Hearings Officer Packet - 07/24/2000•
CITY OF TIGARD
HEARINGS OFFICER
JULY 24, 2000 - 7:00 PM
A G E R D A
I . CALL TO ORDER
2. PUBLIC HEARING
2.1 APPEAL OF CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION (@ 154TH AVENUE
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2000-00003
CITY OF TIGARD
Community (Development
Shaping ,g Better Community
ITEM ON APPEAL: On June 2, 2000, the City of Tigard approved a request to partition a 1.14 acre lot into 2 parcels.
The property was originally acquired by the Water District for access to the recently completed Menlor Reservoir. The
access is now no longer necessary and the partition would have separated the access to the reservoir from the
remaining 1.35 acres. The 1.35 acres would then be able to be sold and/or built upon.
On June 16, 2000 an appeal was filed stating that City staff failed to adequately address the following: public access
and egress to the trailhead and park via SW 154' Avenue, adequate public facilities, tree preservation, erosion, storm
drainage, and nature trail specifications.
LOCATION: 13230 SW 154" Avenue; WCTM 2S105DB, Tax Lot 00600. The subject site is located south of SW Scholl's
Ferry Road, at the end of SW 154' Avenue.
ZONE: Multiple-Family Residential, 25 Units Per Acre; R-25. The R-25 zoning district is designed to accommodate
existing housing of all types and new attached single-family and multi-family housing units at a minimum lot size of
1,480 square feet. REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED: Community Development Code Chapters 18.420, 18.105,
18.165, 18.190, and 18.810. '
3. OTHER BUSINESS
4. ADJOURNMENT
•
CITY OF TIGARD HEARING's OFFICER PAGE 2 OF 2
1/24/2000 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA
0 0
CITY OF TIGARD
HEARING'S OFFICER
JULY 24, 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) 639-4111, Ext.
320 (voice) or (503) 684-2112 (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 TIGARD HEARING'S OFFICER PAGE I OF 2
1/24/2000 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA
0 0
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4,l
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.1 • (PAGE I OF
OTE: JULY 24. 2000
ICI
PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND INCLUDE YOUR ZIP CODE
Proponent - (Speaking In Favor) Opponent - (Speaking Against)
lNe, oddr , Zi Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No.
JAlM1E 6. RAwtS~
R -rtZ~
o e an d Phone o. Addre s, Z91~pCod ~nd Ph no.
97~/ ~C
7~U,q o g7yy3
Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No.
s
Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Addre S, Zi Code and Phone No.
os2 ;71,,7,- 3
Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name,`Ad ress, Zip Code and Phone No.
~s3g6 sw
Tty ,ol o R- ?nz- 3 "a_9s1Z-
r
Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip CodQ and Phone No.
j-"j S~b MsaY-)
i Sa$& SU) F- lre.TeFlic- ~fz( •e
11UAiL-ell 2,*~ i!y -010-7
Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name Address, Zip Code and Phone No.
Ti~ a-►~ ; 4~- ~~-~23
F ,
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.
0 0
RECEIVED PLANGO M MUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC.
JUL 10 2000
CITY ®F T44M
•
City of Tigard
Planning Department
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Patricia Lunsford
P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360
BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075
Legal Notice Advertising
• ❑ Tearsheet Notice
• ❑ Duplicate Affidavit
•
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF OREGON, )
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss.
1, Kathy -Snyder
being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising
Director, or his principal clerk, of the Tigard Tim PC ,
a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010
and 193.020; published at in the
aforesaid county and state; that the
Pi ibl i c HPari n2/ Mr P 9000_0000?
a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the
entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and .
consecutive in the following issues:
July 6th, 2000
Subscribed and {sworn to b ore me t 'S 6th day of Julv,.
-7 D Notary Public for Oregon
My Commission Expires:
Legal
Notice
TT 9684
nr_r-rini SUZETTE 1. CURRAN
NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON
COMMISSION NO. 329400
j MY COMMISSION-EXPIRES-NOV. 28, 2003 ~
2000
AFFIDAVIT
CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC HEARING ITEM
The following will be considered by the Tigard Hearings Officer on
Monday, July 24, 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
Comprehensive 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: Mathew Scheidegger) at 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard,
Oregon 97223, or by calling 503-639-4171. A copy of the application and
all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and
the applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost. 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.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM:
"URBAN SERVICE AREA'
MINOR LAND PARTITION [MLP] 2000-00003
> APPEAL OF CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION
@ 154TH AVENUE <
ITEM ON APPEAL: On June 2, 2000, the City of Tigard approved a
request to partition a 1.74 acre lot into 2 parcels. The property was
originally acquired by the Water District for access to the recently
completed Menlor Reservoir. The access is now no longer necessary and
the partition would have separated the access to the reservoir from the
remaining 1.35 acres. The 1.35-acres would then be able to be sold and/or--,
built upon. On June 16, 2000, an appeal was filed stating that City staff
failed to adequately address the following: public access and egress to the
trailhead and park via SW 154th Avenue, adequate public facilities, tree
preservation, erosion, storm drainage, and nature trail specifications.
LOCATION: 13230 SW 154th Avenue; WCTM 2S105DB, Tax Lot
00600. The subject site is located south of SW Scholls Ferry Road, at the
end of SW 154th Avenue. ZONE: Multiple-Family Residential, 25 Units
Per Acre R-25. The R-25 zoning district is designed to accommodate
existing housing of all types and new attached single-family and multi-
family housing units at a minimum lot size of 1,480 square f -
REVIEW CRITERIA BEING APPEALED : Community Developm~ I I!;~
Code Chapters 18.420, 18.705, 18.765, 18.790, and 18.810. I
1
1
1
1
1
1
J
1. L._ i_., ; ..•:rt-~~
~...t.i. .
_ 1"
I-Fi.illlc:
rw TV
1_1 J,
c cT_. _
T
-L J
. , 11.::.. r
W.
I .SIX.
I i
I
~Irv. !Y111_
SUUJECT
TAX LOT
T6R4 -Publish Jul 6, 2000.
9
•
BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER
FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
Regarding an appeal Jaime Ramsey of a planning ) FINAL ORDER
manager decision conditionally approving a minor )
land partition of a 1.74-acre parcel at 13230 SW ) MLP 2000-00003
154th Avenue in the City of Tigard, Oregon ) (Tigard Water Dept.)
A. SUMMARY
1. This final order concerns an appeal by Jaime Ramsey (the "appellant") of a
June 2, 2000 decision by the planning manager approving a minor land partition subject to
conditions (MLP 2000-00003).
2. The Tigard Water Department is the applicant and property owner. The
applicant proposed to divide the 1.74-acre lot into two parcels, one containing 1.35 acres
and the other containing 0.39 acres. The 0.39-acre parcel would be retained by the applicant
to continue to provide access to adjoining land on which the Menlo Reservoir is developed.
The applicant plans to market the 1.35-acre parcel, which is improved with a home and can
be further divided under City zoning (R-25, Medium Density Residential), because it is not
needed for access to the reservoir property. The southeast portion of the larger parcel is a
sensitive lands area, because it contains slopes greater than 25%. Both proposed parcels
will have frontage on SW 154th Avenue for access purposes. SW 154th Avenue was built
into the site; the applicant proposes to dedicate right of way for that improvement. The
applicant also proposes to grant to the City a 6-foot wide right of way from 154th Avenue
across the west edge of the proposed 1.35-acre parcel and to improve that right of way with
a wood and brush chip surface. Both proposed parcels comply with minimum dimensional
requirements of the Tigard Community Development Code (the "CDC").
3. In the written appeal, the appellant alleged the planning manager's decision
violates the following provisions of the CDC:
a. The decision violates CDC 18.420.050.A.2 and A.5, because there are not
adequate public facilities (i.e., off-street parking) to serve the proposed right of way for the
pathway; and it violates CDC 18.765.010.A and B, because it does not comply with off-
street parking requirements;
b. The decision violates CDC 18.705.010 and .020.A, because the partition
does not result in safe, efficient vehicle access, egress and general circulation on the site;
c. The decision violates CDC 18.790.030.A and B.3, because it does not
establish whether trees in the right of way for the pathway will be removed or whether
removal of the trees would comply with that section;
d. The decision violates CDC 18.810.010, 18.810.020.E. Lg and
18.810.020.E. 1.j, because the right of way for 154th Avenue is not wide enough;
e. The decision violates CDC 18.8 10. 100.C, because it does not provide for
public storm drains or surface water from the southeast. Also the preliminary partition map
does not comply with CDC 18.810.010 and 18.810.100.A.3, because it did not indicate
surface water drainage patterns and provide storm water easements; and
• •
f. The decision violates CDC 18.810.050.B, because the easement for the
pedestrian pathway is too narrow, and CDC 18.810.070.A.2, because it does not require the
applicant to improve the pathway as a sidewalk.
3. A hearings officer conducted a duly noticed public hearing in this matter. At that
hearing City staff and the applicant recommended the hearings officer affirm the manager's
decision and deny the appeal. Four neighbors testified orally and/or in writing in support of
the appeal. At the conclusion of the hearing, the hearings officer held open the record for
two weeks for the parties to offer additional written testimony and evidence.
4. For the reasons provided and referenced in this final order, the hearings officer
affirms the planning manager's decision. approves the preliminary partition, subject to the
conditions recommended by City staff, and denies the appeal.
B. HEARING AND RECORD
1. Tigard Hearings Officer Larry Epstein (the "hearings officer") held a duly
noticed public hearing on July 24, 2000 to receive and consider public testimony in this
matter. The record includes a witness list, materials in the casefile as of the close of the
public record, and an audio record of the hearing. At the beginning of the hearing, the
hearings officer announced 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 and the
manner in which the hearing will be conducted. The hearings officer also disclaimed any ex
parse contacts, bias or conflicts of interest. At the conclusion of the hearing, the hearings
officer ordered the record held open for two weeks for the parties to offer additional
testimony and evidence. The following a summary by the hearings officer of highlights of
the oral and written testimony.
2. City planner Mathew Scheidegger summarized the proposed partition, the
applicable approval standards and the manager's decision.
3. The appellant testified on his own and introduced a lengthy written statement.
a. The appellant argued that the planning manager concluded that certain
sections of the CDC do not apply, because no development is proposed, and because no
new use of the land in question is proposed. Based on CDC 18.120.030.A.56, the appellant
argued a partition is "development". Based on CDC 18.120.030.A.104, the appellant
argued that the partition results in a change of use by creating park space. Therefore "[a]ll
Review Criteria are applicable." (p. 2 of July 24 testimony)
b. By providing public access to more than 20 acres of forested greenspace,
the proposed partition creates a need for off-street parking and circulation under CDC
18.05.010 and.020.A. Park space is a kind of public facility for which CDC 18.765.010
requires adequate parking; therefore parking for the park space is a kind of public facility.
A partition is required to provide adequate public facilities, based on CDC 18.420.050.A.2.
c. The pathway is too narrow for several reasons:
i. It does not accommodate preservation of trees in the pathway.
CDC 18.790.030.A requires a plan identifying trees to be preserved or removed. The
preliminary partition map and accompanying exhibits do not comply with CDC
18.790.030.A, because a tree plan does not indicate which trees are to be removed or
preserved, particularly in the pathway.
Hearings Officer Final Order on Appeal
MLP 2000-00003 (Tigard Water Dept.) Page 2
• •
ii. The path is too narrow for people to pass one another, contrary to
CDC 18.810.030.E.1 J. Also it does not provide width for landscaping buffers or for use
by motor vehicles (for maintenance purposes).
iii. The path is narrow compared to the minimum width of a utility
easement in CDC 18.810.050.B.
d. The manager's decision did not require the pathway to be dedicated or to
be improved as required by CDC 18.810.070.A.2.
e. The manager erred by not requiring the applicant to develop a drainage
facility large enough to accommodate all upstream drainage, as required by CDC
18.8 10. 100.C. In particular the appellant argued the manager should have required a 15-
foot wide easement for the existing storm drainage system on the north edge of the site.
f. The portion of 154th Avenue on the site does not comply with standards
requiring consideration of steep slopes and pedestrian safety pursuant to CDC 18.810.010,
18.810.020.E.1.g and 18.810.020.E.1.j.
g. The manager should have required a conservation easement over portions
of the site sloped more than 25%.
3. Margaret and Christopher Rollo, Gary Parcher and Trevor Parker concurred with
the appellant. Jan Stimson and Christopher Farmer signed the witness list as opponents but
did not testify.
4. Ed Wegner, the City's Public Works Director, testified for the applicant. He
responded to some of the appellant's arguments.
5. After the hearing, but while the record remained open, the appellant and the
applicant introduced additional arguments and evidence in writing.
a. The July 31 written statement from the appellant repeated the arguments
made at the hearing in this matter. The appellant also argued that the manager should have
required a deed restriction prohibiting use of the site for anything but single family detached
dwellings, based on CDC 18.510.010.A.
b. The written statement from the applicant (per Michael Miller) dated
August 7, responded to the arguments by the appellant.
C. DISCUSSION
1. The planning manager's decision was issued pursuant to a Type II process. See
Table 18.390.1 and CDC 18.390.040. CDC 18.390.040.G authorizes the hearings officer
to hear appeals of Type II decisions. Pursuant to ORS 215.416(11)(a), appeals of
administrative decisions must be reviewed as a de novo matter. The hearings officer is
required to conduct an independent review of the record. He is not bound by the prior
decision of the planning manager and does not defer to that decision in any way. New
evidence may be introduced in an appeal, and new issues may be raised, subject to the
limitations in CDC 18.390.040.G.2.b. The hearings officer must decide whether the
applicant has carried the burden of proof that the application complies with all applicable
approval criteria in light of all relevant substantial evidence in the whole record, including
any new evidence.
Hearings Officer Final Order on Appeal
MLP 2000-00003 (Tigard Water Dept.) Page 3
• •
2. The approval criteria for a partition are in CDC 18.420.050.1 The appellant
disputes compliance with CDC 18.420.050.A.2 and 5, alleging that public facilities, i.e., the
pedestrian pathway and 154th Avenue right of way and improvements, are not adequate,
based on other standards in the CDC. The appellant also alleges the partition violates other
ordinance requirements and regulations. CDC 18.420.050.A.3. Although the appeal is well
drafted and was argued with skill and sincerity, the hearings officer concludes it does not
rebut the substantial evidence in the record to support the approval based on the following.
3. The appellant alleges that public facilities are not adequate for the proposed
partition, contrary to CDC 18.420.050.A.2, because parking is not provided. The term
"public facilities" is not defined in CDC 18.120.030.A, and CDC 18.420.050.A.2 does not
describe in more detail what is meant by the use of that term in that section. The hearings
officer finds the term is ambiguous. Therefore the hearings officer must construe it.
a. The hearings officer construes "public facilities" to mean public
transportation facilities (roads, bicycle and pedestrian pathways, sidewalks), sanitary and
storm sewers, the public water system and public facilities for fire and other emergency
services, because these facilities are owned, leased or operated by public agencies for service
to the general public, and because any new lot must accommodate such facilities to be able
to be developed for any use.
b. Parking is not a public facility, as that term is used in CDC
18.420.050.A.2, because a partition per se does not result in a use requiring parking under
CDC 18.765. The parking requirements of CDC 18.765 are based on the particular use of
the property in question. A partition does not result in a material change of use of the land
being divided. It simply divides the land. The partition creates two lots. One of those lots
will be developed with an accessway to continue to provide access to the existing Menlo
Reservoir. The other lot will be developed with a pedestrian pathway to the existing Menlo
Reservoir. Neither development results in a new land use; both serve an existing land use
the reservoir and surrounding open space to which the public already has pedestrian and
bicycle access. Therefore under neither CDC 18.420.050.A.2 nor 18.765 is parking a
public facility for the partition.
4. The appellant alleges the partition violates the parking requirements in Chapter
18.765, which are relevant under CDC 18.420.050.A.5.
a. If CDC 18.765 requires parking for a proposed use, it would violate that
section if such parking is not provided. However, if that section does not require parking
for a proposed use, the lack of such parking does not violate that chapter and, if associated
with a partition, does not violate CDC 18.420.050.A.5. Such is the case here.
1 CDC 18.420.050.A provides a partition shall comply with the following standards (in relevant part):
1. The proposed partition complies with all statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations;
2. There are adequate public facilities are available to serve the proposal;
3. All proposed improvements meet City and applicable agency standards; and
4. All proposed lots conform to the specific requirements below:...
5. Any accessway shall comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 18.705, Access, Egress,
and Circulation...
Hearings Oricer Final Order on Appeal
MLP 2000-00003 (Tigard Water Dept.) Page 4
• •
b. The proposed accessway and pathway are not uses for which parking is
required based on the plain meaning of the words in CDC 17.765. The reservoir site and
surrounding open space already exist. They are not being created by this partition. The
partition merely divides the land in question and facilitates access to the adjoining reservoir
property and the open space it contains.2 The associated accessway and pedestrian path
simply provide access to existing uses.
c. Although a pedestrian pathway is "development" by definition, it is not a
land use. It links lands uses along or at the ends of its route. It is a transportation feature.
Like a roadway, it does not generate vehicle trips itself; rather it accommodates vehicle trips
between origins and destinations it links. CDC 18.765.020, in particular, makes it clear that
the parking regulations do not apply in the absence of a new or enlarged structure or change
of use of an existing structure.3 CDC 18.765 does not require off-street parking under
such circumstances, and it does not violate CDC 18.420.050.A.5 or 18.765 if the partition
does not include such parking.
d. The hearings officer finds that CDC 18.765.010 is not an approval
standard for the partition. That section contains a purpose statement only. A purpose
statement is not an approval standard, based on the plain meaning of the words in that
statement. While the statement may indicate the legislative intent for the chapter, that intent
is relevant only if the standards of the chapter are ambiguous. The hearings officer fords
there is no material ambiguity in the standards in this section that are relevant to this case.
5. The appellant alleged the partition does not result in safe, efficient vehicle access
and egress and general circulation on the site, contrary to CDC 18.705.010 and.020.A.
a. The hearings officer finds that CDC 18.705.010 is not an approval
standard based on the plain meaning of the words in that section. That section contains a
purpose statement only. A purpose statement is not an approval standard.
b. CDC 18.705.020.A is unambiguous.4 It requires CDC 18.705 to apply
"to all development". Although it goes on to list certain kinds of development as examples,
2 In fact the partition is not necessary to facilitate access to the reservoir site. The City already has such
access, because it owns the subject property and can improve it with an accessway to provide vehicular
access to the reservoir with a development permit. The partition does not create a tract. Therefore, based on
the plain meaning of the words in CDC 18.120.030.A.104, it does not create a park. The partition creates
two parcels. One parcel is and will continue to be used for residential purposes. The other parcel is and
will continue to be used for access to the reservoir site. The City has not set apart either parcel for any
purpose other than to provide access to the reservoir site.
3 CDC 18.765.020.A-C provide as follows in relevant part (emphasis added):
A. New construction. At the time of the erection of a new structure within any zoning district,
off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070.
B. Expansion of existing use. At the time of an enlargement of a structure which increases the
on-site vehicle parking requirements, off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance
with Section 18.765.070.
C. Chance of q5g,, When an existing structure is changed from one use to another use as listed
in Section 18.765.070, the following provisions shall apply:...
4 CDC 18.705.020.A provides as follows: [continued on next page]
Hearings Dicer Final Order on Appeal
MLP 2000-00003 (Tigard Water Dept.) Page 5
0
the list is not exclusive based on the plain meaning of the words. Therefore Chapter 18.705
applies to the partition application.
c. The applicant complied with CDC 18.705.030.B by providing a site plan
showing how access, egress and circulation is provided to the proposed parcels and how
access can be provided to the redevelopment of the easterly parcel in a manner that complies
with applicable City standards. See Figure 2 of the application and CDC 18.810.0301.
d. The partition complies with CDC 18.705.030.D, because both proposed
parcels will connect directly with a public street approved by the City. Curb cuts are or can
be provided in accordance with CDC 18.810.030.N based on the available public road
frontage for each proposed parcel.
e. CDC 18.705.030.F.1 does not require any walkways on the site, because
there are no proposed uses or buildings on the site, and the only existing building on the
site is the single family detached home on the proposed easterly parcel. Subsection 2 does
not apply, because the site does not contain multi-family dwellings. Subsections 3 and 4 do
not apply, because there are no required walkways. Therefore the proposed surface of the
pathway with wood and bark chips does not violate CDC 18.705.030.F.4. Soft surfaced
public pathways are expressly permitted if in addition to required pathways. The hearings
officer notes that, if the proposed walkway was required by CDC 18.705.030.F, it would
not be required to be wider than four feet. See CDC 18.705.030.F.3.
f. The proposed access to the easterly parcel, which is used for residential
purposes, complies with CDC 18.705.030.H, based on the available frontage width of that
parcel on 154th Avenue. Other provisions of CDC 18.705.030 do not apply.
6. The appellant alleged the manager's decision violates CDC 18.790.030.A and
B.3, because it does not establish whether trees in the right of way for the pathway will be
removed or whether removal of the trees would comply with that section.
a. The hearings officer finds that CDC 18.790.030.A required the applicant
to submit a tree plan. The applicant did not do so. Neither did the applicant submit
evidence from which the planning manager or hearings officer could find there are no trees
in the areas proposed for land alterations (e.g., the pathway and accessway).
b. Based on the photographs (Exhibits B and D) and an annotated map
(Exhibit C) accompanying the appellant's July 24, 2000 written statement, the hearings
officer finds there are or may be one or two trees or tree clusters with a diameter greater
than six inches in the route of the proposed pathway. Removal of those trees is
discouraged by CDC 18.790.030.A.
c. CDC 18.790.050.A requires a tree removal permit only when a tree is
situated in a sensitive lands area as defined by CDC 18.775. The hearings officer finds
trees in the proposed pathway are not in a sensitive lands area, because they are not in a
100-year floodplain, natural drainageway or wetland. The south tip of the pathway may be
situated on slopes more than 25%, based on Figure 2 of the application. If so, and the
pathway is not otherwise exempt, the applicant can apply for a permit to remove the trees
from that area for the pathway before construction.
When provisions apply. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including
the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures (see Section 18.360.050),
and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which
changes the access requirements.
Hearings Officer Final Order on Appeal
MLP 2000-00003 (Tigard Water Dept.) Page 6
• •
d. The hearings officer concludes the proposed partition and related
development complies with CDC 18.790, because the applicant does not propose to remove
any trees that are subject to a tree permit or such a permit can be obtained, and because the
trees in the pathway must be removed to accommodate the pathway. The location of the
pathway between the two parcels makes it impracticable to alter the pathway to avoid the
trees in question. No other trees are proposed to be removed from the site as a result of the
partition. Therefore a plan to illustrate which trees are to be saved is unnecessary in this
case. Moreover, given the extensive tree cover in the vicinity, removal of one or two trees
with a diameter more than six inches in the pathway route has a negligible effect on tree
cover in the vicinity. Substantially all existing trees on the site will be retained.
7. The appellant alleged the manager's decision violates CDC 18.810.010,
18.810.020.E. 1.g and 18.810.020.E. 1.j, because the right of way for 154th Avenue is not
wide enough.
a. The hearings officer finds that CDC 18.810.010 is not an approval
standard based on the plain meaning of the words in that section. That section contains a
purpose statement only. A purpose statement is not an approval standard.
b. CDC 18.810.020.E contains minimum right of way and street width
standards. The hearings officer finds the right of way and improvements required by the
manager's decision are consistent with CDC 18.810.020.E, because the width and
improvements required are needed to continue an existing improved street.5 SW 154th
Avenue exists north of the site. The applicant proposes to continue it into the site. That is
consistent with CDC 18.810.020.E.6 The manager considered the slope of the land
adjoining the right of way. See, e.g., pp. 3-4 of Mr. Scheidegger's July 10 memorandum to
the hearings officer.
c. The appellant did not show that the slope of land adjoining the right of
way warrants a wider right of way as a matter of law. The hearings officer finds that the
slope of the land adjoining a sidewalk in the right of way is not hazardous, because the
sidewalk itself is not steeply sloped. Although surface water flowing off the slope could
cross the sidewalk, that is hardly unusual or hazardous in this climate. A pair of goulashes
is all it takes to protect oneself against such an impact. The City can require slope
easements as a condition of required improvement permits if deemed necessary to allow for
maintenance and protection of the improvements in the right of way, based on final
engineering plans for such improvements, which are required by the manager's decision.
8. The appellant alleged the manager's decision violates CDC 18.810.010 and
18.810.100, because it does not adequately address storm water drainage.
a. The hearings officer fords that CDC 18.810.010 is not an approval
standard based on the plain meaning of the words in that section. See above.
5 CDC 18.810.050.E provides as follows in relevant part:
Minimum rights-of-way and strut widths. Unless otherwise indicated on an approved street plan,
or as needed to continue an existing improved street, street right-of-way and roadway
widths shall not be less than the minimum width described below... (emphasis added)
6 SW 154th Avenue has a 38-foot wide right of way north of the site. Washington County approved that
right of way width in a decision approving the Round Tree Estates subdivision. See the copy of the
decision in the record.
Hearings Officer Final Order on Appeal
MLP 2000-00003 (Tigard Water Dept.) Page 7
b. The appellant is correct that the preliminary partition map does not show
surface water drainage patterns as required by CDC 18.8 10. 100.A.3. However the hearings
officer finds the topographic information in the record is sufficient to readily determine the
direction of surface water flow from the site. The failure to include drainage flow indicators
is harmless error given the availability of equivalent information.
c. A storm drainage easement exists along the north 15 feet of the subject
property, based on pp. 2-3 of the applicant's August 7, 2000 statement and the
accompanying title report. This fulfills CDC 18.8 10. 100.B.
d. The applicant does not propose to develop the site beyond the accessway
and pathway improvements described in the application. No culverts or other drainage
features are proposed. No additional impervious surface is proposed. No drainageways
will be removed or altered. Therefore the proposed partition does not affect drainage
beyond the limits of any improvements to 154th Avenue. Surface water from the street is or
will be accommodated by the public storm drainage system in the street right of way. The
lands subject to the partition will continue to accommodate drainage from upstream as it has
in the past. Under these circumstances, CDC 18.8 10. 100.C does not require drainage
improvements.
9. The appellant alleged the manager's decision violates CDC 18.810.050.B,
because the width of the easement for the pedestrian pathway is less than 15 feet. The
hearings officer finds that CDC 18.810.0503 is not relevant to the issue raised by the
appellant, because it applies to utility easements only based on the plain meaning of the
words in that section. The term "utility" is not defined in the CDC and is ambiguous. The
hearings officer construes the term "utility" in this section to mean water, sewer, drainage,
electric, natural gas, telecommunications, and lighting facilities. See the list in CDC
18.810.120.A. It does not include transportation facilities (e.g., SW 154th Avenue or the
pathway), based on the context of the term in CDC 18.810, (i.e., it is entitled "Street and
Utility Improvement Standards"). If a street was a utility, the title of the chapter would be
simply "utility improvement standards." Because the title of the section lists streets
separate from utilities, they must refer to different things. Also CDC 18.810.030 contains
separate standards for streets, including easements for access. CDC 18.810.050 does not
need to address transportation-related facilities, because CDC 18.810.030 does so already.
10. The appellant alleged the manager's decision violates CDC 18.810.070.A,
because the applicant will not improve the pedestrian pathway to public sidewalk standards.7
a. The hearings officer finds that the appellant's argument on this point is
based on a antiquated version of CDC 18.810.070.A. That section was amended by
Ordinance 99-22 to read as shown in the footnote below. The former version of CDC
18.810.070.A contained language that supported the appellant's argument, because it
required sidewalks "in pedestrian easements and rights of way". The current version of
that section does not include that language. Therefore, based on the plain meaning of the
words in the effective version of CDC 18.810.070.A, the applicant is not required to
improve the pedestrian pathway with a sidewalk.
7 CDC 18.810.070.A provides as follows:
Sidewalks, All industrial streets shall have sidewalks meeting City standards along one side of the
street. All other streets shall have sidewalks meeting City standards along both sides of the street.
A development may be approved if an adjoining street has sidewalks on the side adjoining the
development, even if no sidewalk exists on the other side of the street.
Hearings Officer Final Order on Appeal
MLP 2000-00003 (Tigard Water Dept.) Page 8
0 0
11. The appellant alleged the manager should have required a conservation
easement over portions of the site sloped more than 25%.
a. The appellant does not cite to any standard requiring such an easement,
and the hearings officer finds such an easement is not required. On its face, the manager's
decision does not authorize a development permit for the pedestrian pathway to be built
without further review.
b. The hearings officer finds that the south tip of the pathway may extend
into sensitive lands, i.e., lands sloped more than 25%, based on the Figure 2 in the
application materials. If the pathway is proposed in the area sloped more than 25%, and it is
not otherwise exempt from review under CDC 18.775.020.A, it is subject to a Type II
review pursuant to CDC 18.775.020.B or D. See CDC 18.775.070.C for standards.
12. In a post-hearing statement, the appellant alleged the manager should have
required a deed restriction prohibiting use of the site for anything but single family detached
dwellings, based on CDC 18.510.010.A. The hearings officer rejects that argument for the
following reasons:
a. The appellant did not raise this issue in the appeal statement as required
by CDC 18.390.040.G.2.b, and there are no extraordinary circumstances that warrant
allowing additional issues to be raised after the appeal was filed.
b. Even if the hearings officer allowed the appellant to raise the issue in
question at this late date, there is no basis in the law for limiting the permitted use of the
property. Such a limitation without a basis in law would be arbitrary and capricious and
would deny the applicant due process and equal protection of the law. The appellant cites
CDC 18.510.010.A in support of his argument. The hearings officer finds CDC
18.510.010 is not an approval standard. It is a purpose statement. It is not a basis for
modifying the plain meaning of the law, i.e., the permitted uses listed in Table 18.510.1.
13. The hearings officer adopts as his own and incorporates by reference the
findings and conclusions in the planning manager's decision and the July 10, 2000
memorandum from Mr. Scheidegger to the hearings officer except to the extent inconsistent
with the findings in this Final Order.
D. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings provided or incorporated above, the hearings officer
concludes that the partition does or can comply with the relevant standards and criteria of
the Tigard CDC, provided the decision is subject to conditions of approval that ensure the
final partition plat and subsequent development will comply with applicable CDC standards
and criteria. The conditions of approval of the planning manager's decision will ensure
such compliance. Therefore the application should be approved subject to such conditions,
and the appeal should be denied.
E. DECISION
Based on the findings and conclusions provided or referenced in this Final Order,
the hearings officer hereby approves MLP 2000-00003 subject to the conditions of
approval in the planning manager's decision.
Hearings Officer Final Order on Appeal
MLP 2000-00003 (Tigard Water Dept.) Page 9
•
•
DATED this 17th day of August, 2000.
Larry 4Eptein, Z City of Tigard e gs Officer
Hearings Ofcer Final Order on Appeal
MLP 2000-00003 (Tigard Water Dept.) Page 10
"EXHIBIT A" PARTIES OF RECORD
(Written Public Testimony received at the hearing)
L-
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Larry Epstein, Tigard Hearings Officer
FROM: Michael Miller, Utility Manager
•
RE: Response to Appeal Testimony on City of Tigard Partition, Casefile
No.: MLP2000-00003.
DATE: August 7, 2000
On July 24, 2000, a hearing was conducted on the decision to approve the request to
partition a 1.74-acre lot into two parcels. After the hearing was conducted the appellant
filed additional testimony contained in the original decision. The following is a summary
of the issues raised by the appellant and the staff's response.
Appellant's Statement:
Knowing that the subject site is being developed and the intended use is being changed
I ask the Hearings Officer to carefully and thoughtfully consider the following:
The neighborhood and the City of Tigard will have no control over who will
visit this large open space. The trailhead must be developed in accordance
with the Community Development Code including adequate public facilities.
Off-street parking for not less than ten cars with ample room for maneuvering
is appropriate. The Director's Decision must be amended to require off-street
parking.
Applicant's Response:
The applicant is not requesting to develop the site. We are only requesting a minor land
partition which will enable us to dispose of surplus property that is not necessary for the
operation of the water system. The intended use of the property is not being changed, it
is and continues to be zoned R-25.
Off-street parking is not required for a minor land partition nor is the requirement of a
pedestrian trail. The six-foot wide nature path dedication to the City of Tigard is for a
soft trail. Its intended purpose was to allow the neighborhood of Round Tree Estates
the ability to access the undeveloped portion of the Menlor Reservoir site, which is
already laced with soft, natural trails, and to access the Cache Creek open space. The
proposed trail on the partition would have chips as the wearing surface, as opposed to
the natural dirt trails that already existing on the Menlor site. It is a connecting trail and
not a "trailhead" in the sense of a National Park or Regional Park such as Forest Park in
the West Hills. Soft trails are paths utilizing wood and brush chippings as the material
Response to Appeal Testimony on City of Tigard Page 1 of 5
Partition, Casefile No.: MLP2000-00003
• •
for the path surface. Soft trials are intended for pedestrian foot traffic only and not
bicycles or motorized equipment.
Appellant's Statement:
The proposed nature path right-of-way is too narrow. The right-of-way must be no less
than 25 feet wide. This will allow 15 feet for the nature trail and 10 feet for screening
and buffering from parking and possible future development.
Applicant's Response:
The proposed nature path is not included on any City Capital Improvement Plan and is
outside the City of Tigard boundary. The proposed six foot wide corridor along the
proposed partition property line, for future use as access to a City owned pathway
located on Tax Lot 400, allows access to adjoining open space not related to street
connections. Although not required as part of the minor land partition, this satisfies
Section 18.810.040.6.2 of the Community Development Code. After reviewing
additional criteria for minimum widths, Section 18.810.110.C states that the minimum
width for bikeways within a roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane and eight feet for
two-way bikeways when separated from the road. Again,. the applicant is proposing an
access to a pedestrian trail and not a bikeway. Therefor this section of the
Development code is not applicable.
Appellant's Statement:
The Director's Decision must be conditioned to require the Final Plat to include
adequate public rights-of-way to serve as the nature path and trailhead; and, the
Applicant must improve the nature trail and public facilities.
Applicant's Response:
Again, the proposed nature trail is a simple walking path, with a wearing surface of
chipped wood and brush, so that the neighborhood can have access to additional open
space. Construction of public facilities is not required of the nature trail and is not a
requirement of the minor land partition.
Appellant's Statement:.
As stated in oral and written testimony previously submitted, a storm drainage system
exists along the entire northern property line of the proposed larger parcel. During the
week of July 24, 2000, the owner of the subject site cleared brush and trees from the
drainageway. Section 18.810.100.6 requires the dedication of a storm water easement
or drainage right-of-way when a development is traversed by such a watercourse,
drainageway or channel. The Director's Decision must be amended to recognize a 15-
foot easement for the existing storm drainage system along the northern property line of
the subject property.
Applicant's Response:
An easement created by instrument, dated September 30, 1994, Recorded October 31,
1994, Recorder's fee No. 94099912, in favor of Unified Sewerage Agency of
Washington County for a storm drainage across the northern 15 feet of the property is
Response to Appeal Testimony on City of Tigard Page 2 of 5
Partition, Casefile No.: MLP2000-00003
• •
already in place. Yes, the drainage swale was overgrown and City crews removed
brush and some saplings from the swale. To the applicant's knowledge, the City has
never received a complaint about drainage problems in this area and was unaware of
the existence of the drainage swale due to the area being overgrown with brush and
blackberries.
Appellant's Statement:
City improvement standards do not appear to have been enforced when 154th Avenue
street extension was built. The Decision must be amended to include a wider right-of-
way or a slope easement on the east side of the street extension.
Applicant's Resoonse:
The proposed partition exceeds minimum requirements for the partitioned piece. As per
City Engineer's statements in the appeal, "the width of the right-of-way (ROW) is not set
by topographical constraints adjacent to a roadway. It is agreed that there is a slope to
contend with, and it will have to be addressed when the applicant submits construction
plans for the roadway extension. This is no different than any other project. Likely, the
City will need to establish a slope easement on the east side of the roadway to cover
the graded slope that will exist behind the ROW."
SW 154th Avenue is classified as a local residential street on the City of Tigard
Transportation Plan map. At present there is approximately 38 feet of ROW on SW
154th Avenue north of this site. Washington County approved the narrow ROW as part
of the Round Tree Estates project. Since the narrow ROW is an existing condition, it
does not make sense to require a wider ROW on this parcel.
We are proposing to extend SW 154th Avenue partially onto the site in order to provide a
standard driveway approach to give access through the smaller parcel to Tax Lot 400
(Mentor Reservoir Site). The extension is shown to be built to City standards to match
existing improvements.
The purpose of the partition is to break off the larger parcel and establish a smaller
parcel to access the Menlor reservoir. Additional street improvements, beyond the
scope for the proposed minor land partition, will be constructed when or if development
of the property occurs.
Appellant's Statement:
The Director's proposed deed restrictions including Sensitive Lands Review prior to tree
removal on slopes greater than 25% is meaningless and redundant since Sensitive
Lands review is required by code. I believe it is the Director's intent to protect Sensitive
Lands and trees. The Director's Decision must be changed to require the creation of a
Conservation easement prohibiting development on slopes greater than 25% on the
subject site. As sited in previous submitted testimony this would best protect the
Sensitive Lands, wildlife habitat and trees while buffering wildlife habitat from future
development and providing a wildlife corridor connecting the Conservation Easement in
Response to Appeal Testimony on City of Tigard Page 3 of 5
Partition, Casefile No.: MLP2000-00003
•
•
the Morningside Subdivision and the Menlor Water Reservoir site (tax lot
2S105DB00400).
Applicant's Response:
Staff cannot find anything in the code that requires this. Again the application is only for
a minor land partition.
Appellant's Statement:
To assure primary residential development with compatible non-residential development
at appropriate locations and at appropriate scale (Section 18.510.010.A) the Director's
Decision must be conditioned to limit, through deed restrictions, all future development
on the subject site to single-family detached housing. This will maintain the integrity of
adjacent Conservation Easements, open spaces and wildlife habitat while protecting
livability for existing and future neighborhoods. High-density, multi-family development
is not appropriate on the subject site.
Applicant's Response:
Again, this request is only for a minor land partition. The Water Section is not in the
business of developing properties for uses other than for water related functions. If, in
1997, we were able to purchase only the proposed smaller portion (0.39-acre parcel) for
access to the Menlor reservoir, we would have done so. However, the property owner
at that time did not want to partition the property. The proposed 1.35 acre parcel is
surplus and the Water Section can better utilize the proceeds from the sell of the
remaining parcel (1.35 acre) to purchase another property further to the south of the
Menlor Reservoir site for a new 2.5 million gallon reservoir with an overflow elevation of
550 feet above Mean Sea Level.
The property is currently zoned R-25, which does allow for 13-25 residences per acre.
Multi-family development is allowed in the zone. Any restriction placed upon the
property cannot hinder what the zone currently allows. It is very interesting that the
Appellant only wants to see single-family detached housing placed on the property
when it develops. Perhaps the Appellant does not realize that single-family attached
housing exists within Round Tree Estates in the form of duplexes.
The Applicant does not have a crystal ball and cannot foretell the future of the proposed
1.35-acre parcel. The existing house has three bedrooms and two full baths. It needs
some fresh paint, updating of the kitchen, landscaping and new garage. Due to the size
of the proposed parcel and location, someone might be interested in just purchasing it
for their own mini estate.
The following page shows examples of existing soft trails and a paved neighborhood
trail within the City of Tigard. Other than the paved City street, there are not any
additional public improvements and no off-street parking.
Response to Appeal Testimony on City of Tigard Page 4 of 5
Partition, Casefile No.: MLP2000-00003
•
Photo of soft trail on SW Fairview Ct
I
Soft trail on SW 118th Ct.
0
Looking from soft trail to SW
Fairview Ct.
Paved neighborhood trail on SW
Riverwood Lane
Soft trail between two homes on SW Riverwood Lane
Attachments: Preliminary Title Report, dated January 9, 1997 (storm easement)
Response to Appeal Testimony on City of Tigard Page 5 of 5
Partition, Casefile No.: MLP2000-00003
f,
r
r
1
w
w
i
w
i
i
i
TRANSNIMON0E INSURANCE COMPANY
\ ff Transnation
Right-of-Way Associates, Inc
At SUSAN ANDERSON
10186 SW Laurel St.
Beaverton, OR 97005
2cc 02-41-00
•
TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
12360 East Burnside
Box 16016
Portland, Oregon 97216
(503) 256-1160 FAX (503) 254-3865
PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT
Dated January 09, 1997 Parties CLUTE, Sandra
Title Officer Kim Wylie Prop. Add: 13230 SW 154th Ave
Title Number W1624y3T Portland, OR 97223
Ref: 96066
ALTA Owners Std. Coverage $1,000.00 Premium: $ 175.00
A consolidated statement of all charges, credits, and advances, if any, in connection with this order will
be provided at closing.
Effective January 2. 1997 at 8:00 A.M., title to the land described herein is
vested in:
SANDRA F. CLUTE
K
N
I
• •
DESCRIPTION:
A tract of land in Section 5, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette
Meridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows:
Beginning at an iron pipe on the North and South centerline of Section 5,
Township 2 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, in the County of
Washington and State of Oregon, said iron pipe being North 00 48' East 1897.04
feet from the South one-quarter corner of said Section 5; running thence from
said beginning point South 890 12' East 337.1 feet to an iron pipe; thence North
00 48' East 225 feet to a point; thence North 890 12' West 312 feet, more or
less, to a point 25 feet East of the North-South centerline of said Section 5;
thence North 0° 48' East parallel with said North-South centerline 764 feet, more
or less, to a point 25 feet South of the South right of way line of Scholls Ferry
Road (County Road No. 812); thence Northeasterly to a point on the South right of
way line of Scholls Ferry Road which is 50 feet East of the North-South
centerline of Section 5; thence Westerly along said South right of way line 50
feet to the North-South centerline of Section 5; thence South 00 48' West 989
feet, more or less, to the point of beginning.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion conveyed to Tom Miller Builder, Inc., an Oregon
corporation, by Bargain and Sale Deed recorded April 17, 1995 under Recorder's
Fee No. 95026309.
January 09, 1997
1
2
W162413T
•
We are prepared to issue title insurance in the form and amount shown above subject
to the usual printed conditions, stipulations and exclusions from coverage appearing
in such policy form and to exceptions as shown herein. This report is preliminary
to the issuance of a policy of title insurance and shall become null and void unless
a policy is issued, and the full premium therefore paid.
EXCEPTIONS:
1.
Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any
taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real pro erty or by the
public record; proceedings by a public agency which may resul in taxes or
assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records
of such agency.or by the public records.
2
f
i
A
t
ht
i
t
l
.
g
ny
ac
s, r
s,
n
erests or c
aims which are not shown by the public records
hi
h
l
cou
c
but w
d be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry
of persons in possession thereof.
3.
Easements, or claims of easement, not shown by the public records, reservations or
exceptions in patents or in acts authorizing the issuance thereof, water-rights,
claims or title to water.
4.
Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or
hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records.
5.
Discrepancies. conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments or any
other facts which a correct survey would disclose.-
6.
Regulations, including the power to acquire rights of ways and easements, and to
levy assessments of the Unified Sewerage Agency. (No liens as of January 2,
1996.)
7.
The rights of the public in and to that portion of the herein described property
l
i
ith
th
li
it
f
d
y
ng w
in
e
m
s o
roa
s and hig
hways.
8.
An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof,
Dated May 25, 1950
Recorded June 5, 1950
Book 307
Page 503
In favor of Utilities
For West Coast Telephone Company
Location Not shown
9.
An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof,
Dated Se tember 30, 1994
Recorded OMber 31, 1994
'
Recorder
s Fee No.: 94099912
In favor of : Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County
For Storm drainage
Location The North 15 feet
January 09, 1997 3
W162413T
' • •
10. An easement created Sy instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof,
Dated tember 30, 1994
Recorded ONober 31, 1994
Recorder's Fee No.: 94099913
' In favor of Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County
For Sanitary sewer
Location 15 by 15 feet along the Northerly boundary
' 11. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof,
Dated June 23. 1995
Recorded April 1, 1996
Recorder's Fee No.: 96028265
In favor of City of Tigard
For Public utilities and water line
Location 15 feet along the West and a portion of the North boundary
NOTE 1: Assessed value for the 1996-97 tax year:
Land $ 58,880.00
Im rovements $ 91,520.00
TZI $150,400.00
NOTE 2: Taxes paid in full for the year 1996-97
Total Amount $1.751.97
Levy Code 051.78
Account No. 2S1 5DB 00600
Key No. R481758
END OF REPORT
DS/k
TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, your number one title company in the
Portland Metro Area, would like to thank you for our success. We
continue to strive to meet your title needs. Please contact me if I can
be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Kim Wylie
January 09.' 1997 4 W162413T
•
•
Ail, I . 'k
CITY OF TIGUO
Shaping A Better Community
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD
TIGARD, OREGON 91223
FAN COVER SHEET
Number of pages Including cover sheet 10
DATE: August 7, 2000 TIME:
TO: Larry Epstein PHONE:
FAX- (503)274-7782
FROM: Shirley Treat PHONE: (503) 639-4171
City of Tigard FAK (503) 684-7297
Planning Department
RE: MLP2000-00003/COT Partition @ 154`h Avenue
Message:
Following is the City's response to the appellant's response.
Please give me a call if you have any questions at (503) 639-4171, extension 419.
Thank you.
08/07/2000 14:06 FAX 5036847297
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO
CONNECTION TEL
SUBADDRESS
CONNECTION ID
ST. TIME
USAGE T
PGS. SENT
RESULT
City of Tigard
TX REPORT
0144
2747782
08/07 14:04
02'38
10
OK
2 h=4 L
cmoFnsnnn
Shaping A Better Communigl
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD
TIGARD, OREGON 91223
la 001
•I; l ui(~r~lu iI a :!c:' Ili l+ J nn it I l rl.. ; In I•
I9 I
ilk l l l l+~ u ! mil : 1o ry L'
J la
Ii' I jl l f I ~ ' I ~
I 1 I + J I I f ~ I ~I ~ ~I' ]If ~ I I{ I ~ IJ R !
,II i I':1~ !I 16IiIi1 I IFi `.;111111+ I~~ I~I I I IIIQh 1~I !il II II I,IJI~I I6
! III IIII
t J~ l.~ ~Il . ,
Number of pages including cover sheet 10
DATE August 7, 2000 TIME
TM Larry Epstein PHONE:
FAX- (503)274-7782
FBOM: Shirley Treat PHONE (503) 639-4171
City of Tigard FAIL (503) 684-7297
Planning Department
RE: MLP2000-00003/COT Partition @ 154th Avenue
Message:
08/07/2000 14:04 FAX 50368472.92
City of Tigard .
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM
RE:
DATE:
Lary Epstein, Tigard Hearings Officer
Michael Miller, Utility Manager
[a 002
Response to Appeal Testimony on City of Tigard Partition, Casefile
No.: MLP2000-00003.
August 7, 2000
On July 24, 2000, a hearing was conducted on the decision to approve the request to
partition a 1.74-acre lot into two parcels. After the hearing was conducted the appellant
filed additional testimony contained in the original decision. The following is a summary
of the issues raised by the appellant and the staffs response-
Appellant's Statement:
Knowing that the subject site is being developed and the intended use is being changed
I ask the Hearings Officer to carefully and thoughtfully consider the following:
The neighborhood and the City of Tigard will have no control over who will
visit this large open space. The trailhead must be developed in accordance
with the Community Development Code including adequate public facilities.
Off-street parking for not less than ten cars with ample room for maneuvering
is appropriate. The Director's Decision must be amended to require off-street
parking.
Applicant's Response:
The applicant is not requesting to develop the site. We are only requesting a minor land
partition which will enable us to dispose of surplus property that is not necessary for the
operation of the water system. The intended use of the property is not being changed, it
is and continues to be zoned R-25.
Off-street parking is not required for a minor land partition nor is the requirement of a
pedestrian trail. The six-foot wide nature path dedication to the City of Tigard is for a
soft trail. Its intended purpose was to allow the neighborhood of Round Tree Estates
the ability to access the undeveloped portion of the Menlor Reservoir site, which is
already laced with soft, natural trails, and to access the Cache Creek open space. The
proposed trail on the partition would have chips as the wearing surface, as opposed to
the natural dirt trails that already existing on the Menlor site. It is a connecting trail and
not a "trailhead" in the sense of a National Park or Regional Park such as Forest Park in
the West Hills. Soft trails are paths utilizing wood and brush chippings as the material
Response to Appeal Testimony on City of Tigard Page 1 of 5
Partition, Casefile No.: MLP2000-00003
08/07/2000 14:04 FAX 50368472. City of Tigard . 0 003
for the path surface. Soft trials are intended for pedestrian foot traffic only and not
bicycles or motorized equipment.
Appellant's Statement:
The proposed nature path right-of-way is too narrow- The right-of-way must be no less
than 25 feet wide. This will allow 15 feet for the nature trail and 10 feet for screening
and buffering from parking and possible future development.
Applicant's Response:
The proposed nature path is not included on any City Capital Improvement Plan and is
outside the City of Tigard boundary. The proposed six foot wide corridor along the
proposed partition property line, for future use as access to a City owned pathway
located on Tax Lot 400, allows access to adjoining open space not related to street
connections- Although not required as part of the minor land partition, this satisfies
Section 18.810.040.B.2 of the Community Development Code. After reviewing
additional criteria for minimum widths, Section 18.810.110_C states that the minimum
width for bikeways within a roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane and eight feet for
two-way bikeways when separated from the road. Again,-the applicant is proposing an
access to a pedestrian trail and not a bikeway. Therefor this section of the
Development code is not applicable.
Appellant's Statement:
The Directors Decision must be conditioned to require the Final Plat to include
adequate public rights-of-way to serve as the nature path and trailhead; and, the
Applicant must improve the nature trail and public facilities.
Applicant's Response:
Again, the proposed nature trail is a simple walking path, with a wearing surface of
chipped wood and brush, so that the neighborhood can have access to additional open
space. Construction of public facilities is not required of the nature trail and is not a
requirement of the minor land partition.
Appellant's Statement:
As stated in oral and written testimony previously submitted, a storm drainage system
exists along the entire northern property line of the proposed larger parcel. During the
week of July 24, 2000, the owner of the subject site cleared brush and trees from the
drainageway. Section 18.810.100.13 requires the dedication of a storm water easement
or drainage right-of-way when a development is traversed by such a watercourse,
drainageway or channel. The Director's Decision must be amended to recognize a 15-
foot easement for the existing storm drainage system along the northern property line of
the subject property.
Applicant's Response:
An easement created by instrument, dated September 30, 1994, Recorded October 31,
1994, Recorder's fee No. 94099912, in favor of Unified Sewerage Agency of
Washington County for a storm drainage across the northern 15 feet of the property is
Response to Appeal Testimony on City of Tigard Page 2 of 5
Partition, Casefile No.: MLP2000-00003
08/07/2000 14:05 FAX 503684729 City of Tigard 1004
already in place. Yes, the drainage swale was overgrown and City crews removed
brush and some saplings from the swale. To the applicant's knowledge, the City has
never received a complaint about drainage problems in this area and was unaware of
the existence of the drainage swale due to the area being overgrown with brush and
blackberries.
Appellant's Statement:.
City improvement standards do not appear to have been enforced when 154th Avenue
street extension was built. The Decision must be amended to include a wider right-of-
way or a slope easement on the east side of the street extension.
Applicant's Response:
The proposed partition exceeds minimum requirements for the partitioned piece- As per
City Engineer's statements in the appeal, "the width of the right-of-way (ROW) is not set
by topographical constraints adjacent to a roadway. It is agreed that there is a slope to
contend with, and it will have to be addressed when the applicant submits construction
plans for the roadway extension. This is no different than any other project. Likely, the
City will need to establish a slope easement on the- east side of the roadway to cover
the graded slope that will exist behind the ROW."
SW 154' Avenue is classified as a local residential street on the City of Tigard
Transportation Plan map. At present there is approximately 38 feet of ROW on SW
154th Avenue north of this site. Washington County approved the narrow ROW as part
of the Round Tree Estates project- Since the narrow ROW is an existing condition, it
does not make sense to require a wider ROW on this parcel.
We are proposing to extend SW 154th Avenue partially onto the site in order to provide a
standard driveway approach to give access through the smaller parcel to Tax Lot 400
(Mentor Reservoir Site). The extension is shown to be built to City standards to match
existing improvements.
The purpose of the partition is to break off the larger parcel and establish a smaller
parcel to access the Menlor reservoir. Additional street improvements, beyond the
scope for the proposed minor land partition, will be constructed when or if development
of the property occurs.
Appellant's Statement:
The Director's proposed deed restrictions including Sensitive Lands Review prior to tree
removal on slopes greater than 25% is meaningless and redundant since Sensitive
Lands review is required by code. I believe it is the Director's intent to protect Sensitive
Lands and trees. The Director's Decision must be changed to require the creation of a
Conservation easement prohibiting development on slopes greater than 25% on the
subject site. As sited in previous submitted testimony this would best protect the
Sensitive Lands, wildlife habitat and trees while buffering wildlife habitat from future
development and providing a wildlife corridor connecting the Conservation Easement in
Response to Appeal Testimony on City of Tigard Page 3 of 5
Partition, Casefile No.: MLP2000-00003
08/07/2000 14:05 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard 0 2005
the Morningside Subdivision and the Menlor Water Reservoir site (tax lot
2S105131300400)_
Applicant's Response:
Staff cannot find anything in the code that requires this. Again the application is only for
a minor land partition.
A_DDellant's Statement'
To assure primary residential development with compatible non-residential development
at appropriate locations and at appropriate scale (Section 18.510.010.A) the Director's
Decision must be conditioned to limit, through deed restrictions, all future development
on the subject site to single-family detached housing. This will maintain the integrity of
adjacent Conservation Easements, open spaces and wildlife habitat while protecting
livability for existing and future neighborhoods. High-density, multi-family development
is not appropriate on the subject site-
Aoplicant's Response:
Again, this request is only for a minor land partition. The Water Section is not in the
business of developing properties for uses other than for wafter related functions. If, in
1997, we were able to purchase only the proposed smaller portion (0.39-acre parcel) for
access to the Menlor reservoir, we would have done so. However, the property owner
at that time did not want to partition the property. The proposed 1.35 acre parcel is
surplus and the Water Section can better utilize the proceeds from the sell of the
remaining parcel (1.35 acre) to purchase another property further to the south of the
Menlor Reservoir site for a new 2.5 million gallon reservoir with an overflow elevation of
550 feet above Mean Sea Level.
The property is currently zoned R-25, which does allow for 13-25 residences per acre.
Multi-family development is allowed in the zone. Any restriction placed upon the
property cannot hinder what the zone currently allows. It is very interesting that the
Appellant only wants to see single-family detached housing placed on the property
when it develops. Perhaps the Appellant does not realize that single-family attached
housing exists within Round Tree Estates in the form of duplexes.
The Applicant does not have a crystal ball and cannot foretell the future of the proposed
1.35-acre parcel. The existing house has three bedrooms and two full baths. It needs
some fresh paint, updating of the kitchen, landscaping and new garage. Due to the size
of the proposed parcel and location, someone might be interested in just purchasing it
for their own mini estate.
The following page shows examples of existing soft trails and a paved neighborhood
trail within the City of Tigard. Other than the paved City street, there are not any
additional public improvements and no off-street parking.
Response to Appeal Testimony on City of Tigard Page 4 of 5
Partition, Casefile No_-. MLP2000-00003
08/07/2000 14:05 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard • 0 006
Photo of soft trail on SW Fairview Ct
Soft trail on SW 118thCt.
Looking from soft trail to SW
Fairview Ct.
Paved neighborhood trail on SW
Riverwood Lane
Soft trail between two homes on SW Riverwood Lane
Attachments: Preliminary Title Report, dated January 9, 1997 (storm easement)
Response to Appeal Testimony on City of Tigard Page 5 of 5
Partition, Casefile No_: MLP2000-00003
r
r
i
~i
r
i
i
i
08/07/2000 14:06 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard
TRANSNATION TITLh INSURANCE COMPANY
ilk Transnation ,
Right-of-Way Associates, Inc
Attn: SUSAN ANDERSON
10186 SW Laurel St.
Beaverton, OR 97005
2cc 02-41-00
•
fa 007
TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
12360 East Burnside
Box 16016
Portland, Oregon 97216
(503) 256-1160 FAX (503) 254-3865
PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT
Dated : January 09, 1997
Title Officer Kim W lie
Title Number : W1624y13T
Parties : CLUTE. Sandra
Prop-- Add: 13230 SW 154th Ave Portl Ref: Portland, OR 97223
ALTA Owners Std. Coverage $1,000.00 Premium: $ 175.00
A consolidated statement of all charges, credits, and advances, if any, In connection with this order will
be provided at closing.
Effective January 2, 1997 at 8:00 A_M., title to the land described herein is
vested in:
SANDRA F. CLUTE
08/07/2000 14:06 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard • a 008
DESCRIPTION:
A tract of land in Section 5, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette
Meridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows:
~I Begirining at an iron pipe on the North and South centerline of Section 5,
Township 2 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, in the County of
Washington and State of Oregon, said iron pipe being North 0° 48' East 1897.04
feet from the South one-quarter corner of said Section 5; running thence from
said beginning point South 890 12' East 337.1 feet to an iron pipe; thence North
00 48' East 225 feet to a point; thence North 89° 12' West 312 feet, more or
less, to a point 25 feet East of the North-South centerline of said Section 5;
thence North 01 48 East parallel with said North-South centerline 764 feet, more
or less, to a point 25 feet South of the South right of way line of Scholls Ferry
Road (County Road No. 812); thence Northeasterly to a point on the South right of
way line of Scholls Ferry Road which is 50 feet East of the North-South
centerline of Section 5; thence Westerly along said South right of way line 50
feet to the North-South centerline of Section 5; thence South 00 48' West 989
feet, more or less, to the point of beginning.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion conveyed to Tom Miller Builder, Inc., an Oregon
corporation, by Bargain and Sale Deed recorded April 17, 1995 under Recorder's
Fee No. 95026309.
t
M
January 09, 1997 2 W162413T
08/07/2000 14:06 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard IA009
We are prepared to issue title insurance in the form and amount shown above subject
to the usual printed conditions, stipulations and exclusions from coverage appearing
in such policy form and to exceptions as shown herein. This report is preliminary
to the issuance of a policy of title insurance and shall become null and void unless
a policy is issued, and the full premium therefore paid.
EXCEPTIONS:
1.
Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any
taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the
public record: proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or
assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records
of such agency or by the public records.
f
t
i
ht
i
A
t
hi
h
l
2.
ac
s, r
g
s,
ny
n
erests or c
aims w
c
are not shown by the public records
h
d
but whic
coul
be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry
of persons in possession thereof.
