parks for environmental education. Tualatin RiverKeepers will not be able to take full advantage of the environmental education values of the park without direct access to the wetland habitat and will drive to other sites for such experiences.These create inefficiencies in energy usage, as well as indirect energy expenditures related to lost or inefficient environmental educator staff time and student learning time. ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 19 of 24 Limit Conflicting Uses (limited protection) The energy consequences of limiting the conflicting use to the trail boardwalks generally would be positive. The installation of the boardwalks will not necessitate the removal of trees, so no impact on natural shading or cooling are anticipated.The shading and cooling potential Wetlands 1 and 4 have will be preserved.The provision of the boardwalks and associated environmental/interpretive displays will enable enhanced on-site outdoor education and environmental learning. This,in turn, will accommodate access and usage by residents, students and Tualatin RiverKeepers classes for local environmental education without the need to drive to distant or remote parks and natural areas with similar habitat features. Allow Conflicting Uses (no local protection) The energy consequences of allowing the conflicting uses and relying on state and federal regulations are generally negative. Since the proposed impact areas are wetlands and development will trigger mitigation, more energy will be used for the construction and required mitigation efforts related to the installation of recreational amenities, such as playgrounds, shelters and structures. If unregulated, the potential development of conflicting uses may result in an inefficient use of available parkland, especially if the conflicting uses are not wetland- dependent amenities. Conclusions/Recommendation The wetland resources of Dirksen Nature Park are valuable to the City from an economic, social and environmental perspective, and the opportunity to expand environmental education and outdoor learning is significant. Past grants awarded to the City for the development of Dirksen Nature Park support the creation of an environmentally-sensitive urban park and natural area with trails and access to the site's varied habitat zones. The following summarizes the anticipated impacts of the three alternatives related to the conflicting use,and the table in Appendix A provides scores for each of the ESEE criteria. Prohibiting the conflicting use would avoid a modest capital construction expenditure by the City of Tigard for the costs of the boardwalks or other amenities, but City maintenance crews will incur on-going operating expenses related to monitoring unwanted activity and hiking in the wetlands,installing trail blockages to attempt to minimize through-passage along the existing rogue wetland trails, and on-going replacement costs for wetland restoration and vegetation management.Tualatin RiverKeepers will not be able to take full advantage of the environmental education values of the park without direct access to the wetland habitat and will drive to other sites for such experiences. In their current state, the wetlands are adversely impacted by human use in the form of rogue (demand) trails,periodic homeless camping activity and uncontrolled passage through these lands. The prohibition of the conflicting uses will still allow for specific restoration activities, but these efforts would be diminished or limited by continued uncontrolled access and the inability to fully pursue an on-site education program regarding the health and benefits of urban wetlands. Limiting the conflicting uses to the two trail boardwalks will positively impact the wetlands, since the planned construction of the trail boardwalks will include low-impact helical screw piers ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 20 of 24 and metal decking/grating to accommodate light,air and water movement through the boardwalk to the wetlands,which is a substantial improvement over existing surface trails. Limiting the conflicting uses will provide significant social benefits in the form of direct exposure to the wetlands for outdoor education, environmental interpretation and passive recreation, especially for persons with limited mobility.The provision of the boardwalks will reinforce appropriate