The URL can be used to link to this page

Hearings Officer Packet - 06/12/2000CITY OF TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER CITY OF TIGARD Community Development JUNE 12, 2000 - 7:00 PM ShiTingA Better Community AG E N DA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC HEARING 2.1 On Apri128, 2000, the Director issued a decision to approve, subject to conditions, a request for shopping center renovation including the demolition of an existing building (th' Ameritone paint store), reconfiguration of the existing parking lot and south access, front and rear additions to the grocery store building, and enhancements to the front of the shopping center stores. On May 12, 2000, the applicant filed an appeal of certain conditions of approval contained in the decision. The specific conditions appealed and items to which they are related are summarized as follows: Condition #3 and #8 .........................................................................................................................South access Condition #10 and #33 ....................................................................................................................Crossover easement Condition #I I Noise study LOCATION: 13400-13580 SW Pacific Highway; WCTM 2SIO2CC, Tax lots 100, 200, 500, 800, 801, 900 and 901. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, pIrkingg, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and Ilght equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW [RITERIA BEING APPEALED: 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765 and 18.810. (Continued from 512212000) 2.2 APPEAL OF PACIFIC CRE SUBDIVISION SUB 199 LOT LINE AD USTME T Ml 1999-1 SENSITIVE LA DS REVIE ( LR) 19S On APPril 18, 2000, the Director issued May 2, 2000, an appeal was filed statin information to allow a com lete w. Future Re-division, I8.7 99 16, 00011 & a deci ' pQ bj ct v o 'ti ts, a request for an 80-lot subdivision. On th ci ' w ss i rrectly because the applicant has not provided sufficient T e ti c 'ss s cit a appeal as being inadequately addressed are: 18.430.020- 4 S ti s _Site Disturbances and appropriate sitingg, 18.790.030(8)-Tree ee .030.M-Grades and Curves-Grades in Excess of I5%, 18.810.100. -Storm . 10.020.A-Traffic Impacts, Storm Water Management Requirement, Erosion Control nlty Plan-Tree Issues, and Bull Mountain Community Plan-Natural Resources Plan. W7 subject parcels are identified as WCTM 2S105DD, Tax Lots 100, 201, 1900, 2000 and 2100; and WCTM 2SI05DA, Tax Lots 400 and 500. The property is located west of the terminus of SW Mistletoe Drive and is directly adjacent (west) of the 100-foot Bonneville Power Administration right-of-way easement. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATION: Medium Density Residential, 7 Units Per Acre; R-7. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED: Community Development Code Chapters 18.430, 18.775, 18.790, 18.810 and the Bull Mountain Community Plan. 3. OTHER BUSINESS 4. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER 611212000 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA PAGE 2 of 2 ,ad • s COMMUNITY NEVUSPAPERS9 INC. P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-4360 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice AdvevtWng OCity of Tigard 13125 SVT Hall Blvd. °Tigard,Oregon 97223 *Accounts Payable o l ❑ Tearsheet Notice ❑ Duplicate Affidavit Legid Motice TT 9 6 5 2 E~'io4tc AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, ) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss' 1,_1CathV -gnVr1ar being first duly suborn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of the T_] ga rr3 --Tu a ]at i n 9',ime s a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Iris[ rd - in the aforesaid county and state; that the U1 ,h1 i r, Naari nrT/Anneal _Ti_aard Marlc.et:_D1ace a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for OME successive and consecutive in the following issues: May am, 2 0 0 0 OFFICIAL SEAL SUZETTE I. CURRAN NOTARY PUBLIC OREGON a MY COMMISSION COMMlSSlON EXPIRES N(6.329400 NOV. 28, 2003 Subscribed and sworn to me Notary Public for Oregon , 2.000 My Commission Expires: AFFIDAVIT s s CITY TIGARD OREGON CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM The following will be considered by the Tigard Hearings Of6cer.on Monday, June 12, 2000, at 7 P.M., at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. Both public, oral and written testimony is invited.-The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with Chapter 18.390 of the Tigard Municipal Code, and rules and procedures of the Hearings Officer. Testimony may be submitted in writing prior to or at the public hearing or verbally at the public hearing only. Failure to raise an issue in person or by letter at some point prior to the close of the hearing accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to allow the hearings authority and all the parties to respond on the request, precludes an appeal, and failure to specify the criterion from the Community Development Code or Com- prehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals based on that criterion. Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Karen Fox) at 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 639-4171. A copy of the application and all docu- ments and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the ap- plicable criteria are available for inspection at not cost. A copy of the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing, and copies for all items can also be provided at a reasonable cost. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW [SDRI 2000-00005 > APPEAL OF TIGARD MARKETPLACE REDEVELOPMENT & EXPANSION < ITEM ON APPEAL: On April 28, 2000, the Director issued a decision to approve, subject to conditions, a request for shopping center renovation including the demolition of an existing building (the Ameritone paint store), reconfiguration of the existing parking lot and south access, front and rear additions to the grocery store building, and enhancements to the front of the shopping center stores. On May 12, 2000, the applicant filed an appeal of certain conditions of approval contained in the decision. The specific conditions appealed and items to which they are related are sum- marized as follows: Condition #3 and #8 South Access Condition #6 and #7 On-site water quality facility Condition #9 Walkway connection Condition #10 and #33 Crossover easement Condition #12 Noise study Condition #13 Trash enclosures Condition #14, 15, 16 Landscaping Condition #18 Waste & recyclable storage Condition #19 Wheel stops Condition #21 and #27 Lighting Condition #23 Bicycle parking spaces Condition #25 Loading docks LOCATION: 13400-13580 SW Pacific Highway; WCTM 2S102CC, Tax Lots 100, 200, 500, 800, 801, 900 and 901. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED: 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, and 18.810. TT9652 - Publish May 25, 2000. 0 • AGENDA ITEM NO. a- I Depending on the numbellf people wishing to testify, the Twd Hearing's Officer may limit the amount of time each person has to speak. We ask you to limit your oral comments to 3 - 5 minutes. The Hearing's Officer may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Hearing's Officer to supplement oral testimony. AGENDA ITEM NO.: 2.1 DATE: JUNE 12, 2000 FILE NAME: APPEAL OF TIGARD MARKETPLACE REDEVELOPMENT & EXPANSION CASE N0: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2000-00005 APPLICANT: Frank Schmidt OWNER/ 13500 Pacific Corp. Tiland/Schmidt Architects, P.C. APPELLANT: do Capozzoli Advisors for Pensions, Inc 333 SW S* Avenue, Suite 406 38345 W. Ten Mile Road, Suite 170 Portland, OR 97204 Farmington Hills, MI 48335 APPELLANTS ATTORNEY.: Michael G. Magnus, P.C. Park Plaza West - Suite 460 10700 SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy. Beaverton, OR 97005 ITEM ON APPEAL On April 28, 2000, the Director issued a decision to approve, subject to conditions, a request for shopping center renovation including the demolition of an existing building (th' Amentone paint store, reconfiguration of the existing parking lot and south access, front and rear additions to the grocery store building, and enhancements to the front of the shopping center stores. On May 12, 2000, the applicant filed an appeal of certain conditions of approval contained in the decision. The specific conditions appealed and items to which they are related are summarized as follows: Condition #3 and #8 South access Condition #10 and #33 Crossover easement Condition # 12 Noise study LOCATION: 13400-13580 SW Pacific Highway; WCTM 2SI02CC, Tax lots 100, 200, 500, 800, 801, 900 and 901. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembl}~, parkingg, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, among other uses. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED: 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765 and 18.810. PLEASE SIGN IN TO TESTIFY ON THE ATTACHED SHEETS FOR THE AGENDA ITEM INDICATED DIRECTLY ABOVE. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.1 0 (PAGE--L-OF-L-) ATE: JUNE 12' 2000 12 PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND INCLUDE YOUR ZIP LODE Proponent - (Speaking in Favor) Opponent - (Speaking Against) Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 16-7(-0 ~ t.,)J t-7ta42.(). 4>ov- ~7 2z'T ~~~F. X03 Name, Address, Zip de and Phone No. G-z5N/'_ j 3 Name, Address Ziq Code and Phone No. Al i e jv~ a xkt6 4 t? SCI ~e~o -~A`5 A O~j ~46(4t o c? l.'~ Name, (Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. L Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, GNU. AJ-99al - P.O. BOX 370 0 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Wotice TT 9 6 5 2 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising 'City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet Notice 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 'Tigard, Oregon 9 7 2 2 3 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit sAccounts Payable • ' r, >','i t"i CIiY OF TIGA -D' : v••i,% "s EGOW. N ! ' O F TIGARD PUBLIC HEARI G ITEM:.- , - CITY AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION The fallowing will be considered by the Tigard Hearings Officevon Monday, June 12, 2000, at 7 P.M., at the Tigard Civk,Centei =.Town STATE OF OREGON, ) 3TATE ss Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon.' OF WASHINGTON, ) ' 3OUNTY Both public, oral and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on K t h v Sn der this matter will be conducted in accordance with Chapter 18,390 of the y oeing first duly sworn depose and say that I am the Advertisin Ti M Code, and rules and tr O in p , ~ 4 Director, or his principal clerk, of t ar -T ua 1 a ti n T r g or Te s mony ma} i be submitted in wr ting prior to or at the public hea . , ORS a newspaper general circulation as n efined in 193 010 verbally at the public, hearing only. Failure to raise an issue in person.or . and 193.020; published at Ti rig rr~ in the by letter at some point prior to the close of the heating accompanied b y S by aforesaid county and state; that the statements or evidence sufficient to allow. the hearings authority and, all _nt,h l-; C Ele p ri ri An e a 1 Ti na rr3 Ma rket n 1 Ari the parties to respond on the request, precludes an appeal, and failure to q. r , , ~ specify the criterion from the Community Development Code or Com- tinted copy a p py of which is hereto annexed, was published in the prehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal- to the entire issue of said newspaper for n1,r P successive and Land Use Board of Appeals based on that criterion. consecutive in the following issues: Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Karen Fox) at 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 639-4171. A copy of the application and all docu- ments and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the ap- plicable criteria are available for inspection at not cost. A copy of the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven (7, ' days prior to the hearing, and copies for all items can also be provided at reasonable cost. ti r SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW [SDR] 2000-00005 \ > APPEAL OF TIGARD MARKETPLACE Subscribed and sworn to befofe me this REDEVELOPMENT & EXPANSION ITEM ON APPEAL: On April 28, 2000, the Director issued a decisior to approve, subject to conditions, a request for shopping center renovatioi - r Notary Public for Oregor including the demolition of an existing building (the Ameritone pain store), reconfiguration of the existing parking lot and south access, fron My Commission Expires: and rear additions to the grocery store building, and enhancements to the front of the shopping center stores. On May 12, 2000, the applicant file( AFFIDAVIT an appeal of certain conditions of approval contained in the decision. Th, Acct. # rr" i On r.1 ~ ~rD i specific conditions appealed and items to which they are related are sum TT 9652 mar ized as follows: Amount + 0 Condition #3 and #8 South Access INVOICE Due $ Case:_ Condition #6 and #7 On-site water quality facility Condition #9 Walkway connection Condition #10 and #33 Crossover easement LEGAL TT 9652 Condition #12 Noise study Date Filed NOTICE Last Pub. by- Condition #13 Trash enclosures, Condition #14, 15, 16 Landscaping y , 7 Condition #18 Waste & recyclable storage a 5 Condition #19 Wheel stops Condition #21 and #27 Lighting 1 Condition #23 Bicyclelparking spaces „ . Condition #25 , Loading docks LOCATION:. 13400-13580 SW Pacific Highway; WCTM 2S 102CC, Ta Lots 100, 200,500, 800, 801, 900 and 901: APPLICABLE REVIEE ' CRITERIA BEING APPEALED: 18.705,18.725, 8.705, 18.725, 18.745; 18.75: 18 765, and 18.810. f T TT9652 -Publish May 25, 2000. - . - . . . , ' , r , - z . kja- jr 69-~2 - 0 9 0 0 CITY OF TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER JUNE 129 2000 - 7:00 PM TOWN HALL TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223 Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item must sign-in on the appropriate sign-in sheets. PUBLIC NOTICE: Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Hearings Officer meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the meeting. Please call (503) 639-4171, Ext. 320 (voice) or (503) 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: ➢ Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and ➢ Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of Tigard of your need(s) by 5:00 p.m. on the Wednesday preceding the meeting date at the same phone numbers as listed above if you are requesting such services. (OVER FOR HEARING AGENDA ITEM(S) CITY OF TIGARO HEARING'S OFFICER PAGE I OF 2 6/1212000 PUBU HEARING AGENDA "EXHIBIT A" PARTIES OF RECORD (Written Public Testimony received at the hearing) • 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Larry Epstein Hearing's Officer FROM: Karen Perl Fox Associate Planner RE: Appeal of Director's Decision to approve with conditions the Tigard Marketplace Renovations, SDR 2000-00005. DATE: June 26, 2000 Sent via Facsimile and US Mail Dear Larry: On June 12, 2000 a hearing was held regarding the Appeal of Conditions #3 and #8, Access, Conditions,# 10 and 33, Crossover Easements, and Condition #12, Noise Study. At the hearing City Staff requested that the applicant submit a site plan showing all tax lot lines in relation to building footprints and crosswalks and other site features, as this was omitted from the land-use application, and is needed to clarify whether legal lot consolidation is necessary. The record has been held open, however, the applicant has not submitted any new evidence including the requested site plan, but has requested withdrawal of its appeal of Conditions #10 and #33. In any case, the Building Department, has raised issues regarding the location of buildings which appear to be crossing lot lines, and other issues which might best be resolved by legal lot consolidation. See attached letters from the Building Department, and the Applicant. If you have any questions, please contact me at 503-639-4171 ext. 315. Yours very truly, ren Perl Fox C: Michael Magnus Frank Schmidt, Tiland/ Schmidt Architects :curplanikarenlsdrlsdr00-5.appeal.doc June 26, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD Mr. Larry Epstein, Hearings Officer RE: Appeal of City of Tigard Conditions of Approval; File No. SDR 2000-00005 Dear Sir: OREGON I have been requested to reply on behalf of the City of Tigard regarding the requirement for lot consolidation for this application. Under the provisions of the Oregon Structural Specialty Code, Sections 503, 504 and 505, it specifically requires a building be located on its own tax lot, and further states that unlimited areas can be achieved where the proposed construction is surrounded by 60' wide yards and an approved sprinkler system In the case of the proposed Hagen Food Store, the proposed construction crosses a property line, this is not allowed by code. In order to ascertain the proposed construction is situated on its own parcel, I will require a site plan of the entire complex showing all existing and proposed property lines. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to call me at 639-4171 X392. Sincerely, Rob rt D. Poskin, CBO Senior Plans Examiner CC: Karen Pearl Fox 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 ICHAEL G. MAGNUS, R19 Park Plaza West - Suite 460 10700 SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy. Beaverton, Oregon 97005 TELEPHONE (503) 641-7468 FACSIMILE (503) 646-9846 Michael G. Magnus (Oregon and California Bars) June 16, 2000 N'IA FACSIMILE AND FIRST CLASS MAIL Karen Fox, Planner City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Larry Epstein, Hearings Officer c/o City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Appeal of City of Tigard Conditions of Approval; File No. SDR2000-005 Dear Ms. Fox and Mr. Epstein: At the appeal hearing on June 12, 2000, Mr. Epstein was kind enough to leave the record open in order to allow the appellant to submit additional evidence concerning tax lot consolidation. The appellant has decided not to consolidate the various tax lots. Instead, it will grant, when necessary, cross over easements on its property as required by the City of Tigard under Conditions No. 10 and 33. Therefore, the landlord and appellant withdraw its appeal of these items. As a result, I am not submitting any additional information or evidence in regards to this matter. If you have any questions or comments, please call me. MAGNUS, P.C. MGM:pbb cc: Clients c l ie nts/5041004/t igard. fox. Itr 006/12. 00 16:33 FAX 1 503 731 8259 0 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS 0 2002/004 1. New and/or updated ODOT approach approval permits' must be obtained prior to issuance of the main building renovation generally on the locally approved site plan (File sDR2000-00005). a. As part of the new and/or updated ODOT approach approval permits, the Tigard Marketplace property owner(s) will construct a raised concrete median on Pacific Highway to ensure that left turn movements are prohibited to and form the south access driveway. The applicant will obtain ODOT construction permits for the raised median. b. As part of the new and/or updated ODOT approach approval permits, the Tigard Marketplace property owner(s) will grant a crossover access easement for the 1.913 acre property immediately adjacent and to the ' This will likely be in the form of a Conditional Approach Permit Approval where the proper securities, if any, have been provided to ODOT. This does not require that the Permit to Construct a State Approach be obtained prior to building permit issuance. Form 73-1950 (1199) 4 ,,,ilre on John .ik• Kiezhaba, MD., Govemor June 12, 2000 Karen Fox, Planner City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Subject: SDR2000-00003 Tigard Marketplace Renovations Dear Karen: Department of Transportation Region 1 123 NW Flanders Portland, OR 97209-4037 (503) 731-8200 FAX (503) 731-8259 FILE CODE., PLA9.1-2A-71"1 Proposal Number. 518 This letter supersedes our March 23, 2000 letter and stipulates new ODOT conditions of approval pertaining to the Tigard Marketplace access. Based on a closer review of the traffic analysis we are in agreement that the right-in / right-out function of the southerly access helps reduce the number of trips at the main, signalized access. Therefore, the southerly access point may serve as a permanent access (relative to the current proposal) rather than temporary as previously stipulated. As a part of this agreement, the following ODOT permit conditions apply: 06/12/00 16:33 FAX 1 503 731 8259 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS Ia003/004 ODOT LeMer June 12, 2400 Page 2 south of the Tigard Marketplace, designated on the City/County tax lot maps as Tax Lot 1000. The easement agreement is to be recorded with both the burdened and benefited properties. The general location of the access easement is shown on the attached Figure A. The benefited property of the crossover access easement will be limited to the subject 1.98 acre property (unless otherwise agreed upon). The terms and conditions of the access easement will be stipulated at the time of or prior to the physical construction of the access between properties. The intent is to execute terms and conditions that are mutually acceptable to the owners of the burdened and benefited properties and the lessee of the proposed supermarket located within the Tigard Marketplace development. C.- At such a time that the 1.98 acre property to the south (Tax Lot 1000) is re-developed to utilize the'access easement, the owner for the Tigard Marketplace will reconfigure the parking lot design to provide access to the 1.98 acre property in the approximate location illustrated on the attached site plan (Figure A). The details of the re-design of the parking lot will be subject to review and approval of the owner of the Tigard Marketplace and the lessee of the proposed supermarket located within the Tigard Marketplace development. d. Alterations made to the parking lot to accommodate access shall be reviewed by the City of Tigard to determine if parking lot minimum parking standards are satisfied. If city minimum parking standards cannot be met, a variance will be required prior to any parking reduction below the city standard. Thank you for your and the city's role in resolving this matter. Please submit this letter as part of the record. I can be reached at 731-8206 should you have any questions. Sincerely, C;LOW Gail Curtis, AICP Senior Land Use Planner cc: Mark Vandehey, P.E. Joel Gordon, Buck & Gordon Michael Magnus, Attorney Randy Potterf, Cappozzoli Advisory for Pensions Jack Orchard, Ball Janik Frank,3chmidt, Tiland Schmidt Architects Sam Hunaidi, District 2A Permit Specialist Attachment: Figure A, Access Easement Location 06/12•/00 16:34 FAX 1 503 731 8259 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS 0004/004 n KI'TTELSON 8 ASSOCIATE :5032738169 Jun 9 ANDO 10: 05 P. 04 ~~xrr~o~e io,rr~ sue. r r r, A a y IARN~IOAR~IA 5$ Sen &F. I r I 785 F ~ I I ~ 11 I I! 1 rIT 11 111 11l I 1 9~ - • r~'~ iii fig--~~- .r-~aQ~~•.a 1 410 ' ' i 4 1` 1 a f 9 P 1 lr s a r I 30 4 1 ~ ~ Y1 d t i u r 7~~e Eo= • i EI ~ w e ~ ~ w R.i`wWE-Arwv.-bo v - - - - - L-;J Af. A . a~ 08/12/00 16:32 FAX 1 503 731 8258 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS • OREGON DEPARTNIENT OF TRANSPORTATION 123 NW FLANDERS PORTLAND, OR 97209-4037 (503)731-8200 FAX (503)751.8259 [a 001/004 FACSIMILE TRAlNSiKTTTAL SKEET ~s J;y CflMP~'~•Y ~ p.tM F&T NUT10U- TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLTMING COV27, c~ ll ?RONS NU24BE3: sm4DER'9 F.Zpm.EVCE N[TbLHER: ❑ U1tGENT R REVIEA ❑ PLEALSE COMMENT 0 PLEASE REPLY ❑ PL .AISE RECYCLE 0611.,400 %.13: 33 FAX 1 503 731 8259 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS 0 OR;?GC)-Iq DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 123 YW FLAN])ER5 PORTLAND, OR 97204-4037 (503)731.8240 FAX (503)731.3259 [a 001/002 FACSIMl lLE TlLAMMITTAL SKEET To- V AT Fd~TiVMBM- 7o-r LNo.OF PAGFS INCLULMG COIWWL _ CMOs 4 , 07 1 4EZV'DER'5 RFF~~ Ytf~Eq: a) PHONE MTH00- ❑ tMGE T W)(elL RE MT ci PLEASE COhfl~,~1T ❑ PLEASE REPLY ❑ PLEASE RECYCLE rro-r~s~ c a trs~s E.V rs: C~rou4nwrr -'~1bt1AcE A 40L' 0 aLLoli 06/12/00 •13:25 FAX 1 503 731 8259 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS 0 la002/003 .,jIne on John & KitzhabeG MA., Governor Department of Transportation Region 1 123 NW Flanders Portland, OR 97209-4037 (503) 731-8200 FAX (503) 731-8259 FILE CADS: June 12, 2000 Karen Fox, Planner City of Tigard Planning IDivision 13125 SVV Hall Blvd- Tigard, OR 97223 Subject: SDR2000-00005 Tigard Marketplace Renovations bear Karen; PLA9.1.2A-TIG-91 Proposal Number: 518 This letter supercedes our March 23, 2000 letter and stipulates new ODOT conditions of approval pertaining to the Tigard Marketplace access. Based on a closer review of the traffic analysis we are in agreement that the right-in ! right-out function of the southerly access helps reduce the number of trips at the main, signalized access. Therefore, the southerly access point may serve as a permanent access (relative to the current proposal) rather than temporary as previously stipulated. As a part of this agreement, the following ODOT permit conditions apply: 1. New and/or updated ODOT approach approval permits must be obtained prior to issuance of the main building renovation generally on the locally approved site plan (File sDR2000-ao005). a_ As part of the new and/or updated ODOT approach approval permits, the Tigard Marketplace property owner(s) will construct a raised concrete median on Pacific Highway to ensure that left turn movements are prohibited to and form the south access driveway. The applicant will obtain ODOT construction permits for the raised median. b. As part of the new and/or updated ODOT approach approval permits, the Tigard Marketplace property owner(s) will grant a This will likely be in the form of a Conditional Approach Permit Approval where the proper securit es, if any, have been provided to ODOT. This does not require that the Permit to Constrict a State Approach be obtained prior to building permit issuance- Form 734-1850 (1/90) 4 06/12,'00..13:26 FAA 1 503 731 8259 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS 0 0003/003 crossover access easement for the 1.98 acre property immediately adjacent and to the south of the Tigard Marketplace; designated on the City/County tax lot maps as Tax Lot 1000. The easement agreement is to be recorded with both the burdened and benefited properties. The general location of the access easement is shown on the attached Figure A. The benefited property of the crossover access easement will be limited to the subject 1.98 acre property (unless otherwise agreed upon). The terns and conditions of the access easement will be stipulated at the time of or prior to the physical construction of the access between properties. The intent is to execute terms and conditions that are mutually acceptable to the owners of the burdened and benefited properties and the lessee of the proposed supermarket located within the Tigard Marketplace development. c. At such a time that the 1.98 acre property to the south (Tax Lot 1000) is re-developed to utilize the access easement, the owner for the Tigard Marketplace will reconfigure the parking lot design to provide access to the 1.98 acre property in the approximate location illustrated on the attached site plan (Figure A). The details of the re-design of the parking lot will be. subject to review and approval of the owner of the Tigard Marketplace and the lessee of the proposed supermarket located within the Tigard Marketplace development. d. Alterations made to the parking lot to accommodate access shall be reviewed by the City of Tigard to determine if parking lot minimum parking standards are satisfied. If not, a variance may be required. Thank you for your and the city's role in resolving this matter. Please submit this letter as part of the record. I can be reached at 731-8206 should you have any questions. Sincerely, 4i aww Coxmwl Gail Curtis, AICP Senior Land Use Planner cc: Mark Vandehey, P.E. Joel Gordon, Buck & Gordon Michael Magnus, Attorney Randy Potterf, Cappozzoli Advisory for Pensions Jack Orchard, Ball Janik Frank Schmidt, Tiland Schmidt Architects Sam Hunaidi, District 2A Permit Specialist 06A2/06' 13:25 FAX 1 503 731 8259 0 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS • OR:7-GON DEpA?-TlvlENLT 01F TRANSPORTATION 123 NW FLANDERS PORTLAND, OR 97209-4037 (503)731-8200 FAX (503)731-3359 1@001/003 FACSIMILE TIUMMITTikL SHEET ROB& Zoo &12= 010(yr cctKPAXY ,~mn CAM two FAx NUMI;22- TO'rAL NC. OF PX= LYCLLM NG COVER: cips y * 072dil N YJYE&zN= v;~~ UR REFSRE+MCe NLTb19EZ: rim& ❑ [TRGFr11T )~ft REVIE'7 C3 ?LEASE CObIIdZlfT Q PUA,-rc REPLY ❑ PLEASE RECYCLE rrorFSicot~x~cs: OiCtpaQeWk. Pl!s~Nt• 0 ZDAGMAi 0 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS--- - 06..4,2/0,6` 13:33 FAX 1 503 731 8259 Jun 9 ax- -0of ~ - ASS ~1.5ON "11/0000"o- zojo/lo, 41~ i Rc • ♦ap~~1 ZHU cJ ao 40 r j r+ + r r 4 d 7 r r ~r J `,S` tt ` 1S Il 1, X11 Vt 1 tit }s I 1 l' lA tl 1 r Ir ~ I~ 1 ~t t r d la Q y ~ P t a J t o I ` r up Dow Taw TO)LOPO p,OA lfl ~05 po ° g'- - WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON i EXHIBI'P 3 / 0- SCALE I 100 r PAGE 4 . ` 305 100 4 b t 84 Ac. as 306 ° b SEE MAP 7 ► 309 5 2S 12C8 101 7 310 .a + g s a w ~ v 200 l C.5. 12,17"51 307 0 JP / _ 9 e *4 4? 'tit / w 308 (o /o a 218614 10 d4.al a, / ~P 7 ® 600 , Qo= 500 N e s 4p' .14Aryo xo / 4.Z5Ac. 102 . 97 5/7 MAc 1- a 312 ~00 14 6,711 ~ o II a 314 e' 700 6~~i•~ 89 AC.°,~ 13 s IL2 3.98 *0 s 50 2 I 313 ► V ^ Sy►e~ 520013 • 12 5 0 ~ 7.16 « 9." IS S91 Ac. J.■9> 4~ 31.64 1 %N A IZ3•ad A Q °y f 2 3• ?4 ►►s QOM g 5300 / / 7q 2.42 d~-c14 540 ~i~ yJ ooh 44.7 5 I :5100 901 y'q 'r 42Ac. 9.39 15 ` ~ w ~ X37 ~ 9.35 x5000 ids ~8 F ~aoy 05AOel 2 4 11 e 900 s.94 a1 I o~~, `o .t4900 1000 , 47Ac. I 9BAc 800 • 14 OL 2.32AC 10 e.3e ~a4 ~e s• 3142 g r ® . 4800 4, 'o \ off' 3'~ 9 a 4200 . 6'rma 74608 cl Rsb ' 'v ?OCy rl-fir y'qy r1?-7 q1 •~9 ; I I 4700 aJ ` sa '430 9 ~ a *.4 39.04 4 > ~a 4600 N p aO 0~cy * q~'y 'r 8 ~ 100.09 ,15 G&O 44( _ >c ~•r~ 7 S 4500 fi 802 [.01Ac. „ pot S88653'1111 6.24cN. 264e 3.94cN. ~ 40 173.4 7096 109.5 INS 4 loo 100 100 100 IIS ' 110 101 62 160.90 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 1 2100 2200 -'p 7700 e) aw In ? i o_ 1 J om r~ oa r o10 Z-A ! r - 16 I at q e W ,3.ei 1 i 1 14 2 V 2: 22 23 1 11 24 15 ti I o9.e s 10~~ 100 '00 .1 100 Us - R 389.27 3o w 999.27'30"w ' r S.W. HILL VIEW STREET a~ 7:.03 144.31 93.56 100 79.61 7b,dd1s9.93 ' ~ ~r ~ Ids ~ 1 3000 3001 R-20 S0 A:o 2900 260C p■24 R. 0 25500 1 2400 2300 Rao W 'Al ° 22 Ac. Jr Ae 20-94' W I 0 k I'l , ---a 01 o w o O O & 14 _ z 1 0- 0 s w I g ° 10 o n 73.0 A94 M794g4' 13 w ,n - F r°ol 1Td.03 *S 170 w 12 p 4Q M boo 09 !r tiAe N!902i E ~ • - 1.i e 2800 Id49 = 1 3200 ' 2700 I Y 01 lu 10 I 9 8 - 14 118 NW24'[ wa 11z.a ~ INITIAL PMT 11 v 115 1► 02 E 115.0 107.0 25 a MELaOff MEIMTS : N79° ,IZ ~ 3700 1 3800 3900, No. 2 1I 4 15 s2E E 1 Zip Y A $ (1 O .36Ac. i46Ac. .45Ac. O 75 N 3 500 a w sat r 0 3301 3302 3400 40A Ns~•32 t laso - 1 W r 0 3600 2Ac. .IBAc. 3.z ^ w2 gOAG W I ' F - Q 3 . o a o - I - 000 W.4, L - 0 3 c 7s ~ ~ i ~ ~ 1 v! = 1111rIAL POI T 1 2 3 4 5 1 6 - 7 ! Az - FgELCO" !i IOMTS 90,2 20 119.4 1101 SA9°!2'W 163.0 SO 113.0 81.1.7 SO _ 01.3K3w 1 S'N.COR9E1i L0~ S1 SA9° 32 W n . Una."Ct'ange is Requested, a.a R- A 0 n! 6 aX Statements To: p r+ a ~4 F J'r Q. Q K i"T 13500 Pacific Corr. c/o Keyer R.E. Advisors 222'So. Harbor Blvd., Ste. 700 Anaheim, CA 92805 t WARRANTY DEED - STATUTORY rOftX ` Portland- Fixture Limited Partnership, an Oregon limited partnership, Grantor, convoys and warrants to 1350,0 Pacific Corp., a Michigan corporation, Grantee, the following described real _ property free of encumbrances except as specifically set forth herein: = ti ^ Legal description on attached Exhibit A n•• -Subject to:_ _The exceptions described on attached Exhibit B THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE ,s LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR' COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USE.. The true consideration for this conveyance is $9,005,000. Dated this ~~day of January, 1991. Portland Fixture Limited 1NI►SHiHGlDM 0OlsM7Y Partnership REAL PRapiNrr TRAAarrs TAX - By: PFMGP, inc., its General Partner FEE PALO DATE _ • , By: Title: ORE±F~DE STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of Multnomah ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on January , 1991 by V l as Pr-'s, cl"-r- of PFMG , Inc. , Ca.-.a:al Partn of Portland Fixture Lfii} Pa ership. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: 7' EDNA Q. HARDIN NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON my C En*05 f ~ EMBIT PAGE._®F~ TRANSAMERICA TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY EXHIBIT A o C De soription ~ s A tract of land being a portion of the George Richardson Donation Land Claim No. 38, situated in the Southwest one-quarter, Section 2, Tewnship 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, ir, the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, being more particularly e described as follows: Beginning at the Southeasterly corner of that tract of land as conveyed to Heinz Sauarberry recorded in Book 1200, Page 556, Washington County Deed Records, said point also being the Southwest corner of Lot 6, BEREA, a plat of record; thence, along the West line of said BEREA plat North 0' 43' 30" East 240.79 feet along the Westerly adjusted property lines as described in Recorder's Fee Nos. 90-55344, 90-55343, 90-67243, 90-55342, 90-55341, 90-55340 and 90-55339 the following courses: North 0' 32' 37" West, 66.77 feet; North 14' 59' 28" West, 8.38 feet; North 6' 57' 300 West. 8.19 feet; North 2. 30' 50• East, 17.60 feet; North 6' 40' 39' East, 8.91 feet; North 11' 16' 32' East. 8.42 feet; North 0' 02' 44• East 42.75 feet; North 8' 44' 37' West 16.48 feet; North 15' 09' 400 East, 9.39 feet; North 0' 30' 37' East, 76.40 feet; North 6' 14' 45' West, 9.93 feet; North 9' 58!-261 East, 7.16 feet; North 0. 43' 29• East 34.11 feet; North 88' 23' 20• West,- 8.01 feet; North 0' 53' 25" East, 49.60 feet; North 89' 52' 030 East, 7.41 feet; North 0' 25' 25' West, 35.41 feet; North 89' 13' 30' West, 6.76 feet; North 0' 39' 56' East 236.03 feet; North 89' 41' 49' East, 7.00 feet; North 0' 28' 30• West 19.08 feet to a point on the Southwesterly line of that tract of land conveyed to Roland and Mary Ingalls, recorded in Book 270, page 455, Washington County Deed Records, said point bears North 50'28148' West, a distance of 5.98 feet from the Southeast corner of said Ingalls tract; thence, along the Southwesterly line of said Ingallis Tract and a Westerly projection thereof, North 50'281489 West 322.17 feet to the most Northerly corner of that tract of land conveyed to Tigard East Associates, recorded in Fee No. 87 31809, Washington County Deed Records, said point being 48.0 feet, when measured at right angles, from the center line of Highway 99W; thence along the Northwesterly line Of said Tigard East Associates parcel and parallel with the center line of said Highway 99W, South 34'23'38" West, 391.12 feet to a point opposite Engineers Station 128 + 30 of said Highway 99W; thence continuing along said Northwesterly line, South 7'49144 West, 29.07 feet to a point that is 61 feet opposite Engineer's Station 128 + 56; thence South 27'26'27• West, 82.61 feet to a point that is 71.0 feet opposite Engineer's Station 129 + 38; thence South 59'57'14' West, 25.50 feet to a point that is 60.0 feet opposite Engineer's Station 129 + 61; thence South 34'231384 West, 91.00 feet to a paint that is 60.0 feet opposite Engineer's Station 130 • 52; thence South 39'15102" West, 153.55 feet to a point that is 47.0 feet opposite Engineer's station 132 + 05; Dated December 19, 1990 Page 1 2623900H EXHIBIT Reliance 2, PAGE OF G• wr..,. cwr W++n c. 44-P - Form 4100.7 ~'J~1~~F'l'~'1°"~~ - s~~:k..i.~xj~ ~i~SY~ • i.+l~± o,~F ~fl~~i. :.r-.; : r.• • `..a•.t r _f.; . • _ ..t r .i ' 'TRANSAMERICA TTx'LE INSURANCE _ nMPANY y~ thence 8outti';1~ ~07!_Wist 33.24 feet -to a_ Point=that'`i"i`"S6{: ,_eat: opposite Engiaesr's Station 132 . 37='thence' South:.30'28:r32;~ia-at 73.17 Lest to a point that is 61.0 feet opposite-8ngiinirl-8tatio 133 • .loj.-.theac"outh_83' 32r 03" Mast, iS.6i': feet to+'a=:point=of= • intersection WithttiC- Nor.thWestsrly projection of, the=Sotithueitsr y;?y t line of that tract-of_land as conveyed to Sherman E.-Lee r,-fcordid " Fee No. 80 23996,'Washington County Deed Recordsj thence"'alonq'the ' Southwesterly 1Sns of said L T A i ` Ltt~` ee ract an t8 Northwesterly projection and also the Southwesterly line of abotia state3 tusrbnrry TrRet, S:u:h.' 53'38'52' East, @33.24 f•of 'tc• k :c' . c1 - i- c ; r,F ^r . HEIGHTS NO. 2, A plat. of rrcc; 3; t°.-..ca ❑_';~r.3 :;'•r. lies c. said Sauerberry Tract and the North line of said FRELEON plat, North 89'321420 East, 13.41 feet to the Northwest corner of Lot 22, P ELEON HEIGHTS NO. 2; thence along the Northerly line of Recorder's Fee No. 90-55345 the following courses; thence North 0' 27' 180 West 1.15 feet;' thence North 84' 39' 300 East, 11.33 feet; North 89' 32' 32' East, 74.62 feats South 85' 05' 03' East, 14.15 feet; South 0' 27' 180 East 0.79 feet to a point on the Northerly line of said FRELEON PLAT;-. thence North 89' 32' 42• East 115.30 feet to the point of 'beginning. EXHIBIT 4 PAGE -5 OF 3 Reliance A awn Crw IYMp ~..~.q Dated Deceabar 19, 1990 Page 2 3 2623900H Form •100.7 i 4 I 0 0 Revised Noise Condition: Tigard Marketplace The Applicant shall demonstrate that its operations can achieve compliance with City noise standards as set forth in City Code Sections 7.40.130-7.40.220_ In order to do so, the Applicant shall first provide to the City, at the Applicant's expense, a noise impact study prepared by a credentialed acoustical consultant, analyzing the effects of noise levels and possible noise mitigation on adjoining properties from operations on the Applicant's property. Following City review of the study. City staff and the Applicant shall confer to determine which mitigation measures (if any) are necessary and appropriate to assure that operations on the Applicant's property shall satisfy City noise standards. YAWPOT1GARMake coodtdoa jM$nviAanLdoc Rjoeived: 6/12/00 11:49AM- • 06/12/00 12:20 $5036 7297 503 684 7297 MCKEEVER/MORRIS EPSTEIN; Page 7 CITY OF TIGARD0 R007/U10 JUN-08-00 03:2DPM FRW-ANDERSONAMONSONAAAGNUS +6460146 -•-wa.~ ova ■ v0V7 L.1%-W. Park Pl= WCSL - 5tdse 460 14700 SW B=vw u-IjUL%dale Hfwy. Deaverrnn, Om pn 97005 TEMHONE (503) 641-7468 FACSDOM (503) 646.9846 Mirla l G. Magus (Orwa anti C.adomm Sacs) Jane 8, 2000 Ms. Karen Fox City of Tigard Division 12125 SW Hall HoWevatd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Appeal of Conditions of Approval City of Tigard File No- 2000-00005 Tigard Marketplace Dear Karen: T-337 P.OZ/05 F-662 VIA E&ACNE ALE AND Enaft CI.AS "as 'Cam is in response to vur telephone convermfion will, your building departmeat about conditions mn (10) and tbitty-tbtm C33) of the sraff report dated April 28, 2000. Those two cond1dom require cross over easements- The Tigard Madooplace (the "Cer amn is under one ownership. The ova ter of the Center is 13500 Pacific Corp. A copy of the deed transferring title is enclosed. This shows a legal description for the =Wre Center- There arc scparme teat lots which Washington Comity Tax Assessor uses to assess the Ceu er. I widemmnd that these tax lots have caused some confusion about the ownership of the Center. This bas now been cla dEmd. Sure 13500 Pacific Corp. owns the entire Comer, it is not required m gram cross over easemenis over its own properny_ These two conditions will therefore be eliminat If my emderstandmg is =aireeT9. please advise me. If you 49M, then these its can be removed fivom the appeal- very Umly youm G. MAGMS, P.C. MGM--dt ratlosurie cc: Mr. Frank Schmuk Mr. Randy Potmrf Joel M. Gardon, Esq. 50410 UW.fox aty.av p RQceived: 5112/00 11:50AM• 503 664 7297 MCKEEVER/MORRIS EPSTEIN; Page 8 06/12/00 12:21 Wo44 7297 CITY OF TIGARD - 1@008/010 JUN-06-00 03:2oPY FRO-ANDERSON8d10NSON/MAGRUS +6459146 T-93T P.03/05 F-662 91001296 • J j.e-% w- -~t3l Z. Change is - 8 Rilie lta 1300- paaitia Cre ![sysr Zt.xo visors 222 BO Nat'sot Blvd.. ate. 200 r ~►hibeiA, CA 92005 Wamman Duo - SZATM03tY TCRY ' pestiand• rLxb=a UI%Ltod Partaershlp, an Oregon limited Pftrlq ip. Grammor, cOhveys and w+a=knts to 13Sg0 paeific ro 4 a x1ch3gan corporation, drowtae, Chu following described real PrOp3s _tras_ of e0c%=brsmas e=ept be apeGIfically moZ Corth r ^ Legal desetiptioa on attached R-%4 it A N svb j eet to: --r _ The exceptions Qaacribed oft attached Zxhibit a 3 =mmmft IRLL for ALUM USE of TM PROPEA?S[ ZMU XKS=nmm =m vrdLATZON or Ap=c"LE OSB ZAVS U0 ?IW1S- $EPM2 rX=ZNG OR X ccup2mr. T=8 I_NSTMONT. ?ES PERSON AoQVIgTAG F= TITIL To 22M HOPEY= u= cu= vm PROFRIX= cm COUM PIMVIXTG DEPAR!l ENT VMU Y JLPPRCVE USE. OR The true colmideratdan for this conveyance is $9,905,000. Dated this :2~n day of ?apoarr, 1991. Portland Fixture itmiLed 1nsipm= COMM partnership AML AVOPAelr 7j+1 M# L6T PrHcp, Inc-, its G-mexa pmrMcr FM A►ID am STAS'E OF OREGON I County of MUltnanah by eta S em4 s acknowledged before me or ?an w__-- as r~s • dear LtS1Y 1991 ~°"°'al PaXta of Portland P mLnrc o= PFC. e ~ ersAip. mozory pum Le tot Qregom by CaMissl,ich Patp;reN: $~~o ~ FpusMOTARN IC - OOg MON 503 684 7297 MCKEEVER/MORRIS EPSTEIN; Page 9 ~lUUB/UlU Received: 8172/00 11:50,4 CITY OF TICiARD~ 06/12/00 12:21 1250 4 7297 JUN-09-00 03:Z1PM FWANDERSONWSONA"NUS +646ee4~ T-331 P.04AS F-882 TRANSANI: RICA - • TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY ZZUTItZ d o SesrxipCioa~ - • a tract of 3-ant being s portion of the George Mchazdzen Donation Land Claim Va. 39, aitu4ted is the Southwest *no- Immver, SeeUvA 2, Ttot>saip 2 SQVta, Lange 1 West of the ftliamacne Keridiaa. is rho cS.ty of Tigard, County of kaebsagton alsd State of aregon. being sore pa.-ticularIv 4ee0rihe3 as follows; SegLeaLng at the Southeasterly cower of that taxam of land as conveyed to Neiaz Sauerberry recorded in Book 1200, Page 556, R4shipq=on County Dead keaar4u. said seine also beiaq eha S0UCj%%F4% cvaavr or Lv= s, PcRYA, a plat of _^ecord; thtnee, along the Uest ),I" of said t18RFA plat Worth 0' 43' 300 Cast 240.79 fear. along the Westerly adjusted p=ogerty lipsx as descrUnd la Recorder's Fee Woe. 90-55344, 90-5$343, 90-67243, 90-55342, 90-553;1, 90.54340 and 90-SS339 the fo3loving caurseas nth 0' 32' 37• 'Pest, 68.77 lees; !forth is- 59' 2a• West, a.3a feet; North 6' S71 30' Hest. 8.29 Seel; Bosch 2' 30' $00 UZZ. X7.60 feet; VottR 6' 401 390 EaSC, 8_91 feet; !roach 11' 16' 320 Fast. 6.42 ieeti Porch 0' 02' ad' Fait 42.75 East; North 8" 44. 37' west 16.48 foe;; North 15" 691 40' East, 9.39 feet; Worth 6- 30, 370 Cast, 76.40 teat; North 4` 14. 45- Vest, 9.93 feet; North 9- 58' 26- Cast, 7_16 feet; dorth 6' 43' 299 Cast 34.11 teed Va=h Oa" 23' 20' ltost,- 8.01 feat; Noczh 0' 53. 75- East, 49.60 teat; North 89' S2' 03" East. 7.41 teat; North 0" 25' 250 Rest, 35_01 fees; Xosth 89' 13. 300 nest. S.75 tact; Mort; 0' 39' 560 East 236.03 Zoom; Korth 89' 41, 49, East, 7.00 feat; Herrh 4' 280 30' hest 19-05 feet to a point ack the Seuthvettarly lies of that tract of land conveyed to R"md bad nary ZAgalls, xecordod 3a Book 270, Page •S5, Washington County Deed Records, safd point bears Howth 50'28148• past, i1 distance of 5.98 feet from tae Southwase 06= r of said gagalls tract; theaca, aloay the touthwesterly line of said ingaliis Trans apd. a wasrer1T pro2action thesoof, VorrA 50'38.48. Vesz 322.11 feet to the nest atoztAsrlY cozaer of that tract of lead conveye$ to Zigard Cast hfsoo ates. sececdod in Fee No. 89 31609, Washington County Deed Rxcorda, said poiaz being 48.0 feet, whan measured at right aaglex, fsoik the canter Sane of Highway 99W.- thence along the "Orthvezzerly Line of 6244 Tigard East Associates parcel and parallel with the ceovmr Line of said Highway 99w, South 34'23138' West, 392.!2 feet to a paint opposite Engineers Station 128 - 30 of said Hl,ghvay 99w; thence continu aq a3oag said Northwesterly liAe. Sour. 7-49.44- Won%. 29.07 feet to a point that is 61 feet epposite tngiaeer's station 128 . 56; thence South 27'26'Z7- Vest, 82.61 feat to a point that Is 11_0 feet opposite rngjpeer's Station 329 • 38; thence South SS'S7'14' !lest, 25.50 feet m* a p04A6 that is 66.0 .tees opposite Engineer's Station 129 - 61; thence S#uCb 34'23.38• West, 91.00 feet to a pot ac that is 60.0 feet apposite' F.t~gi.aeer's Station 130 - 52; thence Swath 39'15'02' !Test. 553_55 feft to a point that s.s 47.0 feet oppoaira Faginser-s Sr rAon 132 - 01; Daesd December 19, 1990 page 1 2639~Oa FoA~ ata~7 C-ow nr+w P. 503 684 7297 MOKEEVER/MORRIS EPSTEIN; Pe90 10 Apoeiled: 6112100 11.51A CITY OF TIGARD 0010/010 - 0 00/12/00 12.22 'x'50 4 4 7297 JIAV-ae-00 oasZZP114 FRom-AMDERsoKwMscm/MAGMIrS +9469045 T-93t P-05/05 F-66z ~.~a Sri _ tir~F~ .J r-l+.'_~-rt ~~-r. ~r y ~...r-rC . ..T w.{w.e _ W,N r awe r A~~~1~~) ±L thence 8ewtlr.33~1'r~s7 Wiir. 33.24 feet ,to a-polik=X sa of ,3•s~ oppesits PA4Mar# s Stlr.Ld i 222 - 371- thonco Saae1t►30-~ -933; t ~bi 73.17 Coat to a point: shit is 61.0 !ao= apposital-ltgti~s stioa. 133. 307.,t~oteaJyoatlt_0312.03' Rest, iS_6i.Zaor to=a=pp t=oL= tas■ssactzon trith t1i%2Y woscsrly psolocrAoa of ths=i6o~ths+o~Eh=1 lies of that: tract. of lead as conveyed co Sherman t. -too=~iaoidid ta'~•.= ' . t Tara ITO. 36 23494: flashSagzoa County Deed Reoar4aj thence sivaq Cho Botatdwsterly Zino of said La* mraat and its Waz%hwasz.rly pcolaction and 4100 TAG SOYthwesrerly line of a5ovo axarma X*-vur."srv. S:act, Stt:h 33-19132' taaL. :33.24 9.-t ev+ % *c!- re r-r*-T% # K1'xZHT3 VC- 2, a plat of rwcaz %'.,a 7C;:=st1y :•i-• _1 sai4 6avarbe~ Tzaet and the Hoeth line of said ~ zio- i plat, werCA !9'32443' Sasr., 13-41 lost e4 the NottAweet cotnar of Lot 22, 8UL$02i R>EZClii'S 110. 7: thence alanq the lToZtbarly lino of Rocosder• s Poo No. 90-55345 tar fellawi.mg courses; bounce Worth o• 27' too west 1.15 foetj- thence blarrA 94' is* 30+ Ea■er 11.33 emoc: aarrm 69- 320 32, lase. ~ - 14.62 toot= South 83- Os' 035 Esst, 2i.U feet; 501ita 0- 27' 291 ' East 0.79 team to a voiat oft she aortbarly 1150 of said rMLECIO/ J?=j thanes Morsb 89' 32' 42' East 115-30 fact to the polat of -beglnaiag. N. I - noted >rievober I9, 2940 .•J -~Y•.N'~ SAS raga 2 262390DK I f~ r Received: 5/12/00 11:48AM; 503 584 7297 MCKEEVER/MORRIS EPSTEIN; Page 3 ~¢Jj003/010 06/12/00 12:19 $503 4 7297 CITY OF TIGARDID KITTELSON 8 ASSOCI S Fax:5032738169 Jun 9 2000 11:48 P.02 Kittelson & Associates, Inc_ Tmilsportai m P", - 'ngrrraf6o En6111101 rg I\ 610 SW Alder, Suite 700 . Portland, OR 57205 (503) 2286230 FAX: (50) V34198 Memo Ta Gail E. Curtis, Oregon Dept of Transportation Rte: Mark Vandehey, P.E. C= Michael Magnus, Attorney Joe! Gordon, Buck & Gordon Randy Potted, Capp=di Advisory for Pensions Jack Olydukrd, 80 Janik Frank Schmidt. TRand Schmidt Architects Karen Fox, Gus Duenas, Bill Monahan (City of Tigard) not" 6W00 Re. Access Permit for Ri**-hMght out Access for Tigard Ma lace Based on our Wephone discussion on Wednesday, June 7 and the subsequent a-mail from you, it is my understanding that ODOT will issue an access permit to combW the right inhight-0Lt driveway shown on the southern end of the site development plan for *0 Tgrard Marketplace Phase Two development (City of Tigard $DR 2000040005). We understand that ODOTs issuance of the access permit would be subject to three conditions_ The following is our recommended language for those conditions: 1} AS part of the redevelopment of the Tigard Marketplace, the Owner will construct a raised concrete median on Pacific Highway to ensure that left turn movements are prohibited to and form the south access driveway. ODOT will issue the necessary construction permits for the raised median. 2) The property owner for Tigard Marketplace will grant a cxossovet access easement for the 1.98 acre property immediately adjacent to ttie Tigard Marketptaee on the south upon completion of its redevelopment. According to City/County tax lot maps, this property is designated as Tax Lot 1000. The benefited property of the crossover actress easement will be limited to the subject 1.98 acre property, and must be on terms and Conditions mutually acceptable to the owners of the burdened and benefited properties and the lessee of the proposed supermarket located within the Tigard Marketplace development. 3) At such a time that the 1.98 acre property to the south (Tax Lot 1000) is re- developed, the owner for the Tigard Marketplace will reconfigure tive parldng lot design to provide access to the 1.98 acre property in the approximate location illustrated on the attached site plan. The details of there-design of the p2rrking lot will be subject to review and approval of the owner of the Tigard Marketplace and the lessee of the proposed supermarket IocZed w INn the Tigard Marketplace development. R'*ceived: 6/12/00 11:48AM; 503 884 7297 MCKEEVER/MORRIS EPSTEIN; Page 4 06/12e'00 122:19 050 4 7297 CITY OF TIGARD0 1@004/010 KITTELSON & ASSOCI S Fax:5032738169 Jun 9 2000 11:49 P.03 Wemwandum to rw Curbs Pte, 377200 We respectfully request that you provide us with written documentation confirming the above information. The letter should also be provided to the City of Tigard d as a replacement for the previous conditions of approval for the aocess submitted by ODOT during the site plan review process. We aMeclaDe your cooperation m this matter. Please let me know if you have any quesbans of Comments related to the if formation in this memorandum. g as~+ocrate~ neG P8902of2 Received: 6/12/00 11:46AM; 503 664 7297 MCKEEVER/MORRIS EPSTEIN; Page 5 06/12/00 12:19 '050 4 7297 CITY OF TIGARD X005/010 KITTELSON 8 FlSSOCIR S Fax:5032738169 Jun 9 2000 1149 P.04 ' ❑G M r~ . i ! OPOSED r 4 \ ~ R 'A r~l wm fso &F a +f F f+ irr ■ 4,aaz e_r. A _ fr l r 1 ie ~ ~ - I ~ i V a M d ~ V rI / 1a r IL r ~ p 41 1 rr I ~ `r ~ + e r + s. ~ I 4 , w BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an appeal of conditions of approval of a ) FINAL ORDER Director's decision approving an application for site ) development review for the Tigard Marketplace at ) SDR 2000-00005 13400-13580 SW Pacific Highway in the City of Tigard ) (Tigard Marketplace) A. SUMMARY 1. On April 28, 2000, the Director issued a decision conditionally approving site development review for renovation of the Tigard Marketplace shopping center subject to conditions. In particular, the applicant proposed to demolish one existing building (the Ameritone paint store), reconfigure the existing parking lot and south access, add to the front and rear of the grocery store (which will be occupied by the Hagen Company) , construct a retaining wall along a portion of the east edge of the site, and make other miscellaneous improvements. The conditions of approval involving the remaining issues on appeal include the following in relevant part:' 3. The applicant's construction plans shall indicate compliance with ODOT's letter to the City dated March 23, 2000... 8. The applicant shall obtain an ODOT access permit prior to the issuance of the City's building permit. The applicant shall modify its plans in accordance with ODOT's conditions of approval as contained in its letter of March 23, 2000 or as subsequently conditioned by ODOT. Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented to the City Engineer in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint access use or to update existing joint access agreements considering any changes to the accesses as a result of this development and must be recorded with Washington County and placed on permanent file with the City. 10. Applicant to record with the County and place on permanent file with the City, a crossover easement for the crosswalk which connects separate parcels. 12. The applicant shall provide a Noise Study and a detailed explanation and written plan to the Planning Division addressing the noise issues that have existed at the site, and how it will comply with the City's Noise Ordinance (Section 7.40.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code), and other agreements filed with the City related to regulation of noise on the site. This plan shall include, but not be limited to, provisions for noise due to existing and proposed truck loading and delivery, night workers, site and building cleaning, and loud music. The applicant shall specify the hours of work for early morning or late night workers relative to compliance with the Noise Ordinance, and the agreement regulating noise at the rear of the building. The applicant shall also address vibration issues due to occasional live music from the pub sufficient to determine compliance with the standards of the Community Development Code. The applicant shall provide a sound attenuating wall along the truck loading dock at the grocery store as part of the modifications to the plans. The appellant also appealed conditions 6, 7 9, 13-16, 18-19, 21, 23, 25 and 27. However the appellant and city staff resolved outstanding issues regarding those conditions before the public hearing in this matter, and the applicant withdrew its appeal with respect to those conditions prior to the hearing. • 0 33. Applicant to record with the County and place on permanent file with the City, a crossover easement for the crosswalk which connects separate parcels. 