3.
Easements, or claims of easement, not shown by the public records, reservations or
ti
i
t
t
h
i
i
ons
n pa
excep
en
s or
oriz
n acts aut
ng the issuance thereof, water-rights,
claims or title to water.
4.
Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or
hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records.
5.
Discrepancies. conflicts in boundary lines. shortage in area, encroachments-or any
other facts which a correct survey would disclose.-
6.
Regulations, including the power to acquire rights of ways and easements, and to
levy assessments of the Unified Sewerage Agency- (No liens as of January 2,
1996
7.
The rights of the public in and to that portion of the herein described property
l
i
ith
h
l
y
ng w
in t
e
imits of roads and highways.
8.
An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof,
Dated : May 25, 1950
June
5, 1950
rded
:
8ook
307
Page : 503
In favor of : Utilities
For : West Coast Telephone Company
Location : Not shown
9.
An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof.
Dated September 30, 1994
d
d
R
e
ecor
October 31, 1994
'
Recorder
s Fee No.: 94099912
In favor of : Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County
For Storm drainage
Location The North 15 feet
I January 09. 1997 3
W162413T
08/07/2000 14:06 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard 010
i
i
i
i
10. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof,
Dated Se tember 30, 1994
Recorded : Oc~ober 31. 1994
Recorder's Fee No.: 94099913
In favor of : Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County
For Sanitary sewer
Location 15 by 15 feet along the Northerly boundary
11. An easement created by instrument. including the terms and provisions thereof.
Dated June 23, 1995
Recorded April 1, 1996
Recorder's Fee No.: 96028265
In favor of City of Tigard
For Public utilities and water line
Location 15 feet along the West and a portion of the North boundary
NOTE 1: Assessed value for the 1996-97 tax year:
Land $ 58,880.00
Improvements $ 91.520.00
Total $150.400.00
NOTE 2: Taxes paid in full for the year 1996-97
Total Amount : $1,751.97
Levy Code 051.78
Account No. 2S1 5DB 00600
Key No. : R481758
END OF REPORT
DS/kl
TRANSNATION TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, your number one title company in the
Portland Metro Area. would like to thank you for our success. We
continue to strive to meet your title needs. Please contact me if I can
be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Kim Wylie
January 09,' 1997 4 W162413T
APPEAL TE IMONY:
0
DECISION MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2000-00003, City of Tigard,
APPEALED: Partition @ 154th Avenue; Notice of Decision Issued June 2, 2000;
Public Hearing July 24, 2000
FROM: Jaime C. Ramsey
RECEIVED
15367 SW Fir Tree Drive
Tigard, Oregon 97223
JUL 31 2000
Hm: (503) 590-3318
Wk: (503) 625-2560 x.417
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
e-mail: ramsev@teleoort.com
I lA P m
K
DATE: July 31, 2000
TO: Larry Epstein, Tigard Hearings Officer
On June 2, 2000, the Director approved the proposed partition of the Clute Property in
which the Applicant proposed to partition the subject site into two parcels and to
dedicate two public rights-of-way. The neighborhood and I have followed development
on the subject site for the past five years through public meetings and constant contact
with city staff.
The Nature Trail is Part of the Application
During public meetings the City of Tigard and the Tigard Water District committed to
building a nature trail establishing access to public open spaces located to the south.
The Applicant's Statement and Narrative included the nature trail (Exhibit J, pages 1 &
2), the Director's Decision referenced the nature trail (Exhibit K, pages 11 & 12), and Ed
Wegner's testimony on July 24, 2000, confirmed that the nature trail is part of the
application.
Issues
Knowing that the subject site is being developed and the intended use is being changed
I ask the Hearings Officer to carefully and thoughtfully consider the following:
The neighborhood understands that the City intends to provide a trailhead for the
immediate neighborhood and is very thankful. We have offered to help build,
improve and maintain the trail system. However, the neighborhood and the City of
Tigard will have no control over who will visit this large open space. The trailhead
must be developed in accordance with the Community Development Code including
adequate public facilities. Off-street parking for not less than ten cars with ample
room for maneuvering is appropriate. The Director's Decision must be amended to
require off-street parking.
• The proposed nature path right-of-way is too narrow. The right-of-way must be no
less than 25 feet wide. This will allow 15 feet for the nature trail and 10 feet for
screening and buffering from parking and possible future development.
Appeal Testimony Jaime C. Ramsey Page 1 of 2
APPEAL T IMONY:
0
• The Director's Decision must be conditioned to require the Final Plat to include
adequate public rights-of-way to serve as the nature path and trailhead; and, the
Applicant must improve the nature trail and public facilities.
As stated in oral and written testimony previously submitted, a storm drainage
system exists along the entire northern property line of the proposed larger
parcel. During the week of July 24th, 2000, the owner of the subject site cleared
brush and trees from this drainageway. Section 18.810.1003 requires the
dedication of a storm water easement or drainage right-of-way when a development
is traversed by such a watercourse, drainageway or channel. The Director's
Decision must be amended to recognize a 15-foot easement for the existing storm
drainage system along the northern property line of the subject site.
City improvement standards do not appear to have been enforced when the 154th
Avenue street extension was built. The Decision must be amended to include a
wider right-of-way or a slope easement on the east side of the street extension.
The Director's proposed deed restrictions including Sensitive Lands Review prior to
tree removal on slopes greater than 25% is meaningless and redundant since
Sensitive Lands review is required by code. I believe it is the Director's intent to
protect Sensitive Lands and trees. The Director's Decision must be changed to
require the creation of a Conservation Easement prohibiting development on slopes
greater than 25% on the subject site. As sited in previous submitted testimony this
would best protect Sensitive Lands, wildlife habitat and trees while buffering wildlife
habitat from future development and providing a wildlife corridor connecting the
Conservation Easement in the Morningside Subdivision and the Menlor Water
Reservoir site (tax lot 2S105DB00400).
To assure primary residential development with compatible non-residential
development at appropriate locations and at appropriate scale (Section
18.510.010.A) the Director's Decision must be conditioned to limit, through deed
restrictions, all future development on the subject site to single-family detached
housing. This will maintain the integrity of adjacent Conservation Easements, open
spaces and wildlife habitat while protecting livability for existing and future
neighborhoods. High-density, multi-family development is not appropriate on the
subject site.
Because the neighborhood has no assurance that the subject site will be further
developed in the future; these issues must be resolved now. I respectfully ask the
Hearings Officer to strengthen the Director's Decision as outlined above and sited in
previously submitted testimony.
Respectfully,
C.
Jaime Ramsey
Attachments:
Exhibit J - Applicant's Statement and Narrative
Exhibit K - Director's Decision
Appeal Testimony Jaime C. Ramsey Page 2 of 2
APPEAL TE TIMONY: •
DECISION MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2000-00003, City of Tigard,
APPEALED: Partition @ 154th Avenue; Notice of Decision Issued June 2, 2000;
Public Hearing July 24, 2000
FROM: Jaime C. Ramsey
15367 SW Fir Tree Drive
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Hm: (503) 590-3318
Wk: (503) 625-2560 x.417
e-mail: ramsev@teleoort.com
DATE: July 24, 2000
TO: Larry Epstein, Tigard Hearings Officer
On June 2, 2000, the Director approved the Applicant's proposed partition of Tax Lot
2S105DB00600 subject to conditions. The subject site is also known as the Clute
Property. The Applicant proposed to partition the subject site into two parcels and to
dedicate two public rights-of-way as follows (See the Applicant's Proposed Taxlot 600
Partition Site Plan - Exhibit A):
1. Parcel 1, the smaller 0.39-acre parcel: This parcel will be retained by the Applicant
to ensure permanent access to the Menlor Water Reservoir.
2. Parcel 2, the larger 1.35-acre parcel: The Applicant intends to sell this parcel,
because it is no longer needed for access to the Menlor Water Reservoir.
3. Right-of-way 1, the Nature Path: This public right-of-way includes a six-foot wide
nature path and will serve as a trailhead by which the public will access forested
public open spaces to the south. The Director's Decision failed to require the Final
Plat to include this dedicated right-of-way.
4. Right-of-way 2, the 154th Avenue Extension: The dedication of the 154th Avenue
extension to public right-of-way will allow permanent access to the Menlor Water
Reservoir. The proposed extension was built more than two years ago (see Exhibit
B) and includes street surfaces, gutters, curbs, sidewalks, utilities and daylight
drains.
Specific criteria based issues regarding the above referenced Partition Application
established during the public comment period that were not addressed in the Director's
Decision include:
Issue 1: Partitions, Change of Use and Development
The Applicant states that sections of the Community Development Code do not apply,
because there is "no development." Section 18.120.030.A.56 of the Community
Development Code defines Development as the division of land into two or more
parcels, including partitions. The Applicant has applied to partition the subject site.
Appeal Testimony _ Jaime C. Ramsey Page 1 of 6
APPEAL TESTIMONY: 0
City staff states that sections of the Community Development Code do not apply,
because this is simply the "partitioning of vacant land" and "the trail and trailhead were
not part of the proposal under review." Section 18.120.030.A.56 of the Community
Development Code defines Development as a material change in the use of land. The
subject site is zoned R-25. Prior to this Land Partition Application the subject site was
used for one single-family detached residence. The dedication of the trailhead and
nature path changes the intended use of the property by creating park space as defined
in Section 18.120.030.A.104 of the Community Development Code. The decision
includes a material Change of Use from a Residential Use Type (18.130.020.A) to a
Civic Use Type (18.130.020.8.3) which includes parks.
This is a division of land into two parcels, and the intended use of the property will be
changed. This is Development as defined by the code. All Review Criteria are
applicable.
Issue 2: Access, Egress and Off-Street Parking Requirements
The Clute Property will provide access to more than 20 acres of naturally forested,
regionally significant greenspace (Reference Tax Lots 2S105DB00600, 2S105DB00400
and 2S105DC00201 owned by the City of Tigard; and, 2S105CD00100 and
2S105CD00200 owned by The Trust for Public Lands). This planned park is nearly as
large as Summer Lake Park, and the nearest similar parks are Forest Park in Portland
and Tryon Creek State Park in Lake Oswego. Barrows Road (formerly Scholls Ferry) is
the closest major collector street, and the nature path that terminates at the south end of
154th Avenue will be the most easily accessible trailhead. Citizens from all over
Southeast Washington County will drive to visit this unique park.
The creation of the trailhead creates problems related to off-street parking, safe and
efficient vehicle access and egress, and general circulation within the site that the
applicant must deal with as stipulated in Sections 18.705.010 and 18.705.020.A.
Specifically:
154th Avenue south of Fir Tree Drive is a public right-of-way narrower than specified
in the code (38' vs. 42') and cannot support increased public parking.
The trailhead is in close proximity to a busy corner (154th Avenue and Fir Tree
Drive). These streets will not support increased public parking and allow for the safe
and efficient flow of traffic.
Round Tree Estates Subdivision borders the proposed partition to the north. The
subdivision's Declaration of Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions includes parking
restrictions.
Section 18.420.050.A.2 specifically requires land partitions to include adequate public
facilities. Public facilities are not specifically defined in the Community Development
Code. A public facility is best defined as "something created to serve a particular
function for the use of all" (Webster's Dictionary). Clearly, adequate parking at public
parks is a public facility.
Appeal Testimony Jaime C. Ramsey Page 2 of 6
APPEAL TEITIMONY: 0
Sections 18.765.010.A and 18.765.010.13 require the Applicant to provide sufficient
vehicle parking in close proximity to the trailhead to maintain the carrying-capacity of
nearby streets and to minimize hazardous conditions on the site and at access points.
Parking spaces in the public street are not eligible to fulfill any part of the parking
requirement (18.765.065.D.1).
The Director's Decision failed to address off-street parking requirements and defers the
applicability of 18.765 until the time of development. As stated above, this application
includes development. Section 18.765 applies, and off-street parking is required.
Section 18.765 does not give specific guidance regarding parking at public parks and
trailheads. Off-street parking for not less than ten cars with ample room for maneuvering
is appropriate. The Director's Decision must be amended to require off-street parking.
Issue 3: Nature Path Right-of-way Is Too Narrow
The proposed public right-of-way for the planned nature path and trailhead establishing
access to the public greenspace is clearly inadequate.
• Trees exist in the proposed narrow public right-of-way.
• The south end of the proposed nature trail and the north end of Tax Lot
2S105DB00400 are too steep to allow a path to be constructed straight up
the property. A path built straight up the property would not be easily
traversed by pedestrians and would ensure significant erosion problems.
• Pedestrians cannot safely pass in a six-foot corridor.
• A six-foot right-of-way will not allow mechanized equipment access to the
proposed trail for construction and maintenance.
To encourage the preservation of trees Section 18.790.030.A specifically requires a tree
plan for the removal and protection of trees for any partition. The proposed trailhead
includes several trees that have not been identified for either preservation or removal as
required by Section 18.790.030.8.3. These trees are identified in Exhibits C and D. Are
these trees to be protected? Removed? It would be ironic to remove trees to construct
a nature path. The Director has not required a tree plan. The existence of trees in the
middle of the proposed nature path and the Community Development Code specifically
requires a tree plan.
Improvement standards (18.810.030.E.1.j) require rights-of-way to provide for the safety
and comfort of pedestrians. Pedestrians will not be able to safely and comfortably pass
one another or climb the proposed six-foot nature trail.
Section 18.810.050.13 requires 15 feet for utility easements to provide for the
construction, maintenance and improvement of public facilities.
A water pipe is given a 15-foot easement. The Director's Decision and the Applicant's
proposed nature trail on a six-foot right-of-way suggests citizens, trees and the
consideration of future trail construction, improvement and maintenance requirements
Appeal Testimony Jaime C. Ramsey Page 3 of 6
APPEAL TE TIMONY:
are not worthy of the same consideration given a water pipe! The proposed nature trail
is not adequate for the reasons stated above.
To ensure the trail is wide enough to allow for trail construction, improvement and
maintenance; to preserve trees; to adequately screen the trail from any future
development; and, to provide for the safety and comfort of citizens visiting the park the
right-of-way must be no less than 25 feet wide. This will allow 15 feet for the nature trail
and 10 feet for buffering from parking and any future development.
Issue 4: The Nature Path Right-of-way, Improvements and the Director's Decision
The Director's decision's includes references to "a six-foot easement" and "a six-foot
wide corridor" when discussing the Applicant's proposed nature path establishing access
to planned open spaces to the south. Not only is the six-foot right-of-way too narrow, but
the Director's Decision is not conditioned to require the Final Plat to include a public
right-of-way for the nature path which was part of the application.
The Applicant is obligated to construct walkways in pedestrian rights-of-way in
conjunction with development of the subject site as stipulated in Section 18.810.070.A.2.
The Director's Decision must be conditioned to require the dedication of adequate public
rights-of-way to serve as the nature path and trailhead; and, the Applicant must improve
the nature trail and public facilities.
Issue 5: Storm Water Drainage
City Staff indicates, "it is not practical to establish a storm drainage system on the
subject site at this time because it is not certain how the parcel will be developed," and,
the partition is "exempt from addressing storm water issues at this time." However, as
stated above, the subject site is being developed, a storm drainage system exists on the
subject site, and a storm drainage easement was not established.
There is a daylight drain in the northeast corner of the subject site (see Exhibit E). This
drain dumps storm water from the adjacent storm water easement in the Morningside
subdivision (see Exhibit F) into a drainage ditch that runs along the entire northern
property line of the subject site (see Exhibit G). The property is steeply sloped from
south to north. The Applicant must develop a drainage facility large enough to
accommodate all upstream drainage including properties to the east and south as per
Section 18.810.100.C. Yet, no easement for public storm drains or surface water
drainage patterns are shown on the plan. They are required per Sections 18.810.010,
18.810.050.13 and 18.810.100.A.3 for the implementation of public drainage facilities
including storm drains and a water retention pond.
If the storm drainage easement is not established, neighbors to the north and east have
no recourse if the system fails or requires maintenance. The Director's Decision must
be amended to recognize a 15-foot easement for the existing storm drainage system
along the entire northern property line of the subject site.
Appeal Testimony Jaime C. Ramsey Page 4 of 6
APPEAL TE TIMONY: •
Issue 6: Slopes and Erosion Adjacent to 154th Avenue Extension
Erosion problems adjacent to the already built 154th Street extension on the larger parcel
have not been addressed. The proposed public right of way for the 154th Avenue street
extension is not wide enough, because it does not consider the steep slope and daylight
drain immediately adjacent to the east sidewalk. The steep slope will erode across the
sidewalk and impair pedestrian safety and water quality.
City Staff agrees that there is a slope to contend with and states that it will be addressed
when the Applicant (in this case the City) submits construction plans for the roadway
extension. As previously noted above and shown in Exhibit B, the roadway extension is
already built and the slope was not dealt with at that time!
Sections 18.810.010, 18.810.020.E.1.g and 18.810.020.E.1.j require the consideration
of steep slope and pedestrian safety issues for the implementation of public facilities
such as public streets. The public right-of-way must be wide enough to neutralize the
impact of the steep slope and daylight drains. A retaining wall may be necessary.
The Director's Decision failed to acknowledge this issue. City improvement standards
do not appear to have been enforced when the street extension was built. The Decision
must be amended to include a wider right-of-way or a slope easement on the east side
of the street extension.
7
Issue 6: Dedication of Sensitive Lands for Conservation Easement
Deed restrictions including Sensitive Lands Review prior to tree removal on slopes
greater than 25% is meaningless and redundant since Sensitive Lands review is
required by Section 18.775 of the Community Development Code.
A Conservation Easement exists on adjacent Sensitive Lands to the east. See plat map
of Morningside Subdivision-Exhibit F.
Reference Exhibit H, Special Use Permit to build the Menlor Water Reservoir, Exhibit C,
Staff Report, pages 8-11. When the City of Tigard applied for a Special Use Permit to
build the Menlor Water Reservoir on tax lot 2S105DB00400 (immediately adjacent to the
subject site) that property was designated as Wildlife Habitat by the Bull Mountain
Community Plan. A Wildlife Habitat Assessment determined that the value of the site as
wildlife habitat was "high," and the Ecologist's report recommended that: (1) all large
diameter overstory trees be retained and (2) retention of the periphery buffer to provide
for travel and cover of wildlife occurring within the site. This is significant, because
Sensitive Lands on the subject site are of the same quality and importance.
I believe it is the Director's intent to protect Sensitive Lands and trees. The Director's
Decision should be changed to require the creation of a Conservation Easement on
slopes greater than 25%, as indicated in Exhibit I. This would best protect Sensitive
Lands, wildlife habitat and trees while buffering wildlife habitat from future development
and providing a wildlife corridor bridging the Conservation Easement in the Morningside
Subdivision and the Menlor Water Reservoir site (tax lot 2S105DB00400).
Appeal Testimony Jaime C. Ramsey Page 5 of 6
APPEAL TEITIMONY: 0
The above referenced criteria based issues were brought to the attention of City Staff
during the public comment period. They were not addressed in the Director's Decision
forcing me to appeal the Director's Decision on behalf of the surrounding neighborhood
for the reasons stated above.
Respectfully,
C. 7 7n
Jaime Ramsey
Attachments:
Exhibit A - Applicant's Proposed Taxlot 600 Partition Site Plan
Exhibit B - Picture of Completed 154th Avenue Extension
Exhibit C - Subject Site Map including location of significant trees in the proposed nature
path right-of-way.
Exhibit D - Picture of trees in the proposed nature path right-of-way
Exhibit E - Pictures of daylight drain in northeast corner of subject site
Exhibit F - Plat Map of Morningside Subdivision
Exhibit G - Subject Site Map including location of existing storm drain easements to the
east and the existing storm drain and daylight drain.
Exhibit H - Staff Report and Recommendation regarding Special Use Approval and
Development Review of the Menlor Water Reservoir Site
Exhibit I - Subject Site Map including location of proposed Conservation Easement
Appeal Testimony Jaime C. Ramsey Page 6 of 6
I ,
I
W
v
a
0
0
i
0
O
WI
U
0
0
3
a
w~
7
a
0
M
0
T
0
m
d
ii
I
I I I I I I
I I I
I I I I ,
TO SCHOLI_S FERRY R~ (:~~5 AC I 6
w
(TL 1200
I X I ST I NG 15 rTH AVE ( (TL 60 "
6XTENS (ON PR a.3s ac
OPOSED 77„
TO AF EA FOR DED CATIgN -
CI EA RI I GHT-OF-Wq~Y 225' 1 965.6.4'
PR POSED TL 600 T POSED AREA FOR I
PAT I T I ON ONE
NE
BULL MTN) D CATION TO 'C I TIY
c EAd I OWS I (rusoo) R, G T-OF-WAY FOR, FUTURE 1
1 N TURD: PATH ACCESS TO
\ (.TL 7900) (TL 7800) (TL 7700) (TL 7600) C#TY OED TAX LOT 400
U ( "T f I
~i' - - - - - ` 25' UTILITY BMEAD&W'
- r _ RIGHT-OF-WA`
S. W. YARR- OW W -AY
II S. W. BRISFLEC0NE WAY
I I I I ~ ,(I I--
- (TL 15300) 1.74 ACRES C
N
. I
225
(TL 1600)
\u
i a
(TL 300)
lQ I (TL 1500)
ROUN)~ (TL 00)
TREE
ESTATES w I - - ' \ Apo
(TL 1400) ~581 -
- - _ _ ( 400)
(TL 1300)
3 EXIS G E -I\
35' HOUSE ~P L J
ACCESS ROAD-\ 8 _
S. W. 154 TH AVE. J-
I _Q_
377,90 X
I
r~ _I vY
r
9~ r I
I
,r
( ~I
r
\ ~ I
1
I ~ I
I
- - - - - CITY IGARD TAX LOT 400
G
I , I
I ( _ _ _I I 4~6 \
I ~ s
MORN INGSIDE~
/ (EVELOPMENT I CITY OF T I GARD
TAX LOT 600
NOTES;
1. TAX MAPAOT NO 2S 105DB00600
2. SEE FIGURE 2 FOR CONCEPTUAL RE-PARTITION SHADOW
PLAN -
SITE PLAN
SCALE: I" = 100'
I \
I
I
I
I \
I
I
I
b
ro
C-4
I
I
~I
I
I I I ,
I I
I I I r
FIGURE 1
CITY OF TIGARD
- PROPOSED TAXLOT 600
PARTITION SITE PLAN
(CjITYOFT AQD
OREGON
94-03!0.466
MARCH 2000
0 EXHIBIT B
i
i
The proposed 154"' Avenue extension was built more than two years ago including
street surfaces, gutters, curbs, sidewalks, utilities and daylight drains.
vl
i
r
W
a
0
0
I
0
3
C)
N
W
J
_U
i
v
d
0
U
r
!
I
1 • I
MORNINGSIDE~ CITY OF TIGA
CEVELOPMENT TAX LOT 600
~ THIS SHADED AREA IS
SENSITIVE LAND AREA W/
(TL 5300) 1/ SLOPE EXCEEDING 257.
` 225'
_ \1\11 1
(TL 1600) II I \ ` \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ ` 11`11\11\ 111
1 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1\ ~\`~~~i 111 111 \11'111 I I' 1\\C
v~>> V vAvv vA A ~ w v vv A 11\1'\ \ vvvv ~.~„1V111 11AVlll" v11'1 vAA,
vvv` v` v4 v v`v vv vvv,. I,.yvvvv~vv~v ,1 v~1vvyvy,
\ \ \ \ \-t~~-~--\ \ \\\\\tl \\1 1\ \U\
v ~ v Imo, v`v Av v , ~ 1. Avv ~ vwvyvvvvvvvvv~y y`~vvvvvv~vAVVVVI
v ~1 v ` . v v , _ 1` ~v . v~~„vy~ vv vvv vvvv" yv"\\\ > \ ~,1 \ \\\\'1
v 1 v 1V v v v v A~~ I' 1 1 " ` v A` v.vvv.vvv vvvAAV~A<;VAAvvv1v< VA1~ (TL 300)
i\VA 1 1 ~ A`v`~V 111 1~ A `v A`VAAVA~IA ~\VA` VAA\ vAAAAAAVA\\p\
1 V A . . . v ~ A~VA \V V A V AAA
(TL 1500) ` T~~vv~~v v,vv\vvv ~'vvvvvv vvv1vvv\
I CONCEPTUAL ROAD I ' 1 1 `v A \ v~ `vv v vvv1~~~~~1v~ vvvvvl~w`~~,;v_
ALIGNMENT ,11 1 vv vt v v1v1,111;11~wv~v yvv
- - - - A~ 1i 1 _R~`~ v111 1 vv v vvvvo
TL 1400\V A 1 1 1 ` v v l 1V 1 1 - ~CC~~ Al"11
( ) ` ` ` 1 ( \v v ~I11 ~I I,.1 ~ILI'Il~llllir
v v~ 1 A 1 1 v v ®II U \~Vv.1~1 L
11 I
1 1 \ 1 1 w ` I I ~I VA - t\V A` 1V A\~ 1 ~ 1 7'v 11 '111»Irl l.,
I Il It ~~11F11 1A v,\VvA~~IA11111 I ~ v 1 111 VAA
I 1 ' ~ I I ~ I I 1 1, t` ~ 1l AV l III ~ ~ ~ 11 11A 4 l V~
I 1 1 i I I l v 1'' l e AAVAVA~' 11111 1 ~ 11,1 1111A\VAV A\
v . '111 ,1 11 vv11~ It;ll I 1' 1 `1111vv . v
CONCEPTUAL 12
PROPERTY LINE I I I ' v'vlvu I I. /I :'~Ci~11 .1'vvvv11)1~1,11i~:~...1'i~~1111vvv`v~~~~vv~
~ I I I 1 ` \ I I r / \ \11\1 1 \\\\1111 1\~.`\ Illl\'~\\
/ 1 I 1 1 l 1 \ 11 I I / \ ~i11\111. A ~~A1{.,1 ~`}1\ VAV`VA VA1 \\VA VA\
;I I I I I III I I I/ `~11\\`~ \\1~ii1~T `11 11111 11hh,1{`~1\1`,1
- - - - 1 11~ I , v\\~\~ \1~t11~111.1111~ 111(~1~11 C~'t11\V~VVA\\\VVAA`
(TL 1300) ` 111 1111 1VA`,~A ~A\\VA1 1'111,1 1\111'11I111v`!A`VAVV``~
\ \ I \ 1 R\ 1 1 1 11 1 I 1 \ \ \ \ \ \
` \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~ \ 1\ 1 1 11 1 \ ,1 k I l l l \ 1 \ \
VII A f V ~A V A \ ERISTIN~ A1~UA11 1~,.111?II~111IIIIII~II~ `11111AVAVAAA~ y~~
VVA HOUSE X111:11 11 ~V vvvv
`~''~v,~~~'\ \ VA ` \ V 1 I II 1\1Af 1111111A 1 11 A 11 AVAVV ~
1~ III A \V A `\\V `~,~v 1 1 -_I 6 1111111(\( ~\-11AAV1V A\VA VvVAAA\
Q1I1 v ~vv v uv,~v) v1 1 11 11vv1 vv vv vv Vine maple rove, In
V A vvv ~V~ AA A 1V'',111 \11V A~~ AAVAvv.
II ~p\ \ ~ \ I >,\\\r 1 1 \
\ , \ { \ . , \ proposed ~ahare trail.
If \ \n\ 11\\\\\\\ \I \
1 , v~~v Vv~ C\VA AA A' AV AVA V A V A
S.W. 154th AVE. ~I~I, ! J '1 1 vv`v v ~`1 11111!11 I I~`~ `~v~~w vvv` ` v`~
I I 't-- \ \ \ \ \ \111 11'1 ~ \ \ 11 \ \ \ 1 \ \
TO SCHOLLS FERRY R0
iI 1 1 1 A ` \ v ` ` h'~ vC 7 I I ` ~~vvv yvvv
(TL 1200) I / 1> _ `_deLL v.._. _U_ I 11'~ A A V `wv~
19'-0"
6"---I I-
7'-0" 12'-0" 12'-0" i ~5 ~o
4.17% 4.17%
WASHINGTON COUNTY
3" CLASS C' ASPHALTIC CONC STD SW, TYP
8" 142"-0" BASE ROCK WASHINGTON COUNTY
2" ~,°-D" LEVELING ROCK STD CURB & GUTTER,
TYP
NOTE-
1. 154th AVE EXTENDED MATCHES EXISTING 154th AVE..
EXISTING SW 154TH AVENUE EXTENSION
TYPICAL'STREET SECTION
SCALE I"=10'-0"
PIVC STA = 8+44,78
PIVC EL = 290.56
-2" VC
AO = 4.6 wl
K = 15.22
310
0
.
310
n
®
+
oo
a OLD DWY
00
w GRADE
300
e u c
N-W 5' v my
300
Nx
uw N
DNY APRON g7"
al`%'l 8~~
>
~ z
`EXIST
O.w w
GRADE
290
-4
290
REMOVED
\8+39 78 END
E1'IST DWY
154TH AVE EXTENSION
APRON
EL=230.65
280
-
280
7+80 8+10
8+40 8+70 9+00 9+30
154TH EXTENDED STA 8+26.78
= 0+00 ACCESS ROAD
J I ~ ' i 1 ' 1 ! II 11'\1'1 1\1j11111
EXISTING ~W 154TH 111,'1+1.
/ t
`\``"\`I1 III I'III'111;',`\\1\
AVENUE E I \600))hj EXISTING FENCE
EXTENSION, , , '
REA FOR r I \ 117 11 111
PROPOSED , \ \ \
.l T}
111 \V AV`v w
DEDICATIONTO CITY '
R I GHTrOF-WAY - . ~ n \ I I \
t-I~rl
1 PROPOSED AREA FOR
PROPOSED ✓ : ' DEDICATION TO CITY
TL 600 R I GHT-OF-WAY FOR FUTURE
e 1 ) I,, , , r ~ Ill I I I , 1 \\11 \ ~ I
PARTIi ION LINE - 22 j ,h! 1 ' 1
NATURE PATH ACCESS TO CITY
TL 7900 TL 7800n 7700 r` I\ OWNED TAX LOT 400
0)
( ) ( ) ( ) (n
760 I `
(TL7500)
I I I 1 I ~ `.I\\\
BULL MTN.
~EADOWS
Loc2{ion of e*is-inn '
frees in PmFosed `
I I
nsiuve mil.
I I I / / ,
NOTU. SITE PLAN
1. TAX MAPAOT NO 2S 105DB00600 SCALE: I" = 50'
NOTE;
I. 154th AVE EXTENSION ROAD SECTION SEE ABOVE.
EXISTING S.W. 154TH AVE EXTENSION PROFILE
SCALE: I" = 60' HORIZ, I"=20' VERT
FIGURE 2 MARCH 2000
CITY OF TIGARD
PROPOSED TAXLOT 600
CONCEPTUAL RE-PARTITION
SHADOW PLAN
onsox -
94-0310.466
0 0 EXHIBIT D
Trees in the proposed nature path right-of-way.
0 EXHIBIT E
a
r r•.
n x
Z , \ m
s into ditch along nortCle
t' here it dump
below
side subdivision show
from Morning close-up picture _
Daylight drain of the subject site. 1iJ;-
MORNINGSIDE SHEET LOTS INDEX: 1
SHEET 1- SURVEYORS CERTIFICATE
TH PLAT BOOK /D~ PAGE
LOTS 12-32 WITH CURVE DATA
SITUATED IN THE SE AND NE QUARTER OF SHEET 2- LOTS 1-11, 33-36, TRACTS 'A' RECORDED AS DOCUMENT No. 9609.3/5'6 s
AND 'B' WITH CURVE DATA
SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 2-SOUTH, RANGE 1-WEST OF THE SHEET 3- CON~~TnAOFNF`IDAACKNOD
VITS. PPLLAT NOTTES LEGEND:
WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON AND APPROVALS k DENOTES 5/8' I.R.F. MTH P.C. . R.P.C. EXCEPT AS NOTED
f , >R DENOTES 5/e' I.R.F. MTH Y.P.C STAMPED PED 'ALPHA ENG. INC
DATE OCTOBER 1 1, 1996 0 DENOTES 5/8' IROM ROD SET "TM RED PLASTIC CAP STAMPED 'W.LMO. LS.e08' 'tk DENOTES 5/8-X30- [ION ROD TO BE SET NTH RED PLASTIC CAP
SCALE 1 SO' HJUI 4-MCNONAGLE ASSOCIATPS, INC. REaSTERED STAMPED 'W.LM. LS.SOa' PER O.R.S. 9ZO70
• ...cam. SLRIYEYORS PROFESSIONAL SET ON a-22ae
12555 S.w. HALL BLVD. LAND SURVEYOR
JOB NO.: 95-29 TIGHID. OR 97223-6287 / • OEM TES 5/e-X30- IRON ROD TO BE SET WITH ALUMINUM CAP
TELEPHONE: 50.] 639-345J ON CENTERUNES OF ROADS STAMPED 'W.LMC. LS.e08' PER O.R.S. 92.070
BOUNDARY SURVEY AND BASIS OF BEARING: SURVEY NO. 26,414 FAX. 1 > 6~9-1232 /f< " -O-" SET ON LI-s2-,o
O R E G 0 II DENOTES 5/8' IRON ROD FOUND ON CENTERLINES OF ROADS
ti
vi2Ci Std AA"41Y~
NOTE: THERE ARE NO GEODETIC MONUMENTS WITHIN Bou1R&~ 0~ `%x
~ W7 OAM L MQMONACLE~
ONE-HALF MILE OF THE BOUNDARY OF THIS PLAT. e o • N DENOTES INITIAL POINT
S- pTfV~ 71ramale ~asmeln+- o EXPIRES 12-31-96 104 DENOTES 1/1 CORNER
CENTERLINE CURVE DATA: l on S.M . DENOTES SURVEY NUMBERS
CODE DELTA RADIUS LENGTH CHORD BEARING 1 A SF DENOTES SQUARE FEET
D 281 YOY 19&86 9&18' 97.18• 5 75'36.38' E p,ro2v'~125~•~(~~'/' Q 1. F. DENOTES IRON PIPE FOUND
r I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS I.R.F. OENOTES IRON ROD FOUND
E 28.30'49' 19&86' 9&9Y 97.95' S 75.43'29' E TRA( G IS AN EXACT COPY OF Y.P.C. DENOTES YELLOW PLASTIC CAP
1E
LOT CURVE DATA: ,Su\,:`eC' "
R.P.C. DENOTES RED PLASTIC CM
LOT DELTA RADIUS LENGTH CHORD BEARING ''UU
18 9013.42' IB.00• 2&35' 25.51' N "32'02' W~ ESMT. DENOTES EASEMENT
20 01'{0'SJ' 236.30• 6.93• 6.93' S 8908'26' E 0 b o E E ease Y a "N7 EAM L. MCM E Mt DENOTES EFNTERLNE N = •
21 1445'50' 236.30' 60.89' 60.72' S 8035'05' E
22 05'00'58• 177.87' 15.57' 15.57' N 63'58'33' w
22 23 230610' 177,87' 7224' 7974' N 780707' W •-O~ a~ ~F~, V'•'~^ry
24 103'49'37' 18.00' 3262' 2&34' N 5209'37' E .J 0 50 1f10
24 14'27'31• 177' r 44.89' 44.77' N 68"41'49' W Dayliglvit braly% avla SCALE
25 1415'53' 219.87 54.74' 54.60' N 68"36'00' w J
26 1401'11' 219.87' 53.80' 53.67' N B2"44'34• W
29 9000'00' 18.00• 28,2r 25.46' N "'45'11' W ~71C~1T(l 1'11 ®1(- 1~ ~r~Httn
30 9000'00' 1&00• 2&27' 25.46' N 4514'49 E
R0UNDTREE ES T3PTES
~1 - -5 8974'5]' E ( I I I
A N 0014'49' 1, 341.7. ~ L 1 R
Un 189ZB5' ~ I I I I
}1/4' ALUMINUM OISK- 3/4' LPF CN oI I I '61 LuT 27 LOT 31
SOUTH I/4 CORNER tWEST UNE,N 408' I I LOT 19 I LOT 26 I :
ToWMN~ 2-SOUTH - 91.24 I 1.arlr.arl N 0014'49' E 1 1072.97' Iz3.oo'I7J.ar,l )
RANGE 1-WEST 756.24',
1' ~ 91.]9' 3 91.00' 'I'1
U.S.B.T. BOOK 7. PACE 552 INITIAL POINT - ' 31614• 21' i 2 100.00'
5/e' IRON ROD E 23'
NTH R.P.C. m 15 STORY%DRAWAQE ANO 1 W -•T~-J n
STAN PED snm„~}_ EW{ , 1J. Iti 26 27~ I 32 ,0 33
'W.LMc. LSeOe' 23 JI / 7 5.005 SF c 4,e{7 SF 5,127 ss r !a•
1. 21,903 Sr S
`I UD. N 001449' E N 0014'49' E ~I N Y 5 0014'19' W T'
' Z of Gid y.~7 ~b r~ 91.00' L I a 100.00' y' IS' STORM
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: + -s 9bi4~% w:
101.90' 98.35 h SE z V ; DRAINAGE ESMT.
42,8 z s W s 31
I WILUAM 2T9
L McMONAGLE, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT 1 HAVE j0'~+r• ' I r4."~ 25 n a°8 W n
t 3 j i ai~'F.'o: ?'l ? . 6,121 SF $ , n ,
CORRECTLY SURVEYED AND MARKED WITH 5/8'x30' IRON RODS ;t S,• '`g'• ' Ln5 v o: I 5,200 sF ,
VA711 RED PLASTIC CAPS STAMPED 'W.LMC. LS. 808' EXCEPT AS 22 ?7 N 0014'49' E M 0014'49' E I mod' ~
J •:1' I 'Y n r.l 1' S 0011'49• W
SHOWN OR NOTED, ALL LOT AND TRACT CORNERS, CURVE POINTS AND a - - ' - . r '`t 1]•J09 Y 9s.or y 100.00'7 I ; 100,00' W - N
BOUNDARY LINE CHANGES IN DIRECTION THE LAND AS REPRESENTED Q-:y~ I h• m OE, "a N o31a•u• w lo• aT ~
$,'00T4'49•'Ww ~,IL(r • tl 15.00' ON LWE W z_ `g IN THE ANNEXED MAP OF 'MORNINGSIDE'. AND AT THE SE CORNER 97.78
.95' o P T 24 - g 29 S 3 I a • 630 ° 'oI W
LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 847• PAGE 108, 1 SET A 116
- "..Y ~;.,-.,.~•ynC'7S9Y )1))) n 6.430 5F ^
5/8'x30' IRON ROD WITH RED PLASTIC CAP STAMPED 'W.L.Mc" LS. 808' - - t"fix' E W' o.n 7,759 Si R-1 Go OF THAT 34 =
FUR THE INITIAL POINT, SAID POINT BEING LOCATED FROM THE SOUTH
7• 16a0 ~~I N
.2Y N I \ /~L~2&27
L-ze
21p L-32.67
QUARTER CORNER OF SECTIC4d 5, N 0014'49' E 1892.85 FEET TO THE e LET, 'L2J;,> n 16.269 SF 107.65' m~ e2.ar `C C loo
I, W
SW CORNER OF SAID GEED ANDS 89K4'ST E 341.09 FEET; THENCE ~R-- - - - -N
y y,
DESCRIBING THE PLAT BOUNDARY AS FOLLOWS: ALONG THE EAST cr 5;7 114.49' w' o. I 9299' W a S.W. 153rd TERRACE /
LANE OF LAST SAID DEED AND THE EAST ONE OF 'ROUNDTREE 107.9C - - - ' - - - - - - ' - ' - - - - - -
M) T Q., C
287.98' ' , , - 5 0014'49' W 274.29' N 0014'49' E 240.57
ESTATES' PLAT, N 0014'49 E 1072.97 FEET TO THE CENTERUNE OF 0
SW SCHCLLS FERRY ROAD; THENCE ALONG THE CENTERUNE OF
d Ey3x pg 1 . $ - _
Ol ''ti o I W I7.SY 84ar e0.ar 52.00' r 32.00' a0.ar 52.00' T'
SAID ROAD. N 1518'22' E 90.62 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF 20
n 1,, W 100•
A 1150LOC. FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A CENTRAL } - CT ~I'E- L' " 14,091 s $ lY I & L L-28.35'
I
ANGLE OF U7'42'01' (THE CHORD OF YMICH BEARS N 71'27'21' E ZC .~'a;$ 5D 439 x": 93.47 ' 3 w 1
154.44 FEET) AN ARC DISTANCE OF 154.55 FEET; THENCE N 67.36'21- E 15 7-"7 loenY{ Li Ib r 8 u $ u 8
li z.
82.89 FEET TL THE NW CORNER OF THE PLAT OF 'MAYVIEW; THENCE $~1 y. S
3 ° 1 8 17 $ $ 616 15 •R', $ 14 7 $ 13 $ 12 in $ 11
ALONG THE WEST ONE OF 'MAYMEW' AND 'MAYMEW No. 2', g .sc (J: ^'C AINATORM
GE ESNT-^ $I o
_ 19 1i 5,450 Sf 6.000 9 H~- a.o00 SF - 5,200 Y ° S.200
SF 6.000 Sf °I^ s,2W Sf a
S 0014'49' W 1179.82 FEET TO THE SW CORNER OF 'MAYVIEW No. 2'; Uj
3/4 (P.Ff 15,125 Y
THENLE N 8924'57' W 310.28 FEET TO THE INITIAL POINT. `4~ 'v*c _ I .gym I 23• 23•
1 • ! . _ a {69.yY' - ' I N' 1
CONTAINING: 7.98 ACRES. 4-94.06' -,I I; 65,00' eo.ar I ao.ar sx.ar ~ szar soar 1 52.00'
109.06' I2J.ar I2J.0U• 35.ar. `
T T \\v23.e9' ~ 30'3'.- 44.00 711 52.00
21.49.1 e.oo e.ar r
AS PER O.R.S. 92.070 (PAR 2) THE POST-MONUMENTATION OF THE I I I I LOT 45 I \ S 0014'49' vi~ 1179.82' I I I
INTERIOR MONUMENTS IN THIS SUBDIVISION PALL BE ACCOMPLISHED LOT 44 LOT 29
N7HIN 90 CALENDER DAYS FOLLOWING THE COMPLETION OF PAVING I I I I LOT 4\ LOT 25 LOT 26 LOT 27 LOT 28
I I
I
IMPROVEMENTS OR ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE ORIGINAL PLAT I I ` E Wi I 1
RECORDATION, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST IN ACCORDANCE NTH I P v
O.R.S. 92.060. M A Y V I E W N 0. 2
0 SHEET 1 OF 3
-3 i-lelo-3
MORNINGSIDE
SITUATED IN THE SE AND NE QUARTER OF HARRIS-MeMONAGIB ASSOCIATES, INC.
04GINEERS-SURVEYORS PROFEMS90 AL
12555 S.W. HALL BLVD. LAND SURVEYOR
SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 2-SOUTH, RANGE 1-WEST OF THE OR ")22'-6267
fA1M0!'. R(50.16396123215'
WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
°aivEa w7
N7WAM a McMONAf;LE
Is
DATE: OCTOBER 11, 1996 ETO IES 12-31-66
SCALE: 1° = 50'
JOB NO.: 95-29 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS
TRACING IS AN EXACT COPY OF
BOUNDARY SURVEY AND BASIS OF BEARING: SURVEY NO. 26,414 1f1
NLITE: THERE ARE NO GEODETIC MONUMENTS WITHIN WIL)dAM L MlMO
ONE-HALF MILE OF THE BOUNDARY OF THIS PLAT.
-W AMENDED BY INTERIOR MONUMENTATION AFF.
RECORDING DOCUMENT NO. 86/112221
4HF AMENDED BY AFFIDAVIT- DOC. NO. 97121898
PLAT BOUNDARY CURVE DATA:
CODE
DELTA
RADIUS
LENGTH
CHORD
BEARING
P-1
07'42'01'
1150.00'
154.55'
154.44
N 717721' E
CENTERUNE
CURVE DATA:
CODE
DELTA
RADIUS
LENGTH
CHORD
BEARING
A
3638'57'
185.00'
118.34'
116.33'
S 7125'42' E
B
26'49'03'
185.00'
86.59'
85.80'
S 66'30'45' E
C
10.03'36'
185.00'
32.48'
32.44'
S 845705' E
D
16'52'39'
185.00'
119.07'
117.03'
S 7172'34' E
LOT CURVE
DATA:
LOT
DELTA
RADIUS
LENGTH
CHORD
BEARING
1
14.02'49'
208.00'
50.50'
50 38'
S 82'13'46' E
2
145939'
206.00'
53.91'
53.76'
S 6812'32' E
3
79'04'07'
18.00'
24.84'
22.91'
5 391722' E
11854'50'
18.00'
37.36
31.00'
S 59'42'14' W
J
07'44'08'
164.00'
22.14'
2213'
N 56'58'18' W
3
07'36'29'
206.00'
27.35'
27.33'
N 5634'28' W
4
02'14'52'
1183.00'
46.41'
46.41'
N 74'10'56' E
4
93'05.00'
18.21'
29.58'
26.43'
N 6228'37' W
5
03'30'53'
1183.00'
7257'
72.56'
N 7118'03' E
6
01'56'16'
1183.00'
40.01'
40.01'
N 6874'29' E
8
70144'04'
18.00'
22.22'
20.84'
N 35'36'51' E
10
9013'42'
18.00'
26.35'
25.51'
N 4432'02' W
11
89'46'18'
18.00
28.20'
25.41'
N 459758' E
34
71'37'51
1B. GO'
22.50'
21.07'
S 35'34'07' E
34
1626'20'
206.00'
59.10'
58.90'
S 63'09.53' E
35
16'37'10'
181.00
53.30'
53,06'
N 6224'49' W
35
0130'29'
206.00'
6.62'
6.62'
S 54'01'28' E
36
18'01'48'
164.00'
51.61'
51.39'
N 80'44'17' W
TRACT A
0025'31
1.163.00'
8.80'
8.80'
N 75'37'09' E
TRACT B
93,05'00'
18.21'
29.58'
26.43'
S 6228'37' E
PLAT BOOK /06 PAGE .6-1
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT No. 9409.-71/71,
LEGEND:
OENOTES 5/6' I.R.F. WITH 'WLMC. LS.608' R.P.C. EXCEPT AS NOTED
1R DENOTES 5/6' LR.F. WITH Y.P.C. STAMPED -ALPHA INC WC.
0 DENOTES 5/8' IRON ROO SET WITH RED PLASTIC CAP STAMPED 'W.LMa LS.808'
DENOTES 5/8'X31' IRON ROD TO BE SET NTH RED PLASTIC CAP
STAMPED 'W-LM. LS.806' PER 0. S. 92.070
SET ON _ 11-22-96 -
N DENOTES 5/6'X30' IRON ROD TO BE SET WITH ALUMINUM CAP
ON CENTERLINES OF ROADS STAMPED 'W.LMC. LS.508' PER O.R.S. 92070
SET ON II-22-9A
1♦ OENOTES 5/8' IRON ROD FOUND ON CENTERLINES OF ROADS
S.N. DENOTES SURVEY NUMBERS
SF DENOTES SQUARE FEET
I.P.F. DENOTES IRON PIPE FOUND
I.R.F. DENOTES IRON ROD FOUND
Y.P.C. DENOTES YELLOW PLASTIC CAP
R.P.C. DENOTES RED PLASTIC CAP
C.R. DENOTES COUNTY ROAD
MT. DENOTES EASEMENT N Z
L DENOTES CENTERLINE
W 0 50 100
W SCALE
D:
H
D
I t t o WI > I EE ESS P~51 I
LOT 31 LOT 36 1 3 nl D 1 ROVNO~ `
I I I LOT 37
vim
1 I N 00'14'49' E 121. 21.00' 1072.97'
67.0 100.00' 21' 21' 101.09' T 41.77' I
32 v _ 36 1 $ m 1
/a P p ~x y a156 ss D
5 5.215 g 3~ C
I' N 0004'49' E_ Ey m ~ J N 0014*49' E
_
15'S10RN --'4`k: 33 10273' 4 ~3 t 107.25' 'yTR 25 TEA
ORNNAt ESIT. LA~ iF1.D' ! 15.00
? 35 O g > 2 4
31 $ ; n s o4e s r3 J? /eH I yy 5.620 SF
aJ \
i ° L-6.62 se Ol
- 30.05 85.66' 5 00'1{'19' W W 56-s" 3 y N 0014.19' E 115,71'
w y9253' .000 S.r{6'Or W 9.59•
c, l• M1?y nms N1/
w 3 4
= 30 34 V . o y F 7.077 SF 5.007 SF
Ln 6.362 SF 447./~jA1~/',,•N ~j. N Oy E
-1400' 14 I 00 R-=4 N Q- o •j~, 5 151d
m 15.00 R
1 L-2250' \ Yi ~a l-]7.76' 75.54• .y 90•
7228 Y
Li
N Y9'd 1A ec17. Yi, ho Jhp~
1.4 S.W. 153rd TERRACE WV9, bs 4 5
R-_.. _ _ _ _ _ _..x•5\G+.
N 0011'49' E 240.51 „ 5001 5.404 SF
4'19' W 156.73'
.N0C g' S 00R4'41' E
T 4B.- ' L ? J8.J3' 50.00' 31.65' 84.61
1 R-18.00' 11 Ia92•
L-26.20' 1 3ar5' I if lA'~ %zi.22'
j.I 23' 23' •T 8,089 SF
'1 I 36.
r 65.00' `.56.00' arj 50.00' 19.00',' 09 I.` ~ 96757 1
23.ar z3
I I S 100.14'49• w 1 1179.82-1
I
1 LOT 2R I LOT 29 1 p:j I LOT 30 1 LOT 31 I LOT 32 I LOT 33
I I I OIQ IM AYV~EW I I
3
vi
_N.E. CORNER
ROUNOTREE ESTATES
Mn
n ~
m
la
a
Q 0
p 4
N
T G
~O
\ ~ 0
rl N
p \
I W' W: w w N 7036'53' F
I Flo $ alb ' ° ` g " $a i h
13 12 ,:8 11rm:m la 10 S 9 8 a J
N e,m s ml ml '>0 4550 s N 5.000 SF 8 Y '6 6
a 226 SF 7 7.161 SF
\ a
45-
\
LOT 34
SHEET 2 OF 3
14,
0
•
MORNINGSIDE
SITUATED IN THE SE AND NE QUARTER OF
SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 2-SOUTH, RANGE 1-WEST OF THE
WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
DATE: OCTOBER 11, 1996
SCALE: 1" = 50'
JOB NO. : 95-29
BOUNDARY SURVEY AND BASIS OF BEARING: SURVEY NO. 26,414
NOTE: THERE ARE NO GEODETIC MONUMENTS WITHIN
ONE-HALF MILE OF THE BOUNDARY OF THIS PLAT.
DECLARATIONi
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT VENTURE PROPERTIES INC.. AN OREGON
CORPORATION, DOES HEREBY MAKE, ESTABLISH, AND DECLARE THE ANNEXED MAP
OF 'MORNINGSIDE' AS DESCRIBED IN THE ACCOMPANYING SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
A TRUE MAP AND PLAT THEREOF: ALL LOTS AND TRACTS BEING OF THE DIMENSIONS
SHOWN AND THEY DO HEREBY DEDICATE TO THE PUBLIC, AS PUBLIC WAYS FOREVER,
ALL STREETS, AND HEREBY GRANT ALL EASEMENTS SET FORTH FOR THE USES STATED
AND AS SHOWN OR NOTED ON SAID MAP.
BY, -a
DON MORISSETTE
PRESIDENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON aa. I
BE IT REMEMBERED THAT ON THIS JADAY OFQL_lObeR , 1996
BEFORE ME A NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID STATE AND COUNTY
PERSONALLY APPEARED DON MORISSETTE WHO BEING DULY SWORN DID
SAY THAT HE IS PRESIDENT OF VENTURE PROPERTIES INC., AN OREGON
CORPORATION, AND THAT THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS SIGNED ON
BEHALF OF THE CORPORATION BY THE AUTHORITY OF ITS BOARD OF
DIRECTORS, AND HE DOES HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THE SIGNING OF SAID
INSTRUMENT TO BE HIS OWN FREE ACT AND DEED.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO, SET MY HAND AND AFFIXED MY
OFFICIAL SEAL THE DAY AND YEAR LAST ABOVE WRITTEN.
_vw
dRDALIMt
~OfAR11111 p ' III
NOTARY PUBLIC G "/G'2pOD 9
INTERIOR CORNER MONUMENTATION:
IN ACCORDANCE WITH O.R.S. 92.070, THE INTERIOR CORNERS OF THIS SUBDIVISION
HAVE BEEN CORRECTLY SET WITH PROPER MONUMENTS. AN AFFIDAVIT HAS BEEN
PREPARED REGARDING THE SETTING OF SAID MONUMENTS AND IS RECORDED IN
OwuME(Ji Nv. WAJn WUN (:U(iNIT UEEU KEUDKUS.
APPROVED THIS (~_M DAY OF •~✓,✓e 19~.
_0 - 5I" . O4. S
CONSENT AFFIDAVIT:
A SUBDIVISION PLAT CONSENT AFFIDAVIT FROM UNITED STATES NATIONAL BANK
OF OREGON, A TRUST DEED BENEFICIARY, HAS BEEN RECORDED IN DOCUMENT
NO. 9/-n 9n 7-/ a/ P WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS.
BARRL9-Mo*OHAGIB ASSOCIATES, INC.
mvillJts-SDRVETOM
12515 &W. 1411 BLVD.
T ICAM. OR 97223-6257
mu""*: sa3 nTa-u5a
FAIC ( ) a-123z
II PROFES AL
L LAND SURVEYOR
1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS
TRACING IS AN EXACT COPY OF '
1NLIGAM L udAO,,Wt
~WIWAN L MtlA AGLE
.o.
FXPW35 12-31-66
PLAT BOOK 304 PAGE S2.
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT No. _2,~o931 YA
WASHINGTON COUNTY APPROVALS:
APPROVED THIS TL- DAY OF c~-r 1996
WASHINGTON fiQUNTY SURVEYOR
V
DAY OF(f~Xc-SSW
1996
IA
APPRO
ED THIS
,
VM
DIRECTOR OF ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION
(WASHINGTON COUNTY A
SESZSOR
V
OT;
og;'•.•,
ATTEST THIS / 7 DAY 11998
PLAT NOTES: EOW • sn EX oMCIO COUNSTY CLEERTK AND TAXATION
1. AN 8 F007 WIDE EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC SIDEWALKS, WATER SUPPLY AND OTHER BY;1v ~7-/
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES SHALL EXIST ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF ALL LOTS DEPUTY
AND TRACTS ABUTTING PUBLIC STREETS.
2. TRACT "A', IS SUBJECT TO AN EASEMENT OVER ITS ENTIRETY, FOR SANITARY SEWER
AND STORM, AND SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE AND DETENTION. TO THE UNIFIED
SEWERAGE AGENCY.
3. 'TRACT •g. IS SUBJECT TO AN EASEMENT OVER ITS ENTIRETY, FOR PUBLIC
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE USE, PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY, AND PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
UTILITIES. TRACT 'B' IS ALSO SUBJECT TO A SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE
EASEMENT, OVER ITS ENTIRETY. TO THE UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY.
'4. LOTS, f8;7HROUGH~:23';ARCSUBJECT'-T0„A. CONSOVK(ION{,EASEMENT"SHOWN~' EREON'
„k FORt5THE2SENEFIT.05tWA5HINGTON'CWNTYUD~TRW ASSIGNS: THE'EASEMENT AREA
.IS TO+RFDAAN IN IiS~NZAL STATE:
5. MOTOR VEHICLE ACCESS TO OR FROM SW SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD TO LOTS 4. 5 AND 6 IS
PROHIBITED.
6. SUBJECT TO COVENAN75, CONDIIDNS, AND RESTRICTIONS RECORDED IN DOCUMENT
NO. Q(~gaNU~, WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS.
7. ALL LOTS AND TRACTS ARE WITHIN. AND SUBJECT TO THE MINERAL AND AGGREGATE
OVERLAY DISTRICT, COUNTY SECTION 379.
8. ALL OF THE LAND WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THE 'MORNINCSIOE" PLAT IS SUBJECT
TO A MINERAL RESERVATION IN FAVOR OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 32. PAGE 1, AND DISCLOSED IN DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 1,
1926 IN DEED BOO( 134, PAGE 126.
9. THIS SUBDIVISION 15 SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PER CASE FILE NO.
95--625-S. WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT O LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION.
10. ALL SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS ARE HEREBY GRANTED
TO THE UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY.
11. MAINTENANCE AND OWNERSHIP OF TRACT 'A'
ALL BENEFITS, RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF OWNERSHIP, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
THE USE AND MAINTENANCE OF THE AREA DESIGNATED IN THIS PLAT AND ENTITLED
TRACT *A' SHALL INURE TO THE DECLARENTS• THEIR SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS AND
SHALL FOREVER RUN AND REMAIN WITH SAID OWNERSHIP. IN THE EVENT OF FAILURE
TO FULFILL ANY OR ALL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESPONSIBLE OWNERSHIP
BY THE SAID OWNERS, OR BY THEIR DELEGATED AGENT FOR SUCH. THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OR ITS SU...,c.a. -3 OR
DELEGATES IS HEREBY GRANTED THE RIGHT TO ENFORCE SAID DUTIES OF RESPONSIBLE
OWNERSHIP, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO REASONABLE MAINTENANCE
OOJPA71BLE WITH THE OTHER AREAS AND LOTS IN THE PLAT, AGAINST THE OWNERS,
BY ILL MEANS PROVIDED BY LAW.
12. MAINTENANCE AND OWNERSHIP OF TRACT 'B'
ALL BENEFITS, RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF UNDIVIDED AND COMMON OWNERSHIP.
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE USE AND MAINTENANCE OF THE COMMON AREA
DESICNATED IN THIS PLAT AND ENTITLED TRACT 'B' SHALL INURE TO THE OWNER OF
EACH AND EVERY PLATTED LOT IN THIS PLAT AND SHALL FOREVER RUN AND REMAIN
WITH THE OWNERSHIP OF SAID PLATTED LOTS. IN THE EVENT OF FAILURE
TO FULFILL ANY OR ALL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESPONSIBLE OWNERSHIP
BY THE SAID LOT OWNERS, AND EACH OF THEM, OR BY THEIR DELEGATED AGENT FOR
SUCH. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OR ITS
SUCCESSORS OR DELEGATES IS HEREBY GRANTED THE RIGHT TO ENFORCE SAID DUTIES
OF RESPONSIBLE OWNERSHIP, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO REASONABLE
MAINTENANCE COMPATIBLE WITH THE OTHER AREAS AND L015 IN THE PLAT, AGAINST
THE OWNERS OF SAID LOTS, JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY BY ALL MEANS PROVIDED BY
LAW.