trail usage and help control against unwanted and undesired off-trail passage into or through the wetland habitats. Dirksen Nature Park, as a whole,will continue to provide visual relief from the surrounding urban environment, and the conflicting uses are sheltered from view from the park edge and will be visually unobtrusive.Wetland function will remain intact and provide opportunities for urban quiet and solitude. Allowing most of the permissible uses from the underlying PR zone would not only further deteriorate the wetland resources,but the relative costs would be high for capital construction, on-going management and related and required mitigation and enhancement. Since the proposed impact areas are wetlands and development will trigger mitigation,more energy will be used for the construction and required mitigation efforts related to the installation of recreational amenities, such as playgrounds, shelters and structures. Additionally, the development of non- resource oriented amenities may not fit within the context of the site as a nature park or within the immediate context of the wetland resources. Decision The analysis concludes that limiting the conflicting use to the proposed boardwalks would result in the most positive consequences of the three decision options. A decision to limit the conflicting use will avoid many of the negative consequences attributed to either allowing or prohibiting the conflicting uses.Through the application of site design and development standards to conflicting uses, the impacts on the significant wetland further can be minimized, and the remaining resource can be enhanced. There will be a relatively high level of economic, social,environmental and energy benefits achieved. Limiting the conflicting uses offers the most benefit to the wetland (through controlled access and enhancement) and to the community (access for all and education opportunities), and it strikes a balance between conflicting uses and planning goals for the services provided in this public park.The recommendation is to limit conflicting use (i.e. the removal of two areas from the City's Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map in order to accommodate the future development of two boardwalks within the significant wetland). ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 21 of 24 Appendices I Figures ESEE Analysis 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 22 of 24 Appendix A: Site-specific ESEE Scoring Sheet Criteria Scores on a Scale of 1 to 5 1 =very negative impact, Scoring Criteria 3 = no/balanced impact. 5=very positive impact SITE:Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Prohibit Limit Allow Conflicting Conflicting Conflicting Uses Uses Uses Economic Efficient urban development 3 _ I 3 3 Cost of installation/maintenance of public infrastructure 3 5 1 (roads, stormwater, utilities) Development potential for property owners 3 3 3 —� Amount of employment land 3 3 3 Amount of residential land 3 — 3 3 —� Housing development costs 3 3 3 Employment development costs _ 3 3 3 - — Economic Subtotal 21 23 19 Social - — -- -- —_ --- Aesthetic Value 5 L- 5 -- 1 Recreational Value 3 5 3 Contribution to local quality of life 3 5 — 3 i Housing Costs 3 3 3 Social Equality 1 r 5 3 — - - --_ _ Social Subtotal 15 23, 13 _ Environmental 1 Water quality: Filtration and removal of pollutants 3 3 3 Hydrologic control:Water collection and storage 3 3 3 Wildlife habitat _—� --- 1 - 5 3 3 - Fish Habitat 3 3— — __- -- _�3 Environmentally-sensitive design 3 5 � 1 Environmental Subtotal , 17 17 13 Energy ---- - — - Transportation Connectivity __ 1 5 3 — Efficient Urban development _ 3 3 3 ~ Shading and cooling 3 E 3 1 -— --—— Energy Subtotal 7 11 7 Average Overall Rating 60 74 52 ESEE Analysis _ - 02/24/15 Dirksen Nature Park Wetland Boardwalks Page 23 of 24 Ei. - - , TRAIL'F 1 -- -- - --, - .vrTZATRD-SrAtiT ---- ,4-L----=----------a-----....=-:zz.,..._.. - 7.1.0 _. s _ __ _ — _ I 1 r --- k ______, A TRAIL'D' ---"•■, ,•"---- • . ' - \\,',.\\NI i 1,,i .,. ,.,\.,, ,„/\'' TRACT 3 //.. TFtACT 4 , _ _ '''''''}^,4,\%,I1,!• ),E\ l'i'''-4--"`- •--- --_---_-_-___ ,---' ? / .., -, "A*41/011.f:,.--011•06...„..n! '8.....\..; gm! •• •.::.:.:.:..:.::.:.:•:.---......., 4. . .''' ,-a•^` ''%t., t ,,,,, , ...-- 1 ^, V Iiik—V.i!:ii0i!i!!1i!ii! !:='...••'...• ,,,:r7.1 iit , ----- tu I . ---."