Loading...
Hearings Officer Packet - 07/28/2003HEARINGS OFFICER MONDAY -JULY 28, 2003 - 7:00 PM Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Hearings Officer meetings by noon on the Friday prior to the meeting. Please call 503-639-4171, Fxd. 2438 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for 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. To request such services, please notify the City of Tigard of your need(s) by 5:00 p.m., no less than one (1) week prior to the meeting date at the same phone numbers listed above so that we can make the appropriate arrangements. Hearings are held in Town Hall at the City of Tigard at 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Staff reports are available to the public 7 days prior to the hearing date 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC HEARING 2.1 TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003-00005 The applicant is seeking Conditional Use approval to expand the existing facility by 2,875 square feet for administrative offices and classrooms, and make site modifications to the parking and landscaped areas. LOCATION: 15670 SW 98"' Avenue; WCTM 2S111CD, Tax Lot 300. R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Religious Institutions, some civic, and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.330, 18.360, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. (Continued Below) Page 1 of 2 SUBJECT TO CHANGE 2.2 BONITA PARK CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003-00006 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2003-00008 The City of Tigard is seeking Conditional Use approval to construct and equip a neighborhood park on approximately 5.5 acres located within the I-L zoning classification. The City is also seeking Sensitive Lands Review approval to allow work within the 100-year floodplain and adjacent to Fanno Creek, and its associated wetlands. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the northwest comer of SW Bonita Road and SW Milton Court; WCTM 2S112BA, Tax Lot 6200. ZONE: I-L: Light Industrial District. The I-L zoning district provides appropriate locations for general industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production, research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics such as noise, glare, odor, and vibration. APPLICABLE,REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.725, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. 3. OTHER BUSINESS 4. ADJOURNMENT Page 2 of 2 SUBJECT TO CHANGE J • 0 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.1 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 2.1 DATE: JULY 28, 2003 PAGELOF FILE NAME: TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION CASE NOS.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003-00005 IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY ON THE ITEM INDICATED ABOVE, PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME, ADDRESS & INCLUDE YOUR ZIP CODE PROPONENT - (Speaking In Favor or Neutral) OPPONENT - (Speakinq Again Name, Address, 'p C' d a d Phone o. 1 Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Nam Address, Zip Code and hone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. U/ ~ ~~Ui~iJ.T 1 Na ddress, Zip C~ one 1 Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 772z3 Name Address, Zip Code and Phone No. I Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. &07-- ZAIZIR16-e~< 4-550C .23'10 I'IUJ THE ~-jv ..S!/l rj57 -701 f 1A72 -W121 dX 97210 _5o3-222--115j _Na--, -Address-, ---and -Phone- No-. ---1 Nam--e, A--ddress-, Zip-Co-de-and --Phone-No---- Zip Code. IeAy weLr ~'~~/4 SGc~Gd~W1Rf ~ 1 Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. I Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 -------I--------------- Name,-Address, Zip Code-and Phone No. 1 Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. I I Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 I 1 • COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503)684-0360 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising *City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. `Tigard,Oregon 97223 Accounts Payable • • ❑ Tearsheet Notice • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit • Legal Notice TT 10274 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) SS. I, Kathv S^== ider being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of theTigard-Tualatin Times a newspaper of general circulatign as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Tigara in the aforesaid county and state; that the Public Hearing/ rTTP9nni-(1(1(105 _rh»rch of God/Tigard 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 10,2003 Fes: HT a: BAPPRORIRIATIM I3ALAN'C[E: PURCH SPECIAUST APPROVAL: 3EPARTIt E3T_ PPROVAL: Subscribed and sworn to "*bae me thisl 0th day of July, 2 0 0 3 G OFFICIAL SEAL = ROBIN A BURGESS otary Public for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 344589 My Commission Expires: ~ D1 2S LIZ, >3, 2c^_5 AFFIDAVIT The following will be considered by the Tigard Hearings Officer on Monday July 28, 2003 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance ; with the Tigard Municipal Code and the rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Chapter 18.390. 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 i sufficient to afford the decision-maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeal based on ' that issue. Failure to specify the criterion from the Community Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion. 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. Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Brad Kilby) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon, - 97223, or by calling 503-639-4171. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003-00005 ➢ TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION Q REQUEST: The applicant is seeking Conditional Use approval to expand the existing facility by 2,875 square feet for administrative offices and classrooms, and make site modifications to the parking and landscaped areas. LOCATION: 15670 SW 98th Avenue; WCTM 2S111CD, Tax Lot 300. ZONE: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of . 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Religious Institutions, some civic, and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA:. Community Development Code Chapters: 18.330, 18.360, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. ......1 ...:::::x-:..............-....:r. i::::::7..'t":::~r............i........._.......~......................~ uaawi . IVY pt" H4 41 L TWO CHURCH Of GOD EXPANSION J 1 I E7 1 pi.Wr ~ \ 9 i TT lu t2i '44 C'T TT 10274 - Publish July 10, 2003. i NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CITY OF TIGARD Community (Development ShapingR Better Community NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY. JULY 28. 2003 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER AT 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003-00005 FILE TITLE: TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION APPLICANT: Zaik/Miller Associates OWNER: Tigard Church of God Attn: Jackie Root Attn: Bruce Plunkett 2340 NW Thurman Street, Suite 201 15670 SW 98th Avenue Portland, OR 97210 Tigard, OR 97224 REQUEST: The applicant is seeking Conditional Use approval to expand the existing facility by 2,875 square feet for administrative offices and classrooms, and make site modifications to the parking and landscaped areas. LOCATION: 15670 SW 98th Avenue; WCTM 2S111CD, Tax Lot 300. ZONE: R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks and subdivisions are also permitted outright. Religious Institutions, some civic, and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.330, 18.360, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURES ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 2438 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION LESS THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AN OPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE` AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25G) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25G) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER BRAD KILBY AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223, OR BY E-MAIL AT bradley@ci.tigard.or.us. BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an application by Tigard Church of God for a ) FINAL ORDER conditional use permit for a 2,875-square foot office/classroom ) building as an expansion of the existing church at 15670 ) CUP 2003-00005 SW 98th Avenue in the R-7 zone in the City of Tigard, Oregon ) (Tigard Church of God) A. SUMMARY 1. Bruce Plunkett filed the application for Tigard Church of God (the "applicant"). He requests approval of a conditional use permit to construct a 2,875-square foot building for administrative offices and classrooms as an addition to the existing Tigard Church of God at 15670 SW 98th Avenue; also known as tax lot 300, WCTM 2S111CD (the "site"). The Staff Report to the Hearings Officer dated August 5, 2003 (the "Staff Report") contains a history of City review and development on the site, which the hearings officer incorporates as his own. 2. Tigard Hearings Officer Larry Epstein (the "hearings officer") conducted a duly noticed public hearing to receive testimony and evidence in the matter. At the public hearing, City staff recommended conditional approval of the application. The applicant accepted the recommended conditions with certain exceptions. Other than service providers, no one else testified orally or in writing. The hearings officer closed the public record at the end of the hearing. Disputed issues in this case include: a. Whether the applicant is required to provide a loading space on the site; b. Whether the applicant is required to provide additional bicycle parking; c. Whether the applicant is required to modify the existing church building to comply with certain building and/or fire standards not directly related to the proposed expansion; and d. Whether the applicant is required to obtain an NPDES permit. 3. The hearings officer concludes that the applicant sustained the burden of proof for a conditional use permit, based on the findings and conclusions included and incorporated herein and subject to conditions at the end of this final order. B. HEARING AND RECORD 1. The hearings officer received testimony at the public hearing about this application on July 28, 2003. All exhibits and records of testimony are filed with the Tigard Department of Community Development. At the beginning of the hearing, the hearings officer made the declaration required by ORS 197.763. The hearings officer disclaimed any ex parte contacts, bias or conflicts of interest. The following is a summary by the hearings officer of selected testimony offered at the public hearing in this matter. 2. City planner Brad Kilby summarized the Staff Report and recommended approval of the application subject to the conditions provided therein. a. He noted that the applicant did not submit a lighting plan. He requested the hearings officer add a condition of approval requiring the applicant to submit a lighting plan demonstrating compliance with City standards prior to issuance of building permits for the proposed addition. b. He noted that the Code requires the applicant to provide a loading space on the site, because the church building complex will exceed a certain size, and the requirement cannot be waived. However the City is flexible about the location and design of the loading space. The applicant can identify an area of the parking lot as the proposed loading space. c. He noted that the Code requires the applicant to provide 8 bicycle parking spaces. However the applicant can request approval of a Type H adjustment to reduce the number of bicycle parking spaces based on the characteristics of the use. d. He agreed with Ms. Root that the applicant is not required to obtain an NPDES permit, because the site is smaller than 5 acres. 3. Jackie Root and Edward Whitehead testified for the applicant. a. Ms. Root accepted the Staff Report and recommended conditions with certain exceptions. i. She argued that a loading space is unnecessary. The church does not distribute or receive goods by truck. ii. She requested the hearings officer reduce the bicycle parking requirement from 8 spaces to 5 spaces. The 5 existing bicycle parking spaces on the site are more than adequate to serve the church. She was not aware of any church members arriving at the site by bicycle. iii. She argued that the applicant should not be required to modify the existing church building to accommodate the expansion, based on her discussions with the City building official and the fire marshal at the pre-application conference. She submitted her notes from that meeting. iv. She argued that the applicant is not required to obtain an NPDES permit, because the site is smaller than 5 acres. v. She waived the applicant's right to have the record held open to offer a closing written argument. b. Mr. Whitehead testified that he has been a member of the church for 25 years, and the church has never needed a loading space during that time. 4. At the end of the hearing, the hearings officer closed the public record and announced his intention to approve the application subject to recommended conditions with certain amendments. C. DISCUSSION 1. The Staff Report identifies the applicable approval standards for the application and applies them to the record in the case. The hearings officer agrees that the standards identified in the Staff Report are all of the applicable standards and finds that they are correctly applied to the facts of the case in the Staff Report. Substantial evidence in the record shows that the proposed use does or can comply with the applicable approval criteria CUP 2003-00005 (Tigard Church of God) Hearings Officer Final Order Page 2 • • for a CUP, and adoption of recommended conditions of approval as amended will ensure final plans are submitted and implemented as approved consistent with those criteria and standards and will prevent, reduce or mitigate potential adverse impacts of the development consistent with the requirements of the Tigard Development Code (the "TDC"). The hearings officer adopts the findings in the Staff Report as his own, except to the extent inconsistent with the findings and conclusions in this final order. 2. The hearings officer finds that the applicant is not required to provide a loading space on the site. TDC 18.765.080.A provides that off-street loading spaces are required for "commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck..." (Emphasis added). The church does not receive or distribute material or merchandise by truck, based on the testimony of Ms. Root and Mr. Whitehead. There is no substantial evidence to the contrary. Therefore condition of approval 1 should be deleted. 3. TDC Table 18.765.2 requires that the applicant provide 1 bicycle parking space for every 20 seats in the main assembly area of the church. The applicant's existing sanctuary provides 160 seats. Therefore the applicant is required to provide 8 bicycle parking spaces on the site.I TDC 18.765.050.E authorizes the director to reduce the number of required bicycle parking spaces through a Type II adjustment. The applicant should be allowed to request such an adjustment without a modification to this conditional use permit. Condition of approval 8 should be modified to that effect. 4. City Building Division staff commented that the applicant will need to add one- hour fire walls and make certain other modifications to the existing church to accommodate the proposed administration building. See page 20, Section VIII of the Staff Report. These comments appear to conflict with Ms. Root's notes from the May 22, 2003 building permit pre-application meeting. Based on Ms. Root's notes, City officials agreed to waive structural modifications to the existing church if the applicant provided fire sprinklers. However the hearings officer cannot resolve the conflict through this decision. The hearings officer has no authority to implement or interpret the building and fire codes. That authority rests solely with the City building official and the fire marshal, respectively. 5. The hearings officer finds that an NPDES permit is not required for this development, because the site is smaller than 5 acres. The finding that an NPDES permit is required on page 19 of the Staff Report is incorrect. 6. TDC 18.360.090.A(10) provides that "[e]xterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime." The analysis in the Staff Report concluded the application complies with this section because the Police Department did not object to the plan, but the hearings officer finds that is not responsive to the standard. The hearings officer further finds that it is feasible for the applicant to comply with this standard by submitting a lighting plan for review and approval consistent with TDC 18.360.090.A(10). Therefore the hearings officer concludes a condition of approval is warranted requiring the applicant to submit to the planning staff for review and approval a lighting plan showing that light fixtures are selected, designed and situated to direct light towards areas of the site vulnerable to crime and away from abutting properties. 1 160/20 = 8 bicycle parking spaces CUP 2003-00005 Hearings Officer Final Order (Tigard Church of God) Page 3 • • D. CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings and discussion provided or incorporated in this final order, the hearings officer concludes that the applicant sustained the burden of proof that the proposed conditional use permit does or will comply with the applicable criteria of the Community Development Code, provided development that occurs after this decision complies with applicable local, state, and federal laws and with conditions of approval warranted to ensure such compliance occurs in fact. E. DECISION In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating the Staff Report and public testimony and exhibits received in this matter, the hearings officer hereby approves CUP 2003-00005 (Tigard Church of God), subject to the following conditions of approval: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS-SHALL-BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Planning Department (Brad Kilby, 639-4171, ext. 2434) for review and approval: 1. The applicant shall comply with the tree protection measures prescribed by the consulting arborist. 2. The applicant shall provide the city arborist with a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, and paving. 3. The applicant shall notify the city arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. 4. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan that shows: a. The manner in which crossings of the traffic aisles will be identified in compliance with TDC Section 18.705.030(F)(3). b. Provisions for a six-foot wall around the trash enclosure. C. All access aisles, parking spaces, and direction of flow are clearly identified and marked as part of the parking lot striping. d. Eight (8) bicycle-parking spaces designed and constructed to the standards that are identified in TDC Section 18.765.050 or approval of (or pending application for) a Type H adjustment reducing the number of required bicycle parking spaces. 5. A lighting plan showing that light fixtures are selected, designed and situated to direct light towards areas of the site vulnerable to crime and away from the abutting properties. Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet, which is sufficient to illuminate a person. CUP 2003-00005 (Tigard Church of Cod) Hearings Officer Final Order Page 4 • • Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: 6. A Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover the street trees and any other work in the public right-of-way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should onTyin7ude sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tigard.or.us). 7. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 8. The applicant's construction plans shall show planting of street trees on the east side of 98 Avenue. 9. The applicant shall provide connection of proposed addition to the public sanitary sewerage system. A connection permit is required to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer system. 10. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No.. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineeng Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 11. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, December 2000 edition." THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: 12. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 13. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW 98' Avenue underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of underggrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $10,862.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection. CUP 2003-00005 (Tigard Church of God) Hearings Officer Final Order Page 5 • • 14. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall ay the fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site water quantity facility. The fee is based on the total area of new impervious surfaces in the proposed development. 15. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. FAILURE TO SATISFY THE CONDITIONS-OF-APPROVAL WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION SHALL RENDER THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION VOID. DATED this 11th day of August, 2003. Larry Epstein, (MCP City of Tigard Land Use Hearings Officer CUP 2003-00005 Hearings Officer Final Order (Tigard Church of God) Page 6 ~ r "TAB B" Applicant's Materials & All Correspondence Filed with Hearings Officer Prior to the Public Hearing. Agenda Item: 2.1 Date: STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER CITY OF TIGARD Community q)evelopment FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ShapingA(Better Community 120 DAYS = 10/4/2003 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: . TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION CASE NO: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) CUP2003-00005 OWNER: Tigard Church of God Attn: Bruce Plunkett 15670 SW 98th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 APPLICANT: Zaik/Miller Associates Attn: Jackie Root 2340 NW Thurman Street, Suite 201 Portland, OR 97210 PROPOSAL: The applicant is seeking Conditional Use Approval to expand the facility by 2,875 square feet for administrative offices and classrooms, and make site modifications to the parking and landscaped areas. LOCATION: 15670 SW 98th Avenue; WCTM 25111 CD, Tax Lot 300. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN and ZONING DESIGNATION: Medium-Density Residential; R-7: Religious Institutions and other civic uses are permitted conditionally in the R-7 zoning district. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.360, 18.390, 18.510, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Hearings Officer find that the proposed Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and meets the Approval Standards as outlined in this report. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL, subject to the following recommended Conditions of Approval: TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 1 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 • CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE AND/OR BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Planning Department (Brad i y, 639-4171, ext. or review an approval: 1. Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the parking plan to include one (1) off-street loading space. Said space shall be designed and constructed to meet the dimensional criteria in Tigard Development Code (TDC) Section 18.765.080(B). 2. The applicant shall comply with the tree protection measures prescribed by the consulting arborist. 3. The applicant shall provide the .city arborist with a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, and paving. 4. The applicant shall notify the city arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. 5. The applicant shall revise the site plan to indicate the manner in which crossings of the traffic aisles will be identified in compliance with TDC Section 18.705.030(F)(3~. 6. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall revise the plans to include provisions for a six-foot wall around the trash enclosure. 7. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan that shows that all access aisles, parking spaces, and direction of flow are clearly identified and marked as part of the parking lot striping. 8. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall revise the parking plan to accommodate 8 bicycle-parking spaces. Said spaces must be designed and constructed to the standards that are identified in TDC Section 18.765.050. Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: 9. A Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover the street trees and any other work in the public right-of-way. Six (6 sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. ublic Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tigard.or.us). 10. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity wFo-w-ill be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 11. Thp applicant's construction plans shall show planting of street trees on the east side of 98 Avenue. 12. The applicant shall provide connection of proposed addition to the public sanitary sewerage system. A connection permit is required to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer system. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 2 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/2812003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 13. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00- Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim cM Millan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 14. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, December 2000 edition." THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit tote Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, , ext. or review and approval: 15. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 16. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW 98th Avenue underground as a part of this project, or they shall pa the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $10,862.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection 17. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall pay the fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site water quanfity facility. The fee is based on the total area of new impervious surfaces in the proposed development. 18. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality face ity for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. FAILURE TO SATISFY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION SHALL RENDER THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION VOID. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The site was rezoned in 1975 for the Church of Christ, and subsequent approval of SDR18-76 permitted the construction of the facility. The Tigard Church of God received conditional use approval in 1977 under CU14-77 and SDR 34-77 to expand the facility. The Church received approval in 1980 under CU20-80 to utilize a single-family residence on site to hold bible study. Vicinity Information: The site is surrounded by property zoned for and developed with a mixture of residential densities. The Southwest Church of Christ is directly south of this site. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 3 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 • 13. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00- 7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 14. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement PFI permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, December 2000 edition." THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. or review and approval: 15. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 16. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW 98th Avenue underground as a part of this project, or they shall pa the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $10,862.00 and it shall be paid prior to a final building inspection 17. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall pay the fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site water quantity facility. The fee is based on the total area of new impervious surfaces in the proposed development and was calculated to be $ 18. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facirity for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. FAILURE TO SATISFY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION SHALL RENDER THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION VOID. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site Histo : e site was rezoned in 1975 for the Church of Christ, and subsequent approval of SDR18-76 permitted the construction of the facility. The Tigard Church of God received conditional use approval in 1977 under CU14-77 and SDR 34-77 to expand the facility. The Church received approval in 1980 under CU20-80 to utilize a single-family residence on site to hold bible study. Vicinity Information: e site is surrounded by property zoned for and developed with a mixture of residential densities. The Southwest Church of Christ is directly south of this site. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 3 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • ! Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is currently developed wl t e existing church. The current proposal involves a 2,875 square foot expansion for classrooms and administrative offices. The applicant is not proposing to modify the existing sanctuary. SECTION IV. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES, PERMITS AND USE Use Classification: Section 18.130.020 Lists the Use Categories. The applicant is proposing to amend the existing conditional use permit to allow for expansion of an existing church by 2,875 square feet. Churches are permitted by Conditional Use in all zones. Conditional Use applications are subject to a public hearing before the City of Tigard Hearings Officer. Summa Land Use Permits: Chapter 18.310 Defines the decision-ma ang type to which the land-use application is assigned. The proposed amendment to the existing Conditional Use permit is a Type III-HO decision. SECTION V. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS The Tigard Community Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal, and be given an opportunity for written comments and/or oral testimony prior to a decision being made. In addition, the applicant is required to post the site with notice of the public hearing. Notice of the application was mailed and staff has verified that the site was posted. To date, staff has not received any letters in support or against the proposal. SECTION VI. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA A summary of the applicable criteria in this case, in the Chapter order in which they are addressed in this report are as follows: A. fic Conditional Use Criteria r r a p rova n ena onal Conditions of A pprova)) p B. Code Standards Develop ment pplicable 18.330 Conditional Uses) 18.360 Site Development Review) 18.510 Residential Zoning) 18.705 Access, Egress & Circulation) 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards) 18.745 Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid-Waste & Recyclable Storage) 18.765 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements) 18.780 signs 18.790 Tree emoval) 18.795 Visual Clearance) C. Additional Site Development Review Approval Stan D. ree an I I improve-m-e-nMandards(IMOT E. Impact u v . TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 4 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 • SECTION VII. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A. SPECIFIC CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL CRITERIA Section 18.330.010.A states that the purpose of this chapter is to provide standards and procedures under which a conditional use may be permitted, enlarged or altered if the site is appropriate and if other appropriate conditions of approval can be met. There are certain uses which due to the nature of the impacts on surrounding land uses and public facilities require a case-by-case review and analysis. Section 18.330.020.A states that a request for approval for a new conditional use shall be processed as a Type III-HO procedure, as regulated by Chapter 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.330.030A and subject to other requirements in Chapter 18.330. General Approval Criteria for a Conditional Use: Section 18.330.030: The site size an imensions provide adequate area or the nee s of the proposed use;. According to the Washington County Assessor's Office, the existing site size is 2.77 acres. This report evaluates the proposal and necessary applicable code requirements, and as conditioned, the site size is adequate for the needs of the proposed 2,875 square foot expansion. The characteristics of the site are suitable for the proposed use considering size, shape, location, topography, and natural features; There are no apparent natural features on this site, and the size, shape, and location are not extraordinary. As discussed in this report, the site appears suitable for the proposed development. All required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposal; and The site is already served by all required public facilities. According to the comments received, all public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the site. The applicable requirements of the zoning district are met except as modified by this chapter. The following table provides the dimensional standards in the R-7 zone, the additional dimensional requirements for religious facilities are specified in the Conditional Use Standards of Section 18.330.050.6.9 and the dimensions proposed for this development. STANDARD R-7 CONDITIONAL USE REQUIREMENT PROPOSED Minimum Lot Size 5,000 sq. ft. 20,000 sq. ft 120,744 sq. ft Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. - 395.6ft ,Winn nuns Vet ac" and 15 ft 25 ft 74 ft Side facing street on comer & through lots loft 20 ft N/A Side and 5 ft 20 ft 144/51 ft Rear and 15 ft 20 ft 85 ft Maximum Height 35 ft. Varies 22ft. Maximum Site Coverage [2] 80% - 67% [2] Minimum Landscape Requirement 20% 33% [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. As identified in the table above, the applicant's plans show that the dimensional standards for the base zone and Conditional Use standards are met. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 5 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • The supplementary requirements set forth in other chapters of this Code including but not limited to Chapter 18.780, Signs, and Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review, if applicable, are met or can be conditioned to be satisfied. The applicable review criteria in this case include the following chapters of the Community Development Code: 18.330, Conditional Use; 18.360, Site Development Review; 18.390, Decision Making Procedures; 18.510, Residential Zoning Districts; 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; 18.725, Environmental Performance Standards; 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; 18.755, Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage; 18.765, Off-Street Parking; 18.780, Signs; 18.790, Tree Removal; 18.795, Visual Clearance Areas; and 18.810, Street and Utility Improvement Standards. The development standards and requirements of these chapters are addressed further in this report. The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following chapters: Variances and Adjustments; 18.390, 18.600, Community Plan Area Standards; 18.710, Accessory Residential Units; 18.715, Density Computations; 18.720, Design Compatibility Standards; 18.730, Exceptions to Development Standard; 18.740, Historic Overlay; 18.742, Home Occupations; 18.750, Manufactured//Mobile Home Regulations; 18.760, Nonconforming Situations; 18.775, Sensitive Lands; 18.785, Temporary Uses; and 18.798, Wireless Communications Facilities. These chapters are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards. The use will comply with the applicable policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is implemented by the Community Development Code. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan policies are, therefore, assured by satisfaction of the applicable development standards of the development code as addressed within this report. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the General Approval Criteria for a Conditional Use have been satisfied. Additional Conditions of A roval for Conditional Use. Section 18.330.030.13 saes a the Hearings u on y may impose conditions on the approval of a conditional use, which are found necessary to ensure the use is compatible with other uses in the vicinity, and that the iizmpacof the proposed use on the surrounding uses and public facilities is minimed. These conditions may include, but are not limited to the following: Limiting the hours, days, place and/or manner of operation; The majority of activities for the Church occur on weekends and evenings. A search of the city's code enforcement records shows no complaints against the existing church operations. Staff finds no reason or circumstance to impose condifions limiting the hours, days, and/or manner of operation. Requiring design features, which minimize environmental impacts such as noise, vibration, air pollution, glare, odor and/or dust; The hazards related to odor, dust, noise, glare, air pollution, and vibration can be mitigated through the design of the building and the buffering and landscaping of the use that has been proposed as conditions of approval. Those hazards that are inherent during construction will be held to the same standards as other construction within the City of Tigard as regulated by the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC). All of these items will be subject to local and state enforcement review if the applicant exceeds the allowed levels. Requiring additional setback areas, lot area, and/or lot depth or width; The buffer requirements are discussed further in this report. Limiting the building height, size or lot coverage, and/or location on the site; TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 6 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • Based on the plans submitted, the applicant has designed and placed the building such that it meets the underlying zone requirements, as well as, the additional requirements imposed on conditional uses. Designating the size, number, location and/or design of vehicle access points; The applicant is proposing to utilize the two existing accesses off of SW 98th Avenue. There are no new accesses proposed or required for this addition. Requiring street right-of-way to be dedicated and street(s) to be improved; Although there are no required street dedications, the applicant will be required to plant street trees along the frontage to complete the street improvements. Street trees specifics have been addressed later in this report. Requiring landscaping, screening, drainage and/or surfacing of parking and loading areas; The applicant has proposed to restripe the parking lot and add some new trees and vegetation to screen the parking area and blend the new building with the existing church. These items are discussed in more detail later in this discussion. Limiting the number, size, location, height and/or lighting of signs; There are no new signs proposed with this expansion. Limiting or setting standards for the location and/or intensity of outdoor lighting; Lighting is addressed later in this report. Requiring berms, screening or landscaping and the establishment of standards for their installation and maintenance; There is no evidence in the record to suggest that this particular proposal would trigger a need for any additional berming, scree,t in and or landscaping. The facility is already partially screened by a berm along SW 98 Avenue. This criterion is met. Requiring and designating the size, height, location and/or materials for fences; The applicant has not proposed any new fencing, and there is no requirement to provide additional fencing for this project. This criterion is satisfied. Requiring the protection and preservation of existing trees, soils, vegetation, watercourses, habitat areas and/or drainage areas; The applicant has provided a tree preservation plan that will be discussed further in this report. There are no watercourses, habitat areas, drainage areas, or vegetation other than domesticated that will be affected by this proposal. Requiring the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjoining and within the floodplain when land form alterations and development are allowed within the 100-year floodplain; and This development is not adjacent to the 100-year floodplain; therefore, a condition is not necessary. Requiring the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. This development is not adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, therefore, a condition is not necessary. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 7 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/2812003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 .0 B. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS Site Develo ment Review - Chapter 18.360: The Site eve opmen eview approval standards require that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of the Community Development Code. The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections. Residential Zonin Districts - Chapter 18.510: The rest en is zoning district development s an ards are discussed previously in this report under the Conditional Use standards. It should be noted that Religious Institutions are permitted conditionally in all residential zones. Access Egress and Circulation - Chapter 18.705: Section saes a an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO. The proposed addition to this facility is to provide office space for current staff members. The applicant has indicated that the addition will not generate new trips to the church site. There are two existing driveways that access 98 Avenue and the applicant is not proposing any changes to these driveways. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impO report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any opion for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The existing driveways are not located within the influence area of collector or arterial streets. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. The existing driveways are located along 98th Avenue, which is designated as a Neighborhood Route. Public Street Access: All vehicular access and egress as required in Sections 18.705.030(H) and 18.705.030(1) 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; The applicant has existing access to SW 98th Avenue, which is a public street. This criterion is satisfied. Walkways: On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses: to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments; TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 8 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 0 The existing facility already has designated walkways to SW 98th Avenue and the applicant has indicated in the narrative that the sidewalk will provide connectivity to this sidewalk as required. This criterion is satisfied. Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or arking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Kequired 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; and The walkways have been identified on the site plan. All existing walkways are five feet in width. No proposed walkway is less than 5-feet in width. All proposed walkways across traffic aisles are less than 36 feet in length, but it has not been determined how those crossings will be identified. The applicant may propose to mark the crossing at the same time that the parking lot is restriped. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The application fails to identify by which means the parking lot crossings will be identified. CONDITION:The applicant shall revise the site plan to indicate the manner in which crossings of the traffic aisles will be identified in compliance with TDC Section 18.705.030(F)(3). Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The applicant indicates that the new sidewalks will be constructed of concrete. This criterion has been satisfied. Minimum Access Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Use: Section 18.705.030.1 provides the minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial uses: Table 18.705.3 indicates that the required access width for developments with more than 100 parking spaces is two 30-foot-wide accesses with a 24-foot pavement width or one 50-foot wide access with 40-feet of pavement. The TDC Table 18.705.3 requires a minimum of two, 30-foot accesses with 24-feet of pavement, or one 50-foot access with 40-feet of pavement. The existing development satisfies this standard by already providing two 30-foot accesses with pavement widths of 24-feet. This criterion is satisfied. F_nvirnnm_ental_ Performance Standards - Chanter 18.725: Requires hat federal era an sae environmen aws, ru es and regulations be applied to development within the City of Tigard. Section 18.725.030 Performance Standards regulates: Noise, visible emissions, vibration and odors. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.41.130 rro-ugFi 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Visible Emissions. Within the Commercial zoning districts and the Industrial Park fl-P) zoning district, ere shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack or other point- source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property line. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) rules for visible emissions (340-21-05 and 340-28-070) apply. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 9 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/2812003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 i Vibration. No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles, trains and aircraft is perms a in any given zoning district, which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. Odors. The emissions of odorous gases or other matter in such quantities as to be reac- detectable at any point beyond the property line of the use creating the odors is prohibited. DEQ rules for odors (340-028-090) apply. Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. Insects and rodents. All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. FINDING: Based on the information provided by the applicant, the expanded use of the property will conform to the above requirements. If for some reason the above standards were in question, and it was subsequently found that the use was out of compliance with any of the above standards, the property owner would be subject to code enforcement, court review, and possible fines until they were brought back into compliance. A search of city records does not indicate any code enforcement issues associated with the existing use. Landscaping and Screenin - Chapter 18.745: street trees: Section saes a all development projects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.C Section 18.745.040.C requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). The subject site has 395 feet of frontage along SW 98th Avenue. Therefore, the development would require the installation of street trees as prescribed in TDC Chapter 18.745. The applicant has provided a street tree plan and indicated in the n%rrative that eleven (11) new street trees will be provided at 30-foot intervals along SW 98 Avenue. The applicants' landscape architect has proposed to plant flowering cherry trees, which are approved street trees at 30 feet on center. This proposal meets the species and spacing standards as required within the chapter. This criterion is satisfied. Land Use Buffering and Screening: Buffering and Screening is required between different types of land uses. It is the intent of these standards to provide for privacy and protection and reduce or eliminate the adverse impacts of visual or noise pollution that a development site may impose on adjacent properties. The proposed use is in a residential zone and partially abutting residential uses on three sides, It is also adjacent to a golT course to the north and east, and to another church directly south. The facility fronts SW 98 h Avenue. In these locations, buffering is. not required. Staff has visited the site and the buffer area is very large and has been previously landscaped. The applicant is proposing to increase the landscaping within the parkiphg areas and along the southern boundary, as well as, planting street trees along SW 98 Avenue. Staff is confident that the landscaping and screening that is existing, and that.is proposed will satisfy any need for buffering and screening from this addition. There is no need to require additional buffering and screening from adjacent uses. This criterion is satisfied. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 10 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Screening Special Provisions: Section 18.745.050.E requires the screening of parkin gg and loading areas. Landscaped Parking areas shall include special design features, wFiich effectively screen the parking of areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three (3) feet wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The existing parking area is already compliant with the requirements of the TDC, and the applicant has provided the City with a landscape plan that demonstrates compliance with the standards within the TDC around the parking area that is to be restriped. This criterion is satisfied. Mixed Solid Waste and Rec clables Storage - Chapter 18.755: Chapter requires a new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review anca Sign-Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan, which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the acility location and compatibility. The applicant has stated that the location of the existing facility will not change and has indicated that the service provider is satisfied with continuing regular service at that location. This standard is satisfied. Location Standards. To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclable shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements; Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations; Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users- Exterior storage.areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C-, design standards- The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. The applicant does not intend to change the size or location of the existing facility. The existing facility is already within the south parking lot. This standard has been met. Design Standards. The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 11 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/2812003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • Staff has visited the site and the facility is screened, however, the applicant is proposing to rebuild the screen with a brick wall of four feet in height. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has proposed a four foot high wall to screen the facility; however, the development code requires a six-foot screen. CONDITION: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall revise the plans to include provisions for a six-foot wall around the trash enclosure. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): Disabled-Accessible arcing: All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal sandards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. According to the Ore on Uniform Building Code, a parking facility accommodating 101-150 spaces requires five I)) ADA accessible spaces. The applicant has indicated that there will be a total of seven (7) tF~roughout the site. This criterion is satisfied. Access Drives: With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; the number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030.P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. The applicant is proposing to utilize the two existing accesses. The TDC requires two, 30-foot accesses with twenty-four feet of pavement. This criterion is satisfied. Loading/unloading driveways: A driveway designed for continuous forward flow of passenger vehicles for the purpose of loading and unloading passengers shall be located on the site of any school or other meeting place which is designed to accommodate more than 25 people at one time. The applicant did not specifically address this criterion, however, a visit to the site and review of the site plan indicates that this criterion is easily satisfied by the location of the two (2) accesses and the main entrance. This criterion is satisfied. Parking Lot Striping: Except for single-family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off-street parking requirements as contained in this Chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and all interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. The applicant has indicated that the parking lot will be restriped and has indicated striping on the plans. However, the applicants restrlping plan does not include provisions to mark access aisles and direction of flow. This criterion has not been met. FINDING: The applicant does not clearly mark the access aisles and direction of flow as required. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 12 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • CONDITION: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan that shows that all access aisles, parking spaces, and direction of flow are clearly identified and marked as part of the parking lot striping. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Table 18.765.1. outlines the minimum dimensions for angled parking. The parking areas are pre-existing and staff has reviewed the areas that are to be restriped. According, to the site plan, the dimensional requirements of the restriped parking areas meet the minimum dimensional requirements as outlined in Table 18.765.1 for 90 degree parking. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements: The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.765.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. The TDC requires one (1) parking space for every 20 seats in the main assembly area. The applicant has indicated that the main sanctuary currently seats 160 patrons. Therefore, the apppplicant is required to provide eight (8) spaces for bicycles. The applicant has indicated that altF~ough there is no existing bike rack on site, they will construct a five stall space at the front of the sanctuary. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not adequately addressed the minimum bicycle parking requirements and design standards as required by TDC Sections 18.765.050 and 18.765.070. CONDITION: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall revise the parking plan to accommodate 8 bicycle-parking spaces. Said spaces must be designed and constructed to the standards that are identified in TDC Section 18.765.050. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.765.070.H states that the minimum and maximum parking shall be as required in Table 18.765.2. As a result of a code amendment by the Tigard City Council in March, 2002, religious institutions must provide one (1) parking space for every three (3) seats in the main assembly area. With seating for 160 in the main sanctuary, the church is required to provide a minimum of 53 off-street parking spaces. The applicant has exceeded the minimum parking requirements. The church is in parking zone B, therefore, the maximum amount of parking they can provide is one (1) space for every 1.3 seats or in this case 123 spaces. The applicant is proposing a tottall of 107. This criterion is satisfied. Off-street loading requirements: Off-street loading spaces: Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows: 1. A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more- 2. A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. Off-street loading dimensions: 1. Each loading berth shall be approved by the City Engineer as to design and location; 2. Each loading space shall have sufficient area for turning and maneuvering of vehicles on the site. At a minimum, the maneuvering length shall not be less than twice the overall length of the longest vehicle using the facility site; 3. Entrances and exits for the loading areas shall be provided at locations approved by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 18.710; TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 13 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 0 4. Screening for off-street loading facilities is required and shall be the same as screening for parking lots in accordance with Chapter 18.745. Because of the size of the overall building, the church would be required to provide one (1) off-street loading space to meet the standard. The applicant contends that the church does not receive or distribute merchandise. Unfortunately the development code does not differentiate when the overall gross building size is 10,000 square feet or more. This criterion is not satisfied. FINDING: The applicant has not addressed the need for off-street loading facilities as required by TDC Section 18.765.080. CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall revise the parking plan to include one (1) off-street loading space. Said space shall be designed and constructed to meet the dimensional criteria in TDC Section 18.765.080(B). Tree Removal - Chapter 18.790 ec ion requires at a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist be provided for a conditional use application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, identification of which trees are proposed to be removed, and a protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. The plan shows 25 trees on site over twelve inches in diameter. Of those trees, the applicant is certain that two (2), possibly three (3) will need to be removed to accommodate construction. In the worse case scenario, the applicant is still maintaining 88% of those trees on site that are over 12 inches in diameter. Therefore, no mitigation is necessary. The applicant has provided a tree protection plan from Terrill Collier, certified arborist. To ensure that the tree protection measures are in place, and the tree preservation plan is implemented, the following conditions shall apply. FINDING: The applicant has proposed to retain 88% percent of trees over twelve inches on site and is not subject to any required tree mitigation in accordance with TDC Section 18.790.030. In order to insure the viability of the existing trees and those trees within the area of work, the following conditions shall apply. CONDITIONS: The applicant shall comply with the protection measures prescribed by the consulting arborist. The applicant shall provide the city arborist with a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, and paving. The applicant shall notify the city arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. Visual Clearance Areas - Chapter 18.795: section .saes a e provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. Section 18.795.030.B. states that a clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measure from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 14 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/2812003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER There are no proposed structures inside of the vision clearance area and the applicant has stated in the narrative, that all landscaping within the vision clearance area will be maintained as required by the Tigard Development Code. On-going maintenance of the vision clearance triangle is required and any violation of this triangle, will be addressed through the City of Tigard Code Enforcement process. This standard is satisfied. C. ADDITIONAL SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL CRITERIA Section 18.360.090(A)(2) through 18.360.090(A)(15) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.360.090.3 (Exterior Elevations);); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 18.360.090.6 (Private Outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.8 (100-year floodplain) and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces). The following sections were discussed previously in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.13 Parking); 18.360.090.12 (Landscaping); 18.360.090.13 (Drainage); and 18.360.090.14 Provision for the Disabled); 18.360.030.15 (Provisions of the underlying zone). Compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this title including Chapter 18.810 street an Utility Standards: As discussed in this report, all applicable sections have been addressed and where the proposal is deficient, staff has recommended conditions to ensure compliance. Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Buildings shall be: located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; located to provide adequate distance between adJ'oining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting; and oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. The applicant has proposed to retain 88% of the trees on site that are over 12 inches in diameter. There are no extraordinary physical or natural restraints that would dictate the placement of the expansion. No buildings or structures are proposed that will hinder air circulation, or prevent fire-fighting apparatus from performing their jobs. The proposed structures do not exceed the allowed height. This criterion has been met. Buffering, screening, and compatibility between adjoining uses: Buffering shall be provided between different types of rand uses and decreased noise levels, air pollution, visual barrier, on site screening of service areas, storage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops shall be considered in determining the intensity of the buffer or screen. Buffering and screening has been addressed elsewhere in this report, and has been conditioned such that it will meet this criterion. Crime Prevention and Safety: Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; Interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 15 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangBrous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet, which is sufficient to illuminate a person. The City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this project and has not indicated concern or objection with the proposal. The crime prevention standards have been satisfied. Public Transit: Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route; the requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: the location of other transit facilities in the area; and the size and type of the proposal. The following facilities may be required after City and Tri-Met review: bus stop shelters; turnouts for buses; and connecting paths to the shelters. There are no transit services adjacent to this site. The nearest stops to this site are located at SW Hall Blvd. This criterion is satisfied. D. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS - CHAPTER 18.810 Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as ppTDCrtion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the Minimum Rights-of-Wayy and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030(E) requires an arterial street to have a 60 to74 to 122-foot right-of-way width and 12-foot travel lanes. 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 98th Avenue, which is classified as a Neighborhood Route on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 55 feet of right-of-way (ROW), according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant has submitted a copy of a Street Dedication document from 1978 that shows an additional 5 feet of ROW dedicated to the public. This brings the total ROW along the frontage to 60 feet. This exceeds the minimum ROW required for a Neighborhood Route. SW 98th is fully improved except for street trees. The applicant's plan indicates they will plant street trees according to the required spacing. The applicant has requested that they be allowed to plant the street trees east of the sidewalk because the existing planter strip is only 4' wide. The street trees may be planted east of the sidewalk as long as they are at least 2' away. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 16 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. There is an existing sidewalk along 98th Avenue. No sidewalk improvements are-required. 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 Clean Water Services 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. The closest sewer line is an 8-inch line in Brentwood Place to the east. The applicant's plan shows a sewer lateral from the proposed addition connecting to the sewer located in Brentwood Place. This standard is satisfied. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states regwires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no existing upstream drainage areas that affect this site. 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 Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The net new impervious surface area is only 3233 sf. Therefore, detention is not required. The stormwater runoff from the new impervious surface will be collected in a 4-inch rain drain that will connect to a 6-inch storm line. The 6-Inch line will transmit the flow to a water quality Swale on the south side of the parking lot. The outflow from the Swale will connect to the existing catch basin at the south west corner of the parking lot. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 17 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • 0 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. SW 98th Avenue is designated as a bicycle facility. There is an existing bikeway along the east side of 98 Avenue. No additional improvements are warranted. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing ufilities which are not underground will serve the developpment and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty ofunder-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under- grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case- by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in- lieu of under-grounding. There are existing overhead utility lines in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 overhead lines. The frontage along this $10,862.00. along the frontage of SW 98th Avenue. If the fee per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the site is 395 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be EN :Y CONCERNS 1 Public Water S stem: This sI a Is serve by Uty of Tigard Water. The applicant indicates the existing water service is adequate to serve the addition. Storm Water Qualit : e i y as agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 18 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • Prior to construction, the applicant shall facility that will meet the intent of the CWS submit a maintenance plan for the facility prior to construction. • submit plans and calculations for a water uality Design Standards. In addition, the applican~ shall that must be reviewed and approved by the City To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall providthe City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and) specifications. Gradin and Erosion Control: Design an ons ruc ion 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, rading, excavating, clearing, and any other activiy which accelerates erosion. Per VWS 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 Building Division will review the grading and erosion control plans for this development as a part of the site permit review. E. IMPACT STUDY: Section a states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidnce that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. The applicant has submitted an impact study addressing the required elements above. ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY ANALYSIS Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development. Presently, the TIF for this project is estimated at $5,607. According to the Washington County TIF ordinance, 32 percent of a projects impacts are met by its TIF assessment in Tigard. This leaves 68% unmitigated. The actual cost of system improvements per trip generated by new development on the Tigard street system can be determined by the following equation (Larson, Mackenzie Engineering, Dolan Findings, June 1995): $1,053 divided by.32 equals $3,303.12. ($1,053 is theTIF assessment according to the Washington County TIF ordinance effective July 1, 2003). Less miti ated costs The app scan is no required to make any dedications or improvements outside of what was proposed. TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 19 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • $3,303.12 of unmitigatea impacts ~Z,Zou. I L FINDING: Using the above cost factors, it can be determined that there are no unmitigated impacts and, therefore, the proposed improvements and imposed conditions are roughly proportional and justified. SECTION VIII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed the proposal and stated that the proximity of the new admin. building to the existing church will require modifications to the existing church. The modification will entail 1 hr. walls with parapets and possibly no openings (doors). The new admin. building will be required to meet all applicable building codes. The City of Tigard Engineering Department was sent this proposal for review and the comments have been incorporated into this report. The City of Tigard Operations Utility Manager has reviewed this application and has indicated that all utility work should be coordinated with the City. Sanitary and Storm are private. He also indicated that the applicant needs to supplement the existing water meter with a backflow device. Contact Rich Sattler at the Tigard Water District. The City of Tigard Arborist has reviewed this application and has indicated that the tree protection fencing was not shown on the plan as indicated in the arborist report. He also indicated that the tree inventory and health report were not included in the report. Staff has recommended that the applicant notify the city's arborist prior to site work so that he can ensure protection measures are in place and functioning; The trees that would potentially be affected were shown on the tree planting plan. The city arborist can be reached at (503) 639-4171, ext. 2589 City of Tigard Police Department has reviewed this application and offered no comments or objections. SECTION IX. AGENCY COMMENTS Clean Water Services has reviewed the proposal and indicated that the applicant needs to adjust the water quality swale as needed to provide required treatment. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has reviewed this application and has provided the following comments: 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUILDING AND TURNAROUNDS: Access roads shall be within 150 feet o a portions o the exterior wall o the first story o the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. An approved turnaround is required i the remaining distance to an approved intersectingg roadway, as measured along the fire apparatus access road, is greater than 150 feet. (UFC Sec. 902.2.1) 2) DEAD END ROADS: Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be prove a with an approved turnaround. Diagrams of approved turnarounds are available from the fire district. (UFC Sec. 902.2.2.4) 3) PAINTED CURBS: Where required, fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted yellow an mare "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" at each 25 feet. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. Lettering shall be white on red or black on yellow background. (UFC Sec. 901.4.5.2) TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 20 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • 4) COMMERCIAL. BUILDINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall no exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GP or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi, whichever is less. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's Office. (UFC Sec. 903.3) s) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - FIRE HYDRANTS: No portion of the exterior of a commercial building shall be located more an 250 ee rom a fire hydrant when measured in an approved manner around the outside of the building and along an approved fire apparatus access roadway. Any hydrants that are left over from the minimum number of hydrant calculations may be full filled by hydrants that are up to 500 feet from any point of the building. The fire Prevention Ordinance has further requirements that need to be used for acceptance and placement of fire hydrants. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1) 6) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - MINIMUM NUMBER OF FIRE HYDRANTS: The minimum number o fire hydrants or a of in s a be based on the require fire ow prior to giving credit for fire protection systems divided by 1500. If the answer is equal to or greater than x.5 the next whole number of hydrants shall be used. There shall not be less than 2 hydrants per building. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1) 7) • xis Ing y rants in !he area may be use to meet the required number of hydrants; however, hydrants that are over 500 feet away from the nearest point of the subject building shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highway, freeway, or heavily traveled collector streets shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the Chief. • Private hydrants or public hydrants that are on adjacent private property shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants for the subject building. Exception: The use of hydrants located on other private property may be considered i t eir locations and access are encumbered in a legal document (such as deed restriction) by the owners of the involved parcels of property. The encumbrance may be lifted only after approvals by the Chief on behalf of the fire department and any other governmental agencies that may require approval. • When evaluating the placement of hydrants at apartment or industrial complexes the first hydrant(Ur be placed shall be at the primary access and any secondary access to the site. these hydrants have been placed other hydrants shall be sited to meet the above requirements for spacing and minimum number of hydrants. (UFC Sec. 903.4.2.1.1) J_ Approved istalled and 8704) Portland General Electric, Tigard/Tualatin Verizon were give a opportunity to review objections. PREPARED BY: Brad Kilby Associate Planner APPROVED BY: Richa ewersdorff Plan • ' g Manager School District, NW Natural Gas, and this proposal and submitted no comments or July 21, 2003 DATE July 21, 2003 DATE TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION PAGE 21 OF 21 CUP2003-00005 7/28/2003 PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Q ~ ST LER HO GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM VICINITY MAP w ° _ > m Y R W CD CUP2003-00005 KABLE ST a S TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD EXPANSION W DR I RS FERR yO i RD 2 D r RD ' co m FF . rn X N Z p SULL Srra i q BONITA D M Tigard Area Map X Z N G B 0 10 1 200 300 400 Feel ;0 1 320 feet m RD City of Tigard 1 DU 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 V (503) 639-4171 http:/Mww.ai.tigard.Dr.us Community Development Plot date: Jun 10, 2003; C:lmagicWIAGIC03.APR r J.Dr",j11 'Y. M'"rE Jpryt Gr,K t 'r,w yw•wM D. N 1' NC+' 1 Cr 0 { ~ ~_4-J.tir. 1pD K ~ e it wooo wow T+I S ~t n f } C h ra ` ~ '~xr.r k V`J ♦K JJ. h AC.r ~ •+AIb~ - ~ w ` . a a. cardtrr 4 t ~3 \ ~ ~ r s ? _ .,.A+ R RLY z~° -~t\ Q SW KIMBE wow tat ~a ' R, s x; V ON q 6 c+ go Jg R tOG.Jf' O GD G ~ s. r v C03_p00p EXpANS10N CHURCH OF GOD TIGARD Tacs of SATE PtAa not to scale) PRE-APP. HELD BY: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION ` 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223-8189 503.639.4171/503.684.7297 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION File # (,_I LP a Ou 3 -0o0&5 Other Case # F RE a 00 3 C~uv a 3 Date By. C ~u 1 es Receipt # vow 1949741 City X] Urb ❑ Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑ Adjustment/Variance (I or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) ❑ Zone Change (III) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment (IV) ❑ Planned Development (III) ❑ Zone Change Annexation (IV) Conditional Use (III) ❑ Sensitive Lands,Review (1, 11 or 111) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment (IV) ❑ Historic Overlay (II or III) ❑ Site Development Review (I1) ❑ Home Occupation (II) ❑ Subdivision (II or III) i (Address i available) TI &AJ*? CHweefl OF. b0D 1-%70 51AI 96TH AVENUE TI10,AP-D 0 X, 97aZ~ ! I I Cn 00 Soo y~5' X N00' = 111) 000 5F V--7 M f%P(UM Pe-N IT`F IZIi5il~EntTrAv APPLICANT' J/1GK it, Izour J M M 1GLt;9 A /A ZAIK IC A55 i AT6> 23q0 klij THUMMA" 5U7E Z0I Po1cTi.A*N1n tog 97214 -PHONE NO. yo 3. 222.9158 rAA NU. 503. ZZ2. Igloo JACK1 ROOT 503. ?22 .1158 is i more an one TIOAXP M X44 Of bad - ucP, I-UuP-6Tr - owNF-R'3 9P-P A•TII/.0, 1A4110 5W 98TW AVF NU1; TI bAIZD 09 97=q PHONt: NO. 503 -1~3q-yooo t-AA NU. 503- X39-1835 When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be th, Uk , Fem-- 0- nor on nnnnf of fhu numar Tho - purchaser of record or a lessee in uncrc mi ict cinn this nnnlirntinn in the rovided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS n1=Qf'RIR1=n IN TI-IF ++RASIC CI IRMITTAI P5=nI IIRFMFNTR" INFORMATION SNFFT_ THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: ♦ If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. ♦ All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. ♦ The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. Z Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Flpr 30 03-10:54a • • P.1 Clean%tcr Services Our comniitrnent is cicar. APR 3 0 2003 File Number Zq / 0 Sensitive Area Pre-Screening Site Assessment Jurisdiction W. ~6 1AJ1,,Tb/J 6WNITy Date WII, :~o. Z00? Map S Tax Lot X511 LC- P 300 Owner Site Address 151W - 1W 1971A hkl~ 1 JQ .6Contact J AV K16 &DT. zAiK1MIU . A~ - Proposed Activity FnrIIS t~:7lobl- of Ar Address ? 3yb NW ~ lv ZO/ Me 2, goo 56 I✓iC~ cslClcA~r op 4 N1= 7Z 10 p I >rM agKPhone 503. ZZZ . %:~S r /L 1 Ollidal use ordy below ttus fine Y N NA Y N NA ❑ ❑ Sensitive Area Composite Map ❑ ❑ ® Stormwater Infrastructure maps Map # -2- 51 y,A QS # W6 I? Y N NA Y N NA ❑ ❑ ® Locally adopted studies or maps ❑ ❑ ® Other Specify Specify Based on a review of the above information and the requirements of Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order No. 00-7: ❑ Sensitive areas potentially exist on site or within 200' of the site. THE APPLICANT MUST PERFORM A SITE CERTIFICATION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER OR STORMWATER CONNECTION PERMIT. If Sensitive Areas exist on the site or within 200 feet on adjacent properties, a Natural Resources Assessment Report may also be required. ® Sensitive areas do not appear to exist on site, or within 200' of the site. This pre- screening site assessment does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your property. NO FURTHER SITE ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQUIRED- THIS FORM WILL SERVE AS AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE A STORMWATER CONNECTION PERMIT. ❑ The proposed activity does not meet the definition of development. NO SITE ASSESSMENT OR SERVICE PROVIDER LETTER IS REQUIRED. Comments: Pr--'r k!v A/ Se» f %T%Yc %ve-,L ,,rd ~t ro, 4e' '0"," V4 Reviewed By: Date: .11A- 3 Returned to Applicant MailX Far Counter 155 N First Avenue, Suite 270 • Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 Date "off By-ek%- Phone: (503) 846-8621 . Fax: (503) 846-3525 www leanwaters~o • • ZAI K/M I LLEK ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS i PLANNERS Conditional Use Date: May 14, 2003 RE: Conditional Use Type III Application Project: New Administrative Offices for: Tigard Church of God 15670 SW 98th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97224 Why this is a Maior Modification: A major modification of a conditional use comes into effect when there is an increase in the floor area proposed for non residential use by more than 10%. The existing Church is a one story building with a building footprint of 11,875 SF. The new Administration Building is 2,875 SF, which is an increase of 9,000 SF or 24%, which is greater than 10% of the existing Church square footage. Summary of Proposal: The existing Church building was constructed in 1978, and has a total square footage of 11,875 SF. The current Church consists of a Main Sanctuary that seats 160 people. There are three offices, classrooms, a kitchen and a library. There are toilet rooms for men and women. The existing site is 275 SF X 400 SF or 110,000 SF and has a current parking lot with103 spaces, 5 of these spaces are currently designated handicapped spaces. We will also change two spaces in front of the new Administration building and make those spaces handicap accessible; one space for cars, the other for vans. The proposed project at Tigard Church of God includes a new 2,875 SF building for Administrative Offices. The new Administrative building would include a waiting and reception area, work and break room, offices for the pastor and staff, a conference room and an open space for meetings or volunteers. The new Administration building will be located to the southeast side of the existing Church and will be connected by a concrete walkway. The proposed site work includes re-grading around the new building and immediate site area, new landscaping around the building, three new landscape islands, street trees, additional site lighting, and utility work consisting of connection to storm water and sewer. Our civil engineer, Dan Symons, has included a drainage swale at the south side of the Church property adjacent to the parking lot. 2340 NORTHWEST THURMAN SUITE 201 PORTLAND. OREGON 97210 503-222-9158 FAX 222-1460 Parking requirements are met. The current worship space seats160 people. According to code we need one parking space for every three people. We currently have 103 parking spaces, which we will increase to 107 spaces by re- striping the existing parking lot. We have proposed parking improvements such as the addition of three landscape islands in the southern parking lot. On the north and west sides of the property there are several large existing trees which shade the parking lot. We will add two trees to existing landscape islands on the north side. We have contracted a landscape architect, Julia Lundy, to draw up a landscape plan. We are adding eleven street trees spaced every 30' along 98th Avenue, in accordance with the City's requirements. We are removing two, possibly three, large fir trees on the southeast side of the property where the new Administration building will be sited. Attached to this report is a letter from our landscape architect who will verify the tree removal. Narrative demonstrating compliance: Zoning District Dimensional requirements: a. The proposed project meets the required setbacks, site coverage, minimum natural vegetation area, and building height. Our proposed building is 20' in height, which is less than the maximum building height of 23 required by the City. The site is 110,000 SF, and the total building area will be 14,750 SF (11,875 SF existing Church, 2,875 SF new Administration building), which is less than 80%. The total landscape area is approximately 40,000 SF, which is greater than 20%. 2. Neighborhood meeting: a. Mailing to neighbors and City of Tigard on April 25, 2003. Affidavit included in the submission. b. Posting of signs on the week of May 11tH c. Neighborhood meeting to be held at Tigard Church of God on Tuesday, May 13th, at 6pm. 3. Access: a. The property has two existing driveways that access 98th Avenue. The pavement width of both driveways is 24, which meets the minimum width requirements of 24'. 4. Walkway requirements: a. Our proposed new concrete walkway will extend from the ground floor north entry and connect to an existing sidewalk, which crosses the existing driveway and then connects to another sidewalk that leads to the public sidewalk in front of the property. There .Wj)) be • 0 an existing paved walkway from the south entry ground floor landing of the stairs, to a ramp which leads to the before mentioned sidewalk. Any change in grade is accomplished by the 1:12 ramp. 5. Overhead Utility lines a. After discussion with the Church they have decided to pay the one time fee in lieu of burying the overhead utility lines. We discovered it would be a cost savings to pay the fee instead of burying the lines. We understand this is a one time fee, and we will not have to pay this fee again pending future work at this site. Please refer to the attached memo by Brian Rager dated April 1, 2003. 6. Water supply a. Water is currently supplied to the existing Church, and we are planning to hook up with the existing system. The new Administration building has two toilet rooms; each with one toilet and one lavatory, one small sink in the break room, and one mop sink for the janitor, therefore the load on the system will be minimal. b. I spoke with Rich Saddler of the City of Tigard on May 6, 2003. He confirmed that the new Administration building has a fixture count of 34 fixture units, which puts us below the minimum requirement of 35 units, therefore we do not have to upsize the existing water meter. 7. Storm sewer improvements a. On-site detention is not required, because the net impervious area does not exceed 5,000 SF. b. We are adding a new 6" pvc storm sewer line, that connects the runoff from the new Administration building to a 4" rain drain. The rain collects in a catch basin, and is naturally piped across the south parking lot and will connect into a new drainage swale. Please refer to civil drawings for details and locations. 8. Storm water quality a. All rain from the new Administration building runs into a 4" pvc pipe which goes through a catch basin and into a water quality drainage swale. Please refer to civil drawings for details and locations. 9. Traffic Impact study - not required. Approved by Brian Rager April 8, 2003. "10. Impact study - this is a small project buffered on all sides by parking lots, land and trees. The purpose of the proposed project is designed to give the Staff more office space. This will be accomplished by moving the Pastor and staff from the existing Church facilities into a new Administration building. The impact on the surrounding neighborhood and transportation systems will be minimal, if at all. a. Parks and Schools i. Tigard Church of God is located within a one mile radius of Tempelton Elementary School, Tuality Junior High School, Tigard High School, and Cook Park. The Church attendance is from the local area. The proposed project draws attendance from the immediate neighborhood and will not have an impact on either the local school or park systems. b. Transportation Systems - Bikeways i. Currently there is an existing bikeway along the east side of 98th Avenue, and construction will not interfere with the bikeway. We do not anticipate any change in the amount of people using the bikeway. ii. There will not be an increase in traffic because we are relocating the Pastor and staff from the existing Church to the new Administration building. The Church members who use this facility will continue to use it in the same manner, we are just increasing office space. This should not increase traffic in the area, or have an adverse affect on the existing transportation system. c. Water supply - please see above. d. Sanitary sewer i. "The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is an 8" line which is located in Brentwood Place to the east. City maps show this line has been extended to the east boundary of this site. However, there are no asbuilts available for the last segment of the sewer line. Based upon the asbuilt information we do have, we can estimate that the depth of the cleanout at the church boundary is approximately four feet deep. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to provide a suitable connection for the new building addition." Pre-application conference notes April 8, 2003. ii. We are providing a 4" line from the new building that will be connected to the 6" line into Brentwood place. The Contractor will verify location and depth of the existing sanitary sewer to be 1' below the new footing. Please refer to civil drawings for specific notes. e. Storm drainage i. Storm drainage for the new building will flow into a downspout connection with a cleanout to a 4" rain drain. The storm drainage will be filtered through a 5' deep trapped catch basin into a 6" pvc pipe. This pipe will run into a water quality swale with catch basin located along the southern • • edge of the property. Please refer to civil drawings for notes and details. f. Noise impacts i. The property is bordered on the west by 98th Avenue. It is bordered on the north and east sides by residences and the Summerfield Golf Course. To the south the Church is bordered by the Southwest Church of Christ. The new Administration building is located 90' from the west and 75' to the south property lines. Landscape berms screen the church on the west side, hedges and a 6' high fence screen the property on the north, the golf course and a large grove of 70' high fir trees screen the property to the east. The south side of the Church has a large landscape area and we are replacing the existing dogwood trees with three maples that will work with the wet conditions of the drainage swale, and provide shade to the parking lot. ii. Most activity in the new Administration building will take place Monday through Friday, 8 am to 5pm. The existing Church has offices for the.Staff but the space no longer meets there needs. The purpose of this project is to move the Staff into a new office space that will better meet their needs. The site is very quiet with a low level of traffic flow on 98th Avenue, and we feel this new building will not impact the noise level on the site. 11. Special setbacks- does not apply to this project. 12. Existing Buffering and screening on the property - please refer to site plan. a. North side- i. There is 6'-7' high chain link fence, which separates residences and the Summerfield golf course driving range, from the Tigard Church of God property. b. East side - i. The Summerfield golf course backs the Church property to the east. This is also were the nice grove of large fir trees is located. c. South side- i. The Southwest Church of Christ borders Tigard Church to the east. There is a landscaped area that provides a buffer zone between the two properties. We will be planting three new maple trees along the property line, there is also an existing 3' hedge to the east. d. West side- i. There is approximately 45' from 98th Avenue to the beginning of the church parking lot. This area is a bermed • • landscape area that shields the Church from the street. This berm is planted with lawn and low plantings, there are 3 cherry trees, a 25" pine, and a 38" fir in this area. The existing Church is situated approximately 90' off the street, and the new Administration building is almost 200' from the street and is buffered on all sides buy either landscaping, parking lot, or building. e. Overall this project is buffered on all sides by landscaping fences, hedges, paved areas and the Church itself. 13. Street trees a. We have hired a landscape architect, Julia Lundy who will submit a landscape plan showing the new street trees. The length of the property is 400', if we space trees at one per every 30' we will have a total of 11 new street trees. b. I spoke with Brian Rager on April 19, 2003, regarding the placement of the new street trees. The existing planting strip between SW 98th Avenue and the public sidewalk is 4'. Our landscape architect suggested planting all street trees to east side of the sidewalk, instead of planting the trees in the strip on the west side adjacent to the street. This would give the trees more room to grow, because of the 20' landscape area .on the east side of the sidewalk, please see site plan. It would also allow for the same visual effect of trees lining SW 98th, and would provide shade. Brian Rager stated that planting the street trees in this location would be fine as long as the new trees would be planted at least 2' to the east of the public sidewalk. The street trees we will plant will be of the acceptable size and type of tree off the approved list from the City of Tigard, please see the landscape plan. 14. Clear vision area a. There are no existing obstructions within the clear vision area. The view from both driveways to 98th Avenue is clear. All clear site lines between 3' and 8' are maintained. 15. Landscaping a. We are adding eleven street trees, from the approved list from the City of Tigard. b. We are adding three landscape parking islands in the south parking.. lot. Each island will contain shade trees and low plantings. c. We are removing two possibly three large fir trees in order to make room for the new building. d. We are adding bushes and low plantings around the new Administration building. We will tie this into the existing landscaping by matching plant species that exist on site. • • e. Lighting - Currently the property is lit by six light poles adjacent to both north and south parking lots. We plan to add three more light poles with a double light to better illuminate the south parking lot, which is adjacent to the new Administration building. These light poles will be placed in the center of three new landscape islands; for locations please refer to the site plan. The existing parking lots are well illuminated, however we feel the additional of three light poles will add to the safety and overall aesthetic effect. 16. Recycling a. Pride Disposal Service was contacted. We are leaving the small trash dumpster in the same location as it is now, and that works well for disposal pick-up. Currently the dumpster is screened by a low hedge. This hedge will be removed when construction begins. We propose replacing the hedge with a 4' high brick screen wall. This screen wall will hide the view of the dumpster form the street. The screen wall is open on the east side to maintain easy access for disposal of trash and recycling. There is a distance of 12' from the parking lot to the dumpster, which is roughly the same distance as exists today. 17. Fire Protection a. I spoke with Eric McMullen of the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District on May 8, 2003. He stated that his two main concerns are access for the fire engines to the site, and the location of the fire hydrants in relation to the building. b. Access - There are two driveways from 98th Avenue into the Church parking lot. The drive on the north side is closest to the Church, the south drive is closest to the proposed Administration building. Both driveways meet the City's requirement of 24' in width. c. Fire hydrants - There are two fire hydrants located adjacent to the property. One fire hydrant is located on the northwest corner of the property. There is a distance of 105' from the hydrant to the corner of the Church. The second fire hydrant is located on the south central side of the Church property. There is a distance of 140' from the hydrant to the entry of the new Administration building. The maximum hose length distance is 150'. Therefore both fire hydrant locations will easily accommodate the distance. All areas of both building will be able to be reached. 18. Parking a. The main assembly area holds 160 seats. Currently there are 103 total parking spaces, which exceed the one required parking space for every three seats. b. We are re-striping the south parking lot, and adding one handicap space, and one handicap van space. This will bring the total as follows: • • i. 100 parking spaces ii. 6 handicap spaces iii. 1 handicap van space iv. 107 total parking spaces This gives us an increase of four spaces. There will be twelve spaces designated as compact spaces. The standard and compact parking spaces comply with the dimensions noted in the City of Tigard Development Code Section 18.765.040. All handicap spaces will be clearly marked with a sign and painted with the wheelchair symbol. 19. Loading area requirements a. The proposed Administration' building is 2,875 SF which falls under the maximum10,000 SF, therefore we are not required to provide a loading area. b. In addition Tigard Church of God does not receive or distribute material or merchandise by truck. This Church serves as a meeting and gathering place for people not materials, therefore a loading space is not necessary. 20. Bike racks a. Currently there are no bike racks on the property. We will be adding a galvanized steel bike rack that can hold up to 5 bicycles at a time. This will be located adjacent to the existing Church on the north side, of the building next to the entry door. We will be adding a new concrete slab, and we will embed the bike rake in the slab. 21. There are no sensitive lands, and no steep slopes on the property. 22. Clean Water Services letter - attached to this report. 23. Sign permits - we are not adding any signs at this time. 24. Tree removal/mitigation a. We are removing two, possibly three, fir trees to the southeast side of the existing Church. The tree removal is necessary because that is where the new Administration building will be built. The site contains several large, old, beautiful fir trees. When the new Administration building was being designed we took into account the grove of fir trees, and sited the building to remove as few of the fir trees as possible. We may have to remove a third tree due to its close proximity to the new building. The root structure of the third fir tree may interfere with the new concrete terrace on the south side, and the root structure may be damaged. • b. We will obtain a letter from our landscape architect in regards to the removal of the trees. We do not have to replace these trees because we are not taking out over 10% of the existing trees and these are large fir trees, most have a diameter between 40"-50". Mitigation is not required, because we are retaining over 75% of the existing trees12" or greater in caliper. Our landscape architect will identify both trees to be removed. We can not replace these two trees specifically because they are a 40", and 54" firs. We are adding six trees in the parking lot and eleven trees along the street. Because the site is already heavily treed we feel that it is not necessary to replace these two trees; in addition there will not be space to put new trees along the east side of the property because of the large existing firs. We will protect the existing fir trees during construction with a fence. Our landscape architect will provide a detailed report, protection, and removal plan. c. There are two small 2" caliper dogwood trees on south side of the property. These dogwoods will have to be removed and relocated due to the new drainage swale we are putting in. We are looking at replacing the dogwoods with three maple trees. For new dogwood locations please see landscape plan. These maples will give shade to the parking lot as well as helping to screen the adjacent Church property. Page 1 of 1 Jim Miller From: 'Brian Rager" <BRIANR@ci.tigard.or.us> To: <jimm@zaikmiller.com> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 3:56 PM Subject: Fee In-Lieu Just to confirm that the fee in-lieu of undergrounding is a one-time fee, paid on the frontage of the site subject to the land use decision. Let me know if you have other questions. 4/22/2003 L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T May 14, 2003 Mr. Brad Kilby City-of Tigard 1312 S.W. Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Tigard Church of God - Administration Building Construction Project POST OFFICE sox 9034 Dear Mr. Kilby, PORTLAND, OREGON 97207. TEL/ FAX: 503/22570505 Our firm has been retained to offer consulting services and prepare landscaping plans for the above named project We have attached, herewith, our ;plan showing the selection and placement of new trees as well as, designation of 2 Firs that will need to be removed. The new building and adjacent constructed areas were carefully sited and designed to minimize any impact gn the existing stand of mature conifers, accomodate the Church's need for easy access between the new and existing buildings and preserve the. site designated for additional construction in a few years. Last week, 1, met on site with the architects and general contractor to discuss our particular concern for the large (58" cal.) Fir off the N.E. corner of the proposed terrace on the East side of the new building. We reduced the terrace by six feet to allow a wider circumference of.clearance ' around the tree. We discussed with the general contractor the importance of the Firs' protection from trucks and equipment driving near and over the trees' major root structures. A sturdy fencing barrier will be installed at a reasonable distance from the trees that are most in danger of being impacted. Morton Tree Service will be consulted during excavation for,any possible root pruning or other issues that may arise. The trees selected for the parking lot are Raywood Ash (Fraxinus oxycarpa 'Raywood'), a nicely structured tree growing to approzimately'25' wide and 35' high. They are deciduous fast.growers . with purple-red fall color and are widely accepted as street and parking lot trees.. Along the South property line, where a drainage swale is proposed, we will plant groupings of - ' Vine Maples (Ater •circinatum). interspersed with three Sweet Bay Magnolias (Magnolia virginiana). The Vine. Maples are native to our region and will help loosen the rigidity, of the parking lot. The Magnolias are relatively small at approximately 20' wide and 35' high: They are semi-deciduous and display creamy-white fragrant flowers in summer. Like the-Maples they are adaptable to.wet soils. Our street tree selection, Akebono Flowering Cherries (Prunus yedoensis 'Akebono'), grow to approximately 25' in width and height. They are to be placed on the private property side, 6' in. from the sidewalk. This is in keeping with the street tree planti ng to the North of our site where London Plane Trees are located at about 5' in from the sidewalk. As you are aware, the parking strip along this section of 98th Avenue is relatively narrow and the power lines seem quite low. For these reasons, we feel it makes sense to continue the planting standard set at the northerly property. It is unfortunate that the utility company has unnecessarily overcut the Plane Trees along the street side. Our selection and placing, of the flowering cherries should not have to meet that fate. Please contact me if you have any questions or comments. . Sincerely, ul' Lu , pe it Neighborhood Meeting Minutes Date: May 13, 2003 at 6pm, at Tigard Church of God RE: Tigard Church of God - proposal for a new Administration Building Project: New Administrative Offices for: Tigard Church of God 15670 SW 98th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97224 Representatives at the meeting: Zaik/Miller Architects: Jim Miller, AIA Jackie Root Shadle and Omundson, Inc.: Jim Omundson Mechanical: Dave Dobbins Professional Air Balance Also present members of the Church and surrounding neighborhood. Please refer to the sign-in sheet. The neighborhood meeting was called to order at 6:10 pm on May 13, 2003. A statement was given regarding the purpose of the meeting. Jim Miller, AIA, and Jackie Root of Zaik/Miller Associates began the meeting by describing the project. We described the site plan specifically noting where the new building will be located on the site. Site improvements were addressed including the addition of street trees along 98th Avenue, the three new landscape islands in the south parking lot, and new trees along the south side of the property. We noted the new landscaping around the Administration building as well and the accessibility to both building from the 1:12 ramp. Marion Todd, neighbor. Will the existing Church be connected to the new Administration building? • Z/M: No, there is 12' in between both the Church and the new Administration building; however the buildings are connected by a concrete walk. A covered walk can be added in the future. Next we walked the participants through the floor plan explaining the functions of the building. Bob Palm, neighbor, How much room will there be in the crawl space for heating? Dave Dobbins: The crawl space is more than adequate with 40"clear. He said we are heating the space with two small gas furnaces comparable to that of a medium size home. There will be no noxious fumes emitted. Will there be any raised vents on the roof, and will we burn any garbage? Z/M: There will be no visible air conditioning units, or mechanical units on the roof. We are keeping the existing trash receptacle but are screening with a brick wall, which replaces the existing hedge. The neighbors were pleased about the brick screen wall around the trash receptacle. We stated that it is against the law to burn garbage in the City of Tigard. Next, Zaik/Miller explained the exterior of the building describing the materials and how we would tie the new building into the existing Church. We explained how we would use the same type and color of brick, cedar siding and metal roof. What color is the roof? Z/M: The roof would be a dark bronze color. We are using metal roof because it has a 30 year warranty and is easy to clean due to the large grove of fir trees. The existing Church has a composition shingle roof. We are not using this type of roof because it will be high maintenance. We opened up the discussion to any questions: What time would construction begin? What about the noise level? Jim Omundson: Construction will begin at 8 am and run until 1 pm, with some possible construction days starting at 8 am and running until 4pm. A lot of the labor will be done with volunteers and construction will be on Tuesday-Saturday. The noise level will be at a minimum, because there will be no large equipment required except for the excavation which will take about one week, all other construction noise will be average. The site will be cleaned every evening to take care of all construction debris. • • Kay Pelzmer asked about the location of the building since she lives across 98th Avenue. Z/M: The new Administration building will be set back into the grove of fir trees and maintain a large grassy space in front of the building. She was concerned that the site would be solidly built upon, and we assured her this is not the case. What would the residents of Summerfield golf course see of the new building from their property? Z/M replied that they would see the east elevation which is primarily window wall, and a concrete terrace. Which trees would be removed? Z/M: We are removing a 40" fir and a 54" fir. We are saving the rest of the grove of fir trees which will maintain the landscape buffer that exists now. Can the trees be sold? Z/M: Yes, the trees can be sold. We talked with Morton tree service who will take down the trees and they will provide us with a name of a company that will buy these trees. We think that the tree will sell between $500 and $700 a piece which will go towards the cost of building the project. Marion Todd asked for a copy of the perspective drawing of the Administration building. This was mailed to her on May 14, 2003. The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 pm. Jackie Root was available to answer any additional questions, no additional questions were asked. The presentation boards are on display at Tigard Church of God for both the Church and neighborhood to see. Overall there were no stated objections to the proposed project. • ►SYMONS ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, Inc. 12805 S.E. Foster Road Portland, OR 97236 (503) 760-1353 FAX 762-1962 WATER QUALITY & CONVEYANCE CALCULATIONS for ZAIK / MILLER ASSOCIATES TIGARD CHURCH OF GOD ADMINISTRATION BUILDING Tigard, OR March, 2003 PRO, EB, G I N R 16,091 OREGO SY RENEWS 6/30/04 • • SYMONS ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, Inc. PROJECT ~L~~IC/iPG/~J ~22 PAGE r` s JOB NO. L/Tf GS BY DATE o 6209'41 ells ~ : / ,~~T✓,~' S!.