APPROVED THIS 1'1+' DAY OF OcTo DrR , 1998
WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON aa.
I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SUBDIVISION PLAT, WAS RECEIVED FOR RECORD
ON THIS /_DAY OF 1/9C TKn As r , 1996 AT /,2 O'CLOCKP M.
AND RECORDED IN THE COUNTY CLERK RECORDS.
By, DEPUTY COUNTY CL K
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON aa.
I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS TRACING IS A COPY CERTIFIED TO ME, BY THE
SURVEYOR OF THIS SUBDIVISION PLAT, TO RF A TR~U-Ff AND FXAL'T [:OPY OF THE
ORIGINAL. AND THAT IT WAS ECORDED ON THE DAY OF~1LN fn h.- t
1996, AT/.2_Lg O'ttOCKJ M. AND RECORDED IN THE COUNTY CLERK RECORDS.
BY:~ mil
DEPUTY COUNTY CLERK
SHEET 3 OF 3
10,
is
v
u'
t
/ MORNINGSIDE CITY OF TIGA D
31~rYY1 ®~'aiv~ DEVELOPMENT
31~ TAX LOT 600 THIS SHADED AREA IS
I SENSITIVE LAND AREA W/
' 0"
- ! 9
-
(T1-5300; - SLOPE EXCEEDING 25% I9 -o -
225' S/W
- - - - - - - `\a \ ' \1\11 I ~1'-0" i 2'-0' I 12'-0" I~ 5_O
r* N v\
I
'-0
\ \ 1 111\1 I l
(TL 1600) I l \ \ 11~\a\\\~\\`\\ \ \\,1`11111 1111111` 4.17% 1 4.17% 2%
1 11 11 _ i7 yv.d,.l/~~~dl^r?~~~~,kr ~u «rre„ r:
E-ls4ivi Storm drain < 0 G\4)\ N' a ` \ \ \ ~ \ \ \ \ \ II 1 } IIIL sin r .
\ \ ® C: \ \\\\•\Pl C\1 1\\~ WASHINGTON COUNTY
\ \L \ \ \ \C\\\~I STD SW, TYP
3" CLASS "C" ASPHALTIC CONC
\ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ I \ \ ` 0' ` \\\`\\C1 `\\\\\11 \\\\1\\\ ea on
\ 1\ \ \ \ 1 11 \ \ \\\::\`I
\ \ \ \ L, B"/Z°-o" BASE ROCK WASHINGTON COUNTY
(n 300) ~1ArP1~~0iS1~ StdIVISIOn
\ ' l ` 1 \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ , \ \ 2" 34"-0" LEVELING ROCK STD CURB & GUTTER,
\\1\1,\`~\\\1\\`;~\\\\\\~ ( TYP
\ .
- - - - ( 1 y, vv y~v v v vyy
(TL 1500) \ l \ \ 1 1 \ \
` J \ \ \ \ \ \\>,,\\L ( = Loco--ion oT dal 45M -OTF:
1 1 + \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\\\\U\ 1\\`\`\`\\\\\\`\ I. 154th AVE EXTENDED MATCHES EXISTING 154th AVE..
CONCEPTUAL ROAD f \ \
6.\ cka:
+11 1 ' + \I Il+`111} 1u 1JIN"\\\\\ r1
ALIGNMENT \
\
1 \ \ f \ \ „ \ \ ,S EX I ST I NG SW ,154TH AVENUE EXTENS I ON
\ TL' &d0 \ \ + 0 Mr)v\ 6A j~ TYPICAL STREET SECTION
v v v A\ 111111\A A~1~A+-V+ v 11
(TL 1400) ~~v v 1 1 1 11~'v `v1.v v~ v 11-LF Iz-Oj11 +I I SCALE I"=10'-0~,
v~11 1 1 1 vv v I j~ ( \v\v1v1 01j111\AVA\.1VAV1,~\\}I,-
111!V ~Illr~lrl Ills
_ / l ~~011 A,':A 1\VAVA\,'\\\If 1''~AI 7vVA'lllnl'Ir~~
\I \I yr I I I
CONCEPTUAL 2I I v` Illlllf ~I\I\111wAA\II~111111 11)v`v`v1`11,11A+~~f~\
: v ~illi'1111vv1)1 tt;~a1111r~::: v11111 Il~iv1`vv~ yv.
PROPERTY LINE I Ilti1,; 1\ tr\4 1101 1',11 1 \ \ \
`mot 1 I I 1 \ \ ~ 1 I r / \ 11111 , 1 \ \ ~+Ii 1'11\\` \ :.I 1 X111 \\1\\\\\\\ ~
I I 1 1 1 1 . \ II 1 I / \ X1111.41 \ ~\\\1:1}1\ \~~~\`1~\\11\`I\`\I\\\\I PIVC STA = 8+44.78
"I I I I _I I \ \ \ q1\ \ \`'1Ci~" \ PIVC EL = 290.56
_ I} \ \
I / ~ II v 111 A 1;vvv1 T• 1 1 1 1 1 1 A`, A\\ , t
1'-2" VC
.II L `~h - A 1Aa 1 } 1 v
.Il 11( 1~1 , \ AD = 4.6
` \ I 3 r / I \\11\\\ \ kI\\1
(TL 1300) V
\ 1 \ I r r r I\ \ \ I\ \.x\\\\11 t+1,\1`1 11111\1111111\'1\\ K= 15.22 all
v 1 1 A
k V, V A v v A ` V V EX IS AAV+111 1•TINI1 1 1111j11 `~1A~vAAVAA A~ 310 ® 00 + 310
V I I A V - TIH 11~`+11 V 1' 11(~j I In l V A 1 1 V` VAA A o co
\ \ l I \ \ \ 11 1` I oQ
vv v1 5'~--\ ~ A V HOUSE +11\1111 1L111 111 11111V`\ +1v` V`vv` vv Op GRAOLD DE
j~ \ \ \ \ If \II \ I "1l 11111 \ \ GRADE
\i. \I\\\,\1 \ -_l0 llllllll\t\1}11111111`111111 mF mm
\ II 1 \ vr \ r \ - If 1111 ^\\\}\`\1111 11111\\` \I\ \ 300 ° N=W 5 i N 300
\
IIlI\-\\.\\\\; \\\ii 111111 \ mx~ NYAPRON
\ \ \
\ JII \ \ \ 11\\\\ v N L
\ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ 1 II
- + - - r-z ~ `EXIST
a
\ \ t ` 1 \ r `\T\~\\ \ \ \ \ t
\ ~jr \I\ 1 \ \ v\ ` ww GRADE
1 \ 1 1 1 0\\~\I:p\\ Q\ 290 y A2~
\ \ \ 290
S.W. 154th AVE. rl ~_7r` a~`\\}\1~`i1~11 ` \ \ \ \ , 8+3976 END
REMOVED \1541'1 AVE EX
I \ \ a\ l)\11.; 1 \ \ \ \11\\\ `\\1+1
1 TNSION
I \ / 1 \ E; IST DWY
TO SCHOLLS FERRY RD ` C~ < \ ` \ \ ) 1 \\\\'r `1 It 1I\ \ y \ \ \ \
\ `
7- ^\111 j1I~~~ 1\ 1\ \ APRON EL=230.65
l\ t / _ \ \ \ 1111 1\\\\ 11 \ \ \ 280 280
- - - - 1 1 \ i \ ` \ \ \ ` 1 !.I • u I I \ \ 7+80 8+10 8+40 8+70 9+00 9+30
I I r 3I I A , ` v A V v v ~`•~VA4' v`vv` ^1 III v`\`` V`
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I 1 1 \ \ \ ' ` \ ` \ ` 15 DEXTEN
(TL 1200) 1 I s:c., 0f_ c r. 1
ED STA 0+00 ACC SS ROAD 26.78
I ~ - wlrl \ \111 ,
W
a
P
0
0
I
3
O
N
W
U
4
to
0
0
a
U
I 1 A A\ 1 1 , A ` t V v+ V \V VA A\V A VA A
I I \ 1 1 \ I \ \ 11\, \ \ \ \
EX I ST I NG $W 154TH -f 1. 1 i r' ` \ 1 I 1 1\I I1y1 \I\\\ 1 1111111 `
/ /I 1 I (TL\1600~.1`I EXISTING FENCE I1 11111(IIIII 11111111111`1`
AVENUE ENTENS I ON, \ \ 1 , \ \
PROPOSED REA FOR f4. I ' I 1111+ "
{ I I\' I .~l /11 v~ v vvv3131111 1 11 11 vv\\ AVv v
DEDICATION TO CITY I
R IGHTrOF-WAY 1 i 1 1 r`/' + - - i/iTi 111\`\ \ \ \ \
PROPOSED AREA FOR
PROPOSED TL 600 r I~ " v
DEDICATION TO CITY
PART I TJ ION LINE 225 i _ i ? \ RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR FUTURE
_ / 111 I 1\11\.\\\' \\\\\r
o\ \ \ \ ` ` NATURE PATH ACCESS TO CITY
(TL 7900 ) (TL 1800) (TL 7700) (TL 7600) OWNED TAX LOT 400
' (TL7500) `\Y \
I I I ~ I I / I\ \
NOTES-
1. TAX MAPAOT NO 2S 105DBOO600
BULL MTS.
MEADOWS
Ins / /
I I ' \
I
SITE PLAN
SCALE: I ° = 50'
NOTE:
I. 154th AVE EXTENSION ROAD SECTION SEE ABOVE.
EXISTING S.W. 154TH AVE EXTENSION PROFILE
SCALE: I" = 60' HORIZ, I"=20' VERT
W
9)
FIGURE 2 MARCH 2000
CITY OF TIGARD
PROPOSED TAXLOT 600
CONCEPTUAL RE-PARTITION
SHADOW PLAN
crtroFr3cApe
olrcoox -
94-0310.466
~GT (
I.~F
4 1996
41UtilSflf,J[Yilltl
~ w
Ma-snington County
Department of Land Use and
~
Transportation
Land Development Services
155 N First Ave, Suite 350
Hillsboro, OR 97124
RECOMMENDATION
& STAFF REPORT
PROCEDURE TYPE II
CPO:4B COMMUNITY PLAN:
Bull Mountain
LAND USE DISTRICT:
R-6 (Residential 6 units Der acre)
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ASSESSOR MAP#: 2S1 5DB
LOT#:-400
SITE SIZE: 11.03 acres
ADDRESS: 13425 SW Sunrise Lane
•
CASEFILE: 96-480-SU/D
APPLICANT:
Citv of Tiaard. Mr. Ed Weaner
Citv Hall
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tiaard. OR 97223
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE:
Mr. Chris Uber
Murray. Smith & Associates. I.Dc.
121 SW Salmon #1020
Portland. OR 97204
CONTACT PERSON:
Mr. Chris Uber
OWNER:
same as aoolicant
LOCATION: 225 ft. south of the current
terminus of SW 154th Av. south of Firtree
Dr.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ACTION: Soecial Use Aooroval and Development Review
for a 3.5 million oallon water storaoe reservoir.
October 17, 1996
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Hearings Officer adopt the attached Findings
(Attachment C) and approve the application subject tc the imposition of the
Conditions of Approval contained in Attachment B.
Attachments: A. - Vicinity Map
B. - CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
C.- Staff Report
D.- Transportation Report
E.- Street Trees
O~
T-
: ATTACHMENT- VICINITY- MAP
aPage 3 Notice of PUb1ic'Nealih9'-' .
TAX MAP/LOT NO. 2S1 5DB 400 CASE FILE NO.96-480-SU/D
REEN ST
61
200
2000 1900 1,600 1401
16011700 1600
W CU/ gA{(Fp V~~ 300
2200 ~ •...,'~++k'y__\
900
2300 0001100 1200
800 1300
r i t l 1200
1900
R15
R6
I1100 ( 600
4 NORTH AREA OF CONSIDERATION
SCALE: 1" TO 400'
SITE & SURROUNDING LAND USE DISTRICTS:
R-6 DISTRICT (RESIDENTIAL 6 UNITS/ACRE)
R-9 DISTRICT (RESIDENTIAL 9 UNITS/ACRE)
R-15 DISTRICT (RESIDENTIAL 15 UNITS/ACRE)
1600 loo
1700
R9
- - 200
WY
300
i
s 600
r 4Q0
r~
300 201
R6
200
100
2000
400 1400 160(
101
600 500
700 1100
too
400 800
1300
v
900 ` 1600
100C 1200
REVIEW STANDARDS FROM CURRENT OR
APPLICABLE ORDINANCE OR PLAN
A. WASHINGTON COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
B. RURAUNATURAL RESOURCE ELEMENT
C. TRANSPORTATION PLAN
D. WASHINGTON COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE:
ARTICLE I, INTRODUCTION & GENERAL PROVISIONS
ARTICLE 11, PROCEDURES
ARTICLE III, LAND USE DISTRICTS
ARTICLE IV, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
ARTICLE V, PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
ARTICLE VI, LAND DIV. & LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS
ARTICLE VII, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
E. R'& O 86-95 TRAFFIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS
F. ORD. NO. 318 UNIFORM ROAD IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
G. ORD. NO. 379 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
H. R & 091-75 SURFACE WATER QUALITY/QUANTITY
200
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Attachment B
CONDITIONS
OF APPROVAL
1. PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY ON-SITE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING
GRADING. EXCAVATION AND/OR FILL ACTIVITIES THE APPLICANT SHALL:
A. Submit to Building Services (640-3470) for review and approval:
Grading/drainage plan consistent with the standards of Sections 410 and 412
(Type I procedure). -
B. Submit to the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (648-8621) for review and
. approval:
Application for USA site development permit in accordance with R&O 91-
47/91-75.
NOTE: Erosion control permit and inspection fees are due upon submittal of
final plans.
C. Submit to Land Development Services, Project Planner (Albert Boesel,
681-3835):
1. Submit copy of easement agreement allowing utilization of Tax
Map/Lot 2S1 5DB/600 as access to the project site.
II. PRIOR TO FINAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL THE APPLICANT .
SHALL:
A. Obtain an Access Permit.for construction of the driveway approach
from the terminus of SW 154th Avenue.
NOTE: Contact Land Development Services (Teri Cramer, 681-3834) to
obtain the required forms.
B. The following documents shall be executed:
1. Sign and record a waiver not to remonstrate against the formation
of a local improvement district or other mechanism to improve and
Casefile 96-480-SUID
Conditions of Approval - Page 2
maintain SW Sunrise Lane to County standards between SW
Scholls Ferry Road and SW Bull Mountain Road.
2. Dedicate additional right-of-way to provide 30 feet from centerline
of SW Sunrise Lane adjacent to the site.
NOTE: Contact the Survey Division (Jamil Kamawal, 693-4543) to
obtain the required forms.
C. Submit to Land Development Services, Project Planner (Albert Boesel,
681-3835):
1. Final Approval form (Type I procedure).
2. Final Approval fee.
3. Replanting plan prepared by a qualified biologist or plant ecologist for
disturbed areas at the site entrance, along the access road and at the
base of the reservoir.
4. Install protective fencing at the drip lines of all trees to be retained
within the vicinity of proposed grading activities. Submit written
verification from a consulting arborist that the fencing is adequate to
protect trees from damage caused by excavation, fill and construction
equipment.
5. Written verification from a registered professional engineer that the
private street into and through the project site has been built to the
standards of Section 409.
111. PRIOR TO BUILDING OCCUPANCY AND/OR FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION.
APPROVAL:
A. Site improvements shall be rnmp. ie}pd in nf-r-.~~rd with t~^e approvefinal
it i U U plans.
B. All facilities and improvements required by USA shall be completed and
approved by USA.
IV. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS:
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Conditions of Approval - Page 3
A. Adequate sight distance shall be continuously maintained by the property
owner. This may require the property owner to periodically remove
obstructing vegetation from the road right-of-way.
B. Access to the site shall be from SW 154th Avenue through Tax Map/Lot
2S1 5DB/600
C. Landscaping and street trees shall be maintained in accordance with Section
407-8.10. Maintenance shall include, but is not limited to regular watering,
weeding, pruning and replacement. .
D. Obtain a Sign Permit prior to the placement of signs on the site unless
otherwise exempt under Section 414-5.
E. This development shall be constructed in accordance with the conditions of
this decision, the approved final plans and the standards of the Community
Development Code (Section 207-6.1).
F. All conditions of approval shall be binding upon all heirs, successors and
assigns (Section 207-6.1).
G. Transferability of this Development Permit shall be in accordance with Section
201-8.
H. The removal of any tree over 6 inches in diameter shall require the approval
of a tree removal permit.
I. This approval shall automatically expire two years from the date of this
approval, unless development has commenced, an application for an
extension is filed, or this approval is revoked or invalidated (CDC Section
201-4).
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Attachment C
STAFF REPORT
I. APPLICABLE STANDARDS
A. 1990 Washington County Comprehensive Plan
B. 1984 Bull Mountain Community Plan
C. 1994 Washington County Community Development Code:
1. Article II, Procedures:
Section 204-4 Type III Procedure
Section 207-6 Conditions of Approval
2. Article III, Land Use Districts:
Section 303 R-6 District
3. Article IV, Development Standards:
Section 404 Master Planning
Section 405 Open Space
Section 406 Building, Siting and Architectural Design
Section 407 Landscape Design
Section 408 Neighborhood Circulation
Section 409 Private Streets
Section 410 Slopes and Grading
Section 411 Screening and Buffering
Section 412 Drainage
Section 413 Parking and Loading
Section 414 Signs
Section 415 Lighting
Section 416 Utilities
Section 423 Environmental Performance Standards
Section 426 Erosion Control
Section 430-105 Public Utility
.4. Article V, Public Facilities and Services:
Section 501-5 Standards for Development
Section 502 Sidewalk Standards
D. 1989 Transportation Plan
E. Ordinance No. 379 - Washington County Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance
F. Resolution and Order No. 86-95 - Determining Traffic Safety
Improvements Under the Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance
G. Ordinance No. 318 - Uniform Road Improvement Standards
H. Resolution and Order No. 91-47 - Concerning Erosion
Control, Water Quality and Quantity
II. AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS
Casefile 96-480-SUID
Staff Report - Page .2
Sewer:
Streets:
Drainage:
Water Quality
and Quantity:
Erosion Control:
Fire Protection:
Transit:
Police Protection
III. FINDINGS
Unified Sewerage Agency
Washington County Dept. of Land Use and Transportation
Washington County Dept. of Land Use and Transportation
Unified Sewerage Agency
Unified Sewerage Agency
Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue
Tri-Met
Washington County Sheriff
A. Background Information:
1. The applicant requests Special Use Approval and Development Review for
a 3.5 million gallon water storage reservoir.
2. Access to the site is proposed from the current terminus of SW 154th
Avenue located north of the project site: A single parcel of land lies
between the terminus of SW 154th Avenue and the project site; it contains
one single family residence. This parcel is not owned by the applicant. At
the time of this Review an access easement had not been granted allowing
the applicant utilization of the northerly abutting property for access to the
project site. The applicant states that negotiations continue with the
property owner.
3. The site contains no drainage hazard areas and/or wetlands/water areas
according to the County Flood Plain Series and National Wetland Inventory
maps.
4. There were no letters of comment received regarding this application
B. 1990 Washington County Comprehensive Framework Plan:
There are no specific Plan policies or goals which affect this request that are not
implemented by the Code or the Community Plan. The Framework Plan requires
development applications to be in compliance with the Community Development
Code and the applicable Community Plan. By demonstrating in this report, that
the request complies with the standards of the Code and the Community Plan,
this Plan requirement will be satisfied.
C. 1984 Bull Mountain Community Plan:
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page 3 -
The site is located in the Summit and Slopes subarea
The site is located in Mineral and Aggregate District B.
The site is designated as a Significant Natural Resource.
The Community Plan is implemented by the Community Development Code.
When built in conformance with the conditions of approval, the project will be in
compliance with the community plan.
D. 1994 Washington County Community Development Code:
1. Article II, Procedures:
Section 204-4 Type III Procedures
STAFF: This application is being reviewed as a Type III
application. A public notice advertising the request has
been mailed to all property owners within 250 feet of the
site. A public notice sign has been posted on the site as
required by the Community Development Code (CDC)
Section 204-1.4. The posting affidavit is in the Casefile.
Section 207-6 Conditions of Approval:
207-6.1 The Review Authority may impose conditions on any
Type II or III development approval. Such conditions
shall be designed to protect the public from potential
adverse impacts of the proposed use or development or
to fulfill an identified need for public services within the
impact area of the proposed development. Conditions
shall not restrict densities to less than that authorized by
the development standards of this Code.
STAFF: . Conditions of approval must be imposed to ensure
compliance with the standards of the Code and other
County regulations and to mitigate any adverse impacts
the use may have on the surrounding area.
2. Article III, Land Use Districts:
Section 303 R-6 District
STAFF: The proposed public utility (water storage reservoir) is
allowed in the District through the Special Use Standards
outlined in Section 430-105 (below).
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page 4
The proposed siting of the water reservoir meets all the
yard requirements of the R-6 District (Section 303-6).
The site plan indicates the water reservoir approximately
34 feet above proposed finished grade. The applicant
states it will not exceed a maximum height of 40 feet in
accordance with Section 303-6.3.
3. Article IV, Development Standards:
Section 404 Master Planning
STAFF: The applicant has submitted the information required by
this section in the form of a site plan showing topography,
the proposed access and siting of the water reservoir.
The general area of existing trees is also.shown. For the
immediate development site, Section 404-1.3, Table I,
requires the size, species and location of trees six inches
or greater in diameter be shown; the general groupings of
other'species shall be shown.
The entire text and maps of the Water Supply Plan for
Bull Mountain Area Tigard Water District is included with
this application. This plan, developed for the City of
Tigard in September, 1986, explores and discusses the
future water supply needs of the Bull Mountain Area. The
Plan includes: recommendations for supply facilities
needed to provide water distribution systems throughout
the study area; a schedule for construction of these
facilities; and the costs to construct and operate the
facilities. The recommendations included in this Plan are
based on population projections and allowed densities of
the service area. Of relevance to this particular Revie i is
the study's reference for the need of a water reservoir at
the 410 foot elevation at a location south of Scholls Ferry
Road.
Section 405 Open Space
STAFF: Section 405-1.1 requires areas mapped as a Significant
Natural Area on the Community Plan to be preserved as
open space, except as otherwise provided. The
applicant's site plan and narrative indicate clearing limits
for the proposed facilities. All existing trees and
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page .5.
vegetation will be removed within the limits of the access
road and reservoir. In order to minimize the impact on
existing vegetation the access road will also serve as a
utility corridor (Section 405-2). As required by this
Section, areas within the project site not affected by
construction of facilities will be left undisturbed. Although
not addressed, it appears ownership and maintenance of
the entire parcel will remain with the Tigard Water District
(Section 405-5.2).
Section 406 Building, Siting and Architectural Design
STAFF:, The development is permitted within the primary district
through Special Use review. The reservoir is sited to
maintain all minimum setback and lot coverage
requirements and meets the maximum height
requirements of the primary district (Section 406-1.1; 1.2;
1.3).
The solar plan submitted with the application indicates
the approximate limits of the tank's shadow at December
21st. The shadow does not encroach on abutting
properties.
The reservoir will be poured concrete. A cement colored
finish will be sprayed onto the concrete.
Section 407 Landscape Design
STAFF: Section 407-7 requires street trees to be planted along all
public and private roadways and access drives.
However, the access drive which passes through Tax
Map/Lot 2S1-5DB/600 will be expanded in the future to
serve residential development and Staff balieves str-aet
trees should not be required at this time. The need for
street trees will be addressed throuqh future residential
development of this parcel. Undisturbed existing trees
and replanting as required by Section 422 shall serve as
street trees along the interior access drive.
A minimum of 25% of the buildable land area pursuant to
Section 407-1.2 shall be used for landscaping in
residential districts (Section 407-1.3). All areas of a
building site not identified in a site plan or development
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page .6
plan application as intended for a specified immediate
use shall be landscaped except where enclosed and
blocked from the view of public streets by solid fencing or
buildings (Section 407-1.6).
Generally, the remaining on-site natural vegetation will be
adequate to meet these requirements. However, Section
430-105.5 of the Code requires the applicant to consider
the compatibility of the facility with existing surrounding
uses and uses allowed by the plan designation. The
applicant's narrative states that final landscaping design
will include provisions for a locking security gate and may
include provisions for an ornamental brick entrance way
and cast iron fencing. Besides the entrance gate and
brick work, Staff believes some form of natural
landscaping will be required at the entrance to replace
vegetation removed as part of roadway construction.
This replanting plan shall be guided by a biologist or
landscape architect.
Section 407-3.3 requires a description of trees to be
removed and an explanation of the purpose of removal.
This Section also requires a site plan showing the
location, size and species of trees six inches or greater in
diameter. For forested areas that are larger than five
acres, the general locations of trees may be shown with
one or more detailed one acre sample areas.
An ecologist's report submitted with the application
describes the trees to be removed and the purpose of
removal (see Section 422 below). A tree removal plan
was also submitted. Trees within the access road
alignment and reservoir footprint and toe of slope are to
be removed.
Section 408 Neighborhood Circulation
STAFF: A neighborhood circulation plan, as required by the
Traffic Impact Statement (May•7, 1996), is included with
the application. The roadway proposed as access to the
project site takes into consideration the future residential
development of Tax Lot 600. Further discussion of
proposed access to the site can be found in Attachment
'D', Transportation Report.
0
Casefile 96-480=SU/D
Staff Report - Page 7
Section 409
0
Section 408-5.4 requires development which is not
single-family or duplex residential to provide on-site
pedestrian and bicycle circulation. The applicant's
narrative proposes a locked gate at the entrance and the
site to be fenced. On-site pedestrian and bicycle
circulation will not be required. Neighboring residents will
most likely be able to continue walking the undeveloped
portion of the site.
Private Streets
STAFF: The private street into and through the site shall be built
to the standards of Section 409-3.3.A(1). The applicant
proposes a 12 foot wide paved access road.
Section 410 Slopes and Grading
STAFF: The applicant has submitted a preliminary grading plan.
A final grading plan as required by Section 410 will be
submitted prior to any work being done on the site.
Section 411 Screening and Buffering
STAFF: Properties to the north are designated R-15, at the south
and east R-6 and the west is designated R-9. Section
411-5 requires Screening and Buffering Type 1 at the
north and west; no screening is required at the south or
east. The natural on-site vegetation shall serve as
screening and buffering. This natural vegetation also
includes any replanting required by Section 422 and
Section 430-105.
Section 4-:2 Drainage
STAFF: Pursuant to Resolution and Order No.'s 90-30 and 90-38,
the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) has the
responsibility for review and approval of storm drainage
plans as well as erosion control plans. The applicant will
be required to obtain approval from USA for the proposed
drainage plan prior to any on-site work. The applicant
has submitted preliminary storm drainage plans.
Section 413 Parking and Loading
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page8
STAFF: Staff has determined that Section 413-9.21. is the most
similar use mentioned to the proposed water storage
reservoir (Section 413-2.3). This section requires two
parking spaces. The site plan indicates adequate
surfaced area (Section 413-5) is being provided for
parking.
Section 414 Signs
STAFF: No signs are proposed at this time. A sign permit in
accordance with Section 414-1 must be obtained prior to
the placement of a sign(s) at the site. Staff encourages
signage. be installed which identifies the property owner
and gives a phone number to call in case of emergencies.
Section 415 Lighting
STAFF: No lighting plan was submitted with the application.
Lighting shall meet the requirements of Section 415.
Section 416 Utilities
STAFF: All new utilities will be located underground as required
by Section 416-1.1.
Section 417 Irrigation
STAFF: Disturbed areas are required to be replanted with native
plant species or with salvage native plants removed for
replanting on the site. These shall be irrigated in
accordance with instructions from a registered biologist or
environmental consultant.
Section 422 Significant Natural Resources.
STAFF: The site is designated a Wildlife Habitat by the Bull
Mountain Community Plan and is therefore subject to the
requirements of this Section (Section 422-2.3). The
applicant states that the resevoir will cover 3% of the site
area and paving, 4% of the site. It is further stated that
landscaping will utilize 4% of the site.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page .9.
The applicant has submitted a Significant Resources
Inventory Report prepared by an Ecologist. This report
states that most of the site is mixed conifer-deciduous
forest with a small meadow located in the northwest
portion of the site. This meadow habitat (approximately 1
acre) is a remnant farm field. Within the forest habitat,
Douglas-fir is the dominant overstory tree. Other
overstory trees include big-leaf maple, madrone, and red
alder with a few scattered individual western red cedar
(as small trees and seedlings) and a lone western
hemlock. Canopy closure averages 85% at full leaf.
Tree recruitment occurring as seedling or sapling trees is
present for all overstory species. Average dbh for
Douglas-fir trees range mostly from 1.1 to 14 inches.
Scattered individual fir trees were measured at 16, 24
and 30 inch dbh, mostly occurring in the southern portion
of the site.
Generally, the forest habitat has the character of a
naturally regenerated forest as typified by the variety of
age/sized trees and the more.open character of the
overstory which allows for side lighting resulting in well
developed shrub and herbaceous vegetative layers.
The Significant Resources Inventory Report states that
within the forest habitat, the shrub and herbaceous layer
is native, diverse and highly developed. Dominant shrubs
include tall Oregon grape, Oregon hazel, vine maple and
thimbleberry. Other shrubs include red elderberry, large
sword fern, English holly seedlings, ocean spray, red
huckleberry, salal, wild rose and Indian plum. The forest
habitat is in healthy condition and is primarily dominated
by native species.
Dead wood habitat exists as downed wood and standing
snags. The Ecologist states that generally, the downed
wood may be missing bark and the tree is embedded. into
the soil but not completely soft. Most of the downed
wood is small, less than 12 inch dbh with the exception of
the southern most portion of the site and the southeast
corner where recent logfalls of large (greater than 20 inch
dbh) Douglas-fir are located. Several large stumps occur
.scattered throughout the site. They are mostly in an
advanced state of decay.
~ a
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page, 10
The project site is located on the break between the
Summer Creek.and the Tualatin River basins. No
permanent water features were observed on-site.
However, there is a small naturally occurring drainage
contour just north of the existing water line which.
transects the site from west to east near the southern
boundary. This drainage appears to function as a winter
or early spring runoff area. Two perennial small creeks
are located within .25 miles to the east and west of the
site. No unique habitat features were identified on the
site. There are no wetlands on the site.
The Ecologist reports observing wildlife and their sign
during the visit to the site. There wildlife included:
rufous-sided towhee, Swainson's thrush, Bewick's wren
(territory call), pileated woodpecker (old and fresh sign),
mourning dove, red-breasted nuthatch, chestnut-backed
chickadee, dark-eyed junco (with young), northern flicker,
golden-crowned kinglet, mole (sign) and coyote (sign).
Pileated woodpecker is a State Sensitive species, The
Ecologist states it is i e y a o er bird and mammal
species occur within the site which provides suitable
habitat for songbirds, small raptors, mice, insects, among
other birds and mammals. Herpetofauna, such as
ensatina, may be present under leaf litter and downed
logs.
The Wildlife. Habitat Assessment form used to develop a
qualitative score for fhe vafuhe site's wildlife habitat
rated the site as 'high'. The 'high' rating is based on the
presence of two habitat types - forest and meadow,
species and structural diversity, the dominance of native
plant species, general habitat health, the site's
connection to other habitats to the east, west and south,
the proximity to water (less than .25 miles away) and its
lack of disturbance both past and present, with the
exception of the meadow/farm field. The site provides
suitable nesting, foraging, denning and travel habitat for a
variety of birds, mammals, insects and possibly
herpetofauna.
The Ecologist's report recommended four mitigation
measures, (1) Time clearing activities to avoid nesting
• _ - . •
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page-1.1
periods for birds, generally March through June; (2)
Retain all existinq larqe diameter overstory trees not
required for removal due to road and reservoir placement.
Many of the large Douglas-fir have been marked with a
blue blaze for removal. These trees provide important
habitat and seed source for regeneration and will be
important habitat components for the pileated
woodpecker as recommended by Oregon Department of
Forestry and Wildlife in the Sensitive Species plan. (3)
Replant disturbed areas with native plant species/salvage
native plants that will be removed for replanting on the
site. (4) Retain periphery buffer to provide travel and
cover.for wildlife occurring within the site.
Section 430-105 Special Use Standards, Public Utility
STAFF: Section 430-105 allows approval of a public utility service
facility based upon a study submitted by the applicant
which includes:
430-105.4.A. The need for the facility, present or future; and how the
facility fits into the utility's Master Plan.
STAFF: In September of 1986 a report titled "Water Supply Plan
for the Bull Mountain Area" was prepared for the Tigard
Water District by Gilbert R. Meigs, Consulting Engineer.
This plan recommended the construction of two
reservoirs to serve the 410 foot pressure zone. The plan
recommended that one of these reservoirs have a
capacity of 2.5 million gallons and be constructed at the
Menlor site. Since the 1986 report; the City of Tigard has
determined that an older, existing, 0.8 million gallon,
reservoir serving the 410 foot pressure zone and located
one ,-Wile east of the Menlor site, should be removed from
service in the near future. Because of this, the original
2.5 million gallon reservoir has been increased to 3.5
million gallons.
A vicinity map showing the location of the Menlor site is
included with this application; the Menlor site is the
current project site. The plan also recommended that a
second reservoir, with a capacity of 1.0 million gallons
and an overflow elevation of approximately 470 feet be
constructed at the Menlor site as well.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page, 12
Engineering considerations with regards to water flow
and pressure dictate the placement of water reservoirs.
The placement of all reservoirs recommended by the
Water Supply Plan report, including the presently
proposed reservoir, take into account lower elevation
pressure, the expense of additional pumping stations,
pipeline sizes, currently functioning reservoirs and
established pressure zones.
The need for the facility is outlined in the report. The
surrounding Districts, R-6 (Residential 6 units per acre),
R-9 (Residential 9 units per acre) and R-15 (Residential
15 units per acre) allow further residential development.
Although these surrounding Districts will most likely not
be developed to their full potential because of
topography, the need for a supply of water will continue to
increase as development pressure within the Urban
Growth Boundary continues to escalate. The report also
sights the installation of sewer lines within the study area
by Unified Sewer Agency as further indication of future
growth within the Bull Mountain area.
430-105.4.B. The minimum area required for the facility for the present
and anticipated expansion.
STAFF: The site is 11 acres in size. The applicant's narrative
states that the proposed layout of facilities on the site will
accommodate future construction of pumping, and piping
facilities south of the proposed. reservoir that may be
required should other water storage or pumping facilities
ultimately be constructed on or near this site. The
proposed site layout also provides opportunities for
alternate uses or sale of the remaining property should no
additional facilities be constructed at the site.
430-105A.C. What measures will be used to minimize damage to
paved roads and natural resources or open space.
STAFF: The site will gain access from SW 154th Avenue, a paved
roadway. No measures were presented with which the
applicant would minimize roadway damage.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page 1.3
Only the minimum vegetative cover and trees will be
removed to accommodate construction activities, the
roadway and water storage reservoir. Natural resources
and open space will be protected following a registered
biologist's and/or ecologist's guidance. Any disturbed
areas will be replanted with native vegetation as
proposed by the applicant and consulting ecologist.
430-105.5 Site size and yard shall be based upon a site plan
submitted by the applicant. The site plan shall consider
especially, the compatibility of the facility with existing
surrounding uses and uses allowed by the plan
designation.
STAFF: The applicant has considered compatibility with
surrounding existing residential developments and uses
allowed by the Bull Mountain Community Plan. An
ornamental brick entrance way and cast iron fencing is
proposed at the entrance. All disturbed areas which
remain undeveloped are proposed to be replanted. Any
remaining slope of the cut area needed to place the
reservoir is proposed to be stabilized following Section
410, Slopes and Grading. Staff is satisfied that the
applicant is cognizant of, and has addressed all
compatibility issues.
Section 426 Erosion Control
STAFF Section 426 requires erosion control measures in the
Tualatin River and Oswego Lake sub-basins during
construction to control and limit soil erosion. Section 426-
5.2 allows the erosion control plan submission and review
to be deferred until the time of any on-site work or
construction. The applicant shall therefore be required to
submit an erosion control plan consistent with the
requirements of Section 426 prior to any physical change
or construction on the site.
On July 1, 1990, Unified Sewerage Agency (USA)
assumed responsibility for erosion control within their
district boundaries. The applicant will be required to
submit an erosion control plan to USA for their approval
prior to any on-site or off-site work or construction.
Casefile 96-480-SUID
Staff Report - Page. 14
4.' Article V, Public Facilities and Services:
9
Section 501-5 Standards for Development
STAFF: Required public services and facilities can be provided to
the site to serve the proposed use. All of the agencies
listed in Section II of this staff report have stated they can
adequately serve the development subject to complying
with their standards.
The findings and recommendations for transportation
standards are found in the Transportation Report,
Attachment "D"; and are hereby incorporated as findings.
Section 502 Sidewalk Standards:
STAFF: The findings and recommendations for sidewalks are
found in the Transportation Report, Attachment "D", and
are hereby incorporated as findings.
E. Transportation Plan:
STAFF: The findings and recommendations for transportation standards
are found in the Transportation Report, Attachment "D", and
are incorporated as findings herein.
F. Ordinance No.'s 379; Traffic Impact Fee:
STAFF: The Traffic Impact Fee is required of all new development and
constitutes an assurance to satisfy a development's
requirement to provide additional capacity to major collectors
and arterial streets needed for development.
This fee is based on the number of daily trips a site generates
and is due at issuance of a building permit.
G. . Resolution and Order No. 91-47 - Erosion Control, Water Quality and
Water Quantity:
STAFF: ' Resolution and Order 91-47 adopted standards and regulations
for the Unified Sewer Agency's (USA) review and approval of
erosion control measures. The applicant will be required to
submit an erosion control plan to USA for their approval prior to
any on-site or off-site work or construction.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page .15
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
The required findings can be made for all of the applicable Code sections. When
constructed in accordance with the Conditions of Approval, the project will be in
compliance with the Community Development Code and the Community Plan.
Therefore, the request for a 3.5 million gallon water storage reservoir can be
approved subject to the Conditions of Approval.
GAUSERSWLB\96480\D0C
0
CASEFILE:
DATE:
APPLICANT:
APPLICANTS
REPRESENTATIVE:
LOCATION:
TAX MAP/LOT:
96-480-SU/D
October 17. 1996
Citv of Tiaard
• .
ATTACHMENT D
TRANSPORTATION
REPORT
Mr. Chris Uber, Murrav. Smith & Associates
225 ft. south of the terminus of SW 154th Av, south of SW Firtree nr.
2S1 5136/400
Staff has reviewed this request for adequacy of transportation facilities and services and submits the
following findings and recommendations.
FINDINGS:
1. PROJECT PROPOSAL:
This request is for preliminary approval for a 3.5 million gallon water reservoir. This development
will generate minimal vehicle trips provided it is an unmanned facility.
2. ACCESS:
Access to the site is proposed from a single access from SW 154th Avenue.
An single parcel of land lies between the current terminus of SW 154th Avenue and the project
site. This parcel is not owned by the applicant and contains a single family residence. At the time
of this review, an easement had not been granted allowing the applicant utilization of the vacant
property for access to the project site. The applicant states that negotiations continue with the
property owner.
A ten foot wide pole portion of the parcel extends from the southeast corner of the property east to
SW Sunrise Lane. This portion of the parcel has not been proposed as access to the site.
SW Sunrise Lane is designated as a Minor Collector on the Transportation Plan. The existing
vertical and horizontal alignment of SW Sunrise Lane does not meet road standards. An
alternative future alignment for SW Sunrise Lane has been developed which locates SW Sunrise
Lane approximately 400 feet west of the current right-of-way, along the east property line of this
site (not the flag pole, but the east property line with a north-south dimension of 615 feet). This
alignment has not been officially adopted or established through development of adjacent or
nearby properties, so right-of-way dedication cannot be required at this time. However, the
applicant should be advised that right-of-way may be needed in the future for the realignment of
SW Sunrise Lane.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Page 2
0
Tract'G' extends from the Bull Mountain Meadows No. 2 subdivision into the northwest corner of
the project site; the Tract is approximately 25 feet in width. Plat Restrictions state the Tract is a
roadway, utility and waterline easement to Tigard Water District. The applicant states that usage
of this access would require that construction traffic be routed through the subdivision.
3. RIGHT-OF-WAY:
a. SW 154th Avenue is a County urban Local Street. Existing right-of-way does not front the
site but terminates approximately 225 feet north of the project site. Existing right-of-way
at the terminus point is 38 feet across its entirety.
b. SW Sunrise Lane is a County urban Minor Collector. Existing right-of-way is 20 feet from
centerline.
C. Section 418-2.2 and 501-8.4 of the Community Development Code requires additional
right-of-way to be dedicated when the existing right-of-way is deficient To meet this
standard, 10 feet of additional right-of-way must be dedicated along the site's frontage of
SW Sunrise Lane.
4. IMPROVEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE:
a. SW 154th Avenue is designated to ultimately be improved to an L-7 standard with a 2
lane section, curb, sidewalk and storm drain. Currently, this road is improved to this
standard at the existing terminus point but not south of the terminus through to the project
site.
b. SW Sunrise Lane is designated to ultimately be improved to a C-12 standard with a 2 land
section, curb, sidewalk and storm drain. Currently, this road is improved to a gravel road.
C. Washington County is currently unable to adequately maintain both SW 154th Avenue
and SW Sunrise Lane due to a lack of funds.
d. CDC Section 501-8.1.B(4) requires that the property owner sign a waiver not to
remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district or other mechanism to
improve and maintain those local and minor collector roads which are not improved in
accordance with Washington County's Uniform Road Standards and which abut or
provide direct access to the development site. As stated above in Finding #4.a through
c, the site's access roads are not improved to County standard or maintained by the
County. Therefore, the property owner shall sign a waiver of non-remonstrance.
SURFACE WIDTH AND STRUCTURAL CONDITION:
a. Sections 501-8.1.6(2)(a) and (b) of the Community Development Code require a site's
access road to have a minimum five year paved wearing surface and structural life to a 22
foot width, between the proposed development and the nearest adequate collector or
arterial. The nearest adequate collector or arterial is Scholls Ferry Road.
b. No roadway exists south of the existing terminus of SW 154th Avenue therefore, the
existing roadway is unacceptable.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Page 3
C. The existing surface and structural condition and width of SW Sunrise Lane is
unacceptable. The surface is gravel. This roadway is not proposed as access to the
project site therefore, no requirements will be required at this time. However, if the
roadway is utilized as access to the project site in the future, improvements may be
required.
6. ACCESS SPACING:
a. The minimum access spacing standard for SW 154th Avenue is 10 feet, measured
between access points on each side of the road as required by Section 501-8.5.B(1) of
the Community Development Code. Access to the project site must therefore be
restricted to meet this spacing standard.
b The minimum access spacing standard'for SW Sunrise Lane is 50 feet, measured
between access points on each side of the road as required by Section 501-8.5.B(2) of
the Community Development Code. If SW Sunrise Lane is utilized, access must be
restricted to meet this spacing standard.
7. SIGHT DISTANCE:
Section 501-8.5.E. of the Community Development Code and Section 210.7 of the
Washington County Uniform Road Improvement Design Standards require adequate
intersection sight distance be provided at a site's access to a County or a public road in
accordance with the standards of Section 501-8.5.E.
b. Intersection sight distance is acceptable at the proposed access location to SW 154th
Avenue. The required intersection sight distance is 250 feet in both directions based
upon a legal speed of 25 m.p.h.
C. Minimum intersection sight distance shall be required if SW Sunrise Lane is utilized as
access to the project site. The required intersection sight distance is 250 feet in both
directions based upon a legal speed of 25 m.p.h.
8. DRAINAGE:
a. Roadway drainage is acceptable up to the current terminus of SW 154th Avenue
however, any roadway constructed to the project site shall provide adequate drainage.
b. Roadway drafflage ak,rig the site's frontage of SIA/ Sunrise Lane is unacceptable. The
ditch needs to be cleaned, graded and shaped to provide proper roadway drainage.
Section 501-8.1.C. of the Code requires each parcel to have adequate roadway drainage.
This roadway is not proposed as access to the project site.
9. SIDEWALKS:
a. A sidewalk exists along SW 154th Avenue at its current terminus north of the project site.
b. A sidewalk does not exist along the site's frontage of SW Sunrise Lane.
C. Section 502-6 of the Community Development Code requires a sidewalk to be
constructed along a site's road frontage when one does not exist. A permit for the
construction of the sidewalk is required to be obtained prior to obtaining final approval and
the issuance of a building permit.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Page 4
RECOMMENDATION:
-I. PRIOR TO FINAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL THE APPLICANT SHALL:
A. Obtain an Access Permit for construction of the driveway approach from the
terminus of SW 154th Avenue.
B. The following documents shall be executed:
1. Sign and record a waiver not to remonstrate against the formation of a local
improvement district or other mechanism to improve and maintain SW Sunrise
Lane to County standards between SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW.Bull
Mountain Road.
2. Dedicate additional right-of-way to provide 30 feet from centerline of SW Sunrise
Lane adjacent to the site.
Il. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS:
A. Access to the site shall be from SW 154th Avenue through Tax Map/Lot 2S1 5DB/600
B. Adequate sight distance shall be continuously maintained by the property owner. This
may require the property owner to periodically remove obstructing vegetation from the
road right-of-way and/or on site.
• s
Attachment E
STREET TREES
Recommended Street Trees:
ACER, platanoides columnare 'Columnar Norway' - Columnar Norway Maple
ACER, platanoides schwedlari nigra 'Crimson King' - Crimson King Maple
ACER, platanoides 'Fairway' - Fairway Sugar Maple - -
ACER, rubrum 'Red'- Red Maple
ACER, rubrum 'Red Sunset' - Red Sunset Maple
ACER, platanoides 'Royal Red' - Royal Red Maple
ACER, platanoides 'Summershade' - Summershade Maple
CERCIS, canadenis - Canadian Red Bud
FRAXINUS, americana - White Ash
FRAXINUS, americana 'Autumn Purple' - Autumn Purple Ash .
GINKGO, biloba - Maidenhair Tree
GINKGO, biloba 'Autumn Gold'
GINKGO, biloba 'Fairmount'
GLEDITSIA, triacanthos 'Sunburst' - Honey Locust
LIQUIDAMBAR, styraciflua - American Sweetgum
LIRIODENDRON, tulipifera - Tulip Tree
MAGNOLIA, grandiflora - Southern Magnolia
PLATANUS, acerifolia - London Plane Tree
QUERCUS, palustris - Pin Oak
QUERCUS, rubra - Red Oak
TILIA, americana - American Linden
TILIA, cordata - Little Leaf Linden
Trees Not Permitted as Street Trees:
Agricultural- fruit bearing trees (apple, pear, plum, cherry, etc.)
Acer, saccharinum - 'Silver Maple'
Acer, negundo - 'Boxelder'
Ailanthus, gladulosa -'Tree-of-heaven'
Betula; birches (Common species and varieties)
Ulmus; elms (Common species and varieties)
Morus; mulberry (Common fruiting species and varieties)
Salix; willow (Common, species and varieties)
Coniferous evergreen (Fir, Pine, Cedar, etc.)
r
I
I
MORNINGSIDE~
DEVELOPMENT CITY OF T I GARD
TAX LOT 600 , THIS SHADED AREA IS
SENSITIVE LAND AREA W/
(TU 5300) SLOPE EXCEEDING 25% 1s'-o" ' 9'-D°
225' 6°-I S /W
3
\~\1\11\1 l~ 1 5
27. O'
(TL 1600) ` \ \ \ \ \ \ \\1 111 .111 4.17% 4.17%
\Or\\\\ 1\ l \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \I1~\\\\~~~ 11\~\'.1w 1p\11111 I "1\\~ P~ S
\ \ \ \ 1 \ \ 1 Y1 1111 ~Xlsh Pace
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ lal\1\1\.1111
\
I
\ \4 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Il \1 C\1' WASHINGTON COUNTY
\ \ \ \ \ `t -v- \ \ j~\\\\\\ \C.\ \ \I y Dy Wn$QYVaTwV1
8 3' CLASS "C° ASPHALTIC CONC STD SW, TYP
\ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ l\ \ . \ 1 \\\P \\\\1\ " I''/2"-0" BASE ROCK WASHINGTON COUNTY
\ \ 1 \ 1 \ \ \ \ I 1 1 \ \ \ \\A
(TL 300) STD CURB & CUTTER,
\ 1 1 \ \ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ 2" Y4'-0" LEVELING ROCK TYP
(TI
N.
1 ` \ \ \ , 1\ ` \ \ \ \ \\\1
~1 i~ ' \ \ \ \ \ 1\\\ \\\\\1\'\\ \
(TL 1500) 1\ \ \1\1 I,\ \ \`\z_ T t~ '\~a\~\\\\\\\\1`\\\\\\\1\\\1S\\
IAYa1~uA Cali
Ube
1 1 } A A\ \1 1 A 1 A, A\ iA A\ `VAA~~\VAV AV\~VA)VAA\~~AAA~~A~
\ \\l\1"\\' i~ $4lh AVE EXTENDED MATCHES EXISTING 154th AVE..
CONCEPTUAL ROAD } 1 , ' r ` \ J\ \ N. \1~ \i\\i \\\\I X=
ALIGNMENT ' 1 , 1 ` 1 \ \ \ , Irs~ 11 \
\ N. } ,\~\„1;111 \ EXISTING SW 154TH AVENUE EXTENSION
f\ N.
\ 1,~1\11,11\\\\\\\~\\\~ TYPICAL STREET SECTION
;1_\I~ } N -i L4 i1 l1}t.CF\\\\\),\\' 1i SCALE I"=10' 0„
(TL 1400) \ y 1 1 \I d \ 1'r 1 1 0 1111 \~\1\\\\\\ \\\N,~. \ '11 ' 1
\ \ @I1 1 1.\\\ ,.J 1 L1_h . \ ,1.1 1 1 )Iii
\ I lr r \ r1~11 \ it \ t\~\ x.111\\,\,I \
r v 1, 1. l VA\VAVAA li 11 1 v \
' I 1 L I I I\ 111.1 1 11\\\\s '11'111 I gf~.\,~t{ \l1(\\\\\ \
CONCEPTUAL 2 0
111\\\+1,11.11111P:~: ,~11r In+'
PROPERTY LINE 1 I 1 I I a I ' \1,\ C:\\llar +.\,t~+r;~ }1 1,11\\,\\\\\\ ,
11 \\\1111+'\\~•~~~Iit~\\\1\
ELI I Ll \<\1\+ \\`\\\1\\"\~ \\111\\\1 1 84-44.78
I I ` X1;11\ \ \1 \ ,~t'1 \\~\1 .1\\ PIVC EL = 290.56 290.56
+ \
- - - (1 1 1 -2" VC
i t ~I C ~`v~ rll\A\ , ~.1A~~~~ v\t r11~V 11A111 A \ v
- AD = 4.6
`I
(TL 1300) v v1 + II 1 r !r V A A A~~A\\t 1 1 A) 7.1 '1.1 + 11\ 1.1 1A 1,1{ 1~ v;"A' VVAA v v K = 15.22 m 310
` 'v v I t o v V v ~A\\ t+ 1 a 11, d. 1 v ,v A vvv vv) 310 go
` v v 1 A V A v, A v V A\1V111 7l1}1.I,j111111 Avv1A.AAVAA "o m.
\ I I I\ \ - E%ISTIN \ 1 1 1° 1 I 1 l I 11 II 1 \I 1' \ ® o0 a 91 a a OLD DWY
\ 11 \ V V A A, A N. HOUSE }\~\1A+..1 11 11 .11- 1 11!111 1 1 `V A v +
r.\ \ I 1 1 1 I1 1 1 ' \ \ \ \ °
`b \ 1 N. \ \ \ \ . \ \ \ ' r { r~l \1'\ !\\7 11111 71 11 X11 \ 111 1} toF w rn GRADE
I,, \ \ \ \ 1\ \ - _ 6 rlUl.ll \ 1 j 11 11 I\\ \ \1 \ \
N. \ 300 NEW 5' v a 300
QII N. \ \ \ - Ir' 1 \ \\1111 11\ 1 \ \~1` x m xNY APRON L
(AX
\ \ \ \ 11 \,\1\ , 1\\\ \ \ N.
LLJ co
NV.
N, N. N. C14
- -e \ EXIST
N. N.
\ - \ - \\Z \ \ N. \ \ \ \ \
\ 1 \ \ \ \ t \ a \ \ \ \ ,y~ a w w GRADE
\ \ \ Q\ 290 x427 290
o Y:, \ II\ I I l1 \ \ • -h +\\\\11'y~1\f- \ \
I C` r 1 1 1 \ r 11 \,1jV 1<\\ \ N. \ \ \ REMOVED 8+39 78 END
S.W. 154th AVE. r J_.
? 1\ \ \ \ \
TO SCHOLLS FERRY RD \\1}~11 \\ll\\\\\\11\ EIISTDWY \154TIfAVEE%TINSION
I
t_ \ \ \\v 0A 11111\ r\ \ APRON EL=230.65
L . A v~vy~ 1, 17vv vvv 17A .
,1- A I ~1 1~- v_ ~ ~~T V I'!7Vy~w'I{Iw`~~~\„1 ~t\V )-.l 280 280
\
v y \ , \ \ \ ; 1}I \ 1 \
v ~v j v v v MMM v{ 11vv`v till I vw~~ N. vv 7+80 8+10 8+40 8+70 9+00 9+30
;
- - - - I 1 1 - \ \ \ \ \ \`I1 I~I1 \ 154TH EXTENDED STA 8+26.78
N. \ \ \ 1 1\\ \ \
(TL 1200) j
, : 11.1 7 7 \ ' \ \ \ = 0+00 ACCESS ROAD
,
\ { \
AI
1 l \ 1 7 1 A~ v \A \ Vii+'~}'\ VAV 11~~\\\~1\r \Vi1VAV0
1 , / \ 1 , 1 ~ r 11 111 7 1\111171\ \\\\1
EXISTING N. 1
SSW 154TH
AVENUE E 7t71 71 7111 +'1,111\\ , i 1 } 1 00)) 1`1 EXISTING FENCE \\\,''1 {1111, Ii l}11111 1 ~1~, NOTE,
TENSION, (TL \ \y l} i, 1 1. 154th AVE EXTENSION ROAD SECTION SEE ABOVE.
Njl 1,'17 i7' I 1 11'' ` <
PROPOSED AREA FOR I ' i ; i v vvv 1
W DED I CAT I ON TO CITY I I , , I . 1 \
T \ EX I ST I NG S.W. 154TH AVE EXTENS I ON PROF I LE
R I GHTrOF-WAY I , r I- 1 I\
E
o / 1 ,i l 1 it l1I ,l , , \;PROPOSED AREA FOR SCALE: 1" = 60' HORIZ, I"=20' VERT
\ ,DEDICATION TO CITY
PROPOSED TL 600 NO
\ \ \ \ \ R I GHT-OF-WAY FOR FUTURE
_PARTII ION LINE 225 r,l I I \ \ \1 \
' -r_ I + \ , \ r\.11 NATURE PATH ACCESS TO C I TY FIGURE 2 MARCH 2000
° TL 7900) (TL 7800 ` \ \ \ \ \ OWNED TAX LOT 400
° ( ) ( ) (TL 1700) (TL7600)/ I TL7500 \\X'
( ) CITY OF TIGARD
BULL MTN) PROPOSED TAXLOT 600
41. 3
~EADOWS CONCEPTUAL RE-PARTITION
~ N /
~ v I I , 1 I
1 SHADOW PLAN
~ P
I I
NOTE; I SJ TE PLAN `mom _
I . TAX MAP/LOT NO 2S 105DB00600 SCALE: 1 ' = 50' 94-0310.466
CITY OF TIGARD
MENLOR RESERVOIR-TAX LOT 600
LAND PARTITION TYPE II APPLICATION
APPLICANT STATEMENT AND NARRATIVE
SUPPLEMENTAL NARRATIVE INFORMATION
Location: 13230 SW 154`h Avenue
Legal Description: Tax Lot No. 600; Assessors Map No. 2S1-5DB
Applicant: City of Tigard
City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
c/o Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.
121 SW Salmon St., Suite 1020
Portland, OR 97204
Property Owner: City of Tigard
City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
STATEMENT:
The purpose of this application is to request approval for partitioning of the City
owned Tax Lot 600 (Map No. 2S 105DB00600), located at the southerly end of S W
154`h Avenue. This property is also referred to as the Clute Property and was acquired
by the City to provide access to the recently completed Menlor Reservoir located on
the adjacent City owned Tax Lot 400. Having completed this reservoir project, the
City proposes to partition the 1.74 acre Tax Lot 600 to allow for the sale of a 1.35acre
portion of the property, which is not required for reservoir access. The City also
wishes to dedicate to City right-of-way two portions of the subject property. Included
in the proposed dedication is the new SW 150 Avenue extension which was
constructed on Tax Lot 600 to allow for permanent access to the reservoir, and a 6-
foot wide corridor along the proposed partition property line for future use as access
•
City of Tigard •
,
Mentor Reservoir-Tax Lot 600
Land Partition Type II Application
March 10, 2000
Page 2
to a City owned pathway located on Tax Lot 400. The proposed partition site plan is
illustrated on the attached Figure 1.
NARRATIVE:
The following narrative describes findings for all applicable approval standards and
documents compliance with the applicable criteria.
Annlicable Development Code Sections:
Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study (Section 18.390)
The property is zoned R-25, Medium-High Density Residential. The proposed Minor
Partition requires a Type H Procedure, subject to the provision of Section 18.420.
The requirement for an impact study does not appear applicable as the proposed
Minor Partition does not involve any land development and therefore will not impact
public facilities and services.
Land Partitions (Section 18.420)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the requirements and approval
criteria of the applicable code section 18.420 Land Partitions. The proposed Minor
Partition involves dividing an existing tract into a large parcel for future possible sale.
The subject parcel appears to be of such size and shape to facilitate future re-
partitioning in accordance with the requirements of the zoning district and the City
code. A conceptual re-partition shadow plan was developed to show an example of
how such a compliant development could be accommodated. This conceptual re-
partition shadow plan is illustrated on attached Figure 2.
Residential Zoning Districts (Section. 18.510)
The proposed Minor Partition involves division of a tract currently zoned R-25, and
appears to meet all of the goals, requirements and criteria of the applicable code
section 18.510 Residential Zoning Districts. Although there will be no new
development as part of the proposed Minor Partition, it appears that future
re-partitioning and development of the subject parcel could comply with the
applicable code.
Access/Egress/Circulation (Section 18.705)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.705 Access/Egress/Circulation. Existing access to both
F:TROIECTSS9410310.466WEMOSWanidon App Nw.dm
0 0
City of Tigard
Menlor Reservoir-Tax Lot 600
Land Partition Type II Application
March 10, 2000
Page 3
proposed partition tracts is directly available from the existing extension of SW
154'hAvenue which was recently constructed as part of the City's Menlor Reservoir
project. It is proposed as part of this application that the City designate to City right-
of-way, the existing SW 154`h Avenue extension, as shown on the attached Figure 2.