/ ''' ..,-;"' \VW'\,\:‘:'s4`' \,.. - TRAIL A' WETLAND 2 ETLAND 4 . / . -- - -- -- ' .-- < TRACT 2 77. 1' a Exclusion Area#2 2 1 / 1 . (Wetland Overlook) o 1 / $ I I LEGEND ,-) ...—.-- (--- — ----i .'—'•,—.1 i \ —..... ....- .. TAX LOT/PROPERTY LINE -•-•- STUDY AREA WETLAND 1 L_______ - - Exclusion Area #1 _7lf----f Fnrested Wetland — - -- , -Th.---1- - — .' - i x7 1 WETLAND 3 I ---- r 1 ' q , I ' ,- VEGETATED CORRIDOR (GOOD CONDITION) \\\\\\\h,,,l VEGETATED CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT PLANTING (39,294 / Overlook) ***--4 ! .11 0 ( 1 , , r' Faxiage MITIGATION PLANTING (8.033 sf) • } ..-- — I / ---- Ili ' .. .. VEGETATED CORRIDOR NIIIIIIirr-:ow' .441 ONVX*Xvi*N (PERMANENT TRAIL & PERMANENT _ I TRAIL'C' ---- - 1 , GRADING ENCROACHMENT = 8,033 r f- 1 .1 I . — ' ^ ,// VEGETATED CORRIDOR i ) RECREATION AREA / Il (APPROX 6.9 i AC) 1 1 // (DEGRADED CONDITION) I I . TRAIL'B' TRACT 2 _ )P, , ! WETLAND L _igpl . STREAM 1 (TO ORDINARY HIGH WATER LINE) , L-- TRAIL E'Th.. --- -- Nik.N. <= DIRECTION OF FLOW , . ______ . inii \ ______..,,:r-tr•----------;:::-- ---,_‘',:,:11 .... \ ---11/4 - - • ...-^" TOTAL ENHANCEMENT AREA 39. ...., ...., TOTAL MITIGATION AREA - I .... \s„..._./ \ • • SUMMER CREEK TOTAL PLANTING AREA 47 I /. . IP alifiC Figure 4 (sheet 1.1) 4 150 D 1W PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, ENCROACHMENT AND MITIGATION N ( FEET ) 97225 , Fax KG 528-0T75 Dirksen Nature Park, City of Tigard,OR I 1 INCH - 15C c.„,, ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS r6 TIGARD City of Tigard March 24, 2015 Jeff Peck City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, Or 97223 RE: Completeness Review for Dirksen Nature Park Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA2015-00002) Dear Mr. Peck: The City received your application submittal dated February 24, 2015 for the above cited permit for the proposed removal of .12 acres of wetlands in and around the area of two planned trail boardwalks from the Local Wetland Inventory. The basic submittal elements were included in your application packet. To complete your application, please submit the following items: Application Copies: Please Submit 22 copies of your application and a compact disc including all elements of your proposal. Should you have any questions,please contact me at 503-718-2434. Sincerely, Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard-or.gov ■ TIGARD City of Tigard May 6, 2015 Jeff Peck City of Tigard l! 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, Or 97223 RE: Completeness Review for Dirksen Nature Park Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA2015-00002) Dear Mr. Peck: The City received your supplemental application materials submittal dated March 26, 2015 for the above cited permit for the proposed removal of 0.12 acres of wetlands from the Local Wetland Inventory in and around the area of two planned trail boardwalks. Your application is now complete and will be noticed this week. The Planning Commission hearing is scheduled for July 6, 2015 and the City Council hearing is scheduled for July 28, 2015. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 503-718-2434. Sincerely, 7(73E,, Gary Pagenstecher,AICP Associate Planner F 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard-or.gov igKfeAs -rtn PeePeeProie4 LAND USE APPLICATION ject: CP ,�Gf5 -O 3 Z COMPLETENESS REVIEW I COMPLETE M INCOMPLETE STANDARD INFORMATION: irx ,3y 4aA6 NA --DeedfTitle/Proof of Ownership /4-E- Neighborhood Mtg Affidavits, Minutes, List of Attendees Impact Study(18 390) a j / USA Service Provider Letter /t, Construction Cost Estimate /*Fe-- Envelopes with Postage (Verify Count) 2—_7-- #Sets Of Applica ion Materials/Plans-"Paper Copies" Pre-Application Conference Notes -: #Sets Of Application Materials/Plans-"CD's" PROJECT STATISTICS: itial ❑ Building Footprint Size ❑ %of Landscaping On Site ❑ Lot Square Footage ❑ %of Building Impervious Surface On Site PLANS DIMENSIONED: Building Footprint ❑ Parking Space Dimensions(Include Accessible&Bike Parking)E Truck Loading Space Where Applicable Building Height ❑ Access Approach and Aisle ❑ Visual Clearance Triangle Shown ADDITIONAL PLANS: Vicinity Map E Architectural Plan ❑ Tree inventory Existing Conditions Pland& ❑ Landscape Plan Site Plan E Lighting Plan TREE PLAN I MITIGATION PLAN: 0 01❑ ADDITIONAL REPORTS: (list any special reports) ❑ ❑ 0 Er RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: ❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) ❑ 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) !ir 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review} ❑ 18 340(Director's Interpretation) ❑ 18 705(Access/Egress/Circulation) ❑ 18.780(Signs) ❑ 18.350(Planned Development) ❑ 18 710(Accessory Residential Units) ❑ 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) ❑ 18.360(Site Development Review) ❑ 18.715(Density Computations) ❑ 18.790(Tree Removal) ❑ 18.370(Variances/Adiuslments) ❑ 1 8.720(Design Compatibility Standards) ❑ 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) I 18.380(Zoning Map(TextAmendments) ❑ 18 725(Environmental Performance Standards) ❑ 18 798(Wireless Communication Facilities) 18 390(Decision Making Procedures/impact Study)IF ❑ 18 730(Exceptions To Development Standards) ❑ 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) ❑ 18 740(Hstonc Overlay) 0 18.420(Land Partitions) 0 18 742(Home Occupation Permits) ❑ 18 430(Subdivisions) ❑ 18 745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) 0❑ 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) 0 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 18 5520(CommerciarZoning Districts) 0 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) 18 5 O rrintius a sin D tr;l�,$)z 4, 0 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) 18. 0-(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) 0 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) ADDITIONAL ITEMS: iI curpin\maslerslferrns-revisedlland use aonlicntirrn r'nrnniptpnpcc a .ei.. r „ia,., 4 n.r„�.,�r. .. . __ �, #111. • r i iii III I TIGARD Legislative Process Checklist /. .17 Asp AL61-1, s?4**4 6-PA Z6' - °°° 2- Planning Commission 7.--,,e4_ G — Date Date Due Completed 7- 7-i f Fill out Pre-Application Conference Notes -S-Fill out Land Use Permit Application and create paper file Create case in Accela (relate all cases) 5--6-15 Fill out and submit Proposal Description to Council Thursday Newsletter 57- "('S Schedule Public Hearing with PC secretary Add hearing dates in Accela Fill out and submit Metro Notice. DLCD must receive the notice 45 days in advance of the f first Planning Commission hearing(Metro Code 3.07.820.A)sent to D -6 (5 Paulette.copperstonec oreaonmetro.gov. (Paulette Copperstone; 503-797-1562) Fill out and submit DLCD Notice of Proposed Amendment. DLCD must receive the notice 35 days in advance of the first Planning Commission hearing and it must be sent via email to ;plan.amendinents(t4state.or.us or uploaded to the FTP site at -" Http://www.oregon.gov/LCD/Pages/papa_submittal.aspx Date Sent Submit Public Hearing Ad to print in The Times 10 business days (CDC 18.390.060.D) in 4^-(a . C^ advance of the hearing. The ad runs on Thursdays, this means that the submission needs to be Published: made the Thursday before the ad is supposed to be printed(approximately 25 days prior to the hearing). The times will send an Affidavit of Publication for the record. (Alternatively,a -14/-/5—notice could be placed in the Oregonian if necessary.) F Send out Request for Comments and proposed amendments to affected agencies. Submit in time to allow them 14 days for comments and staff to incorporate comments into a staff J= -i 5�report. Comments due: 5 r 2 t, / c' f Mail Notice of Public Hearing to affected government agencies, interested parties, and _ anyone that requests notice 10 business days (CDC18.390.060.D) in advance of hearing. An 5 -.4.15 Affidavit of Mailing must be submitted for the record. Email Notice of Public Hearing and proposed amendments to webteam to place on website. 5 .6"7'S (To be done same day as task above.) L'2f 1) Submit staff report to supervisor for review two weeks before hearing. Submit staff report and proposed amendments to admin staff at least one week before hearing. Admin staff will send packet to webteam. Staff report shall be available to the public 6----29`-/5"-7 days prior to the hearing. Update Accela with the results of hearing Commission files a recommendation to City Council within 10 business days after the hearing. Place signed Planning Commission minutes in the record City Council - q���y ,2 S Date Date Due Completed Request to schedule council hearing through Agenda Quick If Measure 56 notice is required,send to affected property owner 45 days prior to hearing. Date Sent Submit Public Hearing Ad to print in The Times 10 business days (CDC 18.390.060.D) in ( -17 advance of the hearing. The ad runs on Thursdays,this means that the submission needs to be Published: made the Thursday before the ad is supposed to be printed(approximately 25 days prior to the _ hearing). The times will send an Affidavit of Publication for the record. (Alternatively,a 5 f9`/5 notice could be placed in the Oregonian if necessary.) Mail Notice of Public Hearing to affected government agencies, interested parties, and ^��- anyone that requests notice 10 business days (CDC18.390.060.D) in advance of hearing. An 1 Affidavit of Mailing must be submitted for the record. 