2. On May 12, 2000 the applicant filed an appeal of the Director's decision. The written appeal contains the following allegations, in relevant part: a. Regarding condition of approval 3, the applicant has a legal right of access to Pacific Highway, and ODOT cannot restrict it as provided in its letter of March 23. If ODOT can impose restrictions, there is no basis to do so in the record, because the existing access has not caused any accidents. Condition of approval 3 does not "support revitalization of the City'. ODOT's position conflicts with its policies to reduce vehicle miles traveled. Lastly the Director did not make the findings required by Tigard Community Development Code ("CDC") section 18.705 to require relocation of the existing access. b. Regarding condition of approval 10, the condition is unnecessary, because the site is "a fully integrated shopping center under one ownership." Condition of approval 33 is unnecessary for the same reason. c. Regarding condition of approval 12, a noise study is unnecessary, vague and ambiguous, and the requirement for a sound attenuating wall did not consider its impact in the redevelopment of the grocery store. 3. A City Hearings Officer conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the appeal. City staff recommended the appeal be denied. The applicant withdrew certain parts of the appeal based on changes in ODOT's recommendations for the site and disputed the recommendations of City staff. ODOT introduced a letter modifying the recommendations in its March 23 letter. One neighbor testified with concerns about noise. The hearings officer held open the record until July 3 to allow for introduction of certain new evidence and responses thereto. Based on the findings and conclusions contained herein and considering the testimony and evidence in the public record, the hearings officer denies the appeal, in part, and grants the appeal, in part, and affirms the Director's decision with certain modifications to the conditions of approval as provided herein. B. HEARING AND RECORD 1. Hearings Officer Larry Epstein (the "hearings officer") received testimony at the public hearing about this application on June 12, 2000. All exhibits and records of testimony are filed with the Tigard Department of Community Development. The hearings officer announced at the beginning of the hearing the rights of persons with an interest in the matter, including the right to request that the hearings officer continue the hearing or hold open the public record, the duty of those persons to testify and to raise all issues to preserve appeal rights, the manner in which the hearing will be conducted, and the applicable approval standards. The hearings officer disclaimed any ex parse contacts, bias or conflicts of interest. 2. At the hearing, City planner Karen Fox summarized the proposed site plan and discussed the conditions of approval that the applicant continues to appeal. a. She opined that the dispute about conditions of approval 3 and 8 is largely resolved by the June 12, 2000 letter from Gail Curtis of ODOT, which modified ODOT's earlier recommendations. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SDR 2000-00005 (Tigard Marketplace) page 2 • • b. Regarding conditions of approval 10 and 33, which requires crossover easements, she noted that the site consists of seven separate tax lots, and that one or more of the existing buildings appear to extend over the tax lot lines. This could be resolved by consolidating all of the tax lots into one through the County or City Building Division. In the absence of such consolidation, easements are needed to accommodate pedestrian pathways that cross tax lot lines. c. She discussed the need for condition of approval 12 to address historic problems with noise at the site, noting the City's noise regulations were adopted specifically in response to those problems. She argued that the proposed changes to the grocery store will extend the store closing to single family homes to the east and will continue to have loading and other activities between the store and those homes. Therefore there is an essential nexus between the proposed development and condition of approval 12. 3. In response to questions from the hearings officer, City planning manager Dick Bewersdorff opined that the requirement in condition of approval 12 that the applicant construct a noise attenuation wall is premature until a noise study is undertaken to determine what mitigation is needed to prevent noise levels from exceeding City standards. 4. Lawyer Michael Magnus and architect Frank Schmidt appeared for the applicant. a. Mr. Magnus withdrew the appeal of conditions of approval 3 and 8, based on the June 12 letter from Gail Curtis of ODOT. The applicant accepts the terms in ODOT's letter. b. Regarding conditions of approval 10 and 33, Mr. Magnus introduced a copy of a tax lot map. He argued that, based on the deed in the record, the subject property consists of one legal lot. Therefore it is unnecessary and untimely to provide cross easements for pedestrian pathways on the site. He acknowledged that the tax lots were separately owned in the past. He explained that it is convenient for the owner to pass- through the taxes to tenants using the tax lots. He was uncertain whether buildings cross tax lot lines. He was unsure whether the applicant would be willing to consolidate the tax lots into a single account. He requested that the record be held open so he can introduce a map showing the buildings and tax lot lines and so he can consult with his client regarding consolidation of tax lots. c. Regarding condition of approval 12, Mr. Magnus introduced text for a revised condition regarding noise. He noted the applicant is building a retaining wall on a portion of the east edge of the site, and that wall will reduce noise levels off-site. He discouraged the City from specifying noise measures beyond those in the City regulations. d. Mr. Schmidt testified the proposed retaining wall would consist of vertical steel pilings 10 to 12 feet on center with horizontal wood members between the pilings. The wall would be 16 feet high at its highest point near the southeast corner of the site and would drop gradually to 4 feet as it extends north. He expected work on the wall to begin within several weeks and to be completed within two months after it is started. e. Mr. Schmidt also testified that noise levels associated with loading activities behind the grocery store will be less than in the past, because the applicant will enclose the loading docks. Trucks will back-up to a rubber-sealed door so that materials will be unloaded into the building rather than onto the exterior loading dock. He also noted that neighbors can telephone the property manager if excessive noise occurs. 5. City staff responded to the testimony by Mr. Magnus and Mr. Schmidt. Hearings WIcer Final Order Appeal of SDR 2000-00005 (Tigard Marketplace) Page 3 a • a. Ms. Fox testified that, if the applicant consolidates the tax lots, that would resolve the City's concern, and crossover easements would not be necessary. However, unless that happens, the City remains concerned that buildings cross tax lot lines, contrary to City regulations and the Uniform Building Code. The applicant did not provide a scaled drawing that accurately depicts buildings and tax lot lines, so the City cannot determine whether buildings cross tax lot lines, but it cannot rule out that circumstance either. b. She also testified that, if condition of approval 12 is amended to delete the requirement that the applicant build a noise wall, the condition should require the applicant's noise study to include specific mitigation measures necessary to comply with City noise standards assuming realistic worst case conditions. The assumptions used in the study should be described clearly. For instance, if the noise study assumes that trucks will unload into an enclosed dock area, the study should describe in detail the nature of the enclosure and the expected operation of the loading area. Those assumptions should be part of any noise mitigation plan. c. Although the general rule is that tax lot lines do not divide property for purposes of ownership, Mr. Bewersdorff noted that the City has experience with Washington County treating tax lot lines as legal lot lines for purposes of conveying property. If that happens in the future with regard to this site, the City wants to be sure that there is a legal right for people to use all on-site pedestrian features. The applicant can do that by granting cross easements now or by consolidating tax lots so there is no potential for tax lots to be conveyed separately in the future. d. Regarding noise issues, Mr. Bewersdorff expressed concern about noise caused by trucks idling or operating refrigeration equipment behind the grocery store. If the applicant intends to prohibit certain employee behavior to prevent noise violations, then the applicant should be required to post signs on the property where such signs are reasonably expected to convey to those employees the nature of the behaviors being prohibited, and the applicant should be required to enforce those prohibitions. Mitigating measures should be sufficiently clear and objective so that they can be enforced readily by the applicant and, if necessary as a last resort, by the City. 6. Barbara Brennan, a neighbor to the east, testified with concerns about noise. She asked about parking behind the Bi-Mart store. Because of the proximity of that parking to her home and her experience that people use that area for parking late at night, it is problematic. She also expressed concern about noise caused by trucks accelerating and braking in the maneuvering area east of the shopping center building. Mr. Schmidt responded that the parking behind the store is for employees. Although it was an issue he had not considered before, he agreed the applicant could limit use of that area at night to reduce the potential for noise-related impacts. 7. At the conclusion of the hearing, the hearings officer ordered the record held open until July 3. The record was held open for one week (until June 19) for the applicant to introduce a map depicting buildings on the site and tax lot lines and other new evidence. The record was held open for a second week (until June 26) for the public and City staff to respond to that new evidence. The record was held open for a third week (until July 3) for the applicant to submit a final written argument without new evidence. a. Mr. Magnus submitted a statement dated June 16, 2000 in which he testified that the applicant will grant cross easements if necessary to assure access to public pedestrian pathways rather than to consolidate the tax lots. He withdrew the appeal of conditions of approval 10 and 33. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SDR 2000-00005 (Tigard Marketplace) Page 4 • 0 b. Ms. Fox submitted a written statement dated June 26, 2000 in which she observed that the City Building Division continues to have concerns about whether buildings cross tax lot lines, contrary to the Uniform Building Code. The applicant's failure to submit a map showing existing buildings and tax lots prevented the City from assessing that issue. A memo dated June 26 from City Senior Plans Examiner Robert Poskin, CBO, indicates that "[i]n order to ascertain the proposed construction is situated on its own parcel, I will require a site plan of the entire complex showing all existing and proposed property lines" including tax lot lines. C. DISCUSSION 1. City staff recommended the hearings officer affirm the planning director's decision and deny the appeal based on the April 28, 2000 decision (the "Decision") and the June 6, 2000 memorandum from Karen Fox to the hearings officer (the "Memo"). The hearings officer finds that the Decision and the Memo accurately identify the applicable standards and contain sufficient findings supported by substantial evidence to sustain the conditions of approval that the applicant continues to appeal. Therefore the hearings officer adopts those findings as his own, except to the extent expressly provided otherwise herein. 2. The hearings officer finds that conditions of approval 3 and 8 should be modified to reference ODOT's June 12, 2000 letter rather than the March 23 letter cited in the original condition of approval. 3. The hearings officer finds that conditions of approval 10 and 33 are authorized by law (CDC 18.705.030.F and K.3) and they are warranted by the facts. That is, the lack of information in the record prevents the planning director from determining whether there is sufficient assurance that pedestrian pathways will be available for public use in the future. If the applicant conveys one or more of the tax lots on the site to a third party without reserving a legal right for the public to use the pedestrian pathways across that tax lot, there will be no assurance that public access to the pathways will be continued. Based on the testimony and experience of Mr. Bewersdorff, it is possible the applicant could convey one or more of the tax lots on the site to a third party. Therefore, the applicant should be required to ensure the development complies with CDC 18.705.030.F and K.3. The applicant can do so in at least two ways: a. Consolidate all of the tax lots into one tax account so that there is no possibility that a portion of the property can be conveyed to a third party; or b. Grant cross-easements over the property where public pathways are proposed or required. Although it might be unusual for an owner to grant an easement over the owners property, there is nothing in the record to show such an easement cannot be granted under the law. Conditions of approval 10 and 33 should be modified consistent with the two alternatives listed above. In addition, authority should be delegated to the planning director to approve any other means of assurance deemed acceptable by the planning director. 4. The hearings officer finds that a condition of approval is authorized by law and warranted by the facts to comply with the City Noise Ordinance. That is, there is testimony in the record from two neighbors in response to this application and from many other persons in response to the consideration of the Noise Ordinance in 1989, all of which is in the record, that several of the businesses in the shopping center generate noise that disturbs the peaceful occupancy of abutting residential properties. It is unrebutted that deliveries and Hearings OfterFinal Order Appeal of SDR 2000-00005 (Tigard Marketplace) Page 5 • • parking do and will continue to occur between the building and the adjoining single family properties. Loading and loading of trucks and the operation of the trucks and refrigeration units in the trucks generates relatively high noise levels. Noise from the tavern in the shopping center and from patrons and employees of various businesses in the shopping center also generates relatively high noise levels at night. The proposed redevelopment of the shopping center will include building expansions toward the single family homes to the east; the greater proximity between outdoor activities. associated with use of the expandtd building make it more likely that noise generated by the shopping center will adversely affect residents of abutting homes and will violate the Noise Ordinance. Therefore a condition of approval is warranted to prevent such-a result. a. Condition of approval 12 requires the applicant to undertake and submit a noise study and to submit "a detailed explanation-and written plan addressing the noise issues... This plan shall include, but not be limited to, provisions for noise due to existing and proposed truck loading and delivery, night workers, site and building cleaning, and loud music." The hearings officer finds that part of the condition is warranted and appropriate to address the issue, although some refinement is warranted to more clearly and completely describe what the noise study should contain. b. Condition of approval 12 also requires the applicant to address vibration issues associated with loud music from the tavern in the shopping center. The proposed expansion of the shopping center is not reasonably likely to change the vibration effects of music at the tavern. Therefore there is no nexus between the condition and the proposed development, and this part of the condition should be deleted. However the City can cite the applicant for a violation of vibration standards independent of this review if the City has reason to believe uses in the shopping center are violating the vibration standards. c. Condition of approval 12 also requires the applicant to "provide a sound attenuating wall along the truck loading dock at he grocery store as part of the modifications of the plans." The hearings officer finds that it is premature to dictate a specific noise mitigation measure such as a wall. There is not sufficient evidence in the record to substantiate the need for (or the lack of need for) the wall. A wall may be warranted based on the result of the noise study. But, until the noise study is done, specific mitigation measures should not be required. Condition of approval 12 should be amended accordingly. d. The alternative condition suggested by Mr. Magnus (Exhibit 5) is not sufficient clear and complete to assure the proposed use will comply with the Noise Ordinance. D. CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings adopted and incorporated herein, the hearings officer concludes that the appeal should be denied in part and granted in part. The appeal should be granted to modify conditions of approval 3 and 8 to be consistent with ODOT's letter dated June 12, 2000; to modify conditions of approval 10 and 33 to provide for consolidation of tax lots as an alternative to the granting of easements; and to modify condition of approval 12 to delete the requirement for a noise wall and to more clearly and completely describe what the noise study should contain and how it should be reflected in the ultimate development and use of the subject property. In all other regards the appeal should be denied, because the applicant failed to sustain the burden of proof that further changes or deletion of conditions of approval are warranted by the relevant facts and the relevant law. Hearings Offxer Final Order Appeal of SDR 2000-00005 (Tigard Marketplace) Page 6 0 2. The hearings officer finds that the applicant should be required to provide a scaled site plan showing all existing or proposed buildings and development and all existing or proposed property or tax lot boundaries, so that the City can determine whether those buildings comply with applicable requirements of the Uniform Building Code. E. DECISION In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained and incorporated herein, the hearings officer hereby grants, in part, and denies, in part, the appeal of the Director's decision in the matter of SDR 2000-00005 (Tigard Marketplace) and affirms that decision with the following amendments: 1. Condition of approval 3 is hereby amended to read as follows: 3. The applicant's construction plans and operations shall comply with ODOT's letter to the City dated June 12, 2000. 2. Condition of approval 8 is hereby amended to read as follows: 8. The applicant shall obtain an ODOT access permit prior to the issuance of the City's building permit. The applicant shall modify its plans in accordance with ODOT's letter of June 12, 2000 or as subsequently conditioned by ODOT. Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented to the City Engineer in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint access use or to update existing joint access agreements considering any changes to the accesses as a result of this development and must be recorded with Washington County and placed on permanent file with the City. 3. Condition of approval 10 is hereby amended to read as follows: 10. The applicant shall provide a scaled site plan showing all existing or proposed buildings and development and all existing or proposed property or tax lot boundaries, so that the City can determine whether those buildings comply with applicable requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The applicant also shall do at least one of the following: a. Consolidate all of the tax lots that comprise the shopping center into one tax lot, and file appropriate documents to that effect with Washington County; or b. Record with the County and place on permanent file with the City an easement or easements, consistent with the applicable requirements of CDC 18.705.030, over pedestrian and bicycle pathways on the site where the pathway(s) cross tax lot lines or property lot lines; or c. Assure continuing public access to public pedestrian and bicycle pathways on the site by means deemed acceptable by the planning director. Hearings 011cerFinal Order Appeal of SDR 2000-00005 (Tigard Marketplace) page 7 0 9 4. Condition of approval 12 is hereby amended to read as follows: 12. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Director for review and approval a noise study prepared by a professional engineer licensed in Oregon with expertise in acoustical engineering. a. The noise study shall include all assumptions on which it is based, including assumptions about structures and their location on the site, the noise-generating nature of delivery vehicles, including assumptions about noise levels from truck engines, assumed truck speeds, noise from refrigeration units, noise from emergency alarms (e.g., back-up alarms), noise from people, noise from activities in the shopping center (e.g., live or recorded music, site maintenance activities, and use of outdoor amplified sound systems, if any) and noise from customer/employee vehicles. Any assumptions about operations at the shopping center shall be listed (e.g., assumptions that trucks will only unload into interior of the grocery store and will not unload onto the loading dock). A realistic schedule of deliveries shall be considered. b. The noise study shall estimate noise levels from realistic "worst case" conditions at a representative sample of homes adjoining the site, including the homes where noise levels are expected to be the highest during daytime hours (7 AM - 10 PM) and night time hours (10 PM - 7 AM). C. The noise study shall describe in detail measures reasonably necessary to ensure the shopping center does not generate noise in excess of limits permitted by the City Noise Ordinance. The measures shall address limits on noise of employee activity, public and employee parking, loading and unloading activities, and other conditions reflected in the noise study. The applicant shall comply with the noise mitigation measures in the approved noise study or with other measures deemed acceptable by the planning director. d. The planning director shall review the noise study pursuant to a Type I process or as part of a final site development review process. If the director finds the noise study is consistent with this condition of approval and the City Noise Ordinance, the director shall approve the study or approve it with conditions the director finds are necessary to comply with this condition of approval and the City Noise Ordinance. Hearings Officer Final Order Appeal of SDR 2000-000OS (Tigard Marketplace) page 8 . t • . MEMORANDUM TO: Larry Epstein FROM: Karen Perl Fox RE: Appeal of Director's Decision to approve with conditions the Tigard Marketplace Renovations, Casefile: SDR 2000-00005. DATE: June 6, 2000 Background: On April 28, 2000, the Director issued a decision to approve, subject to conditions, a request for shopping center renovation including the demolition of an existing building (the Ameritone paint store), reconfiguration of the existing parking lot and south access, Front and rear additions to the grocery store building, and enhancements to the front of the shopping centers. On May 12, 2000, the applicant filed an appeal of certain conditions of approval contained in the decision. A summary of the conditions appealed, related criteria in the Community Development Code and staffs response follows. Conditions # 3 and #8 - South Access: 18.705 and 18.810 The applicant has appealed the City's condition which upholds ODOT's ultimate decision regarding any restrictions to the southerly access. ODOT's letter of March 23, 2000 restricts the southerly access on Pacific Highway 99W to a right-in only access. The applicant based the appeal on the assertion that ODOT has estopped or changed this access, has no basis to impose such a condition, and that ODOT's position does not support the revitalization of the City of Tigard. Staff Response: ODOT is a state agency with regulatory responsibility to ensure that negative impact to the highway generated by development is avoided or mitigated ODOT's authority is set forth in ORS 374 and OAR 734, Division 50 (Division 51 will supersede Division 50 and become effective April 1, 2000 pertaining to ODOT access permits). The City of Tigard is a local jurisdiction required to comply with state law as it pertains to ODOT's authority as a state agency. Staff considers the applicant's appeal to be an objection to ODOT's decision. The appeal fails to address the City's legal obligation to uphold ODOT's decision-making authority, in this case regarding impacts from development on Pacific Highway 99W. Apparently, there is ongoing discussion occurring between ODOT and the applicant regarding the southerly access restrictions. The City's condition is intended to uphold ODOT's ultimate and final decision in this matter, and not to supercede ODOT's final decision. Page 1 of 3 . *A , Memo to Hearing's Officer Appeal of Director's Decision Tigard Marketplace Renovations Casefile No. 2000-00005 Condition #10 and #33 - Crossover easement: 18.705.030 The applicant has objected to this condition based on the statement that "the property and it improvements are a fully integrated shopping center under one ownership". Staff Response: The property is currently comprised of seven lots under one ownership with multiple tenants. It was not clear from the land use application whether separate parcels were intended for individual buildings and where the property lines would ultimately be located in relationship to the buildings and crosswalks. Therefore, Staff included this condition in the case that a crosswalk was located across and connecting separate parcels. This condition can be removed if the applicant provides evidence for review and approval that the property is in one ownership and will not be divided, and will not be sold in separate parcels. Condition #12- Noise study: 18.725.030 The applicant objects to the requirement for a noise study, stating that it will comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. Further, the applicant objects to the requirement of a sound attenuating wall without further consideration of its impact on the redevelopment. Staff Response: Comments were received from two adjacent residential property owners regarding historical problems with noise related to deliveries behind the grocery store building, the noise created by workers at night, and other noise issues related to loud music. Both the neighbors and the applicant have acknowledged that there have been past problems in complying with the City's Noise Ordinance. In City Council hearings dated June 12, 1989 and July 10, 1989, the City Council revised the Noise Ordinance because of problems encountered with the Tigard Marketplace shopping center. The proposed renovation includes a rear addition to the grocery store building bringing the building approximately 50 feet closer to the southeast corner of the site which abuts residential property, and approximately 40 feet closer to the east property line which abuts residential property. In addition, two truck delivery spaces are required in this renovation (there was only one truck delivery space previously). The applicant has proposed to place the truck loading area approximately 20 feet closer to the east property line, or approximately 45 feet from the east property line, and approximately 33 feet from the retaining wall, inside the east property line. A trash compactor is also proposed by the applicant to be newly located to the rear of the grocery store building. Staff is, therefore, concerned that noise impacts to the adjacent residential property owners may be increased due to the proposed project. Page 2 of 3 Memo to Hearing's Officer Appeal of Director's Decision Tigard Marketplace Renovations Casefile No. 2000-00005 Section 18.725.030 regulates both noise and vibration. Standard 18.725.030.A, Noise states that for the purpose of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Standard 18.725.030.0 Vibration states that no vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles, trains and aircraft is permitted in any given zoning district which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. A noise study prepared by a qualified professional is typically required by the City when there is a concern about compliance with the City's maximum noise and vibration levels due to a development proposal. The need for a noise study is warranted as Staff cannot make a final determination as to whether the proposed alterations of the shopping center will meet or exceed the City's maximum noise and vibrations levels without ensuring that noise has been measured with a calibrated sound level meter as required in the TMC Section 7.40.180, and vibration has been measured with the appropriate instruments at the property line as require in the TDC Section 18.725.030.C. The noise study shall include the data for determining the construction specifications for a sound attenuating wall along the truck loading area. Due to the location of the rear addition of the grocery store building and its truck delivery and trash compactor location combined with the history of problems with noise at this site, the need for the noise study is warranted, and the requirement for a sound attenuating wall have attached a list of all attached Exhibits. I: curpl nika renlsd rlsdr00-5app.doc Page 3 of 3 EXHIBITS For Tigard Marketplace (SDR 20000-00005) Appeal Hearing Scheduled June 12, 2000 Exhibit A....... Public Hearing Notice Exhibit B....... June 5, 2000 letter from Michael Magnus, Attorney for Tigard Marketplace Exhibit C ......Appeal of Director's Decision to approve with conditions the Tigard Marketplace Renovations, Casefile No. SDR 2000-00005 submitted by Applicant/Owner on May 12, 2000. Exhibit D ......Type II Staff Decision for Site Development Review (SDR) 2000-00005 dated April 28, 2000. Exhibit E....... May 25, 2000 letter from Frank Schmidt, Architect to Lenny Hing, Pride Disposal, regarding trash compactor. Exhibit F....... April 6, 2000 letter from Austin P. Duenas, P. E., City Engineer to Mark A. Vandehey, P.E., Kittleson & Associates regarding southerly access analysis. Exhibit G ......April 12, 2000 letter from John Hatzung to Frank Schimdt, Tiland/Schimdt Architects, P.C. Exhibit H ......Comment letter dated March 18, 2000 from William and Barbara Brennan. Exhibit 1........ Comment letter received March 20, 2000 from Teresa and Scott McCrae. Exhibit J .......March 23, 2000 ODOT letter. Exhibit K....... February 29, 2000 letter from Frank Schmidt to City of Tigard providing clarification on land-use application. Exhibit L....... February 24, 2000 letter from Augustin Duenas, P.E., Tigard City Engineer, to ODOT. Exhibit M ......October 21, 1999 letter from Chi Mai, Transportation Analyst to Marah Danielson, ODOT. Exhibit N ......Agenda and Minutes from City Council Meetings on June 12, 1989 and July 10, 1989 related to Amendment to the Tigard Municipal Code, Chapter 7.40 (Noise). Exhibit O ......Site Development Review Type II application and Documentation (Narrative) dated January 28, 2000 and submitted February 3, 2000. Pans Exhibit P....... May 30, 2000 Revised Sheet A11.2, Site Development Plan received May 31, 2000. Exhibit Q Revised Sheet EPHI, Photometric Plan received May 31, 2000. Exhibit R Plans submitted Feb 3, 2000 with original application including Architectural Drawings (Site Development Plan, Phase One Pad Preparation, Elevations, Details, Tower and Canopy Sections) Civil Engineering Drawings, Existing and Proposed Landscape Plan, and Partial Photometric Plan. I:curplnikarenlsdrlsdr00-5app.doc NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENH 'VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRE~T IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER PUBLIC NEARING NOTICE EXHIBIT A CITY OF TIGARD Community -Development ShapingA Better Communit) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER. AT A MEETING ON MONDAY. JUNE 12, 2000 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW [SOR]2000-00005 FILE TITLE: APPEAL OF TIGARD MARKETPLACE REDEVELOPMENT & EKPANSION APPLICANT Frank Schmidt OWNER: 13500 Pacific Corp. Tiland/Sc[ridt Architects, P.C. c/o Capozzoli Advisors for Pensions, Inc. 333 SW 5 Avenue, Suite 406 38345 W. Ten Mile Road, Suite 170 Portland, OR 97204 Farmington Hills, MI 48335 ITEM ON APPEAL: On April 28, 2000, the Director issued a decision to approve, subject to conditions, a request for shopping center renovation including the demolition of an existing building the Ameritone paint store), reconfiguration of the existing parking lot and south access, front and rear additions to the grocery store building, and enhancements to the front of the shopping center stores. On May 12, 2000, the applicant filed an appeal of certain conditions of approval contained in the decision. The specific conditions appealed and items to which they are related are summarized as follows: Condition #3 and 48 South access Conditions #6 and #7 On-site water quality facility Condition #9 Walkway connection Condition #10 and #33 Crossover easement Condition #12 Noise study Condition #13 Trash enclosures Conditions #14,15,16 Landscaping Condition #18 Waste & Recyclable Storage Condition #19 Wheel stops Condition #21 and d #27 Lighting Condition #23. Bicycle parking spaces Condition #25 Loading docks LOCATION: 13400-13580 SW Pacific Highway; WCTM 2S102CC, Tax Lots 100, 200, 500, 800, 801, 900 and 901. ZONE: General Commercial; C-G. The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail goods and services. Permitted uses in the C-G zoning district are public agency administrative services, lodge, fraternal and civic assembly, parking, amusement, animal sales and services, automotive sales and light equipment repairs, APPLICABLE among other uses. REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED: 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765 and 18.810_ THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER AND CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES AR~VAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPA~D HEARING. THE.CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR ,LIFTED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERP WRS AND QUALIFIED;-,BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A.PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE OR DOCUMENTS LESS THAN 7 DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE, THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY MAY ALLOW A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING, SUBJECT TO ORS 215.428 OR 227.178. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THE CRITERIA LISTED OR OTHER CRITERIA IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH THE PERSON BELIEVES TO APPLY TO THE DECISION. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST, ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AND ALL PARTIES TO RESPOND PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT WHICH A COMMENT IS DIRECTED PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25t) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25-,) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER, KAREN PERL FOX, AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. JUN-d-00, 03:45PM FROM-ANDERSON4 W/MAGNUS +6469846 • T-222 P.01/03 F-514 EXHIBIT 8 MICHAEL G. MAGNUS, P.C. Park Plaza West - Suite 460 10700 SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy. Beaverton, Oregon 97005 TELEPHONE (503) 641-7468 FACSIMILE (503) 646-9846 E-Mail mgm@ucinet.com Michael G. Magnus (Oregon and California Bars) DATE June 5, 2000 FROM Michael G. Magnus RE Tigard Marketplace I Raggen OUR FILE NO. 504-004 PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING PAGE(S) TO: NAME Ms. Karen Fox FACSIMILE NO. 684-7297 TIME SENT . We are transmitting a total of 3 page(s), INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, PLEASE CALL US AT (503) 641-7468 OR RETURN A NOTE TO FACSIMILE NO. (503) 646-9846. MESSAGE Please review the enclosed. Thank you. The information contained in the facsimile message is privileged and confidential. It is intended only for the use of the recipient named above. If you received this in error, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. if you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by Telephone immediately, and return the original message to us at the above address via U_S_ Postal Service_ We will, of comm. be happy to reimburse your postage costs. Tbank you. ORIGINALS [ ] Will follow First Class Mail cc: Mr. Randy Pottef (248-476-2760) Mr. Frank Schmidt (220-8518) Joel M. Gordon, Esq. (206-626-0675) JUN-05-00, 03':45PM FROM-ANDERSON & ON/MAGNUS +6468646 CCHAEL G. MAGNUS r_A park Plaza West - Suice 460 10700 SW Beavemn-HMsUe Hwy. Beaverton, Oregon 97005 - TELEPHONE (503) 641-7468 FACSINV[IIE (503) 646.9846 Michael G. Magnus (Omgon and California Sacs) June 5, 2000 Ms. Karen Fox City of Tigard Planning Division 12125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Appeal of Conditions of Approval City of Tigard File No. 2000-00005 Tigard Marketplace Dear Ms. Fox: T-222 P.02/03 F-514 A ACSIMILE AND FIRST CLASS MAIL F am the attorney for the Owner/Applicant. On its behalf I filed an appeal of certain of the City's conditions of approval. Last week, representatives of the Owner, you and representatives for Haggen, Inc., the proposed tenant met to discuss those items in detail. At that time the Owner's architect, Frank Schmidt, presented revised plans and specifications. During the meeting, it was determined that certain items of appeal can be resolved directly between the City and the Owner/Applicant without the necessity of the appeal. This letter is intended to outline those items and advise the hearings officer that such items do not need to be considered at next week's appeal hearing. i will refer to the "Conditions" as set forth in the City's Notice of Type IT Decisions, dated April 29, 2000. Conditions 6 and 7 may be removed from the appeal. The Owner's engineer and architect wiU work directly with Brian Rager of the City's Engineering Department. 2. Condition 9 was resolved at the meeting. This item may be removed from the appeal. Condition 13 will be resolved with the Haggen application for its building. 4. Conditions 14, 15, and 16 will be resolved between City and Applicant's architect and may be removed from the appeal. JUN45-04 03:46PM FROM-ANDERSON& ON/MAGNUS +6469646 T-222 P.03/03 F-514 MICHAEL G. MAGNUS, Ms. Karen Fox June 5, 2000 Page 2 5. Condition 18 will be satisfied between the City and the Applicant. This item is removed from the appeal. 6. Condition 19 will be satisfied between the City and the Applicant. This item is removed from the appeal. 7. Conditions 21 and 27 will be satisfied between the City and the Applicant. These items can be removed from The appeal. 8. Condition 23 can be removed from the appeal and can be resolved with the City and Applicant. 9. Condition 25 was resolved as there are two loading docks on the revised plans. All other conditions referenced in my appeal remain subject to the appeal. If you have any questions, please call me. MGM:dt cc: Mr. Frank Schmidt Mr. Randy Potterf Joel M. Gordon, Esq. 504%004VQ. fox,ci rylaggenappeal Very truly yours, t.icl . MAGNUS, P.C. Q Nf . ~ . • EXHIBIT C APPEAL FILING FORM LFOR LAND USE DECISIONS TYPE II CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX.' (503) 684-7297 The City of Tigard supports the citizen's right to participate in local government. Tigard's Land Use Code, therefore, sets out specific requirements for filing appeals on certain land use decisions. The following form has been developed to assist you In filing an appeal of a land use decision in proper form. To determine what filing fees will be required or to answer any questions you have regarding the appeal process, please contact the Planning Division or the City Recorder at the phoneffax listed at the top of this form. GENERAL INFORMATION Property Address/Location(s) and Name(s) of the Application Being Appealed: 13400-13580 SW Pacific Highway How Do You Qualify AS A Party?: Applicant/Owner . Par Plaza West Suite 4bU Appellant's Address: 10700 SW Bvtn-Hillsdale Hwy - City/State: Beaverton, OR Zip: 97005 Day Phone Where You Can Be Reached:( 503 641-7468 Scheduled Date Decision Is To Be Final: May 13 , 2000 Date Notice of Final Decision Was Given: April 28, 2000 Specific Grounds For Appeal or Review: See attached • = FORSTAFF' USE".,ONL~Y,. a: . .,Case`;No (s}. Case+Name(s): Receipt No.. Application Accepted By: Date:' Approved A$,To form By. Date: cbenied; „-AsTd~Forrn By: •f~_ . L' Date: Rev. 10/3186 " L%curP1nlrriastersla0pe I.doc REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS ✓ Application Elements Submitted: ❑ Appeal Filing Form (completed) ❑ Filing Fee (based on criteria below) D Directors Decision to Hearings Officer $ 250.00 > Expedited Review (deposit) $ 300.00 > Hearing Referee $ 500.00 > Planning Commission/Hearing's Otficer to City Council $1.745.00 Transcript) Siggature(s) of Appellant(s): . iMAGNUS, P.C. Micnaei u. via us, tsq. Attorney for Pw~er/Applicant APPEAL FILING FORM FOR LAND USE DECISIONS 1: eurpintmasterslappeal (OVER FOR ADDITIONAL WRITING SPACE) PAGE 1 OF 1 BEFORE THE CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN THE MATTER OF TILAND SCHMIDT, APPLICANT 13500 PACIFIC CORP., OWNER TIGARD MARKETPLACE CASE NO. SDR2000-00005 APPEAL OF LAND USE DECISION TYPE II Background Facts The real property located at 13400-13580 SW Pacific Highway which is legally described on the attached and incorporated by this reference Exhibit "1" (the "Property") and is commonly known as Tigard Marketplace. The Owner of the Property is 13500 Pacific Corp ("Owner"). The Owner caused its architect, Frank Schmidt ("Applicant"), to file certain land use applications with the City of Tigard in connection with the remodeling of one of the existing buildings located on the Property. The building consists of approximately 40,000 square feet (the "Building") The City of Tigard Planning Staff ("Staff') issued its Application Summary and Conditions of Approval ("Approval Conditions") on April 28, 2000. The Approval Conditions become effective on May 13, 2000 unless appealed. Owner and Applicant hereby appeal those certain Approval Conditions as hereinafter set forth. The Building located on the Property has been used by a grocery store tenant. It is currently unoccupied. The Owner has leased the Building to Haggen, Inc., which plans to open a grocery store in the Building after it is remodeled. Haggen is preparing plans for this purpose. In that regard, the Owner will remove the Ameritone Store located near the south access off of Highway 99 and reconfigure the parking lot to accommodate the needs of Haggen. The Owner will also enhance the front of the stores (not any pad sites store) to make them architecturally harmonious with the Haggen store. Anneal of Approval Conditions Owner and Applicant appeal the following Conditions of Approval, designated by reference to the numbers of the Conditions, which are set forth on pages 2 thru 5 of the Approval Conditions. Each Condition will be referred to by the numbers in the Approval Conditions. 1. Condition 3. Application and Owner object to this Condition 3 for the following reasons: a. Pursuant to that certain deed dated March 31, 1988, Recorded April 5, 1988, Fee No. 88-193942, Official Records, Washington County, Oregon, Owner owns deeded access to its south access from the State of Oregon, by and through the Oregon Department of Transportation ("ODOT" Such Deed expressly provides that this south access is unrestricted. A copy of the Deed is attached as Exhibit "B." ODOT is estopped or waived its rights to change such unrestricted access. b. ODOT has no basis to impose such condition. Owner has supplied ODOT with a comprehensive traffic study prepared by Kittleson & Associates ("Kittleson") which clearly shows that no traffic accidents have occurred at this south access. The Kittleson Report does not support ODOT's position. In effect, there is no rational basis for ODOT's position. State Highway Commission v. Burk, 200 Or 211, 265 P2d 783 (1954). c. ODOT's position does not support the revitalization of the City of Tigard. The south access is crucial to attract the caliber of grocery store which will improve the Property consistent with the City's overall land use and comprehensive plan. In addition, the current tenants whose customers utilize the south access believe it is an important component of their businesses. As noted in the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan, the plan emphasizes "Increased 2 partnerships, particularly with regional and local governments." On February 24, 2000, Agustin P. Duenas, P.E., City Engineer (attached as Exhibit "Y) on behalf of the City informed ODOT that the City supported the continuation of the south access in its current status, as a right in/right out. ODOT ignored the City's position on this issue. Also, see Goal 1 and 2 of the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan. Moreover, at the neighborhood meeting, on December 29, 1999, the neighbors and residents of the City strongly supported the location of a Haggen store on the Property. d. ODOT's position conflicts with its own policy to reduce mileage traveled by motor vehicles (see chart, page 25, Benchmark Goals, 1999 Oregon Highway Plan). Currently, there is no modern grocery store in the inner core of the City of Tigard located on Highway 99. The more modern stores are Safeway and Albertsons (near King City) and Fred Meyer (near Interstate 5). If a major, modem grocery store is placed on the Property, this will attract the local neighborhoods to utilize this store, which, will, in turn, reduce the miles traveled to other locations. In addition, due to its proximity to local neighborhoods it will facilitate walking, biking, and other transit use to the Tigard Marketplace Center (note: a Starbucks will be a subtenant of Haggens), which is another important goal of the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan. See Quality Development Objectives, page 29, 1999 Oregon Highway Plan. e. The Owner has a vested right in the south access pursuant to the Deed. This shopping center on the Property was constructed in 1986. In connection with the development of the shopping center, ODOT and the City of Tigard, vacated streets and rearranged Highway 99 to allow the shopping center to be developed as it currently exists. f Finally, none of the conditions exist under the City of Tigard Code Chapter 18.705. In other words, there is no finding that the south access needs to be changed under the City's own standards. In fact, as noted above, the City's own engineer advocated continuation of the south access as a right in/right out. 2. Conditions 6 and 7. There is no basis under Resolution and Order No. 00-7 to require an on-site water quality facility where the proposed plan will cause only a nominal increase in the asphalt impervious surface. Further, such ordinance allows for a fee in lieu. Owner will pay a fee in lieu for the additional, new asphalt surface which will be necessitated by the redevelopment of the Building. 3. Condition S. See comments under Section I of this appeal memorandum. 4. Condition 9. Owner and Applicant appeal only that part of this Condition 9 which requires a pedestrian walkway along the main or middle access. This is a safety issue, and Owner and Applicant believe that the location of a pedestrian access walkway in this middle access area is unsafe: S. Condition 10. This is unnecessary. The Property and its improvements are a fully integrated shopping center under one ownership. Further, an Owner cannot grant itself an easement over its own property. If the Property is divided or sold in separate parcels at some future date, then this condition might be appropriate. 6. Condition 12. This is an existing shopping center. A noise study is unnecessary. Owner will comply with the City's Noise Ordinance as it stated in the neighborhood meeting. Condition 12 is also vague and ambiguous. Owner objects to the sound attenuating wall without further consideration of its impact on the redevelopment of the Building for Haggen. 7. Condition 13. This condition is arbitrary and capricious because the system which will be proposed by Haggen is an enclosed, compactor to be located adjacent and accessible from 4 the inside of the redeveloped Building. This condition is also premature as the redevelopment plans for the Building have not yet been submitted to the City. 8. Conditions 14, 15 and 16. This Property is an existing shopping center. It has mature landscaping located throughout the Property. These conditions sacrifice well-developed landscaping, cause a loss of parking, and impair the visibility of the businesses in the Center. If this were the development of a new center, these conditions would be appropriate. These conditions do not comply with City Code Section 18.745.010(A)(1), which provides: "The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards for landscaping, buffering, and screening of land use within Tigard in order to enhance the aesthetic environmental quality of the City: "1. By protecting existing street trees and requiring the planting of street trees in new developments." The plan proposed by Owner/Applicant serves this purpose and these conditions defeat such goal. 9. Condition 18. This requirement is premature. The recycling operation for the grocery store will be included in its plans and can be made a part of its conditions preparatory to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The last sentence of this condition should be stricken as it does not apply to waste disposal. 10. Condition 19. These are inappropriate. They cause a safety hazard to people who routinely trip over them. In addition, it is difficult to clean a parking lot as these wheels stop, trap garbage and create unslightly conditions, which are anathema to Haggen. 11. Conditions 21 and 27. These conditions contradict each other. They are vague and ambiguous. The Owner cannot determine if it can comply with both of these conditions. 5 12. Condition 23. The condition is vague and ambiguous. It is based on gross area of the Building as redeveloped. However, only 70% of the redeveloped building will be used for sales. The condition does not allow for flexibility in locating the number of bicycle spaces in the Center. 13. Condition 25. The redeveloped Building contains two loading docks as shown on Owner's/Applicant's plans. This condition should be deleted as the plans do comply. 