The requirement for a future street plan does not appear applicable, as the proposed
Minor Partition does not involve any land development or street construction and will
not impact public facilities and services.
Density Computations (Section 18.715)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.715 Density Computations. Although the proposed
Minor Partition does not involve any, land development, Net Residential Density was
calculated to show that the subject tract could be developed in the future to meet the
required code criteria. The calculation is shown below.
Single-Family
58,848 sq. ft. of gross site area
-14,780 sq. ft. (measured) for public right-of-way
-16.288 sa. ft. for sensitive area (steeper than 25%)
Net Area: 27,780 square feet
divide by: 3.050 sa. ft.(minimum lot areal
9.10 Units Per Acre (Maximum Density Allowed)
Minimum Density: 80%(9.10) = 7.28 Units Per Acre
Exceptions to Development Standards (Section 18.730)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.730 Exceptions to Development Standards. The
proposed Minor Partition does not involve any land development.
Landscaping & Screening Standards (Section 18.745)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.745 Landscaping & Screening Standards. The proposed
Minor Partition does not involve any land development and therefore will not involve
changes to existing site conditions and landscaping.
F:~PROIEGTS194NO310.466V.lEMOSkPa tia App N-dm
City of Tigard •
Menlor Reservoir-Tax Lot 600
Land Partition Type II Application
March 10, 2000
Page 4
Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements (Section 18.765)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.765 Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements. The
proposed Minor Partition does not involve any land development and therefore will
not involve changes to existing site conditions.: The requirement for a vehicle parking
plan does not appear applicable.
Tree Removal (Section 18.790)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.790 Tree Removal. The proposed Minor Partition does
not involve any land development and therefore will not involve changes to existing
site conditions or removal of trees. The requirement for a tree plan does not appear
applicable.
Visual Clearance Areas (Section 18.795)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.795 Visual Clearance Areas. The proposed Minor
Partition does not involve any land development or construction of property access.
Street & Utility Improvement Standards (Section 18.810)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.810 Street & Utility Improvement Standards. The
proposed Minor Partition does not involve any land development or utility and street
construction and will not impact public facilities and services or existing site
conditions. As requested, a typical section and profile of the existing SW 154`h
Avenue extension have been included and are illustrated on the attached Figure 2.
This extension was designed to match the specific dimensions of the existing SW
154`h Avenue roadway and sidewalk.
F:kPROJECTSW40310.466V4EMOSWar6Um App N-d
I
I
I I i
I I I I
I I I '
-T_
I
I
I
I I
! 1
I I
I'
• I ! 377.90
`~c J
6 15.64'-
1 `fir ,
~ r I
J
CITY ICARD TAX LOT 400 1
\ 7
r
I r
- - MORNINGSIDE !
/ DEVELOPMENT CITY
TAX LOT 600
'r
I ~
_ - - I - - - (TL'5300)- - - - 1.74 ACRES
I
r
1
225'
(TL 1600)
v , !
W
~ 1 uJ I ( I I
(TL 1500) U i a
DUN )
I (T 00) v
TREE cq
- EST
ATES w'
Li 11 / I
(TL 1400) - j
258'
~I o ~1 I
3 (TL 1300) EXIST G /
v; I \ X35' ~ HousE I ~ i I
ACCESS ROAD-\
i J I\
S. W. I S 4TH A L.
L" = ~I•S5 AC
- TO SCROLLS FERRY RD E
No
(TL 1200' .w
XISTING 154TH AVE I TL
EXTENS ON PROPOS D 60 ~39 nc 777
AREA FqR DED'CATIgN - - - - - I
_ TO_Q I TY RIGHT-IOF-WAY 1 _ 2_25' f d I _ _ _ - \965.64 - - - - - - _ _ - - - - - - 1
00 J '
PR` POSED TL 600---'
/P OPOSED AREA FO .
PA i i I I I I ,
1 TITION INE BULL MTN) , DE CATION TO C IL
I , , , ,
I~EAdows I R G T-OF-WAY FO TIJOE I I J
(n75oo) / / N TURE PATH ACCESS TO i /
E
(TL 7900) (TL 7800) (TL 7700) (TL 7600) y' C TY OED TAX LIT 400
~ BUIt MTN I I I I I I I
1
/ 25 UTILITY I MEADOWS i
_ I - - - _ RIGHT-Of-WA1 -1. Cr I I I I - L - _ i FIGURE 1 MARCH 2000
°o I S. W. YARROW WA Y I Y L_ --1
S. W. 13 R I S T L E C 0 N E WAY CITY OFTIGARD
~ i ` 1 111 1 - - 11 \
- - - I - - - - i - - - PROPOSED TAXLOT 600
- - - - I ' ' PARTITION SITE PLAN
NOTES: SITE PLAN
c; o 1. TAX MAP/LOT NO 2S 105D600600 SCALE: 1' = loo' ® -
a 2. SEE FIGURE 2 FOR CONCEPTUAL RE-PARTITION SHADOW -
OFTr.Am
ORWON
h PLAN -
-
v 94-0310,466
M ~
ci
/ MORN INGSIDE CITY OF TIGARD
DEVELOPMENT
1 TAX LOT 600 THIS SHADED AREA IS
rE
' 1 I SENSITIVE LAND AREA W/
(TL 5300) SLOPE EXCEED I NG 25%
225' 6°-II--
`
1 „ i II -yI
\111117-0 12-G" I2,-0 S/W
---~1\\1`\`\ \\\\\\r .~~~r~``~ \\~~V\1\1\`ttl. I I 5-0"
4.17% 4.17% 27.
(TL 1600) i+I I v`:v v v v v v \1 \v v v`vvv~~~~~v`~~~~v`tAv 41111V111 111 A
A\ 1 V 1 A A V A\ v v A A\ VA A A V vv 1 1 111 V 111 I 1.1 l AA~
\ \ \ \ 11..1\ 1 111 11 J~J/ •o`~~ t rc~~;^
a\~ \ \ \ \ \ ~N1\111N~\1111• 11\1\\\\; ..a
\ ` \ \ \ \ G •\\4\\\1\ n'.• WASHINGTON COUNTY
I \ (4j4))\\
\ \ \ \ \ \ 4-t~-~ \ \ 9 v', \\V\\ STD SW, TYP
I \ 1, \ \ \ \ \ \I 73' CLASS "C" ASPHALTIC CONC
\ \ 11\ \ 1\\\\ ~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'I WASHINGTON COUNTY
\ + \ 1\ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \\\~\~\e\ TL 300 8.. IAi -0" BASE ROCK
\ \ \ 1 * \ \ \ \ \ \ ( ) STO CURB k CUTTER,
1 \ I \ I 1 \ \ \ \ \ \\1'\ \ \i 2" i""-0° LEVELING ROCK
TYP
i
i
i
i
\ \ \ ` \ \ , I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \1
'T v v~ ~~'-v' v v v v v v vr. vv Av v vvv_ ` a
11 vvvvA V`\ v v v v yvvvvV vvv
(TL 1500) 1 11- `IA V A111\~V'Vv Av vvv. T ~~AwvwAVVV 1v~\\~AvvVAA~AAvvAAAVAv~
\ 1 \ ~ A \V 1A V AAA VAC
1 A 1 A 1 A A. A VA AAVA\.AV AVAV A~
\ 1 1 \ \ \ \ N T1541h AVE EXTENDED MATCHES EXISTING 154th AVE..
- I 1 1 ~ \111\\~\I\\~ \ \\\\\\\\\\1\\\..\\\\~~
I CONCEPTUAL ROAD
ALIGNMENT 1111 ~1'1v~ `v ~v`vv ;`v,vti1~vv1i; vjv EXISTING SW 154TH AVENUE EXTENSION
v1 \ 1 111 V ~(TD ~O~~AVAA' \\VA;~111~~1Ff1~~~~\VAV1,.~V,
\ TYPICAL STREET SECTION
---1.11 v~/v vv \'1 1 I\\ VAj}1VAvAv ''VvAly~ I SCALE I"=10'-0`
-ik 0,\\ 1 1 1 1 1 N1 It'c-tt, ,\1 \ 1 t I I
(TL 1400) vV A 1 1 V 1 . vI vI / 1 11 1 m1y.11 1.VAAUVIV C\V~v A1111V I I I I I 1 I
T71r1i1 It
\ 1 1 1 , 1 . II ®+ll \\\\\\\\'>\\'Y `1, 1 \LI I . 11; 1.11
I
1 1 1 1 1 ~v I I V A VAVAVAV A\v A 1 7. mUI /I/
I \ \ \ I I I ' 1 1 I\\ ~ 111 p.1 \~LI I } \ \,\\11}11\\1\rr \
I I I ' I I I / 11 1111\\\\\ IIIhI 1 I\ \ \Il 1\\\`\
1 \ + t \ \ 11 1 11 1 1.\\ t I \ • , I 1 \ \
CONCEPTUAL . 12 \ \ I + ; i , \~1~1~ lil 1\ 111 111+
1 1 \ \ l 0 1 I , ! \ 111j'1 11 \ \\l'In )1 11~\;\ ::111,1111\\\\\\
PROPERTY LINE , I . \ I 11j 1 \ \ \ 1 11 4 11- \
1 \ \ 111'1 \ \\'1 s:.\ l1l \ PIVC STA = 8+44.78
i I I I 1 1 1'~ \ 11 I I / `\d}.11411" \1111" "\\i ll1 PIVC EL = 290.56
1 \ 1\ \ l 1 \ \ \ \
1 I- `11111V v \~v~PA 1 1 V 11 V1` V A. + 1'-2" VC
- - - - ! II I I , ! \ \t „1 1111 1 1 1,1
r+ 4 J L - uh t ~1 1 } \ I \ AD = 4.6
1. / -I 1.11 11(141 p~1 \ n
(TL 1300) ` ` 1 I I I ! 1 Iv A v A~N\.\AV1\' 1~1 11' 111~C~~ 1 A 1 \k, 11 111 1111vv 'Ayvv A v~ v 310 K = 15.22
I ! I } +1 I 310
1 I \ t \ \ \I \ \ 1~\b1 \ 0'\ 1'1 m
1 ;1~ I 1 11 111 \ \ 1\ \
\ I I 1 \ \ \ \ \ 11\\l1 1}l,plll~ 1111\ ® no co
\ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / --EXISTING 111111 1 11 11 11 11 I 1 1 1 \ \ a< Q < OLD DWY
I \ \ \ HOUSE 111 1111''.1 1 111 1 1\ \ \ O m
\ Y \I\, \ \ I \ 11111 \ 111 ma vri GRADE
\ \ \ \ \ \ \\.1 1 \1 ! 1\\1 11111\`I\\1\1 1\'\\\\\\ m m
II v v v A v ~v - 6 MIv t v\:vA X11 \ 1 v v `vvv 300 N_W 5' 0 a
QIIt \ \ \ \ \ \ Illl\\\'S C.\\`\111 •,'ll \ 1 1 \ \ r_-. j g 300
11 \ \ \ vx \NY APRON if g7
\ II\ \ \ \ ` I\\\\\ 111\1\\\ \ ` \ ~wco aLL
\ \ ~I\~II \ ` \ `\\\°q\\ \ \1\\\'` \I\\\\\\\\\\ \ >~II jai
\ \ \ ~z ~8~~ `EXIST
\ ` ` 1 1\ \ aww i GRADE
\ Imo, \1\ \ \ \\\\\\\v.:~\\\ \ \ 290 ~x
~I 1 1 111 \ \\x`411., \ 290
+3~ EN
S. W. IS4th AVE. l I 1 1 1 \ \ 1 11I,j1 I•,\ 1\\\\\ \ \ 1\ \ \ \ \ E, I ST DWY
\\\1. REMOVED \8549611 AVEOXTENSION I'
I - t 1 \ \ \ a\\1111\}`I \ \111\\\\
11111\ y* ` \ \ ` \ APRON EL=20.65
TO SCROLLS FERRY RD \
- +l 11+1,\ 1\ I\ \ \ \ \ P
1\ 1 \ \ )'\\1111\ \\`\1,11 \ 280 280
v
- - - - - 1 \ I \ \ \ ` /:I \ ~jV11 1 \ \ 7+80 8+10 8+40 8+70 9+00 9+30
} \ ` \ \ \ \ 1' \ N \ \ \ \ \ 154TH EXTENDED STA 8+26.78
I ~ 1 I I ' 1 \ \ 1I1 11
(TL 1200)' 1 F 1. ~1, '°7 ~:'1 111 \ 1 ` = 0+00 ACCESS ROAD C~
t7`~ -i3~6c..~ u"9 A \ 11 A V A V A ,
I ~ 1 r' \ \ \ 11 1 \I1 111,1\11 \\1j\111\
EXISTING SiW 1547-H 1 + 1 r + 1 \I1e\ 1 111 1+1j11,1\
/ f I 1\ 1 \\EXISTING FENCE\\\\ I\\ I 1111 1 11111
AVENUE E TENS I ON, I I (TL \600)) v / , Ilk 1I 11
PROPOSED AREA FOR , 1 ! I ; I+t,l J ;1 <
I \ 11 I 1 \ \\11 r -r4 II \
W DEDICATIONTO CITY I I 1 1\ \
R I GHT,'OF-WAY I 1 1 1 .11 I ''1 \ 1 PROPOSED AREA FOR
v v I "i r A t irjl i 1 A A V A \ v v v v
PROPOSED TL 600 ' / ~^1 \ ` \ \ DEDICATION TO CITY
PART I 1 I ON LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR FUTURE
_ \ \ \ ` \ \ NATURE PATH ACCESS TO CITY
OWNED TAX LOT 400
(TL 7900) (TL 7800) Y` (TL 7700)-- (TL 1600) I TL7500 \I\`\\\`\\\\ \
O I I I I I / / I\
h / / \
BULL MTN.
o ~ MEADOWS
`mss I /
J 1 I I 1 1 / / \
V I I I I
~ I
e
NOTUS
1. TAX MAP/LOT NO 2S 105DBOO600 SCALE: IPLA0'
ii
NOTE:
1. 154th AVE EXTENSION ROAD SECTION SEE ABOVE.
EXISTING S.W. 154TH AVE EXTENSION PROFILE
SCALE: I" = 60' HORIZ, I"=20' VERT
FIGURE 2 MARCH 2000
CITY OF TIGARD
PROPOSED TA) LOT 600
CONCEPTUAL RE-PARTITION
SHADOW PLAN
aft 0F MAW
0lECOH -
94-0310.466
I
Y ! -0 t - R .,A [J,ffi SY-y. rM [A.s9:r irz' :xY.? 'a~ 4 CFL'~.i' a - t 'L
a `t,C,'yr ~V 4 r t . rm:.NOTICE OFTYPE ~114DEC ISrIO,N~ r I~jt r ~.T
f ,trkr, !t "U~RBAN SEfRVICE AREA"
`n 4Y r a MINOR YLAND~PARTITION MLP,) 2000'00003 . ClrvOfTIGARO ' ' !t
} x} r i r $1 1 i . xy XI2 C0 mum'ty ~Devetoprttent : '
A f°~i CITY OF LTIG'ARD :PARTITION''u1.154TH SFia~nngA`Bette~r'commu'ritty
120 DAYS = 07/2812000
SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY
"URBAN SERVICE AREA"
FILE NAME: CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION (@ 154th
CASE NO: Minor Land Partition (MLP) MLP2006-00003
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Minor Land Partition approval to partition the 1.74 acre
lot to allow for the sale of a 1.35 acre portion of the property, which was originally
acquired and now not necessary, for access to the recently completed Menlor
Reservoir located on the adjacent Tax Lot.
APPLICANT: City of Tigard Water Department
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223
OWNER: Same
ZONING
DESIGNATION: R-25: Medium High-Density Residential District. The R-25 zoning district is
designed to accommodate existing housing of all types and new attached single-
family and multi-family housing units at a minimum lot size of 1,480 square feet.
LOCATION: 13230 SW 154th Avenue; WCTM 2S105DB, Tax Lot 00600. The subject site is
located south of SW Scholl's Ferry Road, at the end of SW 154th Avenue.
ArrLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390 (Decision-Making Procedures);
18.420 (Land Partitions); 18.510 (Residential Zoning Districts); 18.705 (Access
Egress and Circulation); 18.715 (Density Computations); 18.790 (Tree Removal);
18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards).
SECTION II.
DECISION
•.✓~1!'''' Y^ y~f tFl~i 7~+~ti. ~r ~~z„: `r :3~`4.N'3:•r~~M~ ~~~.~5, ! 1~`~"~<}~ d'!`~xl.~ f~ .~."'r~~u... F..~ t .F S
r
at7{ he findings and conclusions on which therdecision ~s based are-n6bARin^Section W,
r
'i t is :t1',~~ ...-~.r :..,Sr~',~..:x..~,, ..i '.`r ~.Y,ry':; .E:.;F•T~..;+.:..:._a1..~~~''~4-~ssK~.. . -s a.~r...ic ii.L.~.r~LS..
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154- PAGE 1 OF 14
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
f'
[ ~r.:.l•~ G F
a
emit tfie lo-I owing tote annin De artment Mathew Schelde er b3 x or
review and approval:
1. Submit 'a Iplan indicating how tax lot' 600 being screened from the access drive of the newly
partitioned lot according to 18.745.040 and implement the required plantings.
2. Record a deed restriction on the parcels that requires Sensitive Land review prior to any trees
being removed on slopes 25 percent or greater.
_.THE~FOLL;O~WINGCO.NDITIT4NSrS,HALLBEiSATISFIED
BUILDINGPERMITS
PRIOR'TOISSUANCE»OF
..::a-+'~,'. ...r ;=~i....;... .._.~._~s:. a.rn-,w-.•?, ~-..~.t,~~,.•~"av,..x~.r;~,. da.,'V,!!,o.<.',. .a..... ~.i ~.k, n..._ '
Submit to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager, 639-4111, ext. 318) for review and approval:
3. The applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a mylar copy of the recorded final
plat.
rs'~'Y THE£FOLg'LLOWIIVGCONDITIONSSHALLBE''SATISFIED~''u
I# '
3..tt..>W 1. 1 ....re...-n.v..}:~ xa..s a~~ xfir.. ...e. _a't_,.ka . . I
submit to tie ngineering Department (Brian gager, 639-4Tn, ext. JTWtor review and approvaF
4. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall have construction pions submitted for review
and approval by the City Engineer for the proposed extension of SW 154 Avenue.
5. The final plat shall show a right-of-way dedication for SW 154' Avenue of 38 feet, as shown on
the preliminary plan.
6. The applicant's construction drawings shall indicate that full width street improvements, including
traffic control devices, mailbox clusters, concrete sidewalks, driveway aprons, curbs, asphaltic
concrete pavement, sanitary sewers storm drainage, street trees, streetlights, and underground
utilities shall be installed for SW 154 Avenue. Improvements shall be designed and constructed
to local street standards.
7. A profile of SW 154th Avenue shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site
showing the existing grade and proposed future grade through the larger parcel as shown on the
applicant's Future Street Plan.
8. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan
shall conform to 'Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance
Handbook, February 1994."
9. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to
the City's Global Positioning System (GPS) geodetic control network. These monuments shall be
on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary.
Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground
measurements'to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates
can be established by:
GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey.
By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
Final Plat Application Submission Requirements:
A. Submit for City review four (4) paper copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor
licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 15471-' PAGE 2 OF 14
B. The final plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by
the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.95), Washington County, and by the City of Tigard.
C. The right-of-way dedication for SW 154 Avenue shall be made on the final plat.
D. NOT Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive a
letter from the City Engineering Department indicating: 1) that the City has reviewed the
final plat and submitted comments to the applicant's surveyor, and 2) that the applicant
has either completed any public improvements associated with the project, or has at least
obtained the necessary public improvement permit from the City to complete the work.
E. Once the City and County have reviewed the final plat, submit two mylar copies of the final
plat for City Engineer's signature.
SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Property Historv:
The subject parcel is located within the Urban Service Area. The propert y is designated Medium
Density Residential on the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map. No previous land use actions for this
parcel appear in the City's land use records.
Site Information and ProDosal Descriptions
The subject property is approximately 1.74 acres. The City's Public Works Department proposes to
partition the 1.74-acre lot to allow for the sale of a 1.35-acre portion of the property, which was originally
acquired and now not necessary for access to the recently completed Menlor Reservoir located on the
adjacent Tax Lot.
SECTION IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS
The City mailed notice to property owners within 500 feet of the subject site providing them an
opportunity to comment. Twelve (12) letters were received addressing the City's land partition.
Concerns throughout the responses to the 'project have common issues. Dedicating the 1.35-acre
portion of the partition to parks or greenspace. Other issues include privacy, tree retention and property
values.
Staff response:
According to zoning districts, the parcel of land in question is located in an R-25 zone, which is
designated "Medium-High Density Residential." Every property surrounding the sub1'ect site is
designated medium-high density residential. The subject property is zoned R-25 which allows
development. The City cannot deny an application based on possible affects to propert y values.
Leaving the rest of the property as open space has been discussed with the Tigard Public Works
Department and the Water District. Ownership by the District is separate from the City's ownership.
According to Ed Wagner of the Public Works Department, "the property is owned by the Water service
area, not the City, a fact by law. The District has chosen to sell the property for budgeting purposes.
We need to sell this land to burr another reservoir site at a higher elevation, to provide water to those
residents-water is a little more important than parks when it comes to fires and human needs. If we get
another piece of property and we get the pump station located then, and only then, would we consider
selling water land at the Menlor site to the City for park land. The City is providing a nature path to
extend to Menlor Park property to the south.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154- PAGE 3 OF 14
Tree mitigation is an issue not only for the residents but with the City as well. The existing trees on the
site are on a slope that is greater then 25%. According to the Ti ardDevelopment Code, slopes greater
than 25% require "Sensitive Lands Review (SLR)." However, his does not mean no trees would be
removed. The City's. Development Code does allow for tree removal, but has strict mitigation measures
to insure that tree replacement is implemented. Tree mitigation and sensitive land review will be
required for any proposed development.
SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIFW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Land Partitions (18.420):
The proposed partition complies with all statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations;
The proposed partition will comply with all statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations at the
time of proposed development as demonstrated both by the analysis presented within this administrative
decision and by this application and review process through compliance with the conditions of approval.
Therefore, this criterion is met.
There are adequate public facilities are available to serve the proposal;
Public facilities are discussed in detail later in this decision. Based on the analysis provided herein, staff
finds that adequate public facilities are available to serve the proposal. Therefore, this criterion is met.
All proposed improvements meet City and applicable agency standards; and
The public facilities and proposed improvements are discussed and conditioned later in this decision.
Improvements will be reviewed as part of permit process and during construction at which time the
appropri ate review authority will insure that City and applicable agency standards are met. Based on the
analysis in this decision, staff finds that this criterion is met, or will be met as conditioned.
All proposed lots conform to the specific requirements below:
The minimum width of the building envelope area shall meet the lot requirement of the applicable
zoning district.
There is no minimum lot width required for the R-25 zoning district. Therefore, this standard does not
apply.
The lot area shall be as required %the applicable zoning district. In the case of a flag lot, the
accessway may not be included.in e lot area.
The minimum lot area requirement in the R-25 zoning district is 3,050 square feet. The proposed
partition creates two lots that are 0.39 and 1.35 acres respectively. Therefore, this criterion has been
satisfied. .
Each lot created through the partition process shall front a public right-of-way by at least 15 feet
or have a legally recorded minimum 15-foot wide access easement.
The proposed partition plat demonstrates that both lots will have at a minimum, 35 feet of frontage onto
SW 154 after dedication which will be a public street. Therefore, this criterion is satisfied.
Setbacks shall be as required by the applicable zoning district.
No development is proposed with this application. The existing structure on the newly partitioned lot will
not be in violation of applicable setbacks. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
When the partitioned lot is a flag lot, the developer may determine the location of the front yard,
provided that no side yard is less than 10 feet. Structures shall generally be located so as to
maximize separation from existing structures.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154i" PAGE 4 OF 14
Neither lot will be considered as a flag lot. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable.
A screen shall be provided along the property line of a lot of record where the paved drive in an
accessway is located within ten feet of an abutting lot in accordance with Sections 18.745.040.
Screening may also be required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to provide usable
outdoor recreation areas for proposed development.
The access drive to the existing house on the newly partitioned lot is within ten feet of the proposed
artition line. A plan showing tax lot 600 being screened from the access drive of the newly partitioned
Pot according to 18.745.040 will be conditioned.
The fire district may require the installation of a fire hydrant where the length of an accessway
would have a detrimental effect on fire-fighting capabilities.
Fire district regulations will be reviewed at time of development. Therefore, this criterion does not apply.
Where a common drive is to be provided to serve more than one lot, a reciprocal easement
which will ensure access and maintenance rights shall be recorded with the approved partition
map.
The newly created lot (1.35 acres) is being partitioned from Tax Lot 600 because it is not needed for
access to the reservoir property located on Tax Lot 400. Therefore, the access road, located on Tax Lot
600, will be used primarily for accessing the Menlor Reservoir. The City owns both tax lots. Therefore,
a reciprocal easement is not necessary.
Any accessway shall comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 18.705, Access, Egress and
Circulation.
Standards regarding the access road associated with this partition and Chapter 18.705 are discussed
later in this decision.
Where landfill and/or development is allowed within or adjacent to the one-hundred-year
floodplain, the city shall require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for
greenway adorning and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable
elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway with the floodplain in accordance
with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan.
The partitioned lot is not adjacent to a one-hundred-year floodplain. Therefore, this standard does not
apply.
An application for a variance to the standards prescribed in this chapter shall be made in
accordance with Chapter 18.370, Variances and Adjustments. The applications for the partition
and variance(s)/adjustment(s) will be processed concurrently.
No variances or adjustments have been submitted with this application. Therefore, this standard does
not apply.
FINDING: Based on the analysis above, not all of the criteria have been fully met. If the applicant
meets the condition listed below, the standards will be met.
CONDITION:
Submit a plan indicating how tax lot 600 beingg screened from the access drive of the
newly partitioned lot according to 18.745.040 and implement the required planting.
Residential Zonina Districts (18.510):
Development standards in residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2 below:
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154- PAGE 5 OF 14
TABLE 18.510.2 - (Cont'd.)
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES
'STgNDARprt +s~ w "MF DU* "3v r
h
'1
^e
aay ~t xx SF DU'*' SaN`'
h.fi •
,l Y
1t' tl-
Minimum Lot Size
Detached unit
1.480 sq.ft
3,050 sq.ft. per unit
- Attached unit
1,480 sq.ft.
Duplexes
6,100 sq.ft or 3,050 sq.ft per
- Boarding, lodging, rooming
6,100sq.ft.
unit
house
Average Lot width j
None
I None
Minimum Setbacks
- Front yard
20 ft.
15 ft.
- Side facing street on
comer & through lots
20 ft.
10 ft.
- Side yard
10 ft.
5 ft [1)
- Rear yard
20 ft.
15 ft.
- Side or rear yard abutting more
rest ictive zoning district
30 ft.
30 ft.
- Distance between property line
and garage entrance
20 ft.
20 ft.
Maximum Height I
45 ft.
I 45 ft.
Maximum Lot Coverage [2] I
80%
I 80%
Minimum Landscape Requirement I
20%
I 20%
[1] Except this shall not apply to attached units on the lot line on which the units are attached.
[2) Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces.
Multiple-family dwelling unit
Single-family dwelling unit
Access. Earess and Circulation (18.705):
Continuing obligation of property owner:
The provisions and maintenance of access and egress stipulated in this title are continuing
requirements for the use of any structure or parcel of real property in the City.
The property owner will be required to maintain the subject site's access, egress,. or circulation.
Access Plan Requirements:
No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and approved as
provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be
fulfilled.' The applicant shall submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the applicant with
detailed information about this submission requirement.
The applicant has submitted a site plan showing access, egress and circulation requirements that are to
scale. Staff has reviewed the site plan and found it consistent with the criteria found in this chapter.
Joint Access:
Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels or land may agree to utilize joinuy Lire sable
access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or parcels of
land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title, provided: 1) Satisfactory
legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, . leases or contracts to
establish the joint use; and 2) Copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are placed on
permanent file with the City.
Joint access is not proposed nor required for this application. The access located on the reduced tax lot
600 is for the sole purpose of accessing the reservoir property. Therefore, joint access would not be
beneficial to property owners or to the City.
Public Street Access:
All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.0301 shall
connect directly with a public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be
maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154'" PAGE 6 OF 14
All access and egress connect directly to SW 154th Avenue, which will be dedicated by the City of Tigard
for public use.
Curb Cuts:
Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N.
Curb cuts will be discussed under Section 18.810 later in this decision.
Required Walkway Location:
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; 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;
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; 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.
No development is proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard can be deferred until time of
development.
Inadequate or Hazardous Access:
Applications for building permits shall be referred to the Commission for review when, in the
opinion of the Director, the access proposed:
Would cause or increase existing hazardous traffic conditions; or
Would provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles; or
Would in any other way cause hazardous conditions to exist which would constitute a
clear and present danger to the public health, safety, and general welfare. Direct
individual access to arterial or collector streets from single-family dwellings and duplex
lots shall be discouraged. Direct access to major collector or arterial streets shall be
considered only if there is no practical alternative way to access the site. In no case shall
the design of the service drive or drives require or facilitate the backward movement or
other maneuvering of a vehicle within a street, other than an alley. Single-family and
duplex dwellings are exempt from this requirement.
The existing access for the newly partitioned lot will not increase hazardous traffic conditions, hinder
emergency vehicles or cause hazardous conditions in any way. The access drive meets the standards
set for access drives within residential zones. The existing drive is 18 feet wide and has 18 feet of
paving. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
Minimum Access Requirements for Residential Use:
Vehicular access and egress for single-family, duplex or attached single-family dwelling units
on individual lots and multi-family residential uses shall not be less than as provided in Table
18.705.1 and Table 18.705.2; Vehicular access to multi-family structures shall be brought to
within 50 feet of the ground floor entrance or the ground floor landing of a stairway, ramp, or
elevator leading to the dwelling units. Private residential access drives shall be provided nd
maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code; Access drives in
excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around
of fire apparatus by one of the following: A circular, paved surface having a minimum turn
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 15471 PAGE 7 OF 14
• I •
radius measured from center point to outside edge of 35 feet; A hammerhead-configured,
paved surface with each leg of the hammerhead having a minimum depth of 40feet and a
minimum width of 20 feet; the maximum cross slope of a required turnaround is 5 /o. Vehicle
turnouts, (providing a minimum total driveway width of 24 feet for a distance of at least 30
feet), may be required so as to reduce the need for excessive vehicular.backinq motions iri
situations where two vehicles traveling in, opposite directions meet on driveways in excess of
200 feet in length; Where permitted, minimum, width for. driveway. approaches to arterials or
collector streets shall be no less than 20 feet so as to avoid traffic turning from the street
having to wait for traffic exiting the site.
No new vehicular access or development is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard
can will deferred until time of development.
FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the Access, Egress, and Circulation
Standards have been met.
Densitv Computations (18.715):
The standards for Density computation deal with the intensity of residential land uses, usually stated as
the number of housing units per acre. Because no development is associated with this application, this
section will be deferred until time of development.
Landscanina and Screenina (18.745):
The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development of new structures, remodeling existing
structures, and where landscaping is non-conforming. Therefore, this section can be deferred until time
of development.
Off-Street Parkina and Loadina Reauirements (18.765):
This chapter deals with parking requirements for new construction, expansion of existing uses or a
change of use. This application deals specifically with partitioning of property. Therefore, the standards
of 18.765 will be deferred until time of development.
Tree Removal (18.790):
Prior to any building on-site, a tree mitigation plan will be required. Refer to condition #2 of the
Conditions of Approval section.
Visual Clearance Areas (18.795):
This Chapter requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property
adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public. street and a private
driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge; planting, fence, wall structure, or
temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that
obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight
~80-foot feet in height (8) (trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight
feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a
distance points with a straight line.
No obstructions have been proposed where the access located on the newly proposed parcel connects
to SW 154 Avenue or the existing access to the residential dwelling located on the original Tax Lot 600.
FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the Vision Clearance Standards have been
met.
PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS
Street And Utilitv 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:
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154- PAGE 8 OF 14
Streets:
Improvements:
Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be
improved in accordance with the TDC standards.
Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion
of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC.
Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths:
Section 18.810.030(E) requires a local residential street to have a 42 to 50-foot right-of-way width
and a 24 to 32-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking,
sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees.
This°site lies adjacent to SW 154"' Avenue, which is classified as a local residential on thg City of Tigard
Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 38 feet of ROW on SW 154 Avenue north
of this site, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. This narrow ROW was approved by
Washington. County as a part of the Round Tree Estates project. Because the narrow ROW is an
existing condition, it does not make sense to require a wider ROW on this parcel. Therefore, Staff
recommends that the 38-foot ROW be continued into this site.
SW 154' Avenue is currently fully improved to the'north of this site. The City is proposing to extend this
street partially into the site in order to provide a standard driveway approach to give access through the
smaller parcel to Tax Lot 400 (site of a City reservoir). The extension is shown to be built to City
standards to match the existing improvements.
Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets:
Section 18.810.030(F) states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of
existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This
section also states that where it is necessary to give access or ermit a satisfactory future
division of adJoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be
developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to
adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as
through streets at such time as the. adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be
constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall not be removed until
authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction
cost. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for
stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length.
The applicant's plan provides a Future Street Plan that shows conceptually how the extension of SW
154 Avenue could be extended easterly into the larger parcel for future development. The smaller
parcel will not be developed, as it contains the access road to Tax Lot 400 (the reservoir site).
The conceptual plan is acceptable, but if and when this parcel does develop, a hammerhead turnaround
will not be approved. A circular bulb would need to be provided at the end. It is feasible for a bulb to be
provided, but it may mean that the larger parcel will yield fewer lots than what is shown on the Future
Street Plan.
Cul-de-sacs:
Section 18.810.030.K states that a cul-de-sac shall be no more than 200 feet long, shall not
provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units, and shall only be used when environmental or
topo.graphical constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards
in this code preclude street extension and through circulation:
All cul-de-sacs shall terminate with a turnaround. Use of turnaround configurations other
than circular, shall be approved by the City Engineer; and
The length of the cul-de-sac shall be measured along the centerline of the roadway from
the near side of the intersecting street to the farthest point of the cul-de-sac.
If a cul-de-sac is more than 300 feet long, a lighted direct pathway to an adjacent street
may be required to be provided and dedicated to the City.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154"' PAGE 9 OF 14
The Future Street Plan shows that an east/west street from SW 154th Avenue will likely be extended into
the larger of the two new parcels. Due to steep slopes in excess of 25%, it is likely that this east/west
extension will need to terminate as a cul-de-sac. The overall length of the cul-de-sac would be
approximately 300 feet, as measured from the intersection of SW 154 Avenue/SW Firtree Drive. Due
to the constraints of the adjacent topography and the fact that there are no feasible street connections to
the east due to existing development, it is likely that Staff would support a future variance to the cul-de-
sac length. standard.
Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030(G) requires all local streets which abut a
development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded
by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to
other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to
redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. In the case of
environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show
that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some
reasonable street connection.
The City has shown that the only feasible extension of the public street.is to the east. This partition does
not preclude that extension.
Grades and Curves:
Section 18.810.030.M states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on. arterials, 12% on
collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may
have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet), and:
Centerline radii of curves shall not be less than 700 feet on arterials, 500 feet on major
collectors, 350 feet on minor collectors, or 100 feet on other streets; and
Streets intersecting with a minor collector or greater functional classification street; or
streets intended to be posted with a stop sign or signalization, shall provide a landing
averaging five percent or less. Landings are that portion of the street within 20 feet of the
edge of the intersecting street at full improvement.
The street extension proposed by this application appears to meet City standards.
Block Designs:
Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with
due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of
needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of
limitations and opportunities of topography.
Block Sizes:
Section 18.810:040.6.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed
1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except:
Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of
water or, pre-existing development or;
For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or
railroads.
For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access.
No street is proposed to be constructed with this application. Therefore, no City blocks will be formed as
a result of this partition. Street patterns can be more adequately reviewed at time of development.
Therefore, this standard has been met.
Section 18.810.040.6.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements
or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between
connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or
topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards
in the code.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154- PAGE 10 OF 14
The City of Tigard has proposed to provide a 6-foot wide corridor along the proposed partition property
line for future use as access to a City owned pathway located on Tax Lot 400. This is to allow access to
adjoining park property not related to street connections.
Lots - Size and Sha e:
Section 18.810.0600A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width,
unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district.
The newly partitioned lot is a total of 58,050 square feet, 258 feet in depth and. 225 feet wide. Therefore,
this lot is in compliance with the criterion above.
Lot Frontage:
Section 18.810.060(6) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private
streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c applies, which
requires a parcel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded
access easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit, the
frontage shall beat least 15 feet.
Tax Lot 600 has 35 feet of frontage ono SW 154th Ave. The proposed partitioned property will have a
total of 73 feet of frontage onto SW 154" Avenue. Therefore, this standard has been met.
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.
Sidewalks will be required on both sides of the proposed street extension. The applicant's plan indicates
compliance with this standard.
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 appears to be an existing public sanitary sewer line in SW 154`x' Avenue. This line will need to be
extended further south in the new street extension to allow for future service to adjacent development of
the larger parcel. Final review of this line extension shall be by Unified Sewerage Agency (USA).
Storm Drainage:
General Provisions:
Section 18.81.0.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water
and flood water runoff.
Accommodation of Upstream Drainage:
Section 18.810.100.C 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).
The existing storm drainage line in SW 154th Avenue must be further extended with the roadway
improvements. Final review of this extension shall be by USA.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154TH PAGE 11 OF 14
Effect on Downstream Drainage:
Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional
runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and
Engineer shah withhold approval of the development untir 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 Fan no Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek,
the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention.
This partition will not result in an increase in impervious surfaces. If the larger parcel is developed in the
future, then these provisions will apply.
Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways:
Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed
bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for
the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way.
This standard has been satisfied under Section 18.810.040.132.
Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.13 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.
No development is proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard is deferred until time. of
development.
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.
The City proposes to dedicate a six-foot easement for a pedestrian nature path access to connect to an
existing path on the adjacent Menlor property. The above section calls for a bike path to be eight feet
unless it is within the roadway. This application is proposing an access to a pedestrian trail and does not
address the access as a "bikeway." Therefore, this standard does not apply.
Utilities:
Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric
communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed
underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and
meter cabinets which may be placed above round temporary utility service facilities during
construction, high capacity electric lines opera ing at 150,000 volts or above, and:
The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide
the underground services*
The City reserves the righi 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
ubs for service connections shall be long enough fo avoid disturbing the street
improvements when service connections are made.
Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.C states that a developer shall
pay a fee in-lieu of under rounding costs when the development is proposed to take. place on a
street where existing utilies 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 develo ment for which under-grounding would result in the
placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154"' PAGE 12 OF 14
applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which
are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of
under-grounding.
There are no existing overhead utility lines on SW 154t' Avenue. All new utilities shall be placed
underground.
FINDING: Based on the analysis above, not all of the criteria of the Public Facility Section have been
fully met. If the applicant meets conditions 4 through 11 listed under the "Conditions of
Approval" section of this decision, the standards will be met.
ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT
STANDARDS:
Public Water stem:
The pudic water line in SW 154th Avenue must be extended along with the roadway improvements.
Storm Water Quality;
The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management 1SW.M.) re established by the
Unified Sewera a Agency (USA Design and Construction Standards adoed by Resolution and
Order No. 00-7jgwhich require the construction of on-site water quiulat~itons
ity cilities. 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.
Since this partition will not increase the amount of impervious surfaces, this section will not apply. If the
larger parcel is developed in the future, these provisions will apply.
Gradin and Erosion Control:
USA-7e sign 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.
The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb five or more
acres of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an
NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site
and/or building permit.
The public improvement plans must include a grading plan.
Survev RKe uirements:
7 he applicant's tinal prat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the City's
Global Positioning System (GPS) geodetic control network. These monuments shall be on the same
line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the
coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid
measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by:
GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey.
By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it.
City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154- PAGE 13 OF 14
SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS
Unified Sewerage Agency Comments were received in the form of a letter. USA's. issues have been
addressed under the street and utility improvement section of this decision. Sensitive Lands, Division of
State Lands/Corps of Engineers comments have not been addressed due to no development being
proposed with this application. Sensitive Land issues will be addressed at time of development.
SECTION VIII. 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
Finai Decision:
THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JUNE 2, 2000 AND BECOMES
EFFECTIVE ON JUNE 17, 2000 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED.
AT eal:
The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are
otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may
appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.6.2. of the Tigard Community Development
Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director
within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule
and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard,
Oregon 97223.
Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal. from the Director's Decision shall be
confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the
comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may
be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that
may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body.
THE DF_ADLINF_ FOR FLING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON JUNE 16, 2000
Questions:
If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard
Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at 03) 639-4171.
PREPARE[ BY:/ -4a ew SchWd~ger
Assistant Planner
Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW
APPROVED BY: Ric'6rd BewersdOTff
Planning Manager
i:\curpln\MathewVnlp\mlp2000-00003.dec
June 2. 2000
DATE
June 2. 2000
DATE
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154- PAGE 14 OF 14
0
1
,
L -L
I
CITY OF TIGARD
- TAX LOT 600 b
1.74 ACRES \ «'I
_ 225'
:1 s (R X-)
11,
(n 1100)
10 \
Ip ( .oo)
' - - - - . ~ ~a I)Ofp . as r .
rl SS' j I t
I(0. r0a0 I,
EXISTING 154TH AVE (TL 600 :j
EXTENSION, PROPOSED . `
AREA FOR DEDICATION
TO CITY RIGHT-OF-W/1Y Z a_J
\ Cep.. i
.cau w.o-~ "7~
1
r
1
1 '
1
1
1
I
I
PROPOSED TLi6C0-l 77 '-7-- / AROPOSED AREA FOfi
I PARTITION LINE I i
Cµ+',~ DEDICATION TO CITY ;
K.ooe RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR FUTURE
i (nrwol J / NATURE•,PATH ACCESS TO
In nm1,(n r[oaliR nmi lL wool' CITY OWNED TAX LOT 400
FlGUR81
t:.- -rT7"ao_t - CITY OF TIGARD
1
MARCH 2000
PROPOSED TAXILOT 600
PARTITION SITE PLAN
NOTFS•
1. TAX YAPAOT NO 2SIO50500600
2. SEE FICLIRE 2 FOR CONCEPTUAL RE-PARTITICN SHADOW
PLAN
CITY of TIGARD
cm OF nk
SITE PLAN
(Map is not to scale)
SITE PLAN
,r (
srxe , •iK I : 200
7-A 1m
T CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION
N (MLP)2000-00003
r
z
t
z- _-Bl1z--
_ - -
I NT Q
Eg EEN_--S~
_ ~ rSC
zl
zz l___~
SW BRISTI ECONE WAY
1---- -
-z ~
~Z - DRIVE z
N SI~NOE`N
I I I I
I I I Q -
BRISTLECONE-_---~
W_
3
I
I F'1 I
Community Development
i
I
l, V_
W
f-
_z
UzH
~L
SUBJECT
TAX LO
II
Z z
w
-LL
/z
( Swl
~I
.I
GEOG.APNIC INEOeur.IION evEIEY
VICINITY MAP
"URBAN SERVICE AREA"
M LP2000-00003
CITY OF TIGARD
PARTITION @
154TH AVENUE
N
0 100 200 300 400 500 Feel
1-= 360 feel
i
I
I
City of Tigard
i
I
Information on this map is for general location only and
should be verified wth the Development Services Division,
13125 SW Hall Blvd
Tigard, OR 97223
(503) 639-171
http:lh~.cl.liga rd. or. us
Plot date: Apr 21, 2000; C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR
I
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ed Wegner, Director of Public Works 6!U
FROM: Mike Miller, Utility Manager
RE: History of Clute Property Acquisition
DATE: July 7, 2000
Background to Tigard providing operations:
The Tigard Water District once provided water service to the cities of King City, Durham
and two thirds of Tigard, as well as areas of unincorporated Washington County mostly
contained on Bull Mountain. In 1993, the cities of Tigard, King City and Durham
withdrew from the Tigard Water District. Since 1994, the City of Tigard through
intergovernmental agreements (IGA) has provided the operation of the water system to
all entities. The objective has been, and continues to be, that the water system for the
Tigard Water Service Area, which is the boundary of the original water district, remain
intact and be operated as a single system.
Under the IGA, assets were divided into two categories; system assets and other
assets. System assets are the assets necessary for the operation of Tigard's water
supply system throughout the original Tigard Water District. Personal and intangible
properties are system assets as well as water mains, service installations, structures,
facilities, improvements or other property necessary for the operation of the City of
Tigard's water supply system throughout the original Tigard Water District.
Other assets are assets not necessary for the operation of the City of Tigard's water
supply system throughout the original Tigard Water District. As stated in the IGA other
assets shall become the property of the jurisdiction in which the asset is located.
Regardless of whether or not a property is considered a system asset or other asset,
section 4.6 of the IGA states that all system assets and other assets shall be pledged
by the Cities (Tigard, King City and Durham) and the Tigard Water District to Tigard. All
system assets and other assets shall be managed by Tigard and shall be utilized by
Tigard in order to provide services to properties, residences and businesses in the
original District.
The IGA, in Section 3, establishes the Intergovernmental Water Board (IWB). The IWB
was empowered to make recommendations to the Tigard City Council on water service
issues and have the following responsibilities:
0 Make a continuing study of the rate structure of the water system.
Clute Property • • Page 2 %
• Consider and prepare plans for and make recommendations to the Tigard City
Council for a long-range operation and management program.
• Investigate and study means of effecting economies in operation and management.
• Review and make recommendations of to the Tigard Budget Committee and Council
on all budget requests for water operation and maintenance.
• Study and consider ways and means of improving the water system and services,
which it provides.
• Study and make recommendations on Tigard's program for providing insurance for
system assets and operations.
• Make a continuing review of any and all rules and regulations regarding the water
system which may be adopted by the Tigard City Council and periodically make
recommendations to the Council for additions or amendments of such rules and
regulations.
• Work with other agencies and jurisdictions in a cooperative effort to plan for future
water supply needs of the area.
• Make recommendations to the Tigard City Council relative to all of the above-
mentioned matters and as well as to any other matters which the IWB may feel to be
for the good of the water system, the overall public interest and for the benefit of the
consumer.
Tax Lot 600 (Clute Property):
In 1990, the Tigard Water District had their master plan.updated. Within their master
plan the need for a reservoir to be constructed on the Menlor property was again
identified. The first time the reservoir was identified was in the 1986 Bull Mountain
Water Master Plan. In 1994, the City of Tigard assumed responsibility for the entire
Tigard Water Service Area and reassessed the master plan as well as the water supply
plan that was completed in 1986 and 1990 for the Tigard Water District. Through an
independent review of the master plans, and the continued high growth on Bull
Mountain, the City determined that a new 3.5 million-gallon reservoir was necessary to
be constructed upon the Menlor site.
In 1995, the City of Tigard began the process of preliminary design of the 3.5 million
gallon Menlor Reservoir. Three points of access to the proposed reservoir site were
identified: SW Sunrise Lane; Tract G located within Bull Mountain Meadows; and SW
154th Avenue.
Although the Water System had a 10-foot access strip to SW Sunrise Lane, the
steepness of the street, poor condition of the pavement and possible requirement from
Clute Property • • Page 3
the County for total replacement of the street from the terminus to SW Bull Mountain
Road made this option economically unfeasible.
Another access point, through Tract G, was also found not to be the preferred access
due to the necessity of routing all of the construction traffic through an existing
established neighborhood. The only option left was for the City of Tigard, on behalf of
the water system, to try and obtain either an access road easement or purchase the
property at the south terminus of SW 154th Avenue (Tax Lot 600).
It is important to note that the statement "on behalf of the water system" is referring to
the fact that Tigard operates the entire water system for all parties of the IGA.
Contained in the Division of Assets report, proportionate interests in assets are as
follows: Tigard Water District 17.59%; City of Tigard 73.38%; City of King City 4.6%
and the City of Durham 4.43%.
Negotiations with the property owner (Ms. Clute) began in 1995. Negotiations
continued until May 1997, when after relocating the access road from a straight
extension of SW 154th Avenue, Ms. Clute requested that the access road be located on
the west side of the parcel. This is where the access road was ultimately constructed.
Appraisal Report:
In January 1997, an appraisal report was completed on the Clute property. Since
market value is the major focus of most real property appraisal assignments, it was
used in this report. The current economic definition in the US is "the most probable
price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all
conditions requisite to a fair sale". In 1997, prior to IGA between Washington County
and the City of Tigard to provide Urban Services, the property was zoned R15 in the
Washington County Comprehensive Plan, also known as the Bull Mountain Community
Plan.
At the time of the appraisal the highest and best use of the property was to maintain the
existing dwelling and shed, to rebuild the existing garage (which was torn down after the
City purchased the property) at another location on the property and develop the
remaining land into seven single family lots averaging approximately 5,000 square feet.
Fair Market value, at the time was estimated at $287,000. This figure was the basis for
negotiations to acquire the access easement. However after continued negotiations the
City decided to purchase the entire property and on Mav 29. 1997. the Citv utilizina
dedicated water funds purchased Tax Lot 600 for $350,000. v
Discussions of Land Use:
In 1996, prior to submitting the permit application to Washington County, the City held a
public meeting for the surrounding neighborhoods to get their feelings and concerns for
the 3.5 million-gallon reservoir project. At this meeting, some of the neighbors were
under the impression that the Menlor site was to be a combination park and reservoir
site, since there was an organization looking for park space in that area. The Public
Works Director, Ed Wegner, stated that the use of the remainder of the eleven-acre site
Clute Property • • Page 4
has not been determined at that time. Mr. Wegner continued by stating that the City is
not opposed to putting in walking trails, although this has not been determined. The
City is striving to keep the remainder of the site in a natural state by keeping tree
removal to a minimum. When checking through the old records there is no indication
that anything other than two reservoirs would be placed on the site. A second reservoir
was originally proposed in the 1986 Bull Mountain Water Master Plan. Another question
from the neighborhood meeting was raised as to whether or not the entire eleven acres
would be fenced. Mr. Wegner stated that the City would work with the neighborhood
and that the City would probably fence the area along the roadside and leave the
majority of the site in a natural state.
At the September 8, 1998 meeting of the Tigard City Council, Mayor Nicoli responded to
a question from a concerned citizen as to whether or not the City had promised to
adjacent homeowners a park on the Clute property or if the City would grant permits to
build three residential homes. Mayor Nicoli stated that the City (along with Washington
County) had purchased more land directly uphill of the Menlor reservoir land to use as a
City Park in the future. Mayor Nicoli continued by stating that the park would not be
developed immediately as it was outside the City limits at this time.
At the February 24, 1999 meeting of the IWB, Commissioner Scheiderich questioned
whether the surplus property from the Menlor project would be sold that year and will
these funds go into the Water fund. Mr. Wegner stated that this surplus property would
probably be sold during that fiscal year. He continued by saying that the Menlor
reservoir site is complete with the exception of some landscaping. The IWB will need to
decide what to do with the remainder of the Clute property that was purchased at the
bottom of the site. The original intent was to purchase this property (Clute) which was
needed to construct the reservoir and then sell the surplus property. Staffs
recommendation will most likely be to sell the additional property including the house
and utilize those funds to purchase property adjacent to the Menlor reservoir at a higher
level (550 zone).
At the July 14, 1999 meeting of the IWB, Public Works Director, Ed Wegner discussed
the Clute property. Mr. Wegner stated that everything we needed with the property has
been completed and we need to make a decision on the use of the property. Mr.
Wegner identified three options with the Clute property:
• Hold onto the property and house.
• Donate to the greenspaces for park lands and nature center. When Tigard did their
valuation of parks that area was deficient in greenspace, however, since that time
quite a bit of property has been purchased above the Menlor site in addition to other
properties.
• Sell the property. Sell off as is and go through a Minor Land Partition. Some
neighbors have approached the City to see if there is interest in selling property
adjacent to their properties. Mr. Wegner stated that the staff recommendation was
to sell this property and purchase property within the 550 zone.
Clute Property • . Page 5
Mr. Wegner stated that staff needs some direction from the IWB on the future of this
property. Commissioner Scheiderich questioned and recommended that Metro be
approached to valuate the desirability for the preservation of open space, by way of
significant drainage basin or significant stand of trees, etc. Mr. Wegner stated that we
had not consulted Metro on this issue at that time. Mr. Scheiderich also made the
recommendation to get a realtor's advice on whether it would be logical to partition this
property. Commissioner Hunt questioned the ability to purchasing property at the 550
zone and was it reliant upon the sale of the Clute property. Mr. Wegner stated that the
funds generated from the sale of the Clute property would allow us to replenish the
capital fund. Commissioner Froude stated the interests of some of the neighbors in a
community center.
Metro was contacted shortly after the July 14, 1999 IWB meeting. At that time Metro
indicated that they were not interested in purchasing the property or determining a value
of the property. We have once again contacted Metro, as recently as July 6, 2000, and
at the time of writing this memorandum we are waiting for a response.
At the November 10, 1999 meeting of the IWB, Commissioner Scheiderich questioned
the status of disposing of the surplus property. Mr. Wegner stated that we have not
worked on that property at this time. It was discussed that the site is approximately 2
acres and that the purchase price was approximately $219,000 and the estimated value
of the remaining property was somewhere around $200,000. Mr. Wegner stated that
this issue would have to be discussed after the next meeting.
At the January 12, 2000 meeting of the IWB, Mike Miller, Utility Manager for Tigard,
stated that the surplus portion of the Clute property has been identified and will be
proceeding with the Minor Land Partition beginning on January 20, 2000, with a pre-
application meeting to be held on January 27. Mr. Miller continued by stating that this
process will take approximately two months once the partition has been completed.
Zoning:
As stated previously, the original zoning designation for the property was Washington
County's R15. However, Washington County Ordinance No. 487 established a
framework to delegate and transfer to the City of Tigard responsibility for the provision
of certain urban services to provide more efficient public service to the citizens of the
Urban Services Area (Bull Mountain and Walnut Island areas). Through an
intergovernmental agreement, Washington County transferred and delegated certain
services including quasi-judicial and ministerial planning services, including the
issuance of development decisions and code enforcement services.
In order to accomplish an effective and efficient delegation and transfer of services it
was noted in Ordinance 487 that local regulations applicable to the affected area must
be uniform and that changes to the County" Community Development Code were
required. Specifically that the most uniform and efficient way would be to have the City
to administer its own regulations, and other relevant standards with minimal County
regulatory overlap, because Tigard's planning regulations are in compliance with
Statewide Planning Goals.
Clute Property • Page 6 t
In Section 801-8.2 of Ordinance 487, County land use designations and districts within
the Urban Services area were replaced by Tigard land use designations and districts.
Since Tigard does not have an R-15 (15 units per acre) residential designation, the
County amended its designations and districts contained in their R-15 areas to Tigard
zoning R-25 (Multi-family 25 units per acre). The R-25 zone is the closest zone that
Tigard has that would allow 15 units per acre. Tigard does have an R-12 zone that
allows up to 12 units per acre, but that would not have maintained what was allowed by
the original County zone. The planning designation for R-25 in Tigard is medium-high
density 13-25 units per acre.
Also in section 801-8.2.113.1a of Ordinance 487, states that legislative decisionmaking
may only be undertaken by the County in the manner specified in the Washington
County Community Development Code and County Comprehensive Plan provisions. In
other words it is the County that would have to grant a rezoning of the Clute property.
Specific Issues Raised by Neighbors of the Clute Property:
Why is the City of Tigard the applicant for land use approval?
As stated in the IGA, the cities of King City, Durham and Tigard, along with the Tigard
Water District pledged all their assets to Tigard. All system assets and other assets are
managed by the City of Tigard and shall be utilized by the City in order to provide water
services to properties, residences and businesses in the water service area. Also in the
IGA, paragraph 5 of the Recitals states: "The Cities and the District agree that it is in
their best interest if King City, Durham and the District were to be an integrated part of a
water supply network receiving water service from Tigard's city water department.
Tigard will receive revenue from water users in Tigard, King City, Durham, and the
District, and with that revenue Tigard will provide the funds to pay for expenses incurred
in providing water service".
Since Tigard is in charge of all of the funds for the water system, which includes
operation, maintenance and capital funds, and Tigard is operating the entire system on
behalf of the other entities, Tigard as the operator of the system should be the applicant.
Please remember that the Intergovernmental Water Board is only a board and does not
have funds available to it to purchase property or equipment. Also the Tigard Water
District, even though it is a special service district and still has taxing authority within the
unincorporated area, does not have the funding necessary to purchase property. In fact
the Tigard Water District's annual budget is approximately $20,000 per year.
Why can the Intergovernmental Water Board (IWS) decide on whether the
property can be sold or used as open space?
Paragraph 6 of the Recitals of the IGA between the City of Tigard and the Tigard Water
District states: "The Cities and District agree that it is in their best interest to share
authority for decision-making regarding the long-term water supply and capital
improvement planning to serve present and future water customers of the original
District".
Clute Property • • Page 7
Since the Clute property was an integral part of the capital improvement project of
constructing the Menlor reservoir and that each entity owns a proportionate interest in
the Clute property, deposal of surplus property, which is a capital asset, would need to
be recommended by the IWB, and Tigard would need to act upon that recommendation.
Also it is the intention of the IWB to utilize the proceeds from the sell of the Clute
property to purchase another property to site a reservoir within the 550 zone on Bull
Mountain. The purchase of reservoir property at the 550 zone is in the approved 2000-
2001 fiscal year capital improvement plan that was recommended by the IWB and
adopted by the Tigard City Council.
In Section 5.D.3 of the IGA states "...For capital improvements made subsequent to
entering into this Agreement that are determined to be system assets, the Cities and
District shall have a proportionate interest in such 'system asset'...". Again this is to just
show that all system assets are jointly owned.
Why is the deed to the Clute property in the City of Tigard's name?
Again, since Tigard holds all funding and revenues, and that Tigard is responsible for
managing the water system including capital projects on behalf of the other entities,
Tigard should be the deed holder of the property.
Attachments:
• City of Tigard Resolution No. 93-64, approving the Intergovernmental Agreement
between the City of Tigard and the Tigard Water District. Included in the
attachment, as exhibit A, is the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the
City of Tigard and the Tigard Water District that also forms the Intergovernmental
Water Board (IWB).