7—/1'/ Complete and route AIS in Agenda Quick two weeks prior to the hearing. Submit proposed ordinance to City Attorney Send Notice of Public Hearing and proposed amendments to webteam to update on website. After City Council Public Hearing Date Date Due Completed Sendopies of DLCD Notice of Adoption and signed and certified ordiance(original 1 - copy),proposed amendments, staff report, PC minutes and applicable memos to Council to DLCD within 5 business days by certified mail. Send a copy of the same materials listed above to ODOT Region l and Metro by regular mail k` (per an IGA). D `1 Send Notice of Final Order with signed ordinance and proposed amendments to all parties of record. An affidavit of Mailing must be submitted for the record. Send Notice of Final Order with all relevant materials to webteam to post on website. Update Accela with the results of hearing Place copy of Final Order and signed ordinance in the record LUBA Appeal: 21 days from DLCD Notice of Adoption CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE COMM'UNIT'Y DLVELOP,MI:AT APPLICATIONS FILE NOS: FILE NAME: 20 ( S- - C2 z .lt��. t-c , 4 Mark the block to the kit of the name of each person or organization that needs to be notified. CITY OFFICES CD Administration/Kenny Asher,CD Director CD Administration/Tom McGuire,Asst CD Director City Administration/Carol Krager,City Recorder Development Services/Planning-Engineering Techs. (except annexations) Development Services/Development Eng. Greg Berry(Copy on all Notices of Decision) Building Division/Mark \'anDomelen,Building Official Police Department/Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer(Copy on all Notices of I)ecision) Public Works/Michelle Wright Public Works/Karleen Aichele,Engineer Tech 1 Hearings Officer (2 sets) 1 r Planning Commission(12 sets) City Attorney File/Reference (2 sets) LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS h — T it City of Beaverton,Planning Manager,POB 4755,Beaverton OR 97076* City of Beaverton,Steven Sparks,Dcv Svcs Mgr,FOB 4755,Beaverton OR 97076* City of Durham City Manager, 17160 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd,Durham OR 97224* City of King City City Manager, 15300 SW 116th Ave,King City OR 97224* City of Lake Oswego,Planning Director,PO Box 369,Lake Oswego OR 97034* City of Portland,Planning Bureau Director,1900 SW 4th Ave,Suite 4100,Portland OR 97201 City of Tualatin Planning Manager, 18880 SW Martinazzi Ave,Tualatin OR 97062* Metro -Land Use and Planning,600 NE Grand Ave,Portland OR 97232-2736,Joanna Mensher,Data Resource Center ZCA-Adopted)* \term-Land Use and Planning,600 NE Grand Ave,Portland OR 97232-2736,Paulette Copperstone, (ZCA-RFC Only)* Metro-Land Use and Planning,600 NE Grand Ave,Portland OR 97232-2736,Brian Harper,PhD,(CPA/DCA/ZON)* ODOT,Rail Division,Dave Lanning,Sr. Crossing Safety Specialist,555 13th Street NE,Suite 3,Salem OR 97301-4179 (Notify if ODOT R/R-Hwy Crossing is only access to land).Email:Regionl_DEVREV_Applications@odot.state.or.us ODOT,Region 1 -Development Review Coordinator Carl Torland,Right-of-Way Section, 123 NW Flanders,Portland OR 97209-4037 (Vacations)* Email:Regionl_DEVREV_Applications@odot.state.or.us ODOT Region 1 Development Review Program, 123 NW Flanders St,Portland OR 97209 Email: Regionl_DEVREV_Applications@Jodot.state.or.us OR Dept of Energy,Bonneville Power Administration,Routing TIBC-Attn: Renae Ferrera,POB 3621,Portland OR 97208-3621 (powerlines in area) OR Dept of Aviation,Tom Highland,Planning,3040 25th Street,SE,Salem OR 97310 (monopole towers) OR Dept of Environmental Quality (DEQ),Regional Administrator,2020 SW Fourth Ave,Suite 400,Portland OR 97201- 4987 OR Dept of Fish&Wildlife,Elizabeth Ruther, habitat Biologist,North