14. Condition 33. See Comments under Section 5 of this Appeal of Conditions. To the extent any of the Sections IV thru IX, inclusive in the Approval Conditions or any other part of the Approval Conditions refer to the foregoing Conditions appealed, those Sections are also appealed. This Appeal of Conditions is dated May 12, 2000. By: 50410041appeal.city.tigard.haggen Respectfully submitted, MICHAEV G! MAGNWS, P.C. Midhael G. Magnus, C Attorney for Owner/A 6 EXHIBIT "A" A tract of land being a portion of the George Richardson Donation Land Claim No. 38, situated in the Southwest one-quarter, Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southeasterly comer of that tract of land as conveyed to Heinz Sauerberry recorded in Book 1200, page 556, Washington County Deed Records, said point also being the Southwest corner of Lot 8, BEREA, a plat of record; thence along the West line of said BEREA plat North 0°43'30" East 240.79 feet; thence along the Westerly adjusted property lines of lots in the plats of BEREA and CRESMER HILLS, as described in Recorder's Fee Nos. 90-55344,90-55343,90-67243.90-55342,90-55341,90-55340 and 90-55339 the following courses: North 0°32'37' West 68.77 feet; North 14°59'28" West, 8.38 feet; North 6"57'30' West, 8.19 feet; North 2°3050" East, 17.60 feet; thence 6°4039" East, 8.91 feet; North 11' 16'32" East, 8.42 feet; North 0°02'44" East 42.73 feet; North 8°4437' West 16.48 feet; North 15°09'40" East, 9.39 feet; North 0"30'37' East, 76.40 feet; North 6' 1445" West, 9.93 feet; North 9°58'26" East, 7.16 feet; North 0°43'29" East 34.11 feet; North 88' 23'20" West, 8.01 feet; North 0' 53'25" East, 49.60 feet; North 89' 52'03" East, 7.41 feet; North 0°25'25" West, 35.41 feet, North 89°13'30" West, 6.76 feet; North 0°39'56' East 236.03 feet; North 89°41'49" East, 7.00 feet; North 0°28'30" West 19.08 feet to a point on the Southwesterly line of that tract of land conveyed to Roland and Mary Ingalls, recorded In Book 270, page 455, Washington County Deed Records, said point bears North 50'2848' West, a distance of 5.98 feet from the Southeast comer of said Ingalls tract; thence along the Southwesterly line of said Ingalls tract and a Westerly projection thereof, North 50' 28'48" West 322.17 feet to the most Northerly comer of that tract of land conveyed to Tigard East Associates, recorded In Fee No. 87 31809, Washington County Deed Records, said point being 48.0 feet, when measured at right angles, from the center line of Highway 99W; thence along the Northwesterly line of said Tigard East Associates parcel and parallel with the center line of said Highway 99W, South 34'23'38' West 391.12 feet to a point opposite Engineer's Station 128+30 of said Highway 99W; thence continuing along said Northwesterly line, South 7"49'44` West 29.07 feet to a point that is 61 feet opposite Engineer's Station 128+56; thence South 27'26'27' West 82.61 feet to a point that is 71.0 feet opposite Engineer's Station 129+36; thence South 59'57'14" West, 25.50 feet to a point that is 60.0 feet opposite Engineer's Station 129+61; thence South 34°2338" West, 91.00 feet to a point that is 60.0 feet opposite Engineer's Station 130+52; thence South 39" 15'02' West, 153.55 feet to a point that is 47.0 feet opposite Engineer's Station 132+05; thence South 18"41'07' West 33.24 feet to a point that is 56.0 feet opposite Engineer's Station 132+37; thence South 30'28'32' West, 73.17 feet to a point that is 61.0 feet opposite Engineers Station 133+10; thence South 83'32'03" West, 15.61 feet to a point of intersection with the Northwesterly projection of the Southwesterly line of that tract of land as conveyed to Sherman E. Lee recorded in Fee No. 80 23996, Washington County Deed Records; thence along the Southwesterly line of said Lee tract and its Northwesterly projection and also the Southwesterly line of above stated Sauerberry tract South 53"38'52' East 633.24 feet to a point on the North line of FRELEON HEIGHTS NO. 2 a plat of record; thence along the Southerly line of said Sauerberry tract and the North line of said FRELEON plat, North 89°32'42" East 13.41 feet to the Northwest comer of Lot 22, FRELEON HEIGHTS NO. 2; thence along the Northerly line of Fee No. 90-55345 the following courses: North 0'27'18" West 1.15 feet; North 84'39'30" East 11.33 feet; North 89032'32" East, 74.62 feet; South 85'05'03' East 14.15 feet; South 0627'18" East 0.79 feet to a point on the Northerly line of said FRELEON PLAT; thence North 89'32'42" East 115.30 feet to, the point of beginning. U". " .101T PAGE "!N . - - _ . Higl..ay Division 4'~fI File 56796 Map No. 1R-3-1547 88-13942 ' >DORMCM D® wuAlnplon coonly PORMAM Yrrr it MUM PAJ[2MLSM, an Oregon limited partnership. Grantor, hereby conveys unto the 8TM W ORK005, by and through its WARM= OF ti - TRAMPO 7MOf, Rigbway Uivistan, Crante^, fee title to the following described m ptoperty, to wit: t~ rARM I A parcel of land lying in the reorg.- Richardson D.L.C. No. 38, J _ lownsh;, 2 South. Range 1 Went, W.M., Washington County, Oregon and being a portion of that property described in those deeds to Tigard East Associates recorded as Microfilm Document Nos. 85-13434, 85-134:5 and J 85-13437. all of Washington County Book of Records and that portion of vacated Taylors Bridge Road (County Road No. 477) inuring to said property vacated by ^rdinance No. 86-19 of the Official Records of the City of Tigard. Oregon, the said parcel being that portion of said property and said vacated Tayl^ss Bridge Road included in a strip of land varl-ble In width, lying on the SoutheaeL..-:y side of said center 1.r- which center line is described as follows: .ti Begi-ming at Engineer's center line Station 124+00, said station being 1773.24 feet North and 644,b3 feet East of the ",kthwest corner of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 :debt, W.M.; thence South 33° 57' `a.~v'`%• West 1000 feet to Engineer's center line Station 134+00. The vidrhs in feet of the strip of land above referred to are as .y; follows: Station to Station Width on Southeasterly Side o° Center Line 124+00 ;28+30 48 4 128+30 128+56 48 in a straight line to 61 128+56 1[3+38 61 in a straight line to 71 129+38 129+61 7l in a straight line to 60 129+61 130+52 60 10+52 132+05 60 in a straight line to 47 132+05 132+37 47 in a straight line to 56 132+37 133:10 56 in a straight line to 51 133+10 133+20.38 61 in a straight line to 49 133+20.38 134+00 49 I' PeariNs are based c-i Oregon State Hfehvay Divls!on Survey. See Drawing ho. 38-22-3, dated 1530. The parcel of land to which this dePcription applies -intalns 6,530 square feet, more or leas, outside of the existing right of way. - - - U-M 3-25-88 13 j }f~ 1 OF - - - low Highway ivision - - Pile 5679 Hap No. M-3-1547 OC TOGETHER WITH all abutter's rights of access between the above-described prr.;el and Grantor's remaining real property. EXCEPT, however, Reserving access rights, for the service of Grantor's remaining property, to and from said remaining property to the abutting highway at the following 'lace_, in the following widths. and for the following purposes: Hwy. Engr's Ste. Side of Hwy. Width Purpose - - - - - = _ sD - 128+69 - -V- - Left unrestticted 132+50 Left 33' unrestricted 40 Grantor also grants co Grsntez. its successors and assigns, a .._rmanent easement for the installation, operation, and maintenance of a traffic control facility, and its N j 411, appurtenance-t, including trattic signal vehicle loop detectors, under, over, and acres the following described property, to writ: PARCB. 2 A parcel of land lying in the George Richardson D.L.C. No. 38, Township 2 South, Range l West, W.N., Washington County, Oregon and ws being a portion of that property described in that deed to Tigard East i` Associates recorZed as Hicrof;lm Document No. 85-13434 of Washington County Book of Records and that portion of vacated T.t-,lors Bridge Road (County ?-)ad No. 4??) inuring to said property vacated by Ordinance No. 86-19 0: the Official Records of the City of Tigard, Oregon; the said parcel being that portion of said property and said vacated Taylors Bridge Road lying between lines at right angles to the center line of the relochted Pacific Highway West at Engineer's Stations '_26+71 and 129+03 and included in a strip of land '15 feet in width, lying on the Southeasterly side of said center line which center line 1s described in i Parcel 1. EXCEPT therefrom Parcel 1. The parcel of land to wh;ch this description.applies cintaina 1.616 square feet, more or less. IT IS UNDERSTOOD that the easement herein granted does not convey any right or interest in the above-described Parcel 2, except as stated herein, nor prevent Grantor from the use of said property; provided, however, that such use does not interfere with the rights herein grente-4.. Grantee, its euccessors and assigns, shall have the right 3°75-88 Page 2 - WD C • File 56796 Map No. 1R-3-1347.. to go upon the real property her.inabove described for the. purpose of installing, operating, and maintaining said traffic control facility and its appurtenances. Grantor hereby covenants to and with Grantee, its successors_and assigns, that it is the owner of all of the above-described property which is free from encumbrances, except for easeaents, conditions, and restrictions of record, and will warrant and defend the property herein conveyed and the easement rights herein grantcj from all lawful claims whatsoever, except as stated herein. No monetary consideration is being received by grantor for this conveyance; the property herein conveyed being a donation rv Grantor to Crantee. - Dated this 31st day of March 198 8. T P0127A lD Y1XTURE_ L.'(L= PARTWURIP, an Oregon limited partnership by ?MP, Inc., [•t_ Partner - sya4 AL ,4,1 Sri Prh11,P T Mark C. Gram. Secretary gy F. Michael Nugent. Presida STATE OR OREGON, County of rttj_4noif w _ 5 , iy8 Y. Personally appeared the above named CYxw , cyafr) and who being sworn, stated that they arc general partners of Portland Fixture Limitee Partn^_rhip, an Oregon limited pr.rtncrehip, and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act. Be f,Qr4.my ' Publ f4c Oregon My Commission expires 5 lc3 d. f: F M`~~rr STATF. OF OREGON Cow" of WashkWon j SS 3-25-P8 1. Donald w. Mallon, D Page 1 VO Page of Co- and Ta■etim arw E■ Oflicio Recorder of Co- veyances fa said oaxrty. do hereby certify that the w4wn hafrurnent of wdthq was recarrd and recorded in book of records of said county, Donald W. Mason, Director of l tsessmant and Taxation, Ex- of .00 County Cork N98 APO -5 IN 2: 32 3 i' . February 24, 2000 RECEIVED FEB 2 8 ZOU BALLJANIK LLP Marsh Danielson Oregon Department of Transportation, Region 1 123 NW Flanders ' ' Portland, OR 97209-4037 RE: TIGARD- MARKETPLACE SOU ril ACCESS TO SW PAC~C 1UGHWAY Dear Marsh- WY OF TIGARD OREGON We, have reviewed the various comespendeace between ODOT and Kittelson & Associates related to the proposed relocation of the ngbt-iahight-out driveway adjacent to the Tigard Marketplace site on SW Pacific Highway. The enclosed letter from Kittelson to me, dated January 20, 2004, provided to us copies of the previous letters and asked that the City give 2n opinion related to the driveway proposal. We understand that the applicant is requesting to relocate the current right-inhight-out driveway (south driveway) further to the north and maintain the existing hurimg movements. ODOT vnshes to eliminate the right-out movement because the driveway location does not meet their spacing standards and they are concerned about the potential for accidents involving northbound vehicles positioning to turn right into the main driveway and vehicles exiting the south driveway. In reviewing Kittelson°s memorandum to you, dated December 28, 1999, we noted that they looked at accident data between roughly 1994 and 19,98 for two similar existing driveway locations along SW Pacific Highway in Tigard- Those locations are the Tigard Promenade and the Tigard Town Square shopping centers. In both locations, there are right-inhight-out driveways located near full-movement main driveways into the developments. In both situations, the right-intright-out driveways appear to be as close as what is proposed at the TigW. Marketplace. The five-year accident data reveals that there were no accidents at either driveway location. In addition, they looked at accident data for the existing south driveway of the Tigard Marketplace and found that there were no accidents involving right-turning vehicles during that same five year period. From our standpoint, we see an advantage in moving the south driveway further to the north. The existing location is not sufficiently visible to northbound vehicles. We believe moving the driveway further north will make it more visible aatd will afford northbound vehicles more time to respond to vehicles exiting that driveway. We also believe the sight distance for a vehicle exiting the new driveway location will be improved- 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 r Based upon the information provided by Irttelsotd,uponour experience with this driveway, we do support relocation of the drivcw-~y and eo In uirig its orient 1unitations to right-inJright-out, We do not believe it is necessary to restrict the driveway to right-in only. If you brave any questions, or would kle to discuss this matter further, please do not hesitate to give me a call at 639-4171, ext. 378. Sincerely, STIl~T P. DUMA,S, P.M . C~ Engineer Enclosure. Letter from Kittelson, dated January 20, 2000 C: Mark VnWehey, Kittdson & Associates, Inc., 614 SW Alder, Suite 700, Portland, OR 97205 Jack Orchard, Baal Jame 1P Brill Monahan, City Manager Jim= H,eadtya, Community Development Director Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer Karen Fox, Associate Planner Match Danielson February 24, 2000 Page 2 4~ r EXHIBIT D aIV.OTICE OF`TYPE 11 DECISIONr: ..i SITE DEVELOPMENTREVIEW (SI)R) 2000-00005 CITY OF TIGARD TIGARD MARKETPLACE .SCommu►uiyiDeConimnt (apingfl~betterCorrimunuy UU DAY-5 =6/28/2000 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: TIGARD MARKETPLACE RENOVATIONS CASE NO. Site Development Review SDR2000-00005 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested approval of the following land use applications: 1. To demolish an existing building and to reconfigure the existing driveway and parkin in conjunction with development of approximately 4,480 square feet of retal space; and 2. Variance approval for an Adjustment to the minimum Parking Requirements. APPLICANT: Frank Schmidt OWNERS: 13500 Pacific Corp Tiland/Scqgidt Architects c/o Cappozoli Advisors for Pensions, Inc. 333 SW 5 Avenue, Suite 406 38345 W. Ten Mile Road, Suite 170 Portland, OR 97204 Farmington Hills, MI 48335 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: General-Commercial District; C-G. ZONING DESIGNATION: C-G; General-Commercial. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a city-wide and even regional trade area. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, min-warehouse, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and-gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. LOCATION: 13400-13580 SW Pacific Highway; WCTM 2S102CC, Tax Lot 100, 200, 500, 800, 801, 900 and 901. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360 18.390, 18.520, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18 755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development. Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section VII. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2D00-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE i OF 32 • approval: 0 APPROVAL 1. Prior to issuance of a site permit, the applicant shall pay an addressing fee in the amount of $30. NOTE: ' This only applies in the event the existing structure has to be demolished. 2. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall obtain a permit from the State of Oregon Highway Division, to perform work within the right-of-way of SW Pacific Highway. A copy, of the permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Department. 3. The appplicant's construction plans shall indicate compliance with ODOT's letter to the City, dated March 23, 2000' Specifically, the south driveway will be allowed to be a temporary right-in only access, unless otherwise approved by ODOT. ODOT will require the installation of a median in SW Pacific Highway to control movement. The access will be a conditional access until such time when additional trips are added to this site, or when the Taco Time pad is either removed or substantially reconfigured. 4. The applicant's construction plans for the onsite water system shall be reviewed and approved by both the Engineering and Public Works Departments. A public water line easement shall be provided, if none have been recorded to date for all public water lines across the site. Domestic water protection shall be provided in the form of reduced pressure principle device (backflow) assembly installed directly behind (customer side) of the water meter. Fire line protection shall be located in a vault outside of the building near the tee off the main water line. Protection shall be in the form of a double check detector valve assembly. 5. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the onsite drawings submitted to the Building Division. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994." 6. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Unified Sewerage Agency Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 7. To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency design -and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the pprivate water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facilit for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. Submit to the Planning Division (Karen Perl Fox 639-4171, ext 315) for review and approval: 8. The applicant shall obtain an ODOT access permit prior to the issuance of the City building permit. The applicant shall modify it's plans in accordance with ODOT's conditions of approval as contained in its letter of March 23, 2000 or as subsequently conditioned by ODOT. Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented to the City Engineer in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint access use or to update existing joint access agreements considering any changes to the accesses as a result of this development and must be recorded with Washington County and placed on permanent file with the City. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 2 OF 32 9. The applicant shall revise the site and landscape plans and add walkways to provide connectivity between Pad A and the street sidewalk, between Pad B and the pedestrian walkway along the main access drive at the center of the site, and between Pad C and the rest of the walkway system and the street sidewalk. All crosswalks including the additional walkways which cross vehicle access driveways as required in this decision shall be designed for pedestrian safety in accordance with the dimensional requirements of Section 18.705.030.F. 10. Applicant to record with the County and place on permanent file with the City, a crossover easement for the crosswalk which connects separate parcels. 11. The applicant shall revise the site plan and provide the dimensional widths of the accesses and the pavement width on the plans in accordance with the minimum required widths from CDC Tabl18.805.3. 12. The applicant shall provide a Noise Study and a detailed explanation and written plan to the Planning Division addressing the noise issues that have existed at the site, and how it will comply with the City's Noise Ordinance (Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code), and other agreements filed with the City related to regulation of noise on the site. This plan shall include, but not be limited to, provisions for noise due to existing and proposed truck loading and delivery, night workers, site and building cleaning, and'loud music. The applicant shall specify the hours of work for early morning or late night workers relative to compliance with the Noise Ordinance, and the agreement regulating noise at the rear of the building. The applicant shall also address vibration issues due to occasional live music from the pub sufficient to determine compliance with the standards of the Community Development Code. The applicant shall provide a sound attenuating wall along the truck loading dock at the grocery store as part of the modifications to the plans. 13. The applicant shall revise its plans and locate and design the trash enclosure so as to minimize impacts to the adjacent residential property, and shall provide a written explanation of how it will comply with the performance standards for odors, insects and rodents in accordance with CDC Section 18.725.030 14. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan. Street trees shall be spaced to meet spacing standards in accordance with Section 18.745.040.C. The applicant shall provide a reference from a standard landscape or gardening source to confirm the classification of the tree size including tree height and branching width at maturity, and that the street tree is suitable for the Willamette Valley Climate. 15. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan and specifications and provide sufficient detail to determine that the buffer to the south and east of the grocery-store building, Anchor A, meets the minimum requirements for Buffer Standard D including 1) At least 10, five-gallon shrubs or 20, one-gallon shrubs shall be planted for each 1,000 square feet of buffer area, and 2) that the spacing of trees within the buffer area shall meet the tree spacing and size classification standards as contained in Section 18.745.050.B.4. The existing site-obscuring fence shall be repaired where necessary to ensure that fence posts are not exposed and soil shall be placed so that there is no ground movement away from the fence and so that tree roots are not exposed near the fence. 16. The applicant shall revise the landscape plan and provide an adequate number of parking lot trees, on the basis of one(1) tree for each seven (7) parkingg s aces, equally distributed in order to provide a canopy effect including the area between Pad A the Tire Store) and Building D (Old Country Buffet). 17. The applicant shall revise the site and landscape plan and indicate the location and size of the trash enclosure (s) in accordance with CDC Chapter 18.755. The applicant shall demonstrate that it meets the requirements for minimum storage area of 10 square feet/1000 square feet of GFA for non-residential buildings for the grocery store building, and is in compliance with all prior requirements for the other buildings on the site regarding waste and recyclable storage. The applicant shall provide evidence that there is adequate existing trash storage for the site based on current code standards from the CDC; the evidence shall include the area in square feet of each store and the area in square feet of the trash enclosure provided for that store and its NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 3 OF 32 location on the site plan. The applicant shall provide detail drawings and dimensions of the retaining wall for purposes of satisfying the buffering and screening requirements in accordance with Chapter 18.745 and 18.360.090.A.4 18. The appplicant shall specify which method of collection of mixed solid waste and source separated recyclable,s will be provided. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the owner shall submit evidence or a plan which complies with Chapter 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage and indicate which method of pick-up and removal by haulers they have selected. The applicant shall submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility regardless of method chosen. It is estimated that a total of 87 parking lot trees are required including perimeter trees and excluding street trees. 19. The applicant shall revise the site plan and/or landscape plan to indicate wheel stops where required in accordance with CDC Section 18.765.040.J. 20. Nine parking spaces are shown backing onto the proposed secondary access drive, approximately 70 feet from the point of egress. These pparking spaces shall be relocated, and the access drive shall be marked and separated either .by curb cut or other acceptable barrier to prevent vehicular traffic from backing onto it. 21. The applicant shall revise the lighting plan and include proposed lighting to the east and south of Anchor A, the grocery store, and the tower lighting plans. The applicant shall provide sufficient information in the fighting plan to assess the impacts of the lighting on adjacent residential property. All lighting shall be directed away from the adjacent residential property with particular sensitivity given to the height and direction of the tower and pole lighting to eliminate glare, and shield light from the view of residences. 22. All sign changes and additions shall be submitted as part of a separate sign permit appplication, and are not addressed in this decision. No new signs shall be placed or altered prior to review and approval by the City in accordance with Chapter 18.780, Signs. 23. The applicant shall revise the site and landscape plans to include 18 bicycle parking spaces for the grocery store building in accordance with the design standards in CDC Section 18.765.050. 24. The applicant shall verify the number and location of existing bicycle parking spaces on the site. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with all- previously required bicycle parking on the site. Where no requirements were imposed in previous land use decisions, the applicant shall provide a minimum of two (2) bicycle parking spaces per building in accordance with the design standards in CDC Section 18.765.050. 25. The applicant shall revise the site plan and provide a second truck loading space for Anchor building A, the grocery store, in accordance with Section 18.765.080, Off-Street Loading Requirements, or apply and obtain approval for a Variance to this requirement. 26. The applicant shall revise the site plan and indicate 35-foot visual clearance triangles on both sides of the access drives in accordance with Figure 18.795.1 of the CDC. Visual clearance shall be maintained at the access to the site. In no case shall trees near the access have branches below eight feet. 27. The applicant shall revise the lighting plan, and include lighting to the south and east side of Anchor A for crime prevention and safety. The applicant shall revise the lighting plan so that the exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime and shall be placed in areas having heaver pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes; Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet which is sufficient to illuminate a person. 28. The applicant shall revise the site plan and provide dimensions for the accessible parking spaces, and indicate which spaces are van accessible. For the two accessible parking spaces at Pad B (Blockbuster), adjacent access aisles shall be located on the passenger side. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 4 OF 32 ,?.THE FOLLOWING;CONDI,Tl09NS SHALL BE SATISFIED.: PRIOR TO THE FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION BEING PERFORMED: Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian ager, 639-4171, ext. or revi-e-w--a-fi-ff approval: 29. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the work in the right-of-way of SW Pacific Highway and obtain approval from ODOT. 30. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approvalfrom the Engineering Department.. 31. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) mylars, and 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" format, if available; otherwise °DXF" will be acceptable. Note: if the public improvement drawings were hand-drawn, then a diskette is not required. Submit to the Building Department (Bob Poskin Fox 639-4171, ext 392) for review and approval: 32. Applicant to provide detectable warnings at each entrance to the crossing at all accessible crosswalks. 33. Applicant to record with the County and place on permanent file with the City, a crossover easement for the crosswalk which connects separate parcels. 34. A sign shall be posted for each accessible parking space. The sign shall be clearly visible to a person parking in the space, shall be marked with the International Symbol of Access and small indicate the spaces are reserved for persons with disabled parking permits. "Van Accessible" parking spaces shall have an additional sign marked "Van Accessible' mounted below the sign. The parking spaces shall be designed in compliance with ADA standards, and shall be maintained at all times to meet the standards established by the state building code. Submit to the Planning Division (Karen Perl Fox 639-4171, ext.315) for review and approval: 35. All interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING GENERAL PROVISIONS; THIS IS NOT AN EXCLUSIVE LIST: All sign changes and additions shall be submitted as part of a separate sin permit application, and are not addressed in this decision. No new Ins shall be placed or alllered prior to review and approval by the City in accordance with Chapte8.780, Signs. Section 18.725.020 requires compliance with applicable state and federal regulations pertainin to noise, odor and discharge of matter into the atmosphere, ground, sewer system or stream. All fuure tenants shall be in compliance with the Environmental Performance Standard as set forth in federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations, and compliance is a continuing obligation of the property owner and operator. Signs which are placed on parking lots shall be designed and installed in accordance with Chapter 18.780. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 5 OF 32 SE TON III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site Historv: The existing shopping center has been in operation for approximately ten years with multiple tenants and 'a grocery store as an anchor under several different names. The grocery store is currently vacant. This proposed renovation and overall remodel will include an addition to the grocery store building. Phase I of this project is approved and is underway which includes the preparation of the pad area around the anticipated expansion area of the grocery store building. Phase I includes the utility relocation for the expansion, and the continuation of the retaining wall at the rear of the grocerv store building and the BI-Mart building. Vicinity Information: The seven lots which make up this site are located frontage onto this State highway. To the east of the R-4.5 which is in single-family residential use. To the k-3.5 which is in single-family residential use. To General-Commercial in multi-family residential use. To General-Commercial which is in commercial use. to the east of SW Pacific Highway 99W, with subject property is residential property zoned southeast of the subject site is property zoned the southwest of the site is property zoned the north of the subject site is property zoned Site Information and Proposal Description: This proposal is Phase 2 of a two-phased project. Phase 1 was a Minor Modification to the site previously approved through the Planning. Division as a Type 1 land use application which does not require notification to the surrounding property owners. Phase 2 includes the renovation of the storefront and plazas of the existing in-line retail buildings at the Tigard Marketplace Shopping Center, expansion of the existing grocery store with additions to the front and rear, demolition of the existing paint store to make room for the relocation of the right-in/right-out access onto SW Pacific Highway (99W), realignment of the parking lot, new parking lot lighting, and additional site improvements including landscaping. SECTION IV. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES, PERMITS AND USE Use Classification: Section 18.130.020 Lists the Use Categories. The applicant is proposing to renovate an existing shopping center. This use is classified in Code Chapter 18.130 (Use Classifications) as General Retail. The site is located within the General-Commercial District. Table 18.520.1 lists General Retail as a permitted use in the C-G zone. The one exception is Animal Related General Retail which is not permitted. Summary Land Use Permits: Chapter 18.310 Defines the decision-making type to which the land-use application is assigned. This is a new construction proposal requiring Site Development Review and is, therefore, defined as a Type 11 Application. Decision Making Procedures: Chapter 18.390 Describes the decision making procedures. Type II procedures apply to quasi-judicial permits and actions that contain some discretionary criteria. Type II actions are decided by the Director with public notice and appeals are heard by the Hearing's Officer. SECTION V. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS Two letters providing comments were received from surrounding property owners- In one letter, property owners located directly behind the existing shopping center raised issues concerning the livability of their property due to the impacts of the proposed new building lighting and delivering and servicing of the Grocery Store. In addition, issues were raised regarding noise impacts of the existing pub. The comments referenced an ordinance "set in place when the center originally opened which limited vehicular activity in the drive behind the center between 10PM and 6AM". NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2ooo-Oooo5 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 6 OF 32 In the second letter, also from property owners located adjacent to the shopping center, issues were raised including visual screening and landscaping from the rear wall of the grocery store, the width of the buffer, the height of the fence/wall at the rear of the grocery store and needed fence repairs, noise abatement from night shift workers, banging pallets and truck unloading, and location of the refuse containers. Staff Response: Staff has taken these comments into consideration and addressed them under each of the relevant criteria.in this decision. SECTION VI. SUMMARY F APPLICABLE CRITERIA A summary of the applicable criteria in this case in the Chapter order in which they are addressed in this decision are as follows: A. Zoning Districts 18.520 (Commercial Zoning Districts) B. S ecific Develo ment Standards 1 .705 Access, Egress & Circulation) 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards) 18.745 Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste & Recyclable Storage) 18.765 Off-Street Parking. and Loading Requirements) 18.780 Signs) 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) Land Use Decisions C. 18.360 Site Development Review- Specific standards) D. 18.390(l mpact Study Section 18.390.040) F. Street and Utili Improvement Standards 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards) The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of Code Chapters:18.715 (Density Computations), 18.720 (Design Compatibility), 18.730 (Exceptions to Development Standards), 18.742 Ttumatlnsh Occupations , 18.750 (Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations), 18.760 (Nonconforming 18.775 Sensitive Lands), 18.785 Temporary Uses, 18.797 (Water Resources Overlay District), .798 (Wireless Communication Facilities). These Chapters are; therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. SECTION VII. 'APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: A. ZONING DISTRICT Commercial Zoning District: Section 18.520.020 Lists the description of the Commercial Zoning Districts. The site is located in the C-G: General-Commercial District. Development Standards: Section 18.520.040.13 States that Development standards in commercial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.520.2 below: NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 -TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 7 OF 32 EXCERPT FROM C-G STANDARDS FROM TABLE 18.520.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN COMMERCIAL ZONES [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces [3] No setback shall be required except 20 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. The net site area is approximately 12.25 acres or 518,361 square feet. Net proposed building area is 117,804 square feet. Existing building sizes compared to proposed building sizes areas follows: Existin Building Sizes Anchor (Grocery) 41,310 Building B Bi-Mart) 31,113 Building C Retail 17,177 Buildin D Buffet ...9,600 Pad A ire Store 6,702 Pad B Blockbuster). 5,478 Pad C Taco Time) 2,174 Pad D Paint Store 4.250 Total 117,804 Proaosed Buildina Sizes Anc hor A (Groce 59,365 ry Building B Bi-Mart 31,113 Building C Retail 17,177 Buildin D Buffet 9,600 Pad A ire Store 6,702 Pad B Blockbuster) 5,478 Pad C Taco Time 2,174 Total 1 31,609 The total proposed increase in building square foota e is 13,305 sgware feet. The total proposed landscaping proposed is 78,695 square feet, according to the applicant, or 15.2% which slightly exceeds the minimum requirement of 15%. The total proposed building coverage is 131,609 square feet or 25.4%. The total building and impervious surface coverage is 84.8% which is slightly less than the maximum site coverage of 85%.. The minimum lot width of 50 feet is met. The narrowest lot is approximately 100 feet in width. The site is comprised of seven lots with a width at the frontage of the site at approximately 870 lineal feet. The only proposed change to building setbacks is the rear setback. The Code requires a 20-foot setback where the subject property abuts a residential zoning district. The proposed setback ranges from 36-38 feet at the rear of the proposed new addition to the grocery store. Also attached to the addition is a new truck loading dock which ranges from 25-36 feet from the east property line. Currently, the rear setback for the Bi-Mart building is approximately 25 feet from the east property line. As the proposed rear setback meets the minimum setback criteria, and all of the other setbacks currently meet the minimum setback requirements, the setback criteria is met. Adjacent property owners to the east have expressed concerns regarding the change in location of the rear wall of the grocery store further to the east, and the impacts of lighting and noise on their homes. These concerns are addressed in this decision under Sections 18.360.090 Site Development Review Criteria, and Section 18.745 Landscaping and Screening. STANDARD c-G Minimum Lot Size None Detached unit - Boarding, lodging, rooming house Minimum Lot Width 50 ft Minimum Setbacks Front yard 0 ft [6] Side facing street on comer & - through lots [1] Side yard 0120 It [3] - Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district Rear yard 0120 ft [3] Distance between front of garage & - property line abutting a public or private street. Maximum height 4511 Maximum Site Coverage [2] 85% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 8 OF 32 The pro osed main building height on the renovated portion of the building ranges from 20 feet 6 inches ~20'-6to 24 feet, 5 inches 24'-5") at various points. The highest point of the new construction is approximately 44 feet at the peak of the mid-tower, and 41 feet to the midway point.of the hipped roof on the tower (actual height dimensions are not provided on the plans). Dimensions for the Haggen Grocery Store are 38 feet 8 inches (38-8") at the peak of the hipped roof over the entry to the store; and 33 feet, 10 inches at the midway point of the entry's hipped roof. The height of the east elevation is 26 feet, 6 inches (26'-6"). As the maximum building height requirement is 45 feet and the highest point of the structures on the site (the towers), measured from the average height of the highest gable of a itched or hipped roof in accordance with the definition for building height under Chapter 18,120, do not exceed 45 feet, this standard is met. FINDING: The applicant's plans indicate that all minimum setback standards will be met, the lot width exceeds the minimum 50-foot width, no building or structure exceeds the minimum building height, the minimum landscape coveragge of 15% is met, and the proposed site coverage does not exceed the maximum of 85% site coverage allowed. Therefore, this standard is met. B; SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: CHAPTER 18.700 Site Development Review Approval Standards: Chapter 18.360 is applicable to all new developments and major modifications of existing developments. It defines the Applicability of Provisions, the Approval Process, and the Approval Criteria for the standards contained in the Community Development Code. Site Development Review: Section 18.360.090 requires that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the applicable criteria in the Community Development Code. The applicable CDC criteria in this case are listed in the Summary of Applicable Criteria above in Section VI. of this decision. A list of the non-applicable criteria can also be found there. The following addresses the Specific Development Standards in the Community Development Code (CDC): ACCESS. EGRESS, AND CIRCULATION: CHAPTER 18.705 Commercial and industrial uses which require 0-99 parking spaces shall provide one (1) access with a minimum width of 30 feet and minimum pavement width of 24 feet. Section 18.705.030.C provides for joint access. TABLE 18.705.3 VEHICULAR ACCESS/EGRESS REQUIREMENTS: COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES Required Parking Spaces Minimum Number of Driveways Required Minimum Access. Width Minimum Pavement 0-99 1 30' 24' curbs required 100+ 2 30' 24' curbs required or 1 50' 40' curbs required The development's frontage is along the Ore on SW Pacific Highway, 99W, which has a Statewide highway classification. Oregon Department o17 Transportation has regulatory responsibility to ensure that negative impact to the highway generated by development is avoided or mitigated. ODOT's authority is set forth in ORS 374 and OAR 734, Division 50. The applicant proposes 609 parking spaces on the site, therefore, at least one access with a minimum 50-foot width and 40-foot pavement width is required, or two accesses with a minimum 30-foot width and 24-foot pavement width is required under the City of Tigard CDC. The existing site has three access/egress points 1) a signalized driveway at the north end across from SW Park Street, 2) a signalized main access near the mid-point of the frontage, and 3) a right-in/right-out access at the southerly end of the frontage. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 9 OF 32 The applicant proposes to relocate the existing right-in/rigght-o-ut access at the southerly end of the site about 50 feet to the north along the frontage. ODOT f~as determined that a condition of approval should be imposed limiting this second access to a right-in access only. ODOT s preference as stated in a letter dated March 23, 2000 is that there be no access at the southerly end of -the site along the Highway. To balance the applicants business interests and due to existing site conditions, ODOT will support a temporary right-in access only at the southerly frontage. FINDING: This standard has not.been satisfied as ODOT is requesting modification to the southerly access along SW Pacific Highway. Therefore, if the applicant meets the following condition this standard shall be satisfied: CONDITION: The applicant shall obtain the approval for the accesses along Pacific Highway from ODOT and shall modify it's plans in accordance with ODOT's conditions of approval as contained in its letter of March 23, 2000 or as subsequently conditioned by ODOT. Joint Access: Section 18.705.030.C Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of and may agree to utilize jointly the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or parcels of and satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title, provided: Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; and Copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are places on permanent file with the City. As the subject shopping center involves seven lots under one ownership. Joint access agreement(s) are required for all accesses along Pacific Highway. FINDING: The proposed access meets the standard subject to final approval from ODOT as listed in the condition below: CONDITION:The applicant shall obtain an ODOT access permit prior to the issuance of the City building permit. Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented to the City Engineer in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint access use or to update existing joint access agreements considering any changes to the accesses as a result of this development and must be recorded with Washington County and placed on permanent file with the City. Walkway Location: Section 18.705.030.F On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and Industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments; Proposed concrete walkways measure five feet in width on the site plan and extend from the ground floor entrances to the street and along the frontages of the buildings. There is a pedestrian walkway along the main access drive which connects from the walkway along the frontage of the shopping center (Anchor-A and Building's B-D) to the sidewalk at the street. However, Pad's A and C are not connected to the street sidewalk and Pad A, B and C are not connected to the walkway system for the shopping center. Additional walkways are needed for connectivity between Pad A and the street sidewalk, between Pad B and the pedestrian walkway along the main access drive down the center of the site, and between Pad C and the rest of the walkway system and the street sidewalk. Within all attached housing (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling shall be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities; This criteria is not applicable as the property is in commercial use. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 10 OF 32 Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either _ a minimum 6-inch vertical separation (curbed) or a minimum 3-foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of-four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; All crosswalks including the additional walkways which cross vehicle access driveways as required in this decision shall be designed for pedestrian safety in accordance with the dimensional requirements of Section 18.705.030.F. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes: Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The applicant has provided a photometric plan. The pedestrian walkway along the access drive at the center of the site is proposed to be lighted with exterior pole top mounted luminaire. Other walkways will be lit indirectly via exterior arm mounted luminaire located in the parking lot. FINDING: The proposed plan does not meet the standard. If the applicant meets the following conditions the criteria will be met: CONDITIONS: The.applicant shall revise the site and landscape plans and add walkways to provide connectivity between Pad A and the street sidewalk, between Pad B and the pedestrian walkway along the main access drive at the center of the site, and between Pad C and the rest of the walkway system and the street sidewalk. All crosswalks including the additional walkways which cross vehicle access driveways as required in this decision shall be designed for pedestrian safety in accordance with the dimensional requirements of Section 18.705.030.F. Applicant to provide detectable warnings at each entrance to the crossing at all accessible crosswalks. Applicant to record with the County and place on permanent file with the City, a crossover easement for the crosswalk which connects separate parcels. Minimum Access requirements for commercial and industrial use: Section 18.705.030.1 Vehicle access, egress and circulation for commercial and industrial use shall not be less than as provided in Table 98.705.3. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development. The applicant proposes 609 parking spaces on the site, therefore, at least one access with a minimum 50-foot width and 40-foot pavement width is required, or two accesses with a minimum 30-foot width and 24-foot pavement width is required under the City of Tigard CDC. The existing site has three accesses, one access at the north end of the site near Park Street, one main access centrally located at the site along the frontage, and a secondary right-in/right-out access at the southerly end of the site along Pacific Highway. FINDING: This standard is not met. In order to meet this standard the applicant shall satisfy the following condition. CONDITION: The applicant shall obtain ODOT approval for all accesses, and provide the dimensional widths of the accesses and the pavement width on the plans in accordance with the minimum required widths from CDC Table 18.805.3. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 11 OF 32 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: CHAPTER 18.725 Requires that federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations be applied to development within the City of Tigard. Section 18.725.030 Performance Standards regulates: Noise, visible emissions, vibration and odors. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.41.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. There has been a history of problems at the site with noise affecting adjacent residential property owners to the east of the shopping center. There is an existing ordinance in place to regulate noise at the rear of the building, however, this ordinance has been violated in the past. The applicant has stated in the Neighborhood Meeting minutes that the activities of the loading and cleaning along the rear of the building at late night hours and early morning hours is unacceptable and will be modified to meet hours set forth in the established ordinance for this site. The applicant also assured the neighbors that the loading dock will be enclosed and integrated into the new building as opposed to the-loading dock of the old grocery store which was open. Letters of comment from adjacent property owners expressed concern about noise from the old grocery store including night shift workers yoking and playing load music on the, back dock, banging pallets and truck unloading. Neighbors were also concerned about the noise and vibrations from live music coming from the pub (in Retail Building C). As the new truck loading is being relocated closer to the residential property (36 feet from the retaining wall and approximately 50 feet from the east property line) than the existing conditions, the owner sliall provide a Noise Study to determine the noise impact of the truck loading and other noise sources on adjacent residential uses. The applicant shall ensure that the noise level for the renovated shopping center will not exceed the maximum allowable noise levels in the Tigard Municipal Code. If the Noise Stud indicates that noise level will exceed the maximum allowable noise level, the applicant shall modify the plans to bring the noise level within allowable levels. The applicant shall provide a sound attenuating wall along the truck loading dock at the grocery store as part of the modifications. Visible Emissions. No issues were raised by the applicant or adjacent property owners regarding visible emissions. The staff has not been made aware of any emission problems due to the existing or proposed use on the subject site. Vibration. No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles, trains and aircraft is permitted in any given zoning district which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. An adjacent property owner commented that vibrations due to live music in the pub retail space have "deprived us of sleep on many weekend nights beyond 1AM. Live or acoustical type music which produces vibration 'which is discernible without instruments at the property line adjacent to the residentially zoned property is prohibited under-the Tigard CDC. Odors. The emissions of odorous gases or other matter in such quantities as to be readilyy detectable at an point beyond the.property line of the use creating the odors is prohibited. DEc~ rules for odors (340-028-090) apply. One adjacent property owner commented that "odors from refuse containers located across. The accessway from the store - close to our back yard." The applicant has stated that "the grocery store will have contained recycling, trash and corrugated box recycling or disposal. It is not clear from the applicant's plans or narrative exactly where or what size or type of a mixed solid waste and recylcable storage is proposed. The location, type and size of the refuse enclosure will be addressed in further detail under Chapter 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recylcable Storage in this decision. Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from higgh temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 12 OF 32 Issues have been raised in letters of comment from adjacent property owners, in the neighborhood meeting minutes regarding, and in the applicant's narrative application regarding the effect of lighting and glare from the proposed parking lot and building lighting plan. Specific concerns by neighbors include glare from lightin~ on the towers and wallpack light fixtures if located on the rear walls of the Anchor Building A and uilding B-D as the shoppping center abuts the residentially zoned property here. The applicant has proposed to modify lighting on the towers to. prevent negative impacts of glare on adjacent property owners, and states the no light glare will pass the propert lines into the neighbors as a general standard." The applicant has submitted a photometric plan for the western portion of the site including the parking lot, but has not provided photometrics or a lighting plan for the eastern portion of the site which abuts residential property. Insects and rodents. All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propogation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. Similar concerns to those regardini odor from refuse were raised in comments by one property owner. The main concern was that the refuse container was located at the rear of the grocery store building it would attract rodents in close proximity to the residential use. The location, type and size of the refuse enclosure will be addressed in further detail under Chapter 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recylcable Storage in this decision. FINDING: This standard has not been met. If the applicant meets the following conditions this criteria will be met. CONDITIONS: The applicant shall provide a Noise Study and a detailed explanation and written plan to the Planning Division addressing the noise issues that have existed at the site, and how it will comply with the City's Noise Ordinance (Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code), and other agreements filed with the City related to regulation of noise on the site. This plan shall include, but not be limited to, provisions for noise due to existing and proposed truck loading and delivery, night workers, site and building cleaning, and loud music. The applicant shall specify the hours of work for early morning or late night workers relative to compliance with the Noise Ordinance, and the agreement regulating noise at the rear of the building: The applicant shall also address vibration issues due to occasional live music from the pub sufficient to determine compliance with the standards of the Community Development Code. The applicant shall provide a sound attenuating wall along the truck loading dock at the grocery store as part of the modifications to the plans. The applicant shall revise its plans and locate and design the trash enclosure so as to minimize impacts to the adjacent residential property, and shall provide a written explanation of how it will comply with the performance standards for odors, insects and rodents in accordance with CDC Section 18.725.030. LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING: CHAPTER 18.745 Establishes standards for landscaping, buffering and screening to enhance the aesthetic environmental quality of the City. Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 Development projects with more than 100 feet of frontage along a street or private driveway plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.C. Section 18.745.040.0 provides specific requirements for trees acing including: Landscaping in the front and exterior side yards shall include trees with a minimum caliper of two inches at four feet in height as specified in the requirements stated in Subsection 2 which includes the specific spacing of street trees by size of tree, small, medium or large. Except for signalized intersections as provided in Section 18.745.040.H, trees shall not be planted closer than 20 feet from a street intersection, nor closer than two feet from private driveways (measured at the back edge of the sidewalk), fire hydrants or utility policies to maintain visual clearance; NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 13 OF 32 Section 18.745.040.G, Granting of Adjustments. Adjustments to the street tree requirements may be ranted by the Direcfor by means of a Type I procedure, as regulated in Section 18.390.03, using approval criteria in Section 18.370.020.C.4b The property has approximately 870 lineal feet of frontage along Highway 99W. Deductin the estimated widths of the accesses from the frontage leaves approximately 770 feet of frontage for purposes of determining minimum street trees required. The minimum street tree requirement can be met several ways, for example by 22 medium trees spaced 35 feet apart or 20 large trees spaced 40 feet apart. The applicant has proposed 23 trees, however, the trees are not spaced in accordance with the Code spacing standards; instead the trees are spaced approximately 25 to 30 feet apart but along some stretches of the street no street trees are proposed to allow for viewing into the shopping center and its towers. Street trees proposed are a combination of the new and existing trees. Existing trees to remain include two Norway Maple and two Crimson King Maple. The new street trees proposed are 19 Norwegian Sunset Maples. The applicant has not provided a reference source for the size classification for the street trees. A reference source used by Staff to determine classification of the proposed street trees is the Sunset Western Garden Book, Copyright 1988 and printed 1991, Sunset Publishing Corporation, Menlo Park, California. According to the Sunset Western Garden Book, the Norway Maple which includes the Crimson King Maple is described as a broad-crowned, densely foliaged tree 50-60 ft. The Crimson King holds purple foliage color until leaves drop and is slower growing than the species. It is fine in Northwest and California foothills. No information was provided by the applicant or available to Staff about the size classification of the Norwegian Sunset Maple. FINDING: The criteria for street trees has been not been satisfied. If the condition below is satisfied, then the criteria will be met. CONDITION: The applicant shall revise the landscape plan. Street trees shall be spaced to meet spacing standards in accordance with Section 18.745.040.C. The applicant shall provide a reference from a standard landscape or gardening source to confirm the classification of the tree size including tree height and branching width at maturity, and that the street tree is suitable for the Willamette Valley Climate. Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.050 Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.050.A.2 Buffering and screening is required to reduce the impacts on adjacent uses which are of a different type in accordance with the matrices in this chapter (Tables 18.745.1 and 18.745.2). APPLICABLE SECTION OF BUFFER MATRIX TABLE 18.745.1 FOR C-G ZONE PROPOSED USE c,mmero~m zon.s(cc, CG, CP, CSO) EXISTINGIABUTTING USES Detached Single Units; Manufactured Units Attached Single Units and Multifamily, 1-5 Units, Duplexes Attached Single Units and Multifamily, 5- Units Mobile Home Parks Commercial Zones (CC, CG, CP. CBD) Neighborhood Commercial Zone (CN) Mixed Use Employment Zone (MUE) Light Industrial Zones (IP, IL) Heavy Industrial Zone IN) Parking Lots Arterial Streets Note: See Table 18,745.2 for alternative combinations for meeting these screening requirements. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SUR2000-00005 -TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 14 OF 32 0 TABLE 18.745.2 BUFFER COMBINATIONS FOR LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING [1] Options Width (feet) Trees (per linear feet of buffer) Shrubs or Groundcover Screening A 10 Lawnflivin B - 10 20' min130' max spacing Lawniliving roundcover 1 10 Shrubs 4' hed es C 2 8 15' min/30' max spacing Shrubs 5' fence 3 6 Shrubs 6' wall 1 20 Shrubs 6' hed e D 2 15 10' min120' max spacing Shrubs 6' fence 3 10 Shrubs 6' wall 1 30 10' min/20' max s acin Shrubs 6' hedge or fence E 2 25 Shrubs 5' earthen berm or wall F - 40 10' min/20' max spacing Shrubs 6' hedge, fence, wall or berm t11 Buffers are not required between abutting uses that are of a different type when the uses are separated by a street as specified in Section 18.745.050 A2. [21 Adjustments from these requirements can be obtained; see Section 18.370.020 C4. This criterion is addressed in detail under the Site Development Review Criteria: Section 18.360.090.A.4 Buffering, Screening and Compatibility between adjoining uses. Buffering and Screening Requirements: Section 18.745.050.13 A buffer consists of an area within a required setback adjacent to a property line and having a depth equal to the amount specified in the buffering and screening matrix and containing a length of the property line of the abutting use or uses. Further, the Buffer Matrix Table 18.745.1 as illustrated in Table 18.745.2 indicates that where the shopping center abuts a residential use, the required Buffer and Screening Standard is D. The buffer width is not dimensioned on the applicant's plans, but appears to vary as follows: 5-foot existing width at the northern end of the east property line to the rear of the Old Country Buffet (Anchor D) and to the rear of the north end of Retail Buildin (Anchor C), 10-foot width roughly to the rear of Bi-Mart and to the rear of Retail Building (Anchor C~, a buffer width ranging from 10 feet to 75 feet at various points to the rear and south side of the Anchor A, the grocery store building. The buffer shall be planted with shrubs and trees, except than no trees are required where there is a minimum of a six- foot wall. Buffering and Screening are addressed further under the Site Development Review Criteria: Section 18.360.090.A.4 Buffering, Screening and Compatibility between adjoining uses. Screening: Section 18.745.050.6.5 Where screening is required, the following standards shall apply in addition to those required for buffering: 1) A hedge of narrow or broadleaf evergreen shrubs that will form a four (4)) foot continuous screen of the height specified in Table 18.745.2 within two (2) years of planting, or; 2) An earthen berm planted with evergreen plant materials that will form a continuous screen of the height specified in Table 18.745.2 within two (2) years. The unplanted portion of the berm shall be planted in lawn, ground cover, or bark mulch, or; 3) A fence or wall of the height specified in Table 18.745.2, shall be constructed to provide a continuous sight obscuring screen. The applicant has not provided an elevation drawing of the retaining wall or drawings or narrative providing clear height dimensions for proposed screening. Screening proposed includes a retaining wall due south and east of the grocery store building which continues to some point the applicant has not provided dimensions) to the rear of the Bi-Mart Building. An existing 8-foot high fencing continues from about the midpoint behind the Bi-Mart building north along the east property line abuttin the residential property to the east. Adjacent property owners have questioned the conditions 01 the fence, specifically stating that soil has sluffed away from some of the posts, and needs to be replaced. NOTICE OF TYPE If DECISION SOR2000-00005 -TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 15 OF 32 Buffering and Screening Requirements: Section 18.745.050.1 A buffer consists of an area within a required setback adjacent to a property line and having a depth equal to the amount specified in the buffering and screening matrix and containing a length of the property line of the abutting use or uses. FINDING: This Buffering and Screening standards are not met. However, the standards will be met if the following condition is met. CONDITION:The applicant shall revise the landscape plan and specifications and provide sufficient detail to determine that the buffer to the south and east, of the grocery store building, Anchor A, meets the minimum requirements for Buffer Standard D including 1) At least 10, five-gallon shrubs or 20, one-gallon shrubs shall be planted for each 4,000 square feet of buffer area, and 2) that the spacing of trees within the buffer area shall meet the tree spacing and size classification standards as contained in Section 18.745.050.B.4. The existing site-obscuring fence shall be repaired where necessary to ensure that fence posts are not exposed and soil shall be placed so that there is no ground movement away from the fence and so that tree roots are not exposed near the fence'. Screening: Special Provisions: Section 18.745.050.E Requires the screening and landscaping of parking and loading areas. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall.be three-feet-wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The applicant has reconfigured the parking lot and added parking between the Pad A (Tire Store) and Building D (Old Country Buffet). There are a total of 609 parking spaces proposed, and approximately 87 trees required for the parking lot canopy considering a count of 1 tree for each seven parking spaces. The applicant's landscape plan indicates approximately 41 trees within the interior of the parking lot, and approximately 16 perimeter trees which may be counted toward the parking lot tree canopy, or an approximate total of 57 parking lot trees. The parking lot trees are not equally distributed in all cases, and no parking lot trees are shown in the area between Pad A and Building D. FINDING: This standard has not been met as the total number of parking lot trees is inadequate, and the parking lot trees are not equally distributed. In order to meet this standard, the applicant shall meet the following condition. CONDITION: The applicant shall revise the landscape plan and provide an adequate number of parking lot trees, on the basis of one(1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces, equally distributed in order to provide a canopy effect including the area etween Pad A (the Tire Store) and Building D (Old Country Buffet). It is estimated that a total of 87 parking -lot trees are required including perimeter trees and excluding street trees. MIXED SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLABLES STORAGE: CHAPTER 18.755 This Chapter requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on- site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. Section 18.755.040 requires that the applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum standards, Waste assessment, Comprehensive recycling plan, or Franchised hauler review. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. Minimum standards method, Section 18.755.040.C5.b 2) states that non-residential buildings shall provide shall provide a minimum storage area of 10 square feet plus 10 square feet 11000 square feet of GFA. The new grocery store building is 59,365 square feet and, therefore, requires 604 square feet of trash storage area for the proposed expanded building- The applicant's site plan does not indicate clearly where the trash storage area for the grocery store is located or provide the dimensional size of the trash storage area. In a supplemental letter from the applicant dated February 29, 2000, the applicant states NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 16 OF 32 that the grocery store building, Anchor A, will have an enclosed compactor with container to contain the trash being generated in the store. The applicant also states that typically, the cardboard of the grocery store is baled within the store and loaded on a truck for recycling. The applicant has not provided the existing site locations or sizes of trash storage and handling, however, a site check by Staff identified that trash dumpsters are generally located along the service drive and loading drive on the east and north ends of the site for-each of the individual retail stores. FINDING: This standard is not met. However, if the applicant meets the conditions listed below, this standard will be met. CONDITIONS: The applicant shall revise the site and landscape plan and indicate the location and size of the trash enclosure (s) in accordance with CDC Chapter 18.755. The applicant shall demonstrate that it meets the requirements for minimum storage area of 10 square feet/1000 square feet of GFA for non-residential buildings for the grocery store building, and is in compliance with all prior requirements for the other buildings on the site regarding waste and recyclable storage. The applicant shall provide evidence that there is adequate existing trash storage for the site based, on current code standards from the CDC; the evidence shall include the area in square feet of each store and the area in square feet of the trash enclosure provided for that store and its location on the site plan. The applicant shall provide detail drawings and dimensions of the retaining wall for purposes of satisfying the buffering and screening requirements in accordance with Chapter 18.745 and 18.360.090.A.4 The applicant shall specify which method of collection of mixed solid waste and source separated recyclables will be provided. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the owner shall submit evidence or a plan which complies with Chapter 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage and indicate which method of pick-up and removal by haulers they have selected. The applicant shall submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility regardless of method chosen. OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS: CHAPTER 18.765 This Chapter is applicable for development projects when there is new construction, expansion of existing use, or change of use in accordance with Section 18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements. General Provisions: Section 18.765.040 Access Drives: Section 18.765.040.B. - Requires access to public streets from off-street parking as follows: Access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; The number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; Unless otherwise specified Access, Egress and Circulation criteria are addressed under Chapter 18.705 in this decision. Access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; The proposed relocated access at the southern end of the site along Pacific Highway is proposed to be defined by curb cuts. The right-in/right-out access is proposed to be defined further by an island separator. Nine parking spaces are shown backing onto the proposed secondary access drive, approximately 70 feet from the point of egress. These parking spaces will need to be relocated, and the access drive must be marked and separated either by curb cut or other acceptable barrier to prevent vehicular traffic from backing onto it. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 17 OF 32 Access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; This criterion is addressed under Chapter 18.795 in this decision. Access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and The proposed access drive is proposed to be improved with asphalt surface. Excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. All parking spaces are served by a service drive, therefore, this standard is met. Pedestrian Access: Section 18.705.0401 Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow-moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. This standard is addressed under Section 18.705.0301 in this decision. In addition, there are no drop-off grade separations, therefore, this portion of the standard is not applicable. Parking Space Surfacing: Section 18.765.040.H Except for single-family and duplex residences, and for temporary uses or fleet storage areas as authorized in 18.7040 H3 and 4, all areas used for the parking or storage or maneuvering of any vehicle, boat or trailer shall be improved with asphalt or concrete surfaces; The new proposed area for loading for the Anchor A, the grocery store, is proposed to be improved with an asphalt surface. All existing and proposed parking and storage areas are proposed to be surfaced with asphalt. Parking Lot Striping: Section 18.765.040.1 Except for single-family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off- street parking requirements as contained in this chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and all interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. This is a commercial development, therefore, this standard is applicable and shall be met through striping of parking spaces, directional signs, and painted signs in the access and drive aisles to show direction of flow as conditioned. Wheel Stops: Section 18.765.040.) Requires that parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. The applicant has not indicated wheel stops on the site plan and/or landscaping plan in accordance with this criteria. Lighting: Section 18.765.040.L Lights provided to illuminate any public or private parking area or vehicle sales area shall be arranged to direct the light away from any adjacent residential district. A lighting photometric plan was submitted by the applicant showing lighting to the west of the Anchor A and Building's B, C and D; however, no lighting plan was submitted for that portion of the site located to the east of these buildings and the south end of Anchor A which abuts the residential property to the east and south. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 18 OF 32 Signs: Section 18.765.040.M Signs which are placed on parking lots shall be designed and installed in accordance with Chapter 18.780, Signs. There is one existing free-standing sign for the shopping center located at the main access to the site. The applicant has indicated an interest in submitting a proposal for an. additional free-standing sign permit or changes to the existing sign for the shop ingg center at a future time. The applicant has also submitted proposed sign changes for walls signs for tYle shopping center on the elevation drawings in this application. All sign changes and additions shall be submitted as part of a separate sign permit application, and are not addressed in this decision. No new signs shall be placed or altered prior to review and approval by the City. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Section 18.765.040.N Except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2, the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5'x 18.5' for a standard space; 7.5'x 16.5 for a compact spaces; and As required by applicable State of Oregon and federal standards for designated disabled person parking spaces; The width of each parking space includes a stripe which separates each space. Aisles accommodating two-way direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. rluffl r-lyuiu 10.1ou.I Stall width dimensions may be distributed as follows: 50% standard spaces, 50% compact spaces. All compact spaces shall be labeled as such. A A B e C T D F p E F t T G C G Parking Angle Stall Width Stall Depth (no bumper overhang) Aisle Width Between Stall Lines (5) Stall Width Parallel to Aisle Module Width (no bumper overhang) Bumper Overhang The applicant's plans do not indicate dimensions for parking space or aisle drive width.as required. All standard 90 degree parking spaces shall be a minimum dimensions of 8'-5" wide by 18%5" deep. All 90 degree compact parking spaces shall be a minimum of T-5" wide by 16'-6" deep. A minimum 24 feet is required for aisle width between 90 degree stalls for two-way traffic. Angled parking dimensions and aisle widths shall be in accordance with Figure 18.765.1 Off-Street Surface Parking Matrix. Compact spaces shall not exceed the 50% maximum on the site. The applicant proposes 51 compact parking spaces out of the total of 609 proposed for the entire site. The compact spaces are proposed to be located primarily adjacent to Building D due to the greater need as a result of the activity generated by the Old Country Buffet Restaurant. As the compact spaces are not marked as such on the site plan it is not clear exactly where the 51 compact spaces are located. FINDING: The General Provisions for Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements have been not been met. However, if the applicant meets the following conditions, the standard will be met. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005- TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 19 OF 32 CONDITIONS: 16 All interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. The applicant shall revise the site plan and/or landscappe _plan to indicate wheel stops where required in accordance with CDC Section 18.765.040.J. Nine parking. spaces are shown backing onto the proposed secondary access drive, approximately 70 feet from the point of egress. These parking spaces will need to be relocated, and the access drive must be marked and separated either by curb cut or other acceptable barrier to prevent vehicular traffic from backing onto it. The- applicant shall revise the lighting plan and include proposed lighting to the east and south of Anchor A, the grocery store, and the tower lighting plans. The applicant shall provide sufficient information in the lighting plan to assess the impacts of the lighting on adjacent residential property. All lighting shall be directed away from the adjacent residential property with particular sensitivity given to the height and direction of the tower and pole lighting to eliminate glare, and shield light from the view of residences. All sign chan es and additions shall be submitted as part of a separate siggn permit application, and are not addressed in this decision. No new signs shall be placed or altered prior to review and approval by the City in accordance with Chapter 18.780, Signs. Bicycle Parking Design Standards- Section 18.765.050 A minimum of two bicycle parking rack spaces in any development. Bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of the primary entrances to structures; Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas, or pedestrian ways. As the grocery store is being expanded it must meet the minimum required bicycle parking under the current Code. The minimum bicycle parking for retail sales is .311000, or 18 bicycle parking spaces for the 59,365 square foot area. The applicant has not provided the number or location of existing bicycle parking stalls on the site. FINDING: This standard is not met. In order to meet this criterion, the applicant shall meet the following conditions: CONDITIONS: - The applicant shall revise the site and landscape plans to include 18 bicycle parking spaces for the grocery store building in accordance with the design standards in CDC Section 18.765.050. The applicant shall verify the number and location of existing bicycle parking spaces on the site. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with all previously required bicycle parking on the site. Where no requirements were imposed in previous land use decisions, the applicant shall provide a minimum of two (2) bicycle parking spaces per building in accordance with the design standards in CDC Section 18.765.050. Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements: Section 18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements: Section 18.765.070.H The Director may reduce the total required off-street vehicle parking spaces per Section 18.765.070.H by up to a total of 20% by means of parking adjustment to be reviewed through a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.370.020.C.5a. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 20 OF 32 Minimum and Maximum Re uired Off-Street Vehicle and Bicycle Parking Requirements for Existina and Proposed Uses ream Sq. ft. inimum Maximum. is c e Anch or - roce , - - ui ~n - i- art - , 113 3T - - 3.7/1000 - - 11 .11) 5 .1/1000 N/A ui in (;-Het aF ,177 T7 3 .7TTMO 63,55) 5.1/1000 NIA ui m - u e , a A- T ire tore - , Pad - i eo tore 5,478 3.7/1000 20.26 b.1/11JUIJ N/A Pad C- Taco ime 2,174 /1000 1 12.471000 N/A Total aces in.= 609 spaces The minimum number of parking spaces required for the proposed uses is 609 spaces. The applicant proposes 609 spaces, including 19 accessible stalls, and 51 compact stalls. The applicant has also requested shared parking for a possible future building of approximately 8,400 additional square feet adjacent to the Tire Store. As additional building area added to the site will likely necessitate a reduction of the minimum parking requirement, the applicant must apply for a variance or adjustment to the minimum parking requirements or address the joint parking criteria under Section 18.765.030.C at the time that application is made for the future additional building. Off-Street Loading Requirements: Section 18.765.080 Requires that commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space. A minimum of one (1) loading space is required for buildings wit 10,000 gross square feet but less than 40,000 gross square feet. A minimum of two loading spaces is required for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet. Each loading berth shall be approved b the City Engineer as to design and location; each loading space shall have sufficient area for turning, and maneuvering of vehicles on the site. At a minimum the, the maneuvering length shall not be less that twice the overall length of the longest vehicle using the facility site; entrances and exits for the loading areas shall be provided at locations approved by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 18.710; screening for off- street loading facilities is required and shall be the same as screening for parking lots in accordance with Chapter 18.745. As-Anchor Building A will be expanded to 59,365 square feet, two loading spaces are required for this building. One truck loading space is shown on the site plan. All other buildings are existing, and are not required to meet this standard. FINDING: This standard is not met, as Anchor Building A requires two truck loading spaces and only one is shown on the plans. In order to meet this criterion, the applicant shall meet the following condition: CONDITION:The applicant shall revise the site plan and provide a second truck loading space in accordance with Section 18.765.080, Off-Street Loading Requirements,. or apply and obtain approval for a Variance to this requirement. TREE REMOVAL: CHAPTER 18.790 A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. This criteria is addressed under the standards for Site Development Review as contained in Section 18.360.090.A.2 of this decision. Visual Clearance Areas: Section 18.795 Clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersection of two streets, a street and a railroad, or a driveway providing access to a public or private street. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three ~3) feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center grade, except the trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. For arterial streets the visual clearance shall not be less than 35 feet on each side of the intersection. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 21 OF 32 The applicant has 'not shown visual clearance triangles at the accesses to the site on the site plan, or addressed this criteria. Pacific Highway is an arterial street and, therefore, the visual clearance area shall no be less than 35 feet on each side of the access drives. FINDING: This criterion is not met. In order to meet this criterion, the applicant shall meet the following condition. CONDITION: The applicant shall revise the site plan and indicate 35-foot visual clearance triangles on both sides of the access drives in accordance with Figure 18.795.1 of the CDC. Visual clearance shall be maintained at the access to the site. In no case shall- trees near the access have branches below eight feet. - C. ADDITIONAL SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CRITERIA Developmerit Review approval criteria n previously listed sections. Provides additional Site the provisions of the The following standards under Section 18.360.090.A are not applicable to the subject proposal as they relate only to residential uses: 3. (Exterior Elevations), 5. (Privacy and Noise: multi-family or group living uses), 6. (Private Outdoor Areas: multi-family use), 7. (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: multi-family use). Also inapplicable is the following standard: 8. (100-year floodplain). Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Section 18.360.090.A.2 Buildings shall be: • Located to preserve existing trees, topography, and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; • Located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; • Located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation , and fire-fi hting; and • Oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Section 18.360.090.A.2.b states that trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. This project involves alterations to an existing shopping center and reconfiguration of the layout of the parking lot. All existing trees 12 inches DBH or larger are proposed to be retained on the site. Some of the trees which are under 12 inches DBH will need to be removed due to the reconfiguration of the parking lot. The trees within the parking lot will be required to .meet current CDC standards as addressed in this decision under Section 18.745.050.E. The only building area to be added to the existing shopping center, are additions to the front (west) and rear (east) of Anchor A, the grocery store building; and the impacts of the additions to existing trees and drainage is minimal. The rear addition will be approximately 48 feet closer to the residential property to the east than the existing building at the far southeast corner of the site. A new retaining wall will be placed approximately 38 feet to the east of the rear addition and new plantings will be added to the existing landscaped area at the southeast corner of the site. Although the applicant has not provided an existing landscape plan, it does appear that the location of the additions will not result in loss of existing trees. Adequate distance is provided between the rear addition and the residential buildings to the east and southeast for light, air circulation and fire-fighting. The location of the additions on the grocery store building are oriented with consideration for sun and wind as the massing of the building is only altered slightly from the existing configuration. FINDING: This standard is met. Buffering, Screenin and Compatibility between adjoining uses: Section 18.360.090.A.4.a Buffering shall be provided between different types of and uses, for example between single- family and multiple-family residential, and residential and commercial uses, and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the buffer: NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 22 OF 32 • The purpose of the buffer for example to decrease noise level, absorb air pollution, filter dust, or to provide a visual barrier; The size of the buffer required to achieve the purpose in terms of width and height. The direction (s) from which buffering is needed; • The required density of the buffering; and Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile. Due to the fact that new additions are proposed to the grocery store building, buffering and screening must be brought up to current CDC standards for this area of the site from the view of adjoining properties. The primary purpose of this buffer is to decrease noise level, absorb air pollution, and provide a visual barrier. Buffer Standard D is required in accordance with Table 18.745.1 where commercial zones abut residential uses. While the depth of the buffer provided' appears to meet or exceeds in some locations) the minimum 10-foot depth required for walls and 15-foot depth required Tor fenced area, the applicant has not provided sufficient information, dimensions, and detail in the plans and specifications to determine whether the buffer standard is met. FINDING: The buffer standard is not met, as the applicant has not provided sufficient detail on the plans and specifications. In order to satisfy this criteria, the applicant shall meet the conditions as listed under Section 18.745.050 in this decision. Section 18.360.090.A.4.b requires that on-site screening from view of adjoining properties of such things as service and storage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on root tops, i.e., air cooling and heating systems, shall be provided and the following factors will be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: What needs to be screened; The direction from which it is needed; How dense the screen needs to be; Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile ;and Whether the screening needs to be year around. On-site screening is proposed to be provided from the view of the adjoining properties for the service and storage areas to south and east of the grocery store building. The applicant proposes a combination of an existing 8-foot high wooden site-obscuring fence along the east end of the site and a new retaining wall. The 8-foot high fence wraps around the rear of the grocery building and continues along a portion of the south end of the grocery, and then connects to a cyclone fence with wood slats which continues along the south property line to the frontage of the. site. The retaining wall wraps around the southeast corner of the site and continues to the east of the grocery store building to about midway behind the Bi-Mart building. The applicant proposes a combination of existing and new evergreen and deciduous trees as screening in the buffer area. However, the applicant has not provided sufficient detail, dimensions, or sizing classifications for trees to determine that the spacing of trees is adequate in accordance with Section 18.745.050.6.4. FINDING: This criterion has not been met. In order to meet this criterion, the conditions as listed under Section 18.745.050 shall be met. Demarcation of Semi-Public and Private Spaces for CrimePrevention- Section 18.360.090.A.9 Structures and site improvements shall be designed so that public areas such as streets or public gathering places, semi-ppublic areas and private outdoor areas are clearly defined to establish persons having a right to be in the space, to provide for crime prevention and to establish maintenance responsibility. As this development is a shopping center, essentially all space is public spaces with the exception of the service and loading areas to the rear of the building along the east and north ends of the site. The layout and orientation of the buildings on the site define the public areas from the semi-private service and loading areas. FINDING: This proposed development is in compliance with this standard NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 23 OF 32 Crime Prevention and Safe : Section18.360.090.A.10 The location of windows, interior, laundry and service'areas, and mailboxes be located to prevent crime so that areas vulnerable to crime can be observed by others. Exterior lighting levels be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime and shall be placed in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet which is sufficient to illuminate a person. Storefront windows in the shopping center (Anchor A and Buildings B-D) face the parking lot and are located to prevent crime. Pads A-C have high street visibility as they are located along Pacific Highway. FINDING: The Police Department has not provided any objections or concerns with regard to the proposal, however, the applicant has not provided a lighting plan for the east and south sides of Anchor A. Therefore, this criterion is not satisfied. In order to satisfy this criterion, the applicant shall meet the following condition. CONDITION: The applicant shall revise the lighting plan, and include lighting to the south and east side of Anchor A for crime prevention and safety. The applicant shall revise the lighting plan so that the exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime and shall be placed in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet which is sufficient to illuminate a person. Public Transit: Section 18.360.090.A.11 Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route. Facilities that may be required after City and Tri-Met review are: (1) Bus stop shelters; (2) Turnouts for buses; and-(3) Connecting paths to the shelters. The subject site fronts. SW Pacific Highway which is a transit route. No comments were provided by Tri-Met. FINDING: As Tri-Met has not required any additional facilities, and the City has no further requirements, therefore, this criterion is met. Landscaping Plan: Section 18.360.090.A.12 All landscaping shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745. + In addition to the open space and recreation requirements of subsection 5 and 6 above, a minimum of 20 percent of the gross area including parking, loading and service areas shall be landscaped; and A minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped. The applicant proposes 15.2 % of the gross site to be landscaped. With the addition of parking lot trees as regired and conditioned in this decision under Section 18.745.050.E, the gross landscape area will be further increased. FINDING: The minimum of 15 percent of the gross site area shall be met with the proposed landscape plan, therefore, this criterion is met. Drainage: Section 18.360.090.A.13 All dra ni age plans shall be designed in accordance with the criteria in the adopted master drainage plan. This criterion is addressed under Street and Utility Improvements, Section 18.810.100.A and D under this decision. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 24 OF 32 Provision for the disabled: Section 18.360.90.14 All facilities for the disabled shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set forth in ORS Chapter 447; The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became effective on January 26, 1992. All parking areas shall be provided with the required numbers and sizes of disabled person parking spaces as specified by applicable State of Oregon and federal standards. All disabled person parking spaces shall be signed and marked on the pavement as required by these standards. The requirement for accessible parking spaces for parking lots between 501 to 1,000 parking spaces is 2 ercent of the total parking spaces on the lot or 13 spaces minimum. Accessible parking spaces shat[ be at least nine feet wide and shall have an adjacent access aisle, located on the passenger side that is at least six feet. wide (except that two adjacent accessible parking -spaces may share a common access aisle). In addition, one in every eight accessible spaces, but not less than one shall be van accessible which is at least nine feet wide with an adjacent access aisle of at least eight feet wide. The applicant proposes 19 accessible stalls. The two accessible stalls located at Pad B (Blockbuster) do not have adjacent access aisles located on the passenger side. It is also recommended that accessible spaces be placed near the southwest corner of the Building C (near Mogolian BBQ) which is close to the terminus of the new pedestrian walkway through the center of the site. The applicant has not provided dimensions for any of the accessible spaces shown on the site plan, or indicated which spaces are van accessible. - FINDING: The proposed parking plan does not meet this criterion. However, if the following conditions are met, the criteria shall be satisfied. CONDITIONS: The applicant shall revise the site plan and provide dimensions for the accessible parking spaces, and indicate which spaces are van accessible. For the two accessible parking spaces at Pad B (Blockbuster), adjacent access aisles shall be located on the passenger side. Applicant shall provide detectable warnings at each of the entrances to the crossing at all accessible crosswalks. A sign shall be posted for each accessible parking space. The sign shall be clearly visible to a person parking in the space, shall be marked with the International Symbol of Access and shall indicate the spaces are reserved for persons with disabled parking permits. "Van Accessible" parking spaces shall have an additional sign marked "Van Accessible" mounted below the sign. The parking spaces shall be designed in compliance with ADA standards, and shall be maintained at all times to meet the standards established by the state building code. E. IMPACT STUDY: Section 18.390.040.B.e Requires that the applicant shall include an impact study. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code rewires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication of real property interest, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Typically, the City of Tigard requires that a traffic impact study be submitted with Type II Applications, however, the Oregon Department of Transportation ( DOT) has jurisdiction in regard to this pproject. by Kittelson and Associates has provided an access analysis for this project as required by ODOT. FINDING: As ODOT has jurisdiction in regard to traffic issues on Pacific Highway and ODOT did not require a Traffic Impact Study for this project but did require an access analysis, the access analysis is sufficient to meet this standard. ODOT's access requirements are addressed in this decision under "Additional City and/or Agency Concerns With Street And Utility Improvement Standards" in this decision. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SOR2000-00005 -TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 25 OF 32 i F. PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS: STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS: CHAPTER 98.810 Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: - Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Ri hts-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030(E) requires an arterial street to have an 8T to 90-f6ot right-of-way width and a variable-width paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW Pacific Highway (99W), which is classified as an arterial on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. This roadway is a state highway controlled by ODOT. ODOT has not indicated that there is a need for additional right-of-way (ROW) dedication, so there will be no requirement for such dedication. SW Pacific Highway is currently improved through this area with curbs and sidewalks. This site currently has three access points: 1) a signalized driveway at the north end across from SW Park Street, 2) a' signalized main access near the midpoint of the frontage, and 3) a right-in/right-out access at the south boundary. The south boundary access will be discussed in more detail rater in this report. ODOT has not indicated a need for the applicant to perform any additional frontage improvements along SW Pacific Highway. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. There is a concrete sidewalk along the east side of SW Pacific Highway. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Over-sizing: 'Section 18.810.090.C states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. There is an existing 8-inch public sanitary sewer line that crosses through this site in a northwesterly direction- This sewer line serves the existing buildings within this development, and is adequately sized to handle the proposed building addition. Since the sewer line would be in the way of the proposed building extension, the applicant has already applied for a Street Opening Permit (SOP) to relocate a portion of this line. The SOP is ready to be issued, pending submittal of a security deposit and permit executed permit documents. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 26 OF 32 Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage-area, whether inside or outside the development.. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the. Unified Sewerage Agency in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There is an existing 36-inch public storm drainage line that also crosses through this site in a northwesterly direction. This line is presently sized to handle upstream flows and does not need to be u sized. The SOP mentioned in the previous section also includes relocation of a portion of this storm line to facilitate the proposed building addition. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.13 states that where it is anticipated' by the City Engineer that the. additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facilit,y, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage agency in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan. includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant is proposing to modify the existing 60-inch onsite detention pipe system because it, too, would be in the way of the new building addition. They propose to replace a portion of the 60-inch detention pipe with two, 48-inch pipes that will provide the same detention volume. Staff has reviewed the calculations from the engineer, and it appears the proposal will be adequate. In order to accommodate the additional increase in impervious area behind the building, the applicant proposes to install a 105-foot long, 24-inch detention pipe. The preliminary calculations indicate that this pipe will sufficiently meet the USA design criteria for a detention facility. Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 1-8.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. There are no bikeways proposed through this site. SW Pacific Highway is classified to include bike lanes within the street section. No additional dedications or improvements are required of this project- Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.6 states that development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions, and other developments which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements. (Not applicable) NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 -TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 27 OF 32 Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.C states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per, bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. (Not applicable) Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those - required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; The City reserves.-the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. All utilities installed for this site will be placed underground. The existing overhead utility lines along SW Pacific Highway are high capacity lines and, therefore, do not need to be addressed by this applicant. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: South Driveway Significant discussion has taken place between the applicant, ODOT and the City with regard to the existing south driveway into this site. The applicant has a desire to relocate this right-in/right-out driveway approximately 50 feet north of its current location. ODOT's latest letter to the City, dated March 23, 2000, indicates that they do not support the location of this entrance. They cite the Oregon Highway Plan and the fact that SW Pacific Highway is a "Statewide Highway", which requires access spacing of 990 feet. The proposed right-in/right-out driveway would be only approximately 340 feet south of the main entrance into this site, and only 200 feet north of an adjacent driveway to the south. ODOT is also concerned that the access "is located just south of the taper section of the NB right turn lane at the main signalized access. Allowing the right-out movement would create an additional conflict for drivers. A vehicle traveling north on Highway 99W wishing to turn right at the main signalized access would have to enter the taper section to move to the right-turn lane. Also, by law motorists are required to signal 100 feet in advance to a lane change. Therefore, a driver at the unsignalized access waiting for a gap to exit could see a vehicle signaling to turn right into the right- turn taper, assumes that the vehicle is making the right turn into the access and pull out in front of it., (see Chi Mai's memo to March Danielson, attached to ODOT letter). NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000 00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 28 OF 32 The applicant's traffic engineer, Kittelson Associates, argued that the existing right-in/right-out driveway currently does not meet the spacing standards listed in the Oregon Highway Plan, but has operated adequately over the years with no significant accident history. The City Engineer also submitted comments to ODOT on February 24, 2000, that based upon the accident information known at the time, and the City's experience with other driveways alongg SW Pacific Highway with similar spacing constraints, the City could support the relocated right-in/right-out driveway: ODOT responded on March 30, 2000, by sending the City Engineer some accident data for the existing three access points. It appears that there have been two accidents in the vicinity of the southerly driveway, between 1994 and 1998, but none appear to have been caused by vehicles pulling out of the right- in/right-out access in front of northbound vehicles. One accident was a rear end collision caused .byy one driver following too close. The other accident was. due to a southbound vehicle trying to turn ieft into the right-in/right-out access, then getting hit by several northbound vehicles. ODOT's accident data also shows several northbound rear end accidents in the vicinity of the main access, all of which were caused by drivers following too close. Kittelson responded via e-mail to Staff on April 13, 2000, indicating that none of the accidents noted in the ODOT data were adjacent to, or related to, the access in question. ODOT states in their letter that their preference would be to completely remove the southern driveway and have the right-turn lane serving the main access point extended further south to provide for more storage of cars entering the site. However, in order to accomplish, this, significant modifications would need to be made to the Taco Time pad, particular) the drive-through lane. This is not practical with this land use application. Therefore, ODOT will allow a temporary right-in only access at the proposed driveway location. ODOT will require the installation of a median in SW Pacific Highway to control movement. The access will be a conditional access until such time when additional trips are added to this site, or when the Taco Time pad is either removed or substantially reconfigured. Since SW Pacific Highway is a State facility, the City should support ODOT's request for the driveway restrictions and include the appropriate conditions of approval in this decision. Fire and Life Safetv: Fire and life safety issues will be reviewed by the Building Division as a part of the building permit review. Public Water System: This site is presently served from an existing 8-inch public water line that crosses through the site. The Public Works Department submitted comments indicating that all public water line improvements as a result of the project shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. A public water line easement shall be provided, if none have been recorded to date. Domestic water protection shall be provided in the form of reduced pressure principle device (backflow) assembly installed directly behind (customer side) of the water meter. Fire line protection shall be located in a vault outside of the building near the tee off the main water line. Protection shall be in the form of a double check detector valve assembly. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) re ulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant's plans do not indicate that they intend to provide a water quality facility. They also did not submit evidence that supports allowing them to pa a fee in-lieu of water quality facility. Therefore, they must comply with the USA Design Standards. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 -TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 29 OF 32 To ensure compliance with Unified Sewerage Agency design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor). with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Grading and Erosion Control: USA Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants . reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per USA regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. This project will result in very little grading, but an erosion control plan must still be provided to the City as a part of the building permit review. Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). An addressing fee in the amount of $30 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of the site and/or building permit. Based upon information Staff has received from the Building Division, it is possible that the applicant will choose to demolish the existing building and construct a new one in the configuration shown on the plan. If this occurs, a new address must be assigned to the new building to avoid confusion with City records. If a new address is assigned, the addressing fee will be $30. SECTION VIII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS City of Tigard Long-Range Planning Division was notified but no comments were provided. City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed this proposal and has offered no comments other than that they have completed a preliminary construction and fire code review with applicant's architects and engineer. City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this application and offered no comments or objections. City of Tigard Property Manager has reviewed this application and offered no comments. The City of Tigard Operations Department has reviewed this application and offered the following comments: Please note that the existing 8" O.I. Water main on this property (including fire hydrants and meters) are public facilities. All public water line improvements as a result of this renovation shall be approved through public works. Public Water line easement shall be provided (if none have been recorded). Domestic water protection shall be =(customer d. in the form of reduced pressure principle device (back flow) assembly installed directly side) of water meter. Fire line protection to be located in vault outside of building near tee off of the water main line. Protection shall be in the form of DCD. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 30 OF 32 a i SECTION W. AGENCY COMMENTS ODOT was notified and provided the following comments in a letter dated October 21, 1999. The letter submitted raised safety concerns about the unsiggnalized southerly access and recommendin a right-in only access at this point. A letter dated Nfarch 23, 2000 was also submitted by OD~T including a determination that a temporary right-in only at the southerly access should be imposed as a condition of approval rather than allowing a full access as proposed. ODOT requests that the applicant removes the southerly, temporary right-in only access at such a time when the existing northbound, ri ht-turn lane on 99W is extended south. These conditions are incorporated into the Public Facility Toncerns Section of this decision. Note also that,the City Engineer wrote two letters to ODOT dated February 24, 2000 and April 6, 2000 concerning the southerly access. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue were notified and responded with a notation to see comments from the City of Tigard Building Division. Tri-Met was notified but no comments were provided. Unified Sewerage Agency was notified but no comments were provided. GTE was notified but no comments were provided. PGE reviewed this application and offered no comments or objections. NW Natural Gas was notified but no comments were provided. TCI Cable reviewed this application and offered no comments or objections. SECTION X. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: L_. THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 28, 2000, AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON MAY 13, 2000 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. Appeal: The decision of the Director (Type II Procedure) or Review Authority (Type II Administrative Appeal or Type III Procedure) is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.6.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2..of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted b any partyy during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted ~rom time to time by the appellate body. NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 31 OF 32 THE'DEADLINE FOR FILING-AN APPEAL- IS-AT 3:30 PMON MAY 12:2000., Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. PRE ED BY: Karen Ped Fox Associate Planner APPROVED BY: Richard Bewersdorff Planning Manager :curpIn*arenlsdAsdr00-5dec.doc April 28,,2000 DATE April 282000 DATE NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION SDR2000-00005 - TIGARD MARKETPLACE PAGE 32 OF 32 e:'aee ,a / V. k c,J~PG~~ - ~ 95~ C r f r ' Q . {rte ' d f \ < " 1 '1rJ(J/~/~J . fl %r r r r~ . R. Ilry ? ~s not to calc) s sI)R20oo-000 L T/GARD tjARKETPEAEE RENOVATIONS ~t i \`V K- 0 F g9^~\\ GEOGPAPHVG IHLORYATION lYITEY VICINITY MAP 7 SUBJECT TAX LOTS CT Q~ SDR2000-00005 TIGARD MARKETPLACE RENOVATIONS • N H1 LL VIEW J ST Z O C m 0 zoo 400 600 Feel 1'= 476 feel ~I Ciry of Tigard hlformabon an this map is for general location only and should be venhed with the Developmenl Servius Division. _ i3t25 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 hllp9ly w.v.ci.ligard. orms Plot date: Mar 3, 2000; CAmagiCIMAGIC03.APR w i ' • EXHIBIT E T L A N D / S C H M D T A R C H I T E C T S P C FAX TRANSMITTAL To: Lenny Hing From: Frank Schmidt Pride Disposal Date: May 25, 2000 503-625-6179 FAX Project: Tigard Marketplace Project: 97156 Tigard, Oregon NOTES: Find enclosed the information from Haggen that we have received for the proposed store at Tigard Marketplace. The self-contained 25 yard OSC Series will be used. As we discussed you will confirm the use of this unit on your trucks and contact me with any information required by the City of Tigard. Should you have further questions, Mike Edgett at Supervalu can be contacted, or call me and 1 will track down anything you need. I have also attached a plan for your use, indicating the location of the compactor and the ease of pick-up. Thank you for your assistance and we look forward to hearing from you soon Transmitted by: Frank Schmidt Copy to: Kandy Potterf. CAP Eileen Gilchrist: Elliott Associates, Inc. File RECEIVED PLANNING MAY 3 0 2000 Total number of pages including this cover: 8 CITY OF TIGARD 97 t 561docsMcnncy- I Am 333 S.W. FIFTH AVENUE: SUITE 406 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 (503) 220-8517 FAX (503) 220-8518 erlr I IfiI 14 Aft. I F t_t Tr, I a ---L m>.c ! a a wa czm 1 4 10 ail. ZZ-0 ` I M F , ! 1 mu ~a0 `ID r ~ a m I ~ ~ ` ~ rw Z)O I ~7' a ~ , 1 1 1 ~ 11 1 1 I , I 1 , I I 1 gill q'i6~~6: A f.. ~ In d I ~-3-aj a3 "Ic 25 Ali DIN 7~`~ S ~ Qrn ~~@s4~ FS "'''1 se T n i =;e g ~ i ro -R _ R z ~Et tU ~ K p _ p ~e r cif x ~ 1 c 1 I I I I 1 1 1 1 PR.:irDSlD BUILDING ADDITION ~ Ti &ARD MARKETPLACE PRASE TWO ~I PACIFIC HIGH 4AY PARK STREET - TICSARD, OREGON 61 ~qt 01HER: C4POf20L1 oOV190RT FOR 1°BNSK►49 : 30345 UL TEN MILE RD. PAIZ'lltYaTQJ '11 LLB, "1 4&33!5 ~l=X7c7 : Ga ! PROPERTY T ANAGEFL ELLIOTT AS50CIATES. INC. °v0 Sim PINE Si. WITE 200 • PORTLAND, dREGON 91204 1 05/23/00 TUE 14:37 I:AX DESIGN SERVICES GROUP PIANMARK • STUDIO 70 EQUIPMENT SERVICES • . - m- wwffl-~~ A division of SUPFRJ W 6533 Flying Cloud Drive Suite 100 PO Box 1377 Eden Pralrie MN 55344 P H. (612) 9145940 FX. (612) 914-5730 FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: ^,NAry Z3 • ZODO • ) TO: M2. pe-4+J K 5 c*m WT PHONE: COMPANY: FAX: 7'03 - ZLD 55-1 a FROM: W. MIKE EDGETT PHONE: (:612) ,-91457 37 FAX: (.612)-914-5730 IFdo- M,-45W A-x ~'tiGA-gyp , O~GO~ NUMBER OF PAGES (including treasmittal) CQ P MESSAGE: +JI-• Q00, N302M of G6.Aj , 1tJC, g0W0T 0 Yom- r std 7W-F 1fJ F- cvN a~~-D co P T 5 15. r*f' P)OW of 6'Wrmeydr T *#r uX Al2i' -tp4dpdf/^ 4 nR-- - ti qui -vT. *,,IAU MAAAf A-A~l CON409--vS, '05/2'3/00 TUE 14:37 FAX 1~j002 05/24/00 02:35 FAA Wj0 NAY-15-00 MOM 01:11 PH G*,ASHIMC FAX NO. 0'9484579 P. 02 ni lbr . a spa 11"catfuna fool's OSC2 2 Cu. Yd. Roll-Off Self-Contained Compactor WASTEC Racing Size 1.50 cu. yd. Clear Top Oponing - Leijj h 38-1dr Width 55-1/2" Ram Penetration T' Chembcr L.angth 39" Ram Face - Height 25r' Cyliirtder Stroke . 32" C C.~lirtdcrltnd Diameter 2-12" Cycle Time 31 Pump Size 10.3 GPM MotorSize 10 HP _ Operlltino,Pressure - Normal 1950 PSI Maximum 2250 PSI Force Rating Normal 23.3142,000 Maximum 27048,500 Chamber Sides 3/16" Plate Chamber Floor 1/4" Plate Ram Top_ 1/4" Plate Ram Sides _ . . _ 1/4" Plate RamFlaor 1/4" Plate Ram Face 1/4" Plate Top Cover 1015a. Volume Displacement Rate 179 cu. yd. per hr. 2AUMUT11 WC011P11PME0 CNpnh "•14mlem l1 I F. FAIM tkim P.O. U. 220 Y*Mnftc, IM 4086 Ih 210.14d- m1 h.: !Ia-646.157E 10x1064111 O(Wda U8U 102 Lrq Orin NOW liw AAK tU 76082 M- 011-4774674 Fw 6174717asi 101}281.0600 ktvik Ut111 Mv-qq 761a•~► 01w• 91 ILr. AL 7666, M- 2660614140 Fu: 261.117.6147 006061.6171 amwe Uu1 Solid State Control System i - External Power Plant with Weather Cover - UL & Canadian UL Listed Industrial Control Panel - IOMP, 2091230/460 Volt, 3 Phase Continuous Duty Motor • 37 Gallon Capacity Oil Tank - 40 Micron Air Filter - 200 Mesh Suction Filter in Resecvoir - Oil Level Sight Gauge with Thermometer • 40 GPM Hydraulic Control Valve - 3/4 Full Light (1550 PSI) • Container Full Light (1950 PSI) - Hold to OperatC Mode • Hold to Operate Extend/Auto Retract Mode - 2 - 8 Multicycle Modes • Ram Stop Extended Mode • Operator's Controls on 15' Flexible Conduit - Container Guide Angles • Replaceable Nylon Rath Guides • Hydraulic Quick Disconnect Couplcrs Mounted on Streetside - 3/4" 15' Hosea - 6* 'x 2" x 1/4" Lang S ilia • 3" Structural Channel Crossmembers • FullyLiasketed Rear Door System with Recessed Rubber Seal & Adjustable Latches & Hinges • Doghouse Pickup an Both Ends 5 Retaining Teeth • Finish Paint Any Standard Galbreath Color • 2 Year Limited Wwanty 7, 71% . ...,:•-c.'f.•1' i~s.4i.~r•*r•Y•,Y~_r~■rt~~:aYf.!r4t'r1•iii.. _ 4vM1f:•+:.:,~ . • 'Eleetro-Mecbanical Power Plant • Interlock Switch On 30' Flexible Conduit • Preswre Gauge Hauler's Controls on 15' Flexible Conduit ~r1 500 Watt Oil Heater Happera - Photoelectric Eye Chutes Low Oil/High Temperature Shut Off Sensor • Ozone Odor Neutralizer • Hydraulic Quick Disconnect Couplers on - Understiuctures for Most Pickup Systems Curbside or Both Sides 4 o5/b3/00 TUE 14:38 FAX 01103 =Conft Galbreattt Self Roll-off models feature Galbreath's exclu. Roll-Off Self-Contained OSC Series • Ideal for facilities demanding a high sanitary environment • Leak resistant construction helps eliminate insect, rodent and odor problems • Larger feed opening • Dual hydraulic cylinders • Available in 26 through 38 cubic yard capacities Front-Load Model PM6FS Pack-Man (Finked up by front-load waste handling truck) • Ideal for fast food restaurants, nursing homes and other smaller volume locations requiring secure, leak resistant waste handling . l i Syr::, ;I • Interlocked fill door provides safe and tamper-resistant operation • Compatible with most front-load waste handling trucks • 6 cubic yard capacity .05/233/00 TUE 14:38 FAX I 16 00 1 Containe d llCtOYS co 1~P''M breath iN z5'cvBrc Roll-Off Self-Contained RSC Series • Ideal for facilities demanding a high sanitary environm • beak resistant construction helps eliminate insect, rode and odor problems • Available in 17 through 33 cubic yard capacities PMGF' Pack-Mai Front-Load Self-Contained Model PM6FS Pack-Man • Ideal for fast food restaurants, nursing homes and other smaller vc locations requiring secure, leak resistant waste handling • interlocked fill door provides safe and tamper-resistant operation • Compatible with most front-load waste handling trucks • 6 cubic yard capacity uaixsiuu ' LIE 14::18 FAX .e.,d Compd;Aion Systena ;or eal for superior protection against leaking. . f i I. s i .i Roll-Off Setf-Contained Model SPM Super Pack-] • Large volume pivotal compaction system • Available in 29 through 39 cubic yard capacities • Compatible with most rear-load waste handling trucks • 6 cubic yard capacity (QJ 005 Rear-Load Self-Contained Model PMSR Pack-Man • Ideal for fast food restaurants, nursing homes and other smaller volume locations requiring secure, leak resist- ant waste handling • Interlocked fill door provides safe and - tamper-resistant operation Niza Us/lti3/OU ;l'tIL 14:39 FAX 1 1--• Made for a..ustom Fit Roll-Off Model PMF Pack-Man • Pivotal compaction system • Available in 21 through 36 cubic yard capacities SVC Vertical Compactor • Interchangeable front or rear feed • Can be used with 4, 6 and 8 cubic yard containers • Compatible with most front- load waste handling trucks Detailed specifications are available on all Galbreath self-contained equipment Call Galbreath for the dealer nearest yau! ~lb~th Corporate Office: Rosser Drive, Q.O. Box 220 Winamac, Indiana 46996 PH: 800-285-0666 • FAX: (219) 946-4579 - Ider, AL Mansfield, TX 600-964-6478 804-297-0668 Visit our Worldwide Web Site at: hrtp:Uwww.galbreath-inc.com CAUTION! T new eq ipmvil shad! be epnralm try p"rly "kwd peme~t. Im propw use, Thm". of lark d rnaarwnanoe mall cwse w" b persona and M P1ANgY- photos used h Orb trrodwie ere Lirs retire ordy. We reserve the fight to mate &Wgnaj any Woe •obixa notice. drtormatim curtained in This Iamwre b !Mended a pe Oro uXrA srante 0 ere Ume d prin4g. G-05.358 Image Litho, U.S.A. r • April 6, 2000 Mark A. Vandehey, P.E. Principal Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 610 SW Alder, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97205 WY OF 11GARD RE: Tigard Marketplace Access Analysis Dear Mark: EXHIBIT F OREGON Your letter of January 20, 2000 transmitted documents regarding the southerly access to the Tigard Marketplace. You stated in that letter that there have been no accidents during the most recent five-year period at any of the three driveways you examined. I agree that your request for right-in and right-out movements is reasonable and wrote a letter to ODOT (dated February 24, 2000) in support of that request. Our support for your request is based on the information provided in your letter, and on our experience with that particular driveway. I have since then discussed the issue with ODOT officials. They have provided me with accident records indicating that accidents have occurred at the northerly access, at the signalized main entrance, and at the southerly access. Enclosed is a copy of the documents that I received from ODOT. Please review this accident information and let me know how it factors into your analysis for that area. I would like to hear from you before we have any further discussions with ODOT on this matter. - Sincerely, C~ P_ USTIN P. DUENAS, P.E. Fy Engineer Enclosure c: William A. Monahan, City Manager Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer Karen Fox, Associate Planner Jack Orchard, Bail Janik LLP 1AZng\GusU_c11crsU.c11crto Kittelson Regarding Tigard Marketplace 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard. OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 OTMS -;,Crash PRC Report • 'Tt CAA 5zD Mih FZ 4G }x"'T• P LA G F_- ItiS, P, aj, 6) t Post-iR' 1=2x Note 7671 b°t- 3130 pay 0► (p So &us 1),, fPnGS co.IDegt. n Co. Q Phone r Phone r 731-3'42 7 1~ [ F ax a -1 - 07J Z Fax r Lent of Transportation - Transportation Development Division 16on Data Section - Crash Analysis and Reporting Unit i inuous System Comprehensive Crash Listing Ly 091 MP 9.91 to 10.14, 01/01!1994 to 12/31/1998 1 - 45 of 45 rows shown. INTER 47R Page 1 of 6 IDTJW REs- S,>LRIAL DATE/ SYSTEM/ RaAD- TTPE/TURN WRATH/ C'1TA51H TIM- VXIH LTC NO, / DAY- COUNTY'/ PF%- rIRST/ CM- CHAR/ LEGS OR SURF- COLL/ PARTICIPXVT/ CINFLER/ AG3- HM/ LRRCGR/ E'VZHT/ :WMST TI}Sll CITY I? MITRSCT RkO DIREC-LOC 11ANE61 LIGHT CLA'1S SEVRTY TYP8 all FR-TO AC21014 CA4S9 97165 5/19/94 WASIfVtC7CU 1 19DI MIX Tnu IP 71GARD 0 9.91. 19D2 Oo1EI LI/e/S5 NASHLdCTMI L 190E ` i `I 1iY P Tu. J 71r+AAZ) 0 7. 9i 190? t 1~ LOL6? 51/27/95 'AAsKrocraw 1 L901 y) UNK Kzn 11A TIGVID 0 9.911902 4.i U V / 1070E i2JL3/9~ 'A?SHInG oti l LSOL y CL'IV h'stl 7P riG.4HD 0 9.93 1902 cz i s= f OD831 !;79/96 iASE4(NG[OK L 1901 i NDTnEC non 2F TI GARB 0 9.91. L902 0i04D 213D/96 'A-NS6I CTON L 150L CI [Y Sat 2P TICARA 0 9.91 i902 INTSF CROSS SAW E REAR )1v 6 NONE WET DAY ?DO rt+;ER CROSS CL4 B MGL CN L NOI.T DRY DAY rw INT GA CROSS E 6 110GE RAT" E REAR kf T DAY 00 INTER CROSS 9 6 W,11E CLOY E REAR W-s2 DLIT ?DO I 1N7VA CROSS CLR B TURN CN 3 Act1E DRY DAY INJ INTER CROSS C.LR E AFAR fie 5 MOMS DRY DAY 741 07417 3/5!96 A.g5AC6GTOH L L90I ENTER 'CROSS RAIK £ REHR 1 tfA'R Thu LOA TIG.RD 0 9.91 1902 SN 6 NWIS WET BAY P11D hr,p://tcstweb. odot.state.or.us/transview/crashlacedt_prc_mport.asp I Y.VDP FRI ML-T STRCST REAR-END PCO PASS 39 V WL SW FOL-CLJ33 2 W370 P FRI ORL-Y STOP PDO PASS 1914 1!C SW STOPPED 3 NVOP Piz OAI-Y STRGRT UIISr6vER Mr BAKE PDO PASS 22 X N& MN way-Der 2 KVOP FRI DRL-Y STRG%r INJ B PASS 52"r V E I MVOP PRI ORI-Y SSRGAT Rr"-SUB POO PASS 4D K C W pot.-CLOS 2 NlOP PRI ORL-Y STOP PDO PASS 12 r E K STOPPED 3 UND 04 P. P9NCR I Nv01 PRI - ORI-Y STRCAiT RMIN-END Pea PASS 41 )A SN WE DRtt•]CING 2 Wei, PRE OR1-Y STOP 973 PASS 43" SW KE STOPPED 3 UND 04 1 H PSIIGR I MADP PRI ORI-r TURN-L DJS SGVL ' PCO PASS 35 F •A NE OIS--RAG 2 t1VOP PRE ORL-Y STiGNT DIES SGNL tNJ C PASS 54 K NE Sit D1s--7A. 3 IND 04 2: P6NGR 1 MOP PRI ORI-Y. STR411T REAR-END PIA? PASS M H HE SW FOL-CLOS 2T4VOP PRI OR1-Y STOP ENJ C PASS 1o r "t SR S[OPPLD 3 (MD 01 1 r PSNCR 1 M'OP PEII ORI-Y srRGHT RrJ%R-VID POD PASS 70 F 6WI NE FOL-CLOS 2 M/DP PAT ORI-Y STOP PCO PASS 27 N SW NE STOPPED 3/21/200( • • OTIMS -.Crash PRC Report Page 2 of 6 I - 3 L7+0 04 1 r P5116R CS401 10/29/96 Ka9k1++GTON l :905 E!1TE.R CROSS CLR D REAjk 1 vNFOP PRI UP1S-V srxGxi Rmik-ENo C1T% TUC 2P TIGAAD 0 9.911902 S-A 6 NOp= DRY WJ PDO ?D0 PASS 0 SH K7 FDL-CLOS 2 Y.rOP PRI ORI-Y STOP FORMIER POO Pmk9 S6 r Sp )lE sicipno 314VOP P31 ORI-7 STOP POO PASS 7B 7 sw tic STOrPEC 03736 511219) VASUHMN PR A.M 1901 I1ITM CROSS CLR G REFJI 1 HVOP P741 012-Y StACRT RSAA-CMD ROTREC rlon 3P TIGARD 0 9.91 3902 9t4 6 11011'6 DRY DAY PDO F00 PASS 2711 Si tit FOTrCi/3S 2 920P PRC 14DN-Y STOP FORC2VEY POO PASS 34 N SW ME STOPPED 3 14VOP Px3 OAl-Y SrO? iVRC2VPN POO PASS 53m N N6 STO?POD 4 XVOP PRI KWI-Y MP PCO PASS 26 M S1; ]+E S90PPM 1 $ ORB 04 1 f Fa7rOR 08109 9/25/97 kA9?:IOGTDU PR-ARr 390] INTER CROSS RAIN E REAR 1 141+OP Pi3 Oil-Y SPRGIIT REM-VII, 17oSP.LC Thu 8P TIGr.RD 0 9.91 1901 TIE 6 NOIrE NCT ML Mli PDO PASS 62M NE S/1 rUt-CLOS i 2 XVOP PRI ORI-Y STOP ]NO C PASS 1.8 P 11: 2w STOPPED i S ) ]ND C 20 N PSKGR DG5i5 1/22198 KASPINGTON PR-ART 190, 1tIT£R Qi0S5 RAIN 8 Flx I KVO!, FAI ORI-Y TMI:-L CUT COW 7AAS' ISL ID1x Thu SP TIGARD D 9.91 1902 W 6 I1OH£ k5T OUT Pao' fC0 PASS 27 r sx w It4P-TURN i 2 MOP PRI OA2-Y STRG3e- s POO PASS 28 M HE SW 2RIOR ACC 01209 2/16/9E WASY:aGFON Tit-I.RT 1901 STRAIGHT (UNDIV) CL'{ E R1+R I ENO? PRI ORL-Y STIRGHT Rem-END UNx Kon 122 T3CAND 0 9.91 2202 Sol S 441 DRY OAY 200 PCO PASS 16 H SLI NE rOL-CL03 2 HVOP PR1 OR1-Y STOP I + 1 PDO PASS 34 F SW VE 9TO?PED 02758 9/L3/98 WASH IUGTOll PR-ARr 5901 I!ITER CROSS AALN F. RPM 1 Y,JDP PRI ORL-1 STRCHT xE.1R-£ND UH { non I P S IGARD 0 9.91 3 902 SH 6 110110 WEZ DRY : CO Pea PASS 47 M 201 HE roL-CIAs 3 2 MVOP PAI OR)-Y STOP PDO PASS 2S M gw NC STO?PED 1 1 08667 70/9/9R WASHINGICN PR-ART 19D1 Ilrr6A CROSS RAIN E REAR L YVOP PRL DRL-Y STR034T rf(Armll i . moms.C Fli 2P TIe~AD 0 9.91 1402 SN 6 Nol(E WET OAT 111J IN.] C PASS 54 T Sk NC DISTRCCD 70L-CLOS 21NOP PRI ORI-Y STOP rORC29TH POD PASS 23 F SA IrE ST02PED 1 I MVOP ?RI ORI-Y STOP 1 i PCO PASS 2C F Mi NE. SIOPPZO I i 10570 11/29/90 t4AS91K-STON PA-ART 1903 INTER CROSS km 11 E AEAA 3 FlVOP Pa] OR3-7 STRCF.? REAR-CKD DN1t Sun 3P TIGARO D 9.91 1902 NE 6 NONE HET DAY em POO PASS 4t H NR SW FOL-CLOS 2 MVOP PRI ORI-Y 9707 L P0 Pnss 74 r Xs sw S7Y}PPZO p://tesNk,eb.odot.state.or.usliawview/erash/acedt rc_r ort.as ~ p 3121!2001 • QTMS -.Crash PRC Report 03969 5111/95 'AASHL)IGi0l 1 1901 00TREC Sac IF TIGARD 0 9.92 1902 0:1239 4.126/98 OASHINGTON PR-ART 1901 NOTASC San LE ttCARO 0 9.33 L902 09676 12/26/94 WASHING'CN 1 1901 ONK Mon 9P TIGARD D 9,94 1902 0 065 1019/94 'AASHr%T0N 1 1,96i HC711EC Sun L2P TIG4PD O 9.yY 1902 05230 6/29190 WASrIHGTON PR-ART 1901 Oyu tlon 1 P 6?.f.'.'LRTON 0 9,15 1902 1:677 12/30196 WASHIKGTOtI L 1901 NOTRL'_ Mon 3F T MUD 0 9.97 1902 01935 3/22194 RASHVIGLON 1 1901 UKx Tue 5P TIGARD D 10.03D 1,902 00555 1124/95 wASY.141GTON FR-PRT 11301 P(OTRZC Sat 4? TIG440 0 10.03 I902 STRAIGHT (L9bLvl Cut E RPAR Sti; 3 • 141 DRY DAY ?ED STRAIGHT ((IKULV; CLA C RSAA SW 3 (4) DAY DCT 110 STRAIGHT 4111tDIv) ILAIH E RJIA SYI 3 141 KST MIT LNJ STRACGRT :CNOLVI CL.A 0 NOtic $'A S 141 DR[ DAY ?DO STRAIGHT , IUHDIVI ClA C REAR S14 6 (41 DRY DAY INJ ALLOY 0-LEG AS+LN A TURN Sw 5 S WS DAY no 1 STIVAIW;T (ONDIV) CLR 3 PET SW 3 (4) WF.r GAT INJ STRAIGHT (LINDIYI RAIK £ A&SA Sw 4 (41 NET DAY rNJ 0710 28 10/29/9a HASHIKGTON 1 1901 STFWG3S (U)IDI PI CLR E RLAR http:litestweb.odot.skate.or.us/Lransview/crash/a.cedt_prc report.asp Page 3 of 6 1 M'OP PRI OR1-T STRG.4T AEA4-EKD POD PASS- 63 M ME SW TOL-CLOS 2 HVOP PR; 013-Y STO? PDO PASS 40 H N 5 310?PED 1IMP PRI ORL-Y STRCNT RD SWW IFiJ EI PA89 79 P 94I KL POL-CLOS 2 Y-W? PA3 OR7-7 SMUT ]IQ C PASS 32 H 51' V1 SL01P D1: 3 LKJ C 26 F 7SI CA 1YVOF PRI ORl-Y STAG" REAR-M PCO PASS 2014 112. Sit FOL-CLOS 2 t1LroP PAZ DRL-r STOP EDO PASS 49 M 14t S\ STOPPED 3 WOE PRI OAL-Y STROa: FtrAA-END EDO PASS 25 F UE SY PAIOR ACC 110L-CLOS 4 2NJ C L3 F PSNCR 1 )WO9 ETU ORL-T . "GHT taurV£g t4ECH 11CF PCO PASS 30.14 Sw t1E 14ACl-DFX 2 M'OP PAC ORL-T STRCHT OBJ 7 ?F; POO PASS 55 M 113 Sw 1 ?CJOP PRI 091-Y ST7GRT RCAR-£Ha PCO PASS 53 F wx NE TOL-C1.n 2 1-11/0P PR[ OR2-T STOP 110 B PASS 40 n SR HE STOPPED 3 1143 B 12 M ?JINSA 4 [r1J 6 40 F PSNGA L M':OP PIU OA1-Y STRGHT Pro PASS 54 % HE SN' 2 t4vOP Pill ORL-Y TURN-L NO AMY PO3 PASS 21 M N NE EXIT VOY NO-YIELD L Y•JO? PAY 17011-Y , STAGHT PCO PASS 3D M NE SN 2 MISC P£0 'JI(K HT+IN-IKT/I [HJ C 8 Y. K C ON ROW OMR 1 MVOP PAI OR2-Y STAGKT REAR-SND no PASS 41 H S% HE FOL-CIAS 2 rP10P ?R1 0'.4I -Y STOP FORC2'JE:4 Pm PASS 43 M SW ME STOPPED 3 It:J t3 0 Y, PSNGR 4lNOP PRr OR2-1 STOP INJ C ?ASS 40H Sat WE STOPPED 1 14VOP PRI 0X1-r SrRGRT XFAR-EIID 3/21/2000 0 OTMS - Crash PRC Report VKK Sat iP TIGIARO 0 10.02 1902 01261 2/[6/98 wASHINGTOH PR-AR. L901 LT^ HOn 4P TIGARD - 0 IG,03 1902 00309 4125/95 tjAZXTNGCOK i 1901 pIOTPEC Tue 3P Ti ARD 0 20.04 2603 I yS~~'' 541 070AC 9/21/96 WASHINGM4 3 ]90] 70.04 :s05 VV NOIR'>C ~1ad lP T]GAI'D 11 V 1 v 07040 8;21/96 w?550Z?4=11 1 1901 UNK wed 12? TIGRRO 0 10.04 2E05 07517 5/2/97 14ASH]HC1Cy PA-ART 1901 j uNK rri op SLCJ!(D 0 10.04 2605 lid 4 ' r 05901 6117/97 NASHLKCTD'4 PR-ART t901 1V~J VNK Sun 3P TIGARD 0 10.04 2605 01224 2/17/96 WAS1411700H PR-ART 1901 UNK 7ue 3P TIGARD 0 1D.04 1902 Sw 5 441 DRY DRY PLO S7'R,3,3GHT (U(DIVI CI-R S RSRA Sw S 14) DRY DAY IRJ IN: ER CR055 CLA C P,rAR NE 6 1,10148 DRY DAY INJ ALLEY D-LEG CL4 E REAR HE S 4 CRY DAY PDO ALLOY 0-LSG CLR E REAR N 5 4 DRY DAY POO CNTSR CROSS RASH 6 RE" VIE 6 NC41E WET DUSK POO 1 SIRAI GRi WHOM CLR E REAR IG 3 .(4) DRY DAY INJ STRAIG97 (GNDIv) CLR ROAR Sw 6 (41) DRY DAY 1.4j Y/LS/98 w:SHINGTA0 PR-.AJtl 1901 ALLEY 0-LEG CLOY E ' REAR (4.82 I'd 4 GAY DAY 700 VNK sat LIA TiGARD 0 LOOS 1902 3 http J/testweb.odot.state.or. usltransview/crash/accdt_prc_report. aSP Page 4 of S POO PASS 32 ! $9 NE OU-IRC711 O'TK-1HP 2 r4/OP PRi DRK-U STOP PCO PASS C. Sw NE STOPPED 1 MVOP PRi ORI-Y STRGK7 REhR-EN3 PDD PASS 34 F 541 NE fY3L-CL03 2 ID&D 04 37 PSNGR 3 !PLOP PRE OR I-T MP Ci1J C PASS 46 t1 SW NE STOPPED 1 WOF Phi DAI-Y STRG'(T no sLoa POD PASS 28 F SW ITC L-CI1JS 2 Woe PRE ORt-Y SLRGHT fNJ C PASS 51 F SM NE Sim Pt, IITJOP PR] ORL-Y 91RGH 7 Fr-IM-END PO0 PASS 30 F SN N£ FOL-GLOS. 2IWOP PRE OR1-Y STOP FORCMH PDD PASS 32 M SW M STOPPED 3 YVDP PR) OR3-Y Slop rcRc2vER P00 PASS 22 F SK HE 5'ROPPSO 4 M/OP PR] OR3-Y STOP POO PASS 23 M SW NE STOPPED 3 t4vGP PRi NDN-Y S7RGHT FEAR-F-11D 200 PASS 0 M Sw Ne. IDOL-CI49 2 MI/OP PAT OR1-Y STOP PDO PASS 27 F SO t4P STOOPED ] Nvor- PRi OR3-Y SYRGHT REAR-END Vr aREE 700 TAXI t4 t4 SY NE 377L-CLOS 2 ?P:OP PRI ttON-T STOP FQ?.C2VER POD PASS SO N SR NE STOPPED , 314VOP PRE ORI-Y STOP PDO PASS 54 H 64 tic STOPPED I MVOP PRI CAI-Y STRC.4T RSA.R-END POO PASS 17 M HE 51 0. tDL-CLOS 2 woe PRE ORL-Y STOP Itld c PASS 15 F t4E ,w STOPPED 11:VOP PRI 011-Y STRONT INAT7LN Poo PASS 64 r SW NE DISTRC70 I-OL-CLOS 2 ttYOP PRI ORI-Y 5"S Ni C PASS 20 M SA RE STOPPED V. MVOP PRI MI -Y STRGHT REAX-M Poo PASS 2,0 F KC SW :OIL-CLOS 2 UND 04 3 F PSNrrR . 3 UND 04 1 H PSNGR 4 0.10 04 2 r PSTIGR 3/21/200( • 0 OTMS - Crash PRC Report D0130 2/91L4 h:ASA7N ic^N 1 -.901 nOTgE[ N°d ?LA TICA4D 0 10.06 260. OO 1'I2 )!°.097 Ki5 tj$G7CN PA-ART L901 UFH Thu I P TI&AAD 0 10.06 2605 ALLEY 0-LEG PA19 8 TURN OR 5 4 WET MY PCO STRA]GRT (U)MIVI CLR E READ NZ 6 14) CRY DAY POD 0037. i/]5/9B KiSi{1NG544 PR-ART 1901 ALLEY 0-LEv" CLR 9 TARN 0O ERIC Thu 2P T7GARO 0 ID, 06 ICOS WE 6 i DAY DAY PDD i v I 1 04:59 E•/L~J9A WASKINGTVN PR-ART L901 STRnIGBT (Ut40]vi CLR E kE44 FrL 12P TIGAlD 0 30.04 L902 SW 4 14) DRY EAf INJ UN)( 6/7198 t,kSHINC.CON PA-AAT i901 STRAIGHT (UNDIV) CLR L REAR 0.1634 c Sun 3P TIWD 0 10.0E 1902 NE 6 (41 DRY DAY PDD L10Tk C 05709 i,'1619B wASHINGTON PR-ART 1903 ALLEY 0-L G CLA 6 IUTUF 7h,l 41 r ML RD 0 10.06 L902 sw 71 4 ORY DAY INJ DIIR 1/5/96 WASHINGT011 1 1901 STRAIGHT (O)IDIV) RA314 E RSA 00050 ~b?IiS E[L 5P TIGARD 0 10:10 090L Q11 s (41 tiST DUHL PDO H TURN JU 00677 1/25191 WASKVIGTON PR-AAT 1901 ALLEY O-LEG CLR UNH Sat 3P TtaklkD 0' 10.11 2605 NI: 3 4 DRY DAY ]113 J 1/21/9! WASHINGTON L 3901 ST(LAIGNT (DVOIv) CLR E RLAR 04945 V 1101R''C Thu 3P T1Gh" 0 10.13 2605 HE 3 (R) ORY DAY PCO http;/ltes i<veb_odot.state.or.us/transview/emhlaccdt-prc^repoct.asp I ~ Page 5 of 6 511'JOP PRt ORL-Y STOP POO PASS 48 4 NE Wd STOPPED 1 MYOP PRI C:i2-Y STRCHT POO PASS 35 F sN N£ 2 IMP 7%1 Lf:U(-U 9UPN-R No ROM PCO PASS 0 N SE h'£ Exi CdY VC-TIELD 1 MOP PA] OAL-Y STRG-AT RSA-CND POO PASS 60 F SW NT PCL-CLOS 2 M+DF PRC OA]-Y ST:P POO PASS 33 ? SW ;IC STOPPED ? LnrD 04 1 F PSI(GR 1 PROP PRI ORL-Y srAGKT DES SCIL m PASS 2? H S14 NE D;S--RAG 214VOP PRI OR1.-Y TURN-L em P.•A£S $3 F SE SA EXIT 170y I WOE, PRI OFi-Y STIkCNT RrAA- MID INJ B PASS 21 F NE sM ML-CLOS 2 MIOP ?ki ORL-Y STOP f10kcme POO PASS #414 tag SW STOPPED 3 WOE PRt OR3-Y sroP PDD P.R.SS LS F mE SA STOPPED 4 xrOP PR1 OR3-Y STRGHT AVA-ZND POO PASS 70 F NE SIT PRIOR ACC POL-CLOS 1 M'OP PRI ORL-Y STRGF.T RCAR-END Pao PASS-T 59,14 -Tel NC FOL-CLOS 2 11VO? PRI OFRI -7 S70P ?DO PASS 31 F SK n S70PPm L If1`OP PRI ORI-Y TU1Ltf-R BIKE ROV PDD PASS ?2 N SE SW ETN 00 PF PIO-YIELD 2 NYOP Bic NOR-I( STAGHT WkNClcILE INJ a 99 M NE Sit LC.n-CZ" 1 MIOP PRI ORL-I STRCRT REAR-END - POO PASS 0 F S 1( FOL-CIA; 214VOP PRI ORL-Y STO? PDD PASS 32 N' S N STOPPED ] woo PRI 041-1 57RGHT INJ C PASS 39 Y. NB SW 2 ?VOP PRI ORL-Y TURN-L L IN TRF POD P1:SS 43 F SW IM ENTrR bAY NO-YIELD 3 KV07 PAC OR]-Y STRGRT REAR-END POO PASS 29 K III- SA DIS7RCTD FOL-CLOS 2 WOP PAI 0741 -Y STOP 3/21/2000 i . tts sW S104Yib ' . 60 F Pf.55 g:RGHT AVA-E"1] EQL-CT1DE YDO y70N~Y ~ . tiE L PRT fPS= Otiio gTO? t,vpY IM SW SSC1p?VD p~LC R~o~ 6 ppo eay VSSS $15 exD MS . Cam ' cLp x KV02 n?AG~c 4sAA- . M,,_cl A ' iwq;+f1 v91 Uhl 404 pttl^T ttE SW Stg1,tGHT t;1 pAl YpgS j5 T apt-1 4 LoD1 1R A : y1vOp STO STOYYEO NE 4ttT WYSNiryGTpK 'p L0, l7 ZEDS AEM% ?DO V ASS A6 M E ~ 4 Lsii6 it ji95 MLA 1 yp:pp S"Gwl to t1P11'Lt14 T1GAF0 h~t:DiV) W.rT DAY evo OM-%) tm SA 00294 K $1,iay T tat tR+ t •,A] pp$S D SSA 901 ttG 7 H i pAl `Y tiff 1D 13 2LOS Sg.O pL8 PAT YAK ?a ; rhsxlHC10V 0 c pD~ WO? L LN To yto-AOCtA J3°95 gt1"195 T1GAAD t"03,11 Y 0Y 2 VO DAISY EL rNTLR Shit 0RC2ytx STRAtGr.T t~h al 42 T ST-460 Jit>t Pns'` 1941 ST 3 1 ttpY oRT•S > 7F,-OT ?RL Sp M $A LytTCL ,AASNLNG. '.O.i4 26x2 % TL'RV YDp $ p,►tp141ER 0 CLR LHJ 2 lem" 6Y 1JAPP-C 1 STRGM1 2 ! 91 6 Sd ~ FOR~~~.Ft pL5i2 f 9n fi~GAAD p.LiG OAY py,T 1HJ 6 i~1LCLE FORC 011--t 'A Sa. p,tLO a 4A1 95 0,~ PASS gTRGK1 1901 S1a 6 3 Mvoe ()PI L-*( 5M y,AT ?to PAS ew 34 t1 pS1iGR ~51tcTc OR~ 1U.1a.1902 0 K•AY 540 Grit 0 9t?f'B T1G~p ST ' 0;}yi wed lP I>t0 C OR1'Y w Sw C "I PASS 2= f r! Unit a Woe Gs~ AAOIYS" Gan 110( ~ Mee ?DO S et t.rzo. TAOd Reforti"q lmd 1 1 sr. drner>< pt Sfa of n,rl a at dnv he C+g ' to file uo Artetye~s the Ole ted O tep° ~ erne a a+r~'re3tyD"sr u tY crest' report S b c l _ I r and P" ctes ust drNe b9cey~ ame"n" 4 to a Stoke i r, Oll ss BSSQ(an,~ ned in thtsoQvetlt Li s t inforrnaiKx~ rot; ding trio nret~ented nor ere !1 e Qrua~h^ 9 Grasnes Mal a V211200t .Wmecau'r, zeporus? so , k i • EXHIBIT G MAW)WEIRIK ARCHrMCTURE I ENGTNEFRiNG 6533 Fly4 Cloud bra Suite 10o, Eden Prairia, MN 55344 Mail Addr=, Banc 1243, Minnaapoll5, MN 55440 TEL: 612Y-01144890 FAX 612 / 9145950 Fax Transmittal Date: April 12, 2000 No_ of pages: 2 To: Frank Schmidt Fax Number: (503) 220-8518 Company: Island / Schmidt Architects, P.C. From: John Hatzung Phone no,: (612) 914-5893 Project Name: Haggen Food & Pharmacy Project Location: Tigard, OR Project No.: 1112.01 Hard copy to follow: No MESSAGE: Frank - Here are the elevations as they exist with velr4cal dimen.si0 s. It is not likely that they will becorne any higher, but the sides and the back may be reduced once we nail the roof height. T hope to do this by the cnd of this week. John Attachments: Elevation sheet with vertical dimensions cc: .Dorm Everhart •I . D10 T000 8TS80ZZ COS Ydd CO:6T aaA OO/ZT/t0 2208518 .rz0 ,2yp0` 1~ 03 FAQ 503 a WED t.4 r-- I I a ,9-,9t e -,0Z erg- 9Z a 4 1Y v -.-William L. Brennan Barbara J. Brennan '13575 SW Cresmer Drive Tigard, OR' 37223 RECEIVED MAR 2 C, 2000 . 5`0 ►44- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT k_ r r ~ T s lt~` ti~ D TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: We attended the meeting in late December which outlined the proposed plans for Tigard Marketplace. Two issues which have great impact on us personally and the livability of our home are the lighting proposals and the concern regarding adherence to the vehicular traffic ordinance. As city records will indicate, an ordinance was set in place when the center originally opened which limited vehicular activity in the drive behind the center between IOPM and 6AM. With the advent of a large grocery again in the location we naturally have concerns regarding deliveries and servicing. Since the current tenants clearly and regularly disobey the ordinance, it would seem that the potential for continued and increased activity is a real possibility. The proposal which was explained at the meeting is to include new parking lot and building lighting. We are in hopes that this step will be sensitive to the intrusion of those lights in to our home, as the current lighting is so obtrusive that it is necessary for us to close blinds just to keep lights from shining directly in to our faces as we sit in various rooms of our home. The proposals for new lighting revealed parking lot poles and light towers on buildings which would most likely add to or greatly increase the present illuminations. It is our concern that whatever is done does not fitrther adversely impact us. We have lived in our home for 29 years, and of course have witnessed many changes in the area. Due to our location we have most likely endured the greatest impact of die shopping center located directly in our back yard and within just a few feet of our home... with this close proximity various aspects of the operation have had a profound effect on us. The pub which features on occasion live music in a building not acoustically equipped for such, and the resounding vibrations and music coming thru our home as if our walls were attatched , has deprived us of sleep on many weekend nights beyond 1 AM. and necessitated countless phone calls to the establishment management. The lights shining directly in to our home, the deliveries at first to Food Connection then to Thriftway that would occur at all hours of the day and night; the street sweepers, after hours traffic etc, have as it may seem at times made the livability- and enjoyment factor of our home somewhat compromised. We look forward to the pending update of the center, but deeply hope that changes which are proposed and ultimately made will have a positive rather than continued or worsened c8bct on our home. Each of these topics and concerns was discussed at the December 1999 meeting ulth Frank Schmidt of Tiland and Schmidt Architects and Ms. Eileen Gilchrist of Elliott and Associates Property Management, and at that time they were invited to visit our home to see first hand that impact of which we speak. With thanks to you for providing us the opportunity to once again express our concerns. Sincerely, William L Brennait Barbara I Brennan 13575 S.W. Cresmer Drive Tigard, Oregon 97223 6,39-2503 March 18, 2000 Re. Site Development Review.... Tigard Marketplace Renovations 14t:CEIV D PLANNING OAR z 0 2000 ClT y OF T1GA80 0) EXHIBIT I LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date Received RECEIVED MAR 2 0 2000 COMM Mly OEVEWPMENT a ;/o Prn Comments D transmittalform TO: City Of Tigard ATTN: ll;~, o RECEIVED PLANNING RECEIVED PLANNING City of Tigard PAR Z 0 Planning Division CITY 206000 Ms. 13125 aSW Hall Boulevard CITY OF TIGA/AD) Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Site Development Review (SDR) 2000-00005, Tigard Marketplace Renovations Though not opposed to the concept of expanding and improving the grocery store in the Tigard Marketplace, we have some concerns with the changes. As this proposed expansion would put the grocery store and the accessway considerably closer to our property line, we want to ensure that it will not increase noise levels or be a visual detraction to our home. 1. Visual screening and landscaping (Section 18.360.090, Approval Criteria and Section 18.745.050, Buffering and Screening), a. Screening/Landscaping: the proposed addition will bring the back wall of the grocery store approximately 75' closer to our property line. Our concern is that this addition will put an enormous and very visible commercial wall close to our yard and house. The existing fence and vegetation does provide some screening, however, not nearly enough to provide an adequate visual barrier. We see screening vegetation in the plans, but we need something that will adequately block the entire view of the rear of the mall area from both our first and second floor rooms. b. Fence/Wall (Table 18.745.1 and .2, Buffer Combinations for Landscaping and Screening): from the plans and information we received it is impossible to ascertain the width of buffer between the accessway and our fence. Our fence, installed by the original mall owners, is approximately eight feet tall and we want to retain this height. From the information that was provided to us, it is unclear whether the fence separating us from the Marketplace would be replaced or left as is. If left in place there are some repairs and corrections that will be necessary. Over time the soil has sluffed away from some of the posts and needs to be replaced - this has also caused the ground in our backyard just inside the fence to form large cracks and begin to sluff away. The proposed slope and retaining wall will need to address these problems. 2. Noise Abatement (Para 4, Section 18.360.090, Approval Criteria): when the previous grocery (Thriftway) was operating there were numerous loud noises that we found unacceptable. The three most annoying noises were: a) night shift workers smoking, joking (swearing), and playing loud music on the back dock - the noise coming from the dock was magnified and seemed like it was just outside our bedroom window (2nd floor), b) loud banging noises from pallets being thrown around, and c) trucks unloading with doors slamming and banging and people hollering. I realize these noises aren't necessarily part of the actual review for the addition, but they are directly associated with the proposed business and need to be addressed. 3. Odor and rodents (Para D., Section 18.725.030, Performance Standards): if we are reading the sketch correctly, the refuse containers are located across the accessway from the store - close to our yard. This puts the garbage in close proximity to our back yard where the prevailing breeze will push the odor directly into it and puts a rodent attraction very close to our house. This renovation brings the grocery store and traffic closer to our house and will negatively impact our privacy. We also believe it will reduce the value of our property - how much, we can't know. But, we do want the City of Tigard and the Marketplace developer to minimize this impact to the maximum extent possible. We feel it would be extremely beneficial to have you view the present grocery store building from our home, in addition to seeing it from the commercial property side. We believe this is the only way to get a clear perspective of the effects these dramatic proposed changes would make to the livability and monetary value of our home. Please call the number below if you have any questions or to set up a visit to our home. Thank-you for your consideration. 944 ZtAlp_ Scott H. McCrae Teresa K. McCrae 13635 SW Steven Ct 620-7854 p ti i, W iregon John A. Mtzhaber, M. D., Governor March 23, 2000 Tigard, City of Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Attn: Karen Fox Subject: SDR2000-00005 Tigard Marketplace Renovations Tigard Marketplace Access Dear Ms. Fox: EXHIBIT J Department of Transportation Region 1 123 NW Flanders Portland, OR 97209-4037 (503) 731-8200 FAX (503) 731-8259 PLXV T-ZAE7lG-91 Proposal Number: 518 ODOT has worked with the applicant's traffic consultant to resolve one traffic issue associated with the proposed 15,054 sq. ft. expansion for a grocery store use. The configuration of the most southerly access onto Highway 99W is an outstanding issue. Based on our analysis ODOT has determined that a right-in should be imposed as a condition of approval rather than allowing a full access as proposed. Highway 99W is an ODOT facility and based on the Oregon Highway Plan is classified as a Statewide Highway. As such, ODOT has regulatory responsibility to ensure that negative impact to the highway generated by development is avoided or mitigated. ODOT's authority is set forth in ORS 374 and OAR 734, Division 50. (Division 51 will supercede Division 50 and become effective April 1, 2000 pertaining to ODOT access permits). _ Based on our analysis, including Chi Mai's traffic analysis letter dated October 21 51 (attached), the proposed southerly access point should be closed in order to avoid negative impacts to the operation of the highway. Please note in the last paragraph of Ms. Chi's letter that her reference to needing a right-turn lane at the southern access is made in relative to a full access. ODOT's preference is that there be no access at this point and the existing northbound, right-turn lane on the 99W that extends to the signalized main entrance to the shopping center be extended south to provide more storage for cars entering the shopping center. Making this improvement as a part of the current proposal is impractical because of the existing Taco Time drive-thru. To balance the applicant's business interests and due to existing site constraints, ODOT will support a temporary right-in only at the southern access. Form 734-1350 (1 /98) d • The temporary nature of the right-in only provision is in anticipation of future redevelopment or intensification of the shopping center. If and when redevelopment of the shopping center or intensification defined by more trips occurs, a traffic analysis should be conducted to address closing the southern access and extending the right- turn lane south. Based on our findings and conclusions, ODOT requests that the following conditions be imposed as part of the design review decision: Conditions of Approval 1. The southerly access shall be constructed to limit access to a temporary right-in only with a median to control movement. 2. The applicant shall remove the southerly, temporary right-in only access at such a time when the existing northbound, right-turn lane on the 99W is extended south. The extension of the right-turn lane improvement may be triggered by additional trips to the shopping center and/or when the existing building on Pad C (existing Taco Time) is removed or substantially reconfigured. The improvement will entail removal of the existing drive-thru facility on Pad C and additional right-of-way. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and coordinate prior to the ODOT permit process. I can be reached at 731-8206 should you have any questions. Sincerely, Gail Curtis, AICP Senior Land Use Planner Attach. • 9 DATE: October 21, 1999 TO: Marah Danielson FROM: Chi Mai, Transportation Analyst SUBJECT: Tigard Marketplace Center Expansion Highway 99W @ Tigard Marketplace Main Signal (M.P. 10.0) The proposed development is a 60,000 sgft. supermarket that would occupy the southeast corner lot of the Tigard Marketplace Center. ODOT has assessed the shopping center traffic conditions and came to the determination that the unsignalized southerly access shall function best as a right-in only access. In addition to this southerly access, the Tigard Marketplace Center is served by two other signalized accesses. The main signalized access is expected to facilitate a major portion of the shopping center's traffic and the northerly signalized access (intersection of Highway 99W/Park St.) can facilitate the remaining traffic. The proposed supermarket would add trips to the southerly access, which raises the following safety concerns: • Its close proximity to other driveways is in noncompliance with the State's access spacing standard of 990' for this Highway section. • Its location is within 200' to the adjacent driveway to the south. Closely spaced driveways hamper the ability of a driver to safely and easily enter and exit a site by not allowing the driver adequate time in between conflict points to react to.merging and diverging maneuvers. The subject access is located just south of the taper section of the NB right turn lane at the main signalized access. Allowing the right-out movemenfwould create an additional conflict for drivers. A vehicle traveling north on Highway 99W wishing to turn right at the main signalized access would have to enter the taper section to move to the right-turn lane. Also, by law motorists are required to signal 100' in advance to a lane change. Therefore, a driver at the unsignalized access waiting for a gap to exit could see a vehicle signaling to turn right into the right-turn taper, assumes that the vehicle is making the right turn into the access and pull out in front of it. Allowing the right-out movement at the subject access has the potential for traffic conflicts. • It is anticipated that at site occupation the southerly access will be blocked by northbound through traffic during the peak hours. Due to these safety and operational concerns, it is recommended that the right turn egress movement at the southerly access be removed. It is necessary to allow the right-in movement at the southerly access in order to reduce the right-turn queue at the main signalized access. In conclusion, the subject development's needs would be adequately accommodated with two signalized accesses and one right-in only access. CM • • EXHIBIT K T I L A N D J S C H M 1 D T A R C H I T E C T S P. C February 29, 2000 Karen Fox City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Via: Messenger Re: Site Development Application Clarification Letter Tigard Marketplace 13500 SW Pacific Hwy. Tigard, Oregon Dear Karen: The following is intended to clarify the Application you are now reviewing. STORM WATER DETENTION: Find attached the documentation from Don Cushing on the Stonn water detention and full calculations. TREE LOCATIONS ALONG HWY. 99: The Landscape Architect has been questioned on the number of the trees, and he has indicated that the number of trees do match the code, however, the spacing has been modified to open viewing of the existing pylon and new monument sign. I believe we can come to an agreement on the overall spacing, should you desire a realignment of the trees. LANDSCAPING AT PERIMETER BUFFERS: The landscaping has been increase around the southeast corner of the project, which falls behind the Haggen store. This additional landscaping along with all the landscaping indicated throughout the site, is anticipated to be an acceptable solution -for a site that has been existing for ten years in is current state. The neighbors did not voice any specific opinions on the perimeter landscaping, other than the request to do whatever could be done to safeguard the trees that are located along the back of the project, would remain in place. The retaining wall will be placed, as a part of Phase One, to assist in stabilizing the ground around the trees and cover any exposed roots. No work is shown as being necessary on the residential side of the fence. TREE REMOVAL: The question on the size of trees to be removed can be answered by comparing the existing Landscape Plan with the Proposed.. The size of each tree is noted along with the type of tree throughout the plan. It can be noted that there are 12" and larger trees existing, however, no tree 12" or larger are proposed to be removed. TRAFFIC REPORTS: As was understood from the Pre-Application documentation, the additional reviews that have been provided within the notebooks from Kittelson and Associates would be adequate. A frill repoil was not required due to the conditions that are being modified and that the new grocery store is just larger than the original. 333 S.W. 5"' AVE., SUITE 406 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 (503) 220-8517 FAX (503) 220-8518 iT I L A H D J S C. H M I J T A R C H I T E C T S, P C Tigard Marketplace Site Development Application Clarification Letter February 29, 2000 Page 2 of 2 PARKING REDUCTION: As we discussed, the reduction in parking will be possible at such time as the actual building size is known. The allowance of a 20% reduction will more than suit the size of building that could reasonably by placed on this pad. So at this time we will remove the request for this approval as a part of this Application, and submit the actual building size and use, once it has been determined. PARKING DRIVEWAY WIDTHS: The entire site will maintain the minimum requirement of 24 foot driveway widths, as noted in the code. Many of the drives are wider than the 24 foot requirement, and will be fully dimensioned on the construction documents. PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY: The pedestrian walkway between the highway and the plaza of the in-line retail buildings, will be a minimum of 6 feet wide as noted in the code. In addition, as noted in the Pre-Application Meeting, the pedestrian walk now indicates the low-level pedestrian light fixtures. TRASH ENCLOSURES: The existing trash dumpsters and enclosures are to be left in place on all the buildings that are to remain. The Haggen store building will have an enclosed compactor with container, and will contain the trash being generated in the store. Typically the cardboard of the grocery store is baled within the store and loaded on a truck for recycling. As was mentioned on the phone, a site survey by your office may be in order to verify the existing conditions. SURROUNDING AREAS: Find attached the notification area plan that has been used to clarify the multi-family, commercial and residential areas surrounding the site. With these clarifications we request that the information provided on this project be deemed complete so the next step of full review can begin right away. As always we appreciate your assistafice on this project and look forward to a full approval as soon as possible. Sincerely, Tiland / Schmidt Ar ~itects' PC Frank . Schmidt Cc: Randy PotterE CAP Eileen Gilchrist: Elliott Associates, PC Don Cushing: Civil Engineers Mike Oder n- Freshley Landscape Architects File 97 SGIAIT . F Ox Ldrx; 333 S.W. 5"' AVE., SUITE 406 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 (503) 220-8517 FAX (503) 220-8518 UIV l 1 IJ 1 I~VIVI 1 v rrL i u r t~ 1~ J ~ivr'v~►vlr►1 tv~v IJ CT 1F-RR reY o tetceaoso ~ rtY rsL I. ~axoet3oo ,,p 1t3erul"r rtteratr3„ r31 rCY*04 serw ICU rtie Pod\ ST \ lereeo3sot / PARK f pARK , - r - - 2s$Ox"noo j in tt>otcoona /Im t rito toInttoo ZCW361a n ttY~el~ n tauw r. two >n 2pepY3oe lolea nrOn++noo ~ ZC >m Von*" ?f 0 to V~ ic3asa o rs aae O IS tea r ?,*?mum Y13er . Q~ ri teao 2t recce 3 Maw . xcee Zsa xtJ 2Ca8 ft _____l. i J%Ounruo ro nu:cau" I CT r• 44 7t102Ce03i64 IN/'CF11Al1~M SYSi~4 acoc."PHic t40TIFICATION AREA (SOQ') L] I U~LC, Tax lots 100, 200, 500, 600, S01, 900 & 901 A,LEs N 300 40 500 Foul t O tioo_ so° ~ ktl 338 feat Cin' afTig ud NtprtnatiDn a' ts, Mae It, to, pen" tucaGan orjy and uyp)1d De'06nod wl{h tr* Do 'I 5syleos Ob"- 13125 SW Kan 81W ".'d, OR 91213 i~3less-4t1t , February 24, 2000 EXHIBIT L CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Marah Danielson Oregon Department of Transportation, Region 1 123 NW Flanders Portland, OR 97209-4037 RE: TIGARD MARKETPLACE SOUTH ACCESS TO SW PACIFIC HIGHWAY Dear Marah: We have reviewed the various correspondence between ODOT and Kittelson & Associates related to the proposed relocation of the right-in/right-out driveway adjacent to the Tigard Marketplace site on SW Pacific Highway. The enclosed letter from Kittelson to me, dated January 20, 2000, provided to us copies of the previous letters and asked that the City give an opinion related to the driveway proposal. We understand that the applicant is requesting to relocate the current right-in/right-out driveway (south driveway) further to the north and maintain the existing turning movements. ODOT wishes to eliminate the right-out movement because the driveway location does not meet their spacing standards and they are concerned about the potential for accidents involving northbound vehicles positioning to turn right into the main driveway and vehicles exiting the south driveway. In reviewing Kittelson's memorandum to you, dated December 28, 1999, we noted that they looked at accident data between roughly 1994 and 1998 for two similar existing driveway locations along SW Pacific Highway in Tigard. Those locations are the Tigard Promenade and the Tigard Town Square shopping centers. In both locations, there are right-in/right-out driveways located near full-movement main driveways into the developments. In both situations, the right-in/right-out driveways appear to be as close as what is proposed at the Tigard Marketplace. The five-year accident data reveals that there were no accidents at either driveway-location. In addition, they looked at accident data for the existing south driveway of the Tigard Marketplace and found that there were no accidents involving right-turning vehicles during that same five year period. From our standpoint, we see an advantage in moving the south driveway further to the north. The existing location is not sufficiently visible to northbound vehicles. We believe moving the driveway further north will make it more visible and will afford northbound vehicles more time to respond to vehicles exiting that driveway. We also believe the sight distance for a vehicle exiting the new driveway location will be improved. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 0 - 0 Based upon the information provided by Kittelson, and upon our experience with this driveway, we do support relocation of the driveway and continuing its current limitations to right-in/right-out. We do not believe it is necessary to restrict the driveway to right-in only. If you have any questions, or would like to discuss this matter further, please do not hesitate to give me a call at 639-4171, ext. 378. Sincerely, A STIN P. DUENAS, P.E. Ci Engineer Enclosure: Letter from Kittelson, dated January 20, 2000 c: Mark Vandehey, Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 610 SW Alder, Suite 700, Portland, OR 9720.5 Jack Orchard, Ball Janik LLP Bill Monahan, City Manager Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer Karen Fox, Associate Planner iskMglhti2ru44ortrspondmceb2242DOG4ig ardmazketplxc.odoL doc Marah Danielson February 24, 2000 Page 2 03/23/00 15:28 FAX 1 509 79 8259 ODOT RG 1-FLANDERS EXHIBIT M DATE: October 21, 1999 TO: Marah Danielson FROM: Chi Mai, Transportation Analyst SUBJECT. Tigard Marketplace Center Expansion Highway 99W @ Tigard Marketplace Main Signal (M.P. 10.0) The proposed development is a 60,000 sgft. supermarket that would occupy the southeast corner lot of the Tigard Marketplace Center. ODOT has assessed the shopping center traffic conditions and came to the determination that the unsignalized southerly access shall function best as a right-in only access. In addition to this southerly access, the Tigard Marketplace Center is served by two other signalized accesses. The main signalized access is expected to facilitate a major portion of the shopping center's traffic and the northerly signalized access (intersection of Highway 99W/Park St.) can facilitate the remaining traffic. The proposed supermarket would add trips to the southerly access, which raises the following safety concems: • Its close proximity to other driveways is in noncompliance with the State's access spacing standard of 990' for this Highway section. • Its location is within 200' to the adjacent driveway to the south. Closely spaced driveways hamper the ability of a driver to safely and easily enter and exit a site by not allowing the driver adequate time in between conflict points to react to merging and diverging maneuvers. The subject access is located just south of the taper section of the NB right turn lane at the main signalized access. Allowing the right-out movement would create an additional conflict for drivers. A vehicle traveling north on Highway 99W wishing to turn right at the main signalized access would have to enter the taper section to move to the right-turn large. Also, by law motorists are required to signal 100' in advance to a lane change. Therefore, a driver at the unsignalized access waiting for a gap to exit could see a vehicle signaling to turn right into the right-turn taper, assumes that the vehicle is making the right turn into the access and pull out in front of it, Allowing the right-out movement at the subject access has the potential for traffic conflicts. • It is anticipated that at site occupation the southerly access will be blocked by northbound through traffic during the peak hours. Due to these safety and operational concerns, it is recommended that the right turn egress movement at the southerly access be removed. It is necessary to allow the right-in movement at the southerly access in order to reduce the right-turn queue at the main signalized access. In conclusion, the subject development's needs would be adequately accommodated with two signalized accesses and one right-in only access. cM EXHIBIT N LW aked to ral64 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate t BUSINESS AGENDA CATV sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, JUNE 12, 1969, 5:30 P.H. ask to be recognized by the Chair at the start TIGARD CIVIC CENTER of that agenda item. Visitor's agenda items are 13125 SW HALL BLVD. asked to be to 2 minutes or less. Longer matters TIGARD, OREGON 97223 can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or City Administrator. 5:30 o STUDY SESSION ` 5:30 p.m. - Commission er Roy Rogers, Washington County 6:30 p.m. - Councilor Richard Devlin, Metropolitan Serv _L District 7:,U 1. BUSINESS MEETING: 1.1 Call To Order and 1.2 Plcdge of Allegia Roll Call nce 1.3 Call To Staff and Council For Non-Agenda Items Ati 4 F; Y~ 7:35 2. TWALITY JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS PRESENTATION TRAFFIC SAFETY CONCERNS 8:00 3. PRESENTATION OF KEYS TO THE CITY TO CONGP.v55I0N&L AWARD RECI PIENTS: SHANNON KASTEN (BRONZE AWARD) AND JAMES WORLEY (GOLD AdAP.D) o Mayor Edwards 8:10 4. 'ROCLAMATION - NATIONAL FLAG BAY o Mayor Edwards 8:15 S. VISITOR'S AGENDA (2 Minutes or Less Per Issue, Please) 8:20 6. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and r.,ay be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone ray request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Potion to,- 6.1 Approve Council Minutes: Januazy 27. 1989, April 24, 1989, Ray 2, and 9, 1989 6.2 Receive and File: Council Calendar 6.3 Recess Council Feeting; Convene Local Contract 8eview Board fleeting (LCRB): a) Award Bid for porth Dakota SF.oi:lder bidening,; b) Ateard Bid for Parking Lot Landscaping, Irrigation Renovation); Adjourn LCRB; Reconvene Council Meeting 6.4 Approve Final Order - Conditional Use CU 89-02 Tigard Assembly of God Church - NPO 03; Resolution Uo. 89- 6.5 Accept Citv Center Development Plan - Resolution So. 89- 6.6 Approve Amendments to Irtergover=ental Agree=P-:nt %rith Unified Sewerage Agency - Resolution No. 59-_ 6.7 Approve Right-of-nag Use License Agree=ent with '--=21 Croar Go--pany - S.W. 93rd Avenue and Flapleleaf 6.8 Approve Appropriation for Replacement or Dzzzsed Property - Resolution No. 89- 6.9 Approve Appointments to the Washington County Trais-ru.-.atiaa Coordinating Cc=;ttee; Councilor Joe Kasten azd City Engineer Dandy booley (Alternate Representative) U COUNCIL AGEt:DA - JUNE 12, 1989 - PAGE 1 8i?.5 7. PUBLIC HEARING, - AMENDMENT TO THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC), CHAPTER 7.40 (Noise) Amendments to the Noise ordinance provisions of the TI1C o Public Hearing Opened C o Declarations Or Challenges 0 Summation By Community Development Staff r z 0 Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents 0 Recommendation By Community Development Staff 0 Council Questions Or Cumments o Public Hearing Closed 0 Consideration By Council 8:50 8. FINAL ORDER - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 89-0' ~ ZO9E CRANGE . 89-05; CROW OREGON, INC.; NPO #8 - ORDINANCE NO. 89-_,_ 1 :FF 9:00 9. PUBLIC HEARING - PUBLIC RIGHT'-OF-WAY VACATION - __RTION OF SW 66TH Yy' AVENUE IN WEST PORTLAND HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION r'3< Proposed vacation of a portion of S.W. 56th Avenue within West Portland r ? Heights, a recorded plat in the City of Tigard, Washington County, g` Oregon. The request was initiated by City Council on March 27, 1989, I tine .r at the request of Jim and Cora Corliss. , o Public Hearing was continued at the Pay 8, 1989 Council Leeting to June 12. 1989; Staff will be recommending. an extension of the continuation of the Public Hearing Date. 9:05 10. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff 10.1 Support the Nomination of Steve Stoi2e, Flayor for City of Tualatin to Serve on the Emergency Medical Services Policy Board - Resolution No. 89- '1°. ;;';'q:,•: 11. 9.15 EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive K ' ':y Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (a), (d). (e), S (h) to discuss labor relations, Police Chief selection, real property transactions, and current and pending litigation issues. 'a 10:00 12. ADJOURNMENT cw/9943D e a C. y k• -LVa = .d 1~ X}s , w y~r. ti/ e COURCIL AGE= - JUNE 12, 1989 - PAGE 2 a ~ { a S K'`2tr r '~l > e~ a .u ; ~'~•t.''t~~M^± ~ rd ~ '=^r "~p^`' , ,ti ~qte ,z Y. » .~r _ ,a ...~:•:L ~ _ ,ivF:F iT1 J,B k`s... - a'S x i CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUPL4ARY 1 AGENDA OP: June 12. 1989 DATE'SUBMITTED: June 1, 1989 r ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Noise Ordinance. PREVIOUS ACTION: Revision +i t PREPARED BY: Keith Liden DEPT HEAD O LLXITY ADMIN OK ° REQUESTED BY: POL.. ISSUE Should the noise ordinance be amended to batter address noise related impacts with emphasis on protection of residential uses. INFORKATION SUM ARY Because of the problems encountered with the Tigard Market Place Shopping Center, the Council expressed an interest i.n revising the e.:ist::ig noise ordinance standards in the THC. The attached draft :stains the - i- alto-aable noise level and adds average maximu=z that vary in accordance with the type of land use affected. Attached is a copy of t-he proposed ordinance and the existing Code provisions. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDH.RBD 0 1. Approve the revisiono and approve the attached ordinance. 2. Approve the modified revisions and instruct staff to pseparra a Final o Order. 3. Reject the proposal and instruct Staff to prrap+arG a Final Crdar_ .^..a=am:aa=~.a=as«~==n=aaa~sa: mamma«=.:sau::aaaaa= a--+--asasaa~=_:--^-•-^-~••~-- FISCAL 1"AC C2====Y==a a'=a M==G a as s=3==a =IIII=Q 6 G=II==a3=a4 ..======3====61T..=G=ZZ.T=IIEall'aa~= Q:d SUGGBST21) AM rY Apps the otaochc-d ordinanco. br/LvoICO. koI 1.' r;A• 0 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON • ORDINANCE NO. 89- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEFINITIONS, PROHIBITIONS, AND RIBS REGARDING ALLOWABLE NOISE LEVELS IN THE CITY OF TIGARD AND DECLRRING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WMREAS, the City Council desir•3 te~ amend the City•s noise ordinance to utter allow effective enforcement and con._ L of offensive noise. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLIAdS: Section 1: Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.220 are repealed and replaced as follows: ARTICLE IV. NUISANCES AFFECTI'G THE PUBLIC PEACE 7.4G.130 Noise - Definitione. For purposes of this Section and Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.210, the following shall c-an. (a) Ambient noise - means the all-encompassing noise associated with a given environment, usually being a composite of sounds from ray s",rces near and far. For the purpose of this ordinance, a :bient noise level is the level obtained when the noise level is averaged over a period of one hour at specific location without inclusion of noire frogs isolated identifiable sources. (b) Noise-receiving land use - means any portion of a structure which is intended for human occupancy that is the recipient of srsur_ds that are generated from beyond the boundary of the property upon which the structure is located. Thin definition applies to noiee-sensitive and co=mercial-industrial land uses defined beima. (c) Noise-sensitive land use - =ans any portion of a church, children day care, hospital, residential group care, school, single or r_•lti-family dwelling unit, and mobile ha that is intended for livicg, sleeping, or eating. This definition eucludea accessory areas or structures such as yard areas and garages. (d) Cc=- arcial-industrial land uoe - E=ansi any usa which Le a p3xMitted or conditional use in the C-P, C-G, CBC, C-N, I-P, I-L, and I-H zoning dietricte, am identified in Title 18. 7.40, 140 Rotor vehicle noicsaz. Ercopt as any ba axpresely alla-> d pursuant to tho provic3ions of Sections 7.40.190 and 7.40.200, no parson ohall operate a motor vehicle in such a runner or at ouch a location are to cauee the noica creatod by the vehicle to cause tho ambient noioa level at the neareat noice- recciving laud use to exceed the lov©lo apscified in Section 7.40.170 and as €33namrod in Se-tion 7.40.180. .40.150 Joke Brakes Prohibited. No parson shall operate within tho city 110ito of th© city of Tigard a cotor vohiclo aahaust-braTcing c"teo carxnly • 9 known as a "jake brake". For the purposes of' this section; the exceptions set forth in Section 7.40.190 shall not apply and this section shall be read as an absolute prohibition of the operation of such motor vehicle b<-eaking systems within the city of Tigard. 7.40.160 Noise emanating from certain._prooerty. Except as may be e-Kpresely allowed pursuant to the provisions of Sections 7.40.190 and 7.40.200, no person shall cause or permit noise to emanate from the prope--ty under his or her control so as to cause the anbi~nt noise level at the nearest nose-receiving land use to exceed the levels sFs -ified in Sections 7.40.170 and 7.40.180. 7.40.170 Allowable noise limits. Two noise standards shall apply when measuring noise levels at the noise-receiving land use as =assured in accordance with Section 7.40.180 below: (a) Xaximum noise levels. The following maximum noise decd levels shall not be exceeded over 18 of the time (L1 dHA) averaged over a one b3ur period: Time of Day Maximuo Noise Level, Ll dWk 7:00 AM - 10:00 PH 60 10:00 PH - 7:00 AM 55 (b) Average maximum noise levels. The following average noise decib~1 levels shall not ;x exceeded over 500 (L50 dBA) of the time averaged over a one hour period: Time of Day Kaxi- Noise Level, L50 dBA 7:00 AM - 10:00 PH 50 - Noisc-sensitive land use 55 - Co=m2rciai/Industrial land use 10:00 PH - 7:00 AN 45 - Noise-e2nsitive land use 50 - Co=arcial/Industrial land use 55 - Co=2rcial/Industrial lard use if nut occupied during this t.ir~z pariod 7.60.180 Standard for s1--asuremant. (a) U-_asurs=nts shall be made eith a calibrated sound level cater suing the requirements of a Type I or Type II -ter, as specified by th-3 R-rican Ntational Standard Specification for Sound Level Meterm .(ANSI Standarde 1.4-1971). For purposes of this ordinanza, a sound level C3LLRr shall contain at least a recording calibration curve for an W traighing network, and bath fast and alas c st®t reopeznca capability. (b) Persona conducting Bound level m2aaurc==nta shall havo recoivcd training in tho techniques of acund =aaur rnt and the operation of ecund co aeuring inatru_--anto frcm the Dom =nt of 13nviror=o ntal 4~paality, a rcgistorod accouctical ongineor, or other cc=yotent body prior to aagzagIng in any onforcc nt activity. (e) Eloise maasurcmznts shall be taken at a height of 5 feat and a dietanca of 2S foot from' tho noise-receiving land uco in tho dirertiaa of tto naleo i source. If the noise source and noise-receiving land use are less than 25 feet apart, the measurement shall be taken at the property lice. 7.40.190 [poise - Exertions to restrictions. The restrictions imposed by Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.180 shall not apply to the follc*ring: (a) Emergency equipment not operating on a regular or scheduled basis; (b) Noise emanating from Pacific Highway, Highway 217, and Interstate 5; (c) Sounds originating on constrict.. sites and reasonably necessa--y to the Pccomplishment of work *in pr..gress; provided, hosuever, that no construction work may be carried out between the hours of 9:00 PH and 7:00 AM, except for bona fide emergencies where the public health or safety is threatened or for which a special permit, granted by the City Administrator, has beer. first obtained in accordance with the procedures contained in Section 7.40.200; and (d) Lawn, garden or household equipment associated with the nor-i repair, upkeep, or maintenance of pri,erty. 7.40.200 Permits required for exceeding allowable noise levels. (a) The use of amplified voice and music or creation of noise at iece'_s which would otherwise eirceed those permissible under Secticn 7.40.130 through 7.40.190 may be allowed upon application to the City Ad-; istrator. Application for an amplified sound permit shall be made to the City Administrator on fozmn yrepared by the City. The applicant shall identify the date, location and time of the event for which the per=Lit is sought, and shall provide an estimate of the duration of the event. (b) In the case of a serieo of similar events to b2 conducted at the same location, the City Administrator may, at his discretion, isWse the pe=it in a form extending to cover the entire series. In that event, the permit shall be subject to the AdnInistrator's withdrawal at any tip. (c) The City Administrator shall grant a permit in any instance in which the event and its accompanying noise will not, in his judg-ent, interfere unreasonably with the peace of those likely to be affected by the noise. In making this judg=-nt, he shall take into acc4ount the nature of the surrounding propertica and the benefit to tha cc=unity of the event for which the application is -de. (d) The City Administrator "y sutlt any question arising trith respsct to this Soction to tho City Council, and if any sir of the City Council requests its oubmieoion to the Council, any such question shall ba heard by the Council. In oithor event, the decision of tho City Cr4= it nhali bo final. a1J 7.4R.203 PgDaLty for chaptor violations. (a) A violation of thio Chaptor shall Canotituto C ClaGC 1 civil infraction, which ohall bo procacood according to the pracodurea octoblioh-cd in toga ti~1'a.~r, i . ~7 ~ •~kF ri, .r ~r y,3,•. S 4r<-` 0 civil infractions ordinance, set out in Chapter 1.16 of this Code. Notice to abate the nuisance shall be a prior contract. (b) Each violation of a separate provision of this Chapter shall constitute a separate infraction, amend each day that a violation of this Chapter is committed or permitted to continue shall constitute a separate infraction. (c) A finding of a violation of this Chapter shall not relieve the responsible party of the duty to abate the violation. The penalties i=posed by this section are in addition to and not in lieu of any remedies available to the City. (d) If a provision of this Chapter is violated by a firm or corporation, the officer or officerB, or person or persons responsible for the violation shall be subject to the penalties imposed by this Chapter. Section 2: This ordinance shall be effective on and after the 30th day after its inactment. PASSED: By vote of all Council" present after being read by number and title only, this day of June, 1989. Cathy Hheatley, IBeputy City Recordar APPROVED: This day of June, 1989. Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Data /a' d~ ~c ~~krno a 7 0juutA. O~ kt CL.Iza mce i n j 01C &/P1r 1. 92M JUN 5 Keirch S. Liden Community Development Department City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 May 27, 1959 Dear Mr. Liden, As this letter is t.ei g wr tten, constr::crioni workers -c^ °_h and Murdoch: Streeto in T igarJ have r,e un t:.._Y dal ;._„e_. It is now 7:30 A.M. it is also Saturday. The construction day started 7.' notl_b' Z. ':CO A.M. - special _tereo system wired t,_r ,urea. y ti.-7e power sags an6 heavy equipment joined in ~i%e c"onus. it is Memorial Day ee pnd. Thi3 _3 c3 neighborhood. ~'ae are pu'-tinq ''p di`_h th-- and dirt all week nry, 5-Arl.inQ of E'eve-. lie (Their stereo sysce::, b_v the way, r=ayz i We do not deserve put s.;=• witi•. it a-- .,~,~-ekena i::!r.~ is tee;;. T work the evening :;hilt at the hoapita- and it =e2"w' _.-_1 :a~~ that . shoulil be -7e- ..?eeis ate on ._31urday ricrni J ~YSS `lit undue d : sturbanc_ . It i:- net jest 7ne person's .,,Pop you nee-° to cons?4zr he:-e. .AGard is know- as a ".t•~dr~3c~~, Ec•r-jinunity". X%st of us are Horklr:o fr,:kL5 al%o drive to 3h:! !rom c-r Sea•.e_ton every day tc work T;.card has riony q-,,iet, psr`i.ally forested :e_eas, and this is part of its appeal. Tigard wol. lo--e this appeal if we do not work, together toward this end. I have tries: to we°rk with the builders o^ this atte:, and have been totally i jnc:re.3. I have read the City of Tigard noise ordinance and was appal:ed to find out that there is nothing in it to protect Tigard residents from the vagaries of progress. T$erefore, I have enclosed a proposed amendment which : wild like the City Council to adopt. b C ma nt et': Along with the Proposed amer,4...e:. :s a s..,.t_ca si at' ..ed by citizens in this r,?ig~b»rhocd. If necessa we s~i:i cyrairi more signatures lrorl other _ ritas a,_-u. in brief, the chance requeste_ .;s in section 7.40.180 The hours that construction would be not be allowed would be changed to include early morni:;cs .3nc ea-rI v e enincs :n weekends and holidays. I understand that :here: is a hearing on -we 12 whic'n will try to attend. If you can respond to me teiore the hearing w_t;-: arty •:sefa'_ or pertinent inforr;it:on, I ro~_,ld ap] zec'_ate 111 very much. Sincerely, r' Deborah S. abranuv_t.: 10825 S.W. Mnrd~.ck St.ee*_ '.iA5 Tigard, Oregon 972-24 i C TO: TIGARD CITY COUNCIL C PETITION TO AMEND NOISE ORDINANCE We, the undersigned, petition the Cilia Council of Tigard to amend the City of Tigard Noire Ordinance, Article. IV, Section 7.40.180 (c) to read as follows (proposed change :s underlined): 1. U "....that no construction work may be carried out between the hours of 9,00 PM and 7:00 AM and on weekends gD-O holid~s _e weeen ~Q eM end 10 0 flt~ Weekend hours : e 10 00, 1M t_o 6:00 PM and are Al the sufferance of the immedial L neiuhborhood." Date ~--,)7-ZI Name Print Name Address kA J Arr~ rR, 1 'r. TO: TIGARD CITY COUNCU. PETITION TO AMEND NOISE ORDINANCE '-1 We, the undersigned, petition the City Council of Tigard to amend the City of Tigard Noise Ordinance, Article IV, Section 7.40.180 (c) to read as follows (proposed change is underlined): "....that no construction work may be carried out between the hours of 9:00 PM and 7:00 AM and on weekends and holidays between 6:00 pft an s3 10:0(1 Ad, Weekend o r.s aze 10:00 AM to X00 PM ana aria, At the 5uffer.ance of the immediate neighborhood." Date L--~- Name Print Name I .dress Pak e- . r' 1 _ I Fz~s s l rpi Wv 7-- S.- cO t 0 ~ _cc:T)--2 - Z n______ 121cC tr tJ M ~z ~ 5~ 6124 TO: TIGARD CITY COUNCIL. PETITION TO AMEND NOISE ORnINANCE We, the undersigned, petition the City Council of Tigard to amend the City of Tigard Noise Ordinance, Article IV, Section 7.40.180 (c) to read as follows !proposed change is underlined): "....that no construction work may be carried out bctween. the hours of 3:00 PM and 7:00 Alit aLd on - s aad holid between h.00 ??A anal ~0~00 AM. Weekend hours are I0:00 AM to 6:00 PM and are- at t -q sufferance of the immediate p •ighborhood." Date Name Print Name Address . t!C ! 1 ~yf ` , • f - = mot ! :'Y!~ Lip .r r; 4,e i C MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROMs Keith Liden, Senior Planner RE: June 12th Agenda Item 7 - Noise Ordinance DATE: June 8, 1989 Your packet contains the proFosed noise ordinance revisions to be reviewed at the next Council hearing. The existing Code provisions were also supposed to be included best were inadvertently deleted. Attached is a copy of the present Code provisions for your reference. 0 0 7.40.110--7.40.140 C. o any one automobile, truck, bus, trailer or piece of ve- h uIar equipment; ( ci) Used or dismantled household appliances, furniture, other scards or junk, for more than five days. (Ord. 86-20 94 (Exhi t C(5) 5) (4) 1986). 7.40.1 Attractive nuisances. (a) No owner or re- sponsible par shall permit on the property: (1) Un arded machinery, equipment or other devices which are attract. e, dangerous, and accessible to children; (2) Lumber lots, building material or piling placed or stored in a manner o to be attractive, dangerous, and accessible to children; (3) An open pit, Larry, cistern, or other excava- tion without safeguards or rriers to prevent such places from being used by children; (4) An exposed foundat n or portion of foundation, any residue, debris or other bui 'ng or structural remains, for more than thirty days after the estruction, demolition or removal of any building or portion f the building. (b) This section shall not apply authorized con- struction projects with reasonable safequ ds to prevent il,jury or death to playing children. (Ord. 6-20 54(Exhibit CM {51), 1986). 7.40.120 Scattering rubbish'. No person sh 1 deposit upon public or private property any kind of rubbis trash, debris, refuse, or any substance that would mar the ear- ance,•create a stench or fire hazard, detract from the lean- liness or safety of the property, or would be likely to injure a person, animal, or vehicle traveling upon a publi way. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(5)(6)), 1986). ARTICLE IV. NUISANCES AFFECTING THE PUBLIC A PEACE 7.40.130 Noise--Definitions. For purposes of this section and Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.200, the following mean: (a) "Ambient noise" means the all-encompassing noise associated with a given environment, being usually a com- posite of sounds from many sources, near and far: (b) "Noise-sensitive property" means real property on which people normally sleep and, in addition, schools, churches, hospitals and public libraries. (Ord. 86-20 §4 (Exhibit C (6) (1) (a)) , 1986). 7.40.140 Motor vehicle noises. No person shall operate a motor vehicle in such a manner or at such a location as to cause the noise created by the vehicle to cause the ambient ¢6`f noise level at the nearest noise-sensitive property to ex- ceed the levels specified in section 7.40.160, as measured 87-1 (Tigard 8/15/86) • 0 7.40.150--7.40.180 at a point located twenty-five feet from the noise-sensitive structure toward the noise source. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C (6) (1) (b) ) , 1986) . 7.40.150 Noise emanating from certain property. Except as may be expressly allowed pursuant to the provisions of Section 7.40.220, no person shall cause or permit noise to emanate from the property under his or her control so as to cause the ambient noise level at the nearest noise--sensitive property to exceed the levels set forth in Section 7.40.160, as measured at a point located twenty-five feet from the noise-sensitive structure towaru the noise source. (Ord. 86-20 §4 (Exhibit C(6)(1)(c)), 1986 7.40.160 Allowable noise limits. Allowable noise limits are as follows: Time Maximum Noise Level, DBA 7:00 a.m. 10:00 p.m. 60 10:00 p.m. 7:00 a.m. 55 (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(6)(1)(d)), 1986). 7.40.170 Noise---Exemptions to restrictions. The re- strictions-imposed by Sections 7.40.140 through 7.40.160 of this chapter shall not apply to the following: (a) Emergency equipment not operating on a regular or scheduled basis; (b) Noise emanating from the Pacific Highway, Highway I-217 and Highway I-5; (c) Sounds originating on construction sites and rea- sonably necessary to the accomplishment of work in progress; provided, however, that no construction work may be carried on between the hours of nine p.m. and seven a.m., except for bona fide emergencies where the public health or safety is threatened or which a special permit, granted by the city council, has been first obtained. Any such special permit may be granted. by the city council only after first having held a hearing and having otherwise followed the administra- tive procedures contained in Chapter 18.32.of this code; (d) Emergency repair equipment not operated on a regu- lar or scheduled basis; (e) Lawn, garden or household equipment associated with the normal repair, upkeep or maintenance of property. (Ord. 86-20 §4 (Exhibit C(G)M(e)), 1986). 7.40.180 Jake brakes prohibited. No person shall operate within the city limits of the city of Tigard a motor vehicle exhaust-braking system commonly known as a "fake brake." For the purposes of this section, the exceptions set forth in Section 7.40.170 shall not apply, and this 87-2 (Tigard 1115/87) 0 i 7.40.190--7.40.210 section shall be read as an absolute prohibition of the operation of such motor vehicle braking systems within the city of Tigard. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(6)(1)(f)), 1986). 7.40.190 Sound-amplifying equipment restrictions. No person shall cause or permit noise to emanate from sound- amplifying equipment under their control so as to cause the ambient noise level to exceed sixty DBA at any distance one hundred feet or more from the sources between the hours of seven a.m. and ten p.m., and fifty-five DBA one hundred feet from the source between the lours of ten p.m. and seven a.m. (Ord. 86-20 §4 (Exhibit C (6) (.L' f-)) , 1986). 7.40.200 Violation--Penalt. Failure to abate the nuisance within the time allowed for abatement shall consti- tute a Class 1 civil infraction which shall be processed according to the procedures established in Chapter 1.16 of this code, Civil Infractions. (b) Each violation of a separate provision of Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.200-shall constitute a separate in- fraction, and each day that a violation of such sections is committed or pe nnitted to continue shall constitute a sep- arate -iolation. (c) A finding of a violation of Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.200 and imposition of a civil penalty shall not relieve the responsible party of the duty to abate the vio- lation, except where the city has acted to abate the nuisance. In such a situation, the responsible party shall be liable for the costs pursuant to Section 1.16.340 of the civil in- fractions ordinance codified in Chapter 1.16 of this code. (d) If a provision of Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40- .200 is violated by a firm or corporation, the officer or officers, or person or persons responsible for the violation shall be subject to the penalties imposed by this section. (Ord. 86-20 54 (Exhibit C(6) (1) (h)) , 1986) . • ARTICLE V. EVENTS USING AMPLIFIED SOUND 7.40.210 Permits required for certain events. (a) The use of amplified voice and music at levels which would otherwise exceed those permissible under Sections 7.40.130 .through 7.40.200 may be allowed upon application to the city administrator. Application for an amplified sound permit shall be made to the city administrator on forms prepared by the city. The applicant shall identify the date, location and time of the event for which the permit is sought, and shall provide an estimate of the duration of the event. (b) In the case of a series of similar events (for example, a season's high school football games), to be con- ducted at the same location, the city administrator may, in his discretion, issue the permit in a form extending to cover 87-3 (Tigard 8/15/86) 0 0 7.40.220 the entire series. In that event, the permit shall be sub- ject to the administrator's withdrawal at any time. (c) The city administrator shall grant a permit in any, instance in which the event and its accompanying noise will not, in his judgment, interfere unreasonably with the peace of those likely to be affected by the noise. In making this judgment, he shall take into account the nature of the sur- rounding properties and the benefit to the community of the event for which the application is made. (d) The city administrator may submit any question arising with respect to this section to the city council; and if any member of the city -nuncil requests its submission to the council, any such questit shall be heard by the council. In either event, the de Asion of the city council shall be final. (e) No permit authorized by this section shall give the applicant the right to cause or permit sound to emanate from the property on which the event is held so as to cause the ambient noise lev 1 at the nearest noise-sensitive property to exceed fifty-five DBA after the hour of eleven p.m. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(4)(7)), 1986). ARTICLE VI. VIOLATION--PENALTY 7.40.220 Penalty for chapter violations. (a) A vio- lation of this chapter shall constitute a Class 1 civil infraction; which shall be processed according tb the proce- dures established in the civil infractions ordinance, set out at Chapter 1.16 of this code. Notice to abate the nui- sance shall be a prior contract. (b) Each 4iolation of a separate provision of this .chapter shall constitute a separate infraction, and each day that a violation of this chapter is committed or permitted to continue shall constitute a separate infraction. (c) A finding of a violation of this chapter shall not relieve the responsible party of the duty to abate the vio- lation. The penalties imposed by-this section are in addi- tion to and not in lieu of any remedies available to the city. (d) If a provision of this chapter is violated by a firm or corporation, the officer or officers, or person or persons responsible for the violation shall be subject to the penalties imposed by this chapter. (Ord. 86-20 §4 (Exhibit C(8)); 1986). 87-4 (Tigard 8/15/86) TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AGENDA UPDATE JULY 10, 1989 0 o STUDY SESSION Reviewed Hearings Officer Final order for CU 89-03 (Tigard Christian Ministries homeless Shelter). Gcnsensus was to request Hearings Officer amend her decision with regard to Condition No. 6. This condition stipulates that a Tigard Police Officer must remove a guest who has been denied entrance to the shelter. Concern was expressed over the issue of obligating Tigard Police Depar'lent to provide security services for a private organization and , cedent-setting ramifications. Council formally noticed its intent to .eview the Hearing's officer decision if not amended as requested. Update of MSTIP/2 by City Engineer - Washington Co. Coordinating Committee tentatively approved a $60 million/& year levy request to be presented to voters in September. Council consensus to review this issue on 7117 to consider whether to ~-tpport. Report on Agenda item 3.2a. by City Engineer recommendation for Council approval to award bid to Clearwater Construction for asphalt. Community Developi-;,. Director updated on noise ordinance; noted several issues still outstanding and recommended testirony be received during public hearing tonight, then continue public hearing for further study. Community Development Director reviewed Tigard Marketplace issues. Advised letters will be sent to neighbors outlining progress. (Council t-t receive a copy of this letter next vock.) No building persits will be issued until problems are resolved. 1. BUSINESS MEETING: Call To Order and Roll Call ALL CC PRESEI<7Y 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA - 30 VISITORS 3. CONSENT AGENDA: 3.1 Receive and File: Council Calendar >.2 Recess Council Meeting; Convene Local Contract Review Board Meeting (LCRB): a) Award Bid for PacTrust Local I=prove-.t District Contract; b) Approve Contract for Inspection Services for the Pacific Corporate Center Local Irprove=ent District; Adjourn LCRB; Reconvene Council Meeting 3.3 Authorize Preparation 'of a Preli=ina.-y Engineering Report - .t..M. 93rd Avenue Local Improvement District - Resolution Co. 89-54 3.4 Recess Council Meeting; Convene City Center Develop giant Aga.-icy (:CDA): Accept City Center Development Relocatier. Regulations - Resolution tic. 89-0ICCDA; Adjourn CODA; Reconvene Council feting 3.5 Approve Special Permits: Cruisin' Tigard '89 - Bas. Go. 89-55 3.6 Initiate Proceerings to vacate Portion of Sod 95th Acre.-ges. 989-56 Jo/EA UA - Request by Jo to receive sketeb of pray=ed layout for events at Cock Park. Doted would like to see where parking wus planned and notation of ads (noise) level.,- COUVCIL AGENDA - JULY 10. 1989 - PAGE 1 .4. 5. 6. 7. e. CCU1-c➢ 4. PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 89-06 ASH AVENUE, g, EXECUTI' BURNHAM/TIGARD RC~aLICNMENT NPO #1 A recommendation by the Planning ' at 9:56 Commission to amend the Transportation Comprehensive Plan Map. The Ash • s.rv : discuss Avenue connection to be modified to indicate a connection from the r -z pending intersection of SW walnut and Pacific Highway Scoffins. An option shall be preserved to connect Ash/Hill to the Ash Street extension with ~ytyd'• lo. ADJOURN a "T" intersection. The alignment of SW Burnham will be modified to intersect SW Main Street opposite SW Tigard. The realignment of SW Burnham will intersect the existing Burnham right-of-way at a Point :w" south of 9185 SW Burnham. The realigned portion will replace the ca/0104D existing portion of Burnham as the minor collector route. LOCATION: ASH AVENUE EXTENSION - between SW Pacific Highway at Walnut and SW Scoffins. (WCTii 2SI 2BD, 2SI 2AC, 2SI 2CA, 2S1 2D6. 31 2AD, A 2SI 2:.A). BURNHAH/TIGARD REALIGNMENT - between SW Main Stc< t. at Tigard and the existing right-of-way of SW Burnham Street at a point south of 9185 SW Burnham. (WCTM 2SI 2AB 6 2S1 2AD). t3 CC Consensus: Continue Public Hearing to 8/21 to allow time for ~s+ T. review of neighbors concerns. 5. APPEAL PUBLIC HEARING S 89-08 PACIFIC REALTY %SSOCIATES, L.P. - NPO #5 An appeal of Condition No. 2 of the Hearings Offi.:er Decision in the matter of an application for subdivision approval to divide 60.35 acres into 10 industrial lots; Pacific Realty Associates, L.P., applicant. LOCATION: North of S.W. Upper Boones Ferry Rd., east of 72nd Avenue (WCTM 2SI 12AD, Tax Lot &CC. 251.12 DA, Tax Lots 100 3 101, 2SI 12DD, Tax Lots 100 b 600). Withdrawn 6. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT TO THE TIGARD MUVlCIPAL LODE ("C), CHAPTER 7.40'(Noise) Amendments to the Noise Ordinance Vravisions of the THC o Public Hearing Continued frog June 12, 1989 o Council Consensus: Continue Public Hearing to 8/14/89 7. PUBLIC HEARING - VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY - A PORTIOU OF SW 93RD AVENUE AND SW MAPLELEAF STREET Consideration of a proposed vacation of a portion of S.W. 93rd and S.W. Mapleleaf Street, in the City of Tigard. Washington County, Oregon. A petition for the above-proposed vacation, ceeting all signature requirements, was filed with the City of Tigard on Kay 18, 1989. The petition was signed and submitted by the Trarnel Crow Carpany. o Public Heari•ig Opened e Consideration By Council Ea/Sc Adopt Ordinance No. 89-19 with added condition that Ordinance not be recorded until LUBA appeal was settled. VA 8. NON-AGENDA I4MS. From Council and Staff 8.1 Sc/Jo: Motion to voluntarily rind to Council the deciIIiaa with ragari to Century 21 case now under appeal at LLnl&. ab CUUBCIL AGENDA - JULY 10, 1485 - PACE 2 IL"XM CULZZIt 8SEZD CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON } COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: July 10, 1989 DATE SURHITTED: June 30, 1989 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Noise Ordinan a PREVIOUS ACTION: Revision I PREPARED BY: Keith Liden DEPT HEAD OK _ CITY ADMIN-OX REQOESTED BY: az=t.caaaazr~os=aaasarsaa=a ,a a a-az~czc-a.aaaaaa==ac-_aaa~a=--=---a- POLICY ISSUE Should the noise ordinance be amended to better -adrees noise related impacts with emphasis on protection of residential uses. -aaaaaaza~=ccsaasaasa=~c=caaaaaaaaaaa=a.aaaaar-aa_~---aaa-_-- s-- INFORKATION SU 2my- Because of the problems encountered with the Tigard Market Place Shopping Center, the Council expressed an interest in revising the e:.i=tiag noise ordinance standards in the TMC. The consideration of the revision was postponed to allow additional citizen input. The attached memo descritas the suggestions that have been forwarded to the staff. The attached draft retains the maximum allowable noise level and'adde average maximums that vary in C accordance with the type of lano use affected. Attached is a copy of the proposed ordinance and the existing Code provisions. caaaaaaac=..ssaasaz=sac=seas aaaza_aaaaaaaa ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the revisions and approve the attached ordinance. 2. Approve the modified revisions and instruct staff to prepare a Final Order. 3. Reject the proposal and instruct staff to prepare a Final order. nz=a_-~~ aar~ac--~•--~a---•=,••-.+•••-raaaaaa FISCAL imPACT ACTIQy Approve the attached ordinance. br/Naise.9m 1 ' MEKORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Keith Liden, Senior Planner R$: Noise Ordinance Comments DATE: June 30, 1989 Comments have been from Jim Hart regarding the proposed noise ordinance revisions. He expressed three basic areas of concern: 1. Measurement of noise should not be made at a distance of more than 25 feet from the "noise-rec-'.wing land use' to allow lower noise levels within yard areas. 2. Lower frequency noise that is 'felt" rather than heard is also bothersome and is not covered by the revisions. This noise is measured on a scale' rather than the "A scale" noted in the proposed revisions. 3. The duration of loud noises is not adequately covered by the proposal. The L1 dBA criteria used in the revisions will allow the maxi-- noise level of 55 or 60 daA to be exceeded for up to 36 seconds per hour. He suggests that these maximums should not ever be allowed to be e . In response to these concerns, I have the following tents or recommendations: 1. The 25 foot standard was chosen to be consistent with DRQ'e m-ethod of measurement, the present code requirements, and also for the sake of simplicity for use in the field. 2. I checked with DEQ regarding expanding the standards to include low frequency noise. DRQ is not aware _f any established standards or regulations which pertain to noise measured on a "C scales. I w= Id recommend that if the Council is interested in regulating these nolze frequencies, that the proposed revisions be adopted with directica given to staff to further research this issue and review possible a=z=:d= tm! to the Code in the future. 3. The proposed revisions do allow short periods where the r MLt noise level could be exceeded. If the council con=ludes that the raxir noise level should never be exceeded, the warding in Section 7.40.170 (a) should be ex)dified to omit the reference to Ll dBA. I will be reviewing the Cade revisions further with Xr. [tart and a-tkars grin= to the Council hearing Cn July 30th. DRAFT Community Development Department City of Tigard, Oregon ~pCce fir's, -fit, ~s 7~/a/~4 James A. Hart 10255 S.W. Hillview St_ Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Proposed Noise Ordinance Attention: Keith Liden Senior Planner Background Summary: The above ordinance was submitted to City Council on June 12, 1989. Residents surrounding the Tigard Marketplace were informed of the hearing on Thursday, June 8th or Z'ridaY, June 9th, depending on mail delivery. This weekend coincided with Rose Festival activities leaving little time to review t~- ordinance prior to the Nonday night meeting. Pew?dents in the area are particularly ir.terestec: a noise ordinance after suffering severe problems in relation to the Tigard Marketplace development. The noise pollution problem.. could be considered the direct result o= non-specific sound level guidelines developed in the site-re;=ie•.:/permit process. e:hile no specific standards were referred to, the supposition based on records of approval hearings and co_ncil members c::=ents was that the noise level would be co-tained/controlled so as to cause no negative impact on the Yeic far,:oo3. As a result of the controversy and the unacceptable level permitted under DEQ standardz/regulations and City of Tigard regulations, the Council suggested development of a nep, none restrictive and residential-zone oriented standard through enact- ment of a new ordinance. This was first suggested as the best sclution several months ago. :embers of the neighborhood surrounding Tigard .tarfetp_ace requested that they be involved in the cevelop:;ent of a ned noise ordinance. They also suggested the City of Tigard engace an independent consultant to aid in the process. (Other _`:a n DEQ or Ed Daley, who was the developer's consultant an could find '-imse?f in a conflicting interest situation.) We were assure.: by the staff and csu ncil that we bc%:j ce kept informed of action taken and he i n-.'olved in review„-,, the ordinance during the development process and prior to Cap^c i i.'• hearings :cr adoption. J 77 c ~ l ft` a.- r r~3xLl~Tr~'~~ 1..x y*1 v y9 Yiy ~•s & ~YY.•n~ •S.'. LrM11..uRAv. i~~~. ~V` 1y -1`R.• a n E+..,`t Page 2. At the Council meeting of June 12th, Dick Uphoff, Francis Brittain and myself appeared before the Council to request a delay to allow more time to review. At that time, some of the concerns were expressed but a detailed list had not been developed, and we felt after a cursory review that more study was necessary and suggested looking to other municipalities and resources for more input and exploring problems other than those immediately evidenced in the ordinance. Ed Murphy agreed that there were items that needed further study/review and Council voted to hold until July 10th with the understanding that the staff would aet together with the residents mentioned to explore different alte.. »tives and come up with a mutually acceptable ordinance. In the intervening weeks, no contact was initiated by city staff. I called on two or three occasions to chick on the "progress" and although I did not talk directly with you, I was informed that no further study was being made on the ordinance. On June 28th, I called and we discussed the ordinance. You informed me you had made no changes to the document as sub- mitted on June 12th. We discussed the neighborhood involvement issue. From your respcnse, it was apparent that your understand- ing was i- t we would have to initiate any change. However, we had difficulty in contacting you and were expecting the leader- ship in reviewing, exploring-and developing the new ordinance to be initiated by the Tigard staff, as indicated at the Council 4 meeting. I gave you several areas of concern by phone, three of which were: 1. The L1 for impulse sounds was not restrictive enough. Suggested reviewing Tualatin's ordinance. 2. Point of sound measurement 25 feet from building is confiscatory where building is set back more than 25' from property line. 3. Lower frequency sound levels, such as some eainating from Food Connection, are serious source of problem and do not show up on the A scale. We also discussed review and input from consultants, DEQ, other jurisdictions, etc. You said you had contacted some other areas (in California, I believe). You had not reviewed i'ualatin's ordinance on impulse noise. You also had not reviewed or consulted City of Portland nor many of the other metro areas, or Seattle. I suggested you tail 3ellview, since it is a rapidly growing area in the Seattle area and --ay have encountered sc=e similar problems. We had some further discussion regarding consultant and DEQ input and then tied to decide on a -eeting Page 3. time. You sugyested Wed. or Thurs. since you would be working Monday before the Fourth of July and could review the ordinance E ' further. You called me Wed. and left a message on my answering machine to call you. I called back Thursday AFB, at which time you told rye you could not meet with us until Firday or Monday and that you had already submitted the ordinance (unchanged) back to Council with ml three main concerns attached. I have since talked to Dick Uphoff and Francis Brittain and we will be available for meeting Monday, prior to the Council meeting, at a time yet to be set. Upon further review of the rdinance and discussion with ~.r Paul Herman, City of Portland No--.' Control Specialist, I have r, the following additional concerns thc_ should be reviewed and ;•'.4 responded to before Council action on the ordinance: 1. Why not include yards, decks, patios, etc. in definitior of sound sensitive land? We pay taxes on them and are certainly affected by noise pollution to tae extent ax n' of inabili:.1 to confortably rake use of t nea.. 2. ,•iotor Vehicle Noise. (7.40. i 40) Seems to be some con- Ele t f t h t~- g' c o erms - oer can rotor vehicles rase the i3Ki'r, ambient noise level if they are excluded by c__i::it_an? Also, thb i-hour, L or the 6, Scale - hoA can this 5 be measured; how ca.- , be averaged without special } equipment or a computer analysis? Should * averaged? This doesn't appear enforceable as written. l9ii`r~T~,• Host vehicle noises are intermitte-,t/non-conti'.uOl:s ` and should be based on max/impulse - ~F Lfi Permits - man.ayenent has too -uch discretion - neig-:bor- h d i - oo s at mercy of discretionary decision of staff. Could be good - could be ba=. Why not set so a standards for may ti-e, level of sound, etc.? 'Uhat about holidays, Sundays, etc.? !•n Use of L noise level to control impact and _:-pulse noises -heed an absolute max and some ca tro' or. Yr°.. repetitive high level noise night and day. 5. Use of average noise (T, needs special -en` ~r,) e~~_~ - 0,Q or consultant - c6A't averace with hand :-_ter, a , unless a special :deter is used, a::d when t^:s .s still not a good method. 6. What about soave special attention to contin_ s (24-hour-a-day type noises at Loper levers, bu- adversely affecting livability). 45 db3 all r.'_chtt qtu and 60 dba all day is - = a let ^esgh,rFCO~:E indovs are kept shut and outdoor activities iizeted tc those not affected by higher noise level=_. x r r~ e or F`s: F G *ma . , r . 4 u,y , ii r ` r k d g».t~4 ?3.'...7-, r, G rE Y.aa,.G•• Page 4. 7. - Use of different octave band measurements to control especially disturbing noise, particularly in the low frequency level,which penetrates structures. (DE¢ doesn't regulate noises transmitted into buildings.) Based on the premise that many of the issues have not been reviewed/explored by staff with the interested residents, it would be my recommendation that this ordinance be withdrawn from Council agenda, except for requesting further direction from Council as to extent of research/study and bottom lire results. I feel there are serious enfor cement probler.s and questionable benefits to the neighborhood as 'tten. sincerely, James A. ?cart •y~ 4r~ c 4 C b O r b ~ J t ' .I~ Jim, mare arc some notes on the proposed Tigard noise ordinance. You may R`pm` Td'uM use them as you wish, including referencing me, or not. Good luck. f~CVI{- 1. 7.40.130(a) Ambient noise. OK, except for orie very troublesorne second ? sentence, which requires one hours worth- of ineasurement, without "...inclusion of noise frorn isolated identifiable sources.". First, it may be literally impossible to achieve, contingent on the location and time of measurement. Many noises of shorter duration can clause annoyance, sleep interruption, and physical damage. Second, it is unnecessarily expensive (man hours) and not particularly useful to require one hours worth of measurement, when the some information can often be derived within five minutes or less. (Meters are presently available whi,-h will autornatical#y 'average" sound levels (actually, such instruments nnthering and analyzing sound levels according to on algorithm Ydhich i; more complex than a simple arithmetic average), changes in the levels are monitored, and when the sound level stabilizes, one may assurne that the 'true' averaged sound level has been reached. This is easier, and cheaper. If Tigard is at all serious about enfor ernent, I would strongly recommend that This one hour requirement be elirninUted. Also, see 114 below 2. 7.40.140. Motor vehicle noises. There is a problem here. As written, except for exemptions or special ipermitS, motor vehicle noise may not exceed the land use allowable noise levels of section 7.--10. 170 This. means that vehicles which are legitimate under state motor vehicle noise regulations may well be illegal on the street, or parked cn a dri•,,eway with the engine going, since they may well exceed an I_ 1-00 dE'A. I would recommend deferring to the state standard here. 3. 7.40.150. Jake Brakes Prohibited. Alt.rou h I am s•tr en ►u fin favor of r this, I am also afraid that it aright be illegal, in that it is inconsistent with preemptive federal truck standards. However, I wouldnt change a thing until I had to. Good tuck. 4. 7.40.170. Allowable noise limits. Again, I think that requiring an averaging over a one-hour period is incorrect, and undercuts reesonible and cost-effective enforcement, Although i prefer the use of a single "thou shalt not exceed' value, many communities use siatistlcal noise levels (L I and L50) effectively and efficiently. They do not necessitate a one hour measurement. Tualatin uses think) a maximum noise level, in d5A, whiO occurs over any amount of time. This gives the enforcement person the discretion to take a shorter-terra measurement, or, if determined to be appropriate, a longer-term one. Sensible 5. 