• Washington County Ordinance No. 487, which establishes a framework to delegate
and transfer to the City of Tigard responsibility for the provision of certain urban
services to provide more efficient public service to the citizens of the Urban Services
Area (Bull Mountain and Walnut Island areas). As an attachment to Ordinance 487,
is the Urban Services Intergovernmental Agreement between City of Tigard and
Washington County.
• Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation Recommendation
and Staff Report on the Special Use Approval and Development Review for a 3.5
million-gallon water storage reservoir.
• City of Tigard Memorandum, dated June 29, 2000, from Dick Bewersdoff to Jim
Hendryx on the land partition.
JOu &f
14,
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, APPROVING
THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE-CITY OF TIGARD AND THE
TIGARD WATER DISTRICT, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT,
AND'APPOINTING THE WATER DISTRICT'S MEMBER AND ALTERNATE TO THE.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL WATER BOARD CREATED UNDER SECTION 3 OF THE
AGREEMENT.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIGARD THAT:
SECTION l: The Intergovernmental Agreement for water services
between the City and Tigard Water District,
attached hereto as Exhibit A, is approved. The
Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute
the Agreement.
SECTION 2: The City Recorder is authorized to do all things
necessary to secure signatures from the Tigard
Water District and to deliver a copy of the signed
Agreement to the City of-King City and the City of
Durham.
SECTION 3: oh{/1 ScKk),xcis designated as
the City's member on the Intergovernmental Water
B and created under Section 3 of the Agreement.
~zLt L tf uAfl - - is designated as
the city's alternate member on the
Intergovernmental Water Board.
PASSED: By LLVV-LAUMOw0 vote of all Council members
present after being read b number and title only,
this da of ~Cevr~ , 1993.
Cathy Wheatley, City R4~order
APPROVED: This o~ OF-d-4 day' o ~ k_e/1 , 93.
Gerald k'. wards, Mayor
Approved as to fo
. A~~ V
C~fy Attorney
Date: a
ach\tigand \jwa\igat&twd.res
FAHIM A
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF TIGARD AND THE
TIGARD WATER DISTRICT FOR
DELIVERY OF WATER SERVICE TO TERRITORY
WITHIN THE DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
This Agreement is made and entered into by the City of Tigard,
an Oregon municipal corporation, (hereinafter. "Tigard") and the
Tigard Water District, a domestic water supply district existing
under ORS Ch. 264, (hereinafter "District"). Tigard and District
are jointly referred to herein as "the Parties." Unless
identified as "original," District refers to the remnant district.
RECITALS:
1. The cities of Tigard, King City and Durham (collectively
the "Cities") 'withdrew from the original District effective July
1, 1993.
2. Pursuant to ORS 222.540, the District is obligated to
turn over to the Cities its water mains, service installations,
structures, facilities, improvements and'other property in the area
withdrawn from the District as it existed on June 30, 1993,
(original District) that are not necessary for the operation of the
remainder of the water supply system of the District.
3. The area withdrawn by Tigard was a major portion of the
original District. Because of this, Tigard is entitled to a major
portion of the original District's infrastructure pursuant to ORS
222.540. King City and Durham are entitled to smaller portions of
the original District's infrastructure. Furthermore pursuant to
ORS 222.550, should the District dissolve, Tigard will be in a
position to obtain all of the District's remaining assets which
have not been distributed under ORS 222.540.
4. ' With the assets and infrastructure obtained by its
withdrawal from the original District, Tigard is creating a city
water department.
5. The Cities and District agree that it is in their best
interest if King City, Durham and the District were to be an
integrated part of a water supply network receiving water service
from Tigard's city water department. Tigard will receive revenue
from water users in Tigard, King City, Durham, and the District,
and with that revenue Tigard will provide the funds to pay for
expenses incurred in providing water service.
6. The Cities and District agree that it is in their best
interest to share authority for decision-making regarding the long-
term water supply and capital improvement planning to serve
present and future water customers of the original District..
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 1 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
•
7. The Parties shall continue to prepare independent tax
coordination plans.
8. Tigard and the District acknowledge that they have
authority to enter into this Intergovernmental Agreement pursuant
to the powers contained in Tigard's Charter, ORS 264.210 and ORS
190.010.
NOW, THEREFORE, the premises being in general as stated in
the foregoing recitals, it is agreed by and between the Parties
hereto as follows:
1. Mission Statement.
The-Cities withdrew from the original District with intent to
take a more active role in planning and operating a domestic water
supply system for the Southeast Washington County area in order to
provide the residents of that area with the highest quality water
service at the lowest.* possible cost. In keeping with that
intention, the Parties to this Intergovernmental Agreement commit
to working together to provide all of the residents and undeveloped
property in the original District with a clean, economical water
supply.. The Parties further commit to working together and with
other agencies and jurisdictions in a cooperative effort to plan
for the future long term water supply needs of the area.
2. Term.
This Agreement will be in full force and effect until December
31, 2018, unless sooner terminated by one or both of the Parties.
Either party may terminate this Agreement by providing written
notice to the other party a minimum of ten years prior to the
effective date of termination. Tigard recognizes that by this
Agreement, it is assuming the responsibility to provide water to
the inhabitants of the District for the duration of this Agreement
unless a reasonable alternative domestic water supply is available
to the District and the Agreement is terminated.
3. Interaovernmental Water Board.
A. Tigard will establish an Intergovernmental Water Board
(IWB). The Intergovernmental Water Board will consist of five
members. Members of the Board will be appointed by the respective
governing bodies as follows:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 2 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
• •
Tigard - One Member
King City - One Member
Durham - One Member
District/Unincorporated Area - One Member
At Large.- One Member selected by a majority vote of the
Other Members
B. Intergovernmental Water Board Terms.
(1) Initially, three Board members shall be appointed for a
term of three years (from January 1, 1994 to December
31, 1996) and two Board members shall be appointed for
a term of. two years (from January 1, 1994 to December
31, 1995). There shall be a drawing of lots to determine
which Board members will serve two years and which will
serve three years. Thereafter, Board members shall have
two year terms.
(2) Board members shall be appointed in December for the
following two year term. Each term will begin on January
1. Each term will end on December 31 and each Board
member shall serve until a successor has been appointed.
Members may be re-appointed to succeeding terms.
Vacancies may be filled in the same manner as a regular
appointment.
(3) Board members shall be an elected official serving on
'the respective governing body except for that member
selected by a majority vote of the other members. Each
respective governing body may appoint an alternate to
attend meetings in the place of a regularly appointed
Board member. The alternate shall be appointed in the
same manner and must meet the same qualifications as the
regularly appointed Board member.
C. Tigard may appoint city officials as ex officio members
of the Intergovernmental Water Board to assist the Board in its
duties. They shall serve at the pleasure of the Tigard City
Council and shall have no voting privileges.
D. A quorum of the Board shall be three (3) members. All
actions of the Board shall require at least three (3) votes,
excluding abstentions.
E. The Intergovernmental Water Board will make
recommendations to the Tigard City Council on water service issues
and will have the following responsibilities:
(1) to make a continuing study of the rate structure of the
water system-
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 3 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
(2) to consider and prepare plans for and make
recommendations to the Council for a long-range operation
and management program.
(3) to investigate and study means of effecting economies in
operation and management.
(4) to review and make recommendations to the Budget
Committee and Council on all budget requests for
operation and maintenance.
(•i) to slcudy and consider ways and means ~f improving -th(,
water system and services which it provides.
(6) to study and make recommendations on Tigard' s program for
providing insurance for system assets and operations.
(7) to make a continuing review of any and all rules and
regulations regarding the water system which may be
adopted by the Council and periodically to make
recommendations to the Council for additions or
amendments of such rules and regulations.
(8) to work with other agencies and jurisdictions in a
cooperative effort to plan for the future water supply
needs of the area.
(9) to make recommendations to the Council relative to all
of the above-mentioned matters and as to any other
matters which the Intergovernmental Water Board may feel
to be for the good of the water system, the overall
public interest and for the benefit of the consumer.
F. Power to Grant Variances
(1) Except when prohibited by subsection 2 of this section,
upon application, the Intergovernmental Water Board may
grant variances from the water system. rules and
regulations enacted by the City of Tigard when it finds
that: a) strict application of the rules and regulations
create undue economic hardship for the applicant with no
significant benefit to the water system; b) the variance
requested has no material adverse effect upon the water
system and it is consistent with established policies of
the Tigard City Council.
(2) The Intergovernmental Water Board may not grant variances
relating to annexation of property; fire protection
requirements, cross-connection requirements, fees, rates
and charges.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL, AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 4 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
4. Division of Original District Assets.
A. Pursuant to ORS 222.540(4), the District agrees that the
division of assets after withdrawal from the original District by
the cities shall be consistent with the following concepts:
(1). Assets include real, personal and intangible property.
"Intangible property" includes but is not limited to: moneys,
checks, drafts, deposits,..interest, dividends and income.
(2) Assets will be divided into two groups:
a. System Assets: Assets necessary for the operation
of Tigard's water supply system throughout the original
District, not including those "other assets" of Tigard.
Personal and intangible property are system assets.
Water mains, service installations, structures,
facilities, improvements or other property necessary for
operation of the City of Tigard's water supply system,
throughout the original District are system assets.
b. Other Assets: Assets not necessary for the
operation of the City of Tigard's water supply system
throughout the original District. Other assets shall
become the property of the jurisdiction in which the
asset is located. Water mains, service installations,
structures, facilities, improvements or other property
not necessary for the operation of the City of Tigard's
water supply system throughout the original District are
other assets.
B. All system assets and other assets shall be pledged by
the Cities and the District to Tigard. All system assets and other
assets shall be managed by Tigard and shall be utilized by Tigard
in order to provide water services to properties, residences and
businesses in the original District.
C. Should one of the Cities or the District terminate its
water service agreement with Tigard, the Cities' and the District's
proportionate interest in a system asset shall be determined based
upon the following formula:
Jurisdiction's Proportionate Interest = (A + B + C)/3
A = Jurisdiction's Percentage of Current Consumption in
original District
B'= Jurisdiction's Percentage of Current Real Market
Value in original District
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 5 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
9 •
C = Jurisdiction's Percentage of Current Meters in
original District
The Cities' and the District's proportionate interest in
a system asset capital improvement shall be based upon the capital
improvement's depreciated value. The depreciated value shall be
based upon the useful life of the capital improvement under
generally accepted accounting principles using a straight line
method of depreciation.
D. Upon termination of this Agreement, other assets shall
become the property of the jurisdiction in which the asset is
located.
5. Asset Ownership/Water Rates/Revenues.
A. Tigard's Utilization of Assets.
(1) The Parties agree that all system assets in which the
Parties have an undetermined proportionate interest and all
other assets received as a result of the division of assets
after withdrawal from the original District by the Cities
shall be utilized by Tigard in order to provide water services
to properties, residences and businesses in the original
District. The District's ownership interest in the assets
shall remain though the assets are being utilized by Tigard,
unless and until transferred to Tigard by agreement or
operation of law. Tigard will maintain and insure the real
and personal property assets it utilizes. The Parties agree
to execute all documents necessary to allow utilization of the
assets by Tigard.
(2) Tigard agrees that it will maintain, preserve and keep
the assets it utilizes in good repair and working order.
Tigard may appropriate from the water fund all moneys
necessary to meet this obligation.
(3) Tigard shall keep the assets free of *all levies, liens
and encumbrances except those created by this Agreement or
consented to by the governing body of the District in writing.
The-Parties to this Agreement contemplate that the assets will
be used for a governmental or proprietary purpose by Tigard
and, therefore, that the assets will be exempt from all
property taxes. Nevertheless, if the use, possession or
acquisition of the assets are determined to be subject to
taxation, Tigard shall pay when due all taxes and governmental
charges lawfully assessed or levied against or with respect
to the assets. Tigard shall pay all gas, water, steam,
electricity, heat, power, telephone, utility and other charges
incurred in the operation, maintenance, use, occupancy and
upkeep of the assets. Where there is shared use of the
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 6 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
assets, these costs will be shared in an equitable manner.
(4) Tigard shall maintain (i) casualty insurance insuring the
assets against loss or damage by fire and all other risks
covered by the standard extended coverage endorsement then in
use in the State of Oregon and any other risks reasonably
required by District in an amount equal to at least the
replacement value of the assets and, (ii) liability insurance
that protects District, including its officers and
commissioners, from liability arising from Tigard's operation
of the water supply system in an amount satisfactory to
District and (iii) worker's compensation insurance covering
all employees working on, in, near or about the assets as
required under the laws of the State of Oregon. Tigard shall
furnish to District, certificates evidencing such coverage.
All such insurance shall be with insurers that are authorized
to issue such.insurance in the State of Oregon, shall name
District as additional insured and shall contain a provision
to the effect that such-insurance shall not be canceled or
modified materially and adversely to the interest of District
without first giving written notice thereof to District at
least ten (10) days in advance of such cancellation or
modification. All such casualty insurance shall contain a
provision making any losses payable to Tigard and District as
their respective interests may appear. Tigard may meet any
of these requirements through a self-insurance program. Such
insurance requirements may be waived in writing by the
governing body of the District.
(5) To the extent permitted by law, Tigard shall indemnify,
protect, hold harmless, save and keep harmless District from
and against any and all liability, obligation, loss, claim and
damage whatsoever, regardless of cause thereof, and all
expenses in connection therewith, including, without
limitation, counsel fees and expenses, penalties and interest
arising out of or as the result of the entering into of this
Agreement, the ownership of any asset or any accident in
connection with the operation, use, condition, possession,
storage or return of any asset resulting in damage to property
or injury to or death to _any person; provided, however, that
Tigard shall not be deemed to be indemnifying District for
claims arising from its own conduct. The indemnification
arising under this paragraph shall continue in full force and
effect notwithstanding the termination of this Agreement for
any reason.
B. The fees, rates and charges charged by Tigard for
providing water services to properties, residences and businesses
in District shall be the same as those charged within Tigard.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Tigard may impose higher fees, rates
and charges for providing water service to properties, residences
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREF14ENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 7 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
and businesses when the cost of providing such service is greater
due to unusual circumstances, including, but not limited to
additional cost to pump water up hill to reach customers. Any
higher fees, rates and charges imposed for providing water service
shall be reviewed by the Intergovernmental Water Board prior to
taking effect and shall be limited to covering the actual
additional costs of providing such service. When higher fees,
rates and charges are imposed, they shall be consistently applied
in both Tigard and the remainder of the original District, except
that at the request of the District, Tigard will collect on behalf
of the District additional charges imposed by the District on
District customers.
C. Moneys/Revenues.
(1) Moneys and revenues for system capital improvement shall
be held by Tigard in a fund dedicated solely for this
purpose.
(2) Moneys transferred to Tigard as a result of the division
of assets after withdrawal from the original District by
Tigard which were previously dedicated by the District
to system capital improvement shall be used solely for
system capital improvement by Tigard in accordance with
subsection 5.D.
(3) Moneys deposited in a reserve fund for revenue bonds of
the water system are not a- system asset and are not
subject to the system asset distribution formula in
Section 4 of this Agreement. .
(4) The Patties agree to develop a methodology for system
development charges and to impose and collect such
charges in their respective jurisdictions. If any of
the Cities or District fail to impose system development
charges as contemplated herein, then the other parties
may elect to terminate collecting system development
charges within their jurisdictions.- The Parties agree
that Tigard should collect the system development charges
imposed by the District until such time as Tigard imposes
its own charge.
D. Capital Improvements.
(1) (a) Capital projects shall be implemented in accord with
a long-range capital improvement program supported by
sound engineering analysis, in the best interests of
water customers within the original District, ignoring
city boundaries.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 8 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
(b) The capital improvement program must be approved by
the governing bodies' of one less than the number of
jurisdictions holding an ownership interest in the water
system. A governing body may not unreasonably withhold
consent if the program is supported by sound engineering
analysis, is in the best interests of water customers
within the original District and consistent with the goal
of working together to provide all of the residents and
property in the original District with a clean,
economical. water supply. If a proposed capital
improvement program is not approved as provided for in
this subsection, then the governing bodies of any two
jurisdictions may request mediation under the provisions
of ORS Chapter 36 to determine if approval of the program
has been unreasonably withheld.
(c) Tigard shall prepare and deliver to the District a
proposed. Capital Improvement Plan no later than June 30,
1994 for consideration by the Cities and the District.
The District's Capital Improvement Plan dated June, 1993,
will guide Tigard's spending on capital projects until
a capital improvement program is adopted pursuant to
subsection (b).
(2) The capital improvement program shall establish the
location of a capital improvement whether within Tigard,
King City, Durham or the District and shall distinguish
whether a capital improvement qualifies as a system asset
or other asset.
(3) Capital improvements made subsequent to entering into
this Agreement that are determined to be other assets
shall become the property of the jurisdiction in which
the improvement is located. For capital improvements
made subsequent to entering into this Agreement that are
determined to be system assets, the Cities and the
District each shall have a proportionate interest in such
"system asset" capital improvement's depreciated value.
The depreciated value shall be based upon, the useful life
of the capital improvement under generally accepted
accounting principles using a straight line method of
depreciation. The Cities' and the District's
proportionate interest in such "system asset" capital
improvement's depreciated value shall be determined based
upon the formula in Section 4.D. of this Agreement.
(4) Should one of the cities or the District terminate its
water service. agreement with Tigard, such jurisdiction
shall have rights to the use of all system assets equal
to its Jurisdiction's Proportionate Interest as
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 9 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
• •
determined above. Tigard shall be provided reasonable
compensation for any use of its water system necessary
for the continued reasonable use of a system asset by a
jurisdiction. If the asset is not essential to the
operation of such jurisdiction's water system, Tigard may
terminate such jurisdiction's rights in the system asset
capital improvement by payment of a sum equal to the
Jurisdiction's Proportionate Interest in the depreciated
value of such system asset.
(5) The Parties acknowledge that the water system currently
serving the original District is an integrated system.
To the extent that cither Party should terminate this
Agreement, the Parties agree to cooperate with each other
and to enter into such agreements necessary for the
continued reasonable operation of the resulting water
systems.
E. Long-term water supply contracts shall be entered into
in accord with the best interests of water customers within the
original District, ignoring city boundaries. Long-term water
supply contracts must be approved by the governing bodies of one
less than the number of jurisdictions holding an ownership interest
in the water system. A governing body may not unreasonably withhold
consent to a contract if the contract is supported by sound
engineering analysis, is in the best interests of water customers
within the original District and consistent with the goal of
working together to provide all of the residents and property in
the original District with a clean, economical water supply. If
a proposed long-term water supply contract is not approved as
provided for in this subsection, then the governing bodies of any
two jurisdictions may request mediation under the provisions of ORS
Chapter 36 to determine if approval of the contract has been
unreasonably withheld.
F. The District shall receive an annual rebate equal to 1%
of the previous year's water sale revenue within the District for
District expenses. In addition, Tigard, at the District's request,
will appropriate and deliver an amount not to exceed $40,000 from
Tigard's initial (1/94 to 6/94) water fund budget for District
operating expenses for the period from January 1, 1994 through June
300, 1995. Tigard will reimburse..the District from water system
revenues the cost of the District's Division of Assets study
undertaken to fulfill the District's obligations pursuant to ORS
222.540.
G. Accounting
(1) Water activities will be accounted for in the same manner
as other enterprise activities currently under the
jurisdiction of Tigard. Expenditures directly linked to
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 10 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
water activities will be recorded in the water fund.
Applicable indirect charges will be apportioned to the
water fund in the same manner as such charges are
apportioned to other enterprise funds to properly reflect
the costs associated with each activity. Tigard.shall
use generally accepted accounting principles applicable
to utility enterprises for the recording and identifying
of all revenues and expenditures made for the water
system. The Intergovernmental Water Board shall review
such allocation and methodology.
(2) The accounting method used by Tigard shall, to the extent
possible, document the use of assets by Tigard for non-
water system activities. Use of assets by Tigard for
non-water activities shall be funded from resources other
than the water fund.
H. The Parties to this Agreement shall not have. the right
to transfer ownership of or remove system assets or any. interest
therein received or kept as a, result of the Cities' withdrawal from
the original District or any interest in system assets acquired
during the term of this Agreement without written consent of the
other Party. Neither the benefits received by the District nor the
obligations incurred under the terms of this Agreement are
assignable or in any manner transferrable by the District without
the written consent of the City.
I. No part of this Agreement shall be interpreted as a
waiver of either Party's statutory rights upon annexation of
territory.
6. Indebtedness.
A. Each of the Parties shall be liable for their respective
share of the debt, if any, acquired or retained as a result of the
Cities' withdrawal from the original District.
B. Tigard may incur, without the consent of the District,
debt relating to the water supply system, provided-payment of the
debt is fee, rate or charge based. If the debt is to be paid for
by means other than fees, rates or charges, Tigard must have
approval and consent of the governing body of the District in
writing prior to incurring such debt. The District shall be liable
for its proportionate share of any debt for which it has given its
written approval and consent.
C. Tigard is authorized to perform the function and activity
of incurring water revenue bond indebtedness for the water system
by authorizing the issuance of water revenue bonds pursuant to ORS
288.805 to 288.945, as.amended, for the financing of water system
capital improvements. Such debt may be secured by a pledge of
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 11 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
water system revenues, appropriate rate covenants, and mortgaging
of water system assets.. Tigard may not mortgage water system
assets without first receiving the.written consent of the cities,
and District's governing bodies.
D. If this Agreement is terminated by either Party and
indebtedness remains under Section 6.A. or has been incurred and
approved by the District in manner described in Section 6.B.,
District shall either:
1. Pay in full, within 60 days of the effective date
of termination, its proportionate share of the
indebtedness; or
2. Pay annually its proportionate share of the
indebtedness as payment is due.
7. Services Provided By Tigard.
A. Tigard will provide water to properties and customers in
all jurisdictions equally. If circumstances require water
restrictions, each jurisdiction shall share equally. The District
may not sell water provided through this Agreement to a third party
without the prior written consent of Tigard.
B. Tigard will provide equally and in a manner consistent
with the terms of this Agreement all services required for delivery
of potable domestic water to properties and customers within the
cities of King City and Durham as well as the territory of the
District, including but not limited to system repair and
maintenance, water distribution, new installations, system
upgrades, and billing functions. Tigard is under no obligation to
provide such water services to areas annexed to the District
subsequent to this Agreement.
C. District agrees that Tigard is empowered to use any right
of condemnation possessed by the District that is necessary to
provide water services consistent with the terms of this Agreement,
and will take any action necessary for Tigard to exercise that
right on the request of Tigard.
D. To the extent that such agreements or contracts are
transferrable, the District agrees to take the necessary action to
transfer its water supply agreements or contracts with the City of
Portland and the City of Lake Oswego to Tigard in order to
facilitate the provision of water services consistent with the
terms of this Agreement.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 12 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
E. The District may use
office building for meetings of
of the Board's correspondence.
other governmental entities for
agrees to compensate Tigard a
building.
the former Tigard Water District
the District Board and for receipt
To the extent that Tigard charges
use of the building, the District
reasonable amount for use of the
F. Tigard agrees to assist the District in preparation of
budgets, organization and noticing of meetings and other
administrative duties at the request of the District. The.District
agrees to compensate Tigard a reasonable amount for such
assistance.
8. Rules and Recrulations.
A. The Rules, Rates and Recrulations for Water Service
Handbook, (November, 1992), adopted by the Board of Commissioners
Tigard Water District is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and shall
be deemed a part of this Agreement.
B. The Tigard City Council may modify, alter or repeal the
rules, rates and regulations in Exhibit "A." Rules and regulations
will be modified, altered or repealed only after the
Intergovernmental Water Board has had the opportunity to study the
proposed rules and regulations. The Intergovernmental Water Board
is. empowered to make a continuing review of any and all rules and
regulations regarding the water system which may be adopted by the
council and periodically to make recommendations to the Council for
additions or amendments of such rules and regulations. The Parties
agree to comply with the rules and regulations currently in effect
and as hereafter adopted by. the Tigard City Council, and water
service to the District shall be governed thereby.
9. Extension of Service.
A. Extension or modification of District's water distribution
system shall be done only with prior written approval of District.
Furthermore, Tigard will not make any extensions or service
connections within King City's or Durham's Urban Growth Boundary
without permission from the. King City or Durham City Council.
B. For the unincorporated area within the District, it is the
governing body of the District which, subject to the rules and
regulations specified in Section 8, has the authority to allow
connections to the water supply system.
C. Residents located within the District shall not be
responsible for any expenses associated with efforts of the City
of Tigard to withdraw .from the Tualatin Valley Water District to
reach the goal of having a single water purveyor for the City.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 13 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
10. EmDlovee Benefits/Personnel.
All employees of the Southeast Washington County Joint Water
Agency shall become employees of the City. The City shall accept
such employees with all existing benefits and salary, including,
but not limited to, health, retirement, disability insurance,
wages, vacation and compensatory time. Nothing in this subsection
is intended to limit the City's authority to alter benefits or
salary except as such authority is otherwise limited by this
Agreement or by the provisions of ORS 236.605 to 236.650.
31. Annual Meeting.
The governing bodies of the Parties to this Agreement shall
meet annually with the Intergovernmental Water Board to discuss and
consider issues related to this Agreement. The Intergovernmental
Water Board and the Tigard Water Department shall issue an annual
report on its activities to the Parties at this meeting.
12. Attorneys Fees.
In the event any suit, action or other proceeding is brought
with regard to this Agreement, or to enforce any of the provisions
hereof, the prevailing party in any such suit, action or other
proceeding, or any appeal therefrom, shall .be entitled to
reasonable attorneys fees. Attorney fees which are awarded
pursuant to this Section may not be paid from the fees, rates and
charges collected by Tigard for water services.
13. ADDlicable Law.
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon.
14. Ratification of this Agreement.
Prior to the effective date of this Agreement, each Party
shall enact a resolution ratifying the Agreement. This Agreement
may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of
which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but
one and the same instrument.
15. Amendments.
Any amendment to this Agreement must be approved by the
governing bodies of the District and Tigard.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 14 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
16. Effective Date.
0
This Agreement shall be effective January 1, 1994.
Attest:
o ? hoatb-Ai,
U
Attest:
dga d\dgardWD.iga(12/23/93 - final)
CITY 0 / T ARD, OREGON
- 4z"'
By
TIGARD WATER DISTRICT, OREGON
By:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
TIGARD/WATER DISTRICT - 15 (12/23/93 - FINAL)
ji.6 12:46 ,996 FROhi: 503 248 9065 TO: 2473 FAGS: 2
.,i9e16/46 MON 12:39,FAX 503 9085 PRESTON Lkw VED9INING 0ooz
i N
sEP is~
(AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A NEW ARTICLE
(VIII FOR THE WASHINGTON COUNTY
ORDNANCE N0. 487 (DEVELOPMEN7 CODE AMENDING THE )STST
(TIGARD CONLMUNTITY PLAN AND THE BULL
(MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY PLAN
The Board of County Commissioners for Washington County, Oregon ordains:
Section 1.
A. Washington County (County) currently provides a vari ety of services .u that area of
unincorporated land generally described in the West Tigard Community Plan., and the Bull Mountain
Community Plan, including Walnut Island and an area north of the Tualatin River and East of Hgh,%ay
99, but excluding the area immediately adjacent to King City, all as more particularly described in the
attached, Exhibit I map and Exhibit IA legal description incorporated herein by reference below. This
area is her dnater rcf~rred to as "affected are-,'
B. The County desires to adopt the City planning and zoning regulations, with limited exceptions
more specifically established in the attached Exhibit 4, to govern land and certain other uses End activities
within the affected area. These new planning and zoning regulations shall become Article VIII of the
Washington County Community Development Code. The City regulations adopted by this Ordinance
includes regulations governing planning and zoning, including the City enforcement methodology; and
C. With the adoption of this Ordinance, the County is establishing a framework to delegate and
transfer to the City of Tigard (City) responsibility for provision of certain urban services to provide more
efficient public service to the citizens of the affected area, the City and County, through the mechanism of
an intergovernmental agreement implementing this Ordinance. The services to be transferred and
delegated to the City through an intergovernmental agreement to follow adoption of this Ordinance
include quasi-judicial and ministerial planning services, including the issuance of development decisions
and code enforcement services.
D. The County and City have determined transfer and delegation of such services from the County to
the City will provide more efficient urban services, including planning services, to the 'affected area; and
E. In order to accomplish an effective and efficient delegation and transfer of service provision and
responsibility in the manner contemplated, the local regulations applicable to the affected area must be
reasonably uniform and changes to the County's Community Development Code are required; and
F. It is most uniform and efficient for the City to administer its own regulations, and other relevant
standards with minimal County regulatory overlap, which City planning regulations are acknowledged as
being in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals and changes to the County's Community
Development Code are required; and
G. The existing West Tigard Community Plan recognizes the desirability of coordinated planning
functions with the City, and ;
Page 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 487
J%1X\174 0-M0=WJSH1.DOC
c,a a cJ 13: 2473. PAGE: 3
•,OS/16/96 MON 12:41 F.Al • 248 9065 PRESTON LkW FIRM Z003
H. A portion of the affected area is within the City's Active Planning Area. In this area outside of
the Citylimits, the County snakes decisions on individual development proposals, zoning and public
improvement projects, with the City having a right of review and comment on such proposals and
projects; and
1. The existing urban planning area agreement (UPAA) between the City and County calls for
cooperative efforts between the City and County governments to provide efficient and high quality
services to the citizens of both jurisdictions and this agreement will be amended to effectuate this
Ordinance and the UPAA is hereby amended to the extent necessary to reflect the Or i a ce amendments
herein established; and
J. Under ORS 195.060 to 195.085, urban services agreements are authorized between urban service
providers governing the provision of certain urban services including parks, open space, recreation and
streets, roads and mass transit; and
K. Under ORS 215.170, the City and County are authorized to jointly agree on the management of
land located within the Urban Growth Boundzry, and
L. Under ORS Chapter 190, the County is authorized to transfer and delegate to the City by
agreement certain functions otherwise provided by the County in order to provide efficient public service;
and
M The City has functionally equivalent plan and zoning designations to be applied to the affected
area because of the historic coordination between the County and the City, among other things. No
Statewide Planning Goal. (Goal) impacts, either direct or secondary, will occur as a result of the adoption
of this Ordinance, as the affected area will be moved from one Goal complying zone. of a particular
classification ('i.e., residential to residential, industrial to industrial) to another. The County's adoption of
the most equivalent City plan designation and zoning district for the affected area ensures no direct or
secondary Goal impacts.
N. The County Board of Commissioners initiated this action prior to September 1, 1996 and,
therefore, the County does not intend the adoption of this Ordinance to trigger the new Goal 5 rule,
effective on September 1, 1996. In a telephone conversation with the Land Use and Transportation
Department Director, the DLCD Director confirmed this.understanding; and
0. The County Counsel is hereby authorized to codify this Ordinance as is deemed appropriate by
counsel and to make such administrative revisions as required to effectuate proper codification.
Section )
The following exhibits, are attached and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth
hereat:
A. Exhibit 1:. Land Use and Zoning Map of Affected Area
B. Exhibit lA Gereral Legal Description of Affected Area of Ordinance 487
Page 2 - ORDINANCE NO. 487
1~N1JC\179a~-OO.OC2tW ASHtMOC
09/.16 12:48 1996 FROM: 503 248 9065 TO: 2473 PAGE: 4
D9/16/96 MON 12:42 FAX 5148 9085 PRESTO? LAW FIRM • Q004
C. Exhibit 2: Goal 5 and Natu al Area Map for Unincorporated City of Tigard Area
D. Exhibit 3; County District B Boundary and Areas of Special Concern for Unincorporated
Tigard Area
E. Exhibit 4: Text of Article VIII Amendments to County Community Development Code
F. Exhibit 5: City of Tigard Community Development Code (Title 18)
G. Exhibit 6: City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan
Section 3. Effective Date; Lnplemeatat =
This Ordinance is effective thirty (30) days after the date of enactment, specified below. This
Ordinance shall apply only to development and applications for development submitted, initiated or
commenced, as more specifically provided in Exhibit 4, on or after May 1, 1997.
ENACTED this _ day of 1996, being the reading and
public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners of Washington County,
Oregon.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
RECORDING SECRETARY
READING
First
Second
Third
Fourth
Recording Secretary:
Date:
Page 3 - ORDINANCE NO. 487
PUBLIC HEARING
NR^J.U504c 1 ppTWAsxl AMc
~e aa.J Vr.vW. J...: Li0 ~~CJ IIV: L4rJ FAUt: 5
•09/16/96 MON 12:42 FAX 5048 9065 PRESTON LAW FIRM • 11005
ORDINANCE No. 487
EXHIBIT 4
SEPTEMBER 9, 1996
N .
ARTICLE VIII LAND USE A7nNNG FOR CERTAIN PORTIONS OF
UNINCORPORATED CITY OF TIGARD AREA
801-1 Intent and Pumose
The purpose of this Article VIII is to establish the regulations applicable to that area of
land generally described in the County's Rest Tigard Community Plan and the Bull Mountain
Community Plan, including Walnut Island and an area north of the Tualatin River and East of
Highway 99, but excluding the area immediately adjacent to Ring City, all as more specifically
established on the map attached as Exhibit 1 to this Ordinance, on the legal description attached
as Exhibit 1A (affected area).
Y .801-2- Scope
801-2.1 Applicability
Land and structures within the affected area may be developed only in a manner consistent
with this Ordinance. This Ordinance applies to any person developing land and structures and to
the successors in interest of such persons and to any process associated with such development.
801-2-2 Application Submission
All applications for any local government approval of any kind within the scope of this
Ordinance shall be submitted for review and approval or denial, together with the appropriate
application or other fee required by resolution adopted under the procedure set forth in this
Ordinance.
801-3 Transition
801-3.1 This Ordinance applies to all applications and actions falling within
its scope or commenced or initiated on or after May 1, 1997. Applications within the scope of
this Ordinance submitted to the County prior to May 1, 1997 and which are also subject to ORS
215.428, shall be processed under the regulations-in effect at the time the application was first
submitted, unless the applicant provides a written request to the County that this Ordinance apply
to the pending applications and including a waiver of the 120-day processing limitation provided
in ORS 215.428 adequate to enable a final local decision on the pending application under the
regulations imposed by this Ordinance, which includes all local appeals.
Rnl-'t 7 ThP riPtrrmin:, inn rPOArriino flip ariPmlar-v of thn annt;rontle
requested waiver of the above referenced 120-day limitation period shall be made in the sole
discretion of the County or its designee, which designation may be expressed by an implementing
intergovernmental agreement or other means, and shall not be subject to any local appeal. The
determination regarding the adequacy of the applicant's proposed 120-day waiver shall be
reviewable only as provided in ORS 34.010 to 34.100.
Page 1 - EXHIBIT 4 to ORDINANCE NO. 487
1lwuv WAr.MLDOc
,09Y16 12:50 1996 FROM: 503 246 9065 TO: 2473
•09/16196 XON 12:44 FAX 50 8 9085 PRESTON L1F FIRM • ~0or,
ORDINANCE No. 487
EXHIBIT 4
SEPTEMBER 9, 1996
801-3.3 Where County development approval has been previously granted
or a building permit issued prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, the approval or building
permit for which such prior County approval has been granted is subject only to those County
standards governing such approval or permit on the date approval is finally granted or such
building permit is finally issued. Provided, however, alleged violations of such County standards
shall be prosecuted under the code enforcement, nuisance and other administrative provisions
adopted by this or other Ordinance specifically governing the affected area. Nothing in this
Ordinance is intended to prevent ORS 215.428 from governing the standards applied to evaluate
certain applications, as required by law.
80l -4 Replacement
801-4.1 As specified herein, this Ordinance replaces the existing
Washington County Community Development Code standards applicable to all development and
development proposals within the scope of this Ordinance and within the affected area, with the
City of Tigard Community Development Plan. Specifically, this Ordinance replaces the Maps of %
the West Tigard Community Plan and the Bull Mountain Community Plan with Exhibit 1 and 3; -
replaces the County Comprehensive Framework Plan with the City of Tigard Comprehensive
Plan, including the City Comprehensive plan background documents, provided however, the
Framework plan shall apply to quasi-judicial plan amendments.
801-4.2 All inconsistent County regulations, including Community
Development Code provisions, whether adopted by Ordinance or resolution, are hereby
determined to be inapplicable to development and application for development within the affected
area, that are also within the scope of this Ordinance. The determination of inconsistency shall be
made by the applicable County decisionmaker, unless such authority is delegated and transferred
to a City authority pursuant to an implementing Intergovernmental Agreement. All City
regulations adopted by this Ordinance hereby become regulations of the County and, therefore,
are deemed part of this CDC Article VIII.
801-5 Interoretation
Questions regarding the regulations or plan provisions applicable to individual
development and applications therefore, and to what extent such regulations or plan provisions
apply, shall be resolved by the decisionmaker to whom such request is directed.
801-6 Definitions
801-6.1 Generally: The definitions contained in the City regulations
specifically adopted by this Ordinance shall apply to all matters governed by this Ordinance.
801-6.2 Application: Means any request for a local action of a type falling
within the scope of this ordinance.
Page 2 - EXHIBIT 4 to ORDINANCE NO. 487
J 1W1Z17➢+PTwA.4r-DOC
09/16/96 MON 12:45 FAX 50 8 9065 PRESTON LkW FIRM • ®007
ORDINANCE No. 487
EXHIBIT 4
SEPTEMBER 9, 1996
801-6.3 City: Means the City of Tigard. However, where the word "City"
appears in a City of Tigard Ordinance provision herein adopted, the word "City" shall mean
County, but nothing shall prohibit the County from transferring and delegating such authority to
the City by means of an implementing intergovernmental agreement pursuant to the provisions of
ORS chapter 190.
801-6.4 City Administrator: Means the City Administrator for the City of
Tigard. However, where used in a City Ordinance provision adopted by this Ordinance, City
Administrator shall mean County Administrator. Provided however, nothing shall prohibit the
County from transferring and delegating such authority to the City by means of an implementing
inte.-govu,-=cntal agreement pursuant to the provisions of ORS chapter 190.
801-.6.5 City Attorney: Mears an attorney representing the interests of the
City of Tigard. However, where used in a City Ordinance provision adopted by this Ordinance,
City Attorney shall mean County Counsel. Provided, however, nothing shall prohibit the County
from transferring and delegating such authority to the City by means of an implementing
intergovernmental agreement pursuant to the provisions of ORS chapter 190.
801-6.6 City Employee: Means an employee of the City of Tigard.
However, where used in a City Ordinance. provision adopted by this Ordinance, City Employee
shall mean County Employee. Provided, however, nothing shall prohibit the County from
transferring and delegating such authority to the City by means of an implementing
intergovernmental agreement pursuant to the provisions of ORS chapter 190.
801-6.7 City Finance Director: Means the finance director of the City of
Tigard. However, where used in a City ordinance provision adopted by the County in this
Ordinance, shall mean County Finance Director. Provided however, nothing shall prohibit the
County from transferring and delegating such authority to the City by means of an implementing
intergovernmental agreement pursuant to the provisions of ORS chapter 190.
801-6.8 City Council: Means the City of Tigard City Council. However,
where used in a City Ordinance provision adopted by the County in this Ordinance, the word
Council or City Council shall mean Commissioners or County Commissioners. Provided,
however, nothing shall prohibit the County from transferring and delegating such authority to the
City by means of an implementing intergovernmental agreement pursuant to the provisions of
ORS chapter 190.
801-6.9 County. Means Washington County. Provided however, nothing
in this Ordinance nothing shall prohibit the County from transferring and delegating authority to
the City by means of an implementing intergovernmental agreement pursuant to the provisions of
ORS chapter 190.
_801-6.10 Community Development Director: Means the Community
Development Director for the City of Tigard. Where used in a City Ordinance provision adopted
by the County in this Ordinance, the words Community Development Director shall mean the
Page 3 - EA'HIBIT 4 to ORDINANCE NO. 487
JAV11 CA%4C-NWAMU_WC
05/i5 ,2:52 1996 rn0M. 5C13 246 9065 10: kti rf+• d
'09/16/9;6 MON 12:46 FAX 5948 9055 PRESTON L',R FIRM • Q008
ORDINANCE No. 487
EXHIBIT 4
SEPTEMBER 9, 1996
Washington County Director of Land Use and Transportation. Provided, however, nothing shall
prohibit the County from transferring and delegating such authority to the City Community
Development Director or other City authority by means of an implementing intergovernmental
agreement pursuant to the provisions of ORS chapter 190.
801-6.11 Development: Means any building or mining operation, making a
material change in the use or appearance of a structure or land, dividing land into two or more
parcels or lots, including partitions and subdivisions as provided in ORS 92.
801-6.12 Hearings Officer: Where used in a City Ordinance provision
adopt:^d by the County in this Ordinance, the word Hearings Officer or Hearings Official shall
mean the Washington County Hearings Officer or Hearings Official. Provided, however, nothing
shall prohibit the County from transferring and delegating such authority to the City Hearings
Officer or other City authority by means of an implementing intergovernmental agreement
pursuant to the provisions of ORS chapter 190.
801-6.13 Planning Commission: Where used in a City Ordinance provision
adopted by the County in this Ordinance, the word Planning Commission shall mean the
Washington County Planning Commission. Provided however, nothing shall prohibit the County
from transferring and delegating such authority to the City Planning Commission or other City
authority by means -of an implementing intergovernmental agreement pursuant to the provisions of
ORS chapter 190.
801-6.14 Roads: Means any public way designed for use by vehicular trafnc
including automobiles, motorcycles, trucks, transit and bicycles, including rights of way.
801-7 Consistency with Plan and Laa-s
80I-7.1 Consistency with State and Federal Law
It is intended that this Ordinance be consistent with applicable state and federal law. To
the extent that provisions of state or federal law are determined to have mandatory application to
the affected. area and to any application or activity otherwise governed by this Ordinance, the
mandatory, applicable state or federal law shall be applied as if fully set forth hereat.
801-7.2 Consistency with Statewide Planning Goals
This Ordinance involves land subject to three types of County land use districts and
designations. These zoning districts are Residential, Industrial and two County overlay districts -
the District B Overlay and the Area of Special Concern Overlay. The District B overlay and Area
of Special Concern overlay continue to apply, unchanged.
Page 4 - EXHIBIT 4 to ORDINANCE NO. 487
11R13.11.2•l1S.R'A9}C.DLr
00/1,6 12:54 1996 FPO.;: -33 248 9065 70: 2473 PAGE: 9
09716/95 NO'S 12:47 FAX 503 # 9055 PRESTO% LkW FIRM • Q009
ORDINANCE No. 487
EX MIT4
SEPIMSER 9,106
The City and County plan designations and zoning districts at issue here (Residential and
Industrial) are functional equivalents in all respects, including for purposes of County Statewide
Planning Goal (Goal) compliance. Both the County and City Residential and Industrial zoning
districts and plan designations are acknowledged as being in compliance with the Goals by the
Land Conservation and Development Department.
With regard to the Residential designations and districts, this Ordinance is neutral
with regard to the County's Goal 10 (Housing) compliance. There are.no direct or secondary
effects on the Board's continued Goal 10 compliance. This is because after review, the County
interprets its acknowledged County residential designations and districts to authorize and support
equivalent housing opportunities, both in type and cost, to those City designations and districts
herein adopted. Regarding other Goals, no goal impact, either direct or secondary will occur by
the change from acknowledged County designations and districts to City. designations and
districts. Equivalent opportunities with respect to citizen involvement, open spaces, air, land and
water quality and quantity, economic opportunities and access thereto, recreation, public facilities
and services and transportation are provided under the adopted City designations and districts, as
was available under the County designations and districts herein replaced. No changes to safety
and natural disaster awareness or health issues are made or presented by this Ordinance. The area
is within the Metro UGB and, therefore, is presumptively available for urbanization. In any case,
the acknowledged County designations and districts were acknowledged at urban densities for
urban level uses, and continue to be available for the same.
The County Industrial zoning district and plan designation is at issue within the affected
area only with respect to a single, particular property (subject property). This County Industrial
zoning is replaced with the City's Light Industrial District and corresponding City plan.
designation. The Board interprets its own code to mean, for Goal compliance purposes, the only
meaningful difference between the City Light Industrial zone district and plan designation and the
County's Industrial zone and plan designation, is the City's Light Industrial zone (LI) alows
convenience sales, and the County Industrial District does not. However, as with the Residential
districts and designations, both County Industrial and City LI district and designations are
acknowledged as being in compliance with the Goals and both can be, and are, equally applied to
the subject property without any adverse direct or secondary effects on County Goal compliance.
Under either the County Industrial or City LI plan designation and zoning district, the subject
property may be utilized for industrial purposes. Moreover, the subject property is substantially
limited by a 100-year flood plain, identified on Federal Emergency Management (FEMA) maps as
covering approximately 3/4 of the subject property. This would be a substantial limitation on the
development of the subject property for heavier industrial uses in any case. In addition, the
subject property is currently being considered for acquisition by the Unified Sewerage Agency for
public purposes, which purposes may not directly contribute to the economy of the County or
State or the County's industrial base. The subject property is not within an industrial park: and is
not specifically relied upon by the County or identified by it as a significant County industrial land
asset. The County specifically interprets its own code to mean the extent of the subject land's
suitability for County industrial purposes in any case is consistent, for Goal 9 compliance
purposes, with the uses authorized under the City LI district and plan designation. There is no
Goal 9 (Economy of the State) or other direct or secondary Goal impact from applying the City's
Page 5 - EXHIBIT 4 to ORDINANCE NO. 487
1 ~M'3JC~1)9~D.TY'AS}GDOL
0x'/16 12:55 1996 FROM: 503 246 9385 TO: 2473
09%16/9.6 MON 12:49 FAX 50 8 9085 PRESTON L45 FIRM
LI zoning district to the subject property.
• PAGE: 10
ORDINANCE No. 487
EXHIBrr 4
SEPTEMBER 9, 19%
• The County's Goal 5 inventory and program are entirely preserved by this Ordinance.
Therefore there are no Goal 5 impacts, whether direct or secondary, from the adoption of this
Ordinance. Furthermore, because this Ordinance was initiated prior to the effective date of the
new Goal 5 administrative rules, the County is not required to apply the newly revised Goal 5
administrative regulations, in any case.
There are no Goal 12 (Transportation) impacts, either direct or secondary, as no
transportation facility or standards is affected in a way affecting the Count)'s Goal 12 compliance
by the County's lee-islative adoption of acknowledged City regulations herein and the adoption of
functionally equivalent City zoning districts and designations to the affected area-
In sum, this Ordinance triggers no Goals and has no other direct or secondary. Goal
effects. This is because acknowledged County and City Goal programs are preserved and
effective and, where changed, the Board interprets its own code to mean the replacement
regulations are substantially similar to those replaced. This Ordinance simply provides a means
for intergovernmental cooperation in an effort to provide more efficient and cost effective public
service to the citizens of the affected area as well as the City of Tigard and Washington County.
801-7.3 Consistency with County Charter
This ordinance is intended to be consistent with the adopted County Charter. In the event
of a determination of inconsistency, the charter shall control.
801-7.4 Comprehensive Plan
This Ordinance does not amend or alter the applicability of the text of either the Bull
Mountain or the West Tigard Community Plan. It amends only the maps of these two community
plans to apply the functionally equivalent zoning districts and plan designations of the City of
Tigard to these areas, as shown on the attached Exhibit 1 map, which map contains land more
particularly described on the attached Exhibit IA legal description, both of which are herein
incorporated. Provided, however, the Bull Mountain Community Plan resource overlay districts
(District B and Areas of Special Concern) are preserved and carved forward in this Ordinance as
shown on the attached Exhibit 3 also herein incorporated. The Board specifically interprets the
amended maps to be consistent with the West Tigard and Bull Mountain Community Plans
governing the affected area.
The Board specifically interprets this Ordinance as being consistent with the County
Comprehensive Framework Plan because the Framework plan is implemented through the
community plans with which the this Ordinance is consistent. Because it does not apply to
non-plan amendment individual decisions, the Framework Plan is replaced by the City
Comprehensive plan provisions, provided however, the Framework plan shall continue to apply to
quasi-judicial plan amendments. In addition, the imported City zoning districts and approval
standards are functional equivalents of those of the County. The proposal is also consistent with
the County Transportation plan governing the affected area as the County Transportation plan, to
Q3010
Page 6 - EXHIBIT 4 to ORDINANCE NO. 487
-09'/16/96 MON 12:50 F.Al 503 9055 PRESTON LkW FIRM •
ORDINANCE N6.487
EXHIBIT 4
SEPTEMBER 9, 1996
the extent it applies to individual decisions, applies unchanged in the manner stated in the Bull
Mountain Community Plan.
801-8 Land Use Related Standards Applicable to the Affected Area
801-8.1 Roads and sidewalks
Q011
The CiWs Title 15.04 "Streets and Sidewalks" is hereby adopted by the County as if fully
set forth hereat as local regulatory standards applicable to streets and sidewalks within the.
affected area, as those terms are defined by the City of Tigard Municipal Code. These provisions `
are supplementary to those Street and Utility and Improvement Standards specified in City of
i gard Community Development Code Title 18.164, also incorporated herein, as specified below.
801-8.2 Zoning and.Planning
The following County land use designations and districts within the affected area are replaced by
the following City land use designations and districts The West Tigard Community Plan and Buii
Mountain Community Plan maps and any other maps covering the affected area, are hereby
amended to reflect the following designations and districts, in addition to reflecting the herein
preserved County overlay districts (District B and Areas of Special Concern) shown on attached
Exlu'bit 3. Exhibit 1 reflects the following designations and districts:
Land Ust District/Plan Designation
Washington County
City of Tigard
City of Tigard
Land Use
Zoning
Plan Designation
Districts/Plan
Designation
R-5 Res. 5 touts
R4.5
SFR 7,500 sq ft
Low density 1-5 units
/acre'
/ acre
R-6 Res. 6 units
R-7
SFR. 5,000 sq ft
Medium density 6-12
/acre
units / acre
R-9 Res. 9 units
R-12
Multi-family 12
Medium density 6-12
/acre
units / acre
units / acre
R-12 Res. 12 units
R-12
Multi-family 12
Medium density -6-12
/acre
units / acre
units / acre
R-15 Res. 15 units
R 15
Mult11-,c y
ii 25
Y J
* edi_u;gh d~ra.uJlnt,t,
1Y1N11 ~1-1111.1 ~
/acre
units / acre
13-25 units / acre
R-24 Res. 24 units
R-25
Multi-family 25
Medium-High density
/acre
units / acre
13-25 units / acre
IND - Industrial
I- L
Light Industrial
Light Industrial
Page 7 - EXHIBIT 4 to ORDINANCE NO. 487
i.a1Wa5"&, ASW_Doc
r
09/16/96
MON 12:51 FAT
503 9088
PRESTON LAW FIRM •
r` Q012
ORDINANCE No. 487
EX HMIT 4
SEPT'EMBM 9, 1996
801-8.2.1 Adopting City of Tigard Community Development Code Title 18
A Except as specifically provided to the contrary in this Ordinance, both the Citys
Title 18 "Community Development Code' and the City Comprehensive Plan in effect on
October 31, 1996, are hereby adopted by the County as the sole local regulatory standards,
background, justification and guidance applicable to applications for any and all land uses
requiring ministerial or quasi-judicial decision making within the affected area, as if such
standards, background, justification and guidance were fully set forth hereat.
B. County Technical Assistance
County employees shall provide requested technical assistance to City-Officials applying
the County Ordinance provisions established. below, according to a methodology mutually
established by the County and City in an implementing intergovernmental agreement.
1. Legisl.stive D,-,::isionrnzking
(a) The Washington County Community Development Code (CDC)
provisions and County Comprehensive Plan provisions governing legislative decisionmaking
continue to apply to the affected area and such legislative decisionmalang within the affected area
may only be undertaken by the County in the manner specified in the CDC and County
Comprehensive Plan provisions.
(b) The County shall coordinate all legislative decisions in the affected
area with the City and shall consider all City suggestions. The manner in which such coordination
shall be accomplished will be specified in the implementing intergovernmental agreement.
2. West Tigard Community Plan and Bull Mountain Community Plan Text
The textual provisions in the County West Tigard Community Plan and the Bull ID4ountain
Community Plan continue to apply to the affected area in the same manner as before enactment
and implementation of this Ordinance. Provided, however, the Comprehensive Framework plan
shall not apply to individual permit decisions made regarding development and proposals for
development within the affected area, because the Board hereby interprets the Comprehensive
Framework Plan as applicable only to.quasi judicial plan amendments and as guidance in the
adoption of community plans and, accompanying maps and zoning ordinances. The
Comprehensive Framework plan shall continue to apply to applications for quasi-judicial plan
amendments.
3. Rezoning Affected Area, Amendment to Community Plan Maps
The affected area is hereby rezoned to the City zoning districts and City plan designations
as established on Exhibit 1 and in a manner preserving the Bull Mountain Community Plan
District B overlay district and the Areas of Special Concern, as shown on the attached Exhibit 3.
The Board specifically determines and interprets its CDC, Comprehensive Framework and
Community Plans to establish the City zoning districts and plan designations imposed under this
Ordinance and shown on Exhibit 1 are functional equivalents of the County land use standards,
Page 8 - EXHU317 4 to ORDINANCE NO. 487
JAVA-rUSW-7%WAS y.
09/16 12:59 1 996 F n0RS: 503 24b TO: 24 j.5 • rAuc : ;
-09/16/96 YON 12:52 FAX 503 9055 PRESTON' L1R FIRM Q) 013
ORDINANCE No. 487
EXHIBIT 4
SM7E MER 9, 1996
districts and designations previously applied to the affected area. The Maps of the West Tigard
Community Plan and the Bull Mountain Community Plan are hereby amended to conform to the
designations and districts imposed under this Ordinance and its Exhibit I as well as Exhibit 3.
4. Nonconforming Uses
The CDC 440 provisions governing nonconforming uses shall be the sole local standards
governing all nonconforming uses within the affected area, including any uses becoming
nonconforming as a result of the adoption of this Ordinance. Applications concerning
nonconforming uses shall be subject to the process herein adopted specified in the Tigard Zoning
Code Ti±ie 18 to which City nonconforming uses are subject.
5. Acknowledged County Goal 5 Standards
The County has identified certain Goal 5 resources on particular land within the affected
area. These identified Goal 5 resources are shown on the attached Exhibit 2, which exhibit is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference The County designation of land as
having a Goal 5 resource, including any such future designations, any development and approval
standards from the CDC, Comprehensive and Community Plans applicable to these Goal 5
resources shall continue to apply, notwithstanding that the affected area is hereby rezoned to City
zoning districts and planning designations. In this regard, the County specifically determines the
County District B overlay shall continue to apply to the affected area as shown on the attached
Exhibit 3. In addition, the County Areas of Special Concern shown on the attached Exhibit 3
shall also continue to apply to the affected area Review of applications subject to, and resolution
of issues regarding, County Goal 5 inventory and County Goal 5 implementing standards shall
follow City procedures applicable to "Sensitive Lands" as specified in Title 18 of the Tigard
Zoning Code, adopted herein. .
6. . Home Occupations
The City's regulations applicable to Home Occupations are hereby adopted by the County,
except that the following additional CDC standards shall be applied- to all applications concerning
Home Occupations:
(a) Outside storage of inventory, equipment, vehicles or other items
associated with the Home Occupation is prohibited; and
(b) Distribution of materials or sales of any kind outside of the home
and structures accessory to the home is prohibited; and
(c) Parking of a commercial vehicle used as part of the home
occupation, including a truck or fifth wheel, tractor or trailer of any
land, is prohibited.
Page 9 - EXHIBIT 4 to ORDINANCE NO. 487
r. WLKW"4o ZWASW- C
02/16 13:00 1996 FROM: 503 248 9085 TO: 2473 PAGE: 14
09116196 VON 12:54 FAX 503 i 9085 PRESTON L1B FIRX • Q1014
ORDINANCE No. 487
E 11BI T 4
SEPTEMBER 9, 1996
801-9 Severability
If any portion of this Ordinance is for any reason determined to be invalid or
unconstitutional by any court or administrative tribunal having jurisdiction, such portion shall be
deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such determination shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, which shall continue to have full force and
effect.
V
Page 10 - EXHIBIT 4 to ORDINANCE NO. 487
x+w~zuauTwwounoc
EXHIBIT 1 A
Exhibit 1A
The area affected by Ordinance 487 is described as follows: That area of urban
unincorporated Washington County bounded by the south row line of Scholls
Ferry Road to the north, the urban growth boundary line to the west, the north row
line of Beef Bend Road to the south for the areas commonly known as Bull
Mountain and Walnut Island areas; and those areas of urban unincorporated
Washington County bounded by Highway 99W to the west, the Tualatin River to
the south and the City of Tigard's corporate boundary to the north and east.
B 1►ounaary
- B_ ; ,Distrl Con.cexn
f ecial
X-rea o -B oun.aary
• b n Gxo-,wth
r
.1
i
~~~jgEND
e)("1131-1 '3
S~►~ _ 20W
2;W, 3WO'
,04Gy _
{
~c
r`
06T 1
41996 `I
973shrngton County
Department of Land Use and
Transportation
Land Development Services
155 N First Ave, Suite 350
Hillsboro, OR 97124
RECOMMENDATION
& STAFF REPORT
PROCEDURE TYPE III
CPO:4B COMMUNITY PLAN:
Bull Mountain
LAND USE DISTRICT:
J2-6 (.Residential 6 uajiper acre
•
CAS EFILE: 96-480-SU/D
APPLICANT:
Cj~v of Tigard. Mr. Ed Weaw
Citv Hall
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tiaard.OR 97223
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE:
Mr. Chris Uber
Murray. Smith & Associates. tac.
121 SW Salmon #1020
Portland. OR 97204
CONTACT PERSON:
Mr. Chris Uber
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: OWNER:
ASSESSOR MAP#: 2S1 5DB same as an licant
LOTM-400
SITE SIZE: 11.03 acres LOCATION: 225 ft. south of The cures
ADDRESS: 13425 SW Sunrise Lane terminus of SW 154th Av. south of Firtree
Dr.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ACTION: Special Use ADDroval and Development Review
for a 3.5 million aallon water storace reservoir.
October 17, 1996
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Hearings Officer adopt the attached Findings
(Attachment C) and approve the application subiect tc the imposition of the
Conditions of Approval contained in Attachment B.