Willamette'Watershed District, 18330 NW Sauvie Island Road,Portland OR 97231 OR Dept of Geo,&Mineral Ind., Si s i N I Oregon Street,Suite 965, Portland OR 97232 OR Dept of-Land Conservation&Dcv., Mara L'Iloa,633 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150,Salem OR 97301-2540(Comp Plan' Amendments&Measure 37) -You have the option to send electronic copies. See DLCD website for online submittal procedures OR Division of State Lands,Melinda Wood(WLUN Form Required),775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100,Salem OR 97301- 1279 Documents should be entailed/do not send hard copies 11CURPLN!MASTERS/REO FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST(UPDATED 03130115) Page 1 of 2 CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS OR Parks and Rec Dept State Historic Preservation Office, 725 Sumner St NE,Suite C,Salem OR 97301 (Notify if property has HD overlay) OR Public Utilities Commission,PO Box 1088,Salem OR 97308-1088 US Army Corps of Engineers,Kathryn Harris,Routing CEN\\'P-OP-G,POB 2946,Portland OR 97208-2946 (Maps and CWS letter only) Washington County Consolidated Communications Agency(WCCCA) "911",Dave Austin,POB 6375,Beaverton OR 97007-0375 (monopole towers) Washington County,Dept of Land Use&Trans,Naomi Vogel-Beattie, 1400 SW Walnut St MS 51 Hillsboro OR 97123- 5625 (general fps)" Washington County,Dept of Land Use&Trans,Brent Curtis,155 N First Ave,Suite 350,MS 13, Hillsboro OR 97124 (CPA)* Washington County,Assessment&Taxation, 155 N First Ave,Suite 350,MS 9,Hillsboro OR 97124(ZCA)* Washington County,Dept of Land Use&Trans,Dona Mateja,Cartography, 155 N First Ave,Suite 350,MS 14,Hillsboro OR 97124(ZCA)` - UTILITY PROVIDERS,SPECIAL DISTRICTS &AGENCIES Beaverton School District#48, Jennifer Garland,Demographics, 16550 S1\' \lerlo Rd,Beaverton OR 97006-5152 Century Link,Right-of-Way Department,Qwest Corporation dba Century Link QC, 1208 NE 64th St,4th Floor,Seattle WA 981.15 Century Link,Attn: John Pfeifer, 1600 7th Ave,4th Floor,Seattle,\VA 98191-0000(proposed and approved Annexation notices) _ Century Link,Karen Stewart,Local Government Affairs.Director,310 SW Park Ave, Portland OR 97205(proposed and approved Annexation notices) - Clean Water Services,Development Services Department,David Schweitzer/S\VM Program,2550 SW Hillsboro Hwy, Hillsboro OR 97123* Comcast Cable Corp., Gerald Backhaus, 14200 SW Brigadoon Court,Beaverton OR 97005(See map for area contact) Metro Area Communications Commission(\LSCC),Fred Christ, 15201 NW Greenbrier Parkway,C-1,Beaverton OR 9,006-4886 (annexations only) NW Natural Gas Company,Brian Kelley,Engineering Coord.,220 NW Second Ave,Portland OR 97209-3991 NW Natural Gas Company, Account Services,.V1TN: Annexation Coordinator 220 NW Second Ave,Portland OR 97209 3991 (-Annexations only) Portland General Electric,Lorraine Katz,2213 SW 153rd Drive,Beaverton OR 97006 Portland General Electric,Tod L. Shattuck,2213 SW 153rd Drive,Beaverton OR 97006 Portland Western R/R,Burlington Northern/Sante Fe R/R,Oregon Electric R/R,(Burlington,Northern/Sante Fe R/R predecessor),Bruce Carswell, President and GM,200 Hawthorne Ave SE,Suite C320,Salem OR 97301-5294 Union Pacific Railroad,Director of Public Affairs,301 NE 2nd Ave,Portland OR 97232(currently the PA Dir is Bruck Nelson,503-249-3079) Tigard/Tualatin School District#23J,Teri Brady,Administrative Offices,6960 SW Sandburg St,Tigard OR 97223-8039 Tigard Water District,POB 230281,Tigard OR 97281-0281 Tualatin I tills Parks and Rec District, Planning Mgr, 15707 SW Walker Rd,Beaverton OR 97006' • Tualatin Valley Fire& Rescue,John Wolff,DeputyFire Marshall, 11945 SW 70th Ave,Tigard OR 97223-916' Tualatin Valley Water District,Administrative Office, 1850 SW 170th Ave,Beaverton OR 97006* Tri-Met Transit Development,Ben Baldwin,Project Planner, 1800 SW 1st Ave#300,Portland,OR 97201 (If project is within 1/4 mile of a transit route) Verizon,John Cousineau,OSP Network,4155 SW Cedar Hills Blvd,Beaverton OR 97005 *Indicates automatic notification in compliance with intergovernmental agreement if within 500' of the subject property for any/all city projects (Project Planner is Responsible for Indicating Parties to Notify) `Phis document is password protected. Please see Joe or Doreen if you need updates to it.Thank you. - 11CURPLNIMASTERS'REO FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST(UPDATED 03130.'15) Page 2 of 2