-o yCl 0. Z4 ~TrJ . l~-i~~ry A~j v M~~7 = U. O oS = 0, D O, o G l'r 911„,x- )C o s ~c y O (0 00 D 6 gZZ K6 D) C#/55K 3/zs 1~ = 0.045 G~ u = D. J ,4c 3 0.9 = O• z'a C,Fs 0 . z fr 0, _57 • • SYMONS ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, Inc. PROJECT 0 - 0, S c ~-s zs- L 146 o. gG rr BY Z~S \~IQ V = (~l= = ?~Z you = o; olgo cis z s'LOP~1- 21 = 9 x Go x C~.o9 = 116. t' //S ~r/.q-r~~tzs~,~ 7 /D o p , K• cl-).~5c..cl - 5- y~ 0. D l s Vim---- ~ ~C c. Uo ~S ~ ~ 0 S• ~ ~/~a ICJ ~w.ri7iy y .~o of= i C~zs- O,z~r9-~ 3•')09= O,6~crs oC =p,zs z D v x- C/f~G~ ~I !/~7 Lfh~'L 4 a =vD PAGE _ JOB NO DATE _ 9 ULTO V S' Inc C, coy PAGE ENGI1`~~EI~ roe" l ~Ol`~~ ppTE gY -7 Ae ✓;ocr T Z o ! gs9 ti x /J ~ rC ~z he rr 0,70 0.01 n, l I z o. alG l~ 7-o r p -7 ZZ + ~at L~Lr~ 2 0, Ocl, ~ f, 07l tj`•''W L j .~~7\' -SMMENT Fpla ~•lj9 J - - `vER!FY LOC•ncw AHD - _ ~1 y - - - t bmTN nc ~ ; . ~ IF i~ [ nr rnsn $IM (App 1',i0 BC I' MORE 1lCW-fDOi1ryG OR I' I.-` _ \\Y 1`'y1\"~-T 1, AND TO BC FY 1 ...~fl J 1 • ; ` nAr 1 BS y COMPLIANT YA S. IERI.IL Fv j ~7. ~wa tGrt NKA T DADS MORE RCPLA a MIN 01. h0 3' - _ REMOVE EtlSnNC , BCttWD IF NOL.. RAW AW DRAW SETTLEMENT LER. AN TERYINC THIS CAUSE OF AREA TO BUBBLER. CONNECT W APPROXIMATE AREA i0 -•+y.~,~... J LEAD 70 NEW RAW A• a -j.-:.. ;y.• ~ i THE E TTSANAG Of THE PAQFCT MANAGER. REPAIR DRAW (!j~ / Cr Y' 7 /:a n:.r,l, , a - - SUBCRADE ANDIOR PATCH PAYE i TO STRINv7MED GRADES TO J7TT----? NE ADMINISTRATION EUMWATE PONDINO AND ASSURE % n°'r~'orl w- / UILDINr I / - POSInK DRAINAGE - _mm 451/ s-F. -1 EXISTING CHURCH 1v n m" to ..o n"ai ,'I I V E ~ 1 L 19.00 DONN$Pour MrM CLLANour --_I V CAPABILITIES ccvNECTCD TO 4- ABS ~ Y V J 1 : RAIN DRAINS WITH MIN. 3Z r PRA GRAVEL 10 S .F. Of I K _ I r I ' SLOPE. ilP _ 5 P OVER YIN. B• THICK APRON 1 OVER WOMEN GCO7CXnlF } Im I i ADiuENT TRAP. USE 3' DEEP /i---- i; i s 3y f TRAPPED CATCH BA51. OR ~ PRECAST VAULT WTN KRnCAL / Q I!~ ` N \ ip1 Y M I I INLET TEE. SEDIUCNT WEIR SET TO i..l EI yvr NEIJTT OF I.E. IN,! AND A SEDIMENT FENCE Q ` a f FEMOKABLC GOWN-TURNED _ OUTLET ELBOW. •~1 ' ) i I I A-' i y ,ry.'I PLACE UL£ SOD SUITABLE FOR WET CONDITIONS IN HILL AREA DISTURBED BY WATER DUALITY swALE consnrucnoN. n __•_v°_L 1' / OWNER ovnoN Aoi I/ A r r " INTERCEPT CURB GRAIN •Y, I pS OPTION: AT Y BOTTOM MOTH, 1 r A aivsRw AND CONNECT TOWEw titi,'•• C PLACE 7•-4i' PoYFR ROCK AIN DRAIN SfS - - DEEP OVER JUTE MAT OVER s1 ENTIRE LFNDIN n Ir.v.w. rr.. ( T K ! I .1, •.rw (lr, f, / i __J r. 1. RELOCATE 2• DOGWOOD. ' t err I'P1C 5- OD2 T1vIDAl IPlAaS T ~v wvv w i~~ ' TNI$ INDICATED LOU nON- V _ V i INLET PROTECTION •I.E~19.30 fOR ~EX15 nNG $TQFN ~'1 wr . S I N A L 1 i 1 r~ Nk rW~ SEWER DEN47E3 1 7979 PEFAnT BLAN I I 5 wflm .1~ I 1 /i I 1 I I ~1 l • F END OF NEW 6• HOPE PIPE. MACE 16 OK R ROUND PIPE MIN. 9• / ~J S I I/ I ` 1 5, I • r 1~--[[v f I I I I \I F. f. Of 4(-) GRA KL r.. t ~ I L `y' ! R I1NLFi pROTF c 1NIIX APRON RQMM OPEN WOVEN GEOTEXMI n IL i ! I l ' i~_ 1 1 )f,~'~✓~•- ' i V " T 9' HOLE W CATCH BASIN WALL AT N SAME : _ `r ,._.6J._.,w.c-...:--...Lc. r-•-_.....:..m>..:: .s/. 1 i i ` I E CH 1STWG. 5nN0. ATTACH INLET r V ~ _ - 1 _ _ • 1 1="=_'.~~ ~ ~ NUB TO EXTERioR OF CB WALL WITH • WATERnp1T CONNECTION i I / j IvLL. BA.19311. , PG PG N7 I1 T ':1 • 1P . 71 )11 •ti - ~~~--\\~~~T'JJ II. • ~ f 3' MOf EA4uTNT - • 'Sl ty~~'~1 nav is .a F~..~~. ~ 11 AND DCgCA --r. - _ _._SS-- 1 B • Pv SIB - C INC PD&IL ST- ~S' • -•.v. • ~ ~ aw['~ .SS[ . J-~r+!•!`~+•~!+n..ca.•- w lur'•.^1 ~ 1i:~ ^T ~5T _-.-.---Y . s ~ ~"3'!!? e 4•,>-..-..-- ~ _ - C/1'= •`.._=:t::_i _.._..~EJY _ _ri:i • '1._:R *'7~.~~•'~;; ~..T , _j S. w 98th AVE. . m - j 3 > DRAINAGE / EROSION CONTROL PLAN NORTH "t+ $CALL . I' - 70' NOTE $C[ SHEET C: FOR ADDITIONAL SPEC AND DETAILS 4-:3 1 N v I I-I 7 O , O n l ~D , O A a O o ti C O u O C J V Z V 0 U 0.016 20 50 W 0 100 V L C4 7 200 n 500 c 1000 2000 10' ~I lo4, 10' 106~~ IOP ,s Reynolds number NR t `,"y( FIGURE 9-2 Moody's diagram [Source: R. H. F. Pao, Fluid mechanics (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1961), p. 284.1 1 CO Ln { 0 STREET DEDICATION 78042483 KNOW ALL MEN. By' THESE PRESENTS, that 4z 4 r-,'O'a hereinafter called grantor(s), for the sume of $ constituting the actual consideration for this deed, do hereby 4 4.0 vwt c give, grant and dedicate of the St-t- _f" Qp'.08611' and assigns, (st.rike inapplicable part) a perpetual right-oi-way,,and easement 7 for street, road and utility pruposes on, over, across, under, along and within the following described real premises in Washington County, Oregon: A portion of Lot 20 of the duly recorded plat of "Alderbrook Farm" situated in the Southwest one-quarter of Section 11, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, County of Washing- ton, State of Oregon, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Lot 20 which is also the centerline of S.W. 98th Ave., County Road Number 2048; thence along the North line of said Lot 20 N89054101"E 30.00 feet to the East line of said S.W. 98th Ave, and th- point of beginning of the tract herein to be described; thence along said East line SO.09' 16"W 395.45 feet to the South line of the North three acres of said Lot 2C; thence along said South line N89.54101"E 5.00 feet; thence NO°09'16"E 395.45 feet to the North line of said Lot 20; thence along said North line S89054101"W 5.00 feet to the point of beginning. To have and to Hold the above described and dedicated rights unto the Public ( (strike inapplicable part) for the uses and purposes hereinabove stated. The grantor(s) hereby convenants that he (they) are the owner(s) in fee simple and have a good and legal right to grant his (their) rights above described. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor(s) have (have) hereunto set his (their) hands) and seal(s) this day of 4 p,jJ , is 7P . 043VAL)'~- (SEAL) iQc~! EAL) (SEAL) y ~ PWA ) (SEAL) 7 i r` . f ' C STATE OF OREGO# ) ) County of Washington ) ss. - i BE IT REMEMBERED, that on this day of 19 V before me the undersigned a Notary Public in and for the said County and State nersonally appeared the within named _ F 14obt W 1 1d M+ ~44- 4 M i e- L Q tea.' - 1 4 2 T I brl l+t r+1 S who are knownto me to be the identical individuals described in BY: BY: Accepted by, the Council of Ahe City of Tigard. this oZg~day of , 1978. STATE OP OREGON Recorder pro-tea CourAy of wmb4vgm )j r' pro ar~•,y and who executed the within instrument and ac.:nowledged to me that they executed the same freely-and voluntarily. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: Approved as to form this ->`-F- day of 19. BY- 7t-y- At orn - City f Tigard Approved as to legal description this 8AL day of a 197. Approved this B day of N-)6vtT CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON PLANNING COMMISS IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto set my hand and seal day of 19 oduot. 1. R"w TbsaarrA D"wen of Raenb and EMedo and Ea4Nkto Rant dw at Caw V"One s for slid 000nr, do Mrabr-cardq/ that du "W" iastr0wtarN M Wei* w waMwd and nesd.d w bmk •01 ra0wda T of Yid Cwnp VMDn A m r bww and na A"bw& ROGER THOMSSEN., DMaeto at 6 Rneeds a ENetwrr ,vow- /jY0 INDEXED oaPUW Z &r [5 !I 27 !'~B t i Yr w~ (COILILHIER '~'~-,J/1-7'!~~'ARBOR (CARIE Enuironnientally Friendly... Since 1937 11814 SE Jennifer St., Clackamas, OR 97015 June 6, 2003 Mr. Jim Miller Zaik and Miller Architects 2340 NW Thurman Portland, Or 97210 Re: Tree protection plan for the Tigard Church of God, 15670 SW 98`x' Ave. Tigard, Oregon. Dear Mr. Miller At your request, I examined selected trees at the above site with Julia Lundy. Landscape Architect. on 6/02/2003. I am to make recommendations as to which of the selected trees are good candidates to retain in the landscape with respect to the proposed construction of a new building on the site. I did not examine every tree on the site, only those within 50- feet of proposed construction. I will provide a tree preservation plan to help protect the trees designated for preservation during construction. Tree Protection Zones will be established by chain-link fencing around the trees to remain. I am basing my report on my field observations and the preliminary site plan provided me. OBSERVATIONS There are a number of large Douglas fir trees (Pstteclotsuga men_iesii) on the site near the new building construction. In particular there are 58, 33 and 38-inch diameter firs near where the new building will be constructed. The large 58-inch fir is approximately 20- feet from the east wall of the building and 14-16-feet from the concrete terrace. The trees visually appear to be in good health condition, exhibiting normal new growth and full crowns. DISCUSSION One of the best methods for preserving trees is saving trees in groups or groves. This allows for preservation of large areas for tree roots. This gives the tree the best chance at long-term survival. Trying to preserve single trees between buildings is usually not' successful due to unavoidable construction conflicts and grade changes. Preserving the grove of firs east of the new building is a good example. Portland: 503-722-7267 Vancouver: 360-693-6056 Fax: 503-723-5531 Web: xtN«v.co1herarboccom Church of God Tree Protection Plan Page 2 of 5 GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION AFFECTS ON TREES Grading and trenching can negatively affect the health and anchorage of a tree's root system. Trenching for utilities can sever roots resulting in loss of anchoring roots and increase wind throw potential. Cutting the roots results in the loss of the ability for the tree to absorb water and nutrients. Substantial root loss decreases the potential for the trees' long-term survival or eventually may cause death. Lowering grades results in the removal of roots, raising grades leads to root suffocation. As little as 6-inches of soil fill can eventually suffocate roots and cause tree death, or allow root rots to invade and cause root decay. There is a potential for a few roots of the 58-inch diameter fir to be cut near the new building construction. Because the building is approximately 20-feet from the tree and the rest of the tree's root system is largely unaffected there is a high potential for successful tree preservation. It is recommended that the root system be examined near the new building construction using an air spade to evaluate the potential effects of construction and to clean cut anv large roots over 2-inches in diameter that may conflict with construction. MITIGATION OF CONSTRUCTION AFFECTS ON TREES There are several techniques for mitigating and preventing construction affects on trees (see Appendix 1 Tree Preservation Specifications). Some of these include: • Establish a tree protection zone with protective chain link fencing, as directed by the consulting arborist, to preserve root systems. This prohibits trenching, grading, and other construction activities within the tree protection zone without supervision of the consulting arborist. See construction plan detail for tree fencing locations. • When trenching for utilities and/or irrigation lines is required, either route outside the tree protection zone or tunnel under roots to preserve them instead of cutting roots. • Use an air-spade tool to excavate a trench next to where the terrace and the east wall of the new building will be constructed, to identify- potential root conflicts with constrUCi1011. Roots larger than 2-inches in diameter and larger should be clean cut with a sharp saw to prevent later damage by construction. PROTECTIVE FENCING Placement of protective fencing to establish a Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) is one of the key ingredients for successful tree preservation. The tree protection zone and fencing OCollier Arbor Care, Inc. 6/6/2003 0 i Church of God Tree Protection Plan Page 3 of 5 shall be set by the consulting arborist in an effort to retain the trees with the greatest chance of long term survival without unduly increasing the hazard potential and maximizing the trees long term survival. A tree protection plan showing the placement of the fencing shall be submitted in the construction plan details. CONCLUSION The tree preservation plan takes into consideration saving the maximum number of the healthiest trees that have the highest chance of survival and do not pose an unreasonable risk of damage to people and structures. The large 58-inch fir and the rest of the protected tree grove are good candidates for preservation. RECOMMENDATIONS • Implement the Tree Preservation Plan (Appendix 41) tinder the supervision of the consulting arborist. • The consulting arborist shall establish a Tree Protection Zone with protective chain link fencing to preserve root systems. include in the construction plan documents a sheet outlining the tree protection plan and the location of tine protective fencing and the Tree Protection Zones. • Use an air-spade tool to excavate a trench next to where the terrace and the east wall of the new building will be constructed, to identify potential root conflicts with Construction. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the arborist can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. The information contained in this report reflects the condition of those items at the time of inspection. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the trees in question may not arise in the future. Please contact me if you have any further questions. Respectfully submitted: Terrill Collier Consulting Arborist Certified Arborist #PN 0101 Appendix #1: Tree Protection Specifications CCollier Arbor Care, Inc. 6/6/2003 Church of God Tree Protection Plan Page 4 of 5 APPENDIX #1 TREE PROTECTION SPECIFICATIONS Building Construction 1. The building contractor and all sub contractors involved with site work around trees such as grading, utilities, building, landscaping, etc. are required to meet with the consulting arborist at the site prior to beginning work to review all work procedures, access and haul routes, and tree protection measures. 2. Establish a Tree Protection Zone as directed by the consulting arborist to protect and preserve the tree and it's root system. Install temporary protective chain link fencing to establish a Tree Protection Zone. Place the protective fencing around the edge of the drip line (the area below the spread of the branches) of the tree. For trees with narrow growth habit, the Tree Protection Zone extends beyond the drip line and the fencing shall be placed wider direction of the consulting arborist. Tree Protection Zones will be established prior to construction. 3. ConStruCtlon activities within the Tree Protection Zone are prohibited except by permission and Supervision of the consulting arborist. 4. Protect the tree a0ainst cuttin(l, skinning or breaking of branches, trunk and roots. 5. Stockpiling of materials, vehicle operation, and parking is prohibited in the Tree Protection Zone. 6. Maintain existing grade within the Tree Protection Zone. Raising or lowering grades are prohibited except. as permitted by and under the supervision of the consulting arborist. 7. Removal of branches or root pruning of trees to remain is to be performed by a qualified arborist under the supervision of the consulting arborist. 8. Pruning. Trees shall be pruned prior to the start of construction. Trees shall be crown cleaned to remove the deadwood 2 inches in diameter and over. Trees shall be crown thinned by 10-20%. Under the direction of the consulting arborist crowns may be raised by removing bottom branches as necessary up to 14 feet high to give clearance for any construction activities, traffic, etc. All work to be done in accordance with ANSI A300 pruning standards. 9. Cut branches and roots with sharp pruning instruments that do not chop or tear. 10. Excavation and trenching around tree roots within the Tree Protection Zone is prohibited except by permission and under the Supervision of the consulting arborist. ©Collier Arbor Care, Inc. 6/6/2003 Church of God Tree Protection Plan Page 5 of 5 11. When trenching is required within the Tree Protection Zone, tunnel under roots by hand digging. Do not cut roots larger than 2 inches in diameter. Cut smaller roots only if they interfere with new work and only with a sharp instrument. 12. Do not allow any exposed or cut roots to dry out before permanent backfill is placed. Provide a temporary earth cover or mulch to keep exposed roots moist until permanent backfill is placed. 13. Any damage to trees during construction activities shall be reported to the consulting arborist within 6 hours so that remedial action can be taken. Timeliness is critical to the tree health. 14. Water trees to remain, as necessary to maintain their health during the course of construction. 15. Fertilizing. The trees shall be subsurface fertilized with a complete slow release fertilizer and a root stimulant to promote good health and vigor. Initial fertilizing should be done prior to starting of the construction and continue annually for at least 3 years. 16. Contractor is responsible for any and all damage to the tree during the course of construction. The contractor shall pay to the tree owner the value of the damaged tree as established by the consulting arborist. OCollier Arbor Care, Inc. 6/6/2003 0 0 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.2 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 2.2 DATE: JULY 28, 2003 PAGE OF FILE NAME: BONITA PARK CASE NOS.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003-00006 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2003-00008 IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY ON THE ITEM INDICATED ABOVE, PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME, ADDRESS & INCLUDE YOUR ZIP CODE PROPONENT - (Speaking In Favor or Neutral) OPPONENT - (Speaking Against Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. i C r C~ _U/~_j_~_~_ ~_v 7-7 d _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - e, Addess, Zip Code and Phone No. N 1 Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. VAtNm6 A se+(61I I PA/4 cIN 1 j ~4- -1--------------- Name, Aiddress, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 0 s az 19~~2t"%'J f.9 - s<✓ Afzp Tip ' Name,_Address_, Zip Code a d Phone No. _ ~ Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 I - - - - - - - - - - - - Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. I Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 I Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. I Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 1 - -Ad- - - - - - - - Name, dress, Zip Code and Phone No. I - - - - - - - - -an - - - - - - - Name, Address, Zip Code d Phone No. 1 - Name,Address, Zip Code and Phone No. -I- 1 Name, Address, Zip Code and Phone No. 0 • COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503)684-0360 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising 'City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 'Tigard,Oregon 97223 Accounts Payable • • ❑ Tearsheet Notice • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) ,,Kathy Snyder being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of thdi_gard-Tua 1 at-i n Times a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at- i ca rel in the aforesaid county and state; that the Public Hearina/CUP2003-00006,Bonita Park 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 10,2003 RDEt~Z: Legal Notice TT 10275 0: ±AT;•3N 's✓ rPIrC! LA 981 P~'q T ME KT Au 0 ~ '?_'11 Subscribed and sworn t be a me this y, 2 0 0 3 OFFICIAL SEAL ~j ROBIN A BURGESS ~IOtary Public for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO 344589 I' My Commission Expires: AFFIDAVIT 0 • The following will be considered by the Tigard Hearings Officer on Monday July 28, 2003 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the Tigard Municipal Code and the rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Chapter 18.390. 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 afford the decision-maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeal based on that issue. Failure to specify the criterion from the Community Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion. 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. Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Brad Kilbyl at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 503-639-4171. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003-00006/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2003-00008 BONITA PARK Q REQUEST: The City of Tigard is seeking Conditional Use approval to construct and equip a neighborhood park on approximately 5.5 acres located within the I-L zoning classification. The City is also seeking Sensitive Lands Review approval to allow work within the 100-year floodplain and adjacent to Fanno Creek, and its associated wetlands. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the northwest corner of SW Bonita Road and SW Milton Court; WCTM 2S112BA, Tax Lot 6200. ZONE: I-L: Light Industrial District. The I-L zoning district provides appropriate locations for general industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production, research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics such as noise, glare, odor, and vibration. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.725, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. TT 10275 - Publish July 10, 2003. • • NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER CITY oFncano PUBLIC NEARING NOTICE CITY Of TIGARD Community (Development S(rapingA BetterCommunity NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, JULY 28, 2003 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER AT 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2003-00006 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR) 2003-00008 FILE TITLE: BONITA PARK APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: Same Attn: Duane Roberts 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 REQUEST: The City of Tigard is seeking Conditional Use approval to construct and equip a neighborhood park on approximately 5.5 acres located within the I-L zoning classification. The City is also seeking Sensitive Lands Review approval to allow work within the 100-year floodplain and adjacent to Fanno Creek, and its associated wetlands. LOCATION: The subject site is located on the northwest corner of SW Bonita Road and SW Milton Court; WCTM 2S112BA, Tax Lot 6200. ZONE: I-L: Light Industrial District. The I-L zoning district provides appropriate locations for general industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production, research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics such as noise, glare, odor, and vibration. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.725, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURES ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. ASSISTIVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 2438 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. 0 0 ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION LESS THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AN OPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25~) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY-FIVE CENTS (25~) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER BRAD KILBY AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223, OR BY E-MAIL AT bradley@ci.tigard.or.us. 9 0 BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an application by the City of Tigard for a ) FINAL ORDER conditional use permit and sensitive lands review for ) CUP 2003-00006 construction of a neighborhood park west of Milton Court and ) SLR 2003-00008 east of Fanno Creek in the IL zone in the City of Tigard, Oregon ) (Bonita Park) A. SUMMARY 1. Duane Roberts filed the application for the City of Tigard (the "applicant"). He requests approval of a conditional use permit to construct a neighborhood park on 2.5 acres of a 5.5-acre site located at the northwest corner of the intersection of SW Bonita and SW Milton Court, described as WCTM 2S112BA, Tax Lot 6200 (the "site"). The site is zoned IL (Light Industrial). The site is bounded by Milton Court on the east and Fanno Creek on the west. Proposed park improvements include an open lawn area, a play structure, a hard-surface basketball court, a picnic shelter, and landscaping including lawn seeding and tree plantings to provide shade for park users and additional native plantings. The applicant requests sensitive lands review approval for development within the 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek. 2. Tigard Hearings Officer Larry Epstein (the "hearings officer") conducted a duly noticed public hearing to receive testimony and evidence in the matter. At the public hearing, City staff recommended the hearings officer approve the application subject to conditions. See the Staff Report to the Hearings Officer dated July 21, 2003 (the "Staff Report"). The applicant accepted the recommended conditions without exception. The Tualatin Riverkeepers testified in writing. Other than service providers, no one else testified orally or in writing. The hearings officer closed the public record at the end of the hearing. Disputed issues in this case include: a. Whether the steep creek banks on the site create a hazard due to their proximity to the proposed play areas; b. Whether the applicant should be required to re-contour the creek banks to reduce the hazard; and c. Whether the applicant should be required to use native species for required street trees. 3. The hearings officer concludes that the applicant sustained the burden of proof for a conditional use permit and sensitive lands review, based on the findings and conclusions included and incorporated herein and subject to conditions at the end of this final order. B. HEARING AND RECORD 1. The hearings officer received testimony at the public hearing about this application on July 28, 2003. All exhibits and records of testimony are filed with the Tigard Department of Community Development. At the beginning of the hearing, the hearings officer made the declaration required by ORS 197.763. The hearings officer disclaimed any ex parte contacts, bias or conflicts of interest. The following is a summary by the hearings officer of selected testimony offered at the public hearing in this matter. • • 2. City planner Brad Kilby summarized the Staff Report and recommended approval of the application subject to the conditions provided therein. He noted that the Tualatin Riverkeepers submitted written comments about the application. 3. City planner Duane Roberts testified on behalf of the applicant. He testified that they contacted Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue ("TVFR") regarding the safety of the creek banks on the site as recommended by the Tualatin Riverkeepers. TVFR reviewed the applicant's plans and concluded there is nothing the applicant can do to increase safety near the creek on the site. He agreed to change the proposed street trees to native species as recommended by the Tualatin Riverkeepers. He testified that the City has no funds to re- contour the banks of the creek as recommended by the Tualatin Riverkeepers. The City cannot use park funds to re-contour the banks. He testified that the City intends to relocate native plants on the site to accommodate the proposed improvements. He waived the applicant's right to submit a final written argument. 5. At the end of the hearing, the hearings officer closed the public record and announced his intention to approve the application subject to recommended conditions. C. DISCUSSION 1. The Staff Report identifies approval standards for the application and applies them to the record in the case. The hearings officer finds that the standards identified in the Staff Report are all of the standards that are applicable and that they are correctly applied to the facts of the case in the Staff Report. Substantial evidence in the record shows that the proposed use does or can comply with the applicable approval criteria for a conditional use permit and sensitive lands review, and adoption of recommended conditions of approval as amended will ensure final plans are submitted and implemented as approved consistent with those criteria and standards and will prevent, reduce or mitigate potential adverse impacts of the development consistent with the requirements of the Tigard Development Code (the "TDC"). The hearings officer adopts the findings in the Staff Report as his own, except to the extent inconsistent with the findings and conclusions in this final order. 2. The applicant proposed to use native species for street trees on the site. Condition of approval 3 should be modified to that effect. 3. The hearings officer finds that the stream banks on the site are not a significant hazard. The proposed basketball court and playground are more than 40 feet from the top of the creek bank. The edge of the lawn areas are 25 feet or more from the bank. The dense plantings of native trees, shrubs and groundcover proposed between the lawn areas and the creek bank will limit access to the creek banks on the site. The applicant cannot install a fence to limit access to the creek, because City and federal regulations prohibit fences within the 100-year floodplain. Re-contouring the creek banks might reduce the hazard created by the steep banks. However it is not rebutted that re-contouring would exceed the scope of the funding for the proposed park development. Moreover the TDC does not require the applicant to re-contour the banks to comply with approval standards. D. CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings and discussion provided or incorporated in this final order, the hearings officer concludes that the applicant sustained the burden of proof that the proposed conditional use permit and sensitive lands review do or will comply with the applicable criteria of the TDC, provided development that occurs after this decision complies with applicable local, state, and federal laws and with conditions of approval warranted to ensure such compliance occurs in fact. CUP 2003-000061SLR 2003-00008 Hearings Officer Final Order (Bonita Park) Page 2 • E. DECISION • In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating the Staff Report and public testimony and exhibits received in this matter, the hearings officer hereby approves CUP 2003-00006/SLR 2003-00008 (Bonita Park), subject to the following conditions of approval ; THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF SITE PERMITS: Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 6394171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: A Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover water connection, street trees, power connection, s1 f striping and any other work in the public right-of-way. Six (6) sets o~ detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only inc-Tuce sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tigard.or.us). 2. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 3. The applicant's construction plans shall show planting of street trees on the west side of Milton Court. All street trees shall be native tree species approved by the City. 4. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 5. An erosion control plan shall be.provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, December 2000 edition." Submit to the Planning Department (Brad Kilby, 639-4171, ext. 2434) for review and approval: 6. The applicant shall provide the city arborist with a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, and paving. CUP 2003-000061SLR 2003-00008 Hearings Officer Final Order (Bonita Park) Page 3 0 0 7. The applicant shall notify the city arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. 8. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the building, the applicant shall provide plans for the pedestrian/bicycle path that illustrates that no portion of the pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. 9. Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide an erosion control and revgetation plan be approved by Clean Water Services (CWS) and the City of Tigard Engineering Department. 10. Prior to placement of any signs on site, the applicant shall apply for a sign permit and supply staff with the a propriate plans to verify compliance with Tigard Development Code (TDC Chapter 18.780. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL SITE INSPECTION: Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: 11. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 12. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall ay the fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site water quantit facility. The fee is based on the total area of new impervious surfaces in the proposed development. Submit to the Planning Department (Brad Kilby, 639-4171, ext. 2434) for review and approval: 13. Prior to the issuance of a final occupancy permit, or within eighteen (18) months of the date of the Hearings Officer's decision, the applicant shall construct that portion of the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail that crosses the property to ensure connectivity is achieved as planned. 14. The applicant shall comply with the conditions of the CWS service provider letter and submit verification of compliance from both CWS and the projects qualified consultant. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE HEARINGS OFFICERS DECISION. DATED this 11th day of August, 2003. Larry Epstein, E CP City of Tigard Land Use Hearings Officer CUP 2003-000061SLR 2003-00008 (Bonita Park) Hearings Ogicer Final Order Page 4 0 0 "TAB A" Testimony Received at the Public Hearing. • • July 28, 2003 City of Tigard Attn: Duane Roberts RE: Bonita Park Duane, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed development of portions of Bonita Park. As you are aware, we have already attended meetings last year as well as an on-site meeting with Steve Martin to discuss some of our concerns regarding placement of the basketball court, etc., in relation to the camas prairie habitat on the site. We appreciated that the basketball court has been relocated 30' to the south in order to preserve and protect the camas and oak in that area. Several additional comments/concerns we have are as follows: We recommend that only native plants be installed on the site. This will help to increase the biological diversity of the area and is in keeping with Metro's Green Streets Guide as well. In particular we recommend against planting an thing where the camas prairie is other than possibly a few scattered Oregon white oaks. The non-native "Tupelo" and "Tulip Poplar"s are showing up in many areas of Tigard and we recommend against using these species and rather use only native trees and shrubs, especially since this area is dedicated as a "greenway/open space" to the city, and for its cultural heritage. • We recommend the camas area be flagged during all construction activities so that no equipment of any kind is in the area. We will be on site to help flag the prairie. area. • We recommend restoring the meanders to the stream that were lost as a consequence of the sewer line installed on the site. • We are currently working with several tribes as to appropriate language for the signage for the area since the camas was one of the most important plants used by local indigenous' tribes. As we had talked to Mr. Martin about, we would like to work with the city to put the appropriate signage together for this park. • We would like to see the mowing of the area next to the sidewalk stop immediately, as whoever is mowing is cutting many native species including the camas which they cut this spring when it was flowering. • Since the construction of the basketball court and other amenities on the site are in the floodplain, and altogether create a very large impervious surface, what will be the mitigation requirements to offset this? Thank you again for the opportunity to work with the city on this project: Sincerely, Sue Beilke, Director, The Biodiversity Project of Tigard Bonita Park Page 1 of 1 Duane, Thanks for the call regarding the public hearing and for the plans and applicant statement you sent a while back I have a scheduling conflict and won't be able to attend the hearing on the 28th but would like to submit a few additional comments via this e-mail. We appreciate your relocation of the basketball court 30 feet south of the original design to reduce impacts to the Camas meadow. We appreciate your efforts to protect wetlands and native vegetation and to remove invasive plants. We repeat our concerns about safety of putting a playground next to a deeply incised creek six to ten feet below the surrounding floodplain, and ask that Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue be consulted on any solution to safety concerns. We would like to see a more serious consideration of recontouring the stream bank to improve safety with the environmental benefits of reconnecting the creek to its floodplain. We would also like a serious consideration of restoring meanders that were lost when a sewer line was installed. We also suggest that the street trees planned for along Milton Court be changed from the currently planned Tupelo to native species suggested in Metro's Trees for Green Streets Guide (Western Red Cedar, Willamette Valley Ponderosa Pine, Douglas Fir, Oregon White Oak or Bigleaf Maple) Oregon White Oak would be consistent with the natural heritage of the site, and assist in the conservation of a declining indigenous species. We repeat our offer of assisting with interpretive signage on the site and to coordinate our volunteers for native plant rescue. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Watershed Watch Coordinator Tualatin Riverkeepers 16507 SW Roy Rogers Road Sherwood, OR 97140 Phone: (503)590-5813 Fax: (503)590-6702 Stop muddy water. Ask me for a free copy of our guides to erosion prevention and sediment control for construction sites and agriculture. file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\GW}00017.HTM 7/22/03 0 • "TAB B" Applicant's Materials & All Correspondence Filed with Hearings Officer Prior to the Public Hearing. Agenda Item: 2.2 uate: STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON i:uu rm CITY OF TIGARD Community (Development S6upingA Better Community 120 DAYS =10/11/2003 SECTION L APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: BONITA PARK CASE NOS.: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) CUP2003-00006 Sensitive Lands Review (SLR) SLR2003-00008 APPLICANT/ City of Tigard OWNERS: Attn: Duane Roberts 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Conditional Use Approval to construct a neighborhood park on 2.5 acres of a 5.5 acre site. Proposed park improvements include an open lawn area, a play structure, a hard surface basketball court, a picnic shelter, and native plantings. Additional landscaping rovide shade for ark s to and tree lantin rovements include lawn seedin im p p g g p p users. Sensitive Lands Review is requested for development within in the 100-year floodplain. LOCATION: The proJ'ect is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of SW Bonita and SW Milton Court, and is described as WCTM 2S112BA, Tax Lot 6200. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN and ZONING DESIGNATION: I-L: Light Industrial District. The I-L zoning district provides appropriate locations for general industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production, research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics, such as noise, glare, odor, and vibration. Recreational uses are permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.330, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755,'l 8.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Hearings Officer find that the proposed Conditional Use and Sensitive Lands Permits will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City and meets the Approval Standards for a Conditional Use and Sensitive Lands Approval. Therefore, Staff recommends APPROVAL, subject to the following recommended Conditions of Approval: BONITA PARK PAGE 1 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • 0 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF SITE PERMITS: Submit tote Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. or review and approval: 1. A Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover water connection, street trees, power connection, signing, striping and any other work in the public right-of-way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheet~evant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tigard.or.us). 2. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity w o wi I be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 3. The applicant's construction plans shall show planting of street trees on the west side of Milton Court. 4. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 5. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, December 2000 edition." Submit to the Planning Department (Brad Kilby, 639-4171, ext. 2434) for review and approval: 6. The applicant shall provide the city arborist with a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, and paving. 7. The applicant shall notify the city arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. 8. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the building, the applicant shall provide plans for the pedestrian/bicycle path that illustrates that no portion of the pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. 9. Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide an erosion control and revegetation plan be approved by Clean Water Services (CWS) and the City of Tigard Engineering Department. 10. Prior to placement of any signs on site, the ap licant shall apply for a sign permit and supply staff with the appropriate plans to verify compliance with Tigard -Development Code (TDC) Chapter 18.780. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL SITE INSPECTION: BONITA PARK PAGE 2 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: 11. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete any work in the public right-of-way (or public easement) and obtain approval from the Engineering Department. 12. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall pay the fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site water quantity facility. . The fee is based on the total area of new impervious surfaces in the proposed development. Submit to the Planning Department (Brad Kilby, 639-4171, ext. 2434) for review and approval: 13. Prior to the issuance of a final occupancy permit, or within eighteen (18) months of the date of the Hearings Officer's decison, the applicant shall construct that portion of the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail that crosses the property to ensure connectivity is achieved as planned. 14. The applicant shall comply with the conditions of the CWS service provider letter and submit verification of compliance from both CWS and the projects qualified consultant. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE HEARINGS OFFICERS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site Histo : in 1963 the City, in conjunction with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, zoned the property I-L (Li ht Industrial). In 1985, the then owner submitted two proposals to divide the property into 4 lots and for Sensitive Lands approval to allow re-grading and the development of a road within the 100-year floodplain (file No. S 7-85/SL5-85). These two applications were both approved subject to conditions;- however, the applicant did not proceed and both approvals expired. In October 1987, the City's Hearings Officer approved a largely similar subdivision preliminary plat that would divide the subject parcels and adjacent parcels into eleven lots. Included with the subdivision request and approval were plans for construction of a public street within the 100-floodplain of Fanno Creek (Subdivision S 88-07, Sensitive Lands SL 88-05). In 1989, a request was submitted for Site Development Review approval to develop a 25,000 square foot warehouse building and associated site improvements at 7455 SW Bonita Road. The Community Development Director's designee approved the application subject to certain conditions. Among these, condition number nine required the dedication of the area west of the proposed public street, now Milton Court, to be dedicated as greenway/open space to the City. This dedicated area (tax lot 6200) is the subject of the present Conditional Use and Sensitive Lands request. Vicinit Information: The propose par site is located between a segment of Fanno Creek and a dead-end street. Properties generally located to the east of the park site are developed with industrial uses. Properties located to the west, on the opposite side of the creek from the park site, are residential. Access to the site is via Bonita Road, designated as a major collector, and Milton Court. Milton Court serves the light industrial developments located along the cul-de-sac. A densely vegetated, 13-acre Metro-owned Greenspaces property borders the park on the north. When improved and open for public use, the Greenspaces property will provide passive recreational opportunities such as walking and nature viewing for Bonita Park users. BONITA PARK PAGE 3 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/2812003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 0 Site Information and Proposal Description: The site is an undeveloped, -acre, lineal-shaped property located along almost the entire length of Milton Court, with a segment of Fanno Creek generally forming the other boundary. Milton Court includes a continuous sidewalk on the west or Fanno Creek side of the street, and a discontinuous sidewalk on the opposite or industrial subdivision side of the street. The site slopes very gradually from Milton Court on the east to the top of Fanno creek on the western edge of the site. The creek lies in a deeply incised channel six to ten feet below the surrounding parkland. The entire property is located within the floodplain of Fanno Creek. A 60-inch sanitary sewer, the so-called Fanno Creek Interceptor Sanitary Sewer, passes through the length of the property. An 8-inch line extends along the northwest property line and connects to the interceptor some 130 feet south of the northern parcel boundary. Another 8-inch line extends east to west through the middle of the property. No storm drainage facilities are located within the property. wo (2) storm drainage outfalls are located along Milton Court and direct stormwater to the creek. The water reaches the creek through surface sheet flow. The elevation of the top of bank of the stream ranges from 130-140 feet above sea level. This is above the 2-year, 24-hour storm event. Approximately 0.28 acres are wetlands. The northern wetland is approximately 0.21 acres. The southern wetland is approximately 0.07 acres. The Division State Lands has reviewed and concurred with a city delineation of the wetland areas. Copies of the delineation report and concurrence letter are included with the applicant's submittal. The City is proposing to develop a 2.5-acre neighborhood park with several park amenities such as a basketball court, a playground, a picnic shelter, and some lawn areas for recreation. The entire site is located within the 100-year floodplain, and adjacent to Fanno Creek and its' associated wetlands. SECTION IV. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES, PERMITS AND USE Use Classification: Section 18.130.020 Lists the Use Categories. The applicant is proposing to develop a park on land designated for greenspace, and located within the Light Industrial (I-L) Zoning Classification. This use is classified as Community Recreation, which is listed as a Conditional Use in the I-L zone. Summa Land Use Permits and Decision Makin Procedures Chapters 18.310 aand 18.390 A Type III Sensitive Lands Review is required for the proposed development of land within the 100-year floodplain and floodway. The proposed park use requires a Conditional Use permit which is a Type III-HO decision. Type III-HO procedures apply to quasi judicial permits and actions that predominantly contain discretionary approval criteria. Type III-HO actions are decided by the Hearings Officer with appeals to or review by the City Council. Whenever applications are submitted concurrently, they are all reviewed by the highest applicable review authority. In this instance, all applications will be reviewed by the Hearings Officer. Comments From Surrounding Pro ert Owners e igar Development Go de requires a property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal and be given the opportunity to provide written comments prior to a decision being made. Staff received a letter from the Tualatin River Keepers' Watershed Watch Coordinator, Brian Wegener. In his letter, Mr. Wegener identified three primary concerns. The three concerns are safety due to the location of the playground next to the creek, the increased speed of flow as a result of Clean Water Services sewer project in the past, and the amount of non-native lawn associated with the park. Staff has asked the applicant, Mr. Roberts to respond. His response is as follows: BONITA PARK PAGE 4 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • Comment. From a safety standpoint, it may not be prudent to locate a playground next to a creek with such steep banks and accelerated flow. STAFF RESPONSE: We share the Riverkeepers concern regarding'the safely of children using the park, because of its proximity to Fanno Creek. As alluded to in the letter, City and FEMA regulations prohibit the placement of fences within floodways , a desiggnation that applies to almost the entire park area. At the same time, it is relevant to nofe that parks are located next to streams elsewhere in Tigard and, indeed, all over the state. As far as City professional park staff and Tigard Police are aware, incidents of children accidentally falling into and drowning in a creek bordering a park are unknown in Tigard and relatively rare in general. The City's approach to this safety concern in the case of Bonita Park is reliance on the streamside buffering that will result from the preservation of the existing native vegetation and the proposed dense planting of additional vegetation within the vegetated buffer zones. As currently designed, the buffer zone includes a 50- foot-wide combination of trees, shrubs, and ground cover all along the park's easterly creek bank. The buffer zone plants selected by the professional landscape architect who des) ned the park took into account the risk to children and others of the creek's steep bank. he park master plan, in the City's view, strikes a reasonable balance between park safety and the alternative of not developing a park at the proposed location at all. The City recognizes, particularly during the early period of plant establishment, that this is not a perfect solution and that some degree of risk to small, unattended children remains. The rationale for providing the park in the first place is the lack of open spaces within the nearby apartment complexes. The nearest public park or school playground is located approximately one (1) mile away, far beyond normal walking distance. Many of the occupants of the older complexes are non-English speaking, seasonal and low-wage workers and their families. The lack of playground facilities within the complexes compels the children of these families to play in parking lots or in the narrow lawn areas between or around buildings. Without the park, many of these children would continue to play in parking areas. When completed and open to the public, Bonita Park will provided the nearly 800 tenants of the adjacent apartment buildings a place for healthy outdoor recreation and a social gathering place for families in an attractive natural setting On balance, the stream would not appear to pose an undue risk to children using the park and may be a safer alternative to parking lot play. Comment: ..we ask that the hardscape features of the park be located so as to not preclude the future remediation for the stream morphology problems. STAFF RESPONSE: General) speaking, all the park facilities are located away from the creek and just below the high area along the road. The change in grade between the road and park area is the result of the re-grading and the development of Milton Court within the 100-year floodplain in the late 1980's. Comment: We would also like to see a reduction in the area of nonnative lawn in two areas. At the southern end of the park there is a narrow strip of lawn planned. Is there a recreational purpose for this strip of lawn? It's proximity to the steep banks of the creek should raise safety concern. The other area where lawn should be reduced is in the peninsula west of the proposed basketball court. Rather than a small manicured lawn surrounded by native meadow, extending the native meadow would reduce maintenance requirements and preserve more natural landscape. BONITA PARK PAGE 5 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER i ~ STAFF RESPONSE: Park safety concerns related to the steep bank were addressed above. The park's overall purpose, and the rationale for the award of federal funding assistance toward its construction, is to provide healthy outdoor recreation opportunities for nearby residents who live in dense housing. The park is undersized in terms of city neighborhood park standards. According to the adopted Tigard Park System Master Plan, the neighborhood park size standard is 4-14 acres of active and passive areas. Bonita Park's proposed developed area is some 2.5 out of 5.5 park acres overall. Reducing the already limited grassy areas would reduce opportunities for active play. In addition to its use for picnicking, playing catch, and other common outdoor recreation activities, the lineal lawn area located at the southern end of the park functions as a landscape design feature and an aid to visibility into the park from Bonita Road. To be noted is that this area may be considered for a change over to wildflowers after the City has some direct experience with how it is used. SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA A summary of the applicable criteria in this case in the Chapter order in which they are addressed in this report are as follows: A. S Additional Conditions of Approva B. pi3licable Development Code Standards 18.530 n us ria Zoning is nc s 18.705 Access, Egress & Circula ion) 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards) 18.745 Landscaping and Screening) 18.755 Mixed Solid-Waste and Recyclable Storage) 18.765 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements) 18.775 Sensitive Lands Review) 18.780 Sign18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 Visual Clearance) C. D. E. SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A. SPECIFIC CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL CRITERIA Section 18.330.010.A states that the purpose of this chapter is to provide standards and procedures under which a conditional use may be permitted, enlarged or altered if the site is appropriate and if other appropriate conditions of approval can be met. There are certain uses which due to the nature of the impacts on surrounding land uses and public facilities require a case-by-case review and analysis. Section 18.330.020.A states that a request for approval for a new conditional use shall be processed as a Type III-HO procedure, as regulated by Chapter 18.3 requirements in Chapter 18.330. The applicable review criteria in this case include the following chapters of the Community Development Code: 18.330, Conditional Use; 18.390 Decision Making Procedures; 18.530, Industrial Zoning Districts, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; 18.725, Environmental Performance Standards; 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage; 18.765, Off-Street Parking; 18.775, Sensitive Lands; 18.780, Signs; 18.790, Tree Removal; 18.795, Visual Clearance; and 18.810, Street and Utility Improvement Standards. The development standards and requirements of these chapters are addressed below. BONITA PARK PAGE 6 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 0 General Approval Criteria for a Conditional Use: Section 18.330.030: The site size an imensions provide adequate area or the nee s of the proposed use; In terms of the necessary setbacks, landscaping, and other standards applicable to the community recreation use, the site size is adequate for the development of the proposed Ve~Ighborhood k. According to the adopted City Park System Master Plan, the size criteria for a Park is 4 to 14 acres, including active and passive areas. The existing site size is 5.5 acres, of which some 2.5 acres will 6e developed for active recreational use. The impacts of the proposed use of the site can be accommodated considering size, shape, location, topography, and natural features; This proposal is to develop 2.5-acres of a 5.5-acre parcel for the purpose of a neighborhood ppark on an industrial-zoned property. The property in question is located entirely within the floodplain. Scattered groups of existing deciduous and coniferous trees are located on the site, as are two (2 wetlands of 0.21 and 0.07 acres each. The site design preserves all existing trees and the two-wetland areas. Fanno Creek flows along the western edge of the site. A 50-foot setback is maintained between the creek and the park's developed areas. A 25-foot setback is maintained around the portions of the two wetlands located outside of the stream corridor. As documented in the following discussion, the project complies with the CWS Vegetated Corridor Width Standards and the City of Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.775 (Sensitive Lands). As such, the site is suitable for the proposed development, and where the proposal has been found to be deficient in meeting the approval standards, staff has recommended conditions of approval. This criterion can be satisfied. All required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposal; and The only public facilities involved in the proposal, Milton Court and two drinking fountains, have adequate capacity to serve the site, as discussed elsewhere in this report. Moreover, with regard to street capacity, according to the Park System Master Plan, Neighborhood Parks, by definition, are designed for people to walk, rather than drive to. The park's two drinking fountains will be served by an existing water line located along the property's eastern edge. This criterion is satisfied. The applicable requirements of the zoning district are met except as modified by this chapter. The dimensional standards in the I-L zone are specified in Section 18.530.040. According to Table 18.530.2[3] "no (side .yard) setback shall be required (in the I-L district) except 50 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district." The land along Fanno Creek opposite the proposed park is zoned I-L and R-1 Z. The setback of all developed portions of the park, including lawn area, from the creek bank is 50 feet. The setback of all structures from the abutting residential zoned pro ert thy e all points is at least 200 feet from the property line. According to Section 18.530.2(3 , the required front and rear yard setbacks are each 0/50 feet. The respective front and se backs of the proposed park are zero feet front and side yard (south) and 300 feet side yard (north). As identified in the discussion above, the applicant's plans show that the dimensional standards for structures in the base zone and Conditional Use are exceeded. This criterion is satisfied. The applicable policies of 18.330.050. The applicant did not elect to develop the project as a planned development, an option provided under this section. This criterion is not applicable. The supplementary requirements set forth in other chapter of this Code including but not limited to Chapter 18.780, Signs, and Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review, if applicable, are met. BONITA PARK PAGE 7 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/2812003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER The only supplementary requirements that apply are Chapter 18.780 (Signs) and 18.775 (Sensitive Lands). These requirements and how they relate to the proposed site plan are addressed in detail and individually further in this report. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the General Approval Criteria for a Conditional Use are satisfied or will be met as discussed and conditioned further in this report. Additional Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use. Section 18.330.030.5 saes a the earings u on y may impose conditions on the approval of a conditional use, which are found necessary to ensure the use is compatible with other uses in the vicinity, and that the impact of the proposed use on the surrounding uses and public facilities is minimized. These conditions may include, but are not limited to the following: Limiting the hours, days, place and/or manner of operation; The hours of operation for the proposed park, in keeping with current park system usage rules, will be from dawn to dusk. No additional limitations are warranted. This criterion is satisfied. Requiring design features which minimize environmental impacts such as noise, vibration, air pollution, glare, odor and/or dust; The site plan mitigates these potential impacts by developing park rules and a maintenance plan for the site, and by maintaining an approximately 300-foot separation between surrounding dwellings units and the developed portion of the site. The construction of the park may cause some impacts, but no work will be allowed outside of the pparameters of accepted construction practices that are allowed in the City at this time. TC criterion is satisfied. Requiring additional setback areas, lot area, and/or lot depth or width; The proposed buffers and setbacks are adequate, and as discussed elsewhere in this report, meet the standards of the Tigard Development Code (TDC). This criterion is satisfied. Limiting the building height, size or lot coverage, and/or location on the site; As indicated in the plans submitted, the only structures proposed for the site are a small, three-table, picnic shelter and a play structure. Including pathways, the proposed lot coverage is approximately 4-5% of the parcel. This criterion is satisfied. Designating the size, number, location and/or design of vehicle access points; In accordance with park master plan standards, the City is not proposing vehicular access onto the site. Additionally, there is no required access in the TDC for parks. This criterion is satisfied. Requiring street right-of-way to be dedicated and street(s) to be improved; Bonita Road is classified as a Major Collector. The standard width for this classification street is 44 feet. The existing width meets this standard. Milton Court is classified as a local street. It is built to local street standards, except for gaps in the sidewalk on the east side of the street where undeveloped parcels exist. According to the Engineering Department, as presently designed, Bonita Road and Milton Court each have adequate width and capacity to serve the proposed development. Street improvements are discussed in more detail later in this report. This standard is satisfied. Requiring landscaping, screening, drainage and/or surfacing of parking and loading areas. BONITA PARK PAGE 8 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 • As discussed in detail below, landscaping, screening, and drainage requirements do not apply to the proposal as designed. Parking requirements are discussed in detail under Chapter 18.765. Limiting the number, size, location, height and/or lighting of signs. The applicant is proposing one (1) ground sign for the facility. Compliance with the sign requirements for the underlying zone will be addressed once a design is completed. The City, as applicant, proposes to identify the location and typpe of sign for this site prior to building permit issuance because the sign is proposed to be located in the 100-year floodplain. Limiting or setting standards for the location and/or intensity of outdoor lighting. Outdoor lighting is not included in the proposal. The existing overhead street lights along the park side of Milton Court are believedby the Park Supervisor and Police Public Information Officer to provide adequate security lighting within. the lineal-shaped park. Requiring berms, screening or landscaping and the establishment of standards for their installation and maintenance. As discussed later in this report, the City proposes to plant Tulip Poplar and Tupelo street trees along Milton Court. These will be watered and maintained by the City Public Works Department as part of their on-going maintenance of the future park. Requiring and designating the size, height, location and/or materials for fences; No permanent fencing is proposed. Fences are prohibited within the floodway, which includes nearly the entire subject site. Temporary split rail fencing is proposed to be installed during the growing season in order to reduce encroachment into a large area of Camas Lily located near the northern edge of the bgsketball court area. The fencing is proposed to be removed during the period of October 15 to March 31 s , when flooding is likely to occur. Requiring the protection and preservation of existing trees, soils, vegetation, watercourses, habitat areas and/or drainage areas. All exiting trees and riparian native vegetation will be protected. Exotic species located along the creek are proposed to be removed and replaced by native species, as documented in the Planting Plan that has been approved by Clean Water Services (CWS). The stream channel and existing wetland areas are not proposed to be disturbed. Requiring the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjoining and within the floodplain when land form alterations and development are allowed within the 100-year floodplain. The subject property was dedicated to the City in 1989 and continues to be city-owned. Requiring the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. Although the park is located along Fanno Creek, no off-street or greenway trail is proposed. This is because the installation of a trail within the narrow, 60-270 foot wide site would conflict with the use of the parcel as a park. Instead, the adjacent sidewalk and street, respectively, are proposed to function as the pedestrian and bicycle routes along this section of the greenway trail. The City's proposed on-street route is consistent with the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail Action Plan recommendations for the alignment of the trail within the Bonita Park stream reach. The Tigard Development Code Section 18.330.0506.5 allows Community Recreation and Parks provided the following standards are met: All building setbacks shall be a minimum of 30 feet from any property line; BONITA PARK PAGE 9 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/2812003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 0 There are no off-street parking requirements, except that five automobile parking spaces are required for a dog park or off-leash area with a fenced area of one acre or more, along with an approved parking plan for anticipated peak use periods. Off-site peak use or overspill parking shall require a signed agreement with the landowner providing the additional parking. The present proposal meets the prescribed setback and parking requirements, because the picnic shelter and play structure are set back 50 and 75 feet, respectively, from the nearest property lines, and because the two portable toilet pads are each set back 30 feet from the nearest propertyy line. The toilet structures themselves will be set within the pads and, as such, will exceed the 30-foot standard. With regard to off-street parking, the site plan does not include a dog off-leash area. Therefore, the off-street parking requirement does not apply to the project. These criterion are satisfied. B. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS Industrial Zoning Districts Chapter 18.530 Chapter 18.530 describes a dimensional requirements and allowed uses for the different industrial zones. As discussed in the previous discussion, the proposed development meets or exceeds the dimensional requirements for the I-L zoning classification with regard to setbacks, and lot size. Aside from these requirements, the I-L zoning classification requires a maximum lot width of 50 feet, a maximum coverage amounf of 80% for all impervious surfaces, and a maximum height requirement of 45 feet. The lot is an abnormally shaped lot and consists of 5.5 acres. The proposal calls for improvements to less than 5% of the lot. According to the information provided and verification by the Washin ton County Assessor's Office, no portion of this lot is less than 50 feet wide. According to t9e applicant, none of the proposed improvements will exceed the 45-foot maximum height. Recreational uses are permitted conditionally within this zone. According to Table 18.530.1, Use Table: Industrial Zones, the pertinent condition in the case of the resent proposal is that Community Recreation is permitted when the land involved is "classified as floodplain on city flood maps, when the recreational use does not otherwise preclude future cut and fill as needed in order to develop adjoining industrially zoned upland This standard is satisfied in that the subject land is located entirely within the floodplain, and its development as a public park will in no way interfere with the development of nearby properties designated for industrial uses. Proposed cut and fill activities are minor and are addressed below under Section 18.775.070.6. FINDINGS: The proposed improvements meet the dimensional requirements of the Light Industrial Zoning District. Access Egress and Circulation Chapter 18.705 No building or other perms s a 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 proposed use is a neighborhood park that was designed to be pedestrian oriented. The applicant is proposing to place a lighted crosswalk at the intersection of SW Bonita and SW Milton Court to safely facilitate access to the park by nearby residences. There are no parking requirements for parks, unless they are off-leash dog parks, and therefore no requirements to provide vehicular access to the site. However, in order to ensure that pedestrians have safe access the following standards apply. BONITA PARK PAGE 10 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 0 Walkways: On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses: to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments. The City is proposing two (2) 10-foot-wide, low gradient, accessible paved pathways leading, respectively, from the existing sidewalk on Milton Court to the playground/picnic shelter and basketball court activity areas. A curb cut and ramp on Milton Court, designed to ADA standards, is proposed. A walkway extending from the landing of the stairway leading to the basketball court is included in the design. This criterion is satisfied. 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; and Because there are no proposed accesses, driveways, or parking areas, there are no walkways that would cross these areas and be subject to this standard. This criterion is not applicable. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for saFety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The applicant has indicated in the narrative that all walkways between the park entrance and activity areas will be constructed of concrete to City of Tigard Standards. This criterion is satisfied. Environmental Performance Standards Chapter 18.725 Requires that federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations be applied to development within the City of Tigard. Section 18.725.030 Performance Standards regulates: Noise, visible emissions, vibration and odors. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.41.130 Ifiroug 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Visible Emissions. Within the Commercial zoning districts and the Industrial Park fl-P) zoning district, ere shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stackk or other point- source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property line. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) rules for visible emissions (340-21-015 and 340-28-070) apply. Vibration. No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles, trains and aircraft is permed in any given zoning district which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. Odors. The emissions of odorous gases or other matter in such quantities as to be re iry. detectable at any point beyond the property line of the use creating the odors is prohibited. DEQ rules for odors (340-028-090) apply. BONITA PARK PAGE 11 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/2812003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. Insects and rodents. All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. There is no evidence in the record that would suggest that any problems associated with noise, emissions, vibrations, odors, glare and heat, or insects and rodents would result from this specific development. FINDING: Although park uses are not expected to generate undue noise, the City, on an on-going basis, will monitor and control any park-related noise violations through code enforcement. Daily and weekly park maintenance is designed to prevent odors, if any, from becoming a nuisance for existing or future residential and industrial development. Landscaping and Screening Chapter 18.745 Street trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.C Section 18.745.040.C required that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). As depicted in the Planting Plan, the project fronts Milton Court, and includes the planting of street trees, as well as the preservation of all existing street-side trees. The predominant street tree is the 2-inch caliper Tupelo, planted 20 feet apart. Where the wetland buffer borders the road, a variety of wetland associated trees are proposed, consistent with CWS Vegetated Corridor Standards. CWS formally has concurred with the planting scheme proposed within these particular Vegetated Corridor areas. As indicated in the "Planting Plan", the street trees meet the requirements of Section 18.745.040 (Street Trees) with regard to size, spacing, and type. This criterion is satisfied. Land Use Buffering and Screening: There is no buffering indicated between Community Recreation uses and residential uses. The proposed park is located within an industrial zone. The zoning designation of the land surrounding the park on three sides also is industrial. The land use along the park's western edge is multi-family. A 50-foot-wide corridor of dense vegetation, consisting of native trees and understory vegetation, will be planted all along the creek between the park and the adjoining residential zoning district. This standard is satisfied Screening S ecial Provisions: Section 18.74.050.E requires the screening of parking and loading areas. Landscaped Parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking of areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three (3) feet wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. There are no proposed parking areas for this neighborhood park, and as discussed in the following section, there are no parking requirements for this use. This standard is not applicable. BONITA PARK PAGE 12 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/2812003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Mixed Solid Waste and Rec clable Storage Chapter 18.755 Chapter 19755 requires a new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate comp lance: Minimum Standards Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign-Off. The applicant will" have to submit evidence or a plan, which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. As with other neighborhood parks in the City of Tigard the City has proposed to provide trash receptacles that will be emptied as part of a maintenance program. The applicant has indicated that a minimum of four trash receptacles with metal lids will be placed inside the park for the disposal of mixed solid waste. The receptacles will be monitored and emptied once day. The actual disposal and storage will take place at the Tigard public works building. his criterion is satisfied. Off-Street Parkin and Loading Chapter 18.765 As Indicated elsewhere in this Iscusslon no off-street parking is proposed. The TDC states that the parking required for Community Necreation is 2 spaces for every 1,000 square feet of area under a roofed structure. There are no roofed structures proposed for this development. This Chapter is found to be inapplicable to this particular proposal. The applicant is however proposing to provide bicycle parking. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements: The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.765.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. Community Recreation requires 3 spaces/1,000 square feet of building space. Although the building space included within this project is far less than 1,000 square feet, four (4), two-space bicycle racks will be provided within the park to accommodate bicycle users. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.765.070.H states that the minimum and maximum parking shall be as required in Table 18.765.2. Off street parking is not required. The proposed park is designed to serve the adjacent neighborhood area. According to city park standards, access to neighborhood parks is intended to be via walking, rather than by motor vehicle. In common with the City's other neighborhood-level parks, the plan does not include a parking area. Sensitive Lands Review Chapter 18.775 he use is a ommunl ecrea In use but includes play structures and involves landform alterations within the 100-year floodplain and associated floodway, therefore, the proposed use requires Sensitive Lands Review. Section18.775.040 General Provisions for Floodplain Areas The attached letter provided by a registered professional engineer certifies that the structural design, specifications, and plans developed for the construction and equipping of Bonita Park are in accordance with accepted standards and practices for meeting provisions of TMC Section 18.775.040 "General Provisions for Floodplain Areas". The park improvements have been designed to assure that the potential for flood damage to the proposed construction will be minimized. All construction and improvements will be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. All construction and improvements will be constructed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. The proposed sprinkler system shall be constructed so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. The proposed water supply system shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwater into the system. No electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, air-conditioning equipment or other service facilities are included in the project design. All new construction shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure. BONITA PARK PAGE 13 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER Within the 100-year floodplain. The Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application request within the 100- ear floodplain based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any encroachments unless certified by a registered professional engineer that the encroachments will not result in any increase in flood elevation during the base flood discharge. A formal zero-rise study has been conducted by Jim Harper, a registered professional engineer associated with Tetra Tech/KCM, Inc. using the FEMA regulatory model for the Fanno Creek basin. In the study, Mr. Harper indicates that, the proposed park would have no effect on the Fanno Creek floodplain or floodway. This criterion is satisfied. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in chapter 18.120 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas designated residential subject to applicable zoning standards; The comprehensive plan designation of the subject property is light industrial. This criterion is satisfied. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100- year flood. The zero-rise study conducted by Jim Harper indicates that there will be no increase in the water surface elevation. This criterion is satisfied. The land form alteration should include a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely. According to the applicant, a 2003 technical study, "Fanno Creek Greenway Trail Action Plan' prepared for Metro, the preferred alignment for the Bonita Park segment of the Fanno Creek Trail is on the existing sidewalk -for pedestrians and Milton Court for bicyclists. However, the park proposal does not include striping of a bike lane for this portion of the trail. FINDING: The trail is identified in both the Metro Regional Transportation Plan and the Tigard Transportation Systems Plan as a necessary component of a regional multi-use path. CONDITON: Prior to the site work, or within eighteen (18) months of the date of the Hearings Officer's decison the applicant shall construct that portion of the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail that crosses the property to ensure connectivity is achieved as planned. The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. The location of the trail has not been determined as of the date of this application, therefore, staff cannot ensure that the pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. FINDING: The applicant has not provided for the construction of the bicycle/pedestrian path that has been conditioned previously in this report so staff cannot verify elevation at this time. CONDITION: Prior to the issuance of building permits for the building, the applicant shall provide plans for the pedestrian/bicycle path that illustrates that no portion of the pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood. BONITA PARK PAGE 14 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • 0 The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands, and CWS permits and approvals shall be obtained. All the necessary permits have been obtained and copies are included in the application submittal. This includes a DSL wetland delineation concurrence letter and a CWS service provider letter. Because the site plan does not proposed any work within 50 feet of the stream channel or any disturbance of the two wetlands located within the subject property, Kathryn Harris, from the US Army Corps of Engineers has stated that as long as all work is outside of the wetlands, then no permit is required. This criterion is satisfied. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land. No further dedication is needed as this property is already city-owned. This criterion is satisfied. Section 18.775.090.B.2 states that the standard width for "good condition" vegetated corridors along Fanno Creek is 50 feet. If all or part of a locally significant wetland (a wetland identified as significant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map) is located within the 50 foot setback area, the vegetated corridor is measured from the upland edge of the associated wetland. Section 18.775.090.b.3 The standard width for "marginal or degraded condition" vegetated corridors along Fanno Creek is 50% of the standard width. The site design maintains a 50-foot setback between the creek and the park's developed areas as required. The two wetlands located within the subject site are identified as significant on the city wetlands map. A 25-foot setback is maintained around the portions of the two wetlands that do not border the creek consistent with the approved Clean Water Services Natural Resources Assessment Report. This standard is satisfied. Within wetlands. The Director shall approve, approve with conditions or den an app ica ion request for a sensitive lands permit within wetlands based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: The proposed land form alteration or development is neither on wetland in an area designated as significant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map nor is within 25 feet of such a wetland; The proposed land form alteration is not within an area designated as significant wetland on the Comprehensive Plan Floodplain and Wetland Map nor within 25 feet of such a wetland. The wetlands that are located on this site are wetlands that have been degraded in earlier developments. Clean Water Services, and the Oregon Division of State Lands have reviewed and concurred with the applicant's delineation provided by Kurahashi & Associates as part of this application. This criterion is satisfied. The extent and nature of the proposed land form alteration or development will not create site disturbances to an extent greater than the minimum required for the use; The applicant has provided a wetland delineation prepared by Kurahashi & Associates that has been affirmed by the Oregon Division of State Lands and Clean Water Services (CWS). There is no proposed disturbance of the wetland, and the only disturbance of the CWS vegetated corridor is for the purpose of enhancement. This criterion is met. Any encroachment or change in on-site or off-site drainage which would adversely impact wetland characteristics have been mitigated; As stated above, the applicant has provided a delineation of the wetland, and has gained approval of a mitigation plan from CWS. BONITA PARK PAGE 15 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • FINDING: The applicant has been provided with several conditions from CWS to mitigate impacts from this development on the nearby wetland. CONDITION:The applicant shall comply with the conditions of the CWS service provider letter and submit verification of compliance from both CWS and the projects qualified consultant. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to land form alteration or development, erosion control provisions of the Surface Water Management program of Washington County must be met and areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted in like or similar species in accordance with Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; FINDING: The applicant has not provided an erosion control plan as required. CONDITION: Prior to site work, the applicant shall provide an erosion control and revegetation plan to be approved by CWS and the City of Tigard Engineering Department. All other sensitive lands requirements of this chapter have been met; All sensitive lands requirements of the Sensitive Lands chapter can be achieved with compliance of the Conditions. of Approval for this project. This criterion has been satisfied. The provisions of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal, shall be met; These provisions are addressed later in this report. Physical Limitations and Natural Hazards, Floodplains and Wetlands, Natural Areas, and Parks, Recreation and Open Space policies of the Comprehensive Plan have been satisfied. As indicated previously, this proposal can be conditioned such that it satisfies the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. This proposal helps to fulfill the need for parks in the City of Tigard as prescribed by the Comprehensive Plan. This criterion is satisfied. Si ns Cha ter 18.780 Requires a a permit be issued for any sign that is erected, re-erected, constructed, structurally altered, or relocated within the City Limits. The applicant has indicated that they intend to place a monument sign on the site. The I-P zone allows for one (1) free-standing sign of 70 square feet per face. However, no application was submitted for the signs at this time. Staff cannot verify compliance with the sign requirements without all of the information. Signs can be applied for at a later date, which is often times the case with most projects. FINDING: The applicant has indicated the need for signage, but did not provide an application or the necessary information for staff review. CONDITION: Prior to placement of any signs on site, the applicant shall apply for a sign permit and supply staff with the appropriate plans to verify compliance with TDC Chapter 18.780. Tree Removal - Chapter 18.790 ec ion requires at a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist be provided for a conditional use application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, identification of which trees are proposed to be removed, and a protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. BONITA PARK PAGE 16 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER No trees are proposed to be removed. As indicated, a protection plan for these existing trees has been developed. This plan is the city's administrative policy pertaining to tree protection during construction activities on city projects. FINDING: In order to ensure that the tree protection measures are in place prior to site work and approved by the city arborist, the following conditions shall apply: CONDITIONS: The applicant shall provide the city arborist with a construction sequence including installation and removal of tree protection devices, clearing, grading, and paving. The applicant shall notify the city arborist when tree protection measures are in place so that he may verify that the measures will function properly prior to construction. Visual Clearance Areas - Cha ter 18.795: Section .saes a the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. Section 18.795.030.6. states that a clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. There are no proposed structures inside the vision clearance area, and a staff visit has verified that the majority of the vegetation is non-native and will be removed as part of the plan. The park signage will be reviewed for compliance at the time of application. This criterion is satisfied. D. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as TDCrtion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.810.030.E requires a local street to have a 50 right-of-way width and 36-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 Milton Court, which is classified as a local street on the City of Tigard. Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 60 feet of ROW, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. SW Milton Court is currently fully improved. The applicant has indicated that street trees will be planted along the frontage. This criterion is satisfied. BONITA PARK PAGE 17 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/2812003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to roviding 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 new blocks are being created as a result of this development. Environmental constraints and existing development patterns preclude any additional street connections at this time. This criterion is satisfied. 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. The applicant has been conditioned earlier in this report to address the construction and timing of the Fanno Creek Greenway trail that is identified in the Tigard Transportation Systems Plan. Any additional pedestrian connections are precluded by environmental constraints. This criterion is satisfied. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot de th from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than ~ 5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. There are no new lots being created as a result of this proposal. This standard is inapplicable. 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. Although this is not a newly created lot, the site has well over 25 feet of frontage onto SW Milton Court. This criterion is satisfied. 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. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. There is an existing sidewalk along the Milton Court frontage. No additional public sidewalk improvements are required. 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 Clean Water Services in 1996 and includin.g any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. BONITA PARK PAGE 18 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 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. This development does not require a sanitary sewer service connection. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A 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 lare enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, w9ether 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 Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendmens). There are no upstream drainage areas that affect this site. 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 Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. This site is located within the flood plain and therefore detention is not required. The new impervious surface area is 10,019 sf, therefore water quality treatment is required. The applicant is proposing that the runoff sheet flow over the vegetated area to the west, between the development and the creek, in order to achieve water quality treatment. This is an acceptable method of treatment. 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. Milton Court is not designated as a bicycle facility, but if the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail is included along this portion of the creek, bicycle striping along SW Bonita Court may be needed. Conditions have been imposed previously in this report to clear this matter up. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: BONITA PARK PAGE 19 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.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 utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty opunder-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under- grounding in con unction with the develop=-Only, The determination shall be on a case- by-case basis. The most common, but nosuch situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in- lieu of under-grounding. There are not existing overhead utility lines along the frontage of SW Milton Court. AND/OR AGENCY LITY Public Water S stem: Is site is serve by City of Tigard Water. The applicant is proposing a new water meter connection to serve a drinking fountain and irrigation system. Storm Water Qualit : The City as agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. Prior to the City accepting this facility as a public facility, the developer shall maintain it for a minimum of three years after construction is completed. The pond shall be placed in a tract and conveyed to the City on the final plat. The developer will be required to submit annual reports to the City which show what maintenance operations were conducted on the facility for that year. Once the three-year maintenance period is completed, the City will inspect the facility and make note of any problems that have arisen and require them to be resolved before the City will take over maintenance of the facility. In addition, the City will not take over maintenance of the facility unless 80 percent of the landscaping is established and healthy. If at any time during the maintenance period, the landscaping falls below the 80 percent level, the developer shall immediately reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity. BONITA PARK PAGE 20 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/2812003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER 0 • Grading and Erosion Control: GW5 Design an ons ruc ion 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 CWS 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 one or more acre 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. A final grading and erosion control plan will be reviewed by the Building Division as part of the site permlf process. Address Assi nments: T he I o Tigard is responsible for assi ning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary USB . An addressing fee in the amount of $30.00 per address shall be assessed. This shall be aid to the City prior to final buildin Inspection p y p g E. IMPACT STUDY Section 18.390.040.B.2.e states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. The applicant has provided an Impact Study that shows that the park improvement will not result in a negative impact on existing public facilities and services. The park will be required to pay a Traffic Impact Fee of approximately $6,648 dollars. The applicant has submitted an impact study addressing the required elements above. The report substantiates that all services are capable of serving the site. Based on the conditions of approval and findings of fact within this report , there are no unmitigated impacts as a result of this development to any public systems. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed the proposed and stated that they have no objections to the proposal. The City of Tigard Arborist has had the opportunity to review the proposal and offered suggestions that have been incorporated into the body of this report . He also provided a copy of a survey that he has completed for the property. The City of Tigard Police Department has had the opportunity to review the proposal and has offered no comments or objections. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Clean Water Services has reviewed the proposal and offered comments which have been incorporated into the body of this report. BONITA PARK PAGE 21 OF 22 CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER • Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue has had an opportunity to review the pproposal and has stated that the proposal does not conflict with their .interest or operation. It was also stated that if future structures are added, fire apparatus access and firefighting water supplies will be required. US Army Corps of Engineers has reviewed the proposal and provided the following comments: No work shall occur within the wetlands. The City applied for a permit to install a stormwater pipe through the wetlands. The project was modified and the pipe pulled out of the wetlands. Therefore, the City does not have authorization to impact any of the wetlands on this project site. Please call if you have any questions or if your plans show impacts to the wetlands. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Division of State Lands, Department of Environmental Quality, and Tri-met were given the opportunity to review this proposal and submitted no comments or objections. PREPARED BY: Brad Kilby Associate Planner APPROVED BY: Richard Bewers orff Planning Manager BONITA PARK CUP2003-00006 AND SLR2003-00008 July 21, 2003 DATE July 21, 2003 DATE PAGE 22 OF 22 7/28/2003 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER OA / wt. I. a- Dada -.t.q » hard if'Y.re. per I Ste 0.9 M. 510 / -Mane 2"D-W. a.a( tW-,rd std Oy x.570 , - xrs&- Pod / . S« M.1-9-f cJ 611-..e. Cm+o..r. Potn.er 1 See d rat aA«r CJ S-l IAf Gilt AC / l+en.w I7(f or eairr Cwn a 4.rfer aad aier.an. x.126 Conrbucr ,qtF a.e a GLfrer P.+' Sre O.q 1 sp.Ct Cmatruef Sde.ma .wrp (s' ro o eya)-6x .:.qa S« Sre O.q x. 129 Ior p-. secf:w aad pnl «t- A 5K.sa-t for SA t c CJ Ior axipiaq let=` eanaam Poe Sae seta-5✓tM1 c( _ See eeraa sn«r L7 Maras P Pk k tom. orm see e.re ~ ~ u ~ . ✓ (rip) ..a ew waer f \ ~I CITY OF T16ARD CUP2003.000061SLR2003.00008 srrE PLAN BONITA PARK / ` \ I JO , n.,d eaw~ear ' P) ` Lo.a AIM (r)p) 5ateee .Irn Pro r . siw-. aI AO Pei ,000 aq.ft _ ,rte is not to scale A r PRE-APP. HELD BY 5 ) < CITY O TIGARD PLAN?NI'NG w I`SYlti{ N 13125.$W HALL BOU~LEV'ARD TIGARD;''bR 97223,-8189: 50.3~63944117~1%503"~6"84 7297 CITY.OF TIGARD OREGON LAND 6SE;-01ERMIT APPLICATI90`N Fil6# C )CO_GD% . OthecCase,# R a oo3 ooo o $ Date-: 5- a-~3 B y. Rdo: t~#.~~ a ;,®afeA heation,;Com"lete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑ Adjustment/Variance (I or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) ❑ Subdivision (11 or 111) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment (IV) ❑ Minor Modification (1) ❑ Zone Change (III) Conditional Use (III) ❑ Planned Development (111) ❑ Zone Change Annexation (IV) ❑ Historic Overlay (11 or III) Sensitive Lands Review (1, 11 or 111) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment (IV) ❑ Home Occupation (I or II) _ ❑ Site Development Review (II) ❑ Miscellaneous (1) - (Lot Line Adjustment/Temporary Use/Tree Removal/Director's Interpretation, etc.) LO(;A I 1UN WHERE PROF( SED AG I IVI I Y WILL OCCUR (Address i available) o /7 /~ezQ/ ri c~ /lam v C / z-,.S / 2- dA o c) Zo O , APPLICAN I' Cif o~ 5e ;7 1. I PHUNL NU. 7 7/ is_ i more an one C/ 7'c ~ / ♦ 4' rc~ ~o PHONE Nu. FAX NU. 'When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY ease be specific) JZ- .t, v n R. h V U - .sZ ~L /'L C~ / O w °"l -e- C U Z c~f 00, APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. 0 • THE-APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: ♦ If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights. granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. ♦ All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. ♦ The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Applicant/Agent/Re Signature Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date Date Date Date Date J'-/-:;t- 2/o- Date Date COUNTYWIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE WORKSHEET (FOR NON-SINGLE FAMILY USESj-- 1 ANII IISF CATF[:(1DY DATF PFD TDID RESIDENTIAL $ 239.00 BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL $ 60.00 OFFICE $ 220.00 INDUSTRIAL $ 230.00 X INSTITUTIONAL $ 99.00 PAYMENT METHOD: CASH/CHECK CREDIT DATE: Feb 3, 2003 PLANS CHECK NO. PRE2003-00003 PROJECT TITLE: Bonita Park APPLICANT Duane Roberts. MAILING ADDRESS: Here CITY/ZIP/PHONE: Tigard/97223/2444 TAX MAP NO.: SITES NOADDRESS: Bonita & Milton Ct. Estimate BANCROFT {PROMISSORY NOTE) USE LAND CATEGORY DESCRIPTION OF USE WEEKDAY AVG. INSTITUTIONAL ONLY: 411 City Park TRIP RATE 3.66 WEEKEND AVG. TRIP RATE DEFER TO OCCUPANCY 133.58 BASIS: The applicant proposes construction of a 5.5 acre city park CALCULATIONS: TIF = Week day X 5 + Weekend X 2 X Acres Avq. Trips Avq. Trips 7 $6,648 = 12.21 X 5.5 Transit Amt. = Projected Trip Rate X $18 $1,206 = 67 X $18 X Rate Per Trip x $99 FOR) ONLY ADDITIONAL NOTES: No credits assumed ROAD AMT. $5,442 $1,20E S.S. Ca :TIFWKST.DOC (DST) EFF: 07-01-98 f.. • • !d SHEET , OF 2 BONITA INDUSTRIAL PARR 00 a 0 A SUBDIVISION IN THE HICKLIN D.L.C. NO. 43, IN THE NORTH 1/2, SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, W.M. CITY OF TIGARD, v4I ° N -AMENDED BWASHINGTONATCOUNTY, OREGON SCALE 1" = 100' OCT. 13, 1992 Y AFFIDAVIT PER DOCUMENT NO. 94/9085 LEGEND O a 1F N.S. - CORNER NOT SET yJ SET 5, % 31F IRON ROD WITH YELLOW PLASRC CURVE DATA i4 ® - A BRASS SCREW AND TAG CAP STAMPED • A PETERSON P.L.S. / 1656• Q p S/5 % 30' IRON ROD WITH PETERSON CAP TO BE CURVE DELTA RADIUS MC CHORD TANGENT CHORD BRO. STAMPED- PL.S. IB56- SET "THIN RYE SPECIFIED IN SURVEYORS CERTIFICATE Q 0 FOUND 5/5' IRON ROD 1 q 20' 09' 1736.73 10.16 1015 109 3 11' 33' 27' C 0 'WHO IRON PPE AS NOTED 2 2' SU 2Y 516.62 25.60 2160 1160 N 25' 5Y 35' W F. O 0 SET ]/4' X JO' IRON PPE WIT" Y BRASS DISC 3 13' 30' OY 2257.36 531.97 WO.74 267.22 5 N' 40' 34• E ¢p 3iAMPFO P.L.S. 1856' W YON. BO% 4 16' 09' 54' 1736.73 489.99 48637 246.63 S 19' Sq 29' E Q O tC p FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED 5 2P 11' 18' 475.00 22540 223.29 114.50 N /4' 45 3Y W U •Y f FOUND S/8' IRON ROD NTH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP 6 IY3T 51' 473.00 113.01 112.74 56.71 N 35'Ig06'W y \ STAMPED ' 1 PETERSON PLS 1856' 7 t6' 71' 19' Il f 0.76 604.24 602.19 314.19 N 33' 46' 2Y W A•a ~9 \ ALL IRON PIPE DIAMETERS ARE M90E DIAMETERS LOT j DELTA RADIUS MC CHORD TANGENT CHORD ARM ? d.