7.40.150. Standard fur measurement Items a alA b are firie Sub_Sa,)Cj e' requires measurement to be taken at a height of 5 feat, end at a distance of 25 feet from the noise-receiving lend use Firs!, ene cannot . o olwatIs lake mensuremeits from a height of 5 feet, ernj I rro;::" c3►er~ge t" d z ° y +v1 v`fyv~ S d ar9 ! s'$}3i'~ a ti tix i r ~K {aw ,J F, 4 . word "shall" to -meosurernents ore to be token", or soften it in some other wag, to allow the enforcing officer some leeway if needed. Second, f Wink that setting a measurement distance requirement of 25 feet from the noise-receiving land use (defined as any portion of a structure intended for human occupancy) is wrong, and is tantamount to the taking of land without compensation. It means that one does not always have the use of his own yard for residential activities. It would seern to me that this would be particularly important in the Tigard area, where (l expect) lots and backyard areas are iorger, rind outdoor activities more important to the use and enjoyment of property. I realize that the DEO stondards'are written this way, but few (if any) cities ernplop other than the property line as an appropriate measurerent site. Furthermore, the section is uncieor as to what is meant by the noise "sourca s it the land or the device(s) from which the noise arises? It could make kite a difference. If the latter, then the section is additionally unclear as to the proper measurement point for multiple devices. 6. 7.40.200. Permits. Section b r,nders the permit subject to wilhdrawel at any time. OK, but could be unfair. I'd add same conditions under which the permit is '...subject to revocation', e.g_, "...if Ong c-f the conditions of the permit are violated. or others, to make the section less susceptible to the "arbitrc, y and capricious" criticism. }K..a.: 7. Fir:ally, there is no provision for either octave-band measurements or n^ m.sl. s for impulse measurement. It may be 'the case that Tigard teas no need for such measurements, but, dollars to donuts, it will, and scion, given t„_ r _ ate fro - . ' of commercial and inaustrial development in that arts. b o Paul Herman o; n Noise Control Officer City of Portland. e, ( :T v .S H~ r r i• O P ~ x• r' ~h'~ i ~d { , i' a~ j} ,~aq~, l s -d ' Z er a t. 7r •e Y.~ TO L A N D / S C H AD D T A R C H 1 T E C T S . P . C • SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TYPE II APPLICATION AND DOCUMENTATION FOR THE TIGARD MARKETPLACE RENOVATIONS Prepared for: 13500 Pacific Corp. c/o Capozzolli Advisory for Pensions, Inc. 38345 W. Ten Mile Road, Suite 170 Farmington Hills, Michigan 48335 0 Prepared By: Tiland Schmidt Architects, PC 333 SW 5" Ave. Suite 406 Portland, Oregon 97204 RECEIVED PLANNING FEB 0 3 20Q0 ` J' r OF TiGAR® January 28, 2000 • 333 S.W. FIFTH AVENUE. SUITE 406 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 (503) 220-8517 FAX (503) 220-8518 0 • PROJECT DESIGN DIRECTORY Tigard Marketplace 13500 SW Pacific Hwy. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Project No. 97156 Owner: 13500 Pacific Corp. c/o Capozzoli Advisors for Pensions 38345 W. Ten Mile Road Farmington Hills, MI 48335 Property Manager: Elliott Associates, Inc. 50 SW Pine Street, Suite 200 Portland, OR 97204 Tenant: Haggen, Inc. 2211 Rimland Dr., Suite 400 Bellingham, WA 98226 Site & Retail Redevelopment: Tiland/Schmidt Architects, P.C. 333 SW 5t' Ave., Suite 406 Portland, OR 97204 Hansen Buildins Exterior Desi Randy Potterf Phone: (248) 476-8068 Fax: (248) 476-2760 Eileen Gilchrist Phone: (503) 224-6791 Fax: (503) 228-3169 Norm Everhart (Supervalu / DSG) Phone: (360) 650-8382 normever@aol.com Fax: (360) 650-8236 Frank Schmidt Phone: (503) 220-8517 Fax: (503) 220-8518 frankschraidt&ilandschmidt.comn Krannitz Gehl Architects Bryan Krannitz, AIA 765 NE Northlake Way Phone: (206) 547-8334 Seattle, WA 98105 Fax: (206) 547-8219 Haggen Tenant Improvement Construction Documentation: Planmark Architecture John Hatzung 6533 Flying Cloud Dr., Suite 100 Phone: (612) 914-5800 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Fax: (612) 914-5850 • krannitzgehl.com X97156 / Dd's /Re-app / Docs /]inject Design Dirmion- / is • • 0 0 Narrative And Drawings Pre-Application Documentation And Summary Neighborhood Meeting Notification And Summary 0 Warranty Deed And Title Information Traffic ~ Access Information 14, 1~~ 9;HAQv ItI~=;c f~c _rrz svs i EIM • 0 0 • • T I L A N D 1 S C H M I D T A R C H I T E C T S, P. C. February 29, 2000 Karen Fox City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Via: Messenger Re: Site Development Application Clarification Letter Tigard Marketplace 13500 SW Pacific Hwy. Tigard, Oregon Dear Karen: The following is intended to clarify the Application you are now reviewing. STORM WATER DETENTION: Find attached the documentation from Don Cushing on the Storm water detention and full calculations. TREE LOCATIONS ALONG HWY. 99: The Landscape Architect has been questioned on the number of the trees, and he has indicated that the number of trees do match the code, however, the spacing has been modified to open viewing of the existing pylon and new monument sign. I believe we can come to an agreement on the overall spacing, should you desire a realignment of the trees. LANDSCAPING AT PERIMETER BUFFERS: The landscaping has been increase around the southeast comer of the project, which falls behind the Haggen store. This additional landscaping along with all the landscaping indicated throughout the site, is anticipated to be an acceptable solution,for a site that has been existing for ten years in is current state. The neighbors did not voice any specific opinions on the perimeter landscaping, other than the request to do whatever could be done to safeguard the trees that are located along the back of the project, would remain in place. The retaining wall will be placed, as a part of Phase One, to assist in stabilizing the ground around the trees and cover any exposed roots. No work is shown as being necessary on the residential side of the fence. TREE REMOVAL: The question on the size of trees to be removed can be answered by comparing the existing Landscape Plan with the Proposed. The size of each tree is noted along with the type of tree throughout the plan. It can be noted that there are 12" and larger trees existing, however, no tree 1.2" or larger are proposed to be removed. TRAFFIC REPORTS: As was understood from the Pre-Application documentation, the additional reviews that have been provided within the notebooks from Kittelson and Associates would be adequate. A full report was not required due to the conditions that are being modified and that the new grocery store is just larger than the original. 333 S.W. 5'h AVE., SUITE 406 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 (503) 220-8517 FAX (503) 220-8518 T I L A N D / S C H M •D T A R C H I T E C T S P. C Tigard Marketplace Site Development Application Clarification Letter February 29, 2000 Page 2 of 2 PARKING REDUCTION: As we discussed, the reduction in parking will be possible at such time as the actual building size is known. The allowance of a 20% reduction will more than suit the size of building that could reasonably by placed on this pad. So at this time we will remove the request for this approval as a part of this Application, and submit the actual building size and use, once it has been determined. PARKING DRIVEWAY WIDTHS: The entire site will maintain the minimum requirement of 24 foot driveway widths, as noted in the code. Many of the drives are wider than the 24 foot requirement, and will be fully dimensioned on the construction documents. PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY: The pedestrian walkway between the highway and the plaza of the in-line retail buildings, will be a minimum of 6 feet wide as noted in the code. In addition, as noted in the Pre-Application Meeting, the pedestrian walk now indicates the low-level pedestrian light fixtures. TRASH ENCLOSURES: The existing trash dumpsters and enclosures are to be left in place on all the buildings that are to remain. The Haggen store building will have an enclosed compactor with container, and will contain the trash being generated in the store. Typically the cardboard of the grocery store is baled within the store and loaded on a truck for recycling. As was mentioned on the phone, a site survey by your office may be in order to verify the existing conditions. SURROUNDING AREAS: Find attached the notification. area plan that has been used to clarify the multi-family, commercial and residential areas surrounding the site. With these clarifications we request that the information provided on this project be deemed complete so the next step of full review can begin right away. As always we appreciate your assistance on this project and look forward to a full approval as soon as possible. Sincerely, Tiland / Schmidt Ar itects, PC Frank . Schmidt Cc; Randy Potterf: CAP Eileen Gilchrist: Elliott Associates, PC Don Cushing: Civil Engineers Mikd Odem: Chris Freshley Landscape Architects File 9715NAPPI. A-OX Um 333 S.W. 5'" AVE., SUITE 406 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 (503) 220-8517 FAX (503) 220-8518 IVI l r1C UTA I I-- • • V~~ '111VIr17 rtSU 1!V r V KtV1H I I V IV I V !-',t:.~ U r VVY 1,4t: 0006RAP NIC INi ORMATION SYSICM NoTIFICATioN iERRY- AREA (S00') - 2~ w2Ci0~7a ,~3~,~ tCM nu I.. n102if11M2 n102CM2311 n ttg15u9~ 2C i0 nW 67ad\ f ~ PARK ST ynwssol ` . ~ PARK - ,ot nw:cwnoo 906 nw2ca2230 wn" 15 102CL9 IC036 9 i • nyp,2CW1i01 2f 2C7ti15 eJ >n j( 2sso 4~V r~w2ca:+.o Ince 9 n n p0 2 2001 _ A M nr:c+oua 601iQ2 Q~V \ n s exce 2a oa~+ Cl u nw7MMM6 "Suss Sao nwxcev" ,60 2SI ONC, tax lots 100, 200, 500, 800, 801, 900 & 901 Ag EAS _ N P f S00 100 500 Feet 0 100 ~ 1~• 118 feet zswx~awo+ Cic~° af'TiF;vd intmnatiai m itch map Is for pane des an, 66mm be voril ed with t" awelopm 11125 5W "Al BM Tlpard•OR 97223 (507} 619-1171 ---•y~ t,,Wj& vnv.Ei.%ard.a-vs ~~,o nPC 8.1999; C:%magic\MAGiC03.AP E, A, L T OIL A N D / S C H M40 D T A R C H I T E C T S P . C . • TIGARD MARKETPLACE RENOVATIONS Type lI Land Use Application Checklist and Narrative ATTACHED DOCUMENTATION -Application Form has been completed and is. included herein. -Title transfer instrument is not required, since there will be not change of ownership with this proposal. -Written Summary of the Proposal is contained in the Pre-Application Summary narrative attached herein. -Two sets of stamped, addressed envelopes are enclosed with this document. The list is identical to the list of neighbors within 500 feet as mailed and notarized as a part of the pre-application process. -Attached herein, are the Documentary evidence of the Neighborhood Meeting. Should it be necessary for clarification or record a videocassette of the meeting can be supplied. • -Summary Traffic comments from Kittelson and Associates are included herein. -Copy of the Pre-Application Conference Notes from Karen Fox are attached herein. -Filing fee for this form of application is $2,155.00. The cost of construction is estimated at $1,750,000.00. The fee for this application will be $1,780.00 for the first $I million and $5.00 for every subsequent $10,000. NARRATIVE: The project is a renovation of the existing buildings and site with the highway being minimally impacted. The site development plan and the existing site survey (C218) sheets will serve as the vicinity map, existing conditions and site development plan. This portion of the project will be considered phase two and all work anticipated for this site will be addressed under this phase. This portion of the Narrative will follow the Code Chapters outlined in the Pre-Application Conference Notes dated November 30, 1999. 0 333 S.W. FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 406 PORTLAND. OREGON 97204 (503) 220-8517 FAX (503) 220-8518 T OL A N D / S C H A D T A R C H I T E C T S. P . C . • Tigard Marketplace February 1, 2000 Page 2 of 8 Chapter 18-360: Site Development Review: This chapter has been reviewed and as stated in the Pre-Application Conference the project will be reviewed as a Major Modification. Section 18.360.050 covers the requirements that this project is now being based. This document is the product of meeting each and even- item and issue that is requested. Besides the documents listed above, the drawings that are included are as follows: APP 1.1: This drawing indicates the general configuration of the site after Phase One has been completed and prior to Phase Two beginning. The majority of the Phase One work involves the rear of the grocery store building access drive and the utilities needed to be moved out of the way of the new building area. The Proposed Site Development Plan shows the final configuration of the site after Phase Two is completed, and what would be considered the completion of this project. The existing building that housed the paint store has been removed for the new right-in and right-out drive access. The new pedestrian connection to highway 99 has been placed and as can be seen on the electrical drawing, the pedestrian way has a series of light poles situated to illuminate the pedestrian way and give the pedestrian link a more intimate lighting opposed to the tall general site lights. The parking has been re-aligned on the northern portion of the property with additional parking at the north end of the project. The overall parking counts are included in the Site Summary attached herein. The new tower locations can be seen extending from the buildings and not attached. Parking stalls will be eliminated to allow the positioning of these towers. As designed the towers will only touch the existing buildings through the canopies and not directly rest on the buildings. A 3.0: The existing exterior elevations are included for the front elevations of the in-line buildings. These have been included here for a straightforward comparison of the old to the new. Should any questions arise over the existing conditions, these drawings should assist in a complete review. A 3.1: The existing plaza plans are included for the in-line buildings to assist in the manner in which the ne-vN, towers are to be integrated into the project. A 4.0: These new exterior elevations for the in-line shop buildings indicate the tower elements and the difference in the height of the towers due to the location on the site. The canopy has been kept • to a simple design in the conceptual documents with more refined details to come in the development of the construction documents. 333 S.W. FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 406 PORTLAND. OREGON 97204 (503) 220-8517 FAX (503) 220-8518 T 10L A N D I S C H MO D T A R C H 1 T E C T S P. C . • Tigard Marketplace February 1, 2000 Page 3 of 8 A 4.1: The revised plaza plans indicate the new tower locations and the slight modifications of the parking due to the locations selected. The towers are felt to be a major asset to the project and allow the enlarging of the plaza area under the towers. Although, benches are not indicated one can see that the larger plazas will allow room for benches, trash receptacles and room for patrons to enjoy the new center. Haggen Design Exterior Elevations: These elevations have been supplied by Bryan Krannitz and indicated the conceptual building elevations for the new grocery store building. A building very similar to this concept has been completed in Washington, and Bryan had photographs of the completed building. The design is well proportioned with brick, split-faced concrete block, and metal roofing. The photographs were shown at the neighborhood meeting and as can be seen in the neighborhood meeting notes the neighbors with the colors and the overall design. A 5.0: Conceptual Sections of the Towers and Proposed Canopies: This drawing indicates the ideas of keeping the tower open to the upper portion. With the openness more light from the inner part of the tower will be illuminating from the steel gridwork, that makes up the upper tower section. After the neighborhood meeting it was felt that the gridwork could be eliminated on the backside of the tower at BI-Mart and replaced with a solid or translucent wall material. This may allow the tower to pick up several additional materials that are to be incorporated into the Haggen building. The canopies are identified in these sections as steel framework with metal roofing. Canopy lighting is currently being reviewed in a more dramatic manner with the steel frames. The construction documents %V1'11 illustrate this further. C2/8: The existing civil drawing has been included to allow. the reviewers the opportunity to understand the overall grading. Referring back to the proposed site development plan, it is evident that the modifications anticipated to be made in the access drive, pedestrian way, new parking and landscaping will fit within the overall existing site grading. C3/8: This drawing was included in the package to allow anyone reviewing this project the opportunity to see the modifications that are planned for Phase One of the project. The construction of the store is a part of Phase Two, however, as previously approved, the preparation of the area for the building to be located is indicated here. The site will be impacted by the removal of a portion of the existing slope at the rear of the building and the construction of the new retaining wall, and the relocation or new utilities to satisfy the new store or moving to insure that the building will be set apart far enough from the utilities to insure proper separation. L1: The Existing Landscape Plan is included next. This plan indicates the existing location of the plan materials prior to the construction of Phase One. Phase One will eliminate landscaping, • however, as previously indicated, the landscaping will remain within code compliance even after the construction of the wall, 333 S.W. FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 406 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 (503) 220-8517 FAX (503) 220-8518 T 4P L A N D I S C H A D T A R C H 1 T E C T S . P . C • Tigard Marketplace February 1, 2000 Page 4 of 8 Ll.1: The Proposed Landscape Plan will add plant materials to the area modified under Phase One, and will address the overall site interior parking and the perimeter buffering requirements as best-we can incorporate into this existing site situation. The plant materials are called out and are noted to be irrigated. EPH1: This drawing indicates the recommended locations of the new site lighting. The exact locations may vary slightly on the final documents due to the final coordination with the landscaping, and underground utilities. As can now be seen from the drawings included the site and building appears to be in line with the standards set forth in Title 18 by the City of Tigard. The site will allow greater pedestrian connections to the existing sidewalk along the Highway, allow for greater crime prevention and safety with the new activity of the grocery store and the overall care in placing the new lighting throughout the site. The public transportation that now exists will remain as an affective mode of transportation to the surrounding areas including this center. The enhancement of the landscaping will bring the site more in line with the site planning required for a new center, and the patrons of • the center will have the ability to benefit from the new landscaping in a more visually pleasing place to visit. Chapter 18.390: Decision-Making Procedures: The Decision-Making Procedures are outlined for the Type 11 Procedure. This document is a result of passing through the required Pre-Application Conference, posting the property for the Neighborhood Meeting, notifications for the meeting to all properties within 500 feet, the Neighborhood Meeting, the supplying of envelopes as a part of the Application for use in further notifications to the neighbors, and the remainder of the requirements that this narrative and application Will address. The participating parties look forward to proceeding, through this process, in a timely manner. The construction documents for the grocery store building have already been started and are planned to be in for review as soon as they are available. The parties understand that a building permit for the buildings will not be possible without this process being completed. The risk of a possible concurrent review is worth the time saved in an opening date. Chapter 18.520: Commercial Zoning Districts: The Zoning District is C-G: General Commercial District: No changes to the requirements set forth • in this district are requested or anticipated as a part of this Application. 333 S.W. FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 406 PORTLAND. OREGON 97204 (503) 220-85 17 FAX (503) 220-8518 T OL A N D I S C H A D T A R C H 1 T E C T S P . C . • Tigard Marketplace February 1, 2000 Page 5 of 8 Chapter 18.705: Access, Egress, and Circulation: The proposed renovation will allow for greater circulation for pedestrians and equal or greater vehicular circulation. The existing conditions dictate the overall access, egress and circulation, however, should further documentation be required as indicated in this chapter, documents will be provided. The luxury of this type of renovation project is that the site can be visited and with the plans that are now available, actual conditions can be reviewed and not necessarily merely anticipated. It is encouraged to visit the site to personally investigate any assumptions along these lines. Public access, egress and circulation is as major a concern to the property owner as to the City. We look forward to any opinions. Chapter 18.725: Environmental Performance Standards: The applicable state and'federal regulations will be complied with for the construction of both Phase One and Phase Two at Tigard Marketplace. Specific standards addressing the noise have been covered in the neighborhood meeting and an ordinance is currently in place to regulate the rear of the buildings. This has been found to violated in the very recent past, however, with the neighbors now having a direct line to the property manager, the situation should now be resolved. Anticipated noise generating zones from the new grocery store building will be addressed during the design and construction document development. Possible problem areas, based on the original grocery store have been discussed and the Architect for the store will need to incorporate a solution to eliminate the noise and without question keep it into the guidelines listed in this code section. The glare from light fixtures has been addressed in the neighborhood meeting and will be carefully considered in the continued design of the lighting. No light glare will pass the property lines into the neighbors as a general standard, however, with the proximity of the houses to the light fixtures and the possible condition of a selected view corridor over the retail buildings to the light fixtures in the parking lot. Shields wily be placed as needed to meet the glare requirements where they can be effective. A close review of the electrical photometric plan is needed to conclude that the lighting is appropriate for this project. Vibrations and odors are not anticipated to be a concern. The aromas from this project should be from the preparation of food. This should not be disruptive to anyone: The grocery store will have contained recycling, trash and corrugated box recycling or disposal. • 333 S.W. FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 406 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 (503) 220-85 17 FAX (503) 220-8518 T &L A N D / S C H A D T A R C H I T E C T S , P . C Tigard Marketplace February 1, 2000 Page 6 of 8 Due to the frequency of disposal from. the site, it is not anticipated that problems with insects or rodents will be manifested as a result of this project. Assistance after completion of the project from the operations of the grocery store and any notification of the patrons or neighbors will be greatly appreciated. Chapter 18.730: Exceptions to Development Standards: Within the modifications for this project it is not anticipated that any exceptions will be requested or required. Chapter 18.745: Landscaping and Screening: The landscaping will be modified as indicated in the attached drawing. The landscaping as designed meets the intent of the code. The landscape design incorporates new vegetation throughout the site and added plantings at the site perimeter where possible. The landscaping enhances the aesthetic environmental quality of the site and will be maintained as needed to assure proper plant material appearance. The Landscape Architect has selected plant materials from the approved plant list. Landscape buffers have been situated as listed in the code. The site rises to the south and this allows for screening from the north as one approaches the north entry drive. Once again, a site review will be beneficial to determine the acceptance of the plan. In the final documents for construction, further coordination is anticipated to meet the density of the landscaping materials and still have the ability to see the signage for the project. As a comparison is made of the existing site layout and the tree placement, compared to the new tree arrangement, one can see that a number of trees will be removed to make way for the improvements. The proposed plan will add many more trees than are removed during this process. It is requested within this Application that it be approved to do this work without undue tree removal reviews or surveys. To achieve a site to satisfy the new code for a renovated development is in the design teams opinion the best situation for the site and the City. The existing trees will be protected during the renovation work on the site- The general contractor will be responsible for the trees and any damage beyond repair, will have the stipulation that the tree be replaced with like size and species. • 333 S.W. FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 406 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 (503) 220-85 17 FAX (503) 220-85 18 T,L A N D / 5 C H Mig D T A R C H 1 T E C T S . P . C Tigard Marketplace February 1, 2000 Page 7 of 8 Chapter 18.765: Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards: The parking and loading standards appear to be met. The counts are situated on the Site Summary sheet enclosed. The parking is fairly evenly distributed along the fronts of the buildings, allowing the parking to be situated where the greatest need is apparent. The realignment of the parking on the north end of the site will add spaces to the overall count. In addition, compact stalls have been placed at the end of the site where it appears is a greater need due to the activity generated at the `Old Country Buffet'. Compact, Van and Disabled parking are indicated on the drawing. Vanpool and carpool will be located closer than employee stalls however, not as close as the single patron that will have a quick in and out visit to any of the stores. A vanpool or carpool stall will have to be marked specifically for this type of situation and will in turn have a longer duration of parking time for each visit. The ability to drop off and pick up, allows the stalls to be placed almost anywhere on the site for the convenience and accessibility of all people that will shop at this center. The general loading for all the stores is situated at the rear of the buildings, and all but the new grocery store are existing. The grocery store will have a truck dock situation that allows the trucks to back directly up to the building wall, hit a pad around the overhead door and stop the truck for unloading. The majority of all product will come through the enclosed doors with the `daily deliveries of smaller product from smaller trucks to be off loaded and wheeled into the building at the loading dock door placed specifically for this purpose. The entire parking field will be of asphalt or concrete as it is established on the existing site. The pedestrian walkway will be of concrete to establish a change of materials at the crossings. Bicycle parking will be maintained as it is currently established. The parking is spread out over the front of the center for convenient accessibility. The parking indicated, on the proposed site development plan, maximizes the site. The open space for a possible new building adjacent to the tire store could be 8,400 square feet and would require shared parking from the parking stalls already shown. This final buildable site at this center could trigger the need to initiate the "Reductions in Minimum Required Vehicle Parking" noted on page 13 of Section] 8.765.070. It is asked at this time that this be acceptable. It appears that interest in the center is now becoming more active, and with the new appearance of the center the owner feels that this open land will be occupied soon. • 333 S.W. FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 406 PORTLAND. OREGON 97204 (503) 220-8517 FAX (503) 220-8518 T O1. A N D / S C H A D T A R C H I T E C T S P . C . • Tigard Marketplace February 1, 2000 Page 8 of 8 Chapter 18.780: Signs: The site project signs are included and proposed locations are on the site development plan. The sign design and construction will or has been by Garrett Sign Co. Previously a permit was received for a sign that was not installed in light of the proposed project. The new signs and existing sign modifications will be made in conjunction with this project. The `Haggen's' building signage will be under separate contract with Haggen's and is not represented here other than on the drawing of the exterior elevations. The existing building signs are planned to remain as they currently exist, with possible sign changes as a result of tenant relocations. It is understood that any signage modifications not addressed at this time will not be a part of this project. It is requested to approve the signs that are indicted within this proposal. Chapter 18.795: Visual Clearance Areas: • The proposed plan complies with this section. Each of the three access drives maintain the Visual Clearance Areas. Any tree or new retaining wall that may be associated with the south access drive will be kept low to the ground or located completely away form the required areas. Chapter 18.810: Steet and Utility Improvement Standards: No new streets are planned as a part of this proposal. The relocated access drive will be the only impacted area on public right-of-way. The drawings required to construct this relocated access drive will be generated when ODOT has given the approval. The on and off-site documentation will be handled by the civil engineer and will be submitted with the overall documentation for the construction documents for Phase Two. No new traffic signals are planned in conjunction with this renovation project. Easements will be relocated by the work previously approved through Phase One. As noted previously, the overall storm drainage for the site will remain the same. Under Phase One the grades will be slightly modified along the front and rear of the new grocery building. The approval for these grades and new storm drainage configurations are currently under review by the City. We anticipate full approval of Phase One at any time, and look forward to comments on this second and final phase. • 333 S.W. FIFTH AVENUE. SUITE 406 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 (503) 220-8517 FAX (503) 220-8518 01/05/00 13:07 '$503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD r~002/006 CITY OF TIGAR Q- '~'l cc~ i►•L. LAND USE APPLICATION CHECKLIST aS v cc i,11 • / 3 S O U SccJ ~L t/ fi C rat Please read this form carefully in. con unction with the notes provided to you at the re- application conference. This checklist identifies what is required for submittal of a complete land use application. Once an application is deemed complete by Community Development staff, a decision may be issued within 6-8 weeks, if you have additional questions after reviewing all of the information provided to you, .please contact the staff person named below at the City of Tigard Planning Division, (503) 639-4171. Staff: ~C_Xre.&-, Po xC Date: (I 130TH 1. BASIC INFORMATION ALL LAND USE APPLICATIONS REQUIRE THE FOLLOWING: Completed Application Form with property owner's signature or name of agent and letter of authorization Tale transfer instrument or grant deed Written summary of proposal , =b Narrative demonstrating compliance with all applicable development standards and approval criteria (as specified in the Pre-Application Conference notes) Two (2) sets of stamped. addressed 010 envelopes and a notarized mailing list of all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property- Mailing envelopes shall be standard legal-size (00), addressed with I" x 4° labels (see attached envelope submittal requirements) :=o Documentary evidence of neighborhood meeting (if required) Impact Study per Section 18.390.040.B.2.(e) Copy of-the Pre-Application Conference notes Filing Fee 2. PLANS REQUIRED In addition to the above basic information, each type of land use application will require one or more of the following maps or plans. PLEASE SUBMIT EACH OF THE PLANS CHECKED BELOW WITH YOUR APPLICATION (Section 5 of this checklist provides details on what information to include on each plan): ~ re- ;I?F, Vicinity Map Existing Conditions Map 0 Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map ❑ Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan ,;K Site Development Plan 4!C Landscape Plan Public Improvements/Streets Plan tf j < Q Preliminary Grading/Erosion Control Plan aAe a+'`4 ;0z Preliminary Utilities Plan GCu-Se ,;~r, Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan ❑ Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan Architectural Drawings DEr, Sign Drawings 3. NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED The City requires multiple copies of submittal materials. process. FOR AN APPLICATION SUCH AS YOU ARE ALL APPLICATION MATERIALS. The number of copies required depends on the type of review PROPOSING THE CITY REQUIRES 20 COPIES OF Gty of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 1 of 5 01/05/00 13:07 $503 684 7297 • 4. SPECIAL STUDIES AND REPORTS CITY OF TIGARD 0 Z003/006 AftBecause of the nature of your project and/or the site you propose to develop, THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL STUDIES IW~11rr ILL BE REQUIRED. These studies must be prepared by certified professionals with experience in the appropriate field: 44'd ❑ Traffic Study wfQ~ 4 ow (nvpom a dr iut tv~ Q hwl~~)% rt4 ~e ~ 4b 6.0.0.7' ❑ Local Streets Traffic Study ❑ Wetlands/Stream Corridor Delineation and Report ❑ Habitat Area. Evaluation ❑ Storm Drainage System Downstream Analysis ❑ Preliminary Sizing Calculations for Proposed water Quality and/or Detention Facility ❑ Geotechnical Report 0 Other 5. PREPARING PLANS AND MAPS Plans and maps should be prepared at an engineering scale (1" = 40/20/50/100/200') and include a north arrow. legend and date. The same scale should be used for all your plans. Where possible the City prefers the use of a scale that allows a site plan or subdivision plat to be shown on a single sheet Architectural drawings may be prepared at an architectural scale. One copy of each plan must be submitted in photo-ready 8Yz x II format. THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR EACH TYPE OF PLAN (if the plans you submit do not include all of the information requested because you feel it is not applicable, please indicate this and provide a brief explanation). Zvicinity Map Showing the location of the site in relation to: • Adjacent properties ❑ Surrounding street system including nearby intersections ❑ • • Pedestrian ways and bikeways ❑ • Transit stops ❑ / • Utility access existing Conditions Map - Parcel boundaries, dimensions and gross area El or 5' for slopes X10%) Contour lines (2' intervals for 0-10% slopes . Drainage patterns and courses on the site and on adjacent lands ❑ Potential natural hazard areas including: • Floodplain areas ❑ • Areas having a high seasonal water table within 24" of the surface for three or more weeks of the year ❑ Slopes in excess of 25% ❑ • Unstable ground ❑ Areas with severe soil erosion potential ❑ • Areas having severely weak foundation soils ❑ =:i- Locations of resource areas including: • Wildlife habitat areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan ❑ Wetlands ❑ =1 Outer site features. Rock outcroppings ❑ • Trees with 6" caliper measured 4' from ground level ❑ Location and type of noise sources a • Locations of existing structures and their uses Locations of existing utilities and easements ❑ Locations of existing dedicated right-of-ways ❑ Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 2 of 5 01/05/00 13:08 1l 503 684 7297 • CITY OF TIGARD 0 Z004/006 The proposed name of the subdivision ❑ Vicinity map showing propertys relationship to arterial and collector streets ❑ •==5, Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner, developer, engineer surveyor and designer (as applicable) ❑ Scale, north arrow and date ❑ Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided = Names of adjacent subdivisions or names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of unsubdivided land ❑ Contour lines related to a City-established benchmark at 2' intervals for 0-10% grades and 5' intervals for grades greater than 10% ❑ The purpose, location, type and size of all of the following (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): • Public and private right-of-ways and easements ❑ • Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines ❑ • Domestic water mains including fire hydrants ❑ • Major power telephone transmission lines (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ • Watercourses ❑ • Deed reservations for parks, open spaces, pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ • The location of all trees with a diameter 6 inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level ❑ • The location of all structures and the present uses of the structures, and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting ❑ Supplemental information including: • Proposed deed restrictions (i€ any) ❑ • A proposed plan for provision of subdivision improvements ❑ Existing natural features including rock outcroppings, wetlands and marsh areas The proposed lot configurations, lot sizes and dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such lots ❑ =5, It any of the foregoing information cannot practicably be shown on the preliminary plat,- it shall be incorporated • into a narrative and submitted with the application materials ❑ Preliminary PartitidWl.ot Line Adjustment Plan e The owner of the subject p eel The owner's authorized agen The map scale, north arrow and to Proposed property lines Description of panel location and bou aries Contour lines (2' intervals for slopes 0-10 or 5' for slopes }100/6) a Location, width and names of streets, easem is and other public ways within and adjacent to the parcel Location of all permanent buildings on and withi 5' of all property lines =::s Location and width of all water courses a Location of any trees with 6" or greater caliper at 4' a ground level All slopes greater than 25% = Location of existing and proposed utilities and utility easerne s 4 Any applicable deed restrictions z=5 Evidence that land partition will not preclude efficient future land d ' io = Future street extension plan showing existing and potential street cc • where applicable tatty of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist ' Page 3 of 5 01/05/00 13:09 V503 664 7297 CITY OF TIGARD ite Development Plan The proposed site and surrounding properties Contour line intervals The locations, dimensions and proposed names of the following: • Existing and platted streets and other public ways • Easements on the site and on adjoining properties • Proposed streets or other public ways and easements on the site • Aftemative routes of dead-end or proposed streets that require future extensions a The locations and dimensions of the following: • Entrances and exits on the site • Parking and circulation areas • Loading and service areas • Pedestrian and bicycle circulation • Outdoor common areas • Above ground utilities • Trash and recyclable material areas The locations, dimensions and setback distances of the following: • Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25' of the site Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site • Sanitary.sewer facilities • Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements • Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions Locations and type(s) of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques The locations of the following: • All areas to be landscaped • Mailboxes / Structures and their orientation Landscape Plan Location of trees to be removed Location, size and species of existing plant materials a General location, size and species of proposed plan materials Landscape narrative that addresses: • Soil conditions and how plant selections were derived for them • Plans for sail treatment such as stockpiling the top soil • Erosion control measures that will be used Location and description of the irrigation system where applicable a Location and size of fences, buffer areas and screening Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces Public Improvements/Streets Plan Proposed right-of-way locations and widths A scaled cross-section of all proposed streets plus any reserve strips Approximate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision U005/006 n 11 ❑ City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 4 of 5 01/05/00 13,09 V503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD 008/00B Grading/Erosion Control Plan - an Ih ~r ac s n (d }ap e,e w, ~av~•t_~ The locations and extent to which grading will take peace Q • Existing and proposed contour lines Slope ratios ❑ 7*Utilities Plan -4 Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated on the plans ❑ ~ Plan of the proposed water distribution system, showing pipe sizes and the locations of valves and fire hydrants ❑ _//Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm water overflow ❑ Location, width and direction of flow of all water courses and drainageways ❑ a Location and estimated size of proposed storm drainage lines ❑ Where applicable, location and estimated size and dimensions of proposed water quality/detention facility ❑ ✓Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan (f aAt Irzz re-w.u,lcai, e ~)aIdentification of the location, size and species of all existing trees ❑ Program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal (Section 18-790.030) ❑ A protection program defining standards and methods to be used during and after construction ❑ /Architectural Drawings Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures and their proposed use ❑ Elevation drawings for each elevation of the structure ❑ Sign Drawings a Specify proposed location, size and height E] I:~4curplnVnastersVevisedlchklist_doc 40 6-Nov-98 City of Tigard Land Use Application Checklist Page 5 of 5 T 10 A N D l S C H M 4D T A R C H I T E C T S, P . C • • TIGARD MARKETPLACE SITE SUMMARY CODE INFORMATION Building Codes: 1997 ed. U.B.C. Oregon Edition 1998 Zoning: CG Construction Type: Type III-N Parcel: 12.25 acres (518,361 S.F.) EXISTING BUILDING AREA: EXISTING PARKING STATISTICS Anchor `A' 41,310 S.F. Building `B' 31,113 S.F. Building `C' 17,177 S.F. Building `D' 9,600 S.F. Pad `A' (Tire Store) 6,702 S.F. Pad `B' (Blockbuster) 5,478 S.F. Pad `C' (Taco Time 2,174 S.F. Pad `D' (Paint Store) 4.250 S.F. Total: 117,804 S.F. Site Coverage: 22% EXISTING PARKING BREAKDOWN: Standard Stalls 541 Handicapped Stalls 16 Compact Stalls 0 Total Stalls Existing 557 4.7 Stalls/ 1000 S.F. Existing Landscaping 19.9% PHASE TWO Anchor `A' 59,365 S.F. Building `B' 31,113 S.F Building `C' 17,177 S.F. Building `D' 9,600 S.F. Pad `A' (Tire Store) 6,702 S.F. Pad `B' (Blockbuster) 5,478 S.F. Pad `C' (Taco Time 2,174 S.F. Total: 131,609 S.F. PARKING STATISTICS ( 3.7/1000 sf) PARKING BREAKDOWN: ( 3.7/]000 so ( 3.7/1000 sf) Standard Stalls 539 (153/1000 sf) Handicapped Stalls 19 ( 3.3/1000 sf) Compact Stalls 51 ( 3.7/1000 so ( 9.9/1000 so Total Stalls required and provided. 609 REQUIRED PARKING PER CITY OF TIGARD Section 18.765 - Off Street Parking Requirements General Retail: 17/1000 Eating / Drinking Establishments Fast Foods: 9.911000 or other: 15.3/1000 Shop: (Tire Store) 3.3/1000 SITEBUILDING REQUIREMENTS Max. Site Coverage = 85% Min. Landscaping = 15% Section 18,100 (77,754 S.F.) Max. Building Ht. = 45' Landscaping Provided: = 75,865 S.F. (Planting) 2.830 S.F. (Pedestrian Way) 78,695 S.F. Total • 333 S W. 5" AVE._, SUITE 406 PORTLAND. OREGON 97204 (503) 220-8517 FAX (503) 220-8518 X:I_projec/97156/Docs/Site Summan%dWts 0 • 0 • r f , a... =u ~y. FOE, 2Mt1141 COT: 0-26-00 0 W. 46 BY DEBBm PLM;M-Zs-w 0 09:44 A, l i A r~ pp 1:l i LH_D BUFFET J L ~ ~ i.~~ •su sw f j snr . a F~~`. 2L fl=y. it LUPINERE , 'SA' SITE LLMIMIIRE 00 WTI META NLIR LAMP WITH TYPE III 1"121TEW LAD SYMBOL, 04"W" INDICATE ROTATION OF OPTICS. ,REM 21'. MEADS PR PR.E. F'lIINAMC 1 L'COLLECTS\1999-0\98251\91100S01,tE3 LN00 = 30000 LLF 72 SPIN • 0 IESM9l [TEST] TETT M. 1191100301 I~ACI LITMM Ie NI-T6 LHONk Inp ELUEATI MSF2 ADM M ELWINAIREI PREMIUM CUI.OrF 9ICOM WITH SEGMENTED REFLECTOR CLWPCA1, VEM N01009111RI [LAMP] .00MIE0M CCIIERlY.rllRn. 711/97 - 12-01-06 TILT41p[ LAPS • I LUEHSILA" . 32000 PHOTOMETRIC TOE • L WATTS = 465 LUMTKNS LIME IGNS (FEES/ 'WIRTH • 1.27 LEKiN • 1.25 HEIFT . 0 FACTORS . MULTIPLIER . 1 BALLAST • 1 DAL AST-LAP - 1 WAGER IF YERTICAL ANGLES 29 0 To 0 DECIDE" NUMBER Or MMEIZWTA ANGLES • 2T 0 TO 100 DEGREES LINIMVIRE . 111. SITE LMINAIRC 600 WTT METAL HAIm U1P WITH rY 111 DISTRIROTIOI TAO SYKD1. POLE. 25'. FILCNA . L~VRp.ERiSVI9P0^D19006119/10051I.1[f LUMENS • 36010 LLT . .72 SPIN 0 IESN491 [TEST) TEST NO. 119410050L IMANUFALI 111-IP NI-TN LIpOAInp (LOICAT1 KSF2 1101 R3 IL NINA.LREI PREMIUM CLAMOR SIOE&Dt VITM SEGMENTED REFLECTOR tLAMPCAT) VON. MOM0911I1L (LAMP) MOON.ED2B IBRERIV.ra- 711/97 - L2M00M00 TILT-HOW LAPS • I LUEM"AAP • 32000 Ril OETBIC TYM • I WATTS • M5 LUMINAl15 DIMENSIONS IrEET9 ,VIDTH • I.E3 LENLM • I.PS HEIGHT a D FACTORS WLIIPLICR - I BA1.43T I DALLAST-LAP - I NMFR 6 - 'CAL -E. • 29 0 TO 90 DRREES MURDER W HRI7WTA AMES • 21 0 TO 100 gFAEES LMNIwtRE . YM SITE LOIIWIRE 400 WATT META HALIDE LAW VITH TYPE IV DISTRIBUr IEW CAD SYMBOL S -0 POLE. 25 rILCNAE L-\ RDIECTS\19%-3\9D26IN9304I30I.IES LUMENS • 360TH LLF • .R SPIN + 0 ICSMA9l I PESTN 1030 00T ENANFACI LltHONIA ARCHITECTURAL OUTDOOR ILRICAT3 NSF2 40M R4 IL11111RIRI1 TIPS 1 SHBR , CURT LRNIN.IRE ILAPTATI HVIOOWWCMO ILAPI 400 WATT METAL HALIDE - ED-29 ENVELOPE I07ERIVx 1m. 7/1/97 - 1200.00 IILT•ID[ LAWS • 1 LIDENS/LAMP • 32000 PItOEFRIL TYPE • 1 YAKS • 495 LUMINOUS DIMENSIONS (FEET) VIDIH . 1.4 LENGTH . 1.4 HEIW • 0 FACTOPS • MULTIPLIER • 32 BALLAST • I 61LLAST1100 • 1 NROER OP VERTICAL AKA-ES • 29 D TO 90 DE 9 s NUMBER OF HERI20NA ANGLES • RI 0 TO 180 DEGREES LLNIH4IRE , 'IA3' SITE LFMIWIRE 400 WATT META HALIDE LAMP WITH TYPE V DISTPIEUTIO4 CAD SYNC. -0 POLE- as, FILEMVE LM IPLAEL16V99B-B59B261V9305IBM .1E6 LLAEIM • 36000 1 ,72 9YLL IN . o 14W91 I TEST] uTHINIA 01 M ENAWPACI LIIIO00 WE1ECilEA WIED01 [URA YP TE 401M M ILE ANPIC0REI TYPE ,1 , SHORT , CUTOFF ILAPCAII MN4 00/ M19 METAL 400 _TT META H0 0E (CD-2B [NVELOI) IDTTERIY.rM - 711/91 • 12000 , 00 utrE L NP9 . 1 LSIGNS.E • 70PI . UWl TAE . 1 GHTrs .159 LUMINOUS DIME NSIGNS IFEREFIT WIDTH 1 + I.4 4 IFKIM • I.4 WIGHT + 0 FACfiRS . MLIIRIEP • 1AlLMT + I DNLA9I-LAMP • t NLMIER OF VERTICAL M40LES = E9 0 ID 90 ]ERGOT NUMBER IF IO4[PWSA ANGLES • 21 0 10 LBO MEPREES LUMIMMIME 4 -SBA KDE TRIAN LUNImIRE 175 MATT METAL HALIDE vM IYRE V ZISTRIK91M CAD S'YIN'T. 0 POLEA 12' FILRMK . L;VMtO= SVt990.1.95251\SLSR21G7,1ES LIBOIS = 142000 to SPIN ~ o LTG TISCH LAD: 591/A RA6FACTIF" MLIITECTLROL AREA LIOEIM3 CATALOG B SLSleO-G25 20' D1A % l6' HT LANTERN WIT 20' DU x 7' WRITE IODO REFLECTOR TYPE V LASS TOTAL WATTS • 119 LAP TYPE, 100-V CLR MN LAP l1PFM~ 8500 rILT49E LAPS • I LU004 LAP • 1700 FYIFOETRIC TYPE • I VATS • 119 U(R1- UIMEN5106 4FC[T9 WIDEN • .0 LENGTH • .6 HEIOB .6 IACTTRS , MLLIIPLIER • t BALLAST • I BALASITLA(P . t mrom or VERTICAL ANGLES • 30 0 TO TOT LEFREES HIISER UF AORIZ & AA051,13 . 21 0 TO 160 DEGREES RAE - SITE LIGHT METER 1S N3RMAI. TO PLANE AVERAGE fc = 2.09 9AUK Ec • Il W[M[ WR fc = .Ol MYERAREAMIMI MM' 219 MO[I00HMINIMIN • 1100 LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE rtSE 515 ETEANW PULE ARM MOUNTED 10 SITE UUMINAIRE. 25' LONG BY IB WOE BY B H01 ALUMINUM HOUSNC. AIMVPUM BOOR FRAME WIN ALIT TENS TO At01A NO WIGHT MOOTED AND SEGMENTED µBMNUIM REFLECTOR WITH TYPE M 09ORBMW. BRONZE F0194 ML FISTED WET. TWD NEARS PER POLE -20 DEGCA OWA 1004 POWER FACTOR BALLAST. ONE 400 WATT METAL MALIE LAMP. NEAWAL NWT WATTS 15S IITHWIA KSF1 40CW SERIES. MCGRAW-004M. COLD. STERNER OR APPROVED. PILE: 25' MGR, SQUARE SIRAIWT STEEL PO.E UNIFORM WALL T 104HESS OF 012e, MOM SAME CDVDI PLATE FINNISH TO MATCH W -W PONE 10 W116TAro 100 MILL PER HOUR WINDS MTN A GUST FACTOR OF 1.3, LITHOIA 555 .RES. NR, EMIT, SICINm OR APPROVED, TYPE 'SLI': SAME AS TIP[ 'SA' E%CF➢T WIN ONE HEAD PER POLE TYPE 'SAY: SAME AS TYPE 'SA' EXW-l WN Off HCAO PER POE ANO TYPE N DISTRIBUTION, IYPF 5u': SLUE AS TYPE 'SA' EMEPT NM OE MEW MIX RTE AMD T PE V DISTRIBUTION, THE'SE': EVTFAIOR POLE TOP MOUNTED PEM5BNVH UAMNADE 24' (WAMEER BY IY NIX pE CAST AW4NUM NWSRU MN FLARED ARAM AND XOIRONTAL LOUVM GLASS SAD LENS. CAST AOAIMU. POE CA" 440 RAOOG ARM. 9 FIM 10 TOP OF IY POLf. FINISH AS Sa&MO BY AR0WIEET, OL I1sTED TIt r K Y OSTPoWADW. -20 XE . LTIA SOW POWER FACTOR BALLAST. ONE IA WATT META HAUTE LAMP. NOOHL NWT WATTS 192. AA SM24(N5 AA SERER ALUMUTL PN061M OR APPROVED. P ' 12' IIW HONG CLS! AW VMA POL OOORII WALL THICKNESS O 0.1w.. PROVIDE ROUND COVER PLATE FMI91 TO MATH LUMNME POE TO WMSTA(I 100 MU PFA HOUR WINDS WITH A OUST FACTOR OUP 1.0 AAL MR 1W2-125 91EES, ALRNITE PHOBIC OR APPRDAD e231 TILAND / SGHMIDT AROM ITBO TAPAL '9 5M R9NW AVEA4 4co PORTLA,'ID RTCM1204 22D-MR PAM (R71 Y109N6 z Q NI.Y o'~ W Y!-Y LILT ~Lo F A--1 aTl V I V Y BI- LE d 61M FILM rnorctirni e 1'ROLLdT N7. 91156-pq SAYE. 0-MIA GRAIN a . c4e ® DN c+p PSI ~IMFIR1101 FICIAFLLIMC L~eIYd® •YnM ~ 1 SITE PLAN ° PHOTOMETRIC- I'•10 • • • i 0 v / / / / / T LA'NGSGAP; PLAN r;I L, , ~,•o. [~J EXISTING LANDSCAPE LEGEND O EXISTING EEGIP:A15 TREE TO REMAIN ~~❑r'. ExisTiN6 WNIEER 7-REE TO REMAIN EYISTIN6 GORIFER 5RO,F,NS o RE!iAIN f" XISTING DEGip Jph T,~ &Q.0FIN6 E \I dJPIHi TD ~M41N bR v`l EXIST IN5 AWI; ~ TO CFKAlW O EXISTING SH." -.0 k---MAIN EXI57IN6 H:D&E TO EMAM EX5TNC, 6FOJI~.YG`I-=¢ To .F°4NN EXI5TIN6 LAYa 70 REMAIN ma] 4~.vru xue ,a Dope) 'a~DC f. D u xe w b"I. I~d~D naJ ti«.wD wd.. am nxw s xw ,r D't wrtl,« . w~.. rn. Jw. wq Per ml.erwx, rcrmw.= ,wo.. ra.w 4. LANDSCAPE LEGEND ❑ De~m~rr~ r.e' a o= ~ m ou hnd Y u w ew.+ ~ - Ln l P-td ' % ~ rwr x m v«nwD ~,wo I cJ .fp' ac x.DUe w•-Ar r a: r rm„w~ r'-DD' i ee. m ern wf., w ]a..w^ a Pw~. Av.vmxn'gie Wf,n' W bn~k xr wry r'•]C o< b ~!wnn ~p ' ADt If as G4tpremir bmix~~4wD &wiJ f GIL A ea xM[e5 Joint «n: Mr emVr dV. J bJxme eem rxwm•n4 M W Glf J lgav rx4+R~,1 T rgaJ_ i. I'^PP^ u x >wlem nI • nil a:mmt wr•wv* .x,m i Wb/ ~ra en »m De.~sn vx.q rk IMU~p b nmmv Anur rpw rrme Vexrm mp~.ic m/VonmoR CHRISTOPHER FRESHLEY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT S,D. LriDA DV]R D!D • WAMRD, 4D[CM DmD • 5q/#D-VIDI • Ifxk DN/¢A-•mD I[-lu¢k r~iioTAiDEND T1LANv l SGHMIDT ARC NIT CC TO.P0 933 SW rlFi AYC#LL WT 4O6 PORTLAND OR 17304 (533) ]30.6511 PAX 1509) 170.6515 1 r u Ill n - _ 01~ to • F EXISTING LANDSCAPE PLAN I• = 40'-0• UA ~nn -Y j 77- lP_ T 0 IL CL FK0.=T NO 97136 C44 cRwa m . na clYC®m R2V 191o N8 CHRISTOPHER FRESHLEY L l LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IOS lY. IIMP 4ilG Yi0 • PSPfYI®. YaGWF Y.m • 96/~5W! • IIWk JYI«,_,,,, I • • TG D ~a 1 na - 20 R. 1G VERTICAL CURB mrtA ; ENHANCED CURB AREA DRAIN DETAIL .FRS .wr EtSaAENr I A- A e F a~ '9ddY ~ wre ' A r ~i "nv`s ° NMNIr. PAVEMENT SECTION v sa:a~iN"w L GRADINGATRETAMIINGWALL ROOF DRAW RISER DETAIL GRAVEL PAVEMENTSECRDN STORM SEWER NOTES 1.e BI H14llvAIESSoaCOW-0A.- CO Y OF GGMD ANO USA. $M NDARDE S MMP.O pjI AND CO'M'A SMALL CcHrow 7OOTYSTAA A UE COFSR SN4L BE MARKED WTM bTY1M OR mien W r Rasta LEMR AWM VIEGHT OF TW FRAME .;-L SE dW FULY)Ls AIRAOgT WEr.47 OF THE COYFA SWU BE 150 FOIWP S 3 GItYf BA51)FS S4NIBEPEHOETM90Y SHUTC5 4 gTORASEISER PLFE SMALL M AS SBpFlEO ONTHESEPLAS Wt-FWAWUr nrE SHALL BEMVTVEDANDAAPROWDSY NC ENGWEfAP TOW51AILATKW, a eLL STC`M ORAPP40PA9 SMALL SE TE7EVSAR7 At6LWEER ROR TOFAWLACCERINACE B/ME ErlO`AR 6.A ALL OrIEAVWTES ARE04TALLID ANDPILOA TO ASl rW KALL wT f SHNL PASS A LOW PRESSURE AIR ,T PTRUDGIS GAD M WW MEWSI DEOF THE ROV ARE NOT ID BE ISIW roCDTANTIEA9i IES/. 7. TDLENCMMN LiEapX. AAOBNTD➢➢L FOR FIT, sYNLL CONFORM TO CRYOF TrG pSTAF B DLMNO CtA151R/ODmi. ALL EDBSTeAG NA NEM.Y 0451ALLrV DNUNAW STRLCTLRES SNNI BE pF OTEGTED STEM SFOMENM STORM DATA Q Ek9T, 9TdwM4A1NDLE tSEEFAWEq FA15T. ]S'CNPSEEflMLEJ ©O Ie IFW CW STORM L04E IBETWEENQI O ~STWMAA4Mi01f Af ESFE FROFNE) 6 -CW(SEE PROP= Oa d0' STOW MANFFOLE IS IEEE PROFAE7 d dW STOW WMIOLE-(,ffE Rp Q d ENST. STUMUETEMtON--ommuLaTRIM TD NEW GAME N20 FNA7 FDM ,vn EPW 95' JEW 22476;NE)(SEE GETENINN STSIEM GETMJ IE LSq/TNA.7RY0 V S-Ai NIS'HOPE 3. A 0M ISEEIWTENIATNSYSTEM UE S'EFTCS) 1® STNiDMOSTWMMWFULERMZ*d Ed-IN t,'k.W,1VWAElErSOUr2FF.9ysWi SEE OEIFAITIONSVST'd DETM S4EETGW 1© EASE CATCH 94ANGMT . RUG FX44r P(9'A'rEBOVT2IA.NSF/NRLFFPLy S-A.my ® At LFCRCACOFORANS-GPM ZATENO 29BW /SEERlF A J ® 474PrPPC S-0.047 WATEAA23T.N ISEEFesEA OETARJ TAAPDAICHaASWGPATE24065 IF 6'OVT- W SO LF S PYC ROOFDR- S-U WS E AT EH]- /SEER ROEINy ® READDVE IXST9ttWM MVNFOIE I© AEMOIC TC6f WQW © IEAKAE9ATF6GlE ® E#SI 3T -NHOLEADAWAMTDNEW GRAOEN06 ® E TB fresvSTO UNE ® a1ST STORM MANKILE ACNAT F.M ro NEW GiuNEZT9s E Izwzuso E 17 •GUrm9e ® Im<F IR RC 9=001D ® SeSrWMDETEMWYMWHOIEW.