Attachments: A. - Vicinity Map
B. - CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
C.- Staff Report
D.- Transportation Report
E.- Street Trees
rig ATTACHMENT4 VIC1: ITY. MAP
Page 3 Notice of PublW-Hearfng:_.:_-_.::...:.;:
TAX MAP/LOT NO. 2S1 5DB 400 CASE FILE NO. 96-480-SU/D
1600 too
J2R9
00
300
400
201
R6
40C
1
2000 1900 x 1600
-
reor1700 160o
Lu 300
2200 ~ •
900 _ '
2300 o00 ~t 1200
B00 1300
+ two
R6
I11oo I 600
l~ NORTH AREA OF CONSIDERATION
SCALE: 1" TO 400'
SITE & SURROUNDING LAND USE DISTRICTS:
R-6 DISTRICT (RESIDENTIAL 6 UNITS/ACRE)
R-9 DISTRICT (RESIDENTIAL 9 UNITS/ACRE)
R-15 DISTRICT (RESIDENTIAL 15 UNITS/ACRE)
200
0
2000
400
6w Soo
700 ttoo
I too
400 800
s
500 - -
900
100[1
1400 160(
1300 1-1
1600
1200
REVIEW STANDARDS FROM CURRENT OR
APPLICABLE ORDINANCE OR PLAN
A. WASHINGTON COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
B. RURALINATURAL RESOURCE ELEMENT
C. TRANSPORTATION PLAN
D. WASHINGTON COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE:
ARTICLE I, INTRODUCTION & GENERAL PROVISIONS
ARTICLE II, PROCEDURES
ARTICLE III, LAND USE DISTRICTS
ARTICLE IV, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
ARTICLE V, PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
ARTICLE VI, LAND DIV. & LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS
ARTICLE VII, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
E. R & O 86-95 TRAFFIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS
F. ORD. NO. 318 UNIFORM ROAD IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
G_ ORD. NO. 379 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
H R & 0 91-75 SURFACE WATER QUALITY/QUANTITY
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Attachment B
CONDITIONS
OF APPROVAL
I. PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY ON-SITE IMPROVEMENTS. INCLUDING
GRADING. EXCAVATION AND/OR FILL ACTIVITIES THE APPLICANT SHALL:
A. Submit to Building Services (640-3470) for review and approval:
Grading/drainage plan consistent with the standards of Sections 410 and 412
(Type I procedure).
B. Submit to the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (648-8621) for review and
approval:
Application for USA site development permit in accordance with R&O 91-
47/91-75.
NOTE: Erosion control permit and inspection fees are due upon submittal of
final plans.
C. Submit to Land Development Services, Project Planner (Albert Boesei,
681-3835):
1. Submit copy of easement agreement allowing utilization of Tax
Map/Lot 2S1 5DB/600 as access to the project site.
if. PRIOR TO FINAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL THE APPLICANT
SHALL:
A. Obtain an Access Permit for construction of fhe driveway approach
from the terminus of SW 154th Avenue.
NOTE: Contact Land Development Services (Teri Cramer, 681-3834) to
obtain the required forms.
B. The following documents shall be executed:
1. Sign and record a waiver not to remonstrate against the formation
of a local improvement district or other mechanism to improve and
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Conditions of Approval - Page 2
maintain SW Sunrise Lane to County standards between SW
Scholls Ferry Road and SW Bull Mountain Road.
2. Dedicate additional right-of-way to provide 30 feet from centerline
of SW Sunrise Lane adjacent to the site.
NOTE: Contact the Survey Division (Jamil Kamawal, 693-4543) to
obtain the required forms.
C. Submit to Land Development Services, Project Planner (Albert Boesel,
681-3835):
1. Final Approval form (Type I procedure).
2. Final Approval fee.
3. Replanting plan prepared by a qualified biologist or plant ecologist for
disturbed areas at the site entrance, along the access road and at the
base of the reservoir.
4. Install protective fencing at the drip lines of all trees to be retained
within the vicinity of proposed grading activities. Submit written
verification from a consulting arborist that the fencing is adequate to
protect trees from damage caused by excavation, fill and construction
equipment.
5. Written verification from a registered professional engineer that the
private street into and through the project site has been built to the
standards of Section 409.
III. PRIOR TO BUILDING OCCUPANCY AND/OR FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION
APPROVAL:
A. Site improvements shall be completed in accordance with the approved final
plans.
B. All facilities and improvements required by USA shall be completed and
approved by USA.
IV. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS:
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Conditions of Approval - Page 3
A. Adequate sight distance shall be continuously maintained by the property
owner. This may require the property owner to periodically remove
obstructing vegetation from the road right-of-way.
B. Access to the site shall be from SW 154th Avenue through Tax Map/Lot
2S1 5DB/600
C. Landscaping and street trees shall be maintained in accordance with Section
407-8.10. Maintenance shall include, but is not limited to regular watering,
weeding, pruning and replacement.
D. Obtain a Sign Permit prior to the placement of signs on the site unless
otherwise exempt under Section 414-5.
E. This development shall be constructed in accordance with the conditions of
this decision, the approved final plans and the standards of the Community
Development Code (Section 207-6.1).
F. All conditions of approval shall be binding upon all heirs, successors and
assigns (Section 207-6.1).
G. Transferability of this Development Permit shall be in accordance with Section
201-8.
H. The removal of any tree over 6 inches in diameter shall require the approval
of a tree removal permit.
This approval shall automatically expire two years from the date of this
approval, unless development has commenced, an application for an
extension is filed, or this approval is revoked or invalidated (CDC Section
201-4).
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Attachment C
STAFF REPORT
I. APPLICABLE STANDARDS
A. 1990 Washington County Comprehensive Plan
B. 1984 Bull Mountain Community Plan
C. 1994 Washington County Community Development Code:
1. Article II, Procedures:
Section 204-4 Type III Procedure
Section 207-6 Conditions of Approval
2. Article III, Land Use Districts:
Section 303 R-6 District
3. Article IV, Development Standards:
Section 404 Master Planning
Section 405 Open Space
Section 406 Building, Siting and Architectural Design
Section 407 Landscape Design
Section 408 Neighborhood Circulation
Section 409 Private Streets
Section 410 Slopes and Grading
Section 411 Screening and Buffering
Section 412 Drainage
Section 413 Parking and Loading
Section 414 Signs
Section 415 Lighting
Section 416 Utilities
Section 423 Environmental Performance Standards
Section 426 Erosion Control
Section 430-105 Public Utility
4. Article V, Public Facilities and Services:
Section 501-5 Standards for Development
Section 502 Sidewalk Standards
D. 1989 Transportation Plan
E. Ordinance No. 379 - Washington County Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance
F. Resolution and Order No. 86-95 - Determining Traffic Safety
Improvements Under the Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance
G. Ordinance No. 318 - Uniform Road Improvement Standards
H. Resolution and Order No. 91-47 - Concerning Erosion
Control, Water Quality and Quantity
H. AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page .2
Sewer:
Streets:
Drainage:
Water Quality
and Quantity:
Erosion Control:
Fire Protection:
Transit:
Police Protection:.
III. FINDINGS
Unified Sewerage Agency
Washington County Dept. of Land Use and Transportation
Washington County Dept. of Land Use and Transportation
Unified Sewerage Agency
Unified Sewerage Agency
Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue
Tri-Met
Washington County Sheriff
A. Background Information:
1. The applicant requests Special Use Approval and Development Review for
a 3.5 million gallon water storage reservoir.
2. Access to the site is proposed from the current terminus of SW 154th
Avenue located north of the project site. A single parcel of land lies
between the terminus of SW 154th Avenue and the project site; it contains
one single family residence. This parcel is not owned by the applicant. At
the time of this Review an access easement had not been granted allowing
the applicant utilization of the northerly abutting property for access to the
project site. The applicant states that negotiations continue with the
property owner.
3. The site contains no drainage hazard areas and/or wetlands/water areas
according to the County Flood Plain Series and National Wetland Inventory
maps.
4. There were no letters of comment received regarding this application.
B. 1990 Washington County Comprehensive Framework Plan:
There are no specific Plan policies or goals which affect this request that are not
implemented by the Code or the Community Plan. The Framework Plan requires
development applications to be in compliance with the Community Development
Code and the applicable Community Plan. By demonstrating in this report. that
the request complies with the standards of the Code and the Community Plan,
this Plan requirement will be satisfied.
C. 1984 Bull Mountain Community Plan:
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page 3 -
The site is located in the Summit and Slopes subarea.
The site is located in Mineral and Aggregate District B.
The site is designated as a Significant Natural Resource.
The Community Plan is implemented by the Community Development Code.
When built in conformance with the conditions of approval, the project will be in
compliance with the community plan.
D. 1994 Washington County Community Development Code:
1. Article II, Procedures:
Section 204-4 Type III Procedures
STAFF: This application is being reviewed'as a Type I I I
application. A public notice advertising the request has
been mailed to all property owners within 250 feet of the
site. A public notice sign has been posted on the site as
required by the Community Development Code (CDC)
Section 204-1.4. The posting affidavit is in the Casefile.
Section 207-6 Conditions of Approval:
207-6.1 The Review Authority may impose conditions on any
Type 11 or III development approval. Such conditions
shall be designed to protect the public from potential
adverse impacts of the proposed use or development or
to fulfill an identified need for public services within the
impact area of the proposed development. Conditions
shall not restrict densities to less than that authorized by
the development standards of this Code.
STAFF: Conditions of approval must be imposed to ensure
compliance with the standards of the Code and other
County regulations and to mitigate any adverse impacts
the use may have on the surrounding area.
2. Article III, Land Use Districts:
Section 303 R-6 District
STAFF: The proposed public utility (water storage reservoir) is
allowed in the District through the Special Use Standards
outlined in Section 430-105 (below).
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page 4
The proposed siting of the water reservoir meets all the
yard requirements of the R-6 District (Section 303-6).
The site plan indicates the water reservoir approximately
34 feet above proposed finished grade. The applicant
states it will not exceed a maximum height of 40 feet in
accordance with Section 303-6.3.
3. Article IV, Development Standards:
Section 404 Master Planning
STAFF: The applicant has submitted the information required by
this section in the form of a site plan showing topography,
the proposed access and siting of the water reservoir.
The general area of existing trees is also shown. For the
immediate development site, Section 404-1.3, Table I,
requires the size, species and location of trees six inches
or greater in diameter be shown; the general groupings of
other species shall be shown.
The entire text and maps of the Water Supply Plan for
Bull Mountain Area Tigard Water District is included with
this application. This plan, developed for the City of
Tigard in September, 1986, explores and discusses the
future water supply needs of the Bull Mountain Area. The
Plan includes: recommendations for supply facilities
needed to provide water distribution systems throughout
the study area; a schedule for construction of these
facilities; and the costs to construct and operate the
facilities. The recommendations included in this Plan are
based on population projections and allowed densities of
the service urea. Of relevance to this particular Revievi is
the study's reference for the need of a water reservoir at
the 410 foot elevation at a location south of Scholls Ferry
Road.
Section 405 Open Space
STAFF: Section 405-1.1 requires areas mapped as a Significant
Natural Area on the Community Plan to be preserved as
open space, except as otherwise provided. The
applicant's site plan and narrative indicate clearing limits
for the proposed facilities. All existing trees and
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page .5
vegetation will be removed within the limits of the access
road and reservoir. In order to minimize the impact on
existing vegetation the access road will also serve as a
utility corridor (Section 405-2). As required by this
Section, areas within the project site not affected by
construction of facilities will be left undisturbed. Although
not addressed, it appears ownership and maintenance of
the entire parcel will remain with the Tigard Water District
(Section 405-5.2).
Section 406 Building, Siting and Architectural Design
S F : The development is permitted within the primary district
through Special Use review. The reservoir is sited to
maintain all minimum setback and lot coverage
requirements and meets the maximum height
requirements of the primary district (Section 406-1.1; 1.2;
1.3).
The solar plan submitted with the application indicates
the approximate limits of the tank's shadow at December
21 st. The shadow does not encroach on abutting
properties.
The reservoir will be poured concrete. A cement colored
finish will be sprayed onto the concrete.
Section 407 Landscape Design
STAFF: Section 407-7 requires street trees to be planted along all
public and private roadways and access drives.
However, the access drive which passes through Tax
Map/Lot 2S1-5DB/600 will be expanded in the future to
serve residential development and Staff believes street
trees should not be required at this time. The need for
street trees will be addressed through future residential
development of this parcel. Undisturbed existing trees
and replanting as required by Section 422 shall serve as
street trees along the interior access drive.
A minimum of 25% of the buildable land area pursuant to
Section 407-1.2 shall be used for landscaping in
residential districts (Section 407-1.3). All areas of a
building site not identified in a site plan or development
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page .6
plan application as intended for a specified immediate
use shall be landscaped except where enclosed and
blocked from the view of public streets by solid fencing or
buildings (Section 407-1.6).
Generally, the remaining on-site natural vegetation will be
adequate to meet these requirements. However, Section
430-105.5 of the Code requires the applicant to consider
the compatibility of the facility with existing surrounding
uses and uses allowed by the plan designation. The
applicant's narrative states that final landscaping design
will include provisions for a locking security gate and may
include provisions for an ornamental brick entrance way
and cast iron fencing. Besides the entrance gate and
brick work, Staff believes some form of natural
landscaping will be required at the entrance to replace
vegetation removed as part of roadway construction.
This replanting plan shall be guided by a biologist or
landscape architect.
Section 407-3.3 requires a description of trees to be
removed and an explanation of the purpose of removal.
This Section also requires a site plan showing the
location, size and species of trees six inches or greater in
diameter. For forested areas that are larger than five
acres, the general locations of trees may be shown with
one or more detailed one acre sample areas.
An ecologist's report submitted with the application
describes the trees to be removed and the purpose of
removal (see Section 422 below). A tree removal plan
was also submitted. Trees within the access road
alignment and reservoir footprint and toe of slope are to
be removed.
Section 408 Neighborhood Circulation
STAFF: A neighborhood circulation plan, as required by the
Traffic Impact Statement (May 7, 1996), is included with
the application. The roadway proposed as access to the
project site takes into consideration the future residential
development of Tax Lot 600. Further discussion of
proposed access to the site can be found in Attachment
'D', Transportation Report.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page.7
Section 409
STAFF:
Section 410
STAFF: The applicant has submitted a preliminary grading plan.
A final grading plan as required by Section 410 will be
submitted prior to any work being done on the site.
Section 411 Screening and Buffering
•
Section 408-5.4 requires development which is not
single-family or duplex residential to provide on-site
pedestrian and bicycle circulation. The applicant's
narrative proposes a locked gate at the entrance and the
site to be fenced. On-site pedestrian and bicycle
circulation will not be required. Neighboring residents will
most likely be able to continue walking the undeveloped
portion of the site.
Private Streets
The private street into and through the site shall be built
to the standards of Section 409-3.3.A(1). The applicant
proposes a 12 foot wide paved access road.
Slopes and Grading
STAFF: Properties to the north are designated R-15, at the south
and east R-6 and the west is designated R-9. Section
411-5 requires Screening and Buffering Type 1 at the
north and west; no screening is required at the south or
east. The natural on-site vegetation shall serve as
screening and buffering. This natural vegetation also
includes any replanting required by Section 422 and
Section 430-105.
Section 4':2 Drainage
STAFF: Pursuant to Resolution and Order No.'s 90-30 and 90-38,
the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) has the
responsibility for review and approval of storm drainage
plans as well as erosion control plans. The applicant will
be required to obtain approval from USA for the proposed
drainage plan prior to any on-site work. The applicant
has submitted preliminary storm drainage plans.
Section 413 Parking and Loading
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page8
STAFFS Staff has determined that Section 413-9.21. is the most
similar use mentioned to the proposed water storage
reservoir (Section 413-2.3). This section requires two
parking spaces. The site plan indicates adequate
surfaced area (Section 413-5) is being provided for
parking.
Section 414 Signs
STAFF: No signs are proposed at this time. A sign permit in
accordance with Section 414-1 must be obtained prior to
the placement of a sign(s) at the site. Staff encourages
signage be installed which identifies the property owner
and gives a phone number to call in case of emergencies.
Section 415 Lighting
STAFF: No lighting plan was submitted with the application.
Lighting shall meet the requirements of Section 415.
Section 416 Utilities
STAFF: All new utilities will be located underground as required
by Section 416-1.1.
Section 417 Irrigation
STAFF: Disturbed areas are required to be replanted with native
plant species or with salvage native plants removed for
replanting on the site. These shall be irrigated in
accordance with instructions from a registered biologist or
environmental consultant.
Section 422 Significant Natural Resources
STAFF: The site is designated a Wildlife Habitat by the Bull
Mountain Community Plan and is therefore subject to the
requirements of this Section (Section 422-2.3). The
applicant states that the resevoir will cover 3% of the site
area and paving, 4% of the site. It is further stated that
landscaping will utilize 4% of the site.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page .9.
The applicant has submitted a Significant Resources
Inventory Report prepared by an Ecologist. This report
states that most of the site is mixed conifer-deciduous
forest with a small meadow located in the northwest
portion of the site. This meadow habitat (approximately 1
acre) is a remnant farm field. Within the forest habitat,
Douglas-fir is the dominant overstory tree. Other
overstory trees include big-leaf maple, madrone, and red
alder with a few scattered individual western red cedar
(as small trees and seedlings) and a lone western
hemlock. Canopy closure averages 85% at full leaf.
Tree recruitment occurring as seedling or sapling trees is
present for all overstory species. Average dbh for
Douglas-fir trees range mostly from 11 to 14 inches.
Scattered individual fir trees were measured at 16, 24
and 30 inch dbh, mostly occurring in the southern portion
of the site.
Generally, the forest habitat has the character of a
naturally regenerated forest as typified by the variety of
age/sized trees and the more open character of the
overstory which allows for side lighting resulting in well
developed shrub and herbaceous vegetative layers.
The Significant Resources Inventory Report states that
within the forest habitat, the shrub and herbaceous layer
is native, diverse and highly developed. Dominant shrubs
include tall Oregon grape, Oregon hazel, vine maple and
thimbleberry. Other shrubs include red elderberry, large
sword fern, English holly seedlings, ocean spray, red
huckleberry, salal, wild rose and Indian plum. The forest
habitat is in healthy condition and is primarily dominated
by native species.
Dead wood habitat exists as downed wood and standing
snags. The Ecologist states that generally, the downed
wood may be missing bark and the tree is embedded into
the soil but not completely soft.. Most of the downed
wood is small, less than 12 inch dbh with the exception of
the southern most portion of the site and the southeast
corner where recent logfalls of large (greater than 20 inch
dbh) Douglas-fir are located. Several large stumps occur
scattered throughout the site. They are mostly in an
advanced state of decay.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page, 10
The project site is located on the break between the
Summer Creek,and the Tualatin River basins. No
permanent water features were observed on-site.
However, there is a small naturally occurring drainage
contour just north of the existing water line which
transects the site from west to east near the southem
boundary. This drainage appears to function as a winter
or early spring runoff area. Two perennial small creeks
are located within .25 miles to the east and west of the
site. 'No unique habitat features were identified on the
site. There are no wetlands on the site.
The Ecologist reports observing wildlife and their sign
during the visit to the site. There wildlife included:
rufous-sided towhee, Swainson's thrush, Bewick's wren
(territory call), pileated woodpecker (old and fresh sign),
mourning dove, red-breasted nuthatch, chestnut-backed
chickadee, dark-eyed junco (with young), northern flicker,
golden-crowned kinglet, mole (sign) and coyote (sign).
Pileated woodpecker is a State Sensitive species. The
Ecologist states it is likely that other bird and mammal
species occur within the site which provides suitable
habitat for songbirds, small raptors, mice, insects, among
other birds and mammals. Herpetofauna, such as
ensatina, may be present under leaf litter and downed
logs.
The Wildlife Habitat Assessment form used to develop a
qualitative score for the value of the site's wildlife habitat
rated the site as 'high'. The 'high' rating is based on the
presence of two habitat types - forest and meadow,
species and structural diversity, the dominance of native
plant species, general habitat health, the site's
connection to other habitats to the east, west and south,
the proximity to water (less than .25 miles away) and its
lack of disturbance both past and present, with the
exception of the meadow/farm field. The site provides
suitable nesting, foraging, denning and travel habitat for a
variety of birds, mammals, insects and possibly
herpetofauna.
The Ecologist's report recommended four mitigation
measures: (1) Time clearing activities to avoid nesting
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page•11
periods for birds, generally March through June; (2)
Retain all existing large diameter overstory trees not
required for removal due to road and reservoir placement.
Many of the large Douglas-fir have been marked with a
blue blaze for removal. These trees provide important
habitat and seed source for regeneration and will be
important habitat components for the pileated
woodpecker as recommended by Oregon Department of
Forestry and Wildlife in the Sensitive Species plan. (3)
Replant disturbed areas with native plant species/salvage
native plants that will be removed for replanting on the
site. (4) Retain periphery buffer to provide travel and
cover for wildlife occurring within the site.
Section 430-105 Special Use Standards, Public Utility
STAFF: Section 430-105 allows approval of a public utility service
facility based upon a study submitted by the applicant
which includes:
430-105.4.A. The need for the facility, present or future; and how the
facility fits into the utility's Master Plan.
STAFF: In September of 1986 a report titled "Water Supply Plan
for the Bull Mountain Area" was prepared for the Tigard
Water District by Gilbert R. Meigs, Consulting Engineer.
This plan recommended the construction of two
reservoirs to serve the 410 foot pressure zone. The plan
recommended that one of these reservoirs have a
capacity of 2.5 million gallons and be constructed at the
Mentor site. Since the 1986 report, the City of Tigard has
determined that an older, existing, 0.8 million gallon,
reservoir serving the 410 foot pressure zone and located
one mile east of the Mentor site, should be removed from
service in the near future. Because of this, the original
2.5 million gallon reservoir has been increased to 3.5
million gallons.
A vicinity map showing the location of the Mentor site is
included with this application; the Mentor site is the
current project site. The plan also recommended that a
second reservoir, with a capacity of 1.0 million gallons
and an overflow elevation of approximately 470 feet be
constructed at the Mentor site as well.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page. 12
Engineering considerations with regards to water flow
and pressure dictate the placement of water reservoirs.
The placement of all reservoirs recommended by the
Water Supply Plan report, including the presently
proposed reservoir, take into account lower elevation
pressure, the expense of additional pumping stations,
pipeline sizes, currently functioning reservoirs and
established pressure zones.
The need for the facility is outlined in the report. The
surrounding Districts, R-6 (Residential 6 units per acre),
R-9 (Residential 9 units per acre) and R-15 (Residential
15 units per acre) allow further residential development.
Although these surrounding Districts will most likely not
be developed to their full potential because of
topography, the need for a supply of water will continue to
increase as development pressure within the Urban
Growth Boundary continues to escalate. The report also
sights the installation of sewer lines within the study area
by Unified Sewer Agency as further indication of future
growth within the Bull Mountain area.
430-105.4.B. The minimum area required for the facility for the present
and anticipated expansion.
STAFF: The site is 11 acres in size. The applicant's narrative
states that the proposed layout of facilities on the site will
accommodate future construction of pumping and piping
facilities south of the proposed reservoir that may be
required should other water storage or pumping facilities
ultimately be constructed on or near this site. The
proposed site layout also provides opportunities for
alternate uses or sale of the remaining property should no
additional facilities be constructed at the site.
430-105A.C. What measures will be used to minimize damage to
paved roads and natural resources or open space.
STAFF: The site will gain access from SW 154th Avenue, a paved
roadway. No measures were presented with which the
applicant would minimize roadway damage.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page 1.3
Only the minimum vegetative cover and trees will be
removed to accommodate construction activities, the
roadway and water storage reservoir. Natural resources
and open space will be protected following a registered
biologist's and/or ecologist's guidance. Any disturbed
areas will be replanted with native vegetation as
proposed by the applicant and consulting ecologist.
430-105.5 Site size and yard shall be based upon a site plan
submitted by the applicant. The site plan shall consider
especially, the compatibility of the facility with existing
surrounding uses and uses allowed by the plan
designation.
STAFF: The applicant has considered compatibility with
surrounding existing residential developments and uses
allowed by the Bull Mountain Community Plan. An
ornamental brick entrance way and cast iron fencing is
proposed at the entrance. All disturbed areas which
remain undeveloped are proposed to be replanted. Any
remaining slope of the cut area needed to place the
reservoir is proposed to be stabilized following Section
410, Slopes and Grading. Staff is satisfied that the
applicant is cognizant of, and has addressed all
compatibility issues.
Section 426 Erosion Control
_TAFF• Section 426 requires erosion control measures in the
Tualatin River and Oswego Lake sub-basins during
construction to control and limit soil erosion. Section 426-
5.2 allows the erosion control plan submission and review
to be deferred until the time of any on-site work or
construction. The applicant shall therefore be iequired to
submit an erosion control plan consistent with the
requirements of Section 426 prior to any physical change
or construction on the site.
On July 1, 1990, Unified Sewerage Agency (USA)
assumed responsibility for erosion control within their
district boundaries. The applicant will be required to
submit an erosion control plan to USA for their approval
prior to any on-site or off-site work or construction.
•
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report -Page. 14
4.' Article V, Public Facilities and Services:
Section 501-5 Standards for Development
•
STAFF: Required public services and facilities can be provided to
the site to serve the proposed use. All of the agencies
listed in Section II of this staff report have stated they can
adequately serve the development subject to complying
with their standards.
The findings and recommendations for transportation
standards are found in the Transportation Report,
Attachment "D", and are hereby incorporated as findings.
Section 502 Sidewalk Standards:
STAFF: The findings and recommendations for sidewalks are
found in the Transportation Report, Attachment "D", and
are hereby incorporated as findings.
E. Transportation Plan:
S F : The findings and recommendations for transportation standards
are found in the Transportation Report, Attachment "D", and
are incorporated as findings herein.
F. Ordinance No.'s 379; Traffic Impact Fee:
_UAFF: The Traffic Impact Fee is required of all new development and
constitutes an assurance to satisfy a development's
requirement to provide additional capacity to major collectors
and arterial streets needed for development.
This fee is based on the number of daily trips a site generates
and is due at issuance of a building permit.
G. Resolution and Order No. 91-47 - Erosion Control, Water Quality and
Water Quantity:
STAFF: Resolution and. Order 91-47 adopted standards and regulations
for the Unified Sewer Agency's (USA) review and approval of
erosion control measures. The applicant will be required to
submit an erosion control plan to USA for their approval prior to
any on-site or off-site work or construction.
•
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Staff Report - Page •15
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION,
The required findings can be made for all of the applicable Code sections. When
constructed in accordance with the Conditions of Approval, the project will be in
compliance with the Community Development Code and the Community Plan.
Therefore, the request fora 3.5 million gallon water storage reservoir can be
approved subject to the Conditions of Approval.
GAUSERS\ALB\9W0kD0C
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Page 3
C. The existing surface and structural condition and width of SW Sunrise Lane is
unacceptable. The surface is gravel. This roadway is not proposed as access to the
project site therefore, no requirements will be required at this time. However, if the
roadway is utilized as access to the project site in the future, improvements may be
required.
6. ACCESS SPACING:
a. The minimum access spacing standard for SW 154th Avenue is 10 feet, measured
between access points on each side of the road as required by Section '501-8.5. B(1 of
the Community Development Code. Access to the project site must therefore be
restricted to meet this spacing standard.
b The minimum access spacing standard for SW Sunrise Lane is 50 feet, measured
between access points on each side of the road as required by Section 501-8.5.B(2) of
the Community Development Code. If SW Sunrise Lane is utilized, access must be
restricted to meet this spacing standard.
7. SIGHT DISTANCE:
a. Section 501-8.5.E. of the Community Development Code and Section 210.7 of the
Washington County Uniform Road Improvement Design Standards require adequate
intersection sight distance be provided at a site's access to a County or a public road in
accordance with the standards of Section 501-8.5.E.
Intersection sight distance is acceptable at the proposed access location to SW 154th
Avenue. The required intersection sight distance is 250 feet in both directions based
upon a legal speed of 25 m.p.h.
C. Minimum intersection sight distance shall be required if SW Sunrise Lane is utilized as
access to the project site. The required intersection sight distance is 250 feet in both
directions based upon a legal speed of 25 m.p.h.
8. DRAINAGE:
a. Roadway drainage is acceptable up to the current terminus of SW 154th Avenue
however, any roadway constructed to the project site shall provide adequate drainage.
b. Roadway drainage al.,,,ng the site's frontage of SV%+Sunrise Lane is unacceptab:e. The
ditch needs to be cleaned, graded and shaped to provide proper roadway drainage.
Section 501-8.1.C. of the Code requires each parcel to have adequate roadway drainage.
This roadway is not proposed as access to the project site.
SIDEWALKS:
a. A sidewalk exists along SW 154th Avenue at its current terminus north of the project site.
A sidewalk does not exist along the site's frontage of SW Sunrise Lane.
C. Section 502-6 of the Community Development Code requires a sidewalk to be
constructed along a site's road frontage when one does not exist. A permit for the
construction of the sidewalk is required to be obtained prior to obtaining final approval-and
the issuance of a building permit.
Casefile 96-480-SU/D
Page 4
RECOMMENDATION:
1. PRIOR TO FINAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL THE APPLICANT SHALL:
A. Obtain an Access Permit for construction of the driveway approach from the
terminus of SW 154th Avenue.
B. The following documents shall be executed:
1. Sign and record a waiver not to remonstrate against the formation of a local
improvement district or other mechanism to improve and maintain SW Sunrise
Lane to County standards between SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW.Bull
Mountain Road.
2. Dedicate additional right-of-way to provide 30 feet from centerline of SW Sunrise
Lane adjacent to the site.
II. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS:,
A. Access to the site shall be from SW 154th Avenue through Tax Map/Lot 2S1 5DB/600
B. Adequate sight distance shall be continuously maintained by the property owner. This
may require the property owner to periodically remove obstructing vegetation from the
road right-of-way and/or on site.
Attachment E
STREET TREES
Recommended Street Trees:
ACER, platanoides columnare 'Columnar Norway' - Columnar Norway Maple
ACER, platanoides schwedleri nigra 'Crimson King' - Crimson King Maple
ACER, platanoides 'Fairway' - Fairway Sugar Maple - - -
ACER, rubrum 'Red' - Red Maple
ACER, rubrum 'Red Sunset' - Red Sunset Maple
ACER, platanoides 'Royal Red' - Royal Red Maple
ACER, platanoides 'Summershade' - Summershade Maple
CERCIS, canadenis - Canadian Red Bud
FRAXINUS, americana - White Ash
FRAXINUS, americana 'Autumn Purple' - Autumn Purple Ash .
GINKGO, biloba - Maidenhair Tree
GINKGO, biloba 'Autumn Gold'
GINKGO, biloba 'Fairmount'
GLEDITSIA, triacanthos 'Sunburst' - Honey Locust
LIQUIDAMBAR, styraciflua - American Sweetgum
LIRIODENDRON, tulipifera - Tulip Tree
MAGNOLIA, grandiflora -.Southern Magnolia
PLATANUS, acerifolia - London Plane Tree
QUERCUS, palustris - Pin Oak
QUERCUS, rubra - Red Oak
TILIA, americana - American Linden
TILIA, cordata - Little Leaf Linden
Trees Not Permitted as Street Trees:
Agricultural- fruit bearing trees (apple, pear, plum, cherry, etc.)
Acer, saccharinum - 'Silver Maple'
Acer, negundo -'Boxelder'
Ailanthus, gladulosa -'Tree-of-heaven'
Betula; birches (Common species and varieties)
Ulmus; elms (Common species and varieties)
Morus; mulberry (Common fruiting species and varieties)
Salix; willow (Common species and varieties)
Coniferous evergreen (Fir, Pine, Cedar, etc.)
City of Tigard
Community (Development
,ShapingA (Better Community
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon 97223
(503) 639-4171
Fax 684-7297
TO: Jim Hendryx
FROM: Dick Bewersdorff
DATE: June 29, 2000
SUBJECT: Land Partition at 13230 SW 154th Avenue/MLP2000-00003 (x-Clute property)
You requested information regarding the above property.
Zoning: R-25, Medium-High Density Residential.
Comprehensive Plan Desianation: Medium-High Residential.
Allowed Use of Property: This zone allows types of single-family (attached and detached)
and multi-family-Fusing with a minimum lot size of 1,480 square feet for multi-family and
3.050 square feet per unit for single-family detached. Also permitted are mobile home
parks/subdivisions, day care, utilities, colleges and community recreation are conditional
uses. Retail services are permitted as long as limited to ground floor level of multi-family
projects, not to exceed 10% of the total gross square feet of the building.
Density: Up to 25 dwelling units per acre. The minimum density allowed is 80% or 20 units
per acre ofthe net developable area after subtracting streets, slopes, wetlands, etc. The
partition application indicated 27,780 square feet of net developable area on the remaining
parcel. This would mean 18+ units at 100% density and 15 dwelling units at the minimum
80% density if developed. The City can not enforce CC&R's that do not meet minimum
densities.
Propert Size: 1.74 acres to be split into two lots of .39 acres and 1.35 acres.
Re-Zone/Plan Chanae Jurisdiction: Washington County, See Section 801-8.2.1.B.1.a in the
attached Ordinance amending County plan to City designations. The attached Urban
Services Intergovernmental Agreement further omits mention of City responsibility for Plan
Amendments within the Urban Service boundary and thus stays with Washington County.
Washinaton County Contact: Bill Avery 681-3832.
Appeal: Appeal filed by J. Ramsey on June 16, 2000. Scheduled for public hearing with
the-Hearings Officer on July 24, 2000.
i:\curp1n\dick\memos\mIp2000-3 x-clute property memo.doc
URBAN SERVICES INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
CITY OF TIGARD AND WASHINGTON COUNTY
This agreement is entered into this . lIk day of md.,, , 1997, by
WASHINGTON COUNTY, hereinafter "COUNTY" and the CITY OF TIGARD, hereinafter
"CITY" both political subdivisions of the State of Oregon.
WHEREAS, ORS 190.007 provides for the furthering of economy and efficiency in local
government and that intergovernmental cooperation is a matter of state wide concern; and
WHEREAS, ORS 190.010 provides that units of government may enter into agreements for the
performance of any and all functions and activities that a party to the agreement, its officers or
agencies have authority to perform; and
WHEREAS, Article IV(B)(2) of the Urban Planning Area Agreement called for a study of the
transfer of responsibility for certain urban services from the COUNTY to the CITY to determine
the cost effectiveness and feasibility of this transfer; and
WHEREAS, the COUNTY and the CITY believe it is in the best interest of efficiency and
economy to transfer responsibility of certain services to the local unit of government consistent
with the objectives of SB 122;
WHEREAS, this agreement provides for a newly designed method to provide governmental
services, is unique to the parties, and is subject to amendment; it is not intended to be used as a
model agreement for other jurisdictions;
URBAN SERVICES INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTITIGARD/WASHINGTON COUNTY
Page I
• 0-
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNTY AND THE CITY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
AREA AFFECTED BY AGREEMENT
A. The area affected by the intergovernmental agreement is defined by Exhibit "I" to
this agreement and is hereinafter referred to as the "area."
II. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
A. The COUNTY agrees to delegate to the CITY any and all additional authority that
it p•assesses and which is nceded by ?he CITY to car-y out planning, development, road
functions and other related activities within the area. The effective date and terms of the
delegation of authority are as provided for in this agreement. Among the actions to be
authorized pursuant to this provisions will be:
I . Provision of planning information to applicants for development review for
all land development proposed for the active planning area.
2. Performance of pre-application conferences.
3. Preparation of staff reports and performance of site visits for pending
applications.
4. Coordination and provision of public notice of land use applications.
5. Collection of fees pertaining to development applications, building permits
right-of-way use fees, systems development charges and traffic impact fees.
6. Presentation of staff recommendations pertaining to land use proposals at
public hearings.
7. Preparation of administrative decisions for those applications that do not
require public hearings, in keeping with the Tigard Community Development
Code.
S. Conducting of public hearings before the land use approval authority as
provided by the Tigard Community Development Code.
9. Conducting of appeal hearings before the land use approval authority as
provided by the Tigard Community Development Code.
URBAN SERVICES INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT/TIGARD/WASHTNGTON COUNTY
Page
1
10. Preparation of final orders for all final decisions made pursuant to this
agreement.
11. Representing the CITY in any appeal of a decision made by the CITY
under this agreement to LUBA or any other court and representing the CITY in
mandamus actions or any other actions in state or federal court.
12. Review of construction activities related to development approvals granted
pursuant to this agreement for compliance with conditions of development
approval.
13. Coordination with engineering and other appropriate staff for review and
approval of public facilities related to development application and construction.
14. Interpretation of the applicable comprehensive plan and implementing
regulations for the area.
15. Exercise of subdivision authority within the active planning area.
16. Processing and issuance of building permits for all construction activities
within the area. Performance of all building inspecting and enforcement relating to
permits issued.
17. Maintenance and improvements of roads within the area.
18. Issuance of all access permits and right of way use and right-of-way
construction permits for the area.
19. Enforcement of code and permit violations including:
a. Development and zoning violations
b. Building code violations
c. Conditions of approval violations
d. Right of way permit violations
e. Road and street hazards
20. Removing vegetation from right-of-ways.
21. Reviewing OLCC and DivfV land use compatibility statements.
URBAN SERVICES INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTrI-IGARDAVASHINGTON COUN"T"Y
Page 3
III. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES
A. General.Terms Regarding Responsibilities of the Parties.
It is the intention of the parties hereto that there be no cost to the CITY in the
undertaking of the responsibilities under this agreement. As to operational costs, the fee
schedule adopted for development review and building permit services is intended to fully
cover all direct and indirect costs to the CITY associated with development review and
building permit functions. In recognition of initial start up costs and the assumption by the
CITY of applications in process, an initial dollar transfers outlined below will be made by
the COUNTY to the CITY as provided for hereir.
As of the date of this Agreement, the parties contemplate that there are three
broad areas of cost of service in the Affected Area which is the subject of this agreement.
Those areas of cost are:
operational expenses,
2.. defense of litigation, administrative and LUBA appeals occasioned by
development review and engineering review of development; and
3. liability under tort, constitutional and related theories.
It is the intent of the parties that the CITY will be fully compensated for
operational expenses relating to this Agreement. The remaining two described cost areas
to the CITY will be analyzed as provided in Section (IV)(B) and (VI).
B. The County agrees to perform the following activities as part of this
intergovernmental agreement:
I . Transfer all documents, files, and computer data relevant to the particular
services denoted in the agreement on or before the effective date of the agreement.
The data shall be in a format compatible to the CITY's system. All costs
associated with the creation and/or duplication of these documents, files and
computer data shall be borne by the COUNTY. The documents to transferred are
listed in Appendix 1. All documents shall be transferred before the effective date
of this agreement:
URBAN SERVICES INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT/TIGARD/WASHINGTON COUNTY
Page 4
Any service under this agreement provided by CITY that requires payment
by COUNTY to CITY for such service shall only be required of the CITY as long
as COUNTY makes the payments to CITY as required by this agreement. This
agreement shall terminate if COUN'T'Y is unable to make payments to CITY
required under this agreement due to reductions in the COUNTY budget.
3. Transfers of all special fund allocations to the CITY for specific services
denoted in this agreement shall be done before the effective date of the agreement
or later as specified in this agreement. For all subsequent years, the allocations
shall be made no later than 30 days after July 1 of each year. Any interest accrued
by the CITY shall be used in furtherance of delivering such specific services. In
the event of funding short falls for operational expenses arising out of the CITY's
assumption of obligations under this agreement, the provisions of paragraph
IV(A)(1) shall govern the transfer of additional funds to the CITY by the
COUNTY.
4. Provide as needed technical assistance to the CITY to assist in those
services requiring COUNTY expertise. Such technical assistance shall be
delivered to the CITY at no charge and in a timely manner. More specifically, the
COUNTY agrees to provide technical assistance in development review to assist
the CITY's Community Development Department render appropriate land use
decisions including "areas of special concern" and floodplain/drainage hazard
areas, as defined in the COUNTY's Bull Mountain Community Plan.
5. Provide coordination with the CITY in updating and development of the
COUNTY's transportation capital improvement program.
6. Adopt provisions of Tigard's Municipal Code and engineering standards,
street standards and other City rules that are necessary for the CITY to have
authority to fulfill the delegation provisions listed under section II of this
agreement.
7. If at a quarterly meeting, it is determined that the COUNTY fee schedule is
not adequate to compensate CITY for services performed, upon presentation of
adequate documentation to this effect, COUNTY shall adjust its fee schedule for
the area to attempt to cover the cost of the service. In addition, the cost recovery
provisions of paragraph IV(A) shall apply consistent with the intent that there be
no cost to the CITY for operational expenditures under this agreement.
URBAN SERVICES INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREENIF-NT/T'IGARD/WASHINGTON COUNTY
Pale 5
• . 0
C. The CITY agrees to perform the following activities as part of this intergovernmental
agreement:
1. Perform land development services (development assistance development
review) on a daily basis consistent with the CITY Community Development Code
as adopted by the COUNTY.
2._ Perform building inspection services (plan review, electrical, plumbing,
mechanical, structural) on a daily basis consistent with the state law and the CITY
code as adopted by the COUNTY.
3. Utilize the CITY's street standards as adopted by COUNTY in evaluating
public and private development and/or projects in the area.
4. Perform road maintenance work for local public streets and receive
payment for such work from the Urban Road Maintenance District, as described in
Exhibit 2.
5. Perform road right-of-way maintenance on roads and streets and receive
payment for such work from COUNTY Road Funds, as described in Exhibit 3.
6. Perform road maintenance work and receive payment for such work from
Maintenance Local Improvement Districts, as described in Exhibit 4.
7. Perform road capital improvements and receive payment.for such
improvements from Traffic Impact Fees, as described in Exhibit 5.
8. Perform code- enforcement services on a daily basis consistent with the
CITY codes as adopted by the County and receive payment for such enforcement,
as described in Exhibit 6.
9. As of the date of this agreement, CITY shall impose a condition upon any
applications which requires street fighting, that the applicant will agree to the
formation of a Street Lighting District.
10. Take responsibility for and complete inspections and reviews for all
existing building permits and complete review of all development permit
applications (including requests for extensions on existing permits) that are filed
after the effective date of this agreement and receive payments, as described in
Exhibit 7.
URBAN SERVICES INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTrrIGARD/\VASHTNGTON COUNFFY
Page 6
It. Collect all pertinent fees and taxes relevant to building permits, traffic
impact tax, sign permits, right-of-way use permits, sign permits and development
application fees. CITY will use the COUNTY fee schedule for all engineering and
development permits as that schedule is annually adopted by COUNTY. CITY
shall apply its own fee schedule for building permits. CITY shall retain all fees it
collects for its services. COUNTY shall continue to collect MLID and URMD
assessments for this area and transfer them as provided for in this agreement under.
Exhibits 2 and 4.
12. All other actions reasonably necessary to carry out the authority given to
CITY as provided for in the attached Exhibits.
IV. OPERATING PROCEDURES AND RELATIONSHIPS
The COUNTY and CITY agree:
A. Operational Expenses.
It is the parties' intent that this agreement be revenue neutral to the CITY. This
agreement attempts to be revenue neutral through fund transfers and the collection of fees
by CITY. It is expected that the fees gathered will cover the cost of those services
including some enforcement or appeals of CITY decisions. However, if those funds
transferred or fees gathered are not sufficient to pay for the services required by this
agreement, the COUNTY shall in addition to adjusting the fees as stated in Section
III(B)(7), reimburse CITY for the any deficiency remaining at the end of each quarter.
Such reimbursement shall be made within thirty (30) days of a quarterly meeting or within
thirty (30) days of the end of any fiscal year whichever is applicable. To be eligible to
receive such payments for the deficiency, the CITY is required to:
1. Meet quarterly with COUNTY and give accounting records of the CITY's
fund for these services that describe the cost of services and the revenues
generated during the quarter. CITY shall also make estimates about levels of
services, staffing requirements and revenue projections for the next quarter. The
quarterly meetings shall aid in determining the fund transfers that are set in the
annual meeting as described below.
2. Maintain a separate fund for all accounting functions relative to the area
covered by this agreement.
Be in compliance with all other provisions of this agreement.
URBAN SERVICES INTERGOVERNMENTAL. AGREEMENTfFIGARD/WASHINGTON COUNTY
Page 7
i
B. Defense of Appeals/Liability
As described in paragraph II(A)(11) above, it is contemplated by the parties that
LUBA or other-court actions may arise from the review of development in the area subject
to this agreement. The CITY will undertake responsibility for defense of such actions.
The cost of such defense will be borne by either the CITY or the COUNTY or a
combination thereof as provided for in this paragraph.
1. When the CITY receives notice from any party that a LUBA appeal, court
action or other legal review of the CITY's authority is contemplated by that party,
the CITY Community Development Director shall immediately notify the
COUNTY Land Use and Transportation Director in writing. The Directors or
their designee(s) shall confer to determine the source and nature of the requirement
resulting in the disputed and the CITY's decision on whether or not to defend the
action. The COUNTY shall have 10 days from the date of the CITY's notice in
which to decide whether it wants the CITY to proceed in the defense of such
action. If the COUNTY requests that the CITY proceed to defense where the
CITY would otherwise elect not to do so, the COUNTY will fully reimburse the
CITY for all costs of defense including direct and indirect costs. Similarly, if the
CITY believes it is important to proceed the defense where the COUNTY does
not concur, the CITY will absorb the cost. In cases where both parties believe it is
important to defend an action, the parties will share equally the cost of defense.
The same process shall apply in all subsequent appeals from the LUBA or court
decision. In all other cases, the parties will resolve the dispute over cost using the
dispute resolution methods contained in this agreement. The parties here
recognize that the intent is that the party creating the cost should bear
responsibility for that cost.
2. For constitutional takings claims and inverse condemnation claims,
including civil rights actions alleging a taking County shall indemnify City for
City's acts or omissions to a maximum aggregate amount of $500,000 on a
"claims-made" basis. Claims must arise from acts or omissions occurring during
the term of this Agreement and be actually received no later than two years after
termination of this Agreement. This shall include defense costs, attorney fees and
any settlements or judgments. Indemnification shall be on a 50/50 basis with the
City participating in the first dollar of defense costs and any judgment or
settlement, including attorney fees. In no event shall either party be responsible for
any punitive damages awarded against the other party, its officers, employees or
agents.
URBAN SERVICES WTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEtitENTrrIGARD/WASMNGTON COUNTY
Page 3
In the event any portion of the area covered by this Agreement annexes, County's
obligation under this paragraph shall cease as to any claims arising from the
annexed area after annexation is final. County shall bear full responsibility for
claims resulting from its approval of development prior to the effective date of this
Agreement.
3. Consistent with the hold harmless provisions of paragraph VI, it is the
parties' intention that each be responsible for liability arising out of its own
employees' acts.
:4.. On July 1, 1997, County shall create a 5500,000 insurance reserve ford or
account dedicated exclusively to satisfying its obligations under paragraph (2)
above. In no event shall County be responsible for any costs, damages, judgments,
settlements, or attorney fees arising from or relating to the acts or omissions of
City except to the extent of the remaining balance of this reserve. Notwithstanding
termination of this Agreement, this reserve shall continue until either of the
following occurs: the fund balance is expended in defense or on behalf of City as
described in paragraph (2) above or all claims against City filed within two years of
termination of this Agreement are finally resolved and paid.
Each fiscal year, County staff shall make a recommendation to the Board regarding
availability of funds to replenish the reserve and the Board shall seriously consider
such action. City may terminate this Agreement on 90 days' notice if County
declines to replenish the reserve in any future budget year.
5. City shall confer with County at the first opportunity if City has reason to
think that a land use application or decision of City is likely to be contested beyond
the City's internal review process or may give rise to a claim for damages.
C. Dispute Resolution.
To the extent possible, COUNTY and CITY staff will observe the rules, standards
and regulation reference by this agreement. In the case of a dispute about the terms of this
agreement or how to effectuate this agreement, the COUNTY and CITY staff will
immediately refer the dispute to the COUNTY Director of Land Use and Transportation
and the CITY Community Development Director to resolve the dispute. If the Directors
have not resolved the dispute within 30 days, the dispute shall be forwarded to the CITY
and COUNTY Administrators. If the matter cannot be resolved by the Administrators
within 30 days, it shall be forwarded to the Council and the Board for resolution. If the
matter still cannot be resolved, the arbitration provisions of ORS 190.710-190.800 shall
apply.
URBAN SERVICES INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT/T'[GARD/WASHINGTON COUNTY
Page )
D. ' Amendments.
Requested amendments to this intergovernmental agreement shall be submitted in
writing to both the COUNTY Land Use and Transportation Director and to the CITY
Community Development Director with adequate explanations as to the necessity of such
amendment. A decision by the Directors to either reject or accept the amendments must
be made in no more that 30 days from the receipt of the request. After review and
approval by the Directors, the amendments must be submitted to the CITY Manager and
COUNTY Administrator for signature or presentation to the Board and Council.
The CITY Council and the COUNTY Board of County Commissioners grant
authority to the CITY Manager and the COUNTY Administrator to make such changes as
needed to this intergovernmental agreement to effectuate the intent and purpose of this
agreement. For amendments that will result in a financial impact, the amount of the
financial impact needs to be within the Administrator's and Manager's delegated authority.
Any amendments outside this authority need to be made by the Council and the Board and
must be submitted to the Board and Council within 90 days of the Administrator's or
Manager's receipt of the proposed amendments.
E. Annual Review.
COUNTY and CITY will jointly conduct an annual review of this
intergovernmental agreement beginning November 1 and ending no later than January 30
of each year to allow adjustments to upcoming COUNTY and CITY budgets. Such joint
review shall include an evaluation of the effectiveness of the agreement, procedures, and
the delivery of service in meeting the requirements of the agreement. The annual review
shall also evaluate the costs of providing the services, reimburse the CITY for operating
deficits described in section IV(A), and adjust such moneys that are transferred to the
CITY to render services under this agreement. The CITY and COUNTY agree to take
the results of this meeting, along with any amendments to the agreement made pursuant to
paragraph D above, to their respective Board and Council within 30 days of such meeting.
The Board and Council agree to take action on such request consistent with this
agreement.
F. COUNTY will make changes in Article VIII of its Community Development Code
(CDC) necessary to adopt changes in the CITY's development code as it applies to the
area. COUNTY and CITY shall work together to ensure that all CITY code changes are
promptly adopted by COUNTY.
G. The parties agree to coordinate planning efforts under Metro's 2040 Growth
Concepts at a time mutually agreeable to the parties.
URBAN SERVICES tNTERGOVERNIvIENTAL AGREEN ENTITIGARDAVASEINGTON COUNTY
Page 10
H. City shall maintain $3,000,000 aggregate general, professional and automotive
liability insurance for claims arising from its acts and omissions in the area subject to this
Agreement. County, its officers, employees and agents shall be named as an additional
insured (except that County need not be named on professional insurance if that is
unavailable). County shall pay to City the first year premium to a maximum of $5,000.00.
The premium for subsequent years shall be paid by City as an operating expense.
City shall periodically monitor the insurance market to determine if coverage for takings
and inverse condemnation claims is available. If so, County may elect to pay the premium
for said insurance in lieu of maintaining the insurance reserve provided for herein.
1. In the event City elects to terminate this Agreement prior to the end of the five (5)
year term as provided for in section V City agrees to return to County any equipment
purchased with proceeds furnished by the County pursuant to this Agreement.
V. TERM OF AGREEMENT
A. This agreement shall be effective upon execution by both parties and shall remain
in effect for five (5) years, or until terminated by mutual agreement of both parties. By
mutual agreement, this agreement may be extended for another five (5) years. Either party
may terminate this agreement between the dates of March 1 and July 1 of any year with 90
days written notice to the other party.
B. The CITY shall be responsible for processing all permits or applications for this
area which have not been completed at the time of the termination of this agreement.
C. Except for County's obligation to indemnify City for City's acts or omissions, the
parties' obligations as regards LUBA cases and to indemnify and defend each other
pursuant to Section VI shall survive termination as to any claim arising from the actions of
either party during the term of this Agreement. County's obligations to indemnify City for
City's acts or omissions shall survive only to the extent of claims within two years of the
termination of this Agreement and to the extent of funds remaining in the insurance
reserve.
URBAN SERVICES INTERGOVERNMENTAL. AGREEMENTIFIGARDAVASHINGTON COUNTY
Pa,e I i
VI. HOLD HARMLESS
A. Subject to the limitations .of liability for public bodies set forth in the Oregon Tort
Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300, CITY shall hold harmless and indemnify COUNTY,
its Commissioners, employees, and volunteers agents against any and all claims, damages,
losses and expenses (including all attorney(s) fees and costs), arising out of or resulting
from CITY's performance of this agreement where the loss or claim is attributable to the
acts or omissions of the CITY, except as provided in section (IV)(B).
B. Subject to the limitations of liability for public bodies set forth in the Oregon Tort
Claims Act, OILS 30.260 to 30.300, County shall hold harmless and inde(nnify.CTTY, its
Councilors, employees, agents and volunteers against all claims, damages, losses and
expenses (including all attorney fees and costs) arising out of or resulting from
COUNTY's performance of this agreement where the loss or claim is attributable to the
acts or omissions of COUNTY, except as provided in section (IV)(B).
VII. GENERAL PROVISION
A. SEVERABILITY: COUNTY and CITY.agree that if any term or provision of this
contract is declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal or in conflict with any
law, the validity of the remaining terms and provisions shall not be affected, and the rights
and obligations of the parties shall be construed and enforced as if the contract did not
contain the particular term or provision held to be invalid.
B. THIS AGREEMENT CONSTITUTES THE COMPLETE AND EXCLUSIVE
STATEMENT OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES RELEVANT TO
THE PURPOSE DESCRIBED HEREIN AND SUPERSEDES ALL PRIOR
AGREEMENTS OR PROPOSALS, ORAL OR WRITTEN, AND ALL OTHER
COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE PARTIES RELATING TO THE SUBJECT
MATTER OF THIS CONTRACT. NO WAIVER, CONSENT, MODIFICATION OR.
CHANGE OF TERMS OF THIS CONTRACT WILL BE BINDING ON EITHER
PARTY EXCEPT AS A WRITTEN ADDENDUM SIGNED BY AUTHORIZED
AGENTS OF BOTH PARTIES.
This agreement commences on June 2, 1997. All applications or request for permits received by
OnT rKr*rV 4,,.....een A.f 1 1 nn~ _a r.. 1 1 nn7w-1111 t _-r _ a rv c-- _n _
\..V VI`11 l VGIWGGII lvlay 1, 1771 an .4u June 1, 177/ VG 11a11J1G1lGU to CIL lul all remai ing
actions necessary for those applications and permits.
URBAN SERVICES INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTMGARD/WASHINGTON COUNTY
Page 12
In WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have executed this Urban Services Intergovernmental
Agreement on the date set opposite their signatures.
WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
By
Linda Peters `J
Chair, Board of County Commissioners
Date ?Ito a, 12 1
f) "
Approved as to form:,
County ounser
pj 6/icnv90061 /ac6 vp In i g7(S n/97)
VCIT OF TIGARD
By
Jim Nicoll '
N Yor, City of Tigard
Date
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
APPROVED WASHINGTON COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MINUTE ORDER N 1..7.-.1..7 3
DATE .
(MER[ OF THE ARP
URBAN SERVICES FNTERGOVERN ENTAL AGREENENTM ARD/WASHINGTON COUNTY
Pale 13
I
~ o J
Q F
O
Z
w Q
• m
w
Q]
® Affected Area
U t m GmvM Bandar,, A ►
N
E
~C
L
I J
~l
T rd ;
I,~G m
D NALD ST \
-T
I
III
• •
EXHIBIT 2
Urban Road Maintenance District
Responsibility for services under the URMD shall not take effect until November 1, 1997. CITY
shall provide maintenance of urban roads in the area to keep existing roads in the URMD
consistent with the work program to be negotiated each year and the funding provided by the
District. CITY shall be responsible for responding to citizen complaints from the area concerning
road conditions and maintenance. The funding for the URMD will expire in 1998/1999. The last
day for the imposition of assessment for this District will be November 1999. Once the funding
expires, the duties for urban road maintenance ;ender this District and under this agreement will
cease.
City shall keep a subaccount of all expenditures for repairs and maintenance performed under this
fund.
City shall receive payment from the County from the UMRD in the amount of $1,620.00 as of
November 1, 1997. This money is for minor maintenance duties for the remainder of the 1996-
1997 year. There after, the City shall receive an amount that will be negotiated between the
parties for a work program for the following year. This amount shall be established during the
annual meeting of the parties as specified in the agreement. Payment shall be made by COUNTY
within thirty days of July 1 each year for the duration of the agreement.
EXHIBIT 3
Road Fund Maintenance
CITY shall assume responsibility for road maintenance duties described in this exhibit as the Road
Maintenance Program on November 1, 1997. CITY shall provide maintenance of roads in the
area to keep existing roads consistent with the work program to be negotiated each year and the
funding provided by the District. CITY shall be responsible for responding to citizen complaints
from the area concerning road conditions and maintenance.
CITY shall keep a subaccount of all expenditures for repairs and maintenance performed under
this fund.
CITY shall receive payment from the COUNTY from the COUNTY Road Fund in the amount of
$41,343.00 as of November 1, 1997: Thereafter, the CITY and COUNTY shall mutually agree
upon a work program and an amount to be received for such work program for the following
fiscal year at the annual meeting of the parties.
Road Maintenance Prog m
There are 44.95 miles of road to be maintained in the transfer area with 30.07 miles of local roads,
4.24 miles of minor collector roads and 10.64 miles of major collector roads respectively. Road
maintenance is scheduled and service requests prioritized as per the county's road prioritization
policy. The COUNTY's Road Maintenance Priority Policy provides guidelines for allocation of
our maintenance funds. These guidelines shall be used to help establish the yearly work program
for the area. The policy defines various maintenance activities by type, ranging from legally
mandated services, to total reconstruction. A numerical value is assigned to each activity based
on the road's functional classification with major arterial and collectors given first priority for
general maintenance. Minor collectors and local roads are given a higher level of service with the
passing of the UR VM program, however without renewal the maintenance service on these roads
will follow our priority matrix and receive emergency and hazard abatement only.
Emergencies and hazards are given top priority, for example all stop signs and stop ahead signs
damaged or down are repaired within two hours of notification. For collector roads that are both
in area- as well as the unincmmoriti-d nnrtinn of Wachinotnn ('n,,nti, ('TTV c1-11 assume A.11
- - --------r---^- r ..i a . ouuu Lull
maintenance responsibility. (Example: Bull Mountain Road). Development affecting the arterials
and collector streets within the transfer limits has already happened and appears to be "built out".
Traffic Operations Program
Traffic Operations provides support to include analyzing traffic control device warrants to insure and
enhance roadway safety. Also provided are traffic analysis, studies, reports and pre-marking services
as necessary. Traffic Operations staff support the Neighborhood Traffic Calming. Program by
conducting traffic studies and obtaining traffic count data. Staff work with individuals and citizen
groups to address neighborhood livability issues and implement traffic enhancements. A $5,452.00
allowance has been provided for this purpose. Neighborhoods requesting traffic calming shall be
ranked and prioritized as per CITY's current method. An amount of $7,500 shall be used for projects
that would normally qualify under CITY's program. Funds may also be used for education tools such
as readerboards, banners, and community outreach.