\ RECORD DATA 1 16'5539' 30100 165.57 160.12 80.51 N S(F 375PW .13 J\ 1 10' 3W 59' 1736.73 32132 327.53 16L13 S 1705' 31' E C2 25.6E-. y 2 a' 1517 SOSOD 72.76 7260 36.44 N 24' t3' 3Y W 5,( Si tl0 LOT 8 \ 2 1' 20 50' 2257.38 53.06 53.08 25.34 S 28' 33' Sr E IFS 50• 23235 SF. NORTH LINE OF 3 HICTOO D.LC. NO. 43 2 5' 29' 55' 1736.73 166.67 166.61 8140 S 25' 1028' E 3 W 2T W 50100 73M7 ]180 37.00 N 3r 3Y 36' W N. S. .~t e 4~j6 O \ 6C M1~L n \aE 1.0•\~(• .S1 41,17 d Th•~ AO \ °'Pj T LT ) l _ ,~p LOT 7 8d PNW S"'" R 30638 SP B . \ Sh 1 \ P ~ 52 \ ~ M1 \ Ph ,~Y\\ Cy \ \ 473 \ 8 'dl , \ \ LOT 6 \ 43563 F. \ N ♦ ~ 4iI b w \ ~I L Tj \ ' NL N.S hT M1A FD. IA 023 N20'26'3WE• O ' ' • ~ a ~Q TRACT B t 'k' \ ` \ \ 2 ` 242730 &F. \ O YEA LOT 5 ~Y -~y -7F 5.0 43362 S.F. ) 'L\ \ \ \S hd~ 70 THE 017 OF HOARY FOR \ Al i 'f OPENWAY - \ OPEN SPACE hT•ti \ '40y° PS NE) P 301ea LOT 4 ~'N" 1~0~•~ _ ~Tf 43551 IF. _ R SEE "ir Lit NOTE THE NEST END OF WE 13 FOOT SEWER EASEMENT WAS ESTABLISHED ON ME WEST FINE 122.06 FEET NORTHERLY FROM THE WESTERLY SOUTHWEST CORNER PER BOOK 660 PACE 401 FrRATIE WEF 1300711E EASEMENT WE MELD THE PHYSICAL POSITION OF THE MANHOLES FOR THE CENTFRUNE OF WE EASEMENT. THE POINT MERE THE CENTFAUNE or 111E EASEMENT INTERSECTS THE WEST LINE OF THE EASEMENT RECORDED N BOOK 578 PAGE 343 WAS ESTABLISH- ED BY HOLDING THE POSITIONS OF THE MANHOLES AND THEN INTER- SECTIMO SAID WEST U HL BOCK 660 PAD: 366 SPECIFIES 70 TIE WEST ME OF BOOK 570 PACE 343.. THIS METHOD WAS USED SO THAT THE MANACLES WOULD FALL "THIN THE LIMITS Of WE EASEMENT (OCCUPARON~iNE DISTANCES MATCHED RCASONASLY WELL EXCEPT FOR 144E LAST SE NEW IS A MORE OR LESS DISTANCE (230 FEET MORE OR OR LESS) 3 5' OS' 09' 2257.36 20037 20030 100.25 5 31' 48' SIY E 4 3' 15 01' 50100 46.28 40.26 2315 N 37 21'31* W 4 0.25. 28' 2060.76 %146 45.46 1.13 N 41' 45 IB' W 4 4' 52'02' 2257.30 101.70 191.70 9191 5 36' 4Y W E S SOW 54' 2080.78 187.51 187.43 9182 N 38' S9' OT W S 2' IT Or 2257.36 6677 66.76 43,39 S 4W t9' 30' E 6 5' 31' 40' 2050.76 1 3'12'31' 2080.78 20" 116.85 201.25 115.61 100.74 N 33' 3C 30' W 30.45 N 29' 16' 44' W 7 69'00'09' 25.W 30.11 2632 17' Is N 06149'wE 7 56' 49' 48' 55. DO 55.47 54.03 31.01 N I I' 34' 46' E 0 9T 11' 46' 5100 8650 79.26 51.15 N 93-35`01- W 0 TSO'22' 51$.0 2160 2560 MAD"23'5Y 38'W TRACT DELTA RADIUS ARC CHORD TANGENT CHORD am A 95' BY 49• 5&00 9209 8170 51.00 S 22' 20' 12' W A 1' ID' 15' 2146.78 4357 A3AT 21733 N 25 OY 35' W 0 1' 14' 18' 2146.78 4187 4187 21.93 5 25' OY 35' E 0 16.21' 20' 214576 612.81 61074 300.61 S 33' 48' 2Y E 0 13' 3Y 51' 44500 103.87 105.62 5119 5 W l0. 06' E 8 27' 11' 16' 44500 211.16 209.19 107.61 S 14.45' 32' E 30 30 LOT 1 DETAIL ' A' 0.05 eg TRACT 'r ~k ~~WIn Y 31F SEVER EASEMENT PER 4 o BOON 1061 PAGE 55 L. 3 B 3°'00 _ r _ ,.r a 3A~^Ig t• 1~y1 09'1 0YW ~~y WLN VIV-0. , 0 OANRa~Y y - 5 DEDICATION TO PUBLIC 8 A \ A+ S.W. BONITA ROAD ' K5. ~ LOT 3 43557 S.F. y69 F~`. ap7`~ 2M1t 3\ 1 HERBY CERTIFY THAT 943 TRACNO IS A TRUE ANO EXACT COPY OF THE KAI OF 'BOBT DIWSTAUL P LL PETERSON, P.LS ( 3 \ ) LOT 2 \ \ \ rj 0. \f\ 43546 Si. FV,!'r\ ~~~~pA~' Soh S .6, \~1 6 1d a~ti> 6 Y Yy /\\11X7 Hf10 \4 HTT fm~\ N. LR. 7.00 y \ \ \ ! if 4F N.S. 7P 173 \ 1a PR SURVEY E ..e \ \ @ \ 24532 $ & \\\\e (b 07-° LOT 1 2 q~ ~i• ~7a ` yo 65164 SF. i. TO. UR. 2000 $ f 14^\ I I LA T N 645W PER SURVEY E 3 \ \ \ 30 30 If. I.t Oj 24832 \ \ (A'~ \ \ SS I8-M39 E I35U T2 wnw \ r0. 3/4' LP. "AR EASEMENT \ \ \ u ° ( FROM THE WASH m BR. CAP AT THE NORTH 114 . TO UNBICO „ SEE \ \ n 31 3 27 4W 21 ( I0. 1 CORNER OF SECTION 12. . 0 )2 SEWERAGE AGENCY y~ OETAR \ n 8'1 N %A' 217 14' E $ PAGE g . A. \ \ $ + y BOOK ION 13 g 8 ~ \ . z • Oh bs 50EOICAMKI TO PUBLIC ~ SUOPE EASEMENT 70 WASH C0. BOOK SSQS- n q( 229.20 P t+ f0. 5/0' L0. N iW OW 3a' W 2.23 ro 08.957 SCREW AND ]f3 PACE 337 114.41 iF i 171.80 30.28 Fp, ON OF TICARD TAO STAMPED 'PLS rD CITY Of HOMO CONTROL 5 1. 103' w p0 ~ S 1' lY 03 W- BR/SS OLSc ON NOR. BOIL 1636' S OS'30'35'E PgNT IIR SPK. STAMPED 123.09 R E) 36 1211.13 •Q To OOKR SURVEY P.LS 1618 LR. 1.32 G 24832 23 00 ' ' N 0\' 1 Y 11' W N Oq 12 ST W N . S 09 03 W YOEDICAnoN TO PUBLIC 3D.00 Soo 3 cli REGISTERED DEVELOPMENT & ND S UR VE Y CONSTRUCTION U RV E . LA SERVICES OREGON JOHN M'g IRSON 2724 SE SUNFLOWER COURT HUSBOR06 OREGON 97123 (503) 84814959 JOB 1 8911015 I 1 w~ Q~ a_ I I- Z Y i 83 O o co w Q U 0 o K SHEET 2 OF 2 BONITA INDUSTRIAL PARR A SUBDIVISION IN THE J. HICKLIN D.L.C. NO. 43, IN THE NORTH 1/2, SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, W.M. CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON SCALE 1" = 100' OCT. 13, 1992 DECLARATION KNOW ALL PEOPLE BY THEY PRESENTS, THAT FWAN M. SIAMIWECTHER, ROBERT LL STARKWEAIHER. AND MILTCN Q BRO'ANj DO IIEBY DECLARE THE AoNEXEO PUT OF • BG1wTA INOUSTRIAL PARK AS IENMI ARTY DESCRIBED IN THE SURVEYOR S CERTIFICATE HEREUNTO ATTACHED, A TRUE MM AND PUT THEREOF, ALL LOTS BEING OF THE OMEN9ONS SHOWN AND STATED, AND ALL STREETS BEING OF THE WIDTHS THEREON SET FORTH. DOE ABOVE NAMED DOES HEREBY DEDICATE TO THE PUBLIC THE STREET SHOWN THEREON TO IRE PUBLIC FOR PUBUC USE FOREVER. TRACTS • A' AND • r ARE HEREBY CONVEYED TO THE Ott OF TIGARD. WE HEREBY GRANT ALL EASEMENTS AS SHOWN OR NOTED ON SAID PUT. IyEIIE ARE NO W/V1CR75~ T TO IHIS PROPERTY IWnANA STARNMEATHEIII, ROBERT M. S,ETAKW THNI, TRU57H / W 1 V4/ERh rw,VO-~ o~nn ACKNOWLEDGEMENT E ~THIS IS TO CERTIFY: THAT ON THIS 1.1:{1 DAY O JORIMbIAL 1992, BEFORE ME A NOTARY PUBLIC N AND FOR SAID STATE AN5 COUNTY, PERSONALLY APPEARED IWAN Y. STARKNEAIHER, ROBERT M. STARK- WEATHER AND MILTON Q BROWW, WHO ARE KNOWN TO ME TO BE THE IDENTICAL PERSONS NAMED IN AND M40 EXECUTED THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT. AND AFTER BEING DULY SWORN THEY ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT THEY WERE SIGNING SAID INSTRUMENT FREELY AND VOLMN- TARHLY. M SS MY AN D AND OFFICIAL SEAL JI. =P Fldd~ C OF TATE OF OOREGON NY COMUYY COBOS90N EXPIRES *m SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE 1 JOIN M. PETERSON, SAY THAT 1 HAVE CORRECTLY SURVEYED, SUB- DIVIDED AND PUTTED INTO LOTS AND STREETS. THE LANDS SHOWN ON THE ANNEXED YM O "BOMTA INDUSTRIAL PARR' CONTAINING 1151 ACRES,S FOLLOW YORE OR LESS, THE BOUNDARY OF MODE IS DESCRIBED AS BEGINNING AT THE INITIAL POINT A 5/8' X 30' WON ROD WITH A YELLOW PLASTIC CAP STAMPED •1 PETERSON PLS 1858' AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1. MS PUT. MC" PON' BEAI(S M. IS. 28. 38• EAST E5152 FEET FROM A WASHINGTON COUNTY BRASS DISK AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 1$ AND RUNNING THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY 10.18 FEET ALONG A 1736.71 FOOT RADIUS, NON-TANGENT, CURVE TO THE PINT (THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS SCUM 1/'35' 2r EAST 10.18 FEE7k THENCE SOUTH 89' lr BY BEST 56.28 FEET. THENCE NORTH GO 4r 57' HEST 100 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89' IT Or WEST 174.00 THENCE NORTH 01.09' 54• WEST 95.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89• IY 03• WEST 50.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH of 09' 54• EAST 7GOO FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89• Or Or WEST 30,00 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 01.09'34• EAST MOH FEET; THENCE SCUM Or 1r BY HEST 714.4E FEET THENCE NORTH GB•JC JS' NEST 135.57 iEIY THENCE NORM 25' 00' 7Y WEST 109.00 FEET, THENCE NORTH 1r 29' 35• WEST 30160 FEED, THENCE NORTH 00• ICI 33' MST 143.28 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89' 49' 23' NEST 33198 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00'10' 35• WEST 700.00 FEET: APPROVALS APPROVED THMS /1'4 DAY OF UPUebP/ 1302 CITY OF T GMD BY QTY ENGINEER H~Z " e BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR APPROVED THIS 22wd DAY O QQQ. 1392 WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BY BY BY C.~BTAt. A I, APPROVED THIS `f DAY O 1993 OVASMNCTON C SURVEYOR BY 1 APPROVED INNS Y= DAY O_ )AAI. 1009 DIRECTOR OF ASSESSMENT AND TAXATOx (wA9HNGTON COUNTY ASSESSOR) BY~ _ / 1,4 STATE O OREGON ) SS GOLINtt OF wASl3NC7a ATTEST: THIS DAY OF 3 A&FIll try[. 1993 DIRECTOR OF ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION EX_OFnCI tt CLERK BY 1 4 DEPUTY ! p . NRN1W^ STATE OF OREGON ss COUNTY a wA9ILnOTpN 1 00 HEREBY CCR79Y T TANS SUBDMSIGN PUT WAS pECf1VE FM !ZD ON THE _S> • DAY O 1999 AT II: I b O' COCK BY ~-.ws.w/ ~ THE ~lLptt RECORDS. DEPUTY COUNTY CLERKCLERKa STATE OF OREGON ss COUNTY OF WASHINGTON 1 00 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS TiRACL10 IS A COPY CERNIM TO ME, BY THE SURVEYOR OF THIS SUBDIVISION PLAT, TO CE A 7% EXACT COPY OF TIE OMCLYAL AND THAT IT WAS REOOpDEO ON THE DAY O ,YenM9a1[., 1993 AT UA W CLOCK -6 M, me RCODROLD IN THE COUNTY (LER RECORDS 62 FOOT RAMPS. CURVE TO 7NE LEFT (THE LONE D OF 9639'/ GEMS NORM 25' 52' 36' WEST 55.60 FCETk ICE NORTH 43'49* 56• EAST 10193 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 41'25' EAST 692.64 FEET. THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY 531.97 FEET KONG MC OF A 2237.38 FOOT RAIDN9 _ M TNF ft- hue CURVE TO THE FIGHT (THE LONG CHORD OF MOM BEARS SOUTH Ir 50' 29• EAST 488.37 FEET) TO THE POINT OF BECNNING. AS PER O.R.S 92.070 (2)4 L JOHN LL PETERSON ALSO SAY THE POST MONUMENTATION OF THE INTERIOR MONUMENTS WITHIN THIS SUB- DIVISION WILL SE ACCOMPLISHED WITH 90 CAE/DER DAYS FOLLOWING COMPLETION O THE PAWING ILIPROVEYEI/S DR ONE YEAR /dLOW1NG THE ORNINAL PUT RECORDATION, *M` EVER OCCURS MST N A- CCORDANCE WITH O.R.S. Ot"O. . OJON M. PETERSON P.LS 1 1856 PLAT RESTRICTIONS ACCESS TO BOITA ROM ALONG THE SOUTH LINE O LOr 1 SHAD NOT BE PEFUNWO. NOTES THERE IS NO GEODETIC CONTROL MONUMENT "INW 1/2 MILE OF INS PUT. A SUBOw9ON PLAT CONSENT AFFMAVIT FROM MAN M. STARRM:ATHER, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE LR. CANS FSiA7E5, NAS BE[N RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. A"WVV17? - WASMNOTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS BASIS O BEARINGS AND BOUNDARY RESOEUTKIN PER SURVEY 24 B'SZ BY C Yt.4.46.rA `q~/ Du COUNTY LEAK INTERIOR CORNER MONUMENTATION IN ACCORDANCE Mm OJLS 9LD74 THE INTERIM CORNERS O THIS SUSDW9ON HAVE BEEN CORRECTLY SET MIN PROPER MONU- MENTS. AN AFFIDAVIT HAS BEEN PREPARED REGARDING THE SETTING OF SAID MOARIM AND IS RECORDED IN DOCUMENT NO 94/2005 WASHINGTON COUNTY ~G{EEEED RECORDS. APPROVED IJ~ 11C_'DAY OF 199 . WASHINGTON O/__\`10/0 COUNTY SURVEYOR UTILITY EASEMENTS I - A 6.00 FOOT EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES IS HEREBY RLSCOUNED ALONG AND ABUTIVIG S.W. MILTON DRIVE. 2 - PORTIONS OF EXISTING EASEMDIIS THAT FALL WINXI1 THE RKW-OF- BAY OF SR" MILTa1 DRIVE AND BONITA ROAD ARE Rol SHOWN. EDDY EASEMENTS ARE RECORDED IN BOOK 764 PACE 910. BOOK 795 PACE 337. BOOK IDM PACE 573 AND BOOK 578 PACE 345, 3 - A BLANKET EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES IS IEREDY RESERVED OINK ALL OF TRACT • or. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT IHIS TRACING IS A TH E AND EXACT COPY OF THE PLAT OF O A DDUS7M PA K'. M. PETERSON, P.I.S. RELaSTEREO PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR M% DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION w SERVICES , 2724 SE SIINfl. GOuRT ~REGOm7 JOHN M. 'PElER50N IWL69OR4 OREGON 971 23 (503) 648-4939 1856 JOB 0 8911015 v .t ~I \I LLj ~ B. 0 NI TA. I. -N- D US a A SUBDIVISION IN THE J. HICKLIN D:L.C. NO. 43 TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH RANGE 1 WEST ~I Qii o WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON SCAR col Z Z 0 DECLARATION O u KNOW All PEOPLE BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT IWAN M. STARKWEATHER, O p ROBERT M. STARKWEATHER, AND MILTON 0. BROWN, DO HEREBY DECLARE APPROVED Tl m cn THE ANNEXED PLAT OF ' BONITA INDUSTRIAL PARK' AS PARTICULARLY CITY OF TIGA Q DESCRIBED IN THE SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE HEREUNTO ATTACHED, A TRUE MAP AND PLAT THEREOF, ALL LOTS BEING OF THE DIMENSIONS BY CITY ENGI SHOWN AND STATED. AND ALL STREETS BEING OF THE WIDTHS THEREON p SET FORTH. THE ABOVE NAMED DOES HEREBY DEDICATE TO THE PUBLIC THE STREET SHOWN THEREON TO THE PUBLIC FOR PUBLIC USE FORF,% BY'COMMUNIT A ~Wp: ' B =AIDE HEREBY 'NVE1'ED YO THE'f~i'' ?b T1G;AF2I 0~ WE HEREBY GRANT ALL EASEMENTS AS SHOWN OR NOTED ON SAID PLAT. ERE ARE NO W TER RI TS APPURTENANT TO THIS PROPERTY. IWAN M. S K TRUS ROBERT M. S K ATHER, TRUSTEE MIL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THIS IS TO CERTIFY: THAT ON THIS DAY OF 1992, BEFORE ME A NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID STATEON(1 COUNTY, PERSONALLY APPEARED IWAN M. STARKWEATHER, ROBERT M. STARK- WFATHFR ANI) Ull TnN. n RRn%W wun ARC leNnU&J Tn uc m cc Tuc APPROVEbTI• WASHIN BY BY BY APPROVED TH WASHINGTON BY APPROVED TH DIRECTOR OF (WASHINGTON --l RETURN RECORDED DOCUM0TO: ' 4TY HALL RECORDS DEPAR ENT, CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 File No. 0 ~O!~ VEGETATED CORRIDOR EASEMENT KNOWN ALL PEOPLE BY THESE PRESENT, that CREEKSIDE CONLMONS-48, hereinafter referred to as Grantor, grant and convey unto the City. of Tigard, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Oregon hereinafter referred to as Grantee, its successors and assigns, a perpetual easement over the following described land, for the purpose of planting, replanting, and maintaining native vegetation, and using the same for the purpose of protecting stream water quality on real property located in the County of Washington, State of Oregon. Said land is more particularly described as follows: That portion of a lot, Creekside Commons-48, that extends north of the bank of Fanno Creek as shown on the attached exhibit map. The true consideration for this conveyance is $0.00. However, the actual consideration consists of or includes other property or value given or promised which is the whole consideration. The Grantee and its assigns or its agents shall have the right at any time hereafter to enter upon the above- described real property for the purpose, hereinabove mentioned. In connection therewith Grantee may remove any trees, shrubs, brush, paving or other materials which it finds necessary or convenient to accomplish said purpose. The instrument does not grant or convey to the Grantee any fight of title to the surface of the soil except for the purpose of installing, inspecting, maintaining, and replacing the vegetation within the corridor as above stated. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand on this d y of M04C:Gc... , 20 03 Kee. L!5 t~ Com m &As - q5?. L L Name of Corporation Signature r ' AddressTttr pug-F~, ~ r ~~l Sig,~nature P e&Lbee- Title STATE OF OREGON County o VhThin il-' ) This instrument was acknowled ed before me on I\f \ ate) by ~L7Y~(r S • lZ. e s of person (s)) as ~m a of aut ority, e.g., officer, trustee, etc) of (name of party on behalf of whom instrument was executed). 7OFFICIAL SEAL . WARD NIC-OREGON CNO.325798 tc ts Signature MY COMMISS AUG. 2, 2003 mmis sion Expire Accepted on behalf of the City of Tigard this day of Ale; t 1 , 20 &3 P-: Gat, City Engineer is\IrpinWuaneWope easement for Individuat.doc U 1 \ _~EANN 10 cm Fanno Creek Easement Area _ 7 Q i Oe00FAVNIC INFORMATION AYeTEM VICINITY MAP cvm w- clf-U Z~:b CZZ ~o VER = E LP :M0 CITY OF TIGARD PROPOSED BONITA PARK e, k i ~uu d?Ftt r BEEF BEND rto ~ ~ • Tigard Area Map • A N 0 0 200 400 600 Feel 1"a 404 feel Informadon on this map Is for general location only and should be verified with the Development Services Division. 19125 SW Mall Blvd Tigard, OR 97227 (507) 899.4171 1. PTM-~~ go4e- P/ ' 0 LLB z 2S11213A-90491 2S112BA-90341 ATANES LAURA BROADOUS MELVIN O'DELL & 7895 SW FANNO CREEK DR #2 MANAFI-AMOUZEGAR HELEN TIGARD, OR 97224 7885 SW FANNO CREEK DR #1 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112BA-90261 2S101DC-04000 BALL KEITH R CALWEST INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS LLC 7875 SW FANNO CREEK DR #3 BY DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP PORTLAND, OR 97224 2235 FARADAY AVE STE 0 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 2S112AB-01300 2S112BA-90501 BANK AMERICA LEASING & CAPITOL G CLARK JUDITH A BY BONITA PACKING 7895 SW FANNO CREEK DR #1 ATTN: DALE BEVAN VP TIGARD, OR 97224 7333 SW BONITA RD PORTLAND, OR 97224 2S112AC-00700 2S112BA-90191 BHK PROPERTIES LLC CRANE FRANCES M 11555 SW MYSOLONY 7855 SW FANNO CREEK DR #2 TUALATIN, OR 97062 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112AC-00600 2S1 126A-00200 BHK PRO PE IES LLC CREEKSIDE COMMONS-48 LLC 11555 SW SOLONY BY THOMAS J ROGERS TUALATI , OR 97062 PO BOX 231296 TIGARD, OR 97281 00300 2S112AC-00800 2S112BAY2396 ONS-48 LLC BHK PRO PE IES LLC CREEKCo 11555 SW SOLONY BY THOERS TUALATI , OR 97062 PO BOX TIGARD2S1126A-90241 2S112BA-90701 BOECK MARY LEE DEFOREST BARBARA J 7875 SW FANNO CREEK DR #1 7915 SW FANNO CRK DR #4 TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112BA-06400 2S10100-01200 BONITA COURT - 36 LLC FIELDS FRED W 9500 SW BARBUR BLVD STE 300 1149 SW DAVENPORT PORTLAND, OR 97219 PORTLAND, OR 97201 2S112BA-90000 2S112BA-90291 BONITA FIRILLAGE CONDO FLANNERY DENNIS J ASSOCIN OF UNIT OWNERS 7885 SW FANNO CREEK DR #6 0 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112AB-00400 2S112BA-90481 BONITA PACKAGING PRODUCTS FORD SHELLY K 7333 SW BONITA RD 7895 SW FANNO CREEK DR PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97224 • • 1 2S112AB-00700 2S112BA-90461 FOUGHT & COMPANY INC HURD BRYAN DOUGLAS PO BOX 23759 7895 SW FANNO CREEK DR TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112AB-00800 2S112BA-90581 FOUGHT PAN ANY INC KASNER ROGER W PO B 23759 7905 SW FANNO CREEK DR #2 T RD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112BA-90281 2S112BA-90721 GILLETT GINNY S KOBS BLANCHE A 15999 SW WILLOW DR 7915 SW FANNO CREEK DR #2 SHERWOOD, OR 97140 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S11213A-90601 2S112BA-90471 GILLETTE WENDY M LAWLESS KERRY 7905 SW FANNO CREEK DR #4 7895 SW FANNO CREEK DR #4 TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112BA-05901 2S112BA-90611 GOODHEAD DAVID LEE FORMAN VICTOR 14058 SW MILTON CT 7905 SW FANNO CREEK DR #5 PORTLAND, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112BA-05900 2S112BA-90301 GOODHEAD DAVID & JAN M MANNING FRANCES L 14058 SW MILTON CT 7885 SW FANNO CREEK DR #5 PORTLAND, OR 97224. TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112BA-90311 2S11213A-90211 GRUSZKA KAREN MANNING NADINA I & KRISTIN 1 7885 SW FANNO CREEK DR #4 7865 SW FANNO CREEK DR #3 TIGARD, OR 97224 PORTLAND, OR 97224 2S112BA-90621 2S112BA-00600 HALLEY PAULA LYNNE MATRIX DEVELOPMENT CORP 7905 SW FANNO CREEK #6 12755 SW 69TH AVE STE 100 TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S112BD-00100 2S112BA-00500 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF MATRIX DEV PMENT CORP WASHINGTON COUNTY 12755 S 9TH AVE STE 100 111 NE LINCOLN ST #200-L TIGA , OR 97223 HILLSBORO, OR 97124 2S112BD-00800 2510100-01400 HULQUIST MARY ANN METRO 8355 SW LAMANCHA CT BY MILTON 0 BROWN TIGARD, OR 97224 8320 NE HWY 99 VANCOUVER, WA 98665 0 01 2S11213A-90271 2S112AC-00500 MULHEARN BONNIE SKOURTES JOHN R 7875 SW FANNO CREEK DR #4 17010 SW WEIR ROAD TIGARD, OR 97224 BEAVERTON, OR 97007 2S112AC-00400 2S101DC-04500 NATIONAL SAFETY CO SUMMIT PROPERTIES INC BY HARRINGTON IND PLASTICS 5550 SW MACADAM BLVD STE 205 14480 YORBA PORTLAND, OR 97201 CHINO, CA 91710 2S1126A-90691 2S112AB-01600 PIATZ CAROLYN R SUNDAY SCHOOL FELLOWSHIP 7925 SW FANNO CREEK DR #7 11501 NE KLICKITAT ST TIGARD, OR 97224 PORTLAND, OR 97220 2S1121313-00700 2S112BA-90231 PYOUNG PARK & THORSFELDT EINAR L RIELLY BRENDA B REVOCABLE LIVING T PO BOX 40565 7524 SW ELMWOOD PORTLAND, OR 97240 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S112BA-90571 2S112BA-05601 RADER ELIZABETH C TIGARD CI OF 7905 SW FANNO CREEK DR #1 13125 HALL TIGARD, OR 97224 Ti RD, OR 97223 2S112BA-90331 2S112AC-00801 SCHIERSTEIN BARBARA D TIGARD Cl OF 7885 SW FANNO CREEK DR #2 13125 HALL TIGARD, OR 97224 TIG D, OR 97223 2S112BA-90251 2S112BA-06100 SCHMITKE SARA T F 7875 SW FANNO CREEK DR 1L X2HA TIGARD, OR 97224 T 223 2S112BA-90731 2S1126A-05602 SHANAHAN ROBERT B TIGARD C OF 7915 SW FANNO CK DR #1 1312 HALL TIGARD, OR 97224 T ARD, OR 97223 2S112AB-02300 2S112BA-06200 SHEININ-MENDENHALL LLC 1 TIGARD OF BY PARROTT PARTNERHIP 1312 W HALL 12725 SW 66TH AVE #202 ARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97223 2S112RA-90451 2S112AB-01700 SHERARD TIMOTHY E TIGARD CI OF 7895 SW FANNO CREEK DR #6 13125 HALL TIGARD, OR 97224 TI RD, OR 97223 " 2S112BA-90201 TOURANGEAU FAMILY TRUST BY TOURANGEAU DONALD R & JOAN N TR 7030 SW ARBOR LAKE DR WILSONVILLE, OR 97070 2S112AB-01900 TRI-COUNTY INDUSTRIAL PARK INC ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 8320 NE HIGHWAY 99 VANCOUVER, WA 98665 2S112BA-05801 TRI-COUNTY I USTRIAL PARK INC ADMINI RATIVE OFFICE 832 E HIGHWAY 99 V COUVER, WA 98665 2S112BA-06000 TRI-COUNTY I STRIAL PARK INC ADMINI TIVE OFFICE 832 E HIGHWAY 99 NCOUVER, WA 98665 2S112AB-02000 TRI-COUNTY 1 STRIAL PARK INC ADMINI RATIVE OFFICE 832 E HIGHWAY 99 V COUVER, WA 98665 2S112BA-05800 TRI-COUNTY IND RIAL PARK INC BY ADMINIST TIVE OFFICE 8320 NE 99 VAN UVER, WA 98665 2S112BA-90591 VEAHMAN ROBERT A & MARTA C 13885 SW 102ND AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 2S112AB-01800 WASHINGTON COUNTY FACILITIES MGMT-ADMIN 111 SE WASHINGTON ST MS42 HILLSBORO, OR 97123 2S112BA-06300 WC INVESTMENTS LLC BY THOMAS J ROGERS 7775 SW BONITA RD TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112BA-90321 WHIPP CHAD J 7885 SW FANNO CREEK #3 PORTLAND, OR 97224 is 2S1 126A-90711 WILLIAMS ANTHONY H 7915 SW FANNO CREEK DR #3 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112RA-90221 WOLFE DENISE R 7865 SW FANNO CREEK DR #2 TIGARD, OR 97224 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE ;IMPORTANTMOTICE THE IP LICA T IS ttEQty1RED T GAttD ~1 COPY THE : N O 1NAILw THE~CITY OF ; ~ ~ D NEIrC>aHO)tH001~ETING,NOTICEH14ANS TO'TI IS AFFIDIVIT AT TSAME?tME PiOPERTI(.: ; " ' i 'OWNERS'~IREMAI DNbYTICE, TO FTHE„~ADDRES S~BELOW ; f Cityrof"TigardP lann~~g~DIvIston _ Tigard„ OR 9T223,,8 ~ 89 i u :ADDITION THE APPLICANT'SHALL IN r , SUBMIT THISvAFfIDAVIT & COPIES OF,ALL NOTICES AT THE7IE OF M APPLICATION ; aN h u. uw.~n~l .a nv n b i , ~r, w i MAILING: I, 004110, LJ, T Z A , being duly sworn, depose and say that on the 3 / ay of C- 0,~ -e_f~_ 20caused to have mailed to ach of the person on the attached list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposes development at (or near) Ar)L4 i I L . AA ; I f ran , a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposite on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at S ` with postage prepaid thereon. q ~aa3 ature (In the presence of a No Public) POSTING: affirm that I am (represent) the ifici the land located 811- ~ address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) and did on the day of proposed for a discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at ally post notice indicating that the site may be date and place of a neighborhood meeting to location you posted notice on property) Signature (In the Presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF 62EG0K ) County of Wg4tt tW 4T0,, 3 ) ss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 31 day of C0_0_~V'__ , 20 0 --L,. OFFICIAL SEAL DIANE M JELDERKS ` NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON I~ COMMISSION N0.326578 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT. 07i 2003 NOTARY PUBLIC OREGON My Commissio c Tres: 91710 Applicant, please complete the information below: NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Address or General Location of Subject Property: Subject Property Tax Map(s) and Lot #(s): h-Vogin\paffyVnasWrs\affidaA of maaing-posfing neighbodiood meeting.dm ty initiating interest in a proposed the approximate location(s) IF no 10/31/02 PROPERTY OWNER & INTERESTED PARTY RE: Bonita Park Dear Property Owner: The City of Tigard is proposing to develop a neighborhood park on five acres of City-owned property located along Bonita Road at Milton Court (tax lot 2S1 12BA 6200). Milton Court is a cul-de-sac that connects with Bonita near the bridge over Fanno Creek. The Tigard Community Development Code requires the City to apply for Conditional Use and Sensitive Lands permits in order to construct the park. - Prior to applying for the necessary permits, City staff would like to discuss the proposed park with the surrounding property owners and residents. In regard to this, you are invited to attend a meeting on: Monday, November 18, 2002 7:00-8:00 PM Town Hall Room Tigard City Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard Oregon 97223 Please be aware that this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. A copy of the preliminary site plan is provided on the other side of this letter. We look forward to discussing the proposal with you. Please contact me at 503- 639-4171 or duane(cDci.tigard.or.us should you have any questions about the meeting or proposed park. Sincerely, y Duane Rob Associate Planner J 0 . 1 , e M wcou,T ncN NRUNp souw•eT II ~1_.-.-._ L. r• ~Iwn MNI •M/Te•LLCW,1 OT4NOOWrIN {iG~IM ' ter- W.we4,wNl w000/O rCMG wRN OYKt a- OMN,NO ~N Oww`neWrNwl `l AM J - _ aooa or sW/{e r,GNIGT•eLl , ` K ..r I~h.•. I uwN I awTSro eoaw•Ln IL[TFa T,lla , N• , 1'.,L' M ~2}'~ ~T I,I • _ ~ G r•, 1'~VOV4•Y aw,MO TRt~a • • + 1 ~ • 4NIe.• L / lll.. v.. , ~ rN;NN;awl, ~~--~1\ .fe^•`. .-^'.eaoi <eaax.YNx ~ . • - wni~ i • " • - uaP COp,~ mo, ew.P ~ \t Low ruNnNOe , [ • e01pO•,T , ~ {L N ~,i M~Ir,I ItYMeN✓puL,M GMNI MnOKON//~1AIt CLWTPI t W /1 .~J~• ~ OIA.M rYMIWI~`.•••••\ ~ ~ 7 • w/Wn111N,N GNN } rO0` lvaeGMeN TYIRWT/M i .y Ipr/IN/Y / GONG{RTN -T}~: • - ~ 'Y. •~•yp G.N..I I / NNn Orp.wn /em.pvMWTm GW.n+I IMNNN.YWm.p~n,M CNrI . ~ 7 A:. MT4~yY1rP 11<wN,l OG OIH TMeRW,In/ ~ % tiua fela ; .,,/'3 '..,w 111[P fI/r \ CroY Wrr. W r,p BONITA PARK ' /V[eenWT,Y MOitllt IeN/mnW M. CrYO ; '.7. SCHEMATIC DESIGN aeG•T. ~•.i.•~ Tigard, Oregon ~g Mey 22.2002 Ims FREQUENTLY ASKED City of Tigard NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING QUESTIONS What Is The Purpose Of This Neighborhood Meeting? The purpose of the meeting is to allow the prospective developer to share with you what they are planning to do. This is your opportunity to become informed of their proposed development and to let them know what issues or concerns you have in regard to their proposal. What Happens After The Neighborhood Meeting? After the neighborhood meeting, the prospective developer `finalizes their. submittal package (often taking into account citizen concerns) and submits an application to the City. Sometimes it. takes a while before the developer's application is ready to submit, so there could be several months between the neighborhood meeting and the submittal of an application. Once an application is submitted to the City, Staff reviews it for completeness. Once an application has been deemed complete, the formal application review begins. It takes approximately 6-8 weeks from the time the application is accepted for a decision to be -made. Many, types of. applications require a public hearing at which citizens are given the opportunity.to provide comments or concerns. For all types of applications, property owners within 500 feet of the: subject parcels: receive notice of the public hearing i.f applicable); notice of the decision,, and are given the opportunity to-appeal the decision. What If The Proposal Presented At The Neighborhood Meeting Is Not What Is Actually Submitted? Applicants are not required to submit exactly what was presented at the neighborhood meeting if it generally follows the type of development proposed. This provides for the opportunity to address the neighborhood issues and address other changes necessitated by the development or staff. If the project is entirely different, a new neighborhood meeting would-be required. In any case, notice of decision is sent to property owners within 500 feet of the proposed development allowing them the opportunity to appeal. How Do I Know What Issues Are Valid? A decision is reviewed based on compliance with the Tigard Development Code. Review the development code to familiarize yourself with what is permitted and what may not . be permitted. A copy of the development code is available for viewing at the Tigard City Library or a copy may be purchased at the Community Development Services' counter. You may also contact City Planning staff and ask what the standards are for a specific issue. Be-.prepared, however, that you may not LIKE all the standards, but at least you know what they are. If a development meets:-the code standards, it can proceed. ma"Wsis Fors~your assistance; the Gtizen Involvement 'TearnA(CLT~;;has compiled,a hst of help(ulyuestions to.as y .y~ ou in aeterniirii4.1r aurX osi(ian {on a articular ` o osal `The follow~nh'ect {i ts'tliase *uestions~ ;z I \c;tinfo2 i:\CUry1ln\iutia.doc 0 0 EIGHBORN00 - NCE~iNS• EONS 0 SK 0 URE UR 0 CEBNS E~ The following is a list of questions developed by a subgroup of the Citizen Involvement Team. The questions are intended to aid you in formulating your own questions for proposed development in yc area_ . Feel free to ask more.or alter the questions to address your own unique concerns and interests. PROCESS . What applications are you (the developer) applying for? When do you expect to submit tl application(s) so that neighbors can.review it? What changes or additions are expected prior submittal? Will the decision on the application be made by City Staff, Hearings Officer, Planning Commission City Council? How long is the process? (timingy At what point in the process are citizens given notice and the opportunity to provide input? Has a pre-application conference been held with City of Tigard Staff? M ✓ Have any preliminary requirements been addressed or have any critical issues been identified? ✓ What City Planner did you speak with regarding this project? (This person is generally the Plann assigned to the land use case and the one to contact for additional information). STREETS Will there be a traffic study done? What are the preliminary traffic impacts anticipated as a result-of tl development and how do you propose to mitigate the impacts if necessary? What street improvements (including sidewalks) are proposed? What connections to existing stree are proposed? Are streets proposed to be public or private? What are the proposed street.and sidewalk widths? What are the emergency access requirements and what is proposed to meet those requirements . ZONING AND DENSITY What is the current zoning? What uses are allowed under this zoning? Will there be a re-zone requested by the developer? If yes, to what zone? How many units are proposed for the development and what is the minimum and maximum densi allowed in the zone? DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY What is your erosion control and drainage plan the grading plans? What is the natural slope of the property? What a Is there a water quality facility planned within the development and where will it be located? Who- w own and maintain the facility? TREES AND LANDSCAPING What are the tree removal plans and what is proposed to mitigate for trees removed? What are the landscaping plans? What buffering or fencing is required and/or proposed? - 2S112BA-90491 2S101DC-04000 ATANES LAURA CALWEST INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS LLC 7895 SW FANNO CREEK DR #2 BY DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP TIGARD, OR 97224 2235 FARADAY AVE STE 0 CARLSBAD,CA 92008 2S1126A-90261 2S112BA-90191 BALL KEITH R CRANE FRANCES M 7875 SW FANNO CREEK DR #3 7855 SW FANNO CREEK DR #2 PORTLAND, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112AC-00800 2S112BA-00300 BHK PROPERTIES LLC CREEKSIDE COMMONS-48 LLC 11555 SW MYSOLONY BY THOMAS J ROGERS TUALATIN, OR 97062 PO BOX 231296 TIGARD, OR 97281 2S112AC-00700 2S112BA-00200 BHK PROPERTIES LLC CREEKSIDE COMMONS-48 LLC 11555 SW MYSOLONY BY THOMAS J ROGERS TUALATIN, OR 97062 PO BOX 231296 TIGARD, OR 97281 2S112AC-00600 2S11213A-90701 BHK PROPERTIES LLC DEFOREST BARBARA J 11555 SW MYSOLONY 7915 SW FANNO CRK DR #4 TUALATIN, OR 97062 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112BA-90241 2S10100-01200 BOECK MARY LEE. FIELDS FRED W 7875 SW FANNO CREEK DR #1 1149 SW DAVENPORT TIGARD, OR 97224 PORTLAND, OR 97201 2S112BA-06400 2S11213A-90291 BONITA COURT - 36 LLC FLANNERY DENNIS J 9500 SW BARBUR BLVD STE 300 7885 SW FANNO CREEK DR #6 PORTLAND, OR 97219 TIGARD, OR 97224 _ 2S112BA-90000 2S112BA-90481 BONITA FIRS VILLAGE CONDO FORD SHELLY K ASSOCIATION OF UNIT OWNERS 7895 SW FANNO CREEK DR 0 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112BA-90000 2S112AB-00800 BONITA FIRS VILLAGE CONDO FOUGHT & COMPANY INC ASSOCIATION OF UNIT OWNERS PO BOX 23759.. 0 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S11213A-90341 2S112AB-00700 BROADOUS MELVIN O'DELL & FOUGHT & COMPANY INC MANAFI-AMOUZEGAR HELEN PO BOX 23759 7885 SW FANNO CREEK DR #1 TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97224 • • 2S112BA-90281 2S112BA-90461 GILLETT GINNY S HURD BRYAN DOUGLAS 15999 SW WILLOW DR 7895 SW FANNO CREEK DR SHERWOOD, OR 97140 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S 112BA-90601 2S 112BA-90581 GILLETTE WENDY M KASNER ROGER W 7905 SW FANNO CREEK DR #4 7905 SW FANNO CREEK DR #2 TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112BA-05901 2S11213A-90721 GOODHEAD DAVID KOBS BLANCHE A _ 14058 SW MILTON CT 7915 SW FANNO CREEK DR #2 PORTLAND, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S11213A-05900 2S112BD-00900 GOODHEAD DAVID & JAN M LARSGAARD DAVID H 14058 SW MILTON CT 7720 SW BONITA RD PORTLAND, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S112BA-90311 2S1126A-90471 GRUSZKA KAREN LAWLESS KERRY 7885 SW FANNO CREEK DR #4 7895 SW FANNO CREEK DR #4 TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S11213A-90621 2S112BA-90611 HALLEY PAULA LYNNE LEE FORMAN VICTOR 7905 SW FANNO CREEK #6 7905 SW FANNO CREEK DR #5 TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112BA-90501 2S112BA-90711 HANKINS CARRIE LEON JEANETTE V 7895 SW FANNO CREEK DR #1 7915 SW FANNO CREEK DR #3 TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97224 _ 2S112AB-00400 2S112BA-90301 HAYTER FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHI MANNING FRANCES L 23643 SW STAFFORD HILLS DR 7885 SW FANNO CREEK DR #5 WEST LINN, OR 97068 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S1121313-00100 2S112BA-90211 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF MANNING NADINA I & KRISTIN I WASHINGTON COUNTY 7865 SW FANNO CREEK DR #3' 111 NE LINCOLN ST #200-L PORTLAND, OR 97224 HILLSBORO, OR 97124 2S112BD-00800 2S112BA-00600 HULQUIST MARY ANN MATRIX DEVELOPMENT CORP 8355 SW LAMANCHA CT 12755 SW 69TH AVE STE 100 TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97223 • 2S11213A-00500 2S112AB-02300 MATRIX DEVELOPMENT CORP SHEININ-MENDENHALL LLC 1 12755 SW 69TH AVE STE 100 BY PARROTT PARTNERHIP TIGARD, OR 97223 12725 SW 66TH AVE #202 PORTLAND, OR 97223 2S10100-01400 2S 112BA-90451 METRO SHERARD TIMOTHY E ATTN: APRIL OLBRICH 7895 SW FANNO CREEK DR #6 600 NE GRAND AVE TIGARD, OR 97224 PORTLAND, OR 97232 2S112BA-90271 2S112AC-00500 MULHEARN BONNIE SKOURTES JOHN R _ 7875 SW FANNO CREEK DR #4 17010 SW WEIR ROAD TIGARD, OR 97224 BEAVERTON, OR 97007 2S112AC-00400 2S101DC-04500 ' NATIONAL SAFETY CO SUMMIT PROPERTIES INC BY HARRINGTON IND PLASTICS 5550 SW MACADAM BLVD STE 205 14480 YORBA PORTLAND, OR 97201 CHINO, CA 91710 2S11213A-90691 2S112AB-01600 PIATZ CAROLYN R SUNDAY SCHOOL FELLOWSHIP 7925 SW FANNO CREEK DR #7 PO BOX 324 TIGARD, OR 97224 COLUMBIA CITY. OR 97018 2S112BD-00700 2S112BA-90231 PYOUNG PARK & THORSFELDT EINAR L RIELLY BRENDA B REVOCABLE LIVING T PO BOX 40565 7524 SW ELMWOOD PORTLAND, OR 97240 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S112BA-90571 2S112BA-05601 RADER ELIZABETH C TIGARD CITY OF 7905 SW FANNO CREEK DR #1 13125 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97223 _ 2S112BA-90331 2S112BA-05602 SCHIERSTEIN BARBARA D TIGARD CITY OF 7885 SW FANNO CREEK DR #2 13125 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S112BA-90251 2S112AC-00801 SCHMITKE SARA TIGARD CITY OF 7875 SW FANNO CREEK DR 13125 SW HALL. TIGARD, OR 97224 _ TIGARD, OR 97223 2S112BA-90731 2S112BA-06100 SHANAHAN ROBERT B TIGARD CITY OF 7915 SW FANNO CK DR #1 13125 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97224 TIGARD, OR 97223 0 • 2S112AB-01700 TIGARD CITY OF 13125 SW HALL TIGARD, OR 97223 2S11213A-06200 TIGARD CITY OF 13125 SW HALL TIGARD. OR 97223 2S112AB-01800 WASHINGTON COUNTY FACILITIES MGMT-ADMIN 111 SE WASHINGTON ST MS42 HILLSBORO, OR 97123 2S112BA-06300 WC INVESTMENTS LLC BY THOMAS J ROGERS 9500 SW BARBUR BLVD STE 300 PORTLAND, OR 97219 2S112BA-90201 TOURANGEAU FAMILY TRUST BY TOURANGEAU DONALD R & JOAN N TR 7030 SW ARBOR LAKE DR WILSONVILLE, OR 97070 2S11213A-05800 TRI-COUNTY INDUSTRIAL PARK INC 2106 SE OCHOCO ST MILWAUKIE, OR 97222 2S112AB-02000 TRI-COUNTY INDUSTRIAL. PARK INC 2106 SE OCHOCO ST MILWAUKIE, OR 97222 2S 112BA-06000 TRI-COUNTY INDUSTRIAL PARK INC 2106 SE OCHOCO ST MILWAUKIE, OR 97222 2S112AB-01900 TRI-COUNTY INDUSTRIAL PARK INC 2106 SE OCHOCO ST MILWAUKIE, OR 97222 2S112BA-05801 TRI-COUNTY INDUSTRIAL PARK INC 2106 SE OCHOCO ST MILWAUKIE, OR 97222 2S112AB-01300 US EQUIPMENT LEASING ATTN: ANNA BRINKMANN PO BOX 10316 STAMFORD, CT 6904 2S112BA-90591 VEAHMAN ROBERT A & MARTA C 13885 SW 102ND AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 2S112BA-90321 WHIPP CHAD W _ 7885 SW FANNO CREEK DR #3 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S112BA-90221 WOLFE DENISE R 7865 SW FANNO CREEK DR #2 - TIGARD, OR 97224 Smooth Feed SheetsTM 0 Jack Biethan 11023 SW Summerfield Drive, #4 Tigard, OR 97224 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Dieter Jacobs 7775 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 David Chapman 9840 SW Landau Place Tigard, OR 97223 Nathan and Ann Murdock PO Box 231265 Tigard, OR 97281 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 0 Kristen Miller 8940 SW Edgewood Street Tigard, OR 97223 Paul Owen _ 10335 SW Highland Drive Tigard, OR 97224 Use template for 51610 Louise Fronville 15760 SW Oak Meadow Lane Tigard, OR 97224 Tim Esav PO Box 230695 Tigard, OR 97281 Ross Sundberg 16382 SW 104th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Brian Wegener 9830 SW Kimberly Drive Tigard, OR 97224 J. Dyar 10430 SW Century Oak Drive Tigard, OR 97224 ITM \il 'Sr - EASISIY SUBCq,%MIVEE (i:\ajrpln\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: April 18, 24 2 A ress a e s Laser 5961 ' I • Bonita Park Notes of November 18, 2002, Neighborhood Meeting By Duane Roberts • Duane Roberts of the city CD overviewed a large map of the proposed park improvements. Two persons attended the neighborhood meeting: Tom Rogers and Mary Ann Hulquist. Both were concerned about park safety in relation to the relative seclusion of the park site. Mr. Rogers, who owns property bordering the western edge of the park property, also was concerned about his potential liability from park users falling into the portion of 1-he creek running through-his land. After reviewing the master plan and hearing about the police involvement in park design, the ease of patrolling the lineal-shaped park, and the county housing service's acquisition of the former Tiffany Court Apartments, known for its high crime rate, the two indicated that thOy were less concerned about crime associated with the park. Both expressed that, when completed, the park would be asset rather than a liability to the'neighborhood. The city's plan to locate park equipment away from the creek and to plant a dense 50 foot vegetated corridor along the creek bank partially addressed Mr. Rogers concern regarding creek-related accidents. He agreed to provide a vegetated corridor easement on the portion of his land that extends onto the park side of the creek. This will allow thy: city to install dense, native planting on the streamside portion of this property. [Mr. Rogers subsequently provide the vegetated corridor easement in question] • r Applicant Statement Bonita Park APPLICATION SUMMARY The City of Tigard, as applicant, is proposing to construct and equip a neighborhood park on 5.5 acres of city-owned property located between Milton Court and a segment of Fan-no Creek. Milton Court is a cul-de-sac that connects with SW Bonita Road near the Bonita Road bridge over Fanno Creek. Proposed park improvements include an open lawn area, a play structure, a hard surface basketball court, a picnic shelter, and native plantings. Additional landscaping improvements include lawn seeding and tree plantings to provide shade for park users.. The project also includes a marked crosswalk and traffic light on Bonita Road, which, when completed, will provide a safe access to the park for the tenants of the apartment complexes located on Bonita Road opposite the park, as well as other area residents residing in the area south of Bonita Road. Most of the land in question is floodplain. Two wetlands are mapped on the site. The primary funding source for the park improvements is a Community Development Block Grant. The grant-funded park primarily is intended to serve the outdoor recreation needs and improve the quality of life of the residents of the low-income apartment complexes located nearby. FILE NAME: BONITA PARK CASE NO: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) CU2003-0000 Sensitive Lands Approval L) SLR2003-0000 APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: Same 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 PROPOSAL: Approval of a Conditional Use Permit and a Sensitive Lands Review to construct and operate a neighborhood park on 5.5 acres of undeveloped, city-owned land. LOCATION: The project is located along the length of Milton Court described as: WCTM 2S112BA, Tax I a0nn IRA :1+..on lam...u. + Is a cul-de-sac nlni n_~u_ r~_ _ J 1-v1. UZ-vu k1VIiIL liull connecting W JVV DUF11ta MOaU.) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN and ZONINGDESIGNATION: -L: Light Industrial District. The I-L zoning district provides appropriate locations for general industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production, research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics, such as noise, glare, odor, and vibration. Recreational uses are permitted conditionally. 0 0 APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: According to the Pre-Application Checklist provided by Current Planning staff, the applicable review criteria are Community Development Code Chapters: 18.330, 18.390, 18.530, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795, and 18.810. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: In February 1981 the City approved a zone change on tax lots 2S1 12 AB 1500; 2S1 12BA 100, and 2S1 1 lot 1400 from R-7 and M-3 to M-3 (PD) subject to special conditions relating to the development of the property and adjacent parcels to the north (SC PD 13 - 80/Ordinance No. 81-03). A revised proposal was reviewed in September 1981 and was denied for lack of adequate information (PD 25-81/M 5-81). In 1"983, in conjunction with the adoption of the City's Comprehensive Plan, the zoning of these properties was amended from M-3 (PD) to I-L (Light Industrial). In 1985, the then owner submitted two proposals to divide these properties into 14 lots and for a Sensitive Lands approval to allow re-grading and the development of a road within the 100-year floodplain (file No. S 7-85/SL5-85). These two applications were both approved subject to conditions; however, the applicant did not proceed and both approvals expired. In October 1987, the City's Hearings officer approved a largely similar subdivision preliminary plat that would divide the subject parcels and adjacent parcels into eleven lots. Included with the subdivision request and approval were plans for construction of a public street, within the 100-floodplain of Fanno Creek (Subdivision S 88-07, Sensitive Lands SL 88-05). In 1989, a request was submitted for Site Development Review approval to develop a 25,000 square foot warehouse building and associated site improvements at 7455 SW Bonita Road. The Community Development Director's designee approved the application subject to certain conditions. Among these, condition number nine required the dedication of the area west of the proposed public street, now Milton Court, to be dedicated as greenway/open space to the City. This dedicated area, tax lot 6200, is the subject of the present Conditional Use and Sensitive Lands request. Site Description The site is an undeveloped, 5.5-acre, lineal-shaped property located along almost the entire length of the 1,500 foot long Milton Court, with a. segment of Fanno Creek generally forming the other boundary. Milton Court includes a continuous sidewalk on the west or Fanno Creek side of the street and a discontinuous sidewalk on the opposite or industrial subdivision side of the street. Cobra street lights are located along the park side of Milton Court. The site slopes very gradually from Milton Court on the east to the top of Fanno creek. on the western edge of the site. The creek lies in a deeply incised channel six to ten feet below the surrounding parkland. The entire property is located within the floodplain of Fanno Creek. A 60" sanitary sewer, the so-called Fanno Creek Interceptor Sanitary Sewer, passes through the length of the property. An 8" line extends along the northwest property line and connects 2 • • to the interceptor some 130' south of the northern parcel boundary. Another 8" line extends east to west through the middle of the property. No storm drainage facilities are located within the property. Two storm drainage outfalls are located along Milton Court and direct storm water to the creek. The water reaches the creek through surface sheet flow. The elevation of the top of bank of the :stream ranges from 130-140 feet above sea level. This is above the 2-year, 24-hour storm event. Approximately 0.28 acres are wetlands. The northern wetland is approximately 0.21 acres. The southern wetland is approximately 0.07 acres. The Division State Lands has reviewed and concurred with a City delineation of the wetland areas. Copies of the delineation report and concurrence letter are included in this submittal. Vegetation: This gently sloping city-owner property is covered with grass near Bonita Road and with trees to the north. In years past, installation of utilities and apparent preparations for development has disturbed much of the site's natural vegetation. This has left the creek banks and adjacent riparian areas to be taken over by the non-native and invasive Himalayan blackberry. Much of the rest of the site s covered by tall grasslands that are in process of being taken over by the blackberries. There are, however, a number of modest sized areas on the site where native vegetation remains. A notable stand of mature Oregon White Oak, small stands of Douglas fir, and a few scattered grouping of sizable Oregon Ash are found in these areas. Areas of the native Camas lily also are found on the site. Special bi-lingual signage will be placed to identify and protect these areas. Ten plant communities were identified as part of the required Clean Water Services. Natural Resources Assessment Report, a copy of which is included as part of the present application submittal. According to the report, most of these plant communities are degraded. In addition to Himalayan blackberry, invasive; species include reed canary grass, teasel, English ivy, nightshade, and clematis. Vicinity Information: The proposed park site is located between a segment of Fanno Creek and a dead end street. Properties generally located to the east cf the park site are light industrial uses. Properties located to the west, on the opposite side of the creek from the park site, are residential. Within the residential area, the properties closest to the site are apartments. The only access to the site is via Bonita Road, designated as a major collector, and Milton Court. The latter serves the light industrial developments located along the cul-de-sac. A densely vegetated, 13-acre Metro-owned Greerispaces property borders the park on the north. When improved and open for public use, the Greenspaces property will provide passive recreational opportunities, such as walking and nature viewing, for Bonita Park users. Proposal Description: The proposed park is located within an area of three older and one newer apartment complexes. Many of the occupants of the older complexes are non-English speaking, seasonal and low-wage workers and thE!ir families. The lack of playground facilities within the complexes compels the children of these families to play in parking lots or in the narrow 3 • • lawn areas between or around buildings. The nearest public park or school playground is located approximately one mile away. The. proposed park will provided the nearly 800 tenants of the adjacent apartment buildings a place for healthy outdoor recreation and a social gathering place for families in an attractive natural setting. According to the Tigard Chief of Police, "We currently have a high volume of calls for police service to one of the major apartment complexes in this area. I think the development and use of this park will assist with that significantly. It will not only give the kids a place where they can appropriately play and recreate, but it will also create a space for families to enjoy. I think these elements are critical in creating quality neighborhoods and communities within Tigard..." Community Development Block Grant funds will be used to partially finance the construction and equipping of the park. Activities appealing to the full range of age groups within the target population will be incorporated into the design of the project. Tigard police have been involved in the planning of the park from the perspective of safety and security. The project is supported by the Washington County Department of Housing Services as an investment in the health and safety of the children who reside in the apartment complexes. Housing Services recently purchased one of the largest apartment complexes near the park, which it intends to rehabilitate and manage as safe and decent affordable housing. Agency staff have discussed opportunities for city-county partnerships in the operation of the park and for maximizing its potential for serving apartment residents. The hours of operation will be from dawn to dusk on weekdays and weekends. The park will be operated and maintained by the City of Tigard as a public recreation facility. No permanent structures will be placed within the easement area of the trunk sewerline. A two-sided sign, which will include a list of rules for park users, is proposed. City park crews will provide weekly maintenance, including mowing, trash barrel pick-up, and other needed service work. A formal maintenance plan has been developed and is included in this proposal. The park project is identified in the Tigard Park System Master Plan and in the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Community Vision Report. The City held two public involvement workshops in May 2002 to help design the park. Bilingual (English-Spanish) meeting notices were delivered to all residents within the apartment complexes. Notices also were delivered to all the businesses located along Milton Court opposite the park site. The notices indicated that the meetings would be conducted in English and Spanish. The firm of Perceival and Shapiro developed a concept plan for the new park based on the community meeting results, staff comments, the proposed budget, and the physical characteristics of the site. Staff comments included those by the Police Public Information Officer concerning park safety and security. As depicted in the concept plan map, proposed improvements include a children's play structure, a paved basketball court, and an informal sports field. An illuminated crosswalk on Bonita also is part of the project. Located on Bonita Road at Milton Court, the crosswalk improvement is proposed to include installation of an above-grade painted crosswalk, in-pavement flashing lights, advanced 4 0 warning lights, and a push-button activation system. The crossing improvement will provide a safe crossing to a very heavily traveled ;14,000 vehicles per day) two-lane thoroughfare. Areas of the native Camas lily and other native species also are found on the site. Special bi-lingual signage will be placed to identify and protect most of these areas. Split rail fencing will be installed during the growing season in order to reduce park user encroachment into a large area of Camas lily bordering the north side of the basketball court area. In response to public comments, the basketball court was moved 30' south from its original design location in order to minimize disturbance of this area. The fencing will be removed during the period October 15th to March 31", when flooding is likely to occur. The removal is intended to comply with city regulations prohibiting fencing within the floodway. The Tualatin Riverkeepers, Plant Rescue, and the NW Turtle Project will be notified and allowed to remove and/or relocate to on-site vegetated corridor areas any Camas lily or other native plants located within areas proposed for park improvements. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA A formal pre-application conference with City Current Planning and Engineering staff was held on January 28, 2003. A summant of the code sections applicable to this case was provided by these staff. These code sections are listed below in Chapter order and are addressed in the remainder of this submittal: 18.330 (Conditional Use) 18.390 (Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) 18.530 (Industrial Zoning Districts) 18.705 (Access/Egress/Circulation) 18.725 (Environmental Performance Standards) 18.745 (Landscaping, Screening Standards) 18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) 18.765 (Off-Street Parking & Loading RE!quirements) 18.775 (Sensitive Lands Review) 18.780 (Signs) 18.790 (tree Removal) 18.795 (Visual Clearance) 18.810 (Street and Utility. Improvement ;standards) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND APPLICANT RESPONSE A. SPECIFIC CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL CRITERIA Section 18.330.010.A states that the purpose of this chapter is to provide standards and procedures under which a condittional use may be permitted, enlarged or altered if the site is appropriate and if other appropriate conditions of approval can be met. There are certain uses which due to the nature of the impacts on surrounding land uses and public facilities require a case-by-case review and analysis. Section 18.330.020.A states that a request for approval for a new conditional use shall be processed as a Type III-HO procedure, as regulated by Chapter 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.330.030A and subject to other requirements in Chapter 18.330. 5 • • General Approval Criteria for a Conditional Use: Section 18.330.030: 1. The site size and dimensions provide adequate area for the needs of the proposed use; In terms of the necessary setbacks, landscaping, and other standards applicable to the community recreation use, the site size is adequate for the needs of the proposed park. According to the adopted city Park System Master Plan, the size criteria for a Neighborhood Park is 4 to 14 acres, including active and passive areas. The existing site size is 5.5 acres, of which some 3 acres will be developed for active recreational use. Additionally, the parcel borders a 13-acre, Metro-owned Greenspaces property, which will be open to the public for passive recreational activities, such as trail walking and nature study, at some indefinite time in the future. 2. The impacts of the proposed use of the site can be accommodated considering size, shape, location, topography, and natural features; This proposal is for a 5.5-acre neighborhood park on an industrial-zoned property. The property in question is located entirely within the floodplain. The site is a relatively flat, grassy field, and the applicant proposes, with some exceptions, to maintain the existing contours. Scattered groups of existing deciduous and coniferous trees are located on the site, as are two wetlands of 0.21 and 0.07 acres each. The site design preserves all existing trees and the two wetland areas. Fanno Creek flows along the western edge of the site. -A 50' setback is maintained between the creek and the park's developed areas. The 50' standard complies with the CWS Vegetated Corridor Width Standard for streams with year round flow and adjacent slopes of less that 25%. A 25' setback is maintained around the portions of the two wetlands located outside the stream corridor. As documented below, the 25' complies with the CWS Vegetated Corridor Width Standard for wetlands less than 0.5 acres in size and adjacent slopes of less than 25%, physical features descriptive of the two wetland areas under discussion. As detailed below, all proposed setbacks also comply with the Sensitive Lands chapter 18.775.090 "Special Provisions for Fanno Creek As illustrated in the Planning Plan sheet of the Construction Documents, the buffer areas will be enhanced with dense native plantings. As such, the site is suitable for the proposed development. 3. All required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposal. The only public facilities involved in the proposal, Milton Court and two drinking fountains, have adequate capacity to serve the site, as discussed elsewhere in this report. Moreover, with regard to street capacity, according to the Park System Master Plan, Neighborhood Parks, by definition, are designed for people to walk, rather than drive to. The park's two drinking fountains will be served by an existing water line located along the property's eastern edge. 4. The applicable requirements of the zoning district are met except as modified by this chapter. 6 • • The dimensional standards in the I-L zone are specified in 18.530.040. According to Table 18.530.2[3] "no (side yard) setback shall be required (in the I-L district) except 50 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district." The land along Fanno Creek opposite the proposed park is zoned I-L and R-12. The setback of all developed portions of the park, including lawn area, from the creek bank is 50 feet. The setback of all structures from the abutting residential zoned property at all points is at least 200 feet from the property line. According to Section 18.530.2(3), the required front and rear yard setbacks are each 0/50 feet. The respective front yard setbacks of the proposed park are zero feet front and side yard (south) and 300 feet side yard (north). Accordingly, the site and construction plans show that the dimensional standards for the base zone and Conditional Use standards are met. The requirements for accessory parking facilities are specified in the Conditional Use Standards of Section 18.330.0508.5. The parking standards that apply to the site are discussed below under section "C" of the ADDITIONAL CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL CRITERIA portion of the report. 5. The applicable policies of 18.330.050. The applicant does not elect to develop, the project as a planned development, an option provided under this section. 6. The supplementary requirements set forth in other chapters are met. The only supplementary requirements that apply are Chapter 18.780 (Signs) and 18.775 (Sensitive Lands). These requirements and how they relate to the proposed site plan are addressed in detail under section "C". B. Additional Conditions of Approval -For Conditional Use. Section 18.330.030.13 states that the Hearings Authority may impose conditions on the approval of a conditional use, which are found necessary to ensure the use is compatible with other uses in the vicinity, and that the impact of the proposed use on the surrounding uses and public facilities is minimized. These conditions may include, but are not limited to the following: 1. Limiting the hours, days, place andj'or manner of operation; The hours of operation-for the proposed park, in keeping with current park system usage rules, will be from dawn to dusk. No additional limits to the hours, days, or manner of operation are proposed. 2. Requiring design features which minimize environmental impacts such as noise, vibration, air pollution, glare, odor and/or dust; The site plan mitigates these potential impacts by providing a 50 foot wide vegetated buffer between Fanno Creek and the developed portion of the site, by developing park rules and a maintenance plan for the site, and by maintaining an approximately 300 foot separation between surrounding dwellings units and the developed portion of the site. 7 • • 3. Requiring additional setback areas, lot area, and/or lot depth or width; The existing buffer requirements, as discussed further in this report, are adequate. 4. Limiting the building height, size or lot coverage, and/or location on the site; As indicated in the plans submitted, the only structures proposed for the site are a small, three-table, picnic shelter and a play structure. Including pathways, the proposed lot coverage is approximated 4-5% of the parcel. 5. Designating the size, number, location and/or design of vehicle access points; In accordance with park master-plan standards, the city is not proposing vehicular access onto the site. 6. Requiring street right-of-way to be dedicated and street(s) to be improved; Bonita Road is classified as a Major Collector. The standard width for this classification street is 44 feet. The existing width meets this standard. Milton Court is classified as a local street. It is built to local street standards, except for gaps in the sidewalk on the east side of the street where undeveloped parcels exist. According to the Tigard Engineering Department, as presently designed, Bonita Road and Milton Court each have adequate width and capacity to serve the proposed development. As indicated, the City is not proposing vehicular access onto the site itself. 7. Requiring landscaping, screening, drainage and/or surfacing of parking and loading areas. As discussed in detail below, landscaping, screening, and drainage requirements do not apply to the proposal as designed. Parking requirements are met through a the provision of two handicapped parking stalls and a wheelchair ramp along Bonita Road near the park 's paved entrance. 8. Limiting the number, size, location, height and/or lighting of signs. The applicant is proposing one (1) ground sign for the facility. Compliance with the sign requirements for the underlying zone will be addressed once a design is completed. The City, as applicant, proposes to identify the location and type of sign for this site prior to building permit issuance. 9. Limiting or setting standards for the location and/or intensity of outdoor lighting. Outdoor lighting is not included in the proposal. The existing overhead street lights along the park side of Milton Court are believed by the park supervisor and Police Public Information Officer to provide adequate security lighting within the lineal-shaped park. 10. Requiring berms, screening or landscaping and the establishment of standards for their installation and maintenance. 8 • • As discussed further in this submittal statement, the city proposes to plant Tulip Poplar and Tupelo street trees along Milton Court. These will be watered and maintained by the city Public Works Department as part of their on-going maintenance of the future park. 11. Requiring and designating the size, height, location and/or materials for fences; No permanent fencing is proposed. Fences are prohibited by FEMA regulations within the floodway, which includes nearly all the subject site. Temporary split rail fencing will be installed during the growing season in order to reduce encroachment into a large area of Camas lily located near the northern edge of the basketball court area. The fencing will be removed during the period October 15th to March 31St, when flooding is likely to occur. 12. Requiring the protection and preservation of existing trees, soils, vegetation, watercourses, habitat areas and/or drainage areas. All exiting trees and riparian native vegetation is protected. Exotic species located along the creek will be removed and replaced by native species, as documented in the Planting Plan. The net effect of the development of the park will be to greatly improve ecological conditions. The stream channel and existing wetland areas will not be disturbed. 13. Requiring the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjoining and within the floodplain when land form alterations and development are allowed within the 100-year floodplain. The subject property was dedicated to the city in 1989 and continues to be city-owned. 14. Requiring the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. Although the park is located along Fanno Creek, no off-street or greenway trail is proposed. This is because the installation of a trail within the narrow, 60-270 foot wide site would conflict with the use of the parcel as a park. Instead, the adjacent sidewalk and street, respectively, are proposed to function as the pedestrian and bicycle routes along this section of the greenway trail. The Fanno Creek Trail is classified as "regionally significant" on the Metro regional trail map. The route of the segment under discussion is identified as B-K in the December 2002 Fanno Creek Greenway Trail Action Plan (see attached), prepared for the Metro Regional Parks and Greenspaces Department by Alta Planning +.Design. As part of the development of the trail plan, four open houses were held to gather information from citizens on appropriate trail alignments. The City of Tigard contributed to the cost of the study and participated in the study advisory committee. This site-specific, on-the-ground study is the guiding document for the completion of the Fanno Creek Trail within Tigard. The City's proposed on-street route is consistent with the action plan's recommendations for the alignment of the trail within the Bonita Park stream reach. 18.330 Conditional Use. Table 530.1 and footnote 10: Outdoor Recreation is allowed as Conditional Use in the I-L zoning district on land located outside the floodplain as show on City flood maps 9 The present proposal meets this condition, because the parcel in question is city-owned and the land is located entirely within the floodplain, as shown on city floodplain maps. 18.330.0506.5 Community Recreation and Parks: All building setbacks shall be a minimum of 30 feet from any property line; There are no off-street parking requirements, except that five automobile parking spaces are required for a dog park or off-leash area with a fenced area of one acre or more, along with an approved parking plan for anticipated peak use periods. Off-site peak use or overspill parking shall require a signed agreement with the landowner providing the additional parking. The present proposal meets the described setback and parking requirements, because the picnic shelter and play structure are set back 50 and 75 feet, respectively, from the nearest property line, and because the two portable toilet pads are each set back 30 feet from the nearest property line. The toilet structures themselves will be set within the pads and, as such, will exceed the 30 foot standard. These are the only "buildings", as this term is defined in 18.120-3.30, that are included in the project proposal. With regard to off-street parking, the site plan does not include a dog off-leash area. Therefore, the off-street parking requirement does not apply to the project. Decision Making Procedures and Impact Study, Chapter 18.390: Section 18.390.040.B.2.e states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. The project will not be connected to the public storm drainage system. Runoff from the project site will be sheet flow downhill to Fanno Creek. Runoff from the play structure will be via a 4 inch subsurface pipe extending to within 50 feet the creek channel. At its closest point, the developed area of the park is 50 feet away from the creek and 25 feet away from wetland areas. No sanitary sewer facilities will be provided at the project site. Therefore, the project will have no impact on the public sanitary sewer system. Two drinking fountains connected to the public water system will be provided. An irrigation system serving lawn and planting areas also will be connected to the public system. According to the Engineering Department, the fountains and irrigation system will have a negligible impact on the public water system. As addressed above, the traffic generated by the proposed park, because it serves a neighborhood area and primarily will be used by pedestrians, will have a minimal impact on the traffic counts currently associated with Bonita Road and Milton Court. 10 Industrial Zoning Districts, 18.530: The subject parcel is zoned I-L. The 1-1- zoning district provides appropriate locations for general industrial uses including industrial service; manufacturing and production, research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics, such as noise, glare, odor, and vibration. Recreational uses are permitted conditionally within this zone. According to Table 18.530.1, Use Table: Industrial Zones, the pertinent condition in the case of the present proposal is that Community Recreation is permitted when the land involved is "classified as floodplain on City flood maps, when the recreational use does not otherwise preclude future cut and fill as needed in order to develop adjoining industrially zoned upland This condition is met because the subject land is located entirely within the floodplain, and its development as a public park will in no way interfere with the development of nearby properties designated for industrial uses. Proposed cut and fill activities are minor and are addressed below under 18.775.070.B. Access, Egress and Circulation, Chapter 18.705: Walkways: On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access arid 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. The city is proposing two 10-foot wide, low gradient, accessible paved pathways leading, respectively, from the existing sidewalk on Milton Court to the playground/picnic shelter and basketball court activity areas. A curb cut and ramp on Milton Court, designed to ADA standards, will be installed within the cn-street handicapped parking area. A walkway extending from the landing of the stairway leading to the basketball court is included in the design. 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 imotor 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; and This standard does not apply to the proposed project. The proposed walkways do not cross an access driveway or parking lot. 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 11 • • needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The walkways between the park entrance and activity areas will be constructed of concrete to City of Tigard Standards. 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards: No federal and state environment laws apply to the proposed activity, except 18.725.030.A: Odors and 18.725.030: Noise. Milton Court and a 100-foot wide plus floodplain bracket the project on two sides. The 300 foot separation between the park and the nearest multifamily development should mitigate any noise from the park. The industrial uses located along the east side of Milton Court do not involve noise sensitive operations, as these are defined in TMC 7.40.130. Although park uses are not expected to generate undue noise, the City, on an on-going basis, will monitor and control any park-related noise violations through code enforcement. Daily and weekly park maintenance is designed to prevent odors, if any, from becoming a nuisance for existing or future residential and industrial development. 18.745 Landscaping and Screening Street trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.C Section 18.745.040.C required that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). As depicted in the Planting Plan, the project under discussion fronts a public street, Milton Court, and includes the planting of street trees as well as the preservation of all existing street-side trees. As indicated in the "Planting Plan", the street trees meet the requirements of 18.745.040 Street Trees with regard to size, spacing, and type. The predominant street tree is the 2" caliper Tupelo, planted 20' apart. Where the wetland buffer borders the road, a variety of wetland associated trees are proposed, consistent with CWS Vegetated Corridor Standards. CWS formally has concurred with the planting scheme proposed within this particular and all other required Vegetated Corridor areas. Land Use Buffering and Screening: Buffering and Screening is required between different types of land uses. The proposed park is located within an industrial zone. The zoning designation of the land surrounding the park on three sides also is industrial. The land use along the park's western edge is multi-family. A 50-foot wide corridor of dense vegetation, consisting of native trees and understory vegetation, will be planted all along the creek between the park and the adjoining residential zoning district. Screening - Special Provisions: Section 18.745.050.E requires the screening of parking and loading areas. Consistent with the Tigard Park System Master Plan and the Conditional Use Chapter of the Tigard Community Development Code, the proposed Bonita Park master plan does not include off-street parking. 12 • • Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage, 118.755 The proposed use does not involve mixed solid waste or recyclable storage. A minimum of four trash receptacles with metal lids will be placed inside the park for the disposal of mixed solid waste. The receptacles will be monitored and emptied once per day. 18.765 Off-Street Parking and Loading. As indicated elsewhere in this statement, no off-street parking is proposed. Disabled-Accessible Parking: All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the, State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. Two on-street, ADA accessible parking spaces will be provided. A ramp between the spaces designed to ADA standards will bE.' provided between the sidewalk and road surfaces. Access Drives: No off-street parking will be provided. Access will be via Milton Court, a cul de sac designed with a traffic bulb, so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within the street or other public right-of-way will be required. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements: The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.765.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. Community Recreation requires 3 spaces;/1,000 square feet of building space. Although the building space included within this project: is far less than 1,000 square feet, four, two-bicycle racks will be provided within the park to accommodate bicycle users. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.765.070.H states that the minimum and maximum parking shall be as required in Table 18.765.2. Off street parking is not required. The proposed park is designed to serve the adjacent neighborhood area. According to city park standards, access to neighborhood parks is intended to be walking, rather than by motor vehicle. In common with the city's other neighborhood-level parks, the plan does not include a parking area. Sensitive Lands: Section 18.775.020 states that all proposed "development", must obtain a Stormwater Connection Permit from the Clean Water Services (CWS) pursuant to CWS " Design and Construction Standards" as adapted 2/7100. As used in this chapter, the meaning of the word "development"' shall be as defined in CWS's "Design and Construction Standards" Section 1.02.15: "all human-induced changes to improved or 13 • • unimproved real property including: construction of structures requiring a building permit, if such structures are external to existing structures; land division; drilling; site alterations resulting from surface mining or dredging, grading; construction of earthen berms; paving; excavation; and clearing when it results in the removal of trees or vegetation which would require a permit from the local jurisdiction or an Oregon Department of Forestry tree removal permit. The following activities are not included in the definition of development: farming activities when conducted in accordance with accepted farming practices as defined in ORS 30.930 and under a Senate Bill 1010 water quality management plan; construction, reconstruction, or modification of a single family residence on an existing lot of record subject to ORS 92.040(2); and any development activity for which land use approvals have been issued pursuant to a land use application submitted to a land use authority on or before 02/0412000 and deemed complete by the land use authority on or before 03/15/00. A service provider letter for this project has been issued by Clean Water Services and is included as an attachment to this submittal. Section 18.775.040 General Provisions for Floodplain Areas The attached letter provided by a registered professional engineer certifies that the structural design, specifications, and plans developed for the construction and equipping of Bonita Park are in accordance with accepted standards and practices for meeting provisions of TMC 18.775.040 "General Provisions for Floodplain Areas". The park improvements have been design to assure that the potential for flood damage to the proposed construction will be minimized. All construction and improvements will be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. All construction and improvements will be constructed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. The proposed sprinkler system shall be construction so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. The proposed water supply system shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwater into the system. No electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, air-conditioning equipment or other service facilities are included in the project design. All new construction shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure. Section 18.775.070.B.1 states that land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any encroachments unless certified by a registered professional engineer that the encroachments will not result in any increase in flood elevation during the base flood discharge. Developing the park according to the master plan prepared for it, would involve the following fill quantities: • Lawn areas: grading for the lawns will be limited to tilling to loosen soils and then smoothing to provide a playable and mowable lawn surface. There should be no "cut" or "fill", as such, in these areas, except for the moving around of soils to smooth out high spots and fill in ruts and low spots. No soils will be added to these areas. • Playground equipment: the playground and surrounding walks will be cut into the slope. The finished grades at the lower (western) edge will match existing grades. Because the playground area needs to be flat, the rest of the area will be cut into the 14 slight sloping site. There should be approximately 418 cubic yards of materials removed (cut) to construct the proposed improvements. All of these soils will be removed from the site. Some 162 cubic yards of various materials (concrete paving, drainage rock, and wood fiber safety materials) would be placed in the area as "fill." • Basketball court area: Approximately 501 cubic yards of material will be removed to construct the improvements in these areas. Some 282 cubic yards of base rock and pavement will be "filled" back in. All of the individual "cuts" will be balanced by individual "fills" within the same vicinity, in accordance with City and FEMA zero-ri;;e regulations. To verify this, a formal zero-rise study has been conducted by a registered professional engineer associated with Tetra Tech/KCM, Inc. using the FEMA regulatory model for the Fanno Creek basin. A copy of the study is included in the application submittal. It documents that the proposed park development will not result in any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge. In the words of the report, "we conclude that the proposed park will have no effect on the Fanno Creek floodplain or floodway". Section 18.775.070.B.2 states that land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial . . except that alterations or developments associate with community recreation uses shall be allowed in area designated residential The zoning of the subject property is light industrial. Section 18.775.070.B.3 states that where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplai n it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood. As stated above, a study has documented that the proposed park will not result in any increase in flood levels. Section 18.775.070.B.4 states that the land form alteration should include a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer as untimely. According to a 2003 technical study, "Fanno Creek Greenway Trail Action Plan" prepared for the Metro Regional Parks and Greenspaces Department by the Alta Planning + Design, the preferred alignment for the Bonita Park segment of the Fanno Creek Trail is on the existing sidewalk for pedestrians and Milton Court for bicyclists. A City of Tigard staff member served on the study's advisory committee. The adopted City of Tigard pedestrian/bicycle plan defines a conceptual alignment for -the trail. The recent technical study provides on- the-ground mapping of the alignment, based on current conditions and environmental-related regulations. Section 18.775.070.B.6 states that the necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands, and CWS permits and approvals shall be obtained. 15 • All the necessary permits have been obtained and copies are included in the application submittal. This includes a DSL wetland delineation concurrence letter and a CWS service provider letter. Because the site plan does not proposed any work within 50 feet of the stream channel or any disturbance of the two wetlands located within the subject property, no additional agency review, other than the City of Tigard Sensitive Land Review, is required. Section 18.775.070.B.2-7 states that where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land The land in question is city-owned. Section 18.775.090.13.2 states that the standard width for "good condition" vegetated corridors along Fanno Creek is 50 feet If all or part of a locally significant wetland (a wetland identified as significant on the City of Tigard "Wetlands and Streams Corridors Map") is located within the 50 foot setback area, the vegetated corridor is measured from the upland edge of the associated wetland. Section 18.775.090.b.3 The standard width for "marginal or degraded condition" vegetated corridors along Fanno Creek is 50% of the standard width The site design maintains a 50 foot setback between the creek and the park's developed areas. The 50' responds to 18.775.090.B.2 quoted above. The 50 foot standard also complies with the CWS Vegetated Corridor Width Standard for streams, like the one in question, with year round flow and adjacent slopes of less that 25%. The two wetlands located within the subject site are identified as significant on the city wetlands map. A 25 foot setback is maintained around the portions of the two wetlands that do not border the creek. This is consistent with 18.775.090.B.3, which allows a 50% corridor reduction when existing corridor areas are in marginal or degraded condition. The degraded condition of the existing corridor is identified within the required Clean Water Services Natural Resources Assessment Report completed for this present project, a copy of which is included as part of the present application submittal. The 25 feet also complies with the CWS Vegetated Corridor Width Standard for wetlands, such as the two under discussion, less than 0.5 acres in size with adjacent slopes of less than 25%. Unlike the City Sensitive Land standards, the required CWS corridor applied to steams does not expand to include portions of associated wetlands located outside the stream setback. As illustrated in the Planting Plan sheet of the Construction Documents, all buffer areas will be enhanced with dense native plantings. Tree Removal - Chapter 18.790 Section 18.790.030 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist be provided for a conditional use application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, identification of which trees are proposed to be removed, and a protection program 16 • 0 defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. No trees are proposed to be removed. As indicated, a protection plan for these existing trees has been developed. This plan is the city's administrative policy pertaining to tree protection during construction activities. Chapter 18.795 Visual Clearance Areas. Section 18.795.020.A. states that the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and to a change of use which increases the on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements. Section 18.795.030.13. states that a clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure or temporary or permanent obstruction (except for an occasional utility pole or tree), exceeding three feet in height, measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. There are no proposed structures or trees located inside the vision clearance area. The park signage will be located outside of visual clearance areas. Therefore, this standard is satisfied. 18.780.130 Signs. Zoning District Regulations F. In Industrial Zones The I-P zone allows for one free-standing sign of 70 square feet per face. One free-standing park name sign of less that 70 square feet will be placed on the site. The design specifications will be included in a future sign permit request. Public Transit: Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route; the requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: the location of other transit facilities in the area; and the size and type of the proposal. The following facilities may be required after City and Tri-Met review: bus stop shelters; turnouts for buses; and connecting paths to the shelters. Public bus service presently is not provid0d along Bonita Road. The nearest transit facilities are located along 72"d Avenue and Hall Boulevard. D. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS - CHAPTER 18.810: Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: 17 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. Section 18.810.030(E) requires a local residential street to have a 50-foot right-of-way width and a 32-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on- street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. The project abuts Milton Court, which is a dead end street with a 50-foot right-of-way constructed to city standards. No new local residential streets are proposed. Therefore, the requirements of this section do not apply to the proposed development. 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. A continuous sidewalk exists along the park sides of Milton Count and Bonita Road. Since the court's construction, the sidewalk on the east side of Milton Court has been constructed as development has occurred. Altogether, sidewalk has been installed along approximately 50% of this side's street frontage. Sanitary Sewers: 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 Clean Water Services 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. This project does not require a connection to the public sanitary sewer system to serve on- site restrooms. Instead, three portable ADA-accessible toilets will be provided. According to the adopted City Park System Master Plan, neighborhood parks generally do not include permanent restrooms. The two proposed drinking fountains will be connected to the area's sanitary sewer system, which is designed to accommodate future development along Milton Court. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A states requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.C states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its 18 • • 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 Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). The topography of this site slopes to Fanno Creek. Clean Water Service's rules do not require a drainage facility based on the proposed use and site design. A letter from Clean Water Services addressing the application of agency rules to this proposal is included in the documents accompanying this application, Any re-grading will not impose additional restrictions to flow. Effect on Downstream -Drainage: Section 18.810.100.1) 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 Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). The technical study included in the submittal concludes that the re-grading proposed will not impose additional restrictions to flow. City Engineering staff involved the preparation of construction documents do not anticipate that additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility. 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. As discussed earlier in this statement, this site is located within the proposed Fanno Creek Greenway Corridor. The criterion to include a trail segment does not apply to this project, because the trail route has been mapped at this location and is proposed to run on the sidewalk in the case of walkers and on the street in the case of bike riders. The map of the trail route is attached. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utiliity lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: 19 • • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.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 utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under- grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case- by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in- lieu of under-grounding. No utility lines related to electric, communication, lighting or cable television services and related facilities are associated with the project. Proposed water, sewerage, and storm drainage lines are all proposed to be placed underground. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Public Water System: No additional public water line work is necessary to serve this project. As indicated, a private-type lateral is proposed. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Clean Water Services regulations do not require the construction of on-site water quality facilities relative to the proposed outdoor recreational use. This is because the site design proposes very little impervious surface. 20 Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion 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. Per CWS regulations, the applicant will submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits.. Since the development will disturb less than five acres, the requirement to obtain a NPDE.S permit does not apply. As noted previously, the actual disturbance area is three acres. ATTACHMENTS Pre-Application Conference Notes Property Owner and Interested Party Neighborhood Meeting Notice Affidavit of Mailing/Posting Neighborhood Meeting Notice Vicinity Map Impact Statement for Bonita Park Bonita Industrial Park Plat Bonita Park Construction Documents Construction Plans for Bonita Industrial Park Vegetated Corridor Easement Bonita Park Floodway Analysis General Provisions for Floodplain Areas Certified Professional Engineer Letter Bonita Park Maintenance Plan Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter Natural Resource Assessment Sensitive Area Certification Form Wetland Delineation/Determination Report Wetland Delineation for Bonita Park DSL Concurrence Letter Fanno Creek Trail Action Plan Tree Management Plan Storm Water Report 21 IMPACT STATEMENT FOR BONITA PARK All necessary facilities for serving this site currently are in place or can be constructed on site. As shown on the Construction Drawings, the transportation, storm water, sanitary, water and other private utilities are all available and adequate in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Transportation System SW Bonita Road Bonita Road, designated as a major collector, borders the southern edge of the property. It includes a continuous sidewalk on both sides of the street along its length. Milton Court borders the subject property to the east. It includes a continuous sidewalk on the park side of the street and discontinuous sidewalk on the opposite side of the street. No improvements to either street are needed to serve the proposed park. Tri-Met bus routes 76 (Hall Blvd.) and 38 (72nd Ave.) currently serve the area within which the park is located. The closest bus stop on Hall is more than 1/4th mile from the park. The closest stop on 72nd is approximately 1/4th mile away. No bus service is provided on Bonita Road itself. The park project is not expected to result in adverse impacts to the current capacity of SW Bonita Road or Milton Court. The City has not requested additional improvements to Bonita or Milton Court. The proposed park is designed to serve the adjacent neighborhood area. According to City park standards, access to neighborhood parks is intended to be by walking, rather than by motor vehicle. In common with other neighborhood-level parks, the plan does not include a parking area. According to the Tigard Park System Master Plan, adopted March 1999, page 8, "Neighborhood parks generally do not include off street parking". The proposed project includes a painted crosswalk, with in-pavement flashing lights and advanced warning lights on Bonita Road. The crossing improvements will provide safe access to the park by the tenants of the nearby apartment complexes and other neighborhood residents wishing to walk to the park. Drainage System With the exception of subsurface drain pipes in the sub-grade of the children's play area and basketball court, the proposed drainage system will be sheet flow to the creek and wetlands. This design is in accordance with Clean Water Services standards. Water will be conveyed to Fanno Creek and the two wetlands. Based on conversations with the City Engineering staff and the Service Provider Letter provided by Clean Water Services, detention will not be required for this site. The entire site is floodplain. According to Engineering staff, Clean Water Services Design and Construction Manual standards prohibit the location of detention facilities within the floodplain. 22 • • Water Systems There is an existing 12-inch water line in Milton Court. The applicant proposes to extend a lateral connection into the site to serve two drinking fountains, one each near the basketball court and playground area. The newly constructed water lines within the proposed development will be 1 1/2 inch lines. Sanitary Sewer System Sanitary sewer service is available via a '12-inch line located within an easement along the Milton Court. The City is not proposing to use this line to serve the site. According the Tigard Park System Master Plan, "Neighborhood parks generally do not include . . . permanent restrooms " The park master plan does include three portable restrooms, all of which will be ADA accessible. Noise Impacts No negative noise impacts should result from this project. Noise generated would be typical for a small neighborhood park. The nearest residences are some 300 feet from the park edge. The separation between adjacent residential units and the park, provided by the creek and wetland corridor, suitably buffers the r;oise of such an activity. The land uses on Bonita Road opposite the park are light industrial. Parks System The project will add a neighborhood park within a park deficient area. Facilities will include a picnic shelter, basketball court, play structure, lawn area. 23 • Notes: • The site currently is an undeveloped city-owned parcel 5.5 acres in size. The site is located in southeastern Tigard. It is bounded by Bonita Road on the south and by Milton Court on the east, and Fanno Creek The Comprehensive Plan is implemented by the Community Development Code. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan policies are, therefore, assured by satisfaction of the applicable development standards of the development code as addressed within this report. With regard to vegetative cover, the proposed planting of a dense, 50-foot wide vegetated corridor along the creek will restore this area to native conditions. Trees and other vegetation also will be planted elsewhere within the site. Blackberries and other invasive species will be replaced with native vegetation. No existing trees will be removed. Two wetlands located within the site will be left undisturbed and will be buffered with native plantings. The site is a grassy field. The three existing trees located within the area of the proposed site improvements will be preserved. Since no work is proposed to occur within 25 feet of the trees, and this work will include fence installation only, no special protection plan is proposed. Trees will be planted along Milton Court, around the basketball court and playground, and near picnicking areas to provide shade for park users. These trees and the lawn plantings will provide a pleasing, safe, and useful environment for park users. i/Irpn/dr/bonitapark.cu.doc 24 May 16, 2003 Brad Kilby Current Planning Division City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Bonita Part at Milton Court Dear Mr. Kilby: OREGON This is to certify that the structural design, specifications, and plans developed for the construction and equipping of Bonita Park are in accordance with accepted standards and practices for meeting provisions of TMC 18.775.040 "General Provisions for Floodplain Areas". The park improvements have beE.,n design to assure that the potential for flood damage to the proposed construction will be minimized. All construction and improvements will be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. All construction an improvements will be constructed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. The proposed sprinkler system shall be construction so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. The proposed water supply system shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwater into the system. No electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, air-conditioning equipment or other service facilities are included in the project design. All new construction shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure. Sincerely, ~A,% Edmund Tawiah, PE Project Engineer 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-41.7 1 TDD (503) 684-2772 Bonita Park Maintenance Plan The hours of operation will be Dawn to Dusk on all days. The garbage and litter will be picked up daily. The shelter and tables will be visually checked for debris and cleaned daily as needed. The park will be visited daily by park personnel and patrolled for vandalism and graffiti. Park personnel will inspect equipment and grounds daily for obvious problems. The Playground will be inspected monthly by a certified inspector on the city staff. Hard surfaces such as sidewalks, and the basketball court, will be blown off or washed daily or as needed to keep surfaces clear of debris and obstructions. Turf areas will be mowed weekly during the growing season or as needed the rest of the year to maintain a neat appearance. Turf edges along hard surfaces or shrub areas will be edged twice monthly. The turf will be watered by an irrigation system to establish the turf and keep it healthy during the dry summer months. Natural fertilizers will be used in turf or decorative shrub areas to aid in growth only if needed. No fertilizer is to be used in the native areas or buffer zones. Shrubs and trees will be pruned as needed to maintain a neat appearance and the small shrub I''Jeds will be maintained by mechanical or manual means. No herbicides are planned for use in the maintenance of this park. There are extensive native areas and buffer zones along streams and delineated wetlands. The 50 and 25 foot buffer zones respectively for those areas will be maintained in native species. Replanting to maintain the buffer zones is anticipated and will be done yearly as needed. Those and other native shrub areas will be maintained by manual means to control non-native or invasive species. Much of this manual labor is anticipated to be volunteer labor organized by the city forester, volunteer coordinator, or organizations such as the the NW Turtle Project. The backflow devices for the irrigation and fountain will be inspected by the City of Tigard yearly. The portable toilets will be serviced and emptied weekly. Daily cleaning will be done as needed. Damaged structures or other hazards will be addressed immediately. Hazards will be removed or repaired as soon as they are identified. Prepared by Steve Martin, Parks Supervisor Date: 5/14/03 s • LION-RESIDENTIAL rf-ApMG DW 11 J3103 W,VFFEAR Bk<i R APPLICANT: D U A tAF Rc~ ~G w-cS Phone: ( ) .2x1-. ay3+ AGENT: Phone: ( ) PROPERTY LOCATION: rye ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: Nib Corner of Rn n; T- + A M 4 LTd i1 C o ur- TAX MAP(S)/LOT #(S): _OS t ID ta - TcA K 1015 (P)00 Q11J 20C NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: _Ccno,_T'0mNL_ 6rr_ /'etsSi,idr- t~A~SD~ RF_01F1.1 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: ~tnotiE~L ~r,.- a 5± C~ct e ~,Y, yn~z << Pf+r2 k COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: c,t-j Qc,~ ac1r~F- ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: \ BJ CWST R i PAL CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAM (C.I.T.) AREA:_E~, Z Am V So uTu ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18. 530 1 Sc-:r- j8. ,30 MINIMUM LOT SIZE: R sq. ft. Average Min. lot width: ft. Max. building height: Li5 ft. Setbacks Front 30 'ft. Side sG ft. Rear sG ft. Comer ')a ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: 65 % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: is NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING [Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handouu THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE(S), AND THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to s.ibmitting your application or the application will not be accepted. * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 8 NON-Residential AppGcationlPlanning Division Section NARRATIVE [Refer to Code Chapter 18.3901 The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria. [IMPACT STUDY [Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.0501 As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Lid ACCESS [Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 183651 Minimum number of accesses: ` Minimum access width: 30~ Minimum pavement width: aLwi' All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: W MAY REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18305.0301 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 should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. ❑ SPECIAL SETBACKS [Refer to Code Chapter 183301 ➢ STREETS: feet from the ➢ LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: ➢ FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD ❑ SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS [Refer to BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS - Builc height of 75 feet provided that: e of feet, along the site's boundary. Aection 18130.010.BJ located in a non-residential zone may be built to a ➢ A maximum building floor area to site a a ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; ➢ - All actual building setbacks will be at 1 ,Vast half of the building's height; and The stn icture will not ahut a rPSirtPntiI 7nnp-d rliStrict i BUFFERING AND SCREENING [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7451 In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. 0 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section • • The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFFE=R WIDTHS applicable to your proposal area are: feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. - feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG. PAS I►:,c - V LANDSCAPING [Refer to Code Chapters 18145,18365 and 183051 STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public righl-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending. on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include 1`he use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised planters. ( CYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7551 Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Lenin/ Hing is the contact person and can be reached at (503) 625-6177. [,PARKING (Refer to Code Section 18365.0401 REQUIRED parking for this type of use'. a•Q ~Gaces czi, Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: ➢ Standard parking space dimension z 8 feet, 6 inches x 18 feet, 6 inches. ➢ Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 inches x 16 feet, 6 inches. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3) feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. HANDICAPPED PARKING: ➢ All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. > ➢ BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. ❑ LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS iReferto Code S on 18365.080) Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL UILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be provided with a loading space. The pace size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 8 NON-ResWential AppkationlPlanning Division Section Id BICYCLE RACKS [Refer to Code Section 18.7651 , r I coo BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. [/SENSITIVE (ANDS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7151 The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive land areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development aDDlication. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. ❑ STEEP SLOPES (Refer to Code Section .715.080.01 When STEEP SLOPES exist, nor to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses t approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The port shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommen tions for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. CLEANWATTR SERVICES ICWSI BUFFER STANDARDS - (Refer to R a 0 96,441USA Regulations - Chapter 31 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table identifies the required widths: TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION & ORDER 96-44 t 1 i'Gi: a. A, k~s"~ s ' •`.z ~ x~ SENSii IVE REAAUFIIYIit~[ r s .J Lw0 AMR NT , y#., 11 T~s F, ECSEATEU~ { ~ _ READ, % CORRIER$IU°: s.. >-n..5 F - • Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% f 10 to <50 acres 15 feet 1 > 50 to <100 acres 25 feet ♦ Existing or created wetlands <0.5 acre 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands > 0.5 acre <25% 50 feet Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres Natural lakes and ponds Streams with intermittent flow draining: > 25% 1 10 to < 50 acres 30 feet 1 > 50 to < 100 acres 50 feet • Existing or created wetlands > 25% Variable from 50-200 feet. Measure • Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow in 25-foot increments from the starting Streams with intermittent flow draining > 100 acres point to the top of ravine (break in Natural lakes and ponds <25% slope), add 35 feet past the top of ravine6 Starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankful flow) for streams/rivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring boundary, and/or average high water for lakes or ponds, whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor, shall not serve as a starting point for measurement 'Vegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 6'rhe vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced to 15 feet, if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8 NON-Ressidenlial ApplicationflUriing Division section • • Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor. NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as provided for in the CWS Design and Construction Standards. Location of Vegetated Corridor: I ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPME=NT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. CWS Service Provider Letter: PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the R&O 96-44 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas, CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. (SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 183801 SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINE=D PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. [TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18390.030.CJ A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City; ➢ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D according to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping; streE~ts and parking lots: 0 Retainage of less than 25% Df existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; 0 Retainage of from 25 to 501/6 of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two- thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; 0 Retainage of from 50 to 75°/) of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; 0 Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; ➢ Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and ➢ A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. [2~11ITIGATION [Refer to Code Section 18.790.06013 REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: ➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. ➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damaged is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 8 NON4Residential AppGc9oaffllanning Division Section • ➢ If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. ➢ The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. [CLEAR VISION AREA [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7951 The City requires that CLEAR'VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting streets functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. ❑ ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.810.0601 MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet less lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition mu t have a minimum of 15'feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SITYL NOT EXCEED 2%2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1 Y2 times the,(nlnimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. CODE CHAPTERS 18.330 (Conditional use) 18.340 (Diredors Interpretation) - 18.350 (Planned Development) 18.360 (site Development Review) 18.370 (variances/Adjustments) 18.380 (Zoning Maplrext Amendments) . 18.385 (Miscettaneous Permits) 18.390 (Der;ision snaking Pnwedureslimpad study) -AZ 18.410 (Lot Line Adjustments) _ 18.420 (Land Partitions) 18.430 (Subdivisions) 18.510 (Residential Zoning Districts) 18.620 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards) 18.630 (Washington Square Regional Center) 18.705 (AcoesslEgress/Circuiation) 18.710 (Accessory Residential units) 18.715 (Density computations) 18.720 (Design Compatibddy standards) 18.725 (Environmental Perfomrance standards) 18.730 (Exceptions To Development Standards) 18.765 (Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) 18.775 (Sensitive Lands Review) _tL 18.780 (signs) 18.785 (Temporary use Permits) ✓ 18.790 (rree RemovaQ 18.795 (visual Clearance Areas) 18.798 (Wireless Communication Facilities) ✓18.810 (street & utility Improvement standards) 18.520 (Commercial Zoning Districts) 18.530 (Industrial Zoning Districts) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes NON-Residential Applcation/Planning Division Section 18.740 (Historic overlay) 18.742 (Home Occupation Permits) -4/- 18.745 (Landscaping & Screening Standards) 18.750 (Manuladuredmow Home Regulations) -4L 18.755 (Mixed sold wastelRegcii g storage) 18.760 (Noncoribim'mrmg situations) Page 6 of 8 • • ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: .l4.cTil~C1 ~1nnt~c~sE ~+~c_t~1 ~~;6;-, ~~~r~~Cbf!!~cr~t ~'r, ~,.~1:~ ~:C►2.~c~1C~ ~~T'c~l~',~ (.Nress 4s•(vst, ct)ile-c- Cl l , * '&,000 ru-Q~ess \icl ,nc~ / 64 ComAc, ML- snp (~e t . nRcr4. o,~ C~r,c v r ~e~ce PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. held by the City Council. with the Commission making a An additional public hearing shall be APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division .acceptance may be submitted with an application snou The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant il- additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 8 NON-Residential Apptication/Plannirg Division Section C-02 intp-,~ L-S wu--m Cra-e f-tDpl; cthno `f1Gs hf'.fl(l (~Prome (A Cfl,Y,C1' FA Cyrrra~~~e S*.c~Lt~ QddLess cer,e.~c:} s~~,.dards rc,r~ ~Il cjp,0-c5uat Cc,.--e^;cr The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard G; ,(_4 Ceo ; t . A basic flowchart which illustrates the review process is avail ble from the Planning Division upon request. Land use. applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER . AT THE TIME IN WHICH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). PLEASE NOTE: The conference an noes cannot cover a e requirements an aspects related to site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of. the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staffprelative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MO unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY- . FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A NTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as aTY OF TIGARD PLANNING'~NVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: (503) 639-4111 FAX: (503) 684-7297 E-MAIL (stars first name) a@ci.tigard.orms TITLE 18 (aTY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (ODE) INTERNET ADDRESS: www.c1.tigard.Or us K\pa"asters\Pre-App Notes Commercial.doc Updated: 3-Oct-02 (Engineering section: preapp.eng) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 8 NON-Residential Appfcation0annng Division Section CleanWaterr Services Our commitment is clear. Jurisdiction Tigard Date Map & Tax Lot 2S112BA 200, 6203 Owner Assessment limited to Contact project area of tax lots Site Address Between SW Milton Court Address and Fanno Creek Proposed Activity Park development Phone • File Number 5-1 (D I Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter December 20, 2002 City of Tigard Kurahashi and Associates Gregory Kurahashi 15580 SW Jay Street, 200 Beaverton, OR 97008 503-644-6842 This form and the attached conditions will serve as your Service Provider Letter in accordance with Clean Water ServicE!s Design and Construction Standards (R&O 00-7). YES NO YES- NO Natural Resources I Assessment (NRA) i ® El Alternatives Analysis Required i ❑ Submitted I (Section 3.02.5) i (District Site Visit t I ® I I 4 Tier 1 Alternatives Analysis ❑ ❑ Date: 11/19/02 I 1 I t Concur with NRA/or i ® ' _ I I Tier .2 Alternatives Analysis j ❑ submitted information Sensitive Area Present ® L t Vegetated Corridor i ❑ ❑ On-Site I Averag ng Sensitive Area Present ® L~ L , Vegetated Corridor ti R i d ❑ Off-Site re equ Mitiga on t Vegetated Corridor I ® L~ i On-Site Mitigation ❑ E ❑ Present On-Site i F i Width of Vegetated Corridor (feet) 25/50 feet Off-Site Mitigation I ❑ ❑ Condition of Vegetated id C ( Planting Plan Attached? Good/marginal/ i Qlan required prior to any grading or raded I clearing de or orr g , l construction ff 1 Enhancement Required EE ® F I Enhancementfrestoration C~ i i start and completion dates To be determined Encroachment into Vegetated Corridor I I RSAT (no longer required) ; ❑ (Section 3.02.4) I f I i I Type and Square Footage NA j Geotechnical Report ❑ L nsi of Encroachment required ! Allowed Use ❑ ❑ 'it Conditions Attached i ® ❑ (Section 3.02.4(b)) i t t This Service Provider Letter does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your property. Page 1 of 3 • File Number L~J! lQJ In order to comply with Clean Water Services (the District) water quality protection requirements the project must comply with the following conditions: No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within the sensitive area which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed by Section 3.02.3.a (1), (2), or (3). 2. No structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within the vegetated corridor which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed by Section 3.02.4.b.1) (a through h). 3. The vegetated corridor width for sensitive areas within the project site shall be a minimum of 50 feet wide, as measured horizontally from the delineated boundary of the sensitive area along Fanno Creek, and 25 feet as measured horizontally from the delineated boundary of the isolated wetlands. See the attached map for Sensitive Area and study area boundaries. The only activities approved for tax lot 200 involve riparian plantings. 4. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction the vegetated corridor and water quality sensitive areas shall be surveyed, staked, and temporarily fenced per approved plan. During construction the vegetated corridor shall remain fenced and undisturbed except as allowed by Section 3.02.4.b.4. and per approved plans. 5. Prior to any activity within the sensitive area, the applicant shall gain authorization for the project from the Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL) and US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The applicant shall provide the District with copies of all DSL and USACE project authorization permits. No activity is proposed within the Sensitive Areas at this time. 6. For vegetated corridors 50 feet wide or greater, the first 50 feet closest to the sensitive area shall be equal to or better than a "good" corridor condition as defined in Section 3.02.6, Table 3.2. 7. For vegetated corridors less than 50 feet wide, the entire vegetated corridor shall be equal to or better than a "good" corridor condition as defined in Section 3.02.6, Table 3.2. 8. Clean Water Services shall be notified 72 hours prior to the start and completion of enhancement/restoration activities. Enhancement/restoration activities shall comply with the guidelines provided in Appendix E: Landscape Requirements (R&0 007: Appendix E). 9. Prior to installation of plant materials, all invasive vegetation within the vegetated corridor shall be removed. During removal of invasive vegetation care shall be taken to minimize impacts to existing native trees and shrub species. 10. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction, the applicant shall provide the District with the required vegetated corridor enhancement/restoration plan.`ev;ew G.wd o-prravo-l. 11. Maintenance and monitoring requirements shall comply with Section 2.11.2 of R&O 00-7. If at any time during the warranty period the landscaping falls below the 80% survival level, the Owner shall reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity and the two year maintenance period shall begin again from the date of replanting. 12. Performance assurances for the vegetated corridor shall comply with Section 2.06.2, Table 2-1.4 and Section 2.10, Table 2-2.2. Page 2 of 3 • • File Number 2~1 13. Appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's) for Erosion Control, in accordance with the CWS Erosion Control Technical Guidance Manual shall be used prior to, during, and following earth disturbing activities. 14. Prior to construction, a Stormwater Connection Permit from the District or its designee is required pursuant Ordinance 27, Section 4.11. 15. Activities located within the 100-year floodplain shall comply with Section 3.13 of R&O 00-7. 16. Removal of native, woody vegetation shall be limited to the extent practicable. 17. Removal of invasive non-native species by hand is required in all vegetated corridors rated "good°. Replanting is required in any cleared areas larger than 25 square feet. 18. Final construction plans shall clearly depict the location and dimensions of the sensitive area and the vegetated corridor (indicating good, marginal, or degraded condition). Sensitive area boundaries shall be marked in the field. 19. Final construction plans shall include landscape plans. Plans shall include in the details a description of the methods for rernoval and control of exotic species, location, distribution, condition and size of plantings, existing plants and trees to be preserved, and installation methods for plant materials. Plantings shall be tagged for dormant season identification. Tags to remain on plant material after planting for monitoring purposes. 20. A Maintenance Plan shall be included on final plans including methods, responsible party contact information, and dates (minimum two times per year, by June 1 and September 30). 21. Should final development plans differ :;ignificantly from those submitted for review by the District, the applicant shall provide updated drawings, and if necessary, obtain a revised Service Provider Letter. Please call (503) 846-3613 with any questions. Heidi K. Berg Site Assessment Coordinator Page 3of3 7~~ O 2,550 4,700 SCALE= 1"= 4,700 pv ~-.:mot 1 DAM 11-22-OZ SCALL t`=4 700' room KURAHASHx MAWN BY. EMH B O N I T A PARK & ArSDOCIATCO. D(C. TAX LOT MAP IWW SO Jay Street. State 200 Bmm t m Ong 97M SHFT IQ (fto)au Wa mt.. (bw"-uni KAIN 2035 City of Tigard Engineering Department 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Storm Water Report Bonita Park At Miton Court Prepared by: Edmund Tawiah, PE June 11, 2003 J Site hifonnation Pre „ Post ' . Surface Area Development Development T Al" fE. Sq. ft. iz- :7 [Pervious x:76,230 ? 66,211 . Impervious y~ Q.. , 16,019 Existing site cover is a mix of shrubbery, trees and grass vegetation. Site gently slopes towards Fanno Creek at approximately 4 A significantly large portion of the post development surface areas of the site remain as green spaces. The post development impervious areas of the site are the sidewalk, basketball court and stairways. CVIIS WaterQuality Requirements Water Quality Volume (Cu. Ft) = (0.36 in/12 in/ft) x Impervious Area(Sq. ft) Water Quality Flow (cfs) = Water Quality Volume (Cu. Ft) / 14,400 Site Water Quality Volume (WQV) = (0.36 x 10019)/12 = 301 cu. ft Site Water Quality Flow (WQF) = 301 cu. ft/ 14,400 sec = 0.021 cfs 2 J 'G94tated~Swale,Regu~remen F Design Flow = Water Quality flow (CWS) Maximum Water Depth = 0.5 ft Minimum freeboard = 1 ft Maiming's n = 0.240 Minimum Slope = 0.5% Maximum Side Slope = 4H:1 V Proposed Vegetated Swale Given Input Data: Shape Trapezoidal Solving for Depth of Flow Flowrate 0.0210 cfs (Site Water Quality) Slope 0.0050 ft/ft Manning's n 0.2400 Height 18.0000 in Bottom width 24.0000 in Left slope 0.2500 ft/ft (V/H) Right slope 0.2500 ft/ft (V/H) Computed Results: Depth 1.2232 in (Less than required flow depth of 6") Velocity 0.0856 fps Full Flowrate 4.6591 cfs (Exceeds the WQF=0.021 cfs) 5 Trapezoidal Swale Rating Table Data: Flow Rate=0.021 cfs (Water Quality) Slope= 0.0050ft/ft (Minimum Swale Slope-CWS) Manning's n-0.2400 (CWS) Swale Height = 18 in (6 in + 1 ft freeboard-CWS Minimum) Bottom Width = 24 in Side Slope = 4H:1 V Depth - in Flowrate - cffs 0.00000000, 0.00000000 0.90000000, 0.01231903 1.80000000, 0.04165283 2.70000000, 0.08740722 3.60000000, 0.15064549 4.50000000, 0.23272718 5.40000000, 0.33508504 6.30000000, 0.45915837 7.20000000, 0.60636943 8.10000000, 0.77811483 9.00000000, 0.97576292 9.90000000, 1.20065356 10.80000000, 1.45409906 11.70000000, 1.73738550 12.60000000, 2.05177420 13.50000000, 2.39850318 14.40000000, 2.77878854 15.30000000, 3.19382580 16.20000000, 3.64479110 17.10000000, 4.13284230 18.00000000, 4.65912002 18.00000000, 4.6591200 4 6 • • Conclusion Using the CWS minimum hydraulic requirements for a swale, the impervious areas produce a water quality flow so minuscule (0.021 cfs) at a depth so low (1.22 inches) to warrant the construction of a swale. Water quality requirements will be better served if the insignificant sheet flow from the impervious areas (sidewalks and basketball court) is allowed to percolate the large surrounding green spaces to recharge groundwater. Nearby wetlands down slope from the impervious areas will benefit from any sheet flow that can reach it. Thus a swale is not needed. The green space areas will adequately treat the insignificant water quality discharge. 5 r of 0 Q: :O N 1859 uregon John A. Kitzhaber, M.D., Govemor Division of State Lands 775 Summer Street NE, Suite 100 Salem, OR 97301-1279 yLt~t (503) 378-3805 FAX (503) 378-4844 http://statelands.dsl.state.or.us State Land Board November 26, 2002 Duane Roberts City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, Oregon 97223 John A. Kitzhaber Governor Bill Bradbury Secretary of State Randall Edwards Re: Wetland Delineation for Bonita Park located in T 2S R 1W State Treasurer Section 12, Tax Lots 6200 and 200 in Tigard; WD #2002-00357 Dear Mr. Roberts: I have reviewed the wetland delineation report prepared by Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. for the project referenced above. Please* note that only a portion of each tax lot was investigated for this study; see attached map for study area. Based on the information presented in the report and the results of our November 19, 2002 site visit, I concur with the wetland and waterway boundaries as mapped in the revised attached version of Figure 5. These wetlands and waterways are subject to the permit requirements of the state Removal-Fill Law. A state permit is required for fill or excavation of 50 cubic yards or more in a wetland area or below the bankfull stage of a waterway. A state permit is required for any amount of earthwork within the bed or bankfull stage of Fanno Creek since it is Essential Salmonid Habitat. This concurrence is for purposes of the state Removal-Fill Law only. Federal or local permit requirements may apply as well. The Army Corps of Engineers will review the report and make a determination of jurisdiction for purposes of the Clean Water Act at the time that a permit application is submitted. We recommend that you attach a copy of this concurrence letter to both copies of any subsequent joint permit application to speed application review. In evaluating a permit application, our agency will first consider whether there is an analysis of alternatives that avoid or minimize wetland or waterway impacts. State law establishes a preference for avoidance of wetland impacts. Because measures to avoid and minimize wetland impacts may include reconfiguring parcel layout and size or development design, we recommend-that you work with Division staff on appropriate site design before completing the city or county land use approval process. The permit coordinator for this site is Colin MacLaren, ext. 244. K:\Wetlands\Jennifer\WD letters\WD02-0357.doc S 1 4-1 • • This jurisdictional determination is valid for five years from the date of this letter, unless new information necessitates a revision. Circumstances under which the Division may change a determination and procedures for renewal of an expired determination are found in OAR 141-090-0045 (available on our web site or upon request). A request for reconsideration of this determination may be submitted in writing by the applicant, landowner, or agent within 60 calendar - days of the date of this letter. Thank you for your report. Site E-24 and E-25 on the Tigard Local Wetland Inventory should now be revised or annotated to show these more accurate wetland boundaries. Sincerely, Jennifer. G2fodridge Wetland Specialist cc: Melinda Wood, Kurahashi & Associates Tigard Planning Department Kathryn Harris, Corps of Engineers Colin MacLaren, DSL ~ohn E. Lilly Assistant Dil KAWedands\Jennifer\WD letters\WD02-0357.doc o' w r BONITA PARK . WETLAND suave ecl BOUNDARYC -DS L_ e.-:14-- W 2-00 2- 0 3 57 -7 M 13 I~3 I LIB N O O $o$o~o FES2 KURAHASHI & ASSOCIATES, INC. November 21, 2002 Duane Roberts City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Bonita Park - Adjusted Wetland Boundary (2035) Dear Duane: I have enclosed an original of Bonita Park's Wetland Delineation Figures with the changed wefland boundary and study area boundary. for both the Wetland Delineation Report and the NRA Report. I have sent a copy of the materials to both Jennifer Goodridge at DSL and Heidi Berg at CWS. Please feel free to call me with any additional questions or concerns. Thank you. Sincerely, uU &L -cL 4. U-nn--i Melinda Wood Cc: Brent Davis 15580 S.W. Jay Street, Suite 200, Beavert6n, Oregon 97006 503.644.6842 Far 503.644.9731 Civil Grigineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Environmental Planning Surveying Wetland Delineation Report Figures • • ' : i! I L k OT. a "1 ..ari ^l. f V I ST. :rl ^;3.. ~&;~ct:lr.`•°'"va.:rsixh9*^~~ .~4:° I % 'a... y>~., t~~"aa~.~~:R-7r+.uz~•rF:c;. y-.a~K. 'I L e+ r r . ~S •+i:~rWx.~?i iits:e: : 3Yl±vA"SS:: fki; F ~'A lJ - . .r e . x ea m S~ ~y k wr ! t. ,r,':'sDi434 , a..a :i..°t'u"a};~=3+ 111~~~ .&'L-i•' ".•?bi1:G:s"3*.*. Yp 5 •~W ~s~'..~ ik i" . .fin ( V L - 4T7 r • fil ~ / • e d SOURCE: ODOT GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SERVICES rLw"7 0 1320 2640 SCALE: 1"= 2640 DATE 11/22/02 SCALE: I"=2640' IKURAHASIH BONITA PARK DUWWF`` EMH ~ft „TZ8. DFC. .°tmagowmm E ltiti80 31f lay 9tieeC Suite D00 VICINITY MAP SWUM (sos4-eBr2 te= (sos)eu-~rst KAI# 2035 1 Of li 0 2,550 4,700 SCALE: 1"= 4,700 DAM 7-10-02 **RAH BONITA PARK 1-4,700 K V RAHA3ffi DRAWN BY. E M H At w9SOCIAT=. INC. aou fifes • dater ee.ouroa FXXW T AX LOT MAP 10380 SR Jay Street, Suite Z00 Beavortoo. 17M < - (5W)"4~-SM ~ KAI/2035 "0c 1 of 1 22 0 250 500 SCALE: 1"= 50C robs KURAHASHI ae A~OCIATM. INC. trS a Wal- Reww "°°mn8 155W St Jay Street. &Ate ZOO (60Sk+.-0,91 MAP UNIT SYMBOL 1 - ALOHA SILT LOAM 30 - MCBEE SILTY CLAY LOAM 37A - QUATAMA LOAM, (0 TO 3% SLOPES) BONITA PARK SCS SOIL SURVEY MAP RATC: ?/11/02 sc.,r. N/A D"WrA BY: EMH MIME 3 Nm 2035 1 of 1 JID I !°8 - S31-LIvnwwoo 1Nt/1d ~IUVd V I I N 0 8 ' a a ~ ®1 a ~ i~ ~ Y i~ y~ `i; i.:-. ;,'.:s': t,, : ir;r t,a~,'; ft ~'t ,`L^w"y,,. :s>' - rh, ,,f~,>;.:`J .rt'a5' a a'., +•~E'< ~t''tY F},,~ 'a ~r;L .r.::Yt`::'Cf+ ?r4~,~,^.la:ri~ S b_•t.,+a~;°.id~.;,. is:'., ~Etr 1,"y~` i' ; ~ .r,y -74p :~it~e j '.w 3 ' '➢y~,rylfili„ !~I! JV ~ • , S hie tv i • 1, l 1• ~ C a-• p~ r.: • ,a..w «d f T a{r 4, y, yVie: w.s J r ` t.' w. ..5i. "xYV ' a .>P , ~ . t,~~, ~ ..d~ - ,R,;..> vi.~,~.:„.,> ~ "4,tr~',.c ~ , ~ c 1, ,n-i J - •r.^..1 4•„~..Ka 77' 0, ,{z. .f: '.er, r'' k., C' r %1f~. ^:~rl.,:,',~ f. 11' f '11: t I.trI 1 n! 4 :itUJa a' H F i4w,< '•u., .'s rat, '.t ` `t . a, '''4 .t. C 1 z• '-rt ti ,J ti^`*1 _4- r,~• a,r ;E.•,:r y r, 3°~ C ,3d0 t,/• ~"nr S.t ik' , i. 7: ' .4 .ear `9•, , Ya:!:.n"- _ Irn; r:t" '.rL' , s ry » ; ~ t'~,''#° • ' '~t•i fix' n+ . ,A° ,;•.r , '+P • 7, „'f, ),C r :',"'`~`"'t"t. ~~..{.a^t+^"..•:~1'st 4`, k ,,k "3 ~'~,~tU,'.~•t. r: .~t: ~4 ~'~':t; ,°4 •,i 7+,,.'Tt nH'~, , jY ~J „:k?~^..., t ,F'"1 ''.t; a- , t, h,'r ri g n~'~ , .r `5-' ~":4/~5:.,.. 5'4r.•; :.t -':d'f5Y ~'>~+F lc.:'' .t u'rl.:, `L>\: ~ ~ ~r.J ;6`. 'S 3' .ii. Ly.~.tF •'.Y a 'tl -?r."Ac'. ,'4 , et Z, ti'; 't:' • ~,y ^ j,. -t_• ~f MI~ a,.c: ~ 'ly 5t3k :'4;y_t+F;.,e ,rr,' .,r i„'{." e.ar .W„q.r~C,,•r •y'~ittrtt S{4• !(C`a3~ ~{':'t ,t+• r'f "8,,!•',~ri~"a`~' ri-:i'` 19 i`~ ;CS~1 _'101 :.`4»+x , • ~r ,a t' 2 2.''.1•. m f- 'u„°:;.«.. ( .rt r_,, tt Nr,r `'fir. f ~§i t'. ,;?,'t.y, `n? f .r#~ t,~ 'xfkb"` ,Z: f :-~`~~":`t,?'`'•,)roef...;.+L•, h i .1i°r, ri. +1 r' 'd `r- F`,4 f: t.. 'S'T '':d i ".ti „1 ltt i.'• y. ;?'°~•a a' a„..,, ~4 4~.'' c~~, .J ji;, i,. .t+:~ <r, F;y;. `''f`":'3C~ ,:~''a`„tA: j,-.ti`'.^ ;«aigqF b°..f';' .•a, i,~: t .,,y`r5 !'LA`' „r .i', '`'Y° :+,<..,o,~; ,~~.>.•t!rv,•;. •~'4hw?s. ~32~"E, ''~?;S:A,~~,i,, "z , -4+'•_ .~~~1z ;a:.',.S •s.3;K:?f i:s`y~•~J<,:^+-~•5+~5;:'~cw.' ,A''. +~§-`.LTJr~'ic.~ 'n•}, ~'.-Y•'r i, rF~ ,r ,t}. .t." y'4.; ~',-^,-~,y:'.'~;,,•~4; •r. ,tea.' :,,,t~>t. /~~~v t. ' .r' >~t1'~`'"` ~r! ' -•L. '..'~...~ii t/C_,~... _'J" rr;, h 4'(" p t1 1 F,o ,n ;'S4'. ! :~y, .i\ ~ a~ •nt~'~f1 ~ ,{~!3' ..r~,^~.~. 1ff`GR _ ! ' w ,r Nt3,: c .:S:t ti , w k ,t' ~ 1 < ~ p > ~ ~'?'S is ~ t .,ts' I+}.';'~ J ..~'E•~ I a {~;:-t< F).,°' t ~L , ''t'-p4'~`!.'.'.T ~1 i ~F4 .i +ep~x ~},~e~{W ~ 't~... 'N ~v 1 t ".X hAt'n~rs, i_'S,5"67'.e'7.,.~t'7 i~'~;g-i '~'•.t"P-•i~t s ,t: qy•. 1' 1 ~Y• ly •d t_•.. '.~91^ i I ti ?~j11 ,e r,~.. C'tt ,"'t'A`^ A` .r• j '•Y' f, ,~;vd '.i :M(', . , k,: , t ` t I tr l 9 t: h : rF~' •:4. ! ~ t'tit,• 't ai + 'x„ . •t}Y•; ::ti't , '•r, r S •.J''jr~t" t ~tir'Y :.i''.c ~ Sy"a r) .-„t . .4.~ _ `41 'rid.•4,~:~ t,;•. ,"~I•. R. ~ b ''a~,' ~ zu➢.., a ~~e~>• ` ';r,}p v:: ,27;,: :°•3 tilt, ,t~,+ .ec}„n `,~&~~a. nk Ai ,.q `':4 :~i,::ti.3z`s~ti' ,A'._ ~ •;..;rh;t, $ : •,t~;~~ C 1. .?a'um. •j~ T° r~ ~e ,=.7.' ~ ~".7':•~ ~ .,'~'.;'j t~ r•t, ^•r,i u', tm;r `fiv °s ta:-i 1` 1~~,°'-'~. ;.~'~.br ~'t4,"r•".~t'~, t' 01' :iaw. t t', ,oY~f''.i, tt g'~M -.•,R v,.f, tti" 1= „cs+ $ y k "8 iA in4>.1•a ~ '^ii}'• +t'r x, ~ + '~-,r,'.~.'~ ~ i 114.. ~r~''A' s - rak>3 - "Ip ,~Q~,.,. <.:ASt :•a. `t~~ f\ ~ x } ~ ~S *.r mh, .~'ST'~":'t,F v m.r i p~' '?r,, " f . 4, • 1, . ~,Jr>, l,.y%'r. 'r 'a,o 4 ;.r. ti c V , 7 r,=.}i` t`• ~tF~z• <:i„ 't. ':~r ?t~•, .;x~ -c' r~,t,.`,=~• .`i}' QS ^''.u.A; 'i~ I. WF', n~v .r:tr, y ~ a2 i ..S ,},:•t S'r y°. •J,F.~^'`,!f':', :'i'S'~-,.• n'a' '1➢• i .5,,,t 1•~.'~k:•' •,'S+,~'- ~'.a,. ,'L: r3 1 r :t,et !S gii.;e' fF r.. ",.a;iF Y Ni"ra''3a-~, • 'tiii.t'g!~ri :;t°\, >,i~ ~ ~ L#fi'tT q.;11.~`'{t >`,'t,'..r• r, ~ ~.{+1 v, .,t" :::y}r. ..;:rb.ylF" T, Ye .:r : S .'l • - rte: C• ,:.+d•yy y'~ s -5 x. , ~ r ~ S'% i' «a'~a, t«, 1 '•2''t't t -i, , .*:y,.. `Cir "''Y,, .'"a.:K • :t n 'd 'Y ~ '1 :ti>` . f.,' . J •J.l,; C' x' ~~y .,''k' l:..t' '~tn ~ k ''+:-~'tirr .,fie • 1'. a~. .t ~ •n . l:r~" _r T. F t .Y.t 4,jZr WIN a ,4' E .}S :'tr ~jv ,i' ~ , 'dd n . Y; r ~a•r~,". ,tr• v:~~ ~.^t• r,,f "FA'r~, "•d•o J: ,.t :4`t vG ,n 2t tt. b' nn ,'tu.J : ti.Y:.>...,., , r•:a}",r _,h._ `ti: z , t~ r.~. 4f o- % > y t, - . ,~~u.., ~i,. # ~'~,"J r~ •y~ .'rt" -r-➢.::.s~:'i~ .~;`i,' F k''`'1'i 'w ,I.'r' tl, ~'L+ a4': .i5 3 g "1',. f.: '.l y, 'P• Ci''' [RXt .:;,t a ~ , yi'` a, g a , w, _ ',a t,,'r .a 1 : :Lt'` r ,i` +w a};z'. , Y, , t' {t, . waaA;. u'et'~ "m'; 'tab ,•{,c rir .S• ,>S s 5 ,Z. '.t "1 .s-, r-•aw''e• v{ r t•=• =.f r'~t't y a4 _.C •ID _j i4'\ ~ ,:'t.. ~~(s.V '<`,St '14 i ..5. t:,~ ..r.'i P'@".'.\~._ t,s•;ri"z•::•~ "Mr ♦"a, e 4"~ ,b'-, ..~75, r,~,'t r! `{4; ~:'.:i.~'r, r'. .V {'{.t7: "t.', ~'°i"„?:. 7' ~~~r~,y\ .A: ~'.5•` t4,. A~ Il,^ ...e;~ - is ? a} f .t ar ,•,r ,s! p~y~ ~ywti .'.Y ~r :'C,''r \ , f _ ''f • W.. $ ,~t'(1 u' 'fit., ' 3^ y 2~,.,`, rPgt Mtn .+r +x r'xF .t;4 .j,,.~ •°,A. .'`ti"r' , i'n, °7 4. ON t'*'': t~4 . tt~''A~ " ~a, ~t'i ~t , r ~ '$r:'., i.b d', •`v al„' i$; n}•:.S','?`~`-''acr t``~ ^",r~.: „'t' rr*::. fit}. `'k, ~te~:«. 'et t •1 . Y > t2-.,➢7' l_.6e: '~t?'« ji, t• .'w 4wr°' ' i~ ''~t.l _ ;[~,~y~e ' y}'~q ^.t^~1,t, i , ~ri',.t ;i~r., a ,F.}:, x ' ~8'~iskts r• i~pgrS ~ a: e;•'~;. :*'F j. ° ;•f,``• f ~ Jea • ~bf ' t`. : ~.;;'IrY .t,~: .t! %:,-"t .rr u,(j'3 it'=~.~4 1 e,u„;•~;,` 2 .;T4~ ,:Q'➢c,~ rl.,.. PqF}, rr n'th#','Si*$'s" ~eP pJ, .h«.:~.c ..t W e~ e.'"' ~~~'`;Q: t..~' S~g;,~' ~~v .;~s,a~•yy, e~,i>r ~ \ ~';u ,tt` Ir n a y „ ~ ~i~~~~ .~:K 4 +,~G"~' .I. K ..c ','~y:y "k~°,1. ..i~„^;$1 'v.4;x~~,. `.tr'w>r' ta~ b Ira f it ';hj: +k,",•+. J ti. ~,~A s ~ ~ ~pta't , .a t N~,-'0~,~:, '.1 t i.~', ta~ -;fi-' w• } F. q~., ~.',p:.~.. ~ rv'Pr: r:,.irb`Q`°!, ;.'dn. `~`•?,'~'a,,` #'-„.t'ti' 1 c^ '°j rLb ,a;;r `'c t•..~', t ,,'~v.~;., i. ~y;`'.. `"•r ,(aa.t; " ' ,t, ..J,',,.' "t .,•n7 ^',~y';";• ,+t,. •,t , '~YN•yt ''Q~3:;, 1. ~y,'~.: t" t~, ',•rSS i~ _,r?Rar:. ;;g 1i~''°~'S,E~~„ 'A, '•j °i>, `}"c`'', "J±sS~i.'~.`: ~%;s a-A.{: "r• ° - r y;r +~Jc.'~: 1:"''.`. 4I~'s,., •~i~'` ,M'#•~:;°~?' uYs~.~:,. ki.R':<:~~,~r, Si~d~r.r ..a• ,a<t ~ rF''- `µr r'r'~' rc: ,~a" , , ,•}y^,!.$~~ " ~ ,1', ~ a~ :T•°'° •y4rn t k ~N ~ 4 > ,1' ~1 y NOW y A`t try• 4, tt Sr. .,k ~~NU ,T ,t,.. t, r'.'e •'tr..t' .r:..y ~:i t .•;-~;.t~'i➢'~,w 7 a ~N','t., ~~•r .rr...4ixFr1~ } 5 r.iy '•~,'!'~;~''''i '~rft3 >.L- tt"F 1tn A: +vt Ad- ~ r , " "t f(L',' ? .`Yr>' >:o; aa,f•`' ; fir: tF.:tt {e>w7"a•' .,•1 'c`'.4' '#s, E ',•1-: {,"+r,a fi' •rt"~a x.Yix aSi , 4' a 4~..°5«i ;A? ~~1: 1Lh.'~ i ~a, .:i `,"'•,t~ a_ T~.. {'t"• ~n ~"`t' n~' ~ 1 a T.i~~~'~ ~ rT. d*, Jr~, - :•{~rY id Y' k1~,~:.. :i:. '€3. i.,}J~,.t'~ t~ G «:J : a, t1 ,t, ' ;r ~ ir,y`" .~•s ~~.~4~ ~ z„ ,~.,ts s' 7'~~„~ t • ii' ~ r,._ tr, ~ t ~''4:.m. , s r r •sT t >s'' ` ..»'J Ja ..k':'~ :M..i yr}^` (t 'N``?.~'•w f, ,'•i tz ;y- ~a tsi ;:7a,, .,~t „ r t•h ~ Qp'` FLt 1 ~ "s t', =y+ •rr•=. , ~ c m' y~) s')q. Z S ' t!I }rg3'I <i,:. r.. q •r k,,, ?Jb.t' }ge! y F S n, z 't . s - 'Sah3 ~ ` . r `F "'•';,~,•'•'.r y',« e~',.p.$! F, ;:•:U"T' far ; >''~,tb: ~s~j:,r r r ..'r, 4s T~*.'k;~: a`4^;aa ~,:'Z~r'Li,r, »y ~w obi .at. > 3 ~ :'/ra.,<,.:'t•'v ➢1 •1'' ;~rtr' ,ma`r':' >,r ^ti'. - e' ' •P'. 6. '3r•~ , i~e•'x ~ 4~ , t~ "•>A "'C?r ?ra':.°! ,'ai'^• `t s . `n ' '3 • r M'V.;,;o r-.a,~'a "+f , , v 1'1 l.. r+~,/•P "~`>N:, -xR~ aa .Ih r!•8 ~.r. i •it,n Y ik\ ~'y4~ ~ Y•':Z>' r,.... ` n : '''k'` "i.. •#t br'•, 'vi'"° 'I .d': is wl'go ~ I k,! •4 i:'v°'`t,'~I- to "~r ` ki' ,:t .4 ~ 's" ~ ~ -.fit 1'~f'•° `i , "fit •i - vrl.,: a.,:.,, i "mgt e`" ;:.3• ;~24,,o~"':F, .J".d:' 1, a' ,,,("`J :'I~• `s ' h p 1 d .F F •f.t 'h a r 7a*. "3 • a SAO •Y Jae. ) yt: YtN':,'2~ .'i 'y'e~"'ia t~{+ ~'M1R"•li .>"t.t.,"rR' t;,'1y, $~,t'ht'dyy,r'.3"~> .'M'I:~i... ➢ ^'L, .k;.' /y/~~I~ ,tc'e. F . t+~ --3 x. e..riv ~'~x. r,~,c,.'~r..;r., , ,w m; ~1~~ rt, ,5 r , 1, t,-~'' ~h•:1,,,` ';,'ifs kr. + Z r;• -fi.: •il., t', t' 'k '`~B'''ri r➢ M 40 1•, 1 ~ h~,:.~`' F _r, ` ~ `w:a?, `k':~c',> ~i~ a ~,r rQ`; .}tl^Y;, i, ! 1 t •'4. u v .\k ,.,4y' •'i, t,:°rrn}>• d"°•ti.w.ii~lEr."c ~ity A 4>+`„"`tr-. ;t,:a ~``:.r,<Wr. •Q}.p•i'ti!' A. ,•Yf v 4,A. ~'~,~.o`,a''` yf-. r„Y'°`- E. ita f`K\~l ➢ ::2` tl'~ y,s i Ft t''« i... ,,t .`3 emu.. •,.Q T..,` i~' •.t, „i+~~j.r M t `+,k~r~z~'. ';i:';ti„•;' _+'r r ti, / - 3r= r :t. rl•:~"'i,a;.,~ t''iN:'L#>;;d~,4,"'Aet6"'• "rt„ ,J~ 'A1'.z q-' '"•1ir4 "4 °„t•-d t '.i'y'' .rUlr. r w5,;, l rTx't ({:AT„iY „~.jii., • . ,:i •a~ ,'s+ j..5: i ~y.,,~ ~ ,•,.ivrt' ~:.r• •x~ • ~ • ks.r " r' pi ^ d `M .b 7k' '3 „a,a{{'i s" 'al'Y p'F 4. 0,4 ?^•T~' .f ; ; ^'ar tt> . 'j.,; 0 ? „z .,~~2.,.~ - c„ •~t". ..,'S `d ,,,'"'ae z~ •t:''. ~ iy:. ~ tt~'a,:~,". , i' • t `•.1 ",'~i. '.l -;$J.',,,,? J., a •`'x«f~~•e Iti. ~ -s ^ ,0.~Sn ! i'> "ag~ >~M:' .•~:.~R,~a, 1;I:F' ,',~'~"V t a '.'~I~a„ ty''~.Ykl6w.'r'rr • .4 O ',a. 1 s•. r z#.,,,. ,a+ p'ef t+: r.,a:M t. , A~. : ya?Y,, iY r.' v".F: r n ,•!y'VT ' ..z e' ! 1.. 1, nYQ~'.Yr ,y` y t': ~Cl~ twt.~ 'i~`"'~ i'. r'1:1 r '>i`^ ,1A.;~;•u• ~t'~ w.~, ''l i V'i, - '1~fr4\ "•4 :``~'t•~t,?~?jtS`. ,;;`.r,",,,+ st~".r>~`',I' -{n,. "t'r•'~ Q 'r1 lilt W J Q N 0 L1J z LLJ ry J J W L O Qom ° LLJ Q ~ Z U p m¢N OZ(n O Q /A = < UJQ (n O Q Q < V) _J LJ KV LA_ Li°wQQ~YLY~QZ z X_ w<:z U Q J Q Q Q Q Q~/~ g~C~=cnO40U I (n 1JJ W LL- U _j M 0 LL_ N YMx0=00<0UocO ''4:.' ♦ il, ; tif\ P1' 1.' '~,~h t, r 'mik 7 'f p.:, tJ « .f tt:.,a s.a~,,; '.v,:i Nr vqs •i,!~i+ n`tY :,i. ,r{~~}F 'st,'t'jG 'r' Wa `:p<'{ ~,t '{:.:`~I a, " ' at` ;t `;M1n 'tii is ~.%ur, " i • 5 I?. 3 t•.ILi,, ~1. $~r h~YC is p y t t ,1 ' .k t { > f, -Y Z x'rt-;4t . > t r• Y:vjf J } - )•1 • ■ , , d +n '.,ai t ";v,;,J V',' a L, i 'h, t,~v,: Jr3 ~ rp 4n•'htd 'T: ~ a j :'~'I K ` f t t' ~ I~m {r s N 1T' , i t i `~;y_ S' ,yi+4 0[. h• 'Y~ 1:1.,1 ,k ~ 9 V ~ i s. t°. E ,"t,~t' a S~+ :~it, S~r.r y r:".;. s: r' h- aaud ~''*Y,~":;'•Ls«"'_ !,,a V r~tt »t. :'t<',''t t,!„"^( :2.Ir%y ~ 'f+'. 'ry'r~ •r trye•, " 4k i'~ ~ i••P ~h:r ,vt '~¢J..r 'S i.` t t, } ~`,Y„+.,~><.,{p! dpys~'M'~ t (,~,t,)~*~'" 1 ~~,~J ' s~ ~«~I~II "t'. .',f l r`", r t.. 7 M , ' ^ ,y..^,w-, 'i` ,i, .;s 9 - gr'":i;•t';E r t t :;P,',, ' S { a~5 ♦ tr ` 1' ~J ..t t rIQ l i ri r.., P1'+ ,rL •$x d Pc'"' .•'{y t . M•. 'At Y` ' _"'>ayj. t a' 'ti •.eg ,q':, x ~h r i7., 'A:~ r31r'. 't.,,`i, I ➢e S3t'r ~ „ ;t`~h~s : TO ~~Z.'~?• to '3 'i'.,F;;• t[z~i„f,;.~ ':'';'r.:';" ~+.h' y" >'a;.• " g r, , :niy: `A,o~y4,:"x c;~'v ,:.is`„:~''>... ,.r~` t~zy n}'},..r', 'Lih, ,n''•s~^a at' a ' . G ,Y 't e g Y;t t'«r. 7 > `t Y~' +y;•3' , i•h S.'.t- M m~ •~5 a t, 4:o r EI r: r S} .~y"a •,}..,.:r" .1.➢ ~•S"' r.t •9 T%~i t~ tail tjrt rl tl~'t'•' t''•s It hz] r .,yam' > ~ 'xk.:- . -',~.f i, i,-. ~.+.'~i,~' ~j~y~; '.4- Ir, ~m ➢ .t.'.. t ,{r~ti', i, z n.>.".A...r '"ia21".`QM , a 3~` •j'}•-. at .?e''•h ' r . { i +,,a; t.,;r'r E ~ ~ Ar Film .m~;l`,t a;~., '7u' •`~ait <''ez { t'1~'#`a ~h • r~~l t~ ~'4h~ F ~ d~ ~iU `2:' ~~rs ~~tY ~ ;~..trr 1, IM i;.>!r ',S •rJ.y, ^F•.~' q.. y x~,~Rtr : r'` ,o•,' > .4}', ,t13 t t,. . i{ytr ~ ' u' ' ' its '1 -_r5f' ^at IAr, »~~I,~:Ir'li. r!',~ r,yG~ ✓(i t:l _ .apt k a. ~ ,_,.j; ~;6% ~,'tR?}. tta jl ..v~' t~ t.. - t,. ' y~ °J!>it M n BONITA PARK r~=$~ WETLAND N o $ BOUNDARY •g N U O N N Q U7 .C N N Z lU L Y cd C a N Cn CV N_ CV C=3 Ca 7 I KURAHASEE[ c=3 „BSoCI,Tr.B: INC. & Chu Eb& coming • .eta . 3 tend--" Arcbited- . Ptenninj j Envirmmeutei • Surveying M moo Sf ley street, Suite ZDD C=3 Be.ve<te0 Lon Y7008 ~ (6054{-879i ONITA PARK WETLAND BOUNDARY DETAIL DATE: //L/UL SCALE: 1 50' WAVM er: EMH FIGURE 6 KAI i . • NR.A Report Figures O 1320 2640 SCALE: I"= 2640' IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN DAM 11 /22/02 auwn BY. EMH IKURAHMIU BONITA PARK ~ 1-2640 & AIdSOCIATM. INC. . 3,9 Mater Remumn FR~JI1C t 011 6 adta no > VICINITY MAP (soa)au eerz r c (aos)su-vrst KAI# 20 ' a KAI/ 2035 SOURCE: ODOT GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SERVICES p" pmm" V 0 2,350 4,700 SCALE: I"= 4,700 robs OATL 11-22-02 sCAF 1"=4,700' ~,c„A„[,IH BONITA PARK DRAWN BY- EMH TAX LOT MAP ,6680 SA lay Street. Sulte no L -S --z qj-4 'A JO I-N a) Os 5)AUVONnos • aNV113M~ LO Ln i w N Y t Y1 f / yens . W2 0"1 t .t*, O ' 6d fo; .o N Q [A _ N s 5 m cl- M co 50 0 n_k 04 i3 say Saito jP3 •y•• H" tIN% CF we •'ti KEY p AT A P OI SEWER LINE ♦ pP SANITARY NHO1-E ss- VA _ SANITARY A t ~ 0 ND V'vET~-A . UNDP`RY D I 30 WV ~wK yt: W fl •a~ :,T OCnDO (~ODOtnSO~~T. ;;u M ZZD D>Qm ,r r 1• t u t ■ '.Kit. t.t,«w, Q m Ai' I•~~i C j+,•t t` y 5" i~' - {.r .Y t~ K'r m T, , eia 1~ : F~, -1 Ti D z ~ ~ ~ N r ~~J Drr,F11 yZO cf) +r: 0,81, +-r.~ h' hh t. ~ ~ V D = N ~ Z Z D fT1 rr" 8 8 `i, k „t Q, . '4+1' z . C-'. t~» 'td;k; • D fTl D Z^ D m t cd v,. a Q~~D a 'r.■, w` ` .Y e atra , ~ Yrr ~,T ~ z t?t{yv ~ ~ Z Frl ~ Q Q Q.-. D Q N D m 5 ~1' ~~~9't ;'.*^',rl: ~`t. i+i;S, °;n,'lSr~v; .sc.: ..x''F'.,e:~'; e(h`,' n'•,r'" 'IAL.:R':Lr Y 1 ' 1 0 Ay m•~/ (7) s "4i7L N t^ 1~~++,1 x tI F ,'xxi t'~i 4aF, M p Tt Z /1~\ Z m r_ T /V D D ~'d}f' •~~,r,.t}'', tiijr qJ !S,p 1,~ j?S t`a"rr ''sfl:T`a r E• 2 m; "l# ''~'„Zf&4~Ct M D Q Crri • i, ~ 5 ° ~ > :,^'c : , fi* ' ° e~ Y , f{ t, ,;,,~ti.~ ~ O m Q Q .r.. m O .i ) r i1 rr1•,,r 71 AAA H•',t. , a , y,;; h r" t t Ave ' ? ~A.1v n T,5 :a.~ r;, :a V / m Q Ev b 4 ' S':. ~t IVIIFjfr, it ~`yL my D Q ~~t Si4~k~n> t t 3 ,fig ~ '6ai~ a i • r, + • S'"' L T'' ~ -:5 j,k v i~v ay s ( ~'~^i~j'~i,'k~ ~t7~ Q ri.' li 7 N C~ ~r s Yi /Za ~S rg m riy~ 1, •.,5 i .i.. ',i~F.. 'lit, v. d r.n l y.r a4'~n. 1~ •i 1 1 u, T i .:'Wt- t s`pa'-,r I• , Q 7 t :r1>b~ }~~•;'~`^"4`'r,~: 5 "r 9'~S r\> R ~ "R"r ^`C ,a r .f f r 5q:.:" m~7.. a ,4Z '3 Q u41'fr7'U }~l~,,•.•'I'1 .ai ~,.tY' ' P ~'t l,!ivnix.~' ~ .in F~ i~ti I l ~r y d ♦ rl 1. +i „ _ ~ y ,~1 i _r°• .1 ~,~i ~'N aW ':t,>rM ..J ~b `.>i ,:~~r ~a• •a~ar r• ( i ' f 'L . r.Y i, M'A NuIA \ V 1 I.. ~ ~«,'S( •-rq: • ae' 2 etn fr ' 1 x; {Al J''t ¢rl lys ~ 6• r-: u y i t i v w s, i $ r ;ti II ot'~,~;r'?~,.3d. ,4kt as ~,~,,.A;,.'~~``l:',' ~d s . .~~,,R~~'RS~r:.;,'., ~sUaa• r'' x, r I~JIi 1 ~ •~1. iIV ~N."wr S v 2. ~ ~ rn r. ,;~a,. ,•t~'"t ni (y~i ',~P S 'Q x~~r'^ I;y#y'r'u,*` ~xi' 's, t tti 'P::~T`~ 't ri .r4z ~t;;' 1. i' •r T ::!~•.s'W„> o1fTl; 'JA ,•0.' .r: a1x'"r+©°'-t'i;l.',~°J:, y~. C'n't•, i1 "'t'r',d+h§":nC: ,h`', $ ,c'Y i. ' <m: a" ..r,k,jr. r~~, .y, , .a:;Z'~ d 't !2, 1r' `i{i,~:j} 't'tT' a«4v'~, t'• .'rs>,•ry" ' n . ~ `S.3`-l; v ".3~ ~ s "i~.. ~rjh,~,„tii' } e'Z" 41„r t•w'T'x.i tgtt^ef: ~i~. ~,v .~Jii ',~a'~ .•lY: ; . .w...r. •;t., ^•"3'";iQ~.. ,Ai~ ~,41av,.i' '~~tv e,e. ':nr ;rt~s, '~4,' ar_,~^ rt~i;`-~f.'°,` ~~+u, 'ar, 't;r^ ;r„• :'~'h. b'tQ?` •►i. 'S„~' :7~ .Z. t. a`aN~`.h,',: ;;'r.. ..7,.,: ,lY 8 ; r ^,`+..fi.,: . 4;3 •19' it :.#~tt~ , ,.•,JIa . :T ` U, ':C:.. n S .1 r t • v - .!1'i ,A ?t '!e P '.O '""+'3r•. J•`1 t4i I'VI i'. .~`,:J .1,. ij~` t... 1.'. 4• 'r ~ t~' ,z ,H.: :.hart ,m ~I"' 's: i,s`• 'au,-', f• 'q t,r•a:. ,ate' a' t'i's`: i'r .'c:. ~i~~~}d'~'~ :er. • S: Z s v:, _ ~t 2x~yi7tli . 4..?:,~ ~ ',t{' ' .z,. - .~l '.1, ''rt'.,! ,I•r pp T' nr M~ ~ i ~ a ~t.4.; ..T .V Jr+ +P'rS '.i ~_G, .,N ;S. .S~t: ,U. ,~4'~ .Y5.1 - ,,~,r ,,~}'ys, ,4i 9~V`., T `f; °-".9" } ` i~ `sla~~4' '7 'Y: :y':,r-d' 'NN1~1 "t^4~~ , ~ r J~^. t ,.e x y.. sta. .+S'. W a~sJ.„. Icr,.. `+t - ~ r;~:. ;'V ,1. 'P''','P.. '~'+t'Y' ,r ,•1 .1,,, iv *.%.1,>'-.. `tr R~:.,•\.q ,ht? 't lit 'i Aw'.F' ~.i y~ D,. v,nt~,'~' Jf.. d'.'1'. '.3 c`~', `ry, 1 !t `•1•r v _ . ~~yy,, t ,J' .i. ~t e . iIL x ,1~•'" ~ I ~ :d, i V r° r.,, 'ZY "",~A ,1 ~',`,f'`r.:!'• t bi,,,,. •.(r' •.N; ia>*,' L .r 7,+,,!J~ rr"~ tggdF,,. .l> :al'~'~r' _ ,l}.,. 4 ty •f. . ~t ~ j~ ..,,N'S.o'A ,i,. ~y. fi, x, .'L,' f'"r 3 1.i! • t 1 ';t, ~~,I•" .c... { a? ,k wr,a~ ~v t.i 'J • 5,: t ' ,r . "F' w K'y ; ~cr 'P ,v`'G',k^ i ' i G, r "Gr :c 'k :~r , N~' ' t_ w.' , u+,t,:, 5,k~ i . n•-, 'iT 4.4.,':t, , ! ,t,r...., pt' I , . ~ ~ `'c. ~t k O .J . a,<t, •,ri vw;:,i,:',,}:~ ~4 lr T ~e,.,.y rvn..-2'r.. t.h Srii y~,.r r~y w. s 2 ~ j,'•C ry'^•- :rt w'.i>.zw''H. 'i„v t» nA y JZ, f p l r.• 1•" ~ K:~` ,,gi~pp ;e: s^ ,..gsn i ,°i ?hM.:, :':n' -L;z.,^.t.:.. ° , ~ 4 . n _ is y. - 't :''t,C< , ' , ~ i+.;,.tE:.,~, E;:ttf 1 1. ~r~ Q& ' ~ , - •'~4:,,, . ~ PY h 3`':,' _ r .M ;lio: W`"'} Y 93 h'>r< \ ~ ,•~•~t,+, a'r{..,,5 v '..'f . 8S Sy ,b,'~.£,. • t i'' t u t irii`4r....it. ' k. ~.s,': ~ r` +.r ; 3ir'{~,vM'z~~-- a'~",t •`.%c~' .~~i., :.u, "i:+•H;,."• e.cr .f~:.': `4 „'Era i.. t JS NSf,'iYi, r;t H~• e~•, i•3•oT fN~~r s: \F.; 4~tiW~j 'Lt'~nt ,A[i ~,~V ''A.., Fi i4. ',~~`7^~ J:'x.~~, Ir` Kp, i P. ~'-a'M'=li ~ 1:• 'L~ .h,r 'L 4v..,v. .,'i~ t v~~ Q„ Mt- a, u, r4rei '.,ta. ,...,;:~.ti v• .k., n ,.:,i: ".r ,.~,~re,,.:.r~`•ti.~.; ~ i :w ~~is >~'t:;: •,o-. "'k ~ 't :>t r':i~0i'~i7tit`p~ ' 'r.ps;fl .iditib'S."^.a>•w':~! `t.a u>.' ""i',. '1si''1~~,, .a,y hu? r' 1=,'• ;i•,: 1r a,a -,w:a~ 'ors a. .i iv"'~•'` .ti.,t;l,~y , i5~ y f+li +t a`''~, t3- '•;w., ~ti~ni.. s~' r•I''~"°'.: 'yt,~ r~y~ !5~"~~ ? Xi '~,~;pv~ f~~~ 'a.,. t,•a n; 4'~ r ''k'• O:,,Ge,.^°iW`i, s'.v ~5 ln~~H xN`^•_,~'tnt~'•, 1 :nat+ix`~-:_l~ ~l, ,a' s x to '~',gt ~ 1 ,•.1, , ~ tay. '-T; ' •1` 1 t ar 4+~15 . ,ts~ y•rd4y` q ~ "ti• ' ~,a •e, +a , ~5~' t. P'u` . , .Wxk, `k," a:i.e .iii "r~,dt ''~a' a'?S,s in"er. ~ ~ .:!'`.•„e': `'~r'' ~"4'vYi t ,4~~A,04~`y~ a 'a~' F+r f "~R; "y.~ ~.^n: •"7"i._< 1" ~~'rrl`t1: ~`k'a ` 'riip ~ "•},t - vt7t.z,a,',~` },Lai:-^ ha?t~,iv,~ rG , wda. '.A"a ,.,m. ,u~ d p „,•'«n„:.,;• Ft .a^R 'l,.tvp4 .i, ',1.'.; ,~y. 4 tr. 'r, ,'.«d t `•t7> Nm a,:.,,w• „'I,~,'e1~ t. • ,ti i^ :Y-•„p t+r.~ t4.a t' h~.''~' "2,,Y, , ; i• ,t r'; s `r•, , NLt., "~;;'~R"; {!r ~i: <>i'y mr'.~'44,.,' as a...;~,7, •§0 ...v,v',..,~.}.. .it~5 J` t • Ir rma'~v''`.r w}~.!`'"' • ti~~~.g - ~"r e; . -,trt ~}~r~•x ~"+.'~i` i~4,i.,r;? ,,v~ 1'v. a;rr. r ,l"r,,.•, - a, 2~'- s t,•,M;'s.°+,. `;:{j.rtr„•.. ~~.a ,nij„} ,s,<rys.r. ti6 i,, e. C' ^ '1 ' :•g,'"? , "alin'~ 1 . t.. `n s , 3 , P _ .„,..ivr tit::':. .;'fit' q , G. ,i., , t J Ik~>t : . n.~ `',ze `F el ~A , t .1.•~F,•. 5~ ~ m ';,i~y,• :.f '~J' •t"'~>z .tF`y I iii ,~'~"t;.-. 3 . h,:t•r r;t;~;;~ ~ t:eai~ • ~ a^ ~ ,.>u:' a• , s..+ ::ia`", "s~' d:` r.,~L„ 5` `r'~'.a+~'°„`t: rd;•• ?=rat.'; i ,r •3 , IR+r ; i+,•~i ^t.. ',~:t "'r s< w'~,. .fir, nx. \ ,^t "''3 t •t hn,rr, :"f 6_ "6i' _ ~~i,~• "t"e',?t'nt l~ .k~.~ Y{i,^; ,•t.,'''rt` v~. 'i.,. Y'k 'rtj°. 'C.: ~f •>xfturir,.. rt~. +d' ,^,s •t•\, ~;Qq 'i~ ''N .:p,0. :'k7.9v~„na,F;l't~t2. -ti."'• ~ '1 l.r V, t r:*., ..x,, t; .ti; s....a- .7 ,.'y". 'k>{°t :14f ;4 ".24 .S ~yk,j 4a raL •itu., ci'+.•S'1 ,~4.t 'l;i ,....~`„vi sf}i'; 'r' 'i..t b, ,u('^~Er ab, s•ti ti ,~7^ :A'. •u :A+ „i ~.ti ^1'' -rt ~ `,.~v• ,f; ~~4~„' ',Ntt+` v. ''~,s a-7, ..rE....' ti'+ s' a~+r.. ^,~1.:'m;:r.. `r•,`~; 5,: rt'.A, .i.L '•~!F ~F t. ;\+.t •}.~R.,,,£ss't', .rJ1 ~ Y~i` ~•S YE e, bi• '•'~+Q3n' ily"'~ •F -31. 1 iY, 1~ t. ,jk T„¢'.r '`"ri`4•-"y'. ' X111 q:- 'rh :u.;;' Ar.,=yi'• :.h ~k.:. ~.t ',i7+.t,r n~.i•-,ea ag+:41,•S<,~,t,,. A't7,"~~~, rl try). .b'.:+4•e:. ''"f '!r .f'va~ `',t'' 1,1 ~K• rt~!. t. e::iZ °~+F~. C7 ,,,.W' t:. 'y , Ir.'vF } ",i« 7 ,'J..,, t~;,'~ - J!•. , , }S' ii! y~snN,Uu",~"""'Sn r9 {A~ A.? k52 a2 ,vgt~ t"t`. t. .-si' ~Y.$•°. r'rvr,:i °;Y 4. + '',,i.' @.:a+,• ' i ~ ' - : d::>, h4',l. d' ..ta` 'rsk,,,r ..p'- , m jV•` _ . i" p,^ eY' i iy ~t:°r~','?~''~,1~. 3 ,y,r r'i k ..~aYit`~i. b,: t.~ ~ u,i .vt ry..> ' ~ a'r :lt ~~r . !W' !lk,rr , , b`,: •ti „a id; ' , S,t, . S x i M.: ' ` ' c rv'+ ' 3 ' A's' ,>n •a,y,~'< n4~'~1. iWt'. E ~ ~ °v^':•d'!4r':. imr+ n. ~ :,e '~i '^'~rr alts <'r. :t• 4i:..>. ,~,:.@~ .rr ~a'>r.+a" vNs't., t+• 't'. •tl, ~ '~I~~i A ita`' ,i `F' ~'z,r 7 .iHu;r, .t, y?," \ e A. . , ,t ' I !4 ~i,:, ,r.F+i'i„#M~ T .+,'r, ;tl,c ~r "'.1i •a :oi~Sr.° 'fi b- r}Uc. .1 ♦9 •i~,.x •"d'^,~ 'r" •a: •~.,w:Y^•.• is rZt• rl •d., a P ~ s. 1., , nr . ~t : ~ " w ,stns Ltr. c i 3 a t t ti J i .,utr w.r"' ,;^a' I~~~t .ki,:~ y ,r,:i i¢'^'n v^i •:'~v'v ytr F.i '!3' ~,,,<<, 'tl a,a'i,, r+" ,+n'`Y'. i~t{"' I''~i~ ~ t't'i■1 a't?`~ iu,~-,.,.'>' ~t~, iC', •,t, ,;ris; `kii'ir~';.~;, ` •f,Flr 7 'i ~ '"0. y,.. . s , '0 ~.t, H ~v "i} .,1 t ~ ~i• , ~a ' Z ? ra a:',:". ~r ^,54i t '1 4 ,~.t~:,l"i ~1f f'7 ~~y R, 'n.j, `.'rt-•"ty,a;,tiw✓i, L-..'. . yyy, %r„ ;ky`3N~ -=t .'y;r ~~«i^..• p, 'x:t}'~/r`:t'"ty~~aro~. ~ e,.'~`q~'~,ly l~t~` y c m ~ .,,zy~►<.n,' ~ ' ; n ~ I I• t ~ M1 aT i r i ttyi*1 P: ~t •rn ~3.~ 'i t/~N 'i~~n, • ~ ,~.9i ~'~'r~ r ~ t,~,?' M S', r~` t S e ,,y,e '1S P r ak ? 'WI", i, "•,'c;t>',:'t;:\ i . t,\' `i A s i' 11 t:'. t. ^i,t Sf~' ~iyti •ST'~ fu.fa. t•,s:; .f r~Y, K a t' r tH,.;• - 't' L~~wJ 4:~ tt U .a ''Y•. ~~`t ~?',~,2 ^+~'.t'rt~•,`:,'i,,l ~~1v1.A u;1,' tr~t. ` "4'.~'. r i'~ ~ rT y: • ~ rr, +,T.J y, ;ii. t I~.'^', R rt :;in•,. s:_J,~, ~ .:1. Cy t „ .t1,,d 4r'!'yJ,• tiayp' nt+ fn:; r•tr. n'r''' ~ y,c } :.H;a t' z r. ~ -0 i +4 nP •t,r ',it -'r,`.:. .4.,.. A i ~ ,rv. ~ 0. f ~At, •Sh. •4. •'11,y~y.,a L~`F l t. 1ti~ :>'~C,'~"' 1 FE'• r • :,1 = Y~ n,.j'~ r'ei' ; Rk ~ ~ ~r' r>,.~.>. , :'~~v,^+~r~ "i, a ~,Y~u~ °#...y'€ .y ~u.,, .,t,$". ~ ` ~>~rr+*,x' 1. '~i-"„ . 4`:~., E':a'~tir'.'."u. t~~ I ~'.~tsi~, y ' r i J•e~~-., ~c C3~ ~ 'r'-r.t *as 1 r- ..arr.r;• 4" ~i r"t '~^rr = '7 atu r~'':~^rrr.rLa:ay\ ',ir}' A E,yl F ~»..'r. F. 'tt%v r.,~,?. ~ai .k`k'• ~I. ~ Ij e•;5'.'',a it z•?t' S ,Nv 'd v. '.N. t - 'i° 4 :1 i , 5,1.' `+E"•r , e'' r'l: s ` a4 >xq s t gN~ t h •i. .1 . i~I veldt' F F °v'~ ~7 t'4 Z- 1 e •rt t 4. k ~4 Y: YiS a _ ri ~ a. .'A; . ,q a.,,t'<,'~ 7 - ,'fig Tf,~", ,..`t::.wr `r?:: # Y~'a,- 3 + tan: <; , ?v ` ~ r . ~ tv r'tt , - yt' `?fin-aY •'i "fin'.. r~ i , }a•~3 ,,'sf tar^ ~ , ' ,"aa 3. n..} 1 K i:'S 'a "_,"i ip`•q ~1. '•f .y 1' ~~~~Di~''>fardn.r'~~a.;;9:...,-~ "l.&,n s'.ti~++N~.' •:4:s'M"' - _ ~t.-~„ • 'x r. Tt~~•, .tr`A '`s y~ x { 4{,".:{,._y a; wy;•, 2 .-\cv,'°.75. .r-ri^ l 5+*"0~ ,d, } -'•ia'. •':.C;.+6. ^t:a" ,a,~ ar.4 ttrs'ie;.a^:?',t. '''4;. ; } ?~vc.~ _ -.e. ,x'n .r n _ ~'r'-'~ • ~1' . r 'r''';4 t . 1^~ „~yr a tit 1. .'~2' `'tt~•. ' od. .t.~,-. ,r~. .'Y. .r-' •,.?':f `•~a.,,. „i i.':',r^'« ,~t!f,. 'sw ';X,• r "t°'Uv 'i' 1 ~~N w+ .tt~,a t' i,~ ~ ` it d~'\i' Y'. 'i' 1.',:j„ it'p «':H~1, b. ,;.~~i.'~ - 1. T.r,r. F•, ~ _ 7 a„ n',.~tr.•v,, ~d, 4i•'c . i~ 3 r 5,:, u"~ Y i `k^ ni a ?'ice 1 u}e t k ~ I wv M'"s.,tifn :.vU m~Y',', 4 ~ A ~ I ~'i,, '~.t ~ 'r, i r ` t a ;s ,r' a 5 t s.+ :6;ti • L~.. , at_t ~h ~ ,.d^: } a Yyr.. . ~ i ~ ' .r<A ,1, dt r '<•~~p~4 '•,~e.;~. t.~.~~ .u r•;.al ~,,.1'.a-h`"s, h.' r ,i P' : ~w,`. 1 . a. ! j~'m r . Jy a.3hM1 X:' l}? tt 4 ,!e y~ ~:;rA 1; «s c4~ 2'`+ ',1✓ r 1 r,{t "C L-" :.x '.1">.:: 2-"~~'' 15.,. t'*fFf' ' ,XJ .STn~'.T ti's _ <1 T•;, 1 CC~,r,. .h I :it• ! .r .'Ei>~ ,t.-? '~~55,y, ^Yyf.3,./rf . •f k:'. , I i h ((r:: a, .1;: , {,.r'+`,s.a•- g. .1$.'s~,'".''1°'., .hi , e,f ~Y. , ar.(f,t i i f d s; • ~ o:, ..~y.4 i ;.;a,.;;y.. -.-...~F~.ix j .•„a=. `e,n.-r.>. , %wstrR=i..,a'i nt' _ { 'ti.' ' Ntr air n R tort.^.' nd 9„'mo•.ra .r:.; 'Iva C X{':. ~.4.' ♦.)fG ..Y 'ry,.,,,:,^..:,~'.i. ice: , 1' 41•.. ..l 'N. 'y,. 3 r" vS to ~i!a , •rJ'y: U .i i j C: N' . 'i.,' RS~r - ,rlv. • • r y.,~,r,~ ~,i,',f.,;,.._ .r~ ti='~ ~ ,'4n. r ~ ~.r'tr +z,r ~;'^•;^}.r r,.t „^Jt 3 "-r' .a..~'_BO'f'T ROAD 4e~d Y. f y 'z-ai' '^M.c-ip•' ~F ~"iy„;7 D ~ to ! B 0 N I T A PARK glib PLANT N o $ MIN COMMUNITIES o • N) rQ WETLAND DELINEATION / DETERMINA'T'ION REPORT BONITA PARK Prepared For: City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Prepared By: 15580 SW Jay Street, Suite 200 Beaverton, Oregon 97006 Phone: (503) 644-6842 Fax: (503) 644-9731 July 17, 2002 07/17/2002 14:34 FAR 5036847297 City of Tigard 0003 Duane Roberts -DSL Wetland Delineation over Form-2035.doc Pena"~ ] Wetland Delineation / Determination Report Cover Form This form constitutes a request for a jurisdictional determination by the Division of State Lands and must be attached to Me front of reports submitted to the Division for review and approval. Oregon Division of State Lands Attn.: Wetlands Program Leader 775 Summer Street, NE, Suite 100 Salem nrnnnn Q7~nl.177a Applicant MOwner Name, Firm and Address: Business phone # (503) 639AI71 City of Tigard (Duane Roberts) Home phone # (optional) 13125 SW Hall Blvd Fax # (503) 684-7297 Tigard, Oregon 97223 E-mail: duane@cl.tigard.or.us uthorized Legal Agent: Business phone:(503) 644-6842 Name and Address: Fax # (503) 644-9731 Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. (Gregory Kurahashi) Email:gregk@kurahashi.com 15580 SW Jay Street, Suite 200 Beaverton, Oregon 97006 The information contained in the attached report is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I either own the property described below or I have legal authority to allow access to the property. I authorize the Division to. A ss the property for the purpose of confirming the Information in the report, after prior notification to the primary contact. Typed/Printed Name: Duane Roberts Signature Date: Jul 17, 2002 Special instructions regarding site access: Project and Site Information for latitude and longitude, use centriod of site or start and end points of linear project) Project Name:Bonita Park Latitude: 45°25' 32" Longitude: 122045' 14" Proposed Use: To develop a neighborhood park. Tax Ma # 2S112 A 200, 6200, 6400; 2S112AB1800 Project Street Address (or other descriptive location): Township 2S Range 1 W Section 12 QQ NE Between SW Milton Court and Fanno Creek Tax Lot (s) 200, 1800, 6200, 6400 Ci : Tigard County: Washington Waterway: River Mile: Fanno Creek 2 Wetland Delineation Information Wetland Consultant Name, Firm and Address: Phone # (503) 644-6842 Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. (Brent Davis) Fax # (503) 644-9731 15580 SW Jay Stree, Suite 200 E-mail address: gregk@kurahashi.com Beaverton, Oregon 97006 Prima Contact for report review and site access is o sultant Applicant/Owner Authorized A ent Date of Delineation Report: Wetland/Water Present? Total Site Acreage: 5.0 July 17, 2002 Yes No Total Wetland Acreage: 0.28 Other Information Yes No Unknown Is any of the property crop land? If yes, is Applicant/Owner a USDA Program Participant? If yes, has a NRCS Form 026 been completed for the site? Does Local Wetland Inventory, N any, show wetland on parcel? If yes, LWI wetland code: E22-25 Has a previous delineation/application been made on parcel? If applicable, previous Division State Lands # NWI Quad Name(s): Beaverton Site Zoning: R12. IL For Office Use Only Corps Project M DSL Wetland Mgr.: DSL WD # Date Delineation Received: / / DSL Project # Date Review Completed: / / Related Case Number(s): • • TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................2 2.0 WETLAND DEFINITION & REGULATIONS ...........................................................................2 3.0 PROJECT METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................3 HYDROLOGY ........................................................................................................................3 Table 1: Hydrologic Zones in Non-Tidal Areas ......................................................3 SOILS ....................................................................................................................................3 VEGETATION .......................................................................................................................3 Table 2: Vegetation Indicators Status ......................................................................4 4.0 SITE LOCATION & GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS ..............................................................4 5.0 WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................................................4 5.1 LOCAL WETLAND INVENTORY .....................................................................................4 5.2 PRECIPITATION DATA ...................................................................................................4 Table 3: Total Precipitation Prior to the Field Work S 5.3 ON-SITE INVESTIGATION ..............................................................................................5 Hydrology S Soils S Vegetation 6 Table 4: Site Vegetation ...........................................................................................6 5.4 WETLAND BOUNDARY RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................7 6.0 LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................:..............7 7.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................8 FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP 9 FIGURE 2: TAX LOT MAP 10 FIGURE 3: SCS SOIL SURVEY MAP 11 FIGURE 4: PLANT COMMUNITIES MAP 12 FIGURE 5: WETLAND BOUNDARY MAP 13 FIGURE 6: WETLAND BOUNDARY DETAIL MAP 14 APPENDIX A: WETLAND DELINEATION DATA SHEETS APPENDIX B: LOCAL WETLAND INVENTORY APPENDIX C: SOIL DESCRIPTIONS Kurahashi & Associates, Inc July 17, 2002 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION Kurahashi & Associates, Inc., while. under contract with the City of Tigard, completed a wetland delineation / determination study. The on-site delineation study was performed March 17 and 24, 2002 between SW Milton Court and Fanno Creek (T2S R1W Sect 12 Tax Lots 200, 1800, 6200, and 6400) (Figure 1 and 2). The purpose of this study was to determine the possible environmental affects of creating a neighborhood park between SW Milton Court and Fanno Creek. This report is the result of the wetland study. 