- EBI'wtO1-90E12.O I so GAFFE 1.9 ESEEOETId_S'Eflm ® 105L 2.'P.C S-oW5 SNFMAAWHOLE RMt4I$6 E6'W21590 Ea•a.DZasa ® WSLFd•PICROCFD-WN S-0050 A!"MAT bAO r~F REER OETAIu 17V0'PVCRO0FDR4w S-01N E23000AT F-esE R .DETAB} ® MLFe RvC S-O,= EAr"23630 S"OI7r ® 3LF9 PAC ROCF ORA-W8.04" 623&SO ATENO rS RSFN m-) ® I,L O-PPS-oLM ® MVCATCNBSSTN GRATESWlerG SW ® MIRPRc S-o" ® mw GTGRBAmN Fi m-DiP Ee•ONrmsm E1ANSGOD NOTES BGe NE IFLOGLED ADIMS7 WAND ANAND LINT. HIS, NOTES OW AND Si TOM ORI911[E PATTERI ® CM1..9TVALIMTANHOEMM24040EB'w Stl lmgl E8 WZOR-¢147 EWOI07 2xo*, ) ® As - us-DRAW or 90.1 RM 2A3 In E ROJr N -4" ® AR6ADRA Or9C7 M2.5.10 Mrovr 14137 (4E717GV) EATPrzsa (.4EL A9) AREA DAFRI(rrSo) RM24SB0 E rovr24.00 PYEAROALI EATS{ - ESFELETA9) ® NEADANK ET79G)~b950 EBOUTtS7E0 ISEE HEAT IS f9EF G Z!?D-F (EAIOffdRfRF17 EZIW p =LAWN RGOFD'LAM S-0foe E-AT LTA 65EEIi6FRLETAW © MA?$EDQ/ENN/wMAC 14bLE ® EN)MN Cvt%:wt, SrEOETK TFIS 5FE7 GRADING AND PAVING NOTES I. A'AW=TELYFOLLOWING RTeGOADING URERAT FROCE ROLL sUB3Re0 AN sTO ACMXVE - OFMAMLBPI GENSRY -AT DE➢IH PEA AASFRD T99 7ESF METHOD ELFB XUBYTSWFALSAIETOW WNSTRGLTFOwCIW9NINlSr$ NPTFIEAE3F HFT BEM ComaACTED TO 06 R MNOMUM OF NMVAMTHS NEXT U AAS A F.LTOFRO(FF YwG 11T I5TL Kfr mBE IOSTFE 1[9rE0 BYWN0EPSAIDEWEADEMUS . 2AGGFEG47B a4&-FCGKS REL Wd CRUSHFD ROCK LLAMA LEM COLASE OF R'N C HEDROCKAs PEROREGWSTATE MIO AT OAIWONST£@iG7p.'b. AUGREBATE aASE S TGSE (XMiACTED w a, M4vwm LL 1m mzsWMA.UIRNd DENSq PpAAWNU ,_W TM ME-r- aT I OFASPK4 TCCMTEI TO SE LASS CAC. ASP5A mEGONSTATE FOaRWAY 10mmWSPECF)CAT)" CONMtimRSro Ai0.10ET EARpRTECTWHACERTWCATEa O PLANT REV ANT RAVE E CF7KANYWRWa AU/6 d)U DWI E h MEAA40 MEN ME IEMFIERAIMIES gOEG EAAFESCR IYA(41k7i. A mrrDAFCr WPE c- Cups LMW CLAW 030 P9 LGNLAFlE WH TAAMASTM I W ACO%9ATFSLW E~PANSCN•A7wMES CONT IlON WAkNISAr ISTNCI l (~JiTERS WNNAAAFIMW CT'NFUEFI. S. NSRECTAON AA.O O WPACOIM TDR SuBO 4X BASEROCK A4DAC. WU BE MADE wDEPENOEM TEsr UO AND WROR7 FKDIHWTOAACH1 B.MLANTERWS MBT 0ON YJFS7.AAO RSFECRGVS ARE TO BE tR STR CEAlSIITwNKE METH C'REOON DER T. OF Dt4SWRTATIOH STN .IPERFTCIIONS T!£FETANAID WALL SHALL SEOESIGNOM T BY THE co`Y Cr0A ME OONTRICTOR S TO Pf XW VERFCARONBYWAVOEFEACFNr TANG LAO FOR ALL GRAOAO A`♦D E(CAVAOCN STNmWf)5- SPFCIFCAT-DNS ASR RELATES TO THERFTAWwG WALL PAVING DATA 0 AC PAVNGISEE SECrY 4 2[] 3R1 wAC CURB [Sf s4wcvrLAAE 0 nsLocATE EAST SDEFlLONr ro OEEL3AATE0 LOCADCRONMEU&MNa". E7 AEMOvE 9)k T IFEE REGMLNG WNL(sEE FY10FEE7 E7 REA Ed$WC LANOSCAeE ISLWOS SQ REAADJE EXW.. RETAI-G WALL 90 REMOVE EXST. EIEGT YAIDLT ® NEWBMIfSWX-O RMN'FO$WP VALETS SEE LAITIUIDETAE. SHEET G) L(]f CGAM1ERT EMsi rELENENEMNAi TO AMNHOLE ADAST LO N FEt'l ffWDE ® RELOCATFE T. WATERMEIERS ® REMQh EAST GTOi BApNANDUTEL6N F1pAClE E19ST, UNKNCVM UTWP BOX ® E#9MO PA4EIAENr10 tE RI'AC.EOBY GRWFR ® LCMDMODOMTOPEA4,W ® REMOvEEttSTWG~NCJITENLEAVE F,LOGR 1ARPRDCW7ELYI'BFLONFlMSIEO FLOW IFA4F LXX.CAETEUNCERC#TAV CANOPY AEMVJFEXITTF,GAC&FA 5FBMiNNGTO IflELOFA'BELOWFrd wFLOOR. ® PFMOYFZJI LF LF EKAOAEDf1FB. ® REHPEAAI9CFOFUM'A9CAFEARE4 TE IAITNf rRAR3ECION WX FFO.mEr YACE7E7AR7 WAC WL rAVSRKWFAfdT PAWNG ORAL9.AADAO PAMY7, ®i THNATEAWnMWD4RIEO4RE'IBE7wEFHCUAB GR461&LWFAGSWO roeE ifETx IiRAVELr BELpYFFF OF242 F2A2 pI RACEAREM MWCNlWAW ,/DO ppLq~AJ1,H W~ Fl. ~1T aLreM o.N yElrm T I L A N D SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS, P.C. 333 SW FIFTH AVENUE PORTLAND OR r.8517 FAX (50.31 22G220''d518518 50}) 8 Z 0 0 W a (Y 4 WCD U JI 1~ I w Ww NY~ Q L.L nnQ Q LL ,a ~ V I 1 U_ 11 U Q PFO,CCT No. 9B-Oi DATE e/IefSp BR1RM By : OFS CMECAED BY E V I S I O N S 1-21-00 NEW WC 1.7f•xX eee a,mee.R.AR~ w C3 U MTES o =a Rr a£V. - xw a ,qq rY WI~[[!v~iF2w mwlbd RN+fF[ o I ¢ N munndsR.b• asY - vs.es ¢ ar C4)IMLSI(1¢ CW) - ZSSee ¢ N minNSrs' ar7 - zu]a ¢ ON xW Mc31(n' ovl - xul9 fy U R'iRF Iwu W6IAILO(w R N 911111[u1(SF• aa1- xb.W [ ar WrtsRb• aP! - 21..n ¢ M s~mFr fM - ?A.tl a out mNnEUrt{' a.cl - zmn as 0- ©rsmd ¢ N s>AI owcY - xH.s>• ~z~ ii x t w ~ rw. a' Nemr ~s NIW 91[P l c ) ] w Qi mWf+] Q elev. - xare ~Twr uNwa¢ ® acv -nerve De N,saal ¢omWap ulun w Ir a].1 ¢ wr wNn•s¢E oNY - xx.cs ¢ A0]10i - aaos (Y r ml'sRem 1 1na2n ~i ou eu[run.wwu Fw RIFV. - zia ' ®RNf1LV - mn ®oN]] mn as R w saPNCRRA Y CTC - 25].W [ wi N1M1(6' 6YC - a) a (~1(g1[ dal 3411pfA$](b~C~ nFY,fWdE ;I IJ CFS 1frP IP'LLUr W Wl I Q [ q~ [ j ~ ~ N v M'~]F ~A W11fM W w1 ~ P ~N1 ~ } xX+b C w] NIRM/311F' YK) - IM,% ~ Pq~ ~ fi ~H C¢ 4 i Q iWY YNNa[ esmlcsRa r~Y - x11H i ' r CdfY ].IS ~ fl[V. -1♦Sa ©URRPOW A NFF wr rmMR vK7 - xa1.n ~ ~ ~ - Hipp ~ ©srx®1c ]Nf H' PK) rm,~unialz E a] ]rcl - ni.m ~ n]]¢aw Ws lFF®r wW¢w) ¢ wT'rs]Iev oPl - iuxo ® a.a m1 an - zzcu stumwo W'<1aYq EN ' Q smW uNFW.f ~ w owcJ-,i! ® orv zble ' ~ Jett ¢AVq{! CILV, - al.b ©uFw ewx ~ FFL'L - 211]1 r ! F N =R d P. - m.a d N ]N41Re' P ~ sT R wi NN e 0 Y - HV,If ]G Bw~ ® 41Y - ve?S / pF O aLV-K!b>~~1-xa~ N ®GTtn B49M p~F y]~ Eq~~ LLS ?CKI-]]I.ew1 ~ / [ wi a1TR b' f W`7 - lH.b C OU] F' Wlq - xSU ~ t ' ®SNiIARY YANl1f WFILY-1:AW f IM mPdl- xaa 901 ~~OLx~HFA1 fAf/ / ~ ¢ N ~ xau i + u a d" ®Gm vaR i a]°~vunv°rtx°~C or1- z1u,w 1 / l ,Id, Wi rK1.W E p ] {1'' Ry = ASP / ' ¢ N wrnusrtr~~xxlr rortvff - zu W [NwTT-mr pr1-xun H ~ r ®Gm urv b.z / / O Mme: Nn -azW f o 3 ®i ai nw Sp ar-F~o]zaw If r ( ENl b -2,xm ' © ~ I ' , ' ~s n u mNOR n u O1P ~l b vz ®w a i t ~ , I,~~ i ¢ aF u, tl f wr rwN][SR1Y [MP) • IMH r Glp e,N, ~Rwav.°-.U a me uNx I IL I aw is ewmw3 a C w1 WRc' (7 - 1410.1 ara .-xale (7 %I ~ R f ri»N(iY aRt) - L1 fl I ~ I~% ~ ¢ w m¢¢R1r mcz+s . \ A \ I I I xa,s f N YNMR[5 1x' [ m1 xW r m1c7 . ]aa P~ Bj ` ~ • sraa W v.aF y PS ICI . S-RESER ®i w mR r art - ]Hn R ~6'. - ERMAAEEI E an ~it]r or1 - :]AW ,e smN U]r«ac ' U I ~ I~ I 1 I } is i 4 of SPRQPERTVWASACEUg 8/ A a4CyMEAKWWEFJ4 1~ 1 LF4M5 90 ~ f \ t \ 7\ / vv f *m L e AY f1EY - aE,1 C M AUII¢PS7SAti M~ _ xP]w i.II I I IL "nl~°vwx11[n¢ i Y . xxz]. B 00' 43? IjN__~ w GEL R (EASEL' I II I I I .]s-. -13942 b y 1 o I F~~~•! Y ~k5T4RM 1, ~SMT PE87fi0,7 ' Ill e 7! T~iI l A 1 I tt PERPETUAL ESMT IN PER 617/600 63~ • ~ s .x \ \ r TERM. OF vv\' SCAL. V - W 617/598 /g 90 sa a n m na tl \ ~i M17 f~ uMm suxl~da ¢wra :armf Imxw Wm mal~o SURVEY PREPARED BY-. C A, L LAND SURVMNC, INC. 8115 S.W. NIMBUS AVE. BEAVERTCN, OW" 97008 PKONE 641-03f18 Xe W0. 1857-TU BENCHMARK 1161011MALMON [mfx xo. s.: n eus vs a x ]]H] s1v. FIOInN61 a1MCH2 6 II[ eaw WWY ]I]L4 _wrx me tr r:MAf NoNrr f[sRW4 S1AIN6 N HF WN. ru uwm s IIES .xru¢o eo-a¢ mml¢rRm. Mr Wa'OIRf IK N 1)B eRnm 6+¢410 NR - W Rx VY1C • - -T ® - GTOM Bl.IDI t _ C6YTlgR TLL[ 0 NNF [e■ ® - WRlx11 IEIFR - [f1t¢WI lell e - W1t msaNr o _ ]NReos f- - eue+ad ~ - oU VUSR m 9FR ® - RWNM R9R o GH 1cm n - B°5AW • - w¢W1 f t - ua,Pac - - _ - enw ud . sNmWFn rkK - swr,W Uf: • N Z S3rn e~0 ~z P Ap to m n O z w Soto ~z I! ow~iiu Iwe~µH9 { ~ 1 7~wr4+a it { JPHNiNrrIHti9 ih~'tNIFN'~!I~) era~r+•~;fi~ 0 0 PROPOSED BUILDING ACCITION > lA -1 Q $ TiSARI:) MARfCETl=1.AGE _ nr q 6 FACIFIG H16HHAY @) FARfG STREET - T[C7ARP, OREGON Ma 0 s o OWNER: CAPOZZOLI ,ADVISORY FOR PENSIONS • 38345 U. TEN MELE RE).* FARMINGTON HfLL5, MI 45335 d N PROPERTY MANAGER: ELLIOTT A550CIATE5, INC. • 50 5.W. PINE 5T. 5UITE 200 4 PORTLAND, OREGON 91204 8u~ i • y Q rd • Q ~i .P Q h u r 0 a 0 • I All 7 71 N_ r z ~s . --•O 0 0 na f. - 00- i D a -o ou 0 -~a n m z rn w ri'6rn 1 - - Q 1 LI u I € m 1 J ~ a PROP05ED 5UILDING ADDITION p TIC-7ARD MARKETPLACE PAGII±IG HIGHAAY (9 PARK STREET - TIGARD, OREGON lag " D No j OWNER= CAPOZZOLI ADVISORY FOR PENSIONS • 38345 U)- TEN BILE RD,* FARMIN670N HILLS. r1l 46335 o3aijj~ ' -z PROPERTY 1-14NA5ER! ELL€OTT ASSOCIATES, INC. • 50 S.UI. PINE ST. SUITE 200 • PORTLAND, OREGON 91204 ili@ h 21 ~ i ~Im ~ 'Y! 1 ! I • • 0 NEA/EXISTIN6 A HEST ® ELEVATION o RETAIL BUILOING • NEW/EXISTIN6 5 AE5T ELEVATION CONTINUED I@ BI-MART a TI LAMP / SCHMIDT AMC NITRO T.PL. 333 sn riF nveNR DWTT 406 ,OeTL.,iD OF 17704 1'0r.13]0-091T ~Ar flM7 770-031D V Ln mr ~o A JO pa Z Q~ 111 0 O.e Q °D- t- ~ ~Z all1 ~ ~d p~ ~ zl) w z 1,5 I ~w V J~ Ow N IL Ir ww o~ R IXIDTCY E F:VArI" ELEVa p PRO.CGr NO, 91156A1 PARTIAL (NEW/EXI5T) ~ MID TOWER PLAN (p BI-MART E A Y 510N5 I A NEW KEY SITE PLAN ~a 4,0 K T. 9. • • • • Yi / i ! ! 0 ! 1 / Ze7 au: ffTSNNG DOLL o I s. I I I ( ! ! ( i ! ( r r ! r a I fl ~ I1 II . r 'llgp otf 'III r dg / ~ / ~ I I Id'A Y ( I ! / r I11 ! tpCA9p IFS - i, , ! / / / ; Qt~Ht lh y J I ~ I, I I Od0 ® I 11 / ( 4 \ A fl ( / ~ Ih PHASE ONE- PAD P REPARATION a 9 `.Ol , BLDG. )LD COUNTR BUFFET 0,000 9. F. ® 0' I { 0 BLDG. 'C' RETAIL 17,177 S.F I 1 EXISTING BUILDING 'B' BI-MART 31,113 S.F. ANCHOR 'A' I 41,310 S.F. ri i 1 I tK GrAtJ 1 TILANO / SGHMIDT APG RI TE D T9."A. 993 SA FIFTH kml m WIM 4 PORTLM OR R1204 03.0) 22O D91T PU(("g97 220O1,G d m~ 6ml ~ 70 z 1I' to 7 Q 04 o ~ -1 z W ® 1 W7:3 p~ 6U uzW u rZ dV I- d) 3 Z It f- mU W Z 0? ° o0 I qw JLo O Q Y- ~ LLI o. PN0,7LT NO, 91!36 ry fe RuM GRAM OY R~ uaien a . we aeVis oN6 APP ~.I • • • Ah TILAND J SGHMIDT A.GNIT. G T IL IA. 939 9 Fl' AV9l1! VATS 10S P,MTLANO OR 17106 (903) 2=-- 11 FAN MM) 770•BSIS xamw Ill -T. I m vz 0 w UJ o ~ zo OQ Z~ p 11 A 0 U-7 a ~y • ~ V ~ I W~ z £ a ~ EWU W z 4 uJ 3 IL I, z ! v u3i CL 6 z z ` g Q ~ m iri zw - a o32, ~Q Q J~ W IL Na v 0 O 1 tit I O I Y Q O I I o1. 0 - 1~:F I~~I~I II ~ I~ I III I .u- _ [arts EE H7 _ oe _.-F__-_~___1. 1 I I-- - I EXISTING WEST ELEVATION (CONTINUED) BI-MART 4 Va... 1•.0- l~ ww ~a o~ E><IB11NG D All P1PVAtIam FRO.=T W. 91156.01 WRY Lp.£lIH111p, }Yfl D0.aRl T A UlGlim T \ fb \ p[YISIONB n EXISTING KEY SITE PLAN KT 8. EXISTING WEST ELEVATION EXISTING SOU ELEVATION EXISTING 3 WEST ELEVATION & LEASE BUILDING • EXI5TIN6 WEST PLAZA s OLD COUNTRY BUFFET a • • 0 EXI5TIN6 3 WE5® PLAZA m LEASE BUILDING N C EXI5TIN6 jp~ KEY 51TE PLAN H T. 9. ft a EXI5TIN6 2 SOUTH PLAZA @ OLD COUNTRY BUFFET EXI5TIN6 !NEST PLAZA (p BI-MART N 44 ve°, • FEATURES HOUSING - Rugged, .063" thick, aluminum rectilinear housing. • Continuously seam welded for weathertight seal and integrity. Standard finish is dark bronze (DDB) polyester powder. Other powder architectural colors available. DOOR FRAME - Naturally anodized, extruded aluminum door frame with mitered corners is retained with two.188" diameter hinge pins and secured with one quarter-turn, quick-release fastener. Weatherproof seal between housing and door frame is accomplished with an integrally-designed, extruded sili- cone gasket that snaps into door frame. LENS - .125' thick, impact-resistant tempered glass with ther- mally-applied, silk-screened power door shield. MOUNTING - Extruded 4" aluminum arm for pole or wall mount- ing shipped in fixture carton. Optional mountings available. OPTICS Reflectors are anodized and segmented for superior uniformity and control, which allows the flexibility to mix dis- tributions without compromising the overall lighting job. Re- flectors attach with tool-less fasteners and are rotatable and interchangeable. Four cutoff distributions available: Type 11 {roadway), Type III (asymmetric), Type IV (forward throw), Type V Isquare symmetrical). ELECTRICAL SYSTEM - Constant-wattage autotransformer is 100% copper wound and factory tested. Removable power door and positive-locking disconnect plug. SOCKET - Porcelain, horizontally-oriented, mogul-base socket with copper alloy, nickel plated screw shell and center con- tact UL listed 150OW- 60OV. LISTING - UL listed for wet locations. Listed and labeled to comply with Canadian Standards (see Options), • • Catalog Number Type Arm-Mounted Rectilinear Cutoff Lighting Specifications EPA: 2.0 ft2 (.28m2) (includes arm) Length: 25 -5(16 (64.3) Width: 18-112 (47,0) Depth: 8-5116 (21.1) Weight: 52 Ibs (23.6kg) Arm: 4 (10.2) - Arm -I L - IALIDE 40OW hinting 7 D All dimensions are inches Icentimetersl unless otherwise specified. Moungna Qdilfl Drilling Template SP)mRPlocDA12P 5 W8)mDA12WB B WW,a 7 ORDERING INFORMATION Example: KSF2 400M R3120 SP04 SF DDB Choose the boldface catalog nomenclature that best suits your needs and write it on the appropriate line. Order accessories as separate catalog number. KSF2 400M Series Voltage Mounting1O Options KSF2 320MJ 120 SP04 Square pole 14' arm) Shipped Installed In Fixture Architectural Colors KSF2 350M' 2082 (standardls SF Single fuse 1120, 277, 347V, life TB) (powder finish)' KSF2 4DOM" 2402 SP09 Square pole IT arm) OF Double fuse (208, 240, 4BOV, nla TB) Standard Colors RP04 Round pole (4" arm)' PER NEMA twist-lock receptacle only (no DOB Dark bronze (standardl Distribution 217 RP09 Round pole (9' arm} photocontrol) DWH White 347 ORS Quartz restrike system 175W max; lamp OBL Black R2 IES Type II roadway 4602 WW04 Wood pole or wall ' not included,120V only) R3 IES Type III asymmetric Tga 14 arm) EC Emergency circuit Classic Colors IES Type IV forward throw R 4 4 WWO9 Wood pole or wall CR Corrosion-resistant finish DMB Medium bronze R IES Type square IT arm) ' CSA Listed and labeled to comply with DNA Natural aluminum WB04 Wall bracket (4 arm) Canadian Standards OSS Sandstone WB09 Wall bracket (9- arm) LS Lamp support DGC Charcoal gray MB Mounting bracket SCWA Super CWA Pulse Start Ballast (TB only} QTG Tennis green NOTES: UARM When ordering KMA LLRPPL Low Loss Reactor Pulse Start Ballast DBR Bright red I Use E028 reduced jacket lamp. OA12 1277V only) OSS Steel blue 2 Consult factory for availability in Canada. Shipped separatelys 3 Optional multi-tap ballast (120, 208, 240, 277V1. (120, 277, 347V in Canada). OPTIONAL MOUNTING PEI NEMA twist-lock PE 1120, 208,240V) 4 SP09, RP09, or WW09 must be used when (shipped separately) PE3 NEMA twist-lock PE (347V) two or more luminaires are oriented on a 90' drilling pattern. DA12P Degree arm (pole) PE4 NEMA twist-lock PE (48OV) 5 May be ordered as accessory. DA12WB Degree arm {wall) PE7 NEMA twist-lock PE (277V) 6 Additional architectural colors available; KMA Mast arm adapter SC Shorting cap for PER option see Architectural Colors brochure. 7 May be ordered with SCWA or LLRPSL. KTMB Twin mounting bar KSF2HS House side shield IR2,R3) 8 Must be ordered with SCWA or LLRPSL. KSF2VG Vandal guard 9 Refer to technical data section in Outdoor Accessories: Tenon Mounting Slipi fitter binder for drilling template. Order as separate catalog num er. Number of fixtures Tenon O.D. One Two®180° TwoQW'4 Three®120° ThreeQ9V4 Four®90o4 2-318' T20-190 T20-280 T20-290 T20-320 T20-390 T20.490 2-718' T25-190 T25-280 725-290 T25-320 T25.390 T25-490 4' T35-190 735-280 735-290 T35-320 735.390 T35.490 fA Jr ®'91""A/S® / 1F/-XW7_A1AZM. 595-KSF7 .,"f2 • KSF2 400M Arm-Mounted Rectilinear Cutoff Lighting,: ~ 11 Coefficient of thilizalion ]itial Footcandles R2 ED-28 Test no.93031801 KSF2 R3 ED-28 Test no. 94100501 COEFFICIENT OF UTILIZATION COEFFICIENT OF UTILIZATION .0 .1 2 3 .4 3 .0 .1 .2 .S •4 ,5 -i 1 25 1 0,5 0.25 O.l 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 4DOW metal halide lamp, 32,000, rated lumens. Footcandle values based on 30' mounting height, distribution Type II, cutoff. u z a 7 O z z a 0 KSF2 R5S ED-2$ Test no. 93051801 COEFFICIENT OF UTILIZATION • 2.5 1 0.5 0.25 0.1 .0 .1 2 3 .4 3 2 1 0 1 Z 3 4 c 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 40OW metal halide lamp, 32.000 rated lumens. Footcandle values based on 30' mounting height, distribution Type V. cutoff. i z z 6 N Z U Z Q 0 5 2.5 1 0.5 0.25 0.1 i x i 2 0 z 0 1 ~ A H z z s 4 0 5 0 ] 2 S 4. 5 6 40OW metal halide lamp. 32,000 rated lumens. Footcandle values based on 30` mnuntinn height. distribution TYUB III, cutoff. NOTES: 1. For electrical characteristics, consult technical data tab. 2. Tested to current (ES and NEMA standards under stabilized laboratory conditions. Various operating factors can cause differences between labo- ratory and actual field measurements. Dimensions and specifications are based on the most current available data and are subject to change. 3. Photometric data for other distributions can be accessed from the Lithonia Lighting website. Iwww.Litho nis.coml • KSF2 R4 ED-28 Test no. 93041301 COEFFICIENT OF UTILIZATION n 11 7 1 d S 2.5 1 03 0.25 0.1 1 x C 0 1 ~ O 2 2 2 3 a 4 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 40OW metal halide lamp, 32,000 rated lumens. Footcandle values based on 30' mounting height, distribution Type IV, cutoff. Mounting Height Correction Factor (Multiply the fc level by the correction factor) 25 h.. 1.44 32 ft- .88 35ft-.73 Exialno Mounting HelpW a corrwtion Faetor New Mo mling Hai 595-KSF2 4fA L/THaivIA L/GHT/NG 019W Lithonie Lighting.. ReV. 9/99 595KSI'2.P65 ARCHITECTURAL OUTDOOR LIGHTING • • • FEATURES SHAFT - Weldable-grade, hot-rolle , commercial-quality carbon steel tubing with a minimum yield of 55,000 psi {11-gauge), 50,000 psi 17-gauge). Uniform wall thickness of .125' or .188'. Shafts are one-piece with a longitudinal electric resistance weld. Uniformly square in cross-section with flat sides, small corner radii and ex- cellenttorsion. Available shaft widths are 4', 5' and 6'. ANCHOR BASE- Fabricated from hot-rolled carbon steel plate that meets or exceeds a minimum yield strength of 36,000 psi. The an- chor base is provided with slotted holes. HANDHOLE-A rectangular reinforced handhole rim having nominal dimensions of 3' x 5' fdr all shafts. Included is a steel cover with attachment screws. GROUNDING -A nut holder located immediately inside the handhole rim is provided with a 112'- 13 UNC ground bolt and nut. ANCHOR BOLTS - Top 12' galvanized per ASTM A-153. Made of 3/4' or V diameter steel rod having a minimum yield strength of 55,000 psi. HARDWARE-Fasteners are high-strength galvanized zinc-plated or stainless steel. TOP CAP - Weatherproof, high-strength plastic cap provided with all drill-mount poles. FINISHES - Dark bronze (DDB) polyester powder standard. Other architectural colors available. BASE COVER -Automotive-grade ABS plastic full-cover finished to match pole. Anchor Base Poles SSS A N7f I+ C SQUARE STRAIGHT STEEL 10' to 39' Mounting ORDERING INFORMATION Choose the boldface catalog nomenclature that best suits your needs and write it in the appropriate blank. Example: SSS 30 SG OM19 DDB SSS Shaft type Nominal mounting 1~tinal shaft base size/ I F_ Mounting' 117 Options SSS height wall thickness Tenon Mounting Architectural Colors (powder finish)4 10-39 feet (See beck page.) (See back page.) Shaft Bolt Bolt Base Anchor Warehouse Template Base Orcle Projection Square Bolt Anchor Boll Number Size A B C Desoripbon DwpVn 4'C 8.112' 2.3/4'-4' 8' ABSSS-4C A818.0 PJ50004 4'G 8-112' 2.3/4--4' 8- ABSSS-4G AB30.0 PJ50004 5' 10'-12' 3.316'-4' 11- ABSSS-5 A836.0 PJ50010 6' 11'-13' 3.3/8'-4' 12-112' ABSSS-6 AB36.0 PJ50011 PT Open top Standard Colors T20 2-3/8' O.D. (7 NPSI DDB Dark bronze T25 2-7/8' 0.0. (2-1/2' NPSI DWH White T302 3-1/7 O.D. (3N PSI DBL Black T352 4' 0.0. 13-112' NPSI Classic Colors Drill Mounting DMB Medium bronze DM19x1 1 at 901 DNA Natural aluminum DM28x3 2 at 180° DSS Sandstone OM28 PL3 2 at 180° with one side DGC Charcoal gray plugged DTG Tennis green DM29x3 2 at 90• DBR Bright red DM39x3 3 at 90° DSB Steel blue DM49x3 4 at 90• GALV Galvanized finish IMPORTANT: • Do not erect poles without having fixtures installed. • Factory-supplied templates must be used when setting anchor bolts. Lithonia will not accept claim for incorrect anchorage placement due to failure to use lactory template. • if poles are stared outside. all protective wrapping must be removed immediately to prevent finish damage. • Lithonia is net responsible for the foundation design. AAL/THON/A L/GHT/NG ARCHITECTURAL OUTDOOR LIGHTING 135-POLE NOTES: 1 When ordering tenon mounting and drill mounting for the same pole, follow this example: DM28/T20. 2 3-1/2' and 4' tenons available on 5' and W shahs only. 3 The drilling template to be used for a particular luminaire depends on the luminaire that is used. Drilling Template Drilling for Renlace Reference Luminaire Series 1 1 ORCGI,ORDG1 2 2 KRES1 3 3 KRE1, KRES2, KSES1, ORCG2, ORD132 4 4 KRE2, KSES2.ORC1, ORC2, ORD1, OR02 Blank 5 All other Lithonia Area Luminaires Rarer to Technical Data Section or Outdoor Binder for Drilling Templates. 4 Additional architectural colors available; see paint brochure. SSS Square Straight Steel Poles • 0 TECHNICAL INFORMATION EPA (ltt) with 13 gust Catalog Number Nominal mounting height (feet) Pale Shaft Size in x in x ft wall Thickness (inches) Gauge, 80 mph Max. weight 90 : mph Max weight 100 mph Max wet ht Bolt Circle (inches) Bolt Size (in. x in. x in.) Approximate ship weight (pounds) SSS 10 4C 10 4.0 x 10.0 0.125 11 30.6 765 23.8 595 18.9 473 8--9 3/4 x 18 x 3 75 SSS 12 4C 12 4.0 x 12.0 0.125 11 24.4 610 18.8 470 14.8 370 84 314 x 18 x 3 90 SSS 14 4C 14 4.0 x 14.0 0.125 11 19.9 498 15.1 378 11.7 293 8•-9 3/4 x 18 x 3 100 SSS 16 4C 16 4.0 x 16.0 0.125 11 15.9 398 11.8 295 8.9 223 8--9 3/4 x 18 x 3 115 SSS 18 4C 18 4.0 x 18.0 0.125 11 12.6 315 9.2 230 6.7 168 8--9 3/4 x 18 x 3 125 SSS 20 4C 20 4.0 x 20.0 0.125 11 9.6 240 6.7 167 4.5 150 8--9 314 x 18 x 3 140 SSS 20 413 20 4.0 x 20.0 0.188 7 16.5 415 12.25 310 9.3 240 8--9 314 x 30 x 3 198 SSS 20 5C 20 5.0 x 20.0 0.125 11 17.7 443 12.7 343 9.4 235 10--12 1 x 36 x 4 185 SSS 20 5G 20 5.0 x 20.0 0.168 7 28.1 703 21.4 535 16.2 405 I 10--12 1 x 36 x 4 265 SSS 25 4C 25 4.0 x 25.0 0.125 11 4.8 150 2.6 100 1.0 50 6--9 3/4 x 18 x 3 170 SSS 25 4G 25 4.0 x 25.0 0.188 7 10.8 270 7.7 188 5.4 135 8--9 314 x 30 x 3 245 SSS 25 5C 25 5.0 x 25.0 0.125 11 9.8 245 6.3 157 33 150 10--12 1 x 36 x 4 225 SSS 25 513 25 5.0 x 25.0 0.188 7 18.0 350 12.6 350 9.0 250 10-12 1 x 36 x 4 320 SSS 30 4G 30 4.0 x 30.0 0,188 7 6.4 160 4.0 100 2.3 58 ' 8•-9 314 x 30 x 3 295 SSS 30 5C 30 5.0 x 30.0 0.125 11 4.7 150 2.0 50 j 10--12 1 x 36 x 4 265 SSS 30 511 30 5.0 x 30.0 0.188 7 10.7 267 6.7 167 3.9 100 ' 10--12 1 x 36 x 4 380 SSS 30 GG 30 6.0 x 30.0 0.188 7 15.7 392 10.2 257 6.4 160 11--13 1 x 36 x 4 520 SSS 35 5G 35 5.0 x 35.0 0.168 7 5.9 150 2.5 100 10--12 1 x 36 x 4 440 SSS 35 6G 35 6.0 x 35.0 0.188 7 9.5 237 5.0 150 1.8 50 11--13 1 x 36 x 4 540 SSS 39 6113 39 6.0 x 39.0 0.188 7 5.1 128 1.3 33 11--13 1 x 36 x 4 605 BASE DETAIL HANDHOLE ORIENTATION' POLE OPTIONS SUFFIX. DESCRIPTION FDL' Festoon Outlet- less electrical FGLI Festoon GFI Outlet-less electrical HI-18S Horizontal Arm Bracket- 1 fixture VD Vibration Damper L/AB Less Anchor Bolts HH I t Extra Handhole HHC Nandhole Cover NOTES: 1 Sped. iocation and orientation when IMPORTANT: order-.; specify orientation from • Those specifications are intended for general purposes only. Lithonia reserves the right to change handr,:•e and height in feet above base). material or design, without prior notice, in a continuing effort to upgrade its products. 2 Comb: anon of tenon top and drill mount • Installation requires grout to be packed under base to ensure full contact with foundation requir¢s extra handhole. 135-POLE 'A L/rM,WVI4 L/GHT//VG Ot9941 Lrlhonia Lighting, aev s>ge ARCHITECTURAL OUTDOOR LIGHTING 135POLE.P85 P.O. BOX A. CONYERS, GSORGIF 3x+2. TELEPHONE no-922-9000, FAX 770493-2835 IN CANADA: 1 100 50TH AVE.. LACHNE QUEBEC H8T 2V3, A UNIT OF N.S.I. HOLDINGS, INC. 0 • 18" -ce 12, - 22 - 22 ' SL SR16-CA SL SR16-SS 1 L 6 ~ 4 5 1 1 I 1j` SCALE:1/a'=1' HEAD SLSR24GR3 • ARM WMA 16 POLE • OPTIONS • 2-SL SR30 SL SH24 SSA / SLA4 SR24H3 SL SH' 5LA20A-2 • PR5-5R20 BC5-5 PR4-41110 M-41.15 • BC2-4 • 13 LI N WALL BRACKET R D: 100/100 WATT MEDIUM BASE L-V q 175/100 WATT M L/MEDIUM BASE METAL HALIDE IL)Uoe e~2 Optional Trims (Bottom Appearances) 72% Efficiency Wei 62% Efficiency Optional Mount -tat±} ' rL S:'u Regressed Fresnel Option -FR 74% Efficiency (W R5 i 241) 63% Efficiency (WR51242) . f Regressed Fclophane Option -HO 75% Efficiency (wR5124 t ) 671% Efficiency (WR51242) Flat Trim Option -FT Direct-Indirect: Indoor Illumination Features Lan ;p; • 2-100 watt coated E/ED-17 universal (direct and indirect) for WR51241. 175 watt coated ED/BT-28 universal (direct), 100 watt coated EIED-17 universal (indirect) for WR51242. •See Option -43 for optional lower wattage. • Option -23 fol Mercury, Option -24 for HPS. • Horizontal. Medium base pulse rated for WR51241 and indirect only for WR51242. Horizontal. Mogul base for WR51242 direct only. • Glazed porcelain- • Nickel-plated brass screw shell Silicone leads. • Speculai Alzak® aluminum. Direct: • Seamless tapered black OptiGroove with white interlocking flange Flat Trim - Fresnel • i absorbing tempered low brightness Option -FT-FR prismatic glass. Ballad Assembly • WhisperPack° fully encapsulated 180° C rated HPF ballast. • Premium Class H high reactance with 5.12 regulation (140 watt) or CWA with 10:10 regulation (175 watt). • Capacitor and ignitor mounted in arm. (For -PM, mounted in cylinder.) • 120 volt standard or see optional voltages • Cool, quiet, long-life Silicone leads • Fused primary Renewable Aids servicing Housi: • Seamless, deep-dii acrylic enameled aluminum- • Cool: Dissipates heat across entire surface area. • Rustproof- Exceeds 1000 hour ASTM 5 io salt spray test • No visible cylinder hardware Wall bracket and white finish are standard + 7' wall bracket extrusion assembled to housing. Wall plate included. • Indoor only for covered ceiling use Indirect. r I = • i absorbing tempered prismatic glass on Damp or dry locations upper reflector (WR51241 only). - Screen rid on upper reflector (WR51242 l i Year Flat Trim - Holophane only). • Complete standard fixture • Pendant: Option -PM Option -FT-HO Performance at a Glance CP Dstribution CP Distribution CP Distribution 7.114 ' piimn 017 16' 187 157 137 120° 2350 90' 75' 2350 .1 60• l Y 4700 4$• a 15' 30' WR51241 180° 1W 135, ,a0' 35OD 1J5f 90• 75' 3500 + 6n• 7000 4a• 0' 15• 30' WR51241-FR ,117 IW 135' 120` 2350 . 10S° 90• 75' 2350 60° a703 45, 0' 15• 30' W R51241-HO ,e4'150° 12SP 1 80'15P 120' rBO1Sr1 120` 1Ce PO• 90' 75` 75` 75' I~ 11-11r 2 - l ia. ~ 35ov 75, 3500 3S3'] n 60' 1'1' Dia. ` 1 E7 12' ~2 E Metric 7Wo 45' 7000 7W. 45' Inches x 25.4 = Mlhmeters 0' 15' 30' or 304 T r5• 30• W11 242 WR51242-FR WR51242-HO Detailed Photometric Data begins on page 52 0` 90• 180° s¢rr " Options -49 -23 -24 -35 .36 .37 38 43 -45 I-46 t Mercury ballast instead, 1001100ME (WR51241), 175MO1100ME (WR51242) standard or see Option -43. Specify voltage. HIPS ballast instead. 1001100ME (WR51241). 150M0100ME (WR51242) standard or see Option -43. Specify voltage. Silver enameled housing finish instead Gold enameled housing finish instead. Bronze enameled housing finish instead, Black enameled housing finish instead. Lower wattage medium base - specify voltage and combination wattage for WR51241 or indirect wattage only for WR51242: Metal Halide: 70, 50; Mercury: 75, 50; HPS: 70, 50, 35 Gasket above trim flange (between Irim and housing). Gasket between trim and lens. -56 -65 66 -67 -68 -94 Extra circuit DOB socket- (For downlight 100 watt max.) Must not be energized simulta- neously with main source 277 volt 50 Hz. ballast instead. Relay and DCB socket. (For downlight 100 watt max.) With fixture energized, provides immediate light during HID outage Also see Option -66. Time delay relay and DOB socket. (For down- light 140 watt max.) When energized, provides light until HID reaches 70% output. Custom -PM length. Specify 18' - 60` or consult factory. Use with Option -PM. Swivel canopy for sloped ceilings up to 45° (WR51241 only), Earthquake rated. Use with Option -PM. Custom color trim assembly of housing Consult factory -97 Other voltage ballasts. Censull factory -99 Special modification. Consult lactoiy -FR Fresnel tempered lens instead Concentric prisms. (Direct position.) -Fl Flat white trim instead. Standard x!ith UV absorbing tempered prismatic glass 01 add Option -FR or -H0. (Direct position.) -HO Holophane concave prismatic tempered lens instead. (Direct position.) -LP With lamps. Specify source wattage. color temperature and clear or coated (3200°K standard for 10OMH: 3700°K standard for 175MO metal halide) Consult factory for other color temperatures. PM Pendant mount instead. 11 T 6 48' standard or see Oplicn -67 Alzak` is a registered trademark of At COA. c 4 e ri • Dia.-1 J(IRLIN WALL BRACKET ROUND: OFFSEIGAM: 175 and 250 WATT MOGUL A METAL HALIDE WR51239 1usak CA TE 0 • Optional Mount y Pendant: Option -PM Also available Surface: Option -SM Regressed lens: hfi/A#rium/Mall Skylight/Atrium/Mall Features lamp • 175 watt coated EDlBl-28 universal for WR51238. 250 wait coated EDIBT-28 universal for WR51239. • See Option -43 for optional lower wattage. • Option -23 for Mercury, Option -24 for HPS. Sockel • Semi-vertical. Mogul base. • Glazed porcelain. • Nickel-plated brass screw shell Silicone leads. Rafli;~ctot • Specllfat Alzak® aluminum trim Asserrlbly • Seamless tapered black OptiGroove with white flange. • Self. flanged trim interlocks with housing. • UV absorbing tempered low brightness prismatic glass. Optional Trim (Bottom Appearance) ;t Flat Trim-. Option -FT Ballast Assemfyly • WhisperPaCk" fully encapsulated 180" C rated HPF ballast. • Premium Class H; CWA 10.10 regulation (175 watt) or CWA 10.9 regulation (250 watt). • Capacitor (and ignitor for 150) supplied • 120 volt standard or see optional voltages • Cool, quiet, long-life. Silicone leads Fuse • Fused primary Renewable Aids servicing Housing • Seamless. deep drawn acrylic enameled aluminum. • Cool: Dissipates heat .across entire surface area. • Rustproof: Exceeds 1000 hour ASTM 5% salt spray test • No visible cylinder hardware Wall ilracket and while finish are standard Installotlon • 7" wall bracket extrusion assembled to housing. Wall plate included. • Indoor or outdoor for covered ceiling use. • Mounting beneath surface outlet available (Option -80 for use with -SM). U1 Listing • Wet, damp, or a.y local oris covered ceilings (See Option -89). Three Yea, Limited 'No rorrty • Complete standard future. Performance at a Glance Metric: Inches x 25 4 = Millimeters wR5123A. WR51239 Plan View I I ~ I ! CP Distribution CP Distribution 90` 90` 1750 75' 3000 75` `y 60` 60' 3500 6000 a5' 45' 5250 90^0 0° 15, 30° 0` 1S` 30' - 0° SNH 1.5 a, simm 1.5 90° S/MH 1.0 90` SIMH 1.0 160' SJMH 0.7 190` SfMH 0.7 WR51238 WR51239 Detailed Photometric Data begins on page 52, Options -23 -24 -35 -36 -37 -38 •43 •45 Mercury ballast instead. 175MO (WR51238! or 250MO (WR51239) standard or see Option -43. Specify voltage. HPS ballast instead. 150MO (WR51238) o: 250MO (WR51239) standard or see Option -43. Specify voltage. Silver enameled housing finish instead Gold enameled housing finish instead. Bronze enameled housing finish instead Black enameled housing finish instead. Lower wattage - specify voltage and wattage for' Metal Halide: 150, 100. 70ME (WR51236 only); Mercury: 100. 75ME (WR51238) or 175MO (WR5123% HPS: 150, 100. 70ME (WR51238) or 150M0 (ED-28) (WR51239) Gasket above trim flange (between trim and housing). -46 Gasket between trim and lens 49 Extra circuit DCB socket. (100 watt max. WR51238; 150 watt max. WR51239.) Must not be energized simultaneously with main source. -58 277 volt 60 Hz. ballast instead. -65 Relay and DCB socket. (100 watt max. WR51238; 150 watt max. WR51239). With fixture energized, provides immediate light during HID outage. Also see Option -66. •6£ Time delay relay and DCB socket. (100 watt max. WR51238, 150 watt max WR51239) When energized, provides light until HID reaches 70% output. -80 Extension Collar with two /2 knockouts for mounting luminaire beneath surface outlet box -87 Custom -PM length. Specify up to 5 feet or consult factory Use with Option -PM. -88 Swivel canopy for ;iopeo c.eurngs up 10 45° Earthquake ra:ec. Use with Option -PM. -89 weather Cap - required when luminaire is installed wil ,out covered ceiling protection. -94 Custom color trim assemb!v or housing. Consult factory. -97 Other voltage ballasts. Consult factory -99 Special modification. Consult factory -FT Flat while trim with UV absorb no tempered prismatic glass instead LP With lamp. Specify source, wattage, color temperature. and clear or coated (3200°K standard tot MH ) Consult factory for other color tempera!ures. -PM Pendant mount !nstead 'ie' T_S , 18 standard or see Option -87. -SM Surface mount instead Also see Option -60. AlzaV ;s a registered trademark of ALCOA. • r 49% Efficiency 49% Efficiency • • gizmo tvVyAAA ORDERING CHART • Use pre lamp Note: 39W and 70W supplied with integral electrical ballast 15OW supplied with remote "F' can magnetic HPF ballast 20' 100 00 100 20° 30', 30° 40'~ ~ 2400 ~ 70° g 70° W 90° g 90° 70° _ 70° 40' KIAM~N 40° 30° cd/klm 30° 20' 10° 10° 20° t~ ~Zr N n 03 9" T o ;n ,O 4 N n ]111 I. 4.8°-I r GamO GNT 9-HID r 1 r P-Wall Bracket 70 -Textured Black 0- None 0.120V Elect. T-Clear Temp. 0 None Twin T8-39W Master Color FIN-Euro White 1-277V Elect. glass Narrow CDM T6 99 - Custom 9-120V May. R2-70W Master Color A-277V Mag. CDM T6 U2-1150W Master Color NOTE.- 39w and 70w are always 0 or 1 CRM T6 150w is always 9 or A Gizmo GNT 9-HID ' ' ' Tvrin L5-70W Master Color Wide Double Ended D1-150W Master Color 10 Double Ended 6 • Die cast al um pausing • Uses eithesingle ended or one double ended Master Color Lamp • eQ listed wet label IP 65 K • Electronic ballast R • Lamp supplied with fixture 0 • Field adjustable reflector system half beam angle propor- 3 tional from 13-32°, progressively adjustable 13 0 0 fl~o 1 designplan MEYER LIGHTING • • DIRECTIONAL SIGN. D/F ILLUMINATED EXISTING FREESTANDING TENANT SIGN REFERBISHED TOP SECTION HOUSING TIGARD MARKET PLACE. me VGAU 1toror-n° DA a e1121W naoar uur cu>~s~aa Ilea v wCOLIH►r~M M A Tigard Marketplace grdmkplA3 6 ( tr M81 vnrxA w0.4lKCiroN Y~eo (580) 889-8 FAX 7C (96 (W0) 8815848 • • 0 01-MARTI, 0 REE~~QING TENANT SIG,,. 45 SQ• FT• TOTAL. QJF ILLUTAINATED F OFD ~p gM vuso -~w ®A 1100 PlCp ~p5A'gYGARRET~CO SCALE 1}u 'IT ~ P tigrdm~~P1.~ Y `i m , ace 9 +C NC0INI:R WASHINGTON 986 694!3 811 VA HARI() 60-9081 FAX (3r-0) • • 0 0 ~a T I& A N D / S C H M• D T A R C H i T E C T 5. P . C . Pre-Application Protect Description Tigard Market Place Tigard, Oregon November 22,1999 The proposed additions and renovations to the existing Tigard Market Place will entail the construction of additional floor area to the front and rear of the vacant grocery store building, the renovation of the storefront and plazas of the existing in-line retail building, demolition of the existing paint store building to make room for the relocation of the right-in 1 and right-out drives onto Hvq. 99 and the realignment of the parking lot; which wiil include new overall lighting. The existing center has been in operation for appfoximatel_y ten years with multiple tenants and the grocery anchor under several different names. The grocery building is currently vacant. This proposed renovation and overall remodel will provide a larger grocery building to be constructed. The portion of the project that is being submitted on at this time is the remainder of the work that is anticipated for the site. Phase One documents have been submitted to the Planning and Building Departments, and these • include the proposed preparation of the pad area around the anticipated expansion area at the grocery store building. These documents include the utility relocation required for the expanded building, and the continuation of the retaining Nvall at the rear of the building. The Phase One documents are currently being reviewed and City comments are being addressed as they arise. The initial intent for construction of the work listed under Phase One was to complete the work months prior to the commencement of the remainder of the project. This has been delayed due to the number of comments noted on Phase One, which includes additional information being submitted prior to a permit being acquired. It appears at this time that the Phase One work will commence as soon as the information has been completed and approved through the building department. At this time, Phase One will be completed just prior to the work beginning on the project noted within the documents submitted for review. DEMOLITION OF PAINT STORE AND RELOCATION OF ACCESS A key componant of this project will be the removal of the building currently being used for the paint store. This building is schedule to be demolished with the intent of realigning the right-in / right-out access to Highway 99. The removal of the building will allow greater visibility to the new Haggen building, and the realignment of the drive will allow for greater movement off the highway. Knowing that any access drives to state highways continues to be a very sensitive issue, the design team has been working with ODOT over the last six months or so to bring these issues to the forfront as soon as possible. It is our understanding that the City has had discussions with ODOT 33. S.W. FIFTH AVENUE. SUITE 406 PORTLAND. OREGON 97204 f ~10: 1 220-851 7 FAX (?03) 220-85 18 T OL A N D / S C H A D T A R C H I T E C T S . P . C Tigard Market Place Tigard, Oregon Pre-Application Review Narrative Page 2 of 3 over the last few months on this right-in 1 right-out driveway, and so it is assumed that ODOT has indicated there overall opinions. Kittelson and Associates is currently the Traffic Engineer and will remain as the Traffic Engineer for the duration of the project. More information addressing this issue is currently being gathered and will be discussed further in the near future. This will be an issue that will need to be specifically discussed during Pre-Application. EXPANSION OF THE GROCERY STORE The grocery store building is currently at 41,310 square feet, and is being designed up to the maximum square footage of 59,400 square feet. The expanded square footage has been reviewed by Bob Poskin and the Architect working specifically on the building for compliance with the code and have agreed that this square footage will be acceptable. We appreciate the review of the maximum square footage as a part of the Phase One review. This information will allow the Site Review process to run smoother. The proposed exterior elevations of the grocery store are included and indicate a well detailed fagade with the use of brick and materials that will allow the south end of • the building to develop a much greater draw, which has been missing upto this point. The grocery stores that occupied the building over the last ten years have all gone under due to several reasons. It is believed that one main reason is the poor visibility to the store as one is driving north on highway 99, and second is that the grocery store was not a dynamic enough place to draw the number of people needed to allow the location to be successful. This is now completelN rectified, with the additional square footage being added to the building and the quality of the grocer, which is Haggen. Although the portion of the project that was noted as Phase One was submitted early, there is not any portion of this project that can be singled out as a component that can be eliminated from the overall project without it affecting another part. More on these:issues later. IN-LINE STOREFRONT RENOVATION In connection with the rebuilding of the grocery building, the exterior storefront facades for the entire in-line building will be renovated. At this time, the existing canopies and steel tower elements will be demolished and new towers constructed. The drawings that have been provided indicate the extent or initial ideas for these buildings. The new towers xvill be constructed approximately forty feet high. At this time, the Pad buildings are not a part of this project. Each of the tenants using these buildings may make changes or improvements in connection with the work • being done on site, however, this proposal does not include these buildings 333 S,NV, FIFTH AVENUE. SMITE 406 PORTLAND. OREGON 972(14 (503) 220-9517 FAX 1503) 220-8518 T 4W A N D / S C H MO D T A R C H. I T E C T S . P . C . • Tigard Market Place Tigard, Oregon Pre-Application Review Narrative Page 3 of 3 SITE PARKING AND LIGHTING REALIGNMENT In an effort to provide a more uniform site layout, the parking on the north side of the main drive has been realigned. A new pedestrian pathway is incorporated within this realignment which connects the highway with approximately the center of the building. This pedestrian .vay has been noted on the Phase One review documents as needing to be incorporated as a part of phase one. it is requested at this time to make this pedestrian way a part of the second phase, due to the impact on the parking. The realignment of the parking impacts the lighting and the landscaping. The drawings that have been submitted indicate the overall site in a completed condition. Should any department of the City need to be reassured that the pedestrian way will not be located should it become a future requirement, this should not be a concern. The intent of the proposed project, from the start of phase one to the completion of the new grocery store and the exterior renovations, is in reality one continuous project. The documentation for Phase One was developed with the intent of getting a' portion of the project underway and hopefully ahead of the date that the pad has been promised to Haggen. However, Phase One construction will not be started should any issues arise that would kill the deal between Haggen and the Property Owner. So in affect, although documented as several projects, this renovation is truly one continuous project with the intent of remodeling the shopping center and providing the necessary land area necessary for an expanded grocery store. In conclusion, the property owners are very excited about this project. It has taken some time to develop the appropriate design and considerations for this renovation. It is anticipated that beginning with the pre-application conference each requirement of the Site Development Review Process will follow in as an expeditious timeframe as possible. We look forward to the Pre- Application Conference and will follow as soon as possible with the Neighborhood to discuss this project. 971 5G'prcappi.doc 33? S.W FIFTH AVENUE. SUITE 406 PORTLAND. OREGON 97204 U '_20-8~ 17 FAX (;0;} 220-85, 18 .t t ~t~k.~,~.r~~.Q Na :w,•;~-y:FY~e'-~ E"~E-. IECdiEO(1,7T eCilEi VACS - C aiu~~w v wriuE~ ±,rsep~rti.F-~!~,~s.•-r:.r,~-Ws:-.f~:~:.~ NON-RESIDENTIAL P94M KIG. DAIE: ator~ TIM( AT MAP?.: E APPLICANT: t(-a h K C h ft! AGENT: Phone: 9S 1-1 Phone: PROPERTY LOCATION: TAX MAP(WLOT #(S): NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: CCA F r nn A 111 NA A~ FYtO, ~1r1~ _ Av<rl~ r-'A~ ~m 4e., W Oot[ &0-, ii- r Stzi G C VX fY~~ i i'tti+ c t ✓l"r j~1ei V t 0. aC G ~i i nn~3'1 u~ d C YYUC-.,* S ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: - &761 C.I.T. AREA: FACILITATOR: PHONE: ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT SIZE: ors sq. ft. LBi rage lot width: 50 ft Maximum building height:- ft: Setbacks: Front C) ft. Side 10 ft. Rear RAL Corner ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: ;5 % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: 1S (Refer to Cade Section 18. _Sao I ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2'/z TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1'/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. {Referto Code Section 18.810.0601 aff OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 019 A%-"e-ul ~ li n fi z kaior SPECIAL SETBACKS > STREETS: feet from the centerline of • ➢ LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet, along the site's boundary. ➢ FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK.- (Beier to Code Chapter 10.7301 SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS HEIGHT BUILDING EXCEPTIONS - Buildings located in a .non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided that: A maximum building floor area to site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist: All actual building setbacks will be at least half ('/2) of the building's height; The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. (Refer to Code Section 18.730.010.8.] PARKING AND ACCESS 1: ~r L;YPD: REOUIRGD l,G. r f.^r t.;,. v 1... Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): - SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): Minh and -Able- At fla,AcJ V ftAklh- ry a k~ y~~bd~ j a 1OXAD 6yt11 I ~I~I f I O Pryrm,cd'-s?r-1 -5 pc~crs [L0 MORE THAN 40% of required spaces may be designated and/or dimensioned as compact spaces. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 6 inches x 18 feet, 6 inches. ➢ Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 inches x 16 feet, 6 inches. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3) feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. [Refer to Code Section 18.765.0401 Handicapped Parking: 9 All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. ➢ BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. ( t4ic\ Sol 0_~-dtk w1 (461 44,u 6- ~~~~r~ Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: 3l~ ;Ai~J 11 Minimum pavement width: All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: (Referto Code Chapters 18.765 and 18.7051 MY OF TIGARD Pre-Appliauon Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 NffArw:6a l lppSa6wMunint 0~t1 s•aw WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS 0 0 WALKWAYS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-buildirig commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. tReferto Code Section 18305.6301 LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. tReferto code section 18.765.0801 CLEAR VISION AREA The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EiGi-II t81 FELT iN l-,EIGt:i c: rC12d;<6l'J(.waV, rC.:..~"~_ .~c.G, ~:.'ils f~:=C!;CF., i:14:G;;G.~'•`i5. The •SiZE3 of the required dear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7951 BUFFERING AND SCREENING In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE IN OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped -buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are • described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous k and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7451 The REQUIRED BUFFER WIDTHS which areapplicable to our proposal area are as follows• feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. D feet along oath bou danf feet along west boundary. w~►crc a-b u-~•i, ny ~ rc~,ic.~e vrt ~o IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: LANDSCAPING STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private.property within six. (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of t east two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised planters. For detailed information on design requirements for parking areas and accesses. [Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 183051 CRT Of TIGARD Pre-AppliGtioo (onference Notes Page 3 of 9 Ii01;d,;i~droritl l.~~.Utior.9Unr~~ C"i" Section SIGHS SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED -PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or • height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for review before the Hearings Officer. (Refer to Code Chapter 183801 SENSITIVE LANDS TRe.Code provides REGULATIONS D LOPMENT DUE TO ARE DRAI AGEWAYS, WETLAND ARI UNST LE GROUND. Staff will a aoplicati conference based on ~L ,CANDS ICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUIT LE FOR WITHIN T 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, ATURAL ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERC T, OR ON t to preliminary identify sensitive lands ar s at the pre- e information. WEVER, the si ' i to r isel Chapter 18.84 Iso provides r ,Agulations for the areas. T EN PRO [Refer to Co hapt 6.7151 of sensitive lands S'iEEP n STEEP SLOPES exist, or to issuance a final order, a geotechnical r must be su'ed which addresses t approval standards the Tigard Communit velopment Code Secti8.775.080.0. Th port shall be based upon d exploration investigation and shall include sp eco dations for achieving the requirem ion 18.775.080.0. UNIRED SEWERAGE AGENCY [USA] RUM STANDARDS, R & 0 96-14 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive • area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 25-FEET-WIDE, measured horizontatly, from the defined boundaries of the sensitive area, except where approval has been granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce the width of a portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed to an area.of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable encroachment shall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of the length of the vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in width. In any case, the average width of the vegetated comdor shall be 'a minimum of 25 feet. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: ➢ A GRAVEL WALKWAY OR BIKE PATH, NOT EXCEEDING EIGHT (8) FEET IN WIDTH. If (he walkway or bike path is paved, then the vegetated corridor must be widened by the width to the path. A paved or gravel walkway or bike path may not be constructed closer than ten (10) feet from the boundary of the sensitive area, unless approved by the Agency or City. Walkways and bike paths shall be constructed so as to minimize disturbance to existing vegetation; and ➢ WATER QUALITY FACILITIES may encroach into the vegetated corridor a maximum of ten (10) feet with the approval of the Agency or City. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. (Refer to R s 0 96-4VUSA Regulations -Chapter 3, D esign for SWMf M Of PGARD Pre•A~y*S,"icxlion Conference Notes Fage 4 of 9 MPi.te~+6eetid k''VIk1,;,rJPLn_e Viii = SMao.. WATER RES URGES OVERLAY OISTRI~' 0 The ATER RESOURCES (WR) OVERLAY DISTRICT implements the pol' es of the Tigard Comp ensive Plan and is intended to resolve conflicts between develop nt and conservation of sign i nt wetlands, streams and riparian corridors identified in th City of Tigard Local Wetlands entory. Specifically, this chapter.allows reasonable econo is use of property while establishing ear and objective standards to: protect significant tlands and streams; limit development in esignated~ riparian corridors; maintain and enhanc water quality; maximize flood storage capacity; eserve.native plant cover; minimize streamba erosion; maintain and enhance fish and wildli€e itats; and conserve scenic, recreational nd educational .values of water resource areas. Safe Harbor: The WR OVERLAY DISTR T ALSO MEETS THE REQ REMENTS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 (Natural Resources) d the "safe harbor" prov' ions of the Goal 5 administrative rule (OAR 660, Division 23). These prov, 'ons require that "s nifcant" wetlands and riparian corridors be mapped and protected. The Tua tin River, which ' also a "fish-bearing stream," has an average annual flow of more than 1000 cfs. Major Streams: Streams which are mapped as "FISH-BEA G STREAMS" by the Oregon Department of Forestry and have an average annual flow less than 0 cubic feet per second (cfs). ➢ Major streams in Tigard inclucg `FANN(S~ ' CREEK, ASH CRIEEh tEX,0EFT THE NORTH FORK AND OTHER TRIBUTARY CREEKQND BALL CREEK. Minor Streams: Streams which are NOT "FISH-B RING STREAMS" a rding to Oregon Department of Forestry maps . Minor streams in Tigar include Summer Creek, rry Dell Creek, Red Rock Creek, North Fork of Ash Creek and certain ort tributaries of the Tualatin Ever. Riparian Setback Area, This AREA IS MEASUR HORIZONTALLY FROM AND PA LEL TO MAJOR STREAM OR TUALATIN RIVER TOP F-BANKS, OR THE EDGE OF AN ASS IATED WETLAND, whichever is ggreater. The ripari setback is the same as the "riparian torrid boundary" in OAR 660-23- 090(1)(d). ➢ The standar TUALATIN RIVER RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 75 ET, unless modified in accordan with this chapter. ➢ The MAJ R STREAMS RIPARIAN SETBACK IS 50 FEET, nu less m ified in accordance with this apter. 9 .ISO ED WETLANDS AND MINOR STREAMS (including adjacent w lands) have no. ripari n setback; however, a 25-foot "water quality buffer" is required under Unified Sewerage Agen y (USA) standards adopted and administered by the City of Tigard. LReterto Code Section 18397.0301 Riparian Setback ctions The DIRECTO AY APPROVE A SITE-SPECIFIC REDUCTION OF THE TUALATIN RIVER OR ANY MAJOR ST M RIPARIAN SETBACK BY AS MUCH AS 50% to allow the placement of structures or imPerviou rfaces otherwise prohibited by is"chapter, provided that equal or better protection for identified mad stream resources is a red through streambank restoration and/or enhancement of riparian vegetal in preserved ions of the riparian setback area. the riparian corridor was sub: determination must be based • demonstrates all of the followini ➢ Native plant specie pp , GTY Of RGARD Pre- moo (Hi erence Notes . Page 5 or 4 "-r6.1ro c~ A, pKat"e,FR7nfm(' D,6" Stgar REDUCTION, the applicant must demonstrate that disturbe t the time this regulation was adopted. This Vegetation 'SWdy required by Section 18.85.050.C. that ntly cover less than 80% of th~n-site riparian corridor area; ➢ The tree canopy currently covers less than 50% of the on"--site riparian corridor and healthy trees have not been removed from the on-site riparian setback a for the last five years; ➢ That vegetation was not removed contrary to the provisions of Sec ' n 18.85.050 regulating removal of native lant s ecies~