The Mountain Gate Subdivision has requested traffic calming in their neighborhood. Under
COUNTY's current program they do not rank high enough to qualify for funding. The Homeowners
Association has verbally agreed to pay for traffic calming improvement themselves. It is
recommended that CITY complete any necessary staff work and engineering development to get this
project off the ground.
Night Road Logs: To ensure a high standard for maintenance of signs and striping, CITY shall
conduct night road logs checking for reflectivity once a year on arterials and collector roads. This
is accomplished with 2 employees working as a team, covering an average of 55 lane miles per night
or 7 lane miles per hour.
Street Name Limits
115th Avenue Fonner Street to City Limits
121 st Avenue Walnut Street to Gaarde
Street
131 st Avenue Beef Bend Road to Fischer
Road
150th Avenue Sunrise Lane to Beef Bend
Road
Bull Mountain Road Highway 99W to Beef Bend
Road
Fischer Road Highway 99W to 131 st
Avenue
Fonner.Street Walnut Street to 121st
Avenue
Gaarde Street City Limits to 121 st Avenue
Mileage
00.18
01.66
01.06
02.32
06.18
01.36
01.66
00.89
Roshak Road Bull Mountain Road to End 00.56
of AC
Tiedeman Avenue Walnut Street 00.03
Walnut Street 106th Avenue to 135th 03.16
Avenue
19.06 lane miles
Station Counts: In order to track traffic trends and monitor the level of service, CITY shall conduct
counts at the following established stations. Average cost during the 95/96 fiscal year was $63.97
per count.
Street Name Cross Street Location
150th Avenue Beef Bend Road .3N #439
Bull Mountain Road 1 SOth Avenue .1 E #403
Walnut Street 122nd Avenue IW #438
Traffic Maintenance Program
Striping and Stencils: No work proposed for this fiscal year.
Vegetation Program: No work proposed for this fiscal year. A minimal payment of $3,000.00
for incidental brush removal.
Drainage Program
Drainage requests, including emergency situations are currently handled by the Unified Sewerage
Agency. The major collector roads are not scheduled for ditching until the 1999/2000 fiscal year-
However, an $6,000.00 budget will be transferred to CITY for drainage maintenance, emergency
response and additional citizen requests not currently identified by USA- The following work
program shall be completed for the upcoming fiscal year by CITY-
Bull Mountain Road- Ditch south from Roshack Road and install rip-
rap in ditch as needed.
9
•
2. Bull Mountain Road: Reshape ditch and install shoulder rock at
11670 SW Bull Mountain Road mailbox installed in flowline of ditch, light
flooding of property.
3. 150th Avenue: Light ditch work at 14400 SW 150th Avenue,
homeowner mailbox located in ditch blocking flow.
4. 121 st Avenue & Walnut Street: Spot ditching at inlets and outlets of
the driveways and road crossing tiles.
EXHIBIT 4
Maintenance Local Improvement Districts
As of May 1, 1997, CITY shall impose a condition on any land use application requiring the
creation of roads, for the establishment of a Maintenance Local Improvement District. CITY
responsibility for service under the Maintenance Local Improvement Districts shall not commence
to November 1, 1997. As of this date, CITY shall provide maintenance of roads covered under
applicable Maintenance Local Improvement Districts in the area following a work program as
mutually.agreed to by the parties. CITY shall be responsible for responding to citizen complaints-
from the area concerning road conditions and maintenance.
CITY shall keep a subaccount of all expenditures for repairs and maintenance performed under
this fund.
CITY shall not receive any payments from the COUNTY from the Maintenance Local
Improvement Districts for 1996-1997 year. There after, the CITY shall receive an amount that
will be negotiated between the parties for a work program for the following year. This amount
shall be established during the annual meeting of the.parties as specified in the agreement.
Payment shall be made by COUNTY within thirty days of July 1 each year for the duration of the
agreement.
EXHIBIT 5
Traffic Impact Fees
CITY shall assume responsibility for collecting traffic impact fees for the area as of date of the
agreement. Funds shall be spent for projects in the area as determined by CITY working with the
COUNTY in conjunction with the Washington County Coordinating Committee. A work
program shall be established for the area by the parties for the area at the annual meeting of the
parties. Funds allocated srom the TI.F shall used to finance the agreed upon; work program.
CITY shall keep a subaccount of all expenditures for improvement made under this fund.
CITY shall collect these fees and shall be responsible for all accounting and auditing for these
fees.
EXHIBIT 6
Code Enforcement
CITY shall assume responsibility for code enforcement as of the date of this agreement. CITY
shall enforce codes and respond to citizens complaints and prosecute violators for violations of
Washington County Code Articles VIII and IX (Ordinances 487 and 488). CITY shall keep a log
of all complaints and the response time to these complaints as well as the results of the
complaints. CITY shall keep all fines levied from violators.
County shall pay a base amount of $15,000.00 with this amount being transferred to the CITY on
May 1, 1997. At the end of the fiscal year 1997-1998, if CITY has responded to more than 71
cases in the area COUNTY shall pay an additional amount of $150.00 for each case not to exceed
$30,000.00.
0 0
EXHIBIT 7
Building Permits
City shall issue all building permits, for all activities requiring permits under the Building Codes
and other CITY codes as adopted by COUNTY and perform all inspections in a timely manner.
CITY shall assume responsibility for completing existing permits on the date of this agreement
and all building permits requested for the area thereafter.
County shall pay City $200,000.00 to complete existing building permits. These funds shall be
transferred as of the day of the agreement.
CITY shall keep an accounting of all funds collected and expenses in maintaining the building
inspection program. Funds collected by CITY shall be used to operate the CITY building permit
program for the area.
pjb/acm19006I/acdvp1meO(41( (/97)
APPENDIX 1
File, Document & Computer Data Transfers
♦ FEMA Maps
♦ County Zoning Map
♦ County Assessor's Tax Maps (two sets)
♦ Subdivision Plats
♦ Address maps
♦ County Assessor's Property Owners List (including those within 250' of
Urban Services Boundary)
♦ County Comp Plan Map and Transportation Plan Map (Modification of
original Transportation Plan to identify all new collectors and proposed
collectors.)
♦ Benchmark Map & Description (include both Tigard and Urban Services
Area)
♦ Full-size Street Map with index and parcels (include both Tigard and
Urban Services area)
♦ As-built Drawings for Public Streets and Subdivisions
♦ Electronic Download of Sierra Permit Information
♦ Digital Orthophotos
♦ Detailed Natural Resource Information (if available)
♦ Identification of Special Problem Areas
♦ Contact names and phone numbers of Washington County staff
0 0
"EXHIBIT C" WRITTEN TESTIMONY
(Applicant's materials and pertinent correspondence
filed with Hearings Officer prior to Public Hearing.)
a!
City of Tigard
Community (Development
ShapingA Better Community
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon 97223
(503) 639-4171
Fax 684-7297
TO: Larry Epstein, Tigard Hearings Officer
FROM: Mathew Scheidegger, Assistant Planners
DATE: July 10, 2000
SUBJECT: Appeal of Director's Decision to approve with conditions the City of Tigard
Partition, Casefile No.:rMLP2000-00003:
BACKGROUND:
v
On June , 2000,. the Director issued a decision to approve, subject to conditions, P
request for a minor land partition to,-partition the 1.74 acre lot located at 13230 SW 154
Avenue to allow for the sale of a 1.35 acre portion of the property, which was originally
acquired and now not necessary for the access to the recently competed Menlor -
reservoir located on the adjacent Tax Lot.
On June 16, 2000, the- -appellant filed an appeal of certain conditions of approval _
contained in the decision. The related criteria in the Community Development Code,-a
summary of the conditions appealed, and staffs response follows.
Section 18.420 (Land Partitions), 18.705 (Access Egress & Circulation) And 18.765
(Off-Street Parking And Loading Requirements):
ADDellant's Statement:
The applicant's proposed public right-of-way will serve as a trailhead by which citizens
from all over the community will enter a vast greenspace enlarging the use to which the
partition will be put and increasing access and egress requirements. Round Tree
Estates Subdivision borders the proposed partition to the north. The subdivision's
Declaration of Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions includes parking restrictions. The
/application fails to address the resulting increased traffic and changes in access and
egress needs that this proposed partition creates.-, The proposed partition does not meet
the requirements of Sections 18.420.050.A.2 and 18.420.050.A.5 which requires the
applicant to ensure there . are adequate public facilities (e.g. off-street parking,
-emergency vehicle access, etc.) available to serve the proposed public right-of-way.
Furthermore, the applicant has not provided for safe and efficient vehicle access and
egress and general circulation within the site for public access as stipulated in Section
- 18.705.010 and 18.705.020.A-
APPEAL OF MLP2000-000031CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154TH Page 1 OF 5
7/24/00 Public Hearing Memo To The Hearings Officer
• •
Staff Response:
The appellant points out in his appeal that off-street parking is not addressed in the
Director's decision based on Section 18.420.050.A.2 and 5-, which deals with public
facilities. According to the decision, public facilities deals with "Street and Utility
Improvements," "Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths," etc. IOff-Street parking and
emergency vehicle access is associated with 18.765 "Off-Street Parking & Loading
Requirements." Section 18.765 is not associated with this land-partition, because there is
no construction associated with this decision. After further review of the Off-Street
Parking standards, staff can not find any criterion that applies to the partitioning of vacant
land. Chapter 18.705.020 "Applicability of Provisions" states that the following
categories are applicable to the provisions of this chapter:
New construction. At the time of the erection of a new structure within any
zoning district, off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with
Section 18.765.070.
Expansion Of Existing Use. At the time of an enlargement of a structure, which
increases the on-site vehicle parking requirements, off-street vehicle parking will
be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070.
Change of Use. When an existing structure is changed from one use to another
use.
When Site Design Review Is Not Required. Where the provisions of Chapter
18.360, Site Development Review, do not apply, the Director shall approve,
approve with conditions, or deny a plan submitted under the provisions of this
chapter by means of a Type I review as governed by Section 18.390.030.
Building Permit Conditions. The provision and maintenance of off-street
vehicle parking and loading spaces are the continuing obligation of the property
owner.
Emergency vehicle access has been addressed in the decision under Section 18.705.
"Access,, Egress and Circulation." The appellant has stated that the applicant has not
provided for safe and efficient vehicle access and egress and general circulation within
the site. The director's decision addresses access, egress and circulation and finds
there is,-adequate access to the reservoir. Access is- not proposed on the large--;
undeveloped portion of the partition because there is no new development yet to access,
There is an access available to the partitioned property. However, -the access on the
portion of the property that leads to the Menlor Reservoir complies with the criteria of
Chapter 18.705, The existing access drive is 18 feet wide and has 18 feet of aving.
The standard calls for one, 15-foot-wide drive with 10 feet of pavement. Staff finds the
existing condition of the access drive to meet the minimum standard.
Section 18.765 (Off-Street Parking And Loading Requirements):
Appellant's Statement:
The applicant must provide a vehicle parking area with adequate capacity to ensure the
traffic carrying capacity of nearby streets and to minimize any hazardous conditions on
the site and at access points. As stated above, Round Tree Estates' CC&R's includes
parking restrictions. As stated in the application, the applicant intends to developa
public trailhead by which the community will access a large planned greenspace. TT h
appplicant's proposal does not meet the off-street parking requirements of Sections
18.765.010.A and 18.765.010.13.
Staff Response:
As mentioned above, Section 18.765 is not associated with land-partitions because there
is no construction associated with this decision: After further review of the Off-Street
Parking standards, staff can not find any criterion that applies to the partitioning of land.
The Appellant addresses CC&R's for Round Tree Estates, the.City does not enforce
CC&R s. Unless, City parking restrictions are imposed by the City Council, all public
streets that are un-posted are available for parking.. In addition,'the-trailhand trail head
were not part of the proposal under review.
APPEAL OF MLP2000-00003/CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154TH Page 2 OF 5
7/24/00 Public Hearing Memo To The Hearings Officer
•
Section 18.790 (Tree Removal):
•
Appellant's Statement:
To encourage the preservation of trees, Section 18.790.030.A specifically requires a tree
plan for the removal and protection of trees for any partition. The proposed trailhead
includes several trees that have not been identified for either preservation or removal as
required by Section 18.790.030.B.3. Are there trees to be protected? Removed? Since'
this will be a nature path and the codelencourages the preservation of trees, I assume
pedestrians and trail construction and maintenance vehicles will be expected to neatly
tiptoe around there trees? The applicant believes a tree plan "does not appear
applicable" when the existence of trees in the middle of the proposed nature path and
the code specifically requires one.
Staff Response:
Staff has addressed tree mitigation in the decision by placing a condition that deed
restrictions be placed on the parcels that requires Sensitive Lands review prior to any
trees being removed on slopes 25 percent or greater. !No development is proposed on
the 1.35-acre parcel at this point. When development is proposed, a tree plan and
mitigation plan will be required to be provided.
Section 18.810 (Street & Utility Improvement Standards):
Appellant's Statement:
The proposed public right-of-way for the 154th street extension is not wide enough,
because it does not consider the steep slope and daylight drain immediately adjacent to
the east sidewalk. The steep slope will erode across the sidewalk and imppair ppedestrian
safety and water quality. Sections 18.810.010,_ 18.810.020.E1.g and 18.810.020.E.1.j
require the consideration of steep slope and pedestrian safety issues for the
implementation of public facilities such as public streets. The public right-of-way must be
;wide enough to neutralize the impact of the steep slope and_daylight drains.,
There is a daylight. drain in the northeast corner-of the subject site, and there is a
drainage ditch along the entire northern property line. The pro ert is steeply sloped
from south to north. The applicant must develop a drainage facility large enough to
accommodate all u~ppstream drainage including properties to the east and south as per
Section 18.810.100.C. Yet, no easement for public storm drains or surface water
drainage patterns are shown on the plan. They are required per Sections 18.810.010,-
18.810 050.B_ and 1.8.810.100.A.3 for the implementation of public drainage facilities-
including storm drains and a water retention pond.
The applicant has constructed the 154th Street extension; however, the proposed nature
trail has not been completed. Section 18.810.070.A.2 of the Community Development
Code requires the applicant to construct all sidewalks including the proposed nature path
trailhead. This must be completed' before approval, or be cited as a condition of the
application's approval, to ensure useable public access.
Staff Response:
The width of the right-of-way (ROW) is not set by topographical constraints adjacent to a
roadway. It is agreed that there is a slope to contend with, and it will have to be
addressed when the applicant (in this case the City) submits construction plans for the
roadway extension. This is no different than any other project. Likely, the City will need
to establish a slope easement on the east side of the roadway to cover the graded slope
that will exist behind the ROW.
The design of the roadway extension may also- necessitate a retaining wall- on the east
side of the roadway. The City will enforce their public improvement design standards
which control how steep a slope can be behind the sidewalk. If the slope requirements
can not be met, then a retaining wall would be required. The design of the retaining wall,
if required, would be -.reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department prior to
construction. It may also have to be reviewed by the Building Division if the height is
over four feet. -
APPEAL OF MLP2000-00003/CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154TH Page 3 OF 5
7/24/00 Public Hearing Memo To The Hearings Officer
Regarding storm drainage, as was stated in the Director's decision, the larger parcel may
eventually be developed. It is not receiving development approval as a result of this
partition. The purpose of this partition is simply to break-off the larger parcel and
establish the smaller parcel for access to the City's reservoir. ,"It- is not practical to
establish a storm drainage system on the larger parcel at this time because it is not
certain how that parcel will be developed. % The shadow plat shown on the application
plan was merely for purposes .of .illustrating how the site could be developed in the future,,
and howa roadway could be extended. A future developer may have other ideas. Since
the larger parcel will not be developed as a- part =of this partition, it will not generate any
new storm water runoff,, and is therefore, exempt from addressing storm water issues at
this time. x
When the 'larger parcel is developed in the future, the City will require that a storm
drainage system be designed and installed to address the City's and USA's regulations
concerning upstream and downstream water runoff.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
Appellant's Statement:
The applicant claims the Minor Partition "appears to Meet" most of the applicable review
criteria because the partition does not involve any development. However, Section
18.120.030.A.56 clearly defines Development as a material change in the use of land or
a division of land into two or more parcels, including partitions. To ensure the best
interests of the surrounding neighborhood and community are met it is in the public's
interest to ensure that the issues cited above are addressed. And, these issues must be
resolved now while the property remains in the public domain before the subject property
is partitioned.
Beyond what the Code requires, as outlined in the previous pages, common sense tells
us the proposed public right-of-way for the planned nature path and trailhead
establishing access to the public greenspace is clearly inadequate and will necessitate
the dedication of the entire 1.35 acre parcel to public ownership for storm water
retention, greenspace and trailhead access.
Neighborhood doesn't want their streets plugged with the parked cars of
birdwatchers, walkers and joggers. Off-street parking is required.
Trees exist in the proposed narrow public right-of-way.
The south end of the proposed nature trail and the north end of Tax Lot 2S105DB-
00400 are too steep to allow a path to be constructed straight up the property. A
path built straight up the property would not be easily traversed by pedestrians
and would ensure significant erosion problems.
A six-foot corridor is not sufficient for the safety and comfort of pedestrians.
Six feet will not allow mechanized equipment access to the proposed trail for
construction and maintenance.
The Clute property has significant drainage problems that have not been
addressed.
Section 18.810.050.13 requires 15 feet for utility easements.
A water pipe is given a 15-foot easement. The applicant's proposed nature trail on a six-
foot right-of-way suggests citizens are not worthy of the same consideration given a
water pipe!
This application appears to have been completed with little thought and consideration for
the planned greenspace, the immediate neighborhood and the Tigard Community. The
applicant's proposed partition involves a material change in the purpose in which the
land is intended to be used and the application fails to comply with all Applicable Review
Criteria. I oppose the proposed partitioning of the Clute Property (Tax Lot 2S105DB-
00600) on that basis.
APPEAL OF MLP2000-00003/CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154TH Page 4 OF 5
7/24/00 Public Hearing Memo To The Hearings Officer
•
0
Staff Response:
Sta iff fnds that the criterion stated in the appellant's appeal has been addressed in the
decision as noted in the above responses. According to Ed Wagner of the Public Works
Department, the land belongs to the Water District. Therefore, it is not the City's land to
transfer over to public property. Mr. Ramsey's bullet points have been addressed in the
above responses.
The property in question, is zoned R-25, which is designated, "High Density Residential"
on the Comprehensive Plan. Under the definition of the R-25 zoning designation, "The
R-25 zoning district is designed to accommodate existing housing of all types and new
attached single-family and multi-family housing units at a minimum lot size of 1,480
square feet. A limited amount of neighborhood commercial uses is permitted outright
and a wide range of civic and institutional uses are permitted." Mr. Ramsey states in the
last paragraph of his appeal that, "the applicant's proposed partition involves a material
change in the purpose in which the land is intended to be used and the application fails
to comply with all Applicable Review Criteria." According to the Tigard Development
Code, the owner of the subject property has not altered the intent of the property in any
way. A partition is a legal and permitted land use application within the City of Tigard.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit "A" - Copy of the Director's Decision
Exhibit "B" - Appeal Form and Related Material
I:\cu rpln\mathew\mlp\mlp2000-00003.appeal.doc
APPEAL OF MLP2000-00003/CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154TH Page 5 OF 5
7/24/00 Public Hearing Memo To The Hearings Officer
City of Tigard
Community Devefopment
Shaping ,4 Better Community
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon 97223
(503) 639-4171
Fax 684-7297
TO: Larry Epstein, Tigard Hearings Officer
FROM: Mathew Scheidegger, Assistant Planner
DATE: July 10, 2000
SUBJECT: Appeal of Director's Decision to approve with conditions the City of Tigard
Partition, Casefile No.: MLP2000-00003.
BACKGROUND:
On June 16, 2000, the Director issued a decision to approve, subject to conditions, P
request for a minor land partition to partition the 1.74 acre lot located at 13230 SW 154
Avenue to allow for the sale of a 1.35 acre portion of the property, which was originally
acquired and now not necessary for the access to the recently competed Menlor
reservoir located on the adjacent Tax Lot.
On June 16, 2000, the appellant filed an appeal of certain conditions of approval
contained in the decision. The related criteria in the Community Development Code, a
summary of the conditions appealed, and staffs response follows.
Section 18.420 (Land Partitions), 18.705 (Access Egress & Circulation) And 18.765
(Off-Street Parking And Loading Requirements):
Annellant's Statement:
The applicant's proposed.public right-of-way will serve as a trailhead by which citizens
from all over the community will enter a vast greenspace enlarging the use to which the
partition will be put and increasing access and egress requirements. Round Tree
Estates Subdivision borders the proposed partition to the north. The subdivision's
Declaration of Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions includes parking restrictions. The
application fails to address the resulting increased traffic and changes in access and
egress needs that this proposed partition creates. The proposed partition does not meet
the requirements of Sections 18.420.050.A.2 and 18.420.050.A.5 which requires the
applicant to ensure there . are adequate public facilities (e.g. off-street parking,
emergency vehicle access, etc.) available to serve the proposed public right-of-way.
Furthermore, the applicant has not provided for safe and efficient vehicle access and
egress and general circulation within the site for public access as stipulated in Section
18.705.010 and 18.705.020.A.
APPEAL OF MLP2000-00003/CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154TH Page 1 OF 5
7/24/00 Public Hearing Memo To The Hearings Officer
• •
Staff Res onset
The appe Iant points out in his appeal that off-street parking is not addressed in the
Director's decision based on Section 18.420.050.A.2 and 5, which deals with public
facilities. According to the decision, public facilities deals with "Street and Utility
Improvements," "Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths," etc. Off-Street parking and
emergency vehicle access is associated with 18.765 "Off-Street Parking & Loading
Requirements." Section 18.765 is not associated with this land-partition because there is
no construction associated with this decision. After further review of the Off-Street
Parking standards, staff can not find any criterion that applies to the partitioning of vacant
land. Chapter 18.765.020 "Applicability of Provisions" states that the following
categories are applicable to the provisions of this chapter:
New construction. At the time of the erection of a new structure within any
zoning district, off-street vehicle parking will be provided in accordance with
Section 18.765.070.
Expansion Of Existing Use. At the time of an enlargement of a structure, which
increases the on-site vehicle parking requirements, off-street vehicle parking will
be provided in accordance with Section 18.765.070.
Change of Use. When an existing structure is changed from one use to another
use.
When Site Design Review Is Not Required. Where the provisions of Chapter
18.360, Site Development Review, do not apply, the Director shall approve,
approve with conditions, or deny a plan submitted under the provisions of this
chapter by means of a Type I review as governed by Section 18.390.030.
Building Permit Conditions. The provision and maintenance of off-street
vehicle parking and loading spaces are the continuing obligation of the property
owner.
Emergency vehicle access has been addressed in the decision under Section 18.705.
'Access, Egress and Circulation." The appellant has stated that the applicant has not
provided for safe and efficient vehicle access and egress and general circulation within
the site. The director's decision addresses access, egress and circulation and finds
there is adequate access to the reservoir. Access is not proposed on the larger
undeveloped portion of the partition because there is no new development yet to access.
There is an access available to the partitioned property. However, the access on the
portion of the property that leads to the Menlor Reservoir complies with the criteria of
Chapter 18.705. The existing access drive is 18 feet wide and has 18 feet of paving.
The standard calls for one, 15-foot-wide drive with 10 feet of pavement. Staff finds the
existing condition of the access drive to meet the minimum standard.
Section 18.765 (Off-Street Parking And Loading Requirements):
Appellant's Statement:
The applicant must provide a vehicle parking area with adequate capacity to ensure the
traffic carrying capacity of nearby streets and to minimize any hazardous conditions on
the site and at access points. As stated above, Round Tree Estates' CC&R's includes
parking restrictions. As stated in the application, the applicant intends to develop a
public trailhead by which the community will access a large planned greenspace. The
applicant's proposal does not meet the off-street parking requirements of Sections
18.765.010.A and 18.765.010.13.
Staff Response:
As mentioned move, Section 18.765 is not associated with land-partitions because there
is no construction associated with this decision. After further review of the Off-Street
Parking standards, staff can not find any criterion that applies to the partitioning g of land.
The Appellant addresses CC&R's for Round Tree Estates, the City does n enforce
CC&R s. Unless, City parking restrictions are imposed by the City Council, all public
streets that are un-posted are available for parking. In addition, the trail and trailhead
were not part of the proposal under review.
APPEAL OF MLP2000-00003/CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154TH Page 2 OF 5
7/24/00 Public Hearing Memo To The Hearings Officer
•
Section 18.790 (Tree Removal):
0
Appellant's Statement:
To encourage the preservation of trees, Section 18.790.030.A specifically requires a tree
plan for the removal and protection of trees for any partition. The proposed trailhead
includes several trees that have not been identified for either preservation or removal as
required by Section 18.790.030.B.3. Are there trees to be protected? Removed? Since
this will be a nature path and the code encourages the preservation of trees, I assume
pedestrians and trail construction and maintenance vehicles will be expected to neatly
tiptoe around there trees? The applicant believes a tree plan "does not appear
applicable" when the existence of trees in the middle of the proposed nature path and
the code specifically requires one.
Staff Response:
Staff has addressed tree mitigation in the decision by placing a condition that deed
restrictions be placed on the parcels that requires Sensitive Lands review prior to any
trees being removed on slopes 25 percent or greater. No development is proposed on
the 1.35-acre parcel at this point. When development is proposed, a tree plan and
mitigation plan will be required to be provided.
Section 18.810 (Street & Utility Improvement Standards):
Appellant's Statement:
The proposed public right-of-way for the 154th street extension is not wide enough,
because it does not consider the steep slope and daylight drain immediately adjacent to
the east sidewalk. The steep slope will erode across the sidewalk and impair pedestrian
safety and water quality. Sections 18.810.010, 18.810.020.E1.g and 18.810.020.E.1.j
require the consldera ion of steep slope and pedestrian safety issues for the
implementation of public facilities such as public streets. The public right-of-way must be
wide enough to neutralize the impact of the steep slope and daylight drains.
There is a daylight drain in the northeast corner of the subject site, and there is a
drainage ditch along the entire northern property line. The pro ert y is steeply sloped
from south to north. The applicant must develop a draina a facility large enough to
accommodate all upstream drainage including properties to he east and south as per
Section 18.810.100.C. Yet, no easement for public storm drains or surface water
drainage patterns are shown on the plan. They are required per Sections 18.810.010,
18.810.05 B and 18.810.100.A.3 for the implementation of public drainage facilities
including storm drains and a water retention pond.
The applicant has constructed the 154th Street extension; however, the proposed nature
trail has not been completed. Section 18.810.070.A.2 of the Community Development
Code requires the applicant to construct all sidewalks including the proposed nature path
trailhead. This must be completed before approval, or be cited as a condition of the
application's approval, to ensure useable public access.
Staff Response:
The width of the right-of-way ROW). is not set by topographical constraints adjacent to a
roadway. It is agreed that here is a slope to contend with, and it will have to be
addressed when the applicant (in this case the City) submits construction plans for the
roadway extension. This is no different than any other project. Likely, the City will need
to establish a slope easement on the east side of the roadway to cover the graded slope
that will exist behind the ROW.
The design of the roadway extension may also necessitate a retaining wall on the east
side of the roadway. The City will enforce their public improvement design standards
which control how steep a slope can be behind the sidewalk. If the slope requirements
can not be met, then a retaining wall would be required. The design of the retaining wall,
if required, would be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department prior to
construction. It may also have to be reviewed by the Building Division if the height is
over four feet.
APPEAL OF MLP2000-00003/CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154TH Page 3 OF 5
7/24/00 Public Hearing Memo To The Hearings Officer
• 0
=n, storm drainage; as was stated in the Director's decision, the larger parcel may
lly be developed. It is not receiving development approval as a result of this
partition. The purpose of this partition is simply to break-off the larger parcel and
establish the smaller parcel for access to the City's reservoir. It is not practical to
establish a storm drainage system on the larger parcel at this time because it is not
certain how that parcel will be developed. The shadow plat shown on the application
plan was merely for purposes of illustrating how the site could be developed in the future,
and how a roadway could be extended. A future developer may have other ideas. Since
the larger parcel will not be developed as a part of this partition, it will not generate any
new storm water runoff, and is therefore, exempt from addressing storm water issues at
this time.
When the larger parcel is developed in the future, the City will require that a storm
drainage system be designed and installed to address the City's and USA's regulations
concerning upstream and downstream water runoff.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
Appellant's Statement:
The applicant claims the Minor Partition "appears to Meet" most of the applicable review
criteria because the partition does not involve any development. However, Section
18.120.030.A.56 clearly defines Development as a material change in the use of land or
a division of land into two or more parcels, including partitions. To ensure the best
interests of the surrounding neighborhood and community are met it is in the public's
interest to ensure that the issues cited above are addressed. And, these issues must be
resolved now while the property remains in the public domain before the subject property
is partitioned.
Beyond what the Code requires, as outlined in the previous pages, common sense tells
us the proposed public right-of-way for the planned nature path and trailhead
establishing access to the public greenspace is clearly inadequate and will necessitate
the dedication of the entire 1.35 acre parcel to public ownership for storm water
retention, greenspace and trailhead access.
Neighborhood doesn't want their streets plugged with the parked cars of
birdwatchers, walkers and joggers. Off-street parking is required.
Trees exist in the proposed narrow public right-of-way.
The south end of the proposed nature trail and the north end of Tax Lot 2S105DB-
00400 are too steep to allow a path to be constructed straight up the property. A
path built straight up the property would not be easily traversed by pedestrians
and would ensure significant erosion problems.
A six-foot corridor is not sufficient for the safety and comfort of pedestrians.
Six feet will not allow mechanized equipment access to the proposed trail for
construction and maintenance.
The Clute property has significant drainage problems that have not been
addressed.
Section 18.810.050.13 requires 15 feet for utility easements.
A water pipe is given a 15-foot easement. The applicant's proposed nature trail on a six-
foot right-of-way suggests citizens are not worfhy of the same consideration given a
water pipe!
This application appears to have been completed with little thought and consideration for
the planned greenspace, the immediate neighborhood and the Tigard Community. The
applicant's proposed partition involves a material change in the purpose in which the
land is intended to be used and the application fails to comply with all Applicable Review
Criteria. I oppose the proposed partitioning of the Clute Property (Tax Lot 2S105DB-
00600) on that basis.
APPEAL OF MLP2000-00003/CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154TH Page 4 OF 5
7/24/00 Public Hearing Memo To The Hearings Officer
0 0
Staff Res onset
Sta In s that the criterion stated in the appellant's appeal has been addressed in the
decision as noted in the above responses. According to Ed Wagner of the Public Works
Department, the land belongs to the Water District. Therefore, it is not the City's land to
transfer over to public property. Mr. Ramsey's bullet points have been addressed in the
above responses.
The property in question, is zoned R-25, which is designated, "High Density Residential"
on the Comprehensive Plan. Under the definition of the R-25 zoning designation, "The
R-25 zoning district is designed to accommodate existing housing of all types and new
attached single-family and multi-family housing units of a minimum lot size of 1,480
square feet. A limited amount of neighborhood commercial uses is permitted outright
and a wide range of civic and institutional uses are permitted." Mr. Ramsey states in the
last paragraph of his appeal that, "the applicant's proposed partition involves a material
change in the purpose in which the land is intended to be used and the application fails
to comply with all Applicable Review Criteria." According to the Tigard Development
Code, the owner of the subject property has not altered the intent of the property in any
way. A partition is a legal and permitted land use application within the City of Tigard.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit "A" - Copy of the Director's Decision
Exhibit "B" - Appeal Form and Related Material
l Acurpln\mathew\mIp\mlp2000-00003. appeal. doc
APPEAL OF MLP2000-00003/CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154TH Page 5 OF 5
7/24/00 Public Hearing Memo To The Hearings Officer
0. 0
NOTICE OF TYPE 11 DECISION
SECTION I.
FILE NAME:
CASE NO:
"URBAN SERVICE AREA"
MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2000-00003
CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154TH
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF TIGARD
Community Owekl p ent
Sh+aping.4 Better Community
120 DAYS = 07/28/2000
APPLICATION SUMMARY
Minor Land Partition (MLP)
"URBAN SERVICE AREA"
CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION 0- 154th
MLP2000-00003
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Minor Land Partition approval to partition the 1.74 acre
lot to allow for the sale of a 1.35 acre portion of the property, which was originally
acquired and now not necessary, for access to the recently completed Menlor
Reservoir located on the adjacent Tax Lot.
APPLICANT: City of Tigard Water Department
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, OR 97223
OWNER: Same
ZONING
DESIGNATION: R-25: Medium High-Density Residential District. The R-25 zoning district is
designed to accommodate existing housing of all types and new attached single-
family and multi-family housing units at a minimum lot size of 1,480 square feet.
LOCATION: 13230 SW 154th Avenue; WCTM 2S105DB, Tax Lot 00600. The subject site is
located south of SW Scholl's Ferry Road, at the end of SW 154th Avenue.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.390 (Decision-Making Procedures);
18.420 (Land Partitions); 18.510 (Residential Zoning Districts); 18.705 (Access
Egress and Circulation); 18.715 (Density Computations); 18.790 (Tree Removal);
IlQ 4lin /G`+.,,,.+ an.,A 11+;1;+., C+.,n.J.,..ln~
I U.U IV `.7L1 eet U VLIIIL~/ 1111PI VVGI I IGI IL VLQI IUCII U01.
SECTION 11. DECISION
Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Di'rector'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 V.
r
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154'" PAGE 1 OF 14
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PARTITION PLAT,
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS'SHALL'BE SATISFIED:
Zubmit~ie Bowing t-olNe--Planning Department-(M-aThew Scheidegger 639-4 x or
review and approval:
Submit a plan indicating how tax lot 600 being screened from the access drive of the newly
partitioned lot according to 18.745.040 and implement the required plantings.
2. Record a deed restriction on the parcels that requires Sensitive Land review prior to any trees
being removed on slopes 25 percent or greater.
i THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
Submit to tfi-e-~-ngineering DepartmentlBrian Rager, 639-4TT~, ext. 3"or review and approval:
3. The applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a mylar copy of the recorded final
plat.
R_ THE' FOLLOWING CONDITIONS" SHALLIBE SATISFIED
PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT:
S-ubmit to t >f ngineering' DepartmentIBrian Rager, 63S:4-T1, ext-.M or review and approval-
4. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall have construction plans submitted for review
and approval by the City Engineer for the proposed extension of SW 154 Avenue.
5. The final plat shall show a right-of-way dedication for SW 154th Avenue of 38 feet, as shown on
the preliminary plan.
6. The applicant's construction drawings shall indicate that full width street improvements, including
traffic control devices, mailbox clusters, concrete sidewalks, driveway aprons, curbs, asphaltic
concrete pavement, sanitary sewers, storm drainage, street trees, streetlights, and underground
utilities shall be installed for SW 154 Avenue. Improvements shall be designed and constructed
to local street standards.
7. A rofile of SW 154th Avenue shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site
shpowing the existing grade and proposed future grade through the larger parcel as shown on the
applicant's Future Street Plan.
8. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan
shall conform to 'Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance
Handbook, February 1994."
9. The applicant's final plat shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to
the City's Global Positioning System (GPS) geodetic control network. These monuments shall be
on the same line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary.
Along with the coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground
measurements to grid measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates
can be established by:
GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey.
By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
Final Plat Application Submission Requirements:
A. Submit for City review four (4) paper copies of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor
licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 1547" PAGE 2 OF 14
•
•
B. The final plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by
the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.25), Washington County, and by the City of Tigard.
C. The right-of-way dedication for SW 154Avenue shall be made on the final plaD. NOTE: Washington County will not begin their review of the final plat until they receive a
letter from the City Engineering Department indicating: 1) that the City has reviewed the
final plat and submitted comments to the applicant's surveyor, and 2) that the applicant
has either completed any public improvements associated with the project, or has at least
obtained the necessary public improvement permit from the City to complete the work.
E. Once the City and County have reviewed the final plat, submit two mylar copies of the final
plat for City Engineer's signature.
THIS APPROVAL 1S VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN EIGHTEEN (18)
MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION NOTED UNDER
THE PROCESS AND APPEAL SECTION OF THIS DECISION.
SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
prQpertHistor\L
The subject parcel is located within the Urban Service Area. The property is designated Medium
Density Residential on the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map. No previous rand use actions for this
parcel appear in the City's land use records.
Sjte Information and Proposal Descriptions
The subject property is approximately 1.74
partition the 1.74-acre lot to allow for the sal
acquired and now not necessary for access
adjacent Tax Lot.
acres. The City's Public Works Department proposes to
e of a 1.35-acre portion of the property, which was originally
to the recently completed Menlor Reservoir located on the
SECTION IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS
The City mailed notice to property owners within 500 feet of the subject site providing them an
opportunity to comment. Twelve (12) letters were received addressing the City's land partition.
Concerns throughout the responses to the 'project have common issues. Dedicating the 1.35-acre
portion of the partition to parks or greenspace. Other issues include privacy, tree retention and property
values.
Staff response:
According to zoning districts, the parcel of land in question is located in an R-25 zone, which is
designated "Medium-Hi h Density Residential." Every property surrounding the subject site is
designated medium-high density residential. The subject property is zoned R-25 which allows
development. The City cannot deny an application based on possible affects to property values.
Leaving the rest of the property as open space has been discussed with the Tigard Public Works
Department and the Water District. Ownership by the District is separate from the City's ownership.
According to Ed Wagner of the Public Works Department, "the property is owned by the Water service
area, not the City, a fact by law. The District has chosen to sell the property for budgeting purposes.
We need to sell this land to buy another reservoir site at a higher elevation, to provide water to those
residents-water is a little more important than parks when it comes to fires and human needs. If we get
another piece of property and we get the pump station located then, and only then, would we consider
selling water land at the Menlor site to the City for park land. The City is providing a nature path to
extend to Menlor Park property to the south.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154' PAGE 3 OF 14
Tree mitigation is an issue not only for the residents but with the City as well. The existing trees on the
site are on a slope that is greater then 25%. According to the Ti and Development Code, slopes greater
than 25% require Sensitive Lands Review (SLR). However, his does not mean no trees would be
removed. The City's Development Code does allow for tree removal, but has strict mitigation measures
to insure that tree replacement is implemented. Tree mitigation and sensitive land review will be
required for any proposed development.
SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Land Partitions (18.420):
The proposed partition complies with all statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations;
The proposed partition will comply with all statutory and ordinance requirements and regulations at the
time of proposed development as demonstrated both by the analysis presented within this administrative
decision and by this application and review process through compliance with the conditions of approval.
Therefore, this criterion is met.
There are adequate public facilities are available to serve the proposal;
Public facilities are discussed in detail later in this decision. Based on the analysis provided herein, staff
finds that adequate public facilities are available to serve the proposal. Therefore, this criterion is met.
All proposed improvements meet City and applicable agency standards; and
The public facilities and proposed improvements are discussed and conditioned later in this decision.
Improvements will be reviewed as part of permit process and during construction at which time the
appropriate review authority will insure that City and applicable agency standards are met. Based on the
analysis in this decision, staff finds that this criterion is met, or will be met as conditioned.
All proposed lots conform to the specific requirements below:
The minimum width of the building envelope area shall meet the lot requirement of the applicable
zoning district.
There is no minimum lot width required for the R-25 zoning district. Therefore, this standard does not
apply.
The lot area shall be as required %the applicable zoning district. In the case of a flag lot, the
accessway may not be included in e lot area.
The minimum lot- area requirement in the R-25 zoning district is 3,050 square feet. The proposed
partition creates two lots that are 0.39 and 1.35 acres respectively. Therefore, this criterion has been
satisfied.
Far_h Int rranforl thrnunh the nartitinn nrnCP_ss shall front a nublic right-of-wav by at least 15 feet
or have a legally recor ed minimum 1 -foot wide access easement.
The proposed partition plat demonstrates that both lots will have at a minimum, 35 feet of frontage onto
SW 154 after dedication which will be a public street. Therefore, this criterion is satisfied.
Setbacks shall be as required by the applicable zoning district.
No development is proposed with .this application. The existing structure on the newly partitioned lot will
not be in violation of applicable setbacks. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
When the partitioned lot is a flag lot, the developer may determine the location of the front yard,
provided that no side yard is less than 10 feet. Structures shall generally be located so as to
maximize separation from existing structures.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154- PAGE 4 OF 14
Neither lot will be considered as a flag lot. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable.
A screen shall be provided along the property line of a lot of record where the paved drive in an
accessway is located within ten feet of an abutting lot in accordance with Sections 18.745.040.
Screening may also be required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to provide usable
outdoor recreation areas for proposed development.
The access drive to the existing house on the newly partitioned lot is within ten feet of the proposed
partition line. A plan showing tax lot 600 being screened from the access drive of the newly partitioned
lot according to 18.745.040 will be conditioned.
The fire district may require the installation of a fire hydrant where the length of an accessway
would have a detrimental effect on fire-fighting capabilities.
Fire district regulations will be reviewed at time of development. Therefore, this criterion does not apply.
Where a common drive is to be provided to serve more than one lot, a reciprocal easement
which will ensure access and maintenance rights shall be recorded with the approved partition
map.
The newly created lot (1.35 acres) is being partitioned from Tax Lot 600 because it is not needed for
access to the reservoir property located on Tax Lot 400. Therefore, the access road, located on Tax Lot
600, will be used primarily for accessing the Menlor Reservoir. The City owns both tax lots. Therefore,
a reciprocal easement is not necessary.
Any accessway shall comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 18.705, Access, Egress and
Circulation.
Standards regarding the access road associated with this partition and Chapter 18.705 are discussed
later in this decision.
Where landfill and/or development is allowed within or adjacent to the one-hundred-year
floodplain, the city shall require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for
greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions at a suitable
elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway with the floodplain in accordance
with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan.
The partitioned lot is not adjacent to a one-hundred-year floodplain. Therefore, this standard does not
apply.
An application for a variance to the standards prescribed in this chapter shall be made in
accordance with Chapter 18.370, Variances and Adjustments. The applications for the partition
and variance(s)/adjustment(s) will be processed concurrently.
No variances or adjustments have been submitted with this application. Therefore, this standard does
not apply.
FINDING: Based on the analysis above, not all of the criteria have been fully met. If the applicant
meets the condition listed below, the standards will be -met.
CONDITION:
Submit a plan indicating how tax lot 600 being screened from the access drive of the
newly partitioned lot according to 18.745.040 and implement the required planting.
Besiden fial Zonina Districts M 8.5W.
Development standards in residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2-below:
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 15e PAGE 5 OF 14
•
•
TABLE 18.510.2 - (Cont'd.)
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES
STANDARD
MF DU'
SF DU"
Minimum Lot Size
- Detached unit
1.480 sq.ft.
3,050 sq.ft per unit
- Attached unit
1,480 sq.ft.
- Duplexes
6,100 sq.ft. or 3,050 sq.ft per
- Boarding, lodging, rooming
6,100 sq.ft.
unit
house
Average Lot Width I
None
None
Minimum Setbacks
- Front yard
20 ft.
15 ft.
- Side facing street on
comer & through lots
20 ft.
10 ft.
- Side yard
10 ft.
5 ft. [1]
- Rear yard
20 ft.
15 ft.
- Side or rear yard abutting more
restrictive zoning district
30 ft.
30 ft.
Distance between property line
and garage entrance
20 ft.
20 ft.
Maximum Height I
45 ft.
I 45 ft.
Maximum Lot Coverage [2] I
80%
I 80%
Minimum Landscape Requirement 1
20%
1 20%
[1] Except this shall not apply to attached units on the lot line on which the units are attached.
[2] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces.
' Multiple-family dwelling unit
Single-family dwelling unit
Access. Earess and Circulation (18.705):
Continuing obligation of property owner:
The provisions and maintenance of access and egress stipulated in this title are continuing
requirements for the use of any structure or parcel of real property in the City.
The property owner will be required to maintain the subject site's access, egress,. or circulation.
Access Plan Requirements:
No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and approved as
provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be
fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the applicant with
detailed information about this submission requirement.
The applicant has submitted a site plan showing access, egress and circulation requirements that are to
scale. Staff has reviewed the site plan and found it consistent with the criteria found in this chapter.
Joint Access:
Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same
access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or parcels of
land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title, provided: 1) Satisfactory
legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, . leases or contracts to
establish the joint use; and 2) Copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are placed on
permanent file with the City.
Joint access is not proposed nor required for this application. The access located on the reduced tax lot
600 is for the sole purpose of accessing the reservoir property. Therefore, joint access would not be
beneficial to property owners or to the Cig .
Public Street Access:
All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030H and 18.705.0301 shall
connect directly witha public or private street approved by the City for public use and shall be
maintained at the required standards on a continuous basis.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 1547' PAGE 6 OF 14
All access and egress connect directly to SW 154th Avenue, which will be dedicated by the City of Tigard
for public use.
Curb Cuts:
Curb cuts shall be in accordance with Section 18.810.030N.
Curb cuts will be discussed under Section 18.810 later in this decision.
Required Walkway Location:
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; Within all attached housing (except two-family
dwellings- and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling shall be connected by
walkway - o the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities;
Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossinggs
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; 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.
No development is proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard can be deferred until time of
development.
Inadequate or Hazardous Access:
Applications for building permits shall be referred to the Commission for review when, in the
opinion of the Director, the access proposed:
Would cause or increase existing hazardous traffic conditions; or
Would provide inadequate access for emergency vehicles; or
Would in any other way cause hazardous conditions to exist which would constitute a
clear and present danger to the public health, safety, and general welfare. Direct
individual access to arterial or collector streets from single-family dwellings and duplex
lots shall be discouraged. Direct access to major collector or arterial streets shall be
considered only if there is no practical alternative way to access the site. In no case shall
the design of the service drive or drives require or facilitate the backward movement or
other maneuvering of a vehicle within a street, other than an alley. Single-family and
duplex dwellings are exempt from this requirement.
The existing access for the newly partitioned lot will not increase hazardous traffic conditions, hinder
emergency vehicles or cause hazardous conditions in any way. The access drive meets the standards
set for access drives within residential zones. The existing drive is 18 feet wide and has 18 feet of
paving. Therefore, this standard has been satisfied.
Minimum Access Requirements for Residential Use:
Vehicular access and egress for single-family, duplex or attached single-family dwelling units
on individual lots and multi-family residential uses shall not be less than as provided in Table
18.705.1 and Table 18.705.2; Vehicular access to multi-family structures shall be brought to
within 50 feet of the ground floor entrance or the ground floor landing of a stairway, ramp, or
elevator leading to the dwelling units. Private residential access drives shall be provided and
maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code; Access drives in
excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around
of fire apparatus by one of the following: A circular, paved surface having a minimum turn
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154'" PAGE 7 OF 14
radius measured from center point to outside edge of 35 feet; A hammerhead-configured,
paved surface with each leg of the hammerhead having a minimum depth of 40 feet and a
minimum width of 20 feet; the maximum cross slope of a required turnaround is 5%. Vehicle
turnouts, (providing a minimum total driveway width of 24 feet for a distance of at least 30
feet), may be required so as to reduce the need for excessive vehicular backing motions in
situations where two vehicles traveling in. opposite directions meet on driveways in excess of
200 feet in length; Where permitted, minimum width for driveway approaches to arterials or
collector streets shall be no less than 20 feet so as to avoid traffic turning from the street
having to wait for traffic exiting the site.
No new vehicular access or development is associated with this application. Therefore, this standard
can will deferred until time of development.
FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the Access, Egress, and Circulation
Standards have been met.
Densitv Computations (18.715):
The standards for Density computation deal with the intensity of residential land uses, usually stated as
the number of housing units per acre. Because no development is associated with this application, this
section will be deferred until time of development.
Landscaoina and Screenina (18.745):
The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development of new structures, remodeling existing
structures, and where landscaping is non-conforming. Therefore, this section can be deferred until time
of development.
Off-Street Parkina and Loadina Reauirements (18.765):
This chapter deals with parking requirements for new construction, expansion of existing uses or a
change of use. This application deals specifically with partitioning of property. Therefore, the standards
of 18.765 will be deferred until time of development.
Tree Removal (18.790):
Prior to any building on-site, a tree mitigation plan will be required. Refer to condition #2 of the
Conditions of Approval section.
Vjsual Clearance Areas (18.795):
This Chapter requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property
adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private
driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or
temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height The code provides that
obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight
8' feet in height (8) (trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight
8 feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a
30-foot distance points with a straight line.
No obstructions have been proposed. where the access located on the newly proposed parcel connects
to SW 154 Avenue or the existing access to the residential,dwelling located on the original Tax Lot 600.
FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the Vision Clearance Standards have been
met.
PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS
Street And Utilitv 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:
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 1547" PAGE 8 OF 14
Streets:
Improvements:
Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be
improved in accordance with the TDC standards.
Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion
of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC.
Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths:
Section 18.810.030(E) requires a local residential street to have a 42 to 50-foot right-of-way width
and a 24 to 32-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking,
sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees.
This site lies adJjacent to SW 154th Avenue, which is classified as a local residential on thR City of Tigard
Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 38 feet of ROW on SW 154 Avenue north
of this site, according po the most recent tax assessor's map. This narrow ROW was approved by
Washington .County as a part of the Round Tree Estates project. Because the narrow ROW is an
existing condition, it does not make sense to require a wider ROW on this parcel. Therefore, Staff
recommends that the 38-foot ROW be continued into this site.
SW 154t' Avenue is currently fully improved to the north of this site. The City is proposing to extend this
street partially into the site in order to provide a standard driveway approach to give access through the
smaller parcel to Tax Lot 400 (site of a City reservoir). The extension is shown to be built to City.
standards to match the existing improvements.
Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets:
Section 18.810.030(F) states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of
existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This
section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future
division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be
developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to
adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as
through streets at such time as the. adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be
constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall not be removed until
authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction
cost. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for
stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length.
Theapplicant's applicant's plan provides a Future Street Plan that shows conceptually how the extension of SW
154th Avenue could be extended easterly into the larger parcel for future development. The smaller
parcel will not be developed, as it contains the access road to Tax Lot 400 (the reservoir site).
The conceptual plan is acceptable, but if and when this parcel does develop, a hammerhead turnaround
will not be approved. A circular bulb would need to be provided at the end. It is feasible for a bulb to be
provided, but it may mean that the larger parcel will yield fewer lots than what is shown on the Future
Street Plan.
Cul-de-sacs:
Section 18.810.030.K states that a cul-de-sac shall be no more than 200 feet long, shall not
provide access to greater than 20 dwelling units, and shall only be used when environmental or
topographical constraints, existing development pattern, or strict adherence to other standards
in this code preclude street extension and through circulation:
All cul-de-sacs shall terminate with a turnaround. Use of turnaround configurations other
than circular, shall be approved by the City Engineer; and
The length of the cul-de-sac shall be measured along the centerline of the roadway from
the near side of the intersecting street to the farthest point of the cul-de-sac.
If a cul-de-sac is more than 300 feet long, a lighted .direct pathway. to an adjacent street
may be required to be provided and dedicated to the City.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154'" PAGE 9 OF 14
0 .0
The Future Street Plan shows that an east/west street from SW 154th Avenue will likely be extended into
the larger of the two new parcels. Due to steep slopes in excess of 25%, it is likely that this east/west
extension will need to terminate as a cul-de-sac. The overall lenath of the cul-de-sac would be
approximately 300 feet, as measured from the intersection of SW 154' Avenue/SW Firtree Drive. Due
to the constraints of the adjacent topography and the fact that there are no feasible street connections to
the east due to existing development, it is likely that Staff would support a future variance to the cul-de-
sac length standard.
Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030(6) requires all local streets which abut a
development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded
by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to
other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to
redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. In the case of
environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show
that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some
reasonable street connection.
The City has shown that the only feasible extension of the public street is to the east. This partition does
not preclude that extension.
Grades and Curves:
Section 18.810.030.M states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on. arterials, 12% on
collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may
have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet), and:
Centerline radii of curves shall not be less than 700 feet on arterials, 500 feet on major
collectors, 350 feet on minor collectors, or 100 feet on other streets; and
Streets intersecting with a minor collector or greater functional classification street or
streets intended to be posted with a stop sign or signalization, shall provide a landing
averaging five percent or less. Landings are that portion of the street within 20 feet of the
edge of the intersecting street at full improvement.
The street extension proposed by this application appears to meet City standards.
Block Designs:
Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with
due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of
needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of
limitations and opportunities of topography.
Block Sizes:
Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed
1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except:
Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of
water or, pre-existing development or;
For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or
railroads.
For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access.
No street is proposed to be constructed with this application. Therefore, no City blocks will be formed as
a result of this partition. Street patterns can be more adequately reviewed at time of development.
Therefore, this standard has been met.
Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements
or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between
connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or
topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards
in the code.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 15471 PAGE 10 OF 14
The City of Tigard has proposed to provide a 6-foot wide corridor along the proposed partition property
line for future use as access to a City owned pathway located on Tax Lot 400. This is to allow access to
adjoining park property not related to street connections.
Lots - Size and Sha e:
Section 18.810.060rA) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width,
unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district.
The newly partitioned lot is a total of 58,050 square feet, 258 feet in depth and 225 feet wide. Therefore,
this lot is in compliance with the criterion above.
Lot Frontage:
Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private
streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c applies, which
requires a parcel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded
access easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit, the
frontage shall be at least 15 feet.
Tax Lot 600 has 35 feet of frontage ono SW 154"' Ave. The proposed partitioned property will have a
total of 73 feet of frontage onto SW 154" Avenue. Therefore, this standard has been met.
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.
Sidewalks will be required on both sides of the proposed street extension. The applicant's plan indicates
compliance with this standard.
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 appears to be an existing public sanitary sewer line in SW 154th Avenue. This line will need to be
extended further south in the new street extension to allow for future service to adjacent development of
the larger parcel. Final review of this line extension shall be by Unified Sewerage adjacent (USA).
Storm Drainage:
General Provisions:
Section 18.81 states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water
and flood water runoff.
Accommodation of Upstream Drainage:
Section 18.810.100.C 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).
The existing storm drainage line in SW 154t' Avenue must be further extended with the roadway
improvements. Final review of this extension shall be by USA.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 15471 PAGE 11 OF 14
Effect on Downstream Drainage:
Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional
runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and
Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for
improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of
additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction
Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by. 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 breek 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.
This partition will not result in an increase in impervious surfaces. If the larger parcel is developed in the
future, then these provisions will apply.
Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways:
Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed
bikeways. identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for
the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way.
This standard has been satisfied under Section 18.810.040.62.
Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.13 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.
No development is proposed with this application. Therefore, this standard is deferred until time. of
development.
Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.C states that the minimum width for bikeways within the
roadway is five feet er bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from
the road is eight feet .
The City proposes to dedicate a six-foot easement for a pedestrian nature path access to connect to an
existing path on the adjacent Menlor property. The above section calls for a bike path to be eight feet
unless it is within the roadway. This application is proposing an access to a pedestrian trail and does not
address the access as a bikeway. Therefore, this standard does not apply.
Utilities:
Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric
communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed
underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and
meter cabinets which may be laced above round temporary utility service facilities during
construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 550,000 volts or above, and:
The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide
the underground services,
The City reserves the righi 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.C 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 utillies which are not under round will serve the development and the
approval authority determines that the cost and Vechnical 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 develo ment for which under-grounding would result in the
placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154T" PAGE 12 OF 14
applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which
are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of
under-grounding.
There are no existing overhead utility lines on SW 154th Avenue. All new utilities shall be placed
underground.
FINDING: Based on the analysis above, not all of the criteria of the Public Facility Section have been
fully met. If the applicant meets conditions 4 through 11 listed under the "Conditions of
Approval" section of this decision, the standards will be met.
ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT
STANDARDS:
Public Water System:
The pubic water line-in SW 154th Avenue must be extended along with the roadway improvements.
Storm Water Qualit.
as agreed-to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) re ulations established by the
THEM
Unified Sewera a Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards at by Resolution and
Order No. 00-7j 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.
Since this partition will not increase the amount of impervious surfaces, this section will not apply. If the
larger parcel .Is developed in the future, these provisions will apply.
Grading and Erosion Control
USA-Design ancl-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.
The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb five or more
acres of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an
NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site
and/or building permit.
The public improvement plans must include a grading plan.
Survev Reauirements:
The appplican s fin a shall contain State Plane Coordinates on two monuments with a tie to the City's
Global Positioning System (GPS) geodetic control network. These monuments shall be on the same
line and shall be of the same precision as required for the subdivision plat boundary. Along with the
coordinates, the plat shall contain the scale factor to convert ground measurements to grid
measurements and the angle from north to grid north. These coordinates can be established by:
GPS tie networked to the City's GPS survey.
By random traverse using conventional surveying methods.
SECTION VI. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS
City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it.
City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and has no objections to it.
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154°1 . PAGE 13 OF 14
SECTION VII. AGENCY COMMENTS
Unified Sewerage Agency Comments were received in the form of a letter. USA's issues have been
addressed under the street and utility improvement section of this decision. Sensitive Lands, Division of
State Lands/Corps of Engineers comments have not been addressed due to no development being
proposed with this application. Sensitive Land issues will be addressed at time of development.
SECTION VIII. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION
Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to:
X The applicant and owners
X Owner of record within the required distance
X Affected government agencies
Final Decision:
THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON JUNE 2, 2000 AND BECOMES
EFFECTIVE ON JUNE 17, 2000 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED.
Appeal:
The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. All persons entitled to notice or who are
otherwise adversely affected or aggrieved by the decision as pprovided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may
appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development
Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director
within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule
and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard,
Oregon 97223.
Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be
confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the
comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may
be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that
may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body.
THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON JUNE 16, 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 A03) 639-4171.
June 2. 2000
PREPARE B177 w Schei"dger DATE
Assistant Planner
June 2. 2000
APPROVED BY: Ri6ard Bewersdo, DATE
Planning Manager
i:\c u pln\Mathew\mlp\mlp2000-00003.dec
NOTICE OF DECISION MLP2000-00003 CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION @ 154'" PAGE 14 OF 14
•
AREA FOR DEDICATION
TO CITY (jICNT-OF-WI~Y J - -
PRQPOSED TL; 600~I ! ! ROPOSED AREA FOR t
I PARTITION LINE I I 7~.,~ DEDICATION TO CITY
CK.oo.7 In i / RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR FUTURE
t NATURE.PATH ACCESS TO
_ to ,7-) la 77oq In noq R wap y' C I TY OWNED TAX LOT 400
it
(IL Ono C. S
\ r
"Z `lWl
I(a 1700'
EXTENS ON.IPROPOSFD
u,.- aI
r
..J ~
L -L
\ i
CITY OF TIGARD '
-r
TAX LOT 600 i r
1.74 ACRESI J
I I _ ,
22S' ~"aaa+++ ~
m 300
• - - - al (A 1-0p A
FIGURE T
UARCN
I R 171101 •7 I 2000
19
• _ - ---1 - _ _ - i . _r-i "r77 a O_r T-- _ CITY OF MCLA RD
d I PROPOSED TAXL.OT 600
PARTITION SITE PLAN
NOTM,
1 UAPAOT NO 2SIO50BO06W 7r
t SEE FIGURE 2 FOR CONCEPTUAL RE-PARTITION SHADOW 7L`~ 'ipV .ZOO
PLAN
t CITY OF TIGARD PARTITION ,
Cm W MAR. CITY OF RD
SITE PLAN N (MLP)2000-00003
(Map is not to scale)
t
l
1
~g
I ♦ C
T-
Sw BU llSNI
rE _EEN
_ 7
-L--j
t; BRISTLECONE WAY
I I I
RIV
~ - E---- 1 1 I I I I
_ - I
i I
S 777,
I I I I
I I I a I
1 I
ECONE
BRISTL
En
~ ►-I l
Community Development
N
O
JIB
gp~~\
w~l
j WAY TF
g I iv
w
to _BQ1lNDIBFE W D
J
J - _ _ _ _ m a
N3
- w
TT--le T~~4R
- - -I-' I]
SUBJECT
TAX LO
I
r JVV_
I
~I I
I
Plot date
GEOGRAVNIC IRlOR-TIOR 313TEY
VICINITY MAP
"URBAN SERVICE AREA"
M LP2000-00003
CITY OF TIGARD
PARTITION @
154TH AVENUE
N
0 100 200 300 600 500 Feet
1'= 380 feet
City of Tigard
Information on this map is for general location only and
should be verified with the Development Services Division.
13125 SW Hall Blvd
Tigard, OR 97223
(503) 639-1171
httpJt~v.ci.tiga rd.or. us
Apr 21, 2000; C:UnagiCWIAGIC03.APR
• • EXHIBIT B
APPEAL FILING FORM
FOR LAND USE DECISIONS TYPE II
CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX.' (503) 6847297
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 phone/fax listed at the top of this form.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Property Address/Location(s) and Name(s) of the Application Being
Appealed:
How Do You Qualify As A Party?:
Appellant's Address:
City/State:
Day Phone Where You Can Be Reached:/
Scheduled Date Decision Is To Be Final:
Date Notice of Final Decision Was Given:
Specific Grounds For Appeal or Review:
Zip:
1
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
Case No.(s):pa~r-pG~
Case Name(s): -
,Receipt' No.'.. J Rio k
A&Iication Accepted BK:
Date:
Approved As To Form By:
Date:
Denied' . As To"For in by-.
Date:
Rev; 10/3196 IAcurplnkna'sters%0peal.doc
REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS
✓ Application Elements Submitted:
Appeal Filing Form (completed)
Filing Fee (based on criteria below)
> Director's Decision to Hearings Officer $ 250.00
D Expedited Review (deposit) $ 300.00
> Hearing Referee $ 500.00
> Planning Commission/Hearing's Officer to City Council $1,745.00
Transcript)
Signature(s) of Appella (s):
I r
APPEAL FILING FORM FOR LAND USE DECISIONS I: tcurplnlrnasterMappeal (OVER FOR ADDITIONAL WRITING SPACEI
PAGE 1 OF 1
NOTICE OF APPEAL:
DECISION MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2000-00003, City of Tigard,
APPEALED: Partition @ 154th Avenue; Notice Issued June 2, 2000; Effective
June 17, 2000
FROM: Jaime C. Ramsey
15367 SW Fir Tree Drive '
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Hm: (503) 590-3318 7]
Wk: (503) 625-2560 x.417
e-mail: ramsev@teleoort.com JUN 16 2000
DATE: June 15, 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
TO: Richard Bewersdorff, Planning Manager
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon 97223
During the public comment period I submitted a letter (copy attached) citing Specific
Review Criteria that the Applicant's proposal and narrative failed to address. The
Director's decision failed to acknowledge issues addressed in my letter while also
creating new issues.
Specific issues established in my letter that were not addressed in the Director's
Decision include:
• Safe and efficient public access and egress to the trailhead and park via 154th Street
on a public right-of-way narrower than specified in the code (38' vs. 42').
• Adequate public facilities including off-street parking for park patrons are not required
by the Director.
• The preservation of trees in the proposed nature trail has not been required, and a
tree plan was not submitted.
• Erosion problems adjacent to the already built 154th Street extension on the larger
parcel have not been addressed.
• The Final Plat is not conditioned to include a public storm drain easement
recognizing existing storm drains and drainage ditches extending along the entire
northern property line.
• The Applicant is not required to improve the proposed nature trail.
• The proposed six-foot nature trail does not provide for the safety and comfort of
pedestrians or allow for access of mechanized equipment for trail construction and
maintenance.
Notice of Appeal Jaime C. Ramsey Page 1 of 2
• •
NOTICE OF APPEAL:
Specific issues created by the Director's Decision include:
The Final Plat is not conditioned to include a public right-of-way for a nature path
establishing access to planned parks to the south, which were included in the
application.
Deed restrictions including Sensitive Lands Review prior to tree removal on slopes
greater than 25% is meaningless and redundant since Sensitive Lands review is
required by code. I believe it is the Director's intent to protect Sensitive Lands and
trees. Establishing a Conservation Easement on slopes greater than 25% would
best protect Sensitive Lands and trees. A Conservation Easement exists on
adjacent Sensitive Lands to the east. See plat map of Morningside Subdivision
attached.
The Applicant and Director defer the applicability of specific sections of the Community
Development Code, because there is "no development". However, the code defines
development as a material change in the use of land or a division of land into two or
more parcels, including partitions. Because there is no guarantee that the largest parcel
created by this partition application will be further developed, these issues must be
resolved now.
I am appealing the Director's Decision for the reasons stated above. The $250 fee is
included with this notice.
Attachments:
Copy of Original Written Testimony
Copy of Morningside Subdivision Plat
Check in the Amount of $250
Notice of Appeal Jaime C. Ramsey Page 2 of 2
RECEIVED
MAY 5 2000
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FROM: Jaime C. Ramsey
15367 SW Fir Tree Drive
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Phone: (503) 590-3318
e-mail: ramsev@teleoort.com
DATE: May 5, 2000
TO: Mathew Sheidegger, Assistant Planner
Planning Division, City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon 97223
REFERENCE: File Number: MINOR LAND PARTITION (MLP) 2000-00003
File Name: City of Tigard Partition @ 154`h Avenue
The Applicant proposes to partition Tax Lot 2S105DB00600. This property is also
known as the Clute Property. The Applicant also proposes to dedicate two public rights-
of-way. One would extend 154`h Street into the subject partition; the second public right-
of-way would serve as a trailhead and establish access to planned contiguous public
greenspace to the south.
The Clute Property is a very important property for the surrounding neighborhood and
the Tigard Community. It will provide access to more than 20 acres of greenspace,
parks and potentially miles of trails (Reference Tax Lots 2S105DB00600,
2S105DB00400 and 2S1 05D000201 owned by the City of Tigard; and, 2S105CDO0100
and 2S105CDO0200 owned by The Trust for Public Lands). This planned greenspace is
nearly as large as Summer Lake Park and is as important to the citizens of Tigard and
Tigard's Urban Service Area. The proposed partition does not consider the importance
and intended use of the Clute Property and the contiguous greenspace.
I have reviewed the Applicant's file. While the Applicant's narrative indicates that they
"appear to meet" all Applicable Review Criteria, in fact they do not. Issues regarding the
proposed partition must be resolved. now while the property remains in the public
domain. Specifically:
1. Approval Criteria 18.420 and 18.705
The Applicant's proposed public right-of-way will serve as a trailhead by which citizens
from all over the community will enter a vast greenspace enlarging the use to which the
partition will be put and increasing access and egress requirements. Round Tree
Estates Subdivision borders the proposed partition to the north. The subdivision's
Declaration of Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions includes parking restrictions. The
1.2 S PI
K~P
Comments Jaime C. Ramsey Page 1 of 4
• f •
application fails to address the resulting increased traffic and changes in access and
egress needs that this proposed partition creates. The proposed partition does not meet
the requirements of Sections 18.420.050.A.2 and 18.420.050.A.5 which requires the
Applicant to ensure there are adequate pubic facilities (e.g. off-street parking,
emergency vehicle access, etc.) available to serve the proposed public right-of-way.
Furthermore, the Applicant has not provided for safe and efficient vehicle access and
egress and general circulation within the site for public access as stipulated in Sections
18.705.010 and 18.705.020.A.
2. Approval Criteria 18.765
The Applicant must provide a vehicle parking area with adequate capacity to ensure the
traffic carrying capacity of nearby streets and to minimize any hazardous conditions on
the site and at access points. As stated above, Round Tree Estates' CC&R includes
parking restrictions. As stated in the application the Applicant intends develop a public
trailhead by which the community will access a large planned greenspace. The
Applicant's proposal does not meet the off-street parking requirements of Sections
18.765.010.A and 18.765.010.B.
3. Approval Criteria 18.790
To encourage the preservation of trees Section 18.790.030.A specifically requires a tree
plan for the removal and protection of trees for any partition. The proposed trailhead
includes several trees that have not been identified for either preservation or removal as
required by Section 18.790.030.8.3. Are these trees to be protected? Removed?
Since this will be a nature path and the code encourages the preservation of trees,
assume pedestrians and trail construction and maintenance vehicles will be expected to
neatly tiptoe around these trees? The Applicant believes a tree plan "does not appear
applicable" when the existence of trees in the middle of the proposed nature path and
the code specifically requires one.
4. Approval Criteria 18.810
The proposed public right of way for the 154th street extension is not wide enough,
because it does not consider the steep slope and daylight drain immediately adjacent to
the East sidewalk. The steep slope will erode across the sidewalk and impair pedestrian
safety and water quality. Sections 18.810.010, 18.810.020.E.1.g and 18.810.020.E.1.j
require the consideration of steep slope and pedestrian safety issues for the
implementation of public facilities such as public streets. The public right-of-way must
be wide enough to neutralize the impact of the steep slope and daylight drains.
There is a daylight drain in the Northeast corner of the subject site, and there is a
drainage ditch along the entire northern property line. The property is steeply sloped
from South to North. The Applicant must develop a drainage facility large enough to
accommodate all upstream drainage including properties to the east and south as per
Comments Jaime C. Ramsey Page 2 of 4
Section 18.810.100.C. Yet, no easement for public storm drains or surface water
drainage patterns are shown on the plan. They are required per Sections 18.810.010,
18.810.0503 and 18.810.100.A.3 for the implementation of public drainage facilities
including storm drains and a water retention pond.
The Applicant has constructed the 154th Street extension; however, the proposed nature
trail has not been completed. Section 18.810.070.A.2 of the Community Development
Code requires the Applicant to construct all sidewalks including the proposed nature
path trailhead. This must be completed before approval, or be cited as a condition of the
application's approval, to ensure useable public access.
Summary and Conclusion
The Applicant claims the Minor Partition "appears to meet" most of the Applicable
Review Criteria because the partition does not involve any development. However,
Section 18.120.030.A.56 clearly defines Development as a material change in the use of
land or a division of land into two or more parcels, including partitions. To ensure the
best interests of the surrounding neighborhood and community are met it is in the
public's interest to ensure that the issues cited above are addressed. And, these issues
must be resolved now while the property remains in the public domain before the subject
property is partitioned. .
Beyond what the code requires, as outlined in the previous pages, common sense tells
us the proposed public right-of-way for the planned nature path and trailhead
establishing access to the public greenspace is clearly inadequate and will necessitate
the dedication of the entire 1.35 acre parcel to public ownership for storm water
retention, greenspace and trailhead access.
• The neighborhood doesn't want their streets plugged with the parked cars of
birdwatchers, walkers and joggers. Off-street parking is required.
• Trees exist in the proposed narrow public right-of-way.
• The south end of the proposed nature trail and the north end of Tax Lot
2S105DB00400 are too steep to allow a path to be constructed straight up
the property. A path built straight up the property would not be easily
traversed by pedestrians.and would ensure significant erosion problems.
• A six-foot corridor is not sufficient for the safety and comfort of pedestrians.
• Six feet will not allow mechanized equipment access to the proposed trail for
construction and maintenance.
• The Clute Property has significant drainage problems that have not been
addressed.
• Section 18.810.050.8 requires 15 feet for utility easements.
A water pipe is given a 15-foot easement. The Applicant's proposed nature trail on a
six-foot right-of-way suggests citizens are not worthy of the same consideration given a
water pipe!
Comments Jaime C. Ramsey Page 3 of 4
0:
This application appears to have been completed with little thought and consideration for
the planned greenspace, the immediate neighborhood and the Tigard Community. The
Applicant's proposed partition involves a material change in the purpose in which the
land is intended to be used and the application fails to comply with all Applicable Review
Criteria. I oppose the proposed partitioning of the Clute Property (Tax Lot
2S105DB00600) on that basis.
Respectfully,
Jaime C. Ramsey
Comments Jaime C. Ramsey Page 4 of 4
MORNINGSIDE SHEET INDEX:
SHEET 1- SURVEYORS CERTIFICATE
W CURVE PLAT BOOK AM PAGE SO
1075 12-32 WITH TH DATA
SITUATED IN THE SE AND NE QUARTER OF SHEET 2- LOTS 1-11, 33-36, TRACTS 'A' RECORDED AS DOCUMENT No. 409-31y6
AND 'S' WITH CURVE DATA
SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 2-SOUTH, RANGE 1-WEST OF THE SHEET 3- CONNSNT AFFIDAVITS. PLATT NOTES LEGEND:
RM NOTED
WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON AND APPROVALS • DENOTES 5/e' LR.F. WITN'w.lMa LIMB* R.P.C. EXCEPT
, , k DENOTES 5/e' LRF. WITH Y.P.C. STAMPED 'ALPHA EN4 IN C.
O DENOTES 5/6' IRON ROD SET WITH RED PLASTIC CAP STAMPED 'W.LMe. LSaOe
DATE: OCTOBER 11, 1996 1 DENOTES 5/0 X70' IRON ROD TO BE SET NTH RED PLASTIC CAP
SCALE' 1" = 50' HARRIS-MoMONAGLE ASSOCIATES, INC. REGISTERED 9 STAMPED W.LU La806' PER O.R.& 92.070
F1IGINE3.RS-SURVEYOIIS PROFESSIONAL 3ET ON 11.22.•8
12555 S.W. Hui BLVD. LAND SURVEYOR
JOB NO. 95-29 TIFARO. OR 97221-82a7 ■ DENOTES 31e•X3W ROM RIND TO BE SET MTN Al IIANUM CAP
TELE`A cxi;I °3RIOHE: 503 639-1157 ~J~/~~, ON CENTERLINES OF ROADS STAMPED 'W.LM. LS608' PER OAS 92070
BOUNDARY SURVEY AND BASIS OF BEARING: SURVEY NO. 26,414 9-1232 1/1 SET ON n.:ax -
~O p E G O N DENOTES 5/e Rpl ROD i0.MD ON CENTEAl91E5 OF ROADS
NE'TE: THERE ARE NO GEODETIC MONUMENTS WITHIN W7CUAM l.etMcMO~NAW'.E MOTES IMnAL POINT
ONE-HALF MILE OF THE BOUNDARY OF THIS PLAT. o a
E101RE3 12-11-9e - M01E5 1/4 CORNER
GENTERUNE CURVE DATA: S.N. DENOTES SURVEY MOUSERS
CODE DELTA RADIUS LENGTH CHORD BEARING Sr DENOTES SQUARE FEET
D 2817'07' 19&BB' 98.18' 97.19' S 7536'38' E I.P.F. DENOTES IRON PRE FOUND
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS ULF. DENOTES MON ROD FOUND
E 2tl'JO'49' 19&06' 9&97 97.95' S 75'4!'29' E TRACING IS AN
LOT CURVE DATA: E7{gI T COPY OF Y.P.C. DENOTES YELLOW PLASTIC CAP
~tiE,PgR
_ R.P.C. DENOTES RED PLASTIC CM
LOT DELTA RADIUS LENGTH CHORD BEARING ESMT. DENOTES EASEMENT
18 9014'42' 18.00' 2&35' 25.51' N 4432'02' W
20 01'40.53' 236.30' 6.93' 6.93' S 8998'26' E VAJr£fAM L. MtMCCLE ¢ DENOTES CENiERUNE N =
21 1445'50' 236.30' 60.89' 60.72' S 8035'05' E
22 05W'58' 177.87' 15.57' 15.57' N 6338'33' w
22 1204.07' 236J0 49.77' 49.68' N 67'30'07' w
2] 2316'10• 1)).87' 7221 71.74' N 780)'07' w
24 10]'49'37' 18.00' 32.62' 20. N' N 5209'37' E 0 50 100
24 1177'31' 177.87' 44.89' 44.77' N 68'41'49' W SCALE
25 1115'53' 219.87' 54.74' 54.60' N 68'36'00' W b
26 1401'14' 21987' 5. 53.67' N 82'44'34' W
369 0-00-00- . 3 60' 90W'00, 18.00' 28.27' 25.46' N 514'49' E
I \ `,T.. ~p~7 I I ;I R O U. N DT R E E E S T, P T E S
a 0014'49' Ems- _S 59'24.57• E F, C LOT 1R I I I {r~ I I
00 (/l 1692.85' 341.09' I I 7 I I I I
3-1/4' ALUMINUM I
SOUTH /4 CON GISK- X1/1' I.P.f. CN gI L(/7' 27 LOT 31
BI
SOUTH 1/4 CORNER WEST UNE N0.05' I I I LOT 19 I LOT 26
I I I
SECTION s I _ I l.oo'i 21.w( N 00'14'49' E I 1072.97' 123.011123,00-1
TOYM511 2-SOUTH I1_
9f.z4'
~t
RANEE % -WEST 316.24' 156.24'' , i r 91.79' 3 91.00' IOO.ar
V.S.B.T. BOON 7. PACE 552 INITIAL POINT- _ fo21 o r n 1 '23' . 23r
5/8-IRON ROO , 21,
WITH P.P.C. ~15' STORM DRAINAGE AND 26 0 27 i• q 2 N
.d rt
STAMPED SANITARY SEWER ESMT. 3
'W.LMO. L&BOS' ^ 29aT3s 5.005 s 4, ea s I I 5,127 s< to\ ~r 33
21 ^I ^o;' ^ G.' N 0014'49' E N 0014'49• E I I- . * 1 5 001449' W
Z F • y b 9a35' 21.00'
` • N L t00.00' L'
SURVEYOR w Y / I 13' STORM
'S CERTIFICATE: 5 0014'49' _ tol.ar Tj/ 9 7 SET r
U W 1427 e' N/"^ 'n 25 QH UN Z ORAdACE E9rt.
1 WILLIAM L MCMONAGLE, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE 30219' FTS ~8 $ W 31
CORRECTLY SURVEYED AND MARKED WITH 5/8"x30' IRON RODS - " ' zj'[ q• 4t21 g 4•ns sF x I o a20O SF
WITH RED PLASTIC CAPS STAMPED 'W.LMt. L.S. 808' EXCEPT AS iO F- H 81- ~'ti 22 /j ?7 N 0014'42' E " N Om 4'49• F mod' '
K 3 3.0014.49• W CV
SHOWN OR NOTED, ALL LOT AND TRACT CORNERS, CURVE POINTS AND ° _ $I 17.309 s x7' W
BOUNDARY e"
UNE CHANCES IN DIRECTION THE LAND AS REPRESENTED O Q L ' a T• .a . O'jy ~ w 9O SET tEDar Z I r tsar W-
IN THE ANNEXED MAP OF 'MORNINGSIDE', AND AT THE SE CORNER 1x S 0014'49' w ~ 97,76• ~ ,r. ON LDIE I $ ,29 $ 3 r~ $ 30 W
OF THAT LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 847, PACE 108. 1 SETA W z76.%' u ~ 1 '/°'95 1y, 24 1 o s,.3o v I a.41O s I W
S/t, 30' IRON ROO WITH RED PLASTIC CAP STAMPED 'W.LMt. LS. 608' r oja 7.76° SF a Of 34 =
$ Of ~ - n qtr v° ~1q~ y R.1e.00• N R.te.W A 3 Y, 14ar ' V7
FUR THE INITIAL POINT, SAID POINT BEING LOCATED FROM THE SOUTH _ n 21 p O L~12.62' t-2&2Y~ I L.2&24'
QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 5, N 0074'49' E 1892.85 FEET TO THE W W ~ol ~•°e 15.269 s Ij 107.e3' Btar e200•_
SW 3
CORNER TH SAID DEED AND BOUNDARY S AS 8924'57' E FOLLOWS: 341.09 ALONG THE FEET; EAST THENCE II Vl L7) S 0014.49' w 9295' W S.W. 153rd TERRACE
DESCRIBING THE PLAT
UNE OF UST SAID GEED AND THE EAST UNE OF 'ROUNDTREE to7.9IF - - q - - ' ' - ' ' - • - • ~ 44 • - ~ - - - -
` Q 267.98' ix y S 001449' W 274.29' N 001149' E 140.34'
ESTATES' PLAT. AN 00'14'49' E 1072.97 FEET TO THE CENTERUNE OF
Sw SCHL LLS FERRY ROAD; THENCE ALONE THE CENTERLINE OF d i~ W BSI ,8 20 1:-7,3.v eaOy T eo•0C Y• 52.ar SLOtl eD.OO' S2.oO' j' - -
SAID ROAD, N 7518'22' E 90.62 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF nI W I. ~ta'0o' I
A 1150.OC FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A CENTRAL U 10•°01 s cc L.2a3s' I
ANGLE OF 07.42'01• (THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N 71-27'21' E ZE-- _ 5 0014'49• W 93.47 _
444 FEET) AN ARC DISTANCE OF 154.55 FEET; IHENGE N 67'3621- E 26a.4a• 10444'
82.89 FEET TL THE NW CORNER OF THE PLAT OF 'MAYMEWf; THENCE ti 1 - bb 8 r. $ u $
ALONG THE WEST UNE OF 'MAYVIEW' AND 'MAYMEW No. 2', 15 61 0 1 8 g 17 16 9 15 $ 14 j {
:3 DRAINAGEESMT.--•I gl 3 o g $ S $ S o O 12 11
S 0014'49' W 1179.82 FEET TO THE SW CORNER OF 'MAYVIEW No. 2'; • ; 8 1 9 N I z 9.430 s N 0.000 s< N s ■ s,2ao s< ■I' I,.
s s,oo s °I s,zoo sF
c 1'•'d 15,125 SF nl
THENCE N 99'24'57' w 310.28 FEET TO THE INITIAL POINT. /4• I.P.F. nI o of 23' 23' N ~
CONTAINING: 7.98 ACRES. 259.07 ~ I N 0406' 65.00' 00.0p' I eo.ar 32.0(f I 62.00. eo.ar 32.00'
T `
t09.0e' 121.00123.00' 35. \`\00'
I`21.89' 21.19'1 110.31 44.00 ' L400' 52.ar 'i La.OO
AS PER O.R.S. 92.070 (PAR 2) THE POST- MONUMENTATION OF THE I I I I LOT 45 I \ $ QQ'14'49' 1179.82' I I I LOT 29
INTERIOR MONUMENTS IN THIS SUBDIVISION WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED LUT 44
WITHIN 9O CALENDER DAYS FOLLOWING THE COMPLETION OF PAVING I I I I LOT 24\ LOT 25 ` LOT 26 I LOT 27 I LOT 28
IMPROVEMENTS OR ONE YEAR FOLLOWNG THE ORIGINAL PLAT I I I I ♦ ` ` WI
RECORDATION, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST IN ACCORDANCE WITH I A v
O.R.S. 92.060. M A Y V I E W N 0. 2 0 SHEET 1 OF 3
•
•
MORNINGSIDE
SITUATED IN THE SE AND NE QUARTER OF HARM-MaMONAGLI ASSOCIATES. DIC.
ENGINEERS-SURVEYORS
12555 S.W. HALL BLVD.
TIGARD. 97 PHONE R((5o31 )~eJ9?345J
SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 2-SOUTH, RANGE 1-WEST OF THE TnE
WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON FAX: I 5 6 9-1232
DATE: OCTOBER 11, 1996
SCALE: i" = 50'
JOB NO.: 95-29
BOUNDARY SURVEY AND BASIS OF BEARING: SURVEY NO. 26,414
NuTE: THERE ARE NO GEODETIC MONUMENTS WITHIN
ONE-HALF MILE OF THE BOUNDARY OF THIS PLAT.
41F AMENDED BY INTERIOR MONIUMENTATION AFF.
RECORDING DOCUMENT NO. 86/112221
4HF AMENDED BY AFFIDAVIT- DOC. NO. 97121898
PLAT BOUNDARY CURVE DATA
:
CODE
DELTA
RADIUS
LENGTH
CHORD
BEARING
P-1
07'42'01'
1150.00'
154.55'
154.44
N 712r2l' E
CENTERLINE
CURVE DATA:
CODE
DELTA
RADIUS
LENGTH
CHORD
BEARING
A
38'38'57'
165.00'
118.34'
116.33'
S 7125'42' E
B
26.49'03'
185.00'
86.59'
85.90'
S 6670'45' E
C
10,03'36'
185.00'
32.48'
32.44'
S 845rO5' E
D
3632'39'
165.00'
119.Or
117.03'
S 7172'34' E
LOT CURVE
DATA:
LOT
DELTA
RADIUS
LENGTH
CHORD
BEARING
1
1402'49'
206.00'
$0.50'
So.38'
S e2YJ'I6" E
2
1459'39'
206.00'
$3.91'
53.76'
S 6a'12'J2' E
3
79'04'07"
1&00'
24.84'
22.91'
S 3917'22' E
3
11854'50'
18.00'
37.36'
31.00'
S 5942'14' W
3
07'44'08'
164.00'
2214'
22.13'
N 5658'18' W
3
07'36'29'
206.00'
27.35'
27.33'
N 5654'28' W
4
0214'52'
1187.00'
46.41'
46.41'
N 7410'56' E
4
93,05'00'
18.21'
29.58'
26.43'
N 6226'37' W
5
0370'53'
1183.00'
72.57'
72.56'
N 7118'03' E
6
01 A 16'
1183.00'
40.01'
40.01'
N 68'34'29' E
B
70'44'04'
1&00•
22.22'
10.94'
N 35'36'51' E
10
9013'42'
1&00'
2b.35'
25.51'
N 4452'02' W
11
89'46'18'
16.00'
28.20'
25.41'
N 45,07'58' E
34
717751'
18.00'
22.50'
21.07'
S 35'34'07' E
34
1626'20'
206.00'
59.10'
58.90'
S 63'09'53' E
35
1677'10'
164.00'
53.30'
53.06'
N 6224'49' W
35
0150'29'
206.00'
6.62'
6.62'
S 54'01'28' E
36
I"V48'
164.00'
51.61'
51.39'
N 80'44'17' W
TRACT A
002531
1.Ia3.00'
8.80'
8.80'
N 75'31,0. E
TRACT B
93,05'00'
19.21'
29.58'
26.43'
5 6228'37' E
PLAT BOOK 106 PAGE 'S'/
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT No. 9G 0 9-11116
RES
PRO
FES
SI
~
l
LEGEND:
I
pl
LAN
D
RVEYOR
SU
0 DENOTES 610' I.R.F. MiX 'W.LYa 13.909' RP.C. EXCEPT AS NOTED
x DENOTES 61e I.R.F. WRH Y.P.C. STAMPED 'ALPHA IN 4 INC.
O R E C 0 y/ -
0 DENOTES s/. MO1 ROD SET NTH RED PLASTIC CAP STAMPED •W.LM LS.9D6'
N1WAM L~11
MONAOLE
15L OENOIES S/j ff IRON It TO BE SET MTH RED PLASTIC CAP
0
9
STAMPED 'W.LMa LS.908' PER OAS 92070
- -
SET ON _ 1I.22-f6 _
EXPIRES 12-31-96
61 DENOTES 5/6'%30' IRON ROD TO BE SET NTH ALUMINUM CAP
ON CENTERLINES A
RADS STAMPED 'W.L.W. LS.800' PER OAS 92070
f
,D
SET ON I,
-22
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS
TL DENOTES 6/8' RON Roo FOUND ON CENTCRLMES OF ROADS
TRACWG IS AN EX Ci COPY OF
E
SN. DENOTES 5URKY MUYDERS
`
SF DENOTES SQUARE FEET
LPJ. DENOTES RO1 PIPE FOUND
VAL) AM L McMO LE
LRf. DENOTES ROl ROD FOUND
YP.C. DENOTES YELLOW PLASTIC CAP
R.P.C. DENOTES RED PLASTC CAP
CA DENOTES MOM ROAD
ES
MT. DENOTES EASEMENT L4 Z
rt
L DENOTES CENTERLINE
W 0 50 100
W SCALE
N
W
W
fn
W
W
(n
67-
-
1--
I,
Z
I I 5'! P~
LOT 31 I LUT 36 13 o l RpOtAo E \1
1 I Nom: I LOT 37 \
A 1 I N 0014'49' E 121.0(n21.ar1 1072.97'
B7.ar 100.00 2W 1.21' 10.09' 41.73'
32 ry~g 36 1 $ g .2
10'` e Y p I.3 y dl ea SF S
5.ms SF tl = c i $
14--1 J. 33 y N 001449• E (V . J _ N 001449• E TRACT
15' S70RM i 0.761 4 ' 10273' / 107.25' t 4.252 1S0.0
F
aRANAOE ESMT. I. a 35 A. ~A)ti iF1.o' €.7
4 2 s; g 6
31 $ ; 4D4e SF 1 J? ~ Y 4420 ,
S 0011'10• W W W l6 1A
30.05• es.n.
3 N 0014'49' E 115.71' 92.03' .000 ~'Or 7'f 9.
y. a A. IA ry ~ 15
30 8 34 qbl A 'P . ~ 3 b NL-3$31 4
0/v 1 7.077 SF 5.007 9
0542 Sr L'
90
~
5.00' 7220' 8-'&0"))( ~l' alt R-1400' A 5
L. L~]i 3ar0' L-24.64• T
k 75.54' •7 '9 4. )
1
I-]5 ROUNDTREEAESTATES
A
m
9
P
y ~ O
1'7
f
i
\ ~ 0
13
ED ,
N
P \
Dl' - T+ 10°10 ed Y a e"0
J S.W. 153rd TERRACE_ a Lob'~~ b. 5
N 0014'49 E 2_40.5r 4.. S 0014'41W 136.73'x• YL 0404 SF
1''~ L~, • g\'~{ S O7N'4Y E
T "Ar ti ? 30.33' SOW Ni~ 34.65' ~
R-1 Lv Yr taOO .~Q R-id $
L-213. 11 -25.33' I IA L-2222'
' u. 1u M 7P36'3.34
12.44'
13 i 12 Ng a,l1 s< NI 10 5.000 9 $ i~$a ~a 228 Al •s 46eo s N IF
6 4 d Y
A IF [ 7
23' 23• 6.069 SF
~I ,L 65.ar I/ T 56.ar ~yT- Saw oo' ~ 93.73•
T 63.00• 5.W ! 23.00 ' Y.arJ "5r
: 00`
- I S 10014'49• W I 1179.82-1 1
I LOT 2R I LOT 29 1 c`:, I Lor 30 1 LOT 31 1 LOT 32
I t I OlO IM AYE jEW
3
N
`FQ
6? \ N
N.
7,161 A c \ ~i0
67.1r `
35.17"/'71.16'.15.71
LOT 33
/ LCT 34
SHEET 2 OF 3
0
•
MORNINGSIDE
SITUATED IN THE SE AND NE QUARTER OF
SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 2-SOUTH, RANGE 1-WEST OF THE
WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON
DATE: OCTOBER 11, 1996
SCALE: 1" = 50'
JOB NO. : 95-29
BOUNDARY SURVEY AND BASIS OF BEARING: SURVEY NO. 26,414
NOTE: THERE ARE NO GEODETIC MONUMENTS WITHIN
ONE-HALF MILE OF THE BOUNDARY OF THIS PLAT.
DECLARATION!
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT VENTURE PROPERTIES INC., AN OREGON
CORPORATION, DOES HEREBY MAKE, ESTABLISH, AND DECLARE THE ANNEXED MAP
OF 'MORNINGSIDE' AS DESCRIBED IN THE ACCOMPANYING SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
A TRUE MAP AND PLAT THEREOF: ALL LOTS AND TRACTS BEING OF THE DIMENSIONS
SHOWN AND THEY DO HEREBY DEDICATE TO THE PUBUC. AS PUBLIC WAYS FOREVER,
ALL STREETS, AND HEREBY GRANT ALL EASEMENTS SET FORTH FOR THE USES STATED
AND AS SHOWN OR NOTED ON SAID MAP.
BY:
DON MORISSETTE
PRESIDENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON) ta.
BE IT REMEMBERED THAT ON THIS INDAY OFOrfN beC . 1996
BEFORE ME A NOTARY PUBUC IN AND FOR SAID STATE AND COUNTY
PERSONALLY APPEARED DON MORISSETTE WHO BEING DULY SWORN DID
SAY THAT HE IS PRESIDENT OF VENTURE PROPERTIES INC.. AN OREGON
CORPORATION, AND THAT THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS SIGNED ON
BEHALF OF THE CORPORATION BY THE AUTHORITY OF ITS BOARD OF
DIRECTORS, AND HE DOES HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THE SIGNING OF SAID
INSTRUMENT TO BE HIS OWN FREE ACT AND DEED.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO. SET MY HAND AND AFFIXED MY
OFFICIAL SEAL THE DAY AND YEAR LAST ABOVE WRITTEN.
Yj NOTARY PUBLIC G'/G'2000 IntIAOILIgX_p7+<P
INTERIOR CORNER MONUMENTATION:
IN ACCORDANCE WITH O.R.S. 92.070, THE INTERIOR CORNERS OF THIS SUBDIVISION
HAVE BEEN CORRECTLY SET WITH PROPER MONUMENTS. AN AFFIDAVIT HAS BEEN
PREPARED REGARDING THE SETTING OF SAID MONUMENTS AND IS RECORDED IN
DOCUMENT NO. WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS
APPROVED THIS ($./.i.Jl r , 191-7,
CONSENT AFFIDAVIT:
A SLJBDM510N PUT CONSENT AFFIDAVIT FROM UNITED STATES NATIONAL BANK
OF OREGON, A TRUST DEED BENEFICIARY, HAS SEEN RECORDED IN DOCUMENT
NO. 9Y -n 9 al y p , WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS.
BARRL9-1MOl1ONAGiB ASSOCIATES, INC.
D.Gil"llifts-SDRITTOn
12515 4W. TIME OLM
TICNID, OR 0725)-6207
TD FE. (;°730 vz 6'
SS9 VIAL
tl PROFESURVEYOR
p LAND
XEOO h
ur w tw,
WIWAM L M•M GLE
to
DwmES a-3,-/e
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS
TRACING IS AN EEpXXAAACT COPY OF /
WI L MCMONNAKL
PLAT BOOK 1,16 PAGE SZ
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT No. 94o931Y4
WASHINGTON COUNTY APPROVALS:
APPROVED THIS DAY OF Clot , 1995
WASHINGTON TY SURVEYOR
BY:
PPROVED THIS 1~ - O
Q-M4&"A
SYM •
A
F
, 1996
s.
DIRECTOR OF ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION
(WASHINGTON COU,,/N/TY-yASSESSOR
n;
ap" yy
ATTEST THIS DAY 0 _ c - 0A r 1996
PLAT NOTES: db4. StIL DIRECTOR OF ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION
EX-OFFICIO COUNTY CLERK
1. AN 8 FOOT WIDE EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC SIDEWALKS, WATER SUPPLY AND OTHER
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTIUTIES SHALL EXIST ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF ALL L07S BY. AND TRACTS ABUTTING PUBLIC STREETS. a
2. TRACT "A', IS SUBJECT TO AN EASEMENT OVER ITS ENTIRETY. FOR SANITARY SEWER
AND STORM, AND SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE AND DETENTION, TO THE UNIFIED
SEWERAGE AGENCY.
3. TRACT 'B" IS SUBJECT TO AN EASEMENT OVER ITS ENTIRETY, FOR PUBLIC
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE USE, PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY, AND PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
UTILITIES. TRACT 'B' IS ALSO SUBJECT TO A SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE
EASEMENT, OVER ITS ENTIRETY. TO THE UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY.
4. LOTS 19 THROUGH 23 ARE SUBJECT TO A CONSERVATION EASEMENT SHOWN THEREON
FOR THE BENEFIT OF WASHINGTON COUNTY AND THEIR ASSIGNS THE EASEMENT AREA
IS TO REMAIN IN ITS NATURAL STATE.
5. MOTOR VEHICLE ACCESS TO OR FROM SW SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD TO LOTS 4, 5 AND 6 IS
PROHIBITED.
6. SUBJECT TO COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS RECORDED IN DOCUMENT
NO. 69?Ili WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS
7. ALL LOTS AND TRACTS ARE WITHIN, AND SUBJECT TO THE MINERAL AND AGGREGATE
OVERLAY DISTRICT, COUNTY SECTION 378.
8. ALL OF THE LAND WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THE 'MORNINGSIDE' PUT IS SUBJECT
TO A MINERAL RESERVATION IN FAVOR OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
RECORDED W DEED BOOK 32, PAGE 1, AND DISCLOSED IN DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 1,
1926 IN DEED BOOK 134, PAGE 126.
9. THIS SUBDIVISION IS SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PER CASE FILE NO.
95-625-5, WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION.
to. ALL SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS ARE HEREBY GRANTED
TO THE UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY.
11. MAINTENANCE AND OWNERSHIP OF TRACT 'A'
ALL BENEFITS, RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF OWNERSHIP, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
THE USE AND MAINTENANCE OF TIME AREA DESIGNATED IN THIS PUT AND ENTITLED
TRACT 'A' SHALL INURE TO THE DECLARENTS, THEIR SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS AND
SHALL FOREVER RUN AND REMAIN WITH SAID OWNERSHIP. IN THE EVENT OF FAILURE
TO FULFILL ANY OR ALL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBIUTIES OF RESPONSIBLE OWNERSHIP
BY THE SAID OWNERS OR BY THEIR DELEGATED AGENT FOR SUCH, THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OR ITS SUCCESSORS OR
DELEGATES IS HEREBY GRANTED THE RIGHT TO ENFORCE SAID DUTIES OF RESPONSIBLE
OWNERSHIP, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO REASONABLE MAINTENANCE
COMPATIBLE WITH THE EITHER AREAS AND LOTS IN THE PUT, AGAINST THE OWNERS,
BY ALL MEANS PROVIDED BY LAW.
12. MAINTENANCE AND OWNERSHIP OF TRACT 'B'
ALL BENEFITS, RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF UNDIVIDED AND COMMON OWNERSHIP.
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE USE AND MAINTENANCE OF THE COMMON AREA
DESIGNATED IN THIS PUT AND ENTITLED TRACT 'B' SHALL INURE TO THE OWNER OF
EACH AND EVERY PLATTED LOT IN THIS PUT AND SHALL FOREVER RUN AND REMAIN
WITH THE OWNERSHIP OF SAID PUTTED LOTS IN THE EVENT OF FAILURE
TO FULFILL ANY OR ALL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESPONSIBLE OWNERSHIP
BY THE SAID LOT OWNERS, AND EACH OF THEM, OR BY THEIR DELEGATED AGENT FOR
SUCH. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OR ITS
SUCCESSORS OR DELEGATES IS HEREBY GRANTED THE RIGHT TO ENFORCE SAID DUTIES
OF RESPONSIBLE OWNERSHIP, INCLUDING BUT NOT UMITED TO REASONABLE
MAINTENANCE COMPATIBLE WITH THE OTHER AREAS AND LOTS IN THE PUT, AGAINST
THE OWNERS OF SAID LOTS. JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY BY ALL MEANS PROVIDED BY
LAW.
APPROVED THIS 1'5 +h DAY OF OcTO6c11 , 1996
WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON) et.
I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THA THIS SUBDIVISION PUT, WAS RECEIVED FOR RECORD
ON THIS /7 DAY OF C n h s , , 1996 AT 11:1,P O'CLOCK )0M.
AND RECORDED IN THE COUNTY CLERK RECORDS.
BY: EPUTY COUNTY CL K Q
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS TRACING IS A COPY CERTIFIED TO ME, BY THE
SURVEYOR OF THIS SUBDIVISION PLAT, TO BE A TRUE AND EXACT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL AND THAT IT WAS ECORDED ON TIME 1 7 DAY OF ")P fobs
1996, AT/_.Z;.LB O'CLOCK 0- M. AND RECORDED IN THE COUNTY CLERK RECORDS
BY: 1f~ 'clel /X E, igetu-
1~7 DEPUTY COUNTY CIER
SHEET 3 OF 3
0
40
r w
Customer Receipt
CITY OF TIGARD Printed: 06/16/2000 12:30
User: front
Station: 02
Operator: GEO
Rcpt No: 0003062 Date: 06/16/2000
Customer No: 000000 Amount Due: 250.00
Name: JAMIE C. RAMSEY Cash: 0.00
Address: 15367 SW FIR TREE DR Check: 250.00
TIGARD, OR 97223 N/A 0.00
Change: 0.00
Tyne Description
LANDUS Land Use Applications
Amount
250.00
(5,9 0 00 Ll -5
•
CITY OF TIGARD
MENLOR RESERVOIR-TAX LOT 600
0
LAND PARTITION TYPE II APPLICATION
APPLICANT STATEMENT AND NARRATIVE
SUPPLEMENTAL NARRATIVE INFORMATION
Location: 13230 SW 154`h Avenue
Legal Description: Tax Lot No. 600, Assessors Map No. 2SI-513B
Applicant: City of Tigard
City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
c/o Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.
121 SW Salmon St., Suite 1020
Portland, OR 97204
Property Owner: City of Tigard
City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
STATEMENT:
The purpose of this application is to request approval for partitioning of the City
owned Tax Lot 600 (Map No. 2S105DB00600), located at the southerly end of SW
154`h Avenue. This property is also referred to as the Clute Property and was acquired
by the City to provide access to the recently completed Menlor Reservoir located on
the adjacent City owned Tax Lot 400. Having completed this reservoir project, the
City proposes to partition the 1.74 acre Tax Lot 600 to allow for the sale of a 1.35acre
portion of the property, which is not required for reservoir access. The City also
wishes to dedicate to City right-of-way two portions of the subject property. Included
in the proposed dedication is the new SW 154`h Avenue extension which was
constructed on Tax Lot 600 to allow for permanent access to the reservoir, and a 6-
foot wide corridor along the proposed partition property line for future use as access
City of Tigard •
Menlor Reservoir-Tax Lot 600
Land Partition Type II Application
March 10, 2000
Page 2
to a City owned pathway located on Tax Lot 400. The proposed partition site plan is
illustrated on the attached Figure 1.
NARRATIVE:
The following narrative describes findings for all applicable approval standards and
documents compliance with the applicable criteria.
Auulicable Develoument Code Sections:
Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study (Section 18.390)
The property is zoned R-25, Medium-High Density Residential. The proposed Minor
Partition requires a Type II Procedure, subject to the provision of Section 18.420.
The requirement for an impact study does not appear applicable as the proposed
Minor Partition does not involve any land development and therefore will not impact
public facilities and services.
Land Partitions (Section 18.420)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the requirements and approval
criteria of the applicable code section 18.420 Land Partitions. The proposed Minor
Partition involves dividing an existing tract into a large parcel for future possible sale.
The subject parcel appears to be of such size and shape to facilitate future re-
partitioning in accordance with the requirements of the zoning district and the City
code. A conceptual re-partition shadow plan was developed to show an example of
how such a compliant development could be accommodated. This conceptual re-
partition shadow plan is illustrated on attached Figure 2.
Residential Zoning Districts (Section 18.510)
The proposed Minor Partition involves division of a tract currently zoned R-25, and
appears to meet all of the goals, requirements and criteria of the applicable code
section 18.510 Residential Zoning Districts. Although there will be no new
development as part of the proposed Minor Partition, it appears that future
re-partitioning and development of the subject parcel could comply with the
applicable code.
Access/Egress/Circulation (Section 18.705)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.705 Access/Egress/Circulation. Existing access to both
F:U'R(1JECTS\94V)3111,4({6\A1EM()S\P.(iti,MI App N- d-
City of Tigard
Menlor Reservoir-Tax Lot 600
Land Partition Type II Application
March 10, 2000
Page 3
proposed partition tracts is directly available from the existing extension of SW
154`hAvenue which was recently constructed as part of the City's Menlor Reservoir
project. It is proposed as part of this application that the City designate to City right-
of-way, the existing SW 154th Avenue extension, as shown on the attached Figure 2.
The requirement for a future street plan does not appear applicable, as the proposed
Minor Partition does not involve any land development or street construction and will
not impact public facilities and services.
Density Computations (Section 18.715)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.715 Density Computations. Although the proposed
Minor Partition does not involve any land development, Net Residential Density was
calculated to show that the subject tract could be developed in the future to meet the
required code criteria. The calculation is shown below.
Single-Family
58,848 sq. ft. of gross site area
-14,780 sq. ft. (measured) for public right-of-way
-16,288 so. ft. for sensitive area (steeper than 25%)
Net Area: 27,780 square feet
divide by: 3,050 so. ft.(minimum lot area)
9.10 Units Per Acre (Maximum Density Allowed)
Minimum Density: 80%(9.10) = 7.28 Units Per Acre
Exceptions to Development Standards (Section 18.730)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.730 Exceptions to Development Standards. The
proposed Minor Partition does not involve any land development.
Landscaping & Screening Standards (Section 18.745)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.745 Landscaping & Screening Standards. The proposed
Minor Partition does not involve any land development and therefore will not involve
changes to existing site conditions and landscaping.
F:\FR(UECTS\44VI110.4h6\,NC.\IOS\I'-ili,m App N-.J.R•
City of Tigard 10 0
Menlor Reservoir-Tax Lot 600
Land Partition Type II Application
March 10, 2000
Page 4
Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements (Section 18.765)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.765 Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements. The
proposed Minor Partition does not involve any land development and therefore will
not involve changes to existing site conditions. The requirement for a vehicle parking
plan does not appear applicable.
Tree Removal (Section 18.790)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable - requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.790 Tree Removal. The proposed Minor Partition does
not involve any land development and therefore will not involve changes to existing
site conditions or removal of trees. The requirement for a tree plan does not appear
applicable.
Visual Clearance Areas (Section 18.795)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.795 Visual Clearance Areas. The proposed Minor
Partition does not involve any land development or construction of property access.
Street & Utility Improvement Standards (Section 18.810)
The proposed Minor Partition appears to meet all of the applicable requirements and
criteria of the code section 18.810 Street & Utility Improvement Standards. The
proposed Minor Partition does not involve any land development or utility and street
construction and will not impact public facilities and services or existing site
conditions. As requested, a typical section and profile of the existing SW 154`h
Avenue extension have been included and are illustrated on the attached Figure 2.
This extension was designed to match the specific dimensions of the existing SW
154`h Avenue roadway and sidewalk.
17:V'ROJECfS\.4Vl3 111.4WMEMOST-id- Abp N:urA,
37 .90
1 II
I + I
I I I 615.64'
1 1 I 1 I ~1
I I I I I T9
- - a / 1
r
1 I I I I ,r~~_
.B0.
J
CITY IGARD TAX LOT 400 \ {
_ l f
/
' -
1 /
- - - MORN INGSIOE) /
/ - I
/DEVELOPMENT CITY OF TIGARD
1~s I 1 I
I
TAX LOT 600
1
- - J - - - (TL5300)
1.74 ACRES
• I I
225' '
(TL 1600) 1 /
a / J
W lw~ (TL 300)
N I I
o
(TL 1500)
ROUND (TL 00) = I
TREE w I J / n
ESTATES W _ I 1
348.16-1
cr (TL 1400) I l
cr1 5 o
- `
(TL 1300) I '
3 EXIST G I I I
/ En I \ \35 HOUSE
ACCESS ROAD
S W._154TH AVE. -38' ( I
TO SCHOLLS FERRY RD _D- ~~15 AC I
(TL 1200 " r
I L 1 ;
EXISTING 154TH AVE i (TL 600 0.39 AC ,
EXTENSION, PfOPOS~D 77
AREA FOR DED CATION - - - - - 1
_ TO ~ I TY POSED TLA 600 225 1 _d-
PR
PA~TITION LINE ~ POSED AREA FOR I I
I ,
' DE CATION TO C I TIY
W - - - MEADOWS I / R ~G T-OF-WAY FORT FUTURE /
E (TL7500) i NATURE PATH ACCESS TO
TL 7900) (TL 7800) (TL 7700) (TL 7600) C I TY OWNED TAX LdT 400 1 I I f , , J
( BUL`L MTN ~ I
25' UTILITY I - MEADOWS i 1 1
RIGHT-OF-WAY I I I I { FIGURE 1 MARCH 2000
OW WAY \ I L-~1--J~-- -L L_ i
o \ SW. YARR_
° I S. W. 6 R I S T L E C 0 N E WAY CITY OFTIGARD
PROPOSED TAX.OT 600
- - j - - - - - - - - - - - PARTITION SITE PLAN
NOTES SITE PLAN ME
1. TAX MAPAOT NO 2SIO5DB00600 SCALE: I• _ 100'
2. SEE FIGURE 2 FOR CONCEPTUAL RE-PARTITION SHADOW a
a nor ncum
PLAN
0
ga-0310.a66
rn
ti.
1
l
1
11
i
t
f
I
I
THIS SHADED AREA IS
SENSITIVE LAND AREA W/
SLOPE EXCEEDING 25%
~ I
19'-0"
(TL 5300) I ' 6
225 11111 7'-0" 12'-0" 2'-0" 5~~
i r-- - - - - - - - __i'~'~\\ \ ~ \\~C1 \ ~\\111 1111!1 1 I ..._4.1717 4.I7Y ~2%
vy,
TL 1600 X111 I A vvv♦v`v\ \ 1 \ ` v"~~~~~~ ~~♦w~V1 A11 AAA 11 / / h/;urn r
( ) llVA I l V A v AA V1 ♦ v. V v v vv v♦.v1 1 111,A11 I .111AA axwm:~ ''~~.~4: ~~,r-~ '~-%rb'~s .,~P-s~':,.u Ewa
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 111[\\ \1l1 , WASHINGTON COUNTY
\ \ \ \ Ull
i \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Il\\\\\\l\\\\\ 1' 1131\\\\
\4 ` \ \ ♦ ` \ \ 0 ` \ \tt \ \ 3" CLASS "C" ASPHALTIC CONC STD SW, TYP
y \ \ \{>-y - \ \ \ \\\\`l\`\ \U \I WASHINGTON COUNTY
8" 0/ 2"-0" \ U 0" BASE ROCK STD CURB & GUTTER,
\ \\1 1♦ \ \ ` \ \1 \\\\l \`\\I
\J 1 , \ \ ~ ~ \ (TL 300) 2" -Y4"-0" LEVELING ROCK TYP
I\♦\ \ \ 1 \ \ 111 1\ \ i\ \ '
~ x,-1-1- ♦ \ I \ \ ♦ \ ♦ ♦ \
TL 1500 ll \ \ \ \ ~~\~c3\\\\\\1\\\\l\\\\\\\
NOTE,
\ \l\\\\\\\\\\ \ 1. 154th AVE EXTENDED MATCHES EXISTING 1541h AVE..
CONCEPTUAL ROAD ` ` ; \ 1\\ ` 1i\ "`\\1
\ \ ` 1 11 \ \ EXISTING SW 154TH AVENUE EXTENSION
ALIGNMENT
~ \ 11 `3j\\\ \1111111\\\\\\
~TL -66 TYPICAL STREET SECTION
\ 1 1 L \ ~1 1 \ 11 \\\\11\\\\\\ SCALE I"=10'-O"
1
' - - - - ~1._~~_1~ 1 1y'♦ \ ~ 11 1 1 1 11111\\\ \ ♦ 11 I
-i FZ- Z ttttCF\ \1 1 I I
0\ l 1 1\ 1 1 `
Z\ \ 1 1 1 ♦ ` \ ♦ l 1 l 1 (\111 \I [1\
TL 1400 \ `I I \1 \ 1 \l \ . \ 'III 1 111 .t
) ♦O-I -T
♦ ♦ 1 1 1 1 1 v ` ~I I A♦ vA ®III1\\ V AA A \ AA 1', 11T V 1 'IUnl11 l'
I ~ I I 1. 1 J♦ \111 l VAVAVAA A♦I1 1 1 1~ v`11 1VA l(
I I 1 1 1 I I 1 ~ -I r! ♦ hl, l1 t\\l\\\ 11141 I~~ I. \ \\11111\\\\\\ \ \
I v S III`v vvv \
CONCEPTUAL I l l J 1 1 1 1 1 v11 vvvIv v111111111111 v111 vvvvv v
PROPERTY LINE i ` 1 \\1111 1 PIVC STA = 8+44.78
1 1 I / ~ V11 v VV v;~~\ ~"~I Ivv `A ~ A AA\ PIVC EL = 290.56
A 1 ♦ v 11j v V 11V11 ~`Vv\ VAV V` VA. AVA VAVAv
/I I/ ♦ 111111 v vA11Av" ~i1V 1 1 1 A A V A VAA v 1'-2" VC
_1 1 1 1 ! 1111 ` v 1~♦v1vT 1 1 V - } L l V11 \ VAA\
j 1 I I I / II I I i ♦ ,1V \\v vA ~1 111111 1\ Col `vI v A VAA♦ AD = 4.6 00
- - - - RAF t ! J- - II LS U[~ ~111a ( K = 15.22
V ~ 1 J t AAA\\v v 1 11111 A- 1 A 1 11 v v vvv v` O1
310 310
(TL 1300) \1 1 I l (1 ♦ I\ \ \1 I 1 111,1 l11 1 1 11 1111 ll \ mo m
~`vv v 1 1 V l A A\ v\\~11 \ 1 I I 1 h• vv 1 v Av ♦ vv` ® rna a OLD DWY
` \ \ --EX15TiN 1111 11j5 I I 11 l 1 \111 ` < GRADE
\ I I l 1 1 1 11 111 ri
r \ 1l Y \ . V A A \ V 1 HOUSE 1111 I 1 1 111 1111 1 A V A V A` v m m
,-I 5 i• \ \ Iflj 11 1 1 ,11 t1t 11 11 1\ 1 1 \ \ m N:W s' U 0,
` Y, \ \ \ \ \ \I \ -l 0 11 f l \ t \ 1 I l \11 t 111 1 1 1\\ 300 300
EA DNY APRON ~ 9~°
II \ 1 1 \ \ l rn ~
\ ♦ _ Ill \ \
\~GIII \ \♦\C` ♦l lllllt\\\ \1l\ ,111`11111 wx `0 \ aU~,.
C-) N
II l \ \ ` \ \ \ %e~~ EXIST
~z _j
1 \ \ \ ♦ \ \ \`L\ \ \ \ \ am GRADE
\ I \ ; \ - - -G8\\\\~\ oK 290
` - - \ ` I\\ \ \\♦\\\♦ll\ l\\\\. \\\\l\\ \u\\ 290
' \ \ " \ \ \ \8+39 78 END
\ \ 1 i \ \ \ \ 1111 \
1 ♦ \ \ \ \ \ \ 154Ti 1 AVE EXT NS I ON
S.W. 154th AVE. J I REMOVED
1 t 'f 1 I 11 ♦ ` \\1`IV1 u\\\`\ \
r, \ \ \ \ `.\j\ \~11\ .l` ` \ \ \ EL=2 0.65
_ 5 Q0.\ I \ \ ~ ` \ 1 \ r ~ 1 11 I\ \ \ ♦ \ E',IST DWYAPRON
` - ` ` ` `111 1111♦\ 11\~\` l l
TO SCHOLLS FERRY RD f ♦ \ \ ♦ ` ` \ \ 28C 280
III -1 l y l l\ - _ \ \ \ J ♦ Il l l l l` \ 11 1 \ \ 7+80 8+10 8+40 8+70 9+00 9+30
• \ \ \ \ \ f /I\ ` U,I I
_ _ _ _ t l \ + \ \ \ \ \ \\\1 f•\~ 1 I, I~ l \ \ 154TH EXTENDED STA 8+26.78
1 t \ \ ♦ \ \ \ `v l\ll \ \ \ \
1\ \ \ \ \ = 0+00 ACCESS ROAD
W
0
P
°o
I
0
n
3
0
N
w1
U
i
O
(TL 1200) 1 1~ w # L1 ,crsay t l1l \ \ 1 \\1\ `
/ I 1 AI i "vv 1 11 l l♦ ~ ~vvv v v 1 Iv 111'1`11 1Ajj 11v1 vvIvvvvv
EXISTING $W 154TH J I f, \1 1 1 1 \ \ Il t\ 1 1 1 1 1 lry 1 1 1 1 111 \ 1
/ 1 1 I I (jL 600)1 l/ ` EXISTING FENCE I1 II tll 1111111\\ \ l.;
AVENUE E TENS I ON)
~ ! ~ ~ , i Il I, II 11,E
PROPOSED AREA FOR
1 \ 1 I 11
ITO-CITY 111i
DEDICATION TO \1\ \ \
I _ _ tTrl \
R I GHTrOF-WAY I I \ , 1 / \ lli, 1 11 11' 1 \ ` ` y PROPOSED AREA FOR
I V 1 1 1 V 'l'j 1 1~ 1 \ V AA ♦ v v
DEDICATION TO CITY
PROPOSED TL 600 .J J \\I i_ ,`'i i A /'/'f'f' I \ ` \ \ \ ` \ 1 1
o . \ 1111 1 I \ \ \ \ \ RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR FUTURE
PARTITION LINE 1,\.`1 ` \1 \ \IV NATURE PATH ACCESS TO CITY
OWNED TAX LOT 400
(TL 7900) (TL 7800) (TL 7700) (TL 7600) (TL7500) ~l\\\\\\`
I I I I I / ~ ` \
I /
I I BULL MTN. I
~EADOWS ,
1 I I ! I / / I
I I I I f I
1 1 1 I I
NOTES; SITE PLAN
1. TAX MAPAOT NO 2S105DBOO600 SCALE: 1° = 50'
I
I
MORN INGSIDE) CITY OF TIGARID
DEVELOPMENT /-TAX LOT 600
I
NOTE,
1. 154th AVE EXTENSION ROAD SECTION SEE ABOVE.
EXISTING S.W. 154TH AVLFXTENSION PROFILE
SCALE: I" = 60' HORIZ, 1"=20' VERT
FIGURE 2 MARCH 2000
CITY OF TIGARD
PROPOSED TAXLOT 600
CONCEPTUAL RE-PARTITION
SHADOW PLAN
CM OF TICUMM
OIKON MR
94-0310.466
0