2.0 WETLAND DEFINITION & REGULATIONS Wetlands are defined as "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marches, bogs, and similar areas" (CE Federal Register 1982 and EPA Federal Register 1980). The three criteria that must be met for an area to be considered a wetland are hydric soils, wetland hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation. Hydric soils are defined as "a soil that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part" (USDA-NRCS 1995). Another accepted definition is "a soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation". (US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) 1985, as amended by the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS) in December 1986). Wetland hydrology is defined as "encompass(ing) all hydrologic characteristics of areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to the surface at some time during the growing season. Areas with evident characteristics of wetland hydrology are those where the presence of water has an overriding influence on characteristics of vegetation and soils due to anaerobic and reducing conditions." (Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual 1987). Hydrophytic vegetation are defined as "the sum total of macrophytic plant life that occurs in areas where the frequency and duration of inundation or saturated soils produce permanently or periodically saturated soils of sufficient duration to exert a controlling influence on the plant species present" (Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual 1987). Federal, state, and local regulations that govern activities located in or near wetland streams include: • The Clean Water Act Section 401 and 404, which are administered through the Army Corps of Engineers • The "Swampbuster" provision of the Food Security Act of 1985, which is administered through the Natural Resources Conservation Service. • The Oregon's Removal-Fill Law (ORS 196.800-.990) and the Oregon's Wetland Inventory and Wetland Conservation Plans, Standards, and Guidelines (ORS 196.668-.692), which are administered through the Division of State Lands. • The Washington County Development Code Section 422. • The City of Tigard Municipal Code Title 18: Environmental Performance Sensitive Lands (Section 18.775), and Water Resources Overlay District (18.797). Standards (18.725), Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 2 3.0 PROJECT METHODOLOGY The site was delineated and the wetland boundary was determined using the methodology described in the Anny Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, 1987. This was a routine on-site investigation. HYDROLOGY Wetland hydrology is considered present when the soils are saturated or inundated continuously for at 12.5% of the growing season and is sometimes considered a wetland if saturation or inundation occurs 5%-12.5% of the growing season. This requires a minimum of 12 consecutive days between March 23 and November 11 for Washington County, Oregon. An area is considered inundated if, on average, the water is greater than 6.6 feet deep. If a site had at least 1 primary indicator or 2 secondary indicators, it was considered to have wetland hydrology. All observations were recorded in the data sheets in Addendum A. The primary indicators are: visual observation of inundation or saturation within 12-inches of the surface, watermarks, sediment deposit, and drainage patterns. Secondary indicators are: oxidized root channels in the upper 12-inches, water-stained leaves, local soil survey data, and the FAC-Neutral test. Table l: Hydrologic Zones in Non-Tidal Areas Degree of Inundation or Saturation Duration* Wetland Characteristic Permanently inundated 100% Present Semipermanently to nearly permanently inundated or saturated >75%-100% Present Regularly inundated or saturated >25%-75% Usually present Seasonally inundated or saturated >12.5%-25% Often Present Irregularly inundated or saturated >5%-12.5% Often Not-Present Intermittent) or never inundated or saturated <5% Not-Present * Refers to the duration of inundation and/or saturation during the growing season Source: Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, 1987 Clark and Benforado, 1981 SOILS The soil series have been mapped in the Soil Survey of Washington County by the Soil Conservation Services. The descriptions of the soils that are mapped within the site area are attached in Addendum C. A 16-inch soil horizon profile was complete for each data point and recorded on the data sheets in Addendum A. The soil colors' hue, value, chroma, and mottle abundance were described using the 1995 Munsell Soil Color Chart. The soils texture was also recorded for each location. The soil characteristics at the horizon immediately below the A-horizon, or 10 inches (whichever is less) was used to determine the if the soils are hydric. A soils was considered hydric if the matrix chroma was 2 or less with mottling, or 1 or less without mottling. Other hydric soil indicators are: histosols, histic epidedon, sulfuric odor, aquic moisture regime, reducing conditions, gleyed or low-chroma colors, concretions, high organic content in surface layer in sandy soils, organic streaking in sandy soils, listing on the local hydric soils list, and listing on the national hydric soils list. VEGETATION The dominate species' indicator status in each location for each layer was recorded on the data sheets in Addendum A. The layers that were observed are trees, shrub/scrub, herbs, and woody vines. The wetland. status of the vegetation was determined using Reed's National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9) and the 1993 supplement to this list. Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 The 50/20 rule was used to determine dominance. An area was considered as having hydrophytic vegetation if greater than 50% of the dominant species had an indicator status of facultative or wetter. Other hydrophytic vegetation indicators are: visual observations of plant species growing in areas of prolonged inundation and/or soils saturation, morphological adaptations, technical literature, physiological adaptations, and reproductive adaptations. 1 able z: Vegetation indicators matus OBL Obligate Wetland Plants (occur in wetlands -99% of the time) FAC W Facultative Wetland Plants (occur in wetlands 67%-99% of the time) FAC Facultative Plants (occur in wetlands 33%-67% of the time) FACU Facultative Upland Plants (occur in wetlands 1%-33% of the time) UPL Obligate Upland Plants occur in wetlands ^-1% of the time) Source: Army Corp of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, 1987 4.0 SITE LOCATION & GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS The studied site area is located between SW Milton Court and Fanno Creek (T2S R1W Sect 12 Tax Lots 200, 1800, 6200, and 6400) (Figure 1 and 2). This is includes area both East of Fanno Creek, and West of Burlington Northern Railroad. Except for a portion of Tax Lot 6200, the studied area is currently undeveloped and is describes as having a "perennial stream with small areas of fringe wetland; sparse riparian vegetation" according to Tigard's Local Wetlands Inventory. There are buildings located on the southern portion of Tax Lot 6200 and a sanitary sewer line that runs through Tax Lot 6200, which has little or no affect on the wetlands. There are nine different vegetative communities found within the study are (Figure 3). A significant portion of the vegetation along Fanno Creek is reed canary grass, mixed forest, scrub/shrub, and himalayan blackberry. There is a small patch of an oak and ash stand near the middle of the proposed site along Fanno Creek. Southwest of the creek is an alder and ash tree stand. Along the western side of Milton Court is a large area of grassland meadows with a small patch of camas meadow just north of the grassland. The total area studied was 5.0 acres. Approximately 0.28 acres are wetlands. The northern wetland is approximately 8,782.19 square feet, which equals 0.21 acres. The southern wetland is approximately 3,257.01 square feet, which equals 0.07 acres. The studied area is zoned as R-12 (zone class MFR1) and I-L (zone class IL). The elevation of the area ranges from 130 to 170 feet above sea level. The proposed neighborhood park will be located within Tax Lot 200, 6200, and 6400. 5.0 WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS 5.1 LOCAL WETLAND INVENTORY The wetlands identified in this report are mapped at E-22-25 in the City of Tigard Local Wetland Inventory (1994), which was completed by Fishman Environmental Services, Inc. These wetlands are summarized in one wetland summary sheet (Appendix B). 5.2 PRECIPITATION DATA Precipitation data was collected for the two weeks prior to both site visits, as shown in Table 3. This information was downloaded from the National Weather Services Forecast Website (http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/Portland/climate/) for the Portland Station (#356751) located at the Portland Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 4 • • International Airport (45° 35' N and 122° 36' W). As shown in Table 3, the actual rainfall was much greater than normal, except for the 7 days prior to March 24. Table 3: Total Precipitation Prior to the Field Work Actual Rainfall Historical Rainfall (30 Year Average) Date 7 Days Before 14 Days Before 7 Days Before 14 Days Before March 17, 2002 1.90 inches 3.01 inches 0.88 inches 1.86 inches March 24, 2002 0.37 inches 2.27 inches 0.77 inches 1.65 inches 5.3 ON-SITE INVESTIGATION The field work was conducted on March 17 and 24, 2002. Hydrology Fanno Creek runs through the middle of the proposed site location and adjacent property tax lots. There is a tributary stream that flows into Fanno Creek on Tax Lot 6400. This tributary does not appear to have a direct impact on the existing wetlands. Many of the upland areas were observed to have surface inundation and/or saturation near the surface on March 17. On March 24, these areas had no surface inundation or saturation in the upper 12 inches of the soil. Secondary indicators were generally not adequate to meet hydrology criteria as well. Based on these observations and the rainfall data for the 14 days prior to the March 24 field investigation it was determined that wetland hydrology criteria were not met in the upland areas. The two wetlands on the site are perched closed depressions that retain sufficient water to meet the hydrology criteria. Soils The SCS Soil Survey of Washington County maps 3 soil series within the entire studied area, but only 2 exist where the data points were collected (see Figure 3). The two soil series that occurred where data points were collected are McBee silty clay loam (30) and Quatama loam (37). Both also occur within the delineated wetland. The other soil series that occur within the studied area is Aloha silt loam (1). None of these are listed as hydric soils. The soil mapping could not be confirmed on this site. The Aloha series (1) are somewhat poorly drained and are usually located in alluvium or lacustrine silt on broad valley terraces. The slope is 0-3% with an elevation between 150-200 feet, slow runoff, and a slight hazard of erosion. The A horizon (0-8 inches) tends to be dark brown (10YR 3/3) silt loam. The BI horizon (0-15 inches) tends to be dark brown (10YR 4/3) and the second B horizon (15-22 inches) is usually dark yellowish-brown (10YR 4/4). The B horizon has silt clay texture. McBee silty clay loam (30) is moderately well drained, has slow runoff, a slight erosion hazard, a slope of 0-3%, and is usually formed in alluvium on flood plains. The A horizon (0-7 inches) tends to be dark brown (10YR 3/3) with a silty clay loam texture. The B horizon (7-24 inches) is usually dark brown (10YR 3/3) with a silty clay loam texture. The Quatama series (37) is moderately well drained, medium runoff, a moderate erosion hazard, and is formed in mixed, loamy alluvium on old terraces. The elevation for 37A is 0-3%. The A horizon (0-9 inches) tends to be a dark-brown (10YR 3/3) loam. The B1 horizon (9-15 inches) is usually a dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/4) loam. The B2 horizon (15-21 inches) is also usually dark yellowish brown (10YR3/4) with a clay loam texture. Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 Test pits were excavated to a minimum of 16 inches at all data plots. Hydric soils were observed at 17 out of 19 data plots. Wetland soils were generally very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) silty clay and clay loams with dark olive brown mottles (2.5Y 3/3) at 10 inches. Sampled upland soils were generally similar in matrix and chroma with dark reddish brown and yellowish red (5YR 3/6 to 4/6) mottling. A few upland data plots (nos. 12 and 13) had soils that were similar to the Cove mapping series. Cove is a hydric soil. These Cove soils in uplands were moist but not saturated on March 24, suggesting that they are remnant hydric soils in uplands. Vegetation The vegetation on the site is generally a mix of FACW to FACU herbaceous and shrub species. Wetland vegetation criteria were met at several upland data plots and were not met in one area of wetland (see discussion of Problem Areas below). A reference data plot (no. 20) was established in an Oak woodland off-site to illustrate the presence of FAC and FACW species found to be dominant within some of the upland areas in the study area within a plant community representative of pre-disturbance conditions on the site. The following table (Table 4) lists vegetation found on the site. Plant communities in and around the site are shown in Figure 4. Table 4: Site Vegetation BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME INDICATOR WETLAND VEGETATION Saplings/Shrubs Cratae us mono na* One-seed hawthorn FACU+ Fraxinus latifolia* Oregon ash FACW Herbs A rostis tenius* Colonial bent grass FAC Alo ecurus ratensis Meadow foxtail FACW Cardamine occidentalis Western bittercress FACW+ Carex obnu ta* Slough sedge OBL Cirsium arvense Creeping thistle FACU+ Festuca arundinacea* Kentucky fescue FAC- Geranium dissectum Cut leaf geranium NL Juncus effusus Soft rush FACW Juncus atens* Spreading rush FACW Moss - NL Phalaris arundinacea Reed canary grass FACW Pol ovum la athifolium Weed willow FACW Ranunculus re ens Creeping buttercup FACW Rubus discolor Himalayan blackberry FACU Rumex cris us . Curl dock FAC+ UPLAND VEGETATION Trees Fraxinus latifolia* Oregon ash FACW uercus garryana* White oak UPL Saplings/Shrubs Alnus rubra Red alder FAC Cratae us mon na* One-seed Hawthorn FACU+ Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 6 • 0 Fraxinus latifolia* Oregon ash FACW Quercus garryana White oak Rosa isocar a Clustered rose FAC Sym horica os albus* Common snowbe FACU Herbs A rostis tenius* Colonial bent grass FAC Alo ecurus ratensis Meadow foxtail FACW Cardamine occidentalis Slough sedge FACW+ Cirsium arvense* Creeping thistle FACU+ Daucus carrota NL Festuca arundinacea* Kentucky fescue FAC- Galium triflorum Sweetscented bedstraw FACU Geranium dissectum . Cut leaf geranium NL Juncus effusus* Soft rush FACW Juncus atens* Spreading rush FACW Moss - NL Phalaris arundinacea Reed canary grass FACW Plantano lanceolata English plantain FAC Rubus discolor* Himalayan blackberry FACU Rubus ursinus California dewberry FACU Taraxacum officinale Common dandelion FACU Trifolium re ens White clover FAC Vicia americana American purple vetch FAC *Species used in dominance calculations at various data plots Problem Areas A portion of Wetland A (Figure 5 and 6) was determined to be a seasonal wetland dominated by tufts of Festuca arundinacea (FAC-) on hummocks elevated approximately 6 inches above the ground surface. The ground between the hummocks was devoid of vegetation and covered in a thin layer of decaying organic material (i.e. dead grass) and patches of live algae at the time of this study. This area clearly met hydrology and soils criteria on March 24 when other areas of the site had drained since the March 17 field visit. It was determined that vegetation is not an appropriate indicator to use in this case because all the vegetation is elevated on hummocks, the Festuca continues to be a dominant species in adjacent uplands where there are no hummocks. This portion of wetland A has therefore been defined as a Seasonal Wetland under the guidelines for Problem Areas. 5.4 WETLAND BOUNDARY RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 22 wetland boundary points and 19 wetland data points were established to define 2 wetlands within the study area. An additional data plot was collected outside the area as a reference point (data point 20). The boundaries were flagged on March 17 and March 24 and surveyed. The surveyed wetland boundaries are shown in Figure 5 and 6. Approximately 0.28 acres are wetlands. The northern wetland is approximately 0.21 acres. The southern wetland is approximately 0.07 acres. 6.0 LIMITATIONS The delineation of wetland boundaries is an inexact science. Wetlands are transitional areas (ecotones) between upland and aquatic environments that often change seasonally as well as over time. The wetland Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 boundaries mapped in this report were determined based on the knowledge, experience and best professional judgement of the authors in the application of the 1987 US Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. It is not uncommon for wetland delineation experts to differ in opinion regarding the precise location of wetland boundaries. This report documents the investigation, best professional judgement and conclusion of the investigator. It should be considered a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination and used at your own risk until it has bee reviewed and approved in writing by the Oregon Division of State Lands in accordance with OAR 141-090-0055 through 141-090-0055. 7.0 REFERENCES Kollmorgan Corporation. 1995. Munsell Soil Color Charts. MacBeth Division of Kollmorgen Corporation, Baltimore, MD. Oregon Department of Transportation. 2001. Washington County Atlas. Oregon Department of Transportation Geographic Information Services. Salem, Oregon. Page 34-1. Reed, Porter B, Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services Biological Report No. 88 (26.9) Reed, Porter B., Jr., et at. 1993. 1993 Supplement to List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. Washington DC. 10 pp. U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Services, Springfield, VA. USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1975. Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station. Sheets 7A, 12A, 44, 47. USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1982. Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station. http://ice.or.nres.usda.gov/website/washington/viewer.htm. Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 I f3 • D. -wR 'win SOURCE: ODOT GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SERVICES O 1320 2640 SCALE: I"= 2640' KURAHMIll B O N I T A PARK ORAMM 9Y: EMH ! ARSOCLTM. INC. FKAM Water Renowe" INN sw Jay street, &dw No VICINITY MAP M# 2.OM 1 of 1 0 2,350 4,700 SCALE: 1"= 4,700 - CAM 7-10-02 WAM- 14,700' KURAHAS ffi BONITAPARK °RAw"e`' EMH Chum4wowtv ..ata. FOLM planning TAX LOT MAP 2 Butte goo ONEET ~Exo: Zit z (6a9~14-o75t - KKAI# 2035' 1 Of I ,t ns:7 0 250 500 500, V, - _ ,pc- 200 I _ MCBEE alt- ' , - 0 30 A _ Q0 ATAMA IAAM, t 3 p pRK B0 NIT A RVEY MAP SCg SON- ~ )AM Vv 3% SLOPES) w NI p' S woo EM ems FOA* 3 2035 N w N e N 8 S311INnwwoo r r 1NV-ld = NUVd VIINOe o o v o y r u Q ~ ~ ~ ® MIZ Q Y „ C N•N 10, o o • AUVONn08 aNV113M y LO tn 'N ~B=Y~ NHYd VIIN®S ui 16 a o ~ ~I a $ 11 t!l Y !mi! scDATE: u 7/° 2/02 KvRAxAsffi BONITA PARK RWBY: ' 'EM° & A980CIATS8. INC. avR Engineering . Water Resources FIGURE lAaa,eapaArchitecture ~dranmmte! surveying urve "°°°'°g WETLAND 6 Street. nite ~ BOUNDARY DETAIL X 1 of 1 (509)8{4-882 fa= (503)844-8731 IKAI#2035 APPENDIX A: WETLAND DELINEATION DATA SHEETS • • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION .Pt'oject/Site: : Bonita Park Date: '3' 1710 2, County.: Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator: . Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes ® Transect ID: Is the area a .potential Problem Area? I NA Plot ID: (if needed, explain on reverse.) VEGETATION ~f ES Species % Cover / Relative % Indicator Species % Cover/ Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs - qo - AAVG^15FS v G tirh © v L Id a d' OCCA a Saplings/S hrubs Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine; Total # of Dominants FAC,*OBL p - # of Dominants FAC- c*UPL - - I - 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: FEST-ocA TO F 15 PE o,-J l O m m o LIc.S HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): - Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: Inundation -X.- Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: L (in.) Secondary Indicators: Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: O (in. FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: (-}JMMoc.~S DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Ptoject/Site: Bonita Park Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Is the area -a potential Problem Area?, (if needed, ex• laindn'reverse.)'' Date: t~.. p County:; . Washington State: Oregon e No Community ID: Yes 49 Transect ID: Yes &c Plot ID: Z.. VEGE'I•ATIO N Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover/ (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs CAP-6x t)B(40t-rA o L. d S J Saplings/Shrubs LJ Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc*OBL O - # of Dominants FAC- *UPL - - - - 0 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) . 100% Remarks: 2,0 aZo CPNtGX 1Z1G-Q0t R.Gp pG fz STfL rq- f-A- i7owA 1 iJ gn1G6 HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): - Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other _ No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: ~C Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: Z (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION f - Date: - Z o Project/Site!' Bonita Park County:.. Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes tg Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: 3 (if needed, ex+ lain on reverse.) I 7T d"in / TT/ll►T Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Species i % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs hAZt,)Qjr*QA A(-',- J CJS En~)S 15 - E& W L1 iJ E J rJp G O t4 L_ Saplings/S hrubs Woody Vi nes :,54/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFrER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs, Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC-*OBL _ O # of Dominants FAC- *UPL - l Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding F, Remarks: FE~r~cq on 14%jrArxc)C,K 17•~TTT Ai /l/"~tl Li1Y1~VLVV Z Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs Inundation Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: O (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: J M Mo fi1G S DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION -Project/Site: Bonita Park Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Is the area a potential Problem Area? if needed, ex lain on+reverse.) Date: 2 a-L County: Washington State: Oregon e No Community ID: Yes Transect ID: Yes o Plot ID; L T VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Trees Herbs Ot _3 O I:A(-- 6646,456 o CJ CA&CAMWG bmiDE&VAUS 4C FACU)+ ,la w_05 tJ o C.v3 i2~ S cot.o t2 1= Saplings/Shrubs s 2S NL. a wrv~ ~ LS Nt.. Woody Vines ,50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPIIYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc*OBL # of Dominants FAC- c*UPL - 2 Z Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 33 Remarks: FESNGA p t-4 0,5 M ° CAS S HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): - Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: .1 (in.) _ _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 14UMMoGK5 Oo % N a De57r Nc T DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date::. 3 I z 4l OZ Project/Site:' Bonita Park County:, Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator: Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes i& Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: S if needed, explain on reverse.) A -VYnXT ' • auv --•a<~aa Species % Cover / Relative [Indicator Species % Cover / Relative %o) Indicator Tree s Herbs CS vC 0a171NFvCE o c.- v i.) W5 AT r3S -tom u5 Aa o BA8c aJND to Saplings/S hrubs Woody-Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPELYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACbOBL - - ( . # of Dominants FAC- c*UPL - _ l l Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) O Remarks: F,& Sro cA 6i Q l4JM m o cites rrirnnnT nrv ~ ~ - 111 Ll\VLV V i Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Aerial Photographs Inundation Other X Saturate in Upper 12 Inches No Recorded Data Available Water Marks Field Observations: Sediment Deposits X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: -7 (in.) Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils:_(in•) Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NJMNIOC,~GS ' DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION 3 2.' I oz `Project/Site: Bonita Park Date: y Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? © No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: (0 (if needed, explain on reverse.) 2 VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Trees Herbs F S O ODWACGA -y- ' c.- t t NG 0QXC-iot s Cf&St) IQ M 4DISSECTO6A Ac 51 L A6A* s T• % s t,) u 's 2u * c. M 6Rn C f9 J G iEC; Saplings/Shrubs Woody Vines 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC->OBL # of Dominants FAC- r*UPL - - 1 - 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- o Remarks: HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in_) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: - (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) - Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ND IN~tGATd/LS 0 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: 2 O 3 /4 Z_ Project/Site: Bonita Park 1 Washington County:. Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator: Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (0 Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes o Plot ID: (if needed, ex lain on reverse.) 17vi-' T A 9rYAW • i:IV a-•1L11avL Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs S 4in1 o Q N h463tA6(WtrLkA J k1ol 21 scdLOPL J Pic R.S~v~► A.~lvir~SE <S J ,JC J Ppr-rC-,QS S K Saplings/S hrubs M - AA S .45- F6c+ M Woody Vines 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Wood Vine Total # of Dominants FACc:~OBL O - O # of Dominants FAC- *UPL _ 1 - Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) ©Ro Remarks: IIVTUlIT nl"IX7 11 L LL\,JLVV i Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs - Inundation Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: U3A 1 EF-. STAIN 6D L-15A-13ES 11,_1 S rA JJLL gPrQG DEpj (i551o~ r 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION /Si P o B i P k -Date: Z. ' Z ject on r te: ta ar Applicant/Owner. City of Tigard County:.. Washington Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? (M) No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (S) Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: (if needed, explain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative -Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs n1 n1 &CEA O w L G M(,) f; (t 'Rt" 1 rE,-)t vS I !T L Wm O « M G N Saplings/S hrubs U a L. J rn AC.- Wood 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACbOBL - O O # of Dominants FAC- c:,UPL - - l - Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAG (excluding FAC-) Remarks: • IIYDRnLnC.Y _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: r-- (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: - (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: (N p(G/}TGR-S 00 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: 31Z`il 0-L Project/Site: Bonita Park County: Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes 40 Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: 9 if needed, explain on reverse.) IIr, !•V•r A Tyh1%XT Species Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs EP_STOC_A IJo 35 FAC- C_% A'D10 , f ~vrK.JS ~ 1 ~O OCC 4 0&rgt t <S i j -r <5 Sa lin s/ hrubs VLAM Cvv c H&A06 O C• Cam r !a J C ~ JnI -z.~ Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc*OBL - - # of Dominants FAC- *UPL - Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: Fp- -..y- pr .2,0V6 ^AtM L-cJ E 2 PEI'- Slit H WA 7b " ,PC t~on~. .gN r 1T~1T\TIAT A/'~~7 111 L1\VLVV L Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs ^ Inundation _ Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: (AJ MMa C L<!& 5Q e-l-- R-CC WF}' eg- OC3SE2clCi~ alt-? t c> l n~ 0(C PrTCA-s -517)-A DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION z Project/Site: Bonita Park Date:' 3lZN10 County: Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes ® Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot -ID: 10 11 (if needed, explain on reverse) VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs F jc-4- uv~A~ >30 J ✓EnJS C J RCoRoosn ,,)r-)s Saplings/Shrubs Woody Vi nes •50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC,*OBL Q # of Dominants FAC- c*UPL - ( - Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) Remarks: HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other _ No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate m Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: _ FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: N~ ~ NCI ~rj- ; c~Zs 0 • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site:" Bonita Park 3 Z~ Date: It) 7- Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard Applicant/Owner: County: Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e-YP No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: 1 / (if needed, explain on reverse.)' VEGETATION Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative 0 o Indicator Tree s Herbs tT'1)GA R~ntOl~J9'CE O h14C.." AcAPCG~R~S n! Jt- 4 s t s n1i-j o X F xicjM Of~y=u ALE L runt t "c v" G Saplings/Shrubs TJ NGJ FyJ u co of u < FA&J- ylupr r ,-f C L CMW = cr.~.t ~r~u ~ ~ M Ent FWcL4 + 5020 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc:>OBL - - Z Z # 'of Dominants FAC- c::>UPL Percent of Dominant S ecies.that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) (o Remarks: HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): - Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: lJD f~ ptc~4~-b~GS • 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Pr 'ect/Site: Bonita Park Date: 751Z,4 lo?_ Applicant/Owner. City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: _l Z (if needed, explain on reverse.) ' VEGETATION Species % Cover/ (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs G r1 ►v F~ ~'vn~ C~tS H7'FiJS 2 0 FACA,,) ►0" M - 45, L ►GtR rA69tC b Ttixi4 Aonlolnl G to _SaplinQs/Shrubs c4SIC05 C t N 6LO D UL rJ QCC. 10 F v nJfl F PA--ejS I WRv /0 vJ F~A Woody Vi nes $0/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HymomYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACbOBL Z # of Dominants FAC- bUPL Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC- 4b Remarks: Ldi cord O F'< PcA 57A477 v.~ VaM I .J4-NC e EQ.uR.c a HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: in.) FAC-Neutral Test _ _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Sitd. Bonita Park Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard -Investigator Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Is the area a potential Problem Area? if needed, explain on reverse).' Date: Z OZ County:. '..Washington State: Oregon Ye No Community ID: Yes 10> Transect ID: Yes 1`~ Plot ID: 13 tie VEGETATION Species % Cover/ Relative Indicator Species % Cover/ (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs <S~JSAJ h*i!~ Ca 64M o N L J1,3w X ,-J At.o W "En~6t O FWAIJ J n1 J J S ,4 &~J ~ t0S o Y 4(- Saplings/S hrubs WJ1A 65 G /Vt ►J IJ FA(-L4 f VI M6 r> F40 TAI o As S Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFFER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc>OBL # of Dominants FAC- bUPL O Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) p Remarks: HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: - Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ►~{O 111lJJe611- To.2S DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date: :2-4 102- County: Washington Applicant/Owner. City of Tigard Investigator Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es to Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes V~o Plot ID: y if needed, ex lain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / Relative % Indicator Trees Herbs NALAAC, 40c1,3 tOp ,p 64<113 Saplings/S hrubs Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACbOBL # of Dominants FAC- c:~UPL - - O - D Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) 100 Remarks: r HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: /~o I nl 10 ( C49- 7-bP-S A DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date: 2 o Z Applicant/Owner. City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes o Plot ID: 1S' if need ed,'explain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative % Indicator Trees Herbs T~r~wS riS ?ZO y) JNc~S vS S ' JACIE'DrUco-1 AAJW, ~ c _ nllJJ o Sa lin s/Shrubs dN W5 /lE EIS ~S" vJ k A3US 20 * 0-J Paci6wum GS Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACbOBL 2, 3-- # of Dominants FAC- c~UPL - - 2 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) 601-t. Ws- Remarks: HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): - Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other - _ No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation V C ~h,. nto TT---- V) T..,.L-- ucalurate LLl Vkl~1G1 1L 1i1G11GJ _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: '(in.) Secondary Indicators: D th F W i _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches ep to ree ater n Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves If Depth to Saturated Soils: in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 0 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: _j Z oZ Proj ect/Site Bonita Park Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County:. as ington Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? a No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: ha (if needed, ex lain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs CVJGACVS a L .✓,tirn~9Cr o ECvav 0 ?-I S .-J/o3 '3o R-C 6,9440rA dM i C-ER 1% 0 )=A[. Sa lin s/Shrubs A1at)_o6t1,-A <T J d Ic v G Fi9L Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC*OBL O - - - -2- # of Dominants FAC- bUPL 1 - - - l Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC- Remarks: HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves -Neutral Test FAC Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: N° i~O LAroR 5 0 i DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date: BIZ OZ Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes o Transect ID: Is the area.a potential Problem Area? Yes o Plot ID: 17 if needed, ex laiti on reverse.)' VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative % Indicator Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Trees Herbs Ig C S a c.J Aa,49xE' 30 c-- G~l a ~J r J "Zc7 7~'4 C c L' c v G S F C-4-510M ✓C/`t & < E4_( _L* Saplings/S hrubs GRw 1 - Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Wood Vine Total # of Dominants FACbOBL 2 # of Dominants FAC- c*UPL - 1 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: _ HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pir in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves w Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ~ vMMaGKS i 0. DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park r Date: 31Z4I0 Z- Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes <29D Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Vo Plot ID: (if needed, explain.on:reverse.) VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative % Indicator Tree s Herbs PA-AMXl l.~ Ttsritoys (o - VjQer M C C Saplings/S hrubs G AZ 1 V AA dAn) b n1SE ZO J Woody Vi nes. 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACbOBL # of Dominants FAC- AUPL - 2 - Z. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) '2)? 3 Remarks: HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): - Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other _ No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Y, Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) - FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 1vo 1^3 PtGOj-Tot4-S Oi ! 0~ "T 4-ftJ D kl012,ED •r DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date: I!Dz Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County:. as ington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? J~f e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes o Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: 1 q (if needed, explain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Trees Herbs o _ .~2o t o c n1c~ :P L, Saplings/Shrubs T t A c.14 t Woody Vi nes $0/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFCER RELATIVE %'COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Wood Vine Total # of Dominants FACc:~OBL - - . 2' # of Dominants FAC- c*UPL - I - 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) Remarks: HYDROLOGY :P,ACk-3 - Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: ~~in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ! n1 c G f}'t-o~L S DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: J,/ Project/Site:' Bonita Park County: Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator: Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? a No Community ID: OAK 'LAtgXtog Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: REF ~3~~ if needed, explain on revere:) j~P- 20 crr, rr, m ♦'TTlIAT WL`"Ju I&VA&V1\ Species % 00 Cover / Relative % Indicator S % Cover / tor Indic Trees Herbs ZO * f~g A+1 my MU A Tf 3 TaN i,J S f~ CA ✓NGJS ('En7 o W wNGaS J o Saplings/ S hrubs 0,01 & P/ o c W s o o PALO Woody Vines 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPWVTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine • Total # of Dominants FAEOBL 1 0 # of Dominants FAC- c*UPL 1 2 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC- 2. L Remarks: 11 Y JuKuEuty 1 Record Data (Describe. in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs Inundation _ Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks it D s epos Sediment Field Observations: - _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: C,4-roe- 5 APPENDIX B: LOCAL WETLAND INVENTORY 0 0 7-1gard Local Wetlands Inventory - Offsite Option WETLAND SUMMARY SHEET UNIT: 7 WETLAND: E-22, 23, 24, 25 Wetland Acreage: 2.26 Field Verified Date: 8/23/94 (1 ac PFO/2 ac PEM) Location: Fanno Ck S of Colony Ct & N of Bonita Rd Beaverton Quadrangle T2S R1W Sec. 1,2 Tax Map: 252112 BA Zoning: I-L R-2S Aerial: SE NWI Classification: R, PEM, PFO Mapped Soils: non-hydric Hydrologic Basin: Fanno Sub-basin: Fanno Ck Hydrologic Source/Comments: Fanno Creek Dominant Vegetation: Trees Shrubs Alnus rubra (Rubes discolor) WWHA Score: 58 Herbs/Ewer ents Agrostis sp. Boundary Information: distinct topographic break; vegetation changes to Himalayan blackberry, Oregon white oak, and tall fescue. Buffer Information: Standard minimum 25 ft Comments: Fanno Creek, perennial stream with small areas of fringe wetland; sparse riparian vegetation. Fishman Environmental Services TIGARD LOCAL WETLANDS INVENTORY - FUNCTIONAL VALUES. Fishman Environmental Services 1994 UNIT Wetland PFO PSS PEM POW R WILD FISH LINK UNIQ WQ HYDR REC ED AEST 5 E-1-3 7.53 M M M L M H L L M 5 E-4 1.19 M M M L M H L L M 5 E-5 R H M M L L H L L M 6 C-15 0.19 H M M L L H L L M 6 E-26, 27 1.0 0.5 M L L L M H L' L L 6 E-28 11 1.0 H M L H H H L L H 6 E-29 1.0 M M L L M H M 'L H 6. E-30 5.0 M L L H M H L M H 6 E-31-33 1.5 1.0 M M L L M H L. L M. 7 E-6 4.5 1.0 H H H L H H H M H 7 E-7,8 2.56 M L L L M- H L L M 7 E-9-13 6 11 H H H L H H H H H 7 E-14-16,18-21,39 19 0,25 4.0 2.0 H H H H H H L L H 7 E-17 R H L M L L H L L M 7 E-22-25 1 2.0 H H H L H H L L H 7 E-37 0.25 0.25 M L M L M H L L L 7 E-38 0.5 M L L L M. H L L M 7 E-39 0.251 1 L L L L' L L L L L 3 Note: Acreage approximate; see text for abbreviations (PFO is forested wetland, WILD is wildlife habitat, etc.) u CITY OF TIGARD ;y WETLANDS INVENTORY UNIT 7 Identified Wetlands A-1 Wetland ID Aquatic Resource Unit Boundary Stream Corridor Wetlands 3434 Public Land Survey Section IDs Source: Scientific Resources Inc. and Fishman Environmental Services. Aerial photography from April, 1994 at a nominal scale of 1" 400'. Information on this, map is of a generalized nature. In all cases, actual field conditions determine wetland boundaries. Public Land Survey Information: All Public land survey sections depicted on this map survey are within either T1SR1W or T2SR1W. NORTH Scale 1'=600' FEET 0 600 1200 PI nT r)ATF• 02/10/95 0 0 IX C - SOIL DESCRIPTIONS APPEND Soil Survey of Washington County OR067 1 of 3 Ma Unit Symbol tS'~~ C+S Ma w. m , Urtit_ tJa;e ~Qg}}.~G Iaa!41~i~vi !$~.lA +r]•t5. `b'Kn~~'cF~''L~°~^i$":~'ri.~.,t''s'I: T:~ I': R Ji'lYv^i j~~~. r. 2 Amity silt loam 3E Astoria silt loam, 5 to 30 percent slopes 3F Astoria silt loam, 30. to 60 percent slopes 4B Briedwell silt loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes 58 Briedwell stony silt loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes 5C Briedwell stony silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 5D Briedwell stop silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 6B Carlton silt loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes 6C Carlton silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 7B Cascade silt loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes 7C Cascade silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 7D Cascade silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 7E Cascade silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 7F Cascade silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 8C Chehalern silty clay loam 9 Chehalis silty clay loam, occasional overflow 10 Chehalis silt loam, occasional overflow 11B Cornelius and kinton silt loams, 2 to 7 percent slopes 11C Cornelius and kinton silt loams, 7 to 12 percent slopes 11D Cornelius and kinton silt loams, 12 to 20 percent slopes 11E Cornelius and kinton silt loams, 20 to 30 percent slopes 11F Cornelius and kinton silt loams, 30 to 60 percent slopes 12A Cornelius variant silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 12B Cornelius variant silt loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes 12C Cornelius variant silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 13 Cove silty day loam 14 Cove day 15 Dayton silt loam 16C Delena silt loam, 3 to 12 percent slopes 17B Goble silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 17C Goble silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 17D Goble silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 17E Goble silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 18E Goble silt loam, 2 to 30 percent slopes' 18F Goble silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 19B Helvetia silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 19C Helvetia silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 19D Helvetia silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 19E Helvetia silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 20E Hembre silt loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 20F Hembre silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 20G 01 WNW, MM' Hembre silt loam, 60 to 90 percent slopes F"0 cam; ftn_t T ; ' 21B Hillsboro loam, 3 to 7 percent slot es 21D Hillsboro loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes . ru ex. Etta m-. * } 23B , Jo silt clay loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes Soil Survey of Washington County OR067 2 of 3 23C Jo silty clay loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 23D Jo silty clay loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 23E Jory silt clay loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes. 23F Jo silt clay loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 24G Kilchis klickitat complex, 60 to 90 percent slopes 25E Klickitat stop loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 25F Klickitat stony loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 25G Klickitat stony loam, 60 to 90 percent slopes 26 Kna a silt loam 27 Labish muck clay 28B Laurelwood silt loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes 28C Lauretwood silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 28D Laurelwood silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 28E Laurelwood silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 29E Laurelwood silt loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 29F Laurelwood silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 31B Melbourne silty clay loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 31C Melbourne silty clay loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 31D Melbourne silt clay loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 31E Melbourne sit clay loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 31F Melbourne silt day loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 32C Melb silt loam, 3 to 12 percent slopes 32D Melb silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 32E Melb silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 33E Melb silt loam, 2 to 30 percent slopes 33F Melb silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 33G Melb silt loam, 60 to 90 percent slopes 34C Ol is silt loam, 5 to 12 percent slopes 34D OI is silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 34E Olyic silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 35E OI is silt loam, 5 to 30 percent slopes 35F OI is silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 35G OI is silt loam, 60 to 90 percent slopes 36C Pervina silt clay loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 36D Pervina silt clay loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 36E Pervina silt clay loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 36F r ` y o-. Pervina silt clay loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes- M. MIAMI Qua 1[rta oa : Q 7 r enfJi 7NOR 3 4' 37C Quatama loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 37D Quatama loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 38B Saum silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes 38C Saum silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 38D Saum silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 38E Saum silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes 38F Saum silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 39E Tolke silt loam, 5 to 30 percent slopes 39F Tolke silt loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes 40 6difluvents, nearly level Soil Survey of Washington County OR067 3 of 3 41 Urban land 42 Verboort silt clay loam 43 Wa ato silt clay loam 44A Willamette silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 44B Willamette silt loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes 44C Willamette silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 44D Willamette silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 45A Woodburn silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 45B Woodburn silt loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes 45C Woodburn silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes 45D Woodburn silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes 46F Xerochre is and ha loxerolls, very steep 47D Xerochre is rock outcrop complex 48F Sca onia braun silt loams, 30 to 60 percent north slopes 49F Sca nia braun silt loams, 30 to 60 percent south slopes 50F Wauld very gravel) loam, 30 to 70 ' rcent slopes 51E Tolan loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 52F Tolan loam, 30 to 60 percent north slopes 53F Tolan loam, 30 to 60 percent south slopes 54F Cater) ravel) silt loam, 30 to 60 percent north slopes 55F Cater) ravel) silt loam, 30 to 60 percent south slopes 56G Braun sca onia silt loams, 60 to 90 percent north slopes 57G Braun sca onia silt loams, 60 to 90 percent south slopes 58E Vernonia silt loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes 59 Eilertsen silt loam 60B Multnomah cobbl silt loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes 61 Huma ue ts, onded 62B Salem silt loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes 63B Salem ravel) silt loam, 0 to 7 percent slopes 76 Pits W Water 0 Hembre soils are well drained. They have a surface layer of dark reddish-brown silt loam and a subsoil of dark reddish-brown, reddish-brown, and yellowish-red silty clay loam over basalt bedrock. Effective rooting depth is 40 to 50 inches. Klickitat soils are well drained. They have a surface layer of dark reddish-brown cobbly loam and . a subsoil of dark-brown and reddish-brown cobbly and very cobbly loam over basalt bedrock. Effective rooting depth is 40 to 50 inches. These soils are used for timber production, recreation, and' wildlife habitat. Availability of food, cover, and water controls movement and number of birds and animals. Runoff is mainly from areas where the plant cover has been removed. Sedimentation from runoff is high. Maintaining maximum cover and using water control practices on roads and logged areas minimize soil loss. These soils provide good sites for most recreational uses. As a result of the heavy precipitation, these soils are a major source of water supply. These soils provide good habitat for game animals and some birds. Descriptions of the soils This section describes the soil series and mapping units in Washington County. Each soil series is described in detail, and then, briefly, each mapping unit in that series. Unless it is noted otherwise, what is stated about the soil series holds true for the mapping units in that series. Thus, to get full information about any one mapping unit, it is necessary to read both the description of the mapping unit and the description of the soil series to which it belongs. An important part of the description of each soil series is the soil profile. That is, the sequence of layers from the surface downward to rock or other underlying material. Each series contains two descriptions of this profile. The first is brief and in terms familiar to the layman. The second is much more detailed and is for those who need to make thorough and precise studies of soils. Color terms are for moist soil unless otherwise stated. The profile described in the series is representative for one of the mapping units in that series. If the profile of a soil in a given mapping unit is different from the one described for the series, these differences are stated in describing the mapping unit or they are differences that are apparent in the name of the mapping unit, or both. As mentioned in the section "How This Survey Was Made," not all mapping units are members of a soil series. Udifluvents, nearly level, for example, do not belong to a soil series, but nevertheless, are listed in alphabetic order along with the soil series. Preceding the name of each mapping unit is a number, or number and letter, which identifies the mapping unit on the detailed soil map. Listed at the end of each description of a mapping unit is the capability unit, wildlife group, and woodland group in which the mapping unit has been placed. The page for the description of each capability unit and a listing of the wildlife group and woodland group can be found by referring to the "Guide to Mapping Units" at the back of this survey. The acreage and proportionate extent of each mapping unit are shown in table 1. Many of the terms used in describing soils can be found in the Glossary at the end of this survey, and more detailed information about the terminology and methods of soil mapping can be obtained from the Soil Survey Manual (I]). The Aloha series consists of somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium or lacustrine silt on broad valley terraces. Slope is 0 to 3 percent. Elevation is 150 to 200 feet. Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is mainly Douglas-fir and some Oregon white oak, shrubs, forbs, and grasses. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 50 inches, average annual air temperature is 52° to 54° F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is dark-brown silt loam about 8 inches thick. The subsoil is a dark-brown and dark yellowish-brown, mottled silt loam about 38 inches thick. The substratum is dark yellowish-brown, mottled silt loam and very fine sandy loam about 19 inches thick. The profile is medium acid throughout. Permeability is moderately slow. Available water capacity is' 11 to 13 inches. Water-supplying capacity is 18 to 20 inches. Effective rooting depth is 40 inches to more than 60 inches. These soils are used mainly for orchards, irrigated vegetable crops, irrigated berries, small grain, hay, pasture, and legume seed production. Other uses include wildlife habitat, recreation, and homesites. Representative profile of Aloha silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, located 200 feet south and 40 feet east of the end of the county road in the NWl/4SW1/4NW1/4 section 16, T. 1 S., R. 2 W.: Ap-0 to 8 inches, dark-brown (IOYR 3/3) silt loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) dry; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky and slightly plastic; common very fine roots; common, fine, irregular pores; common fine shot; medium acid (pH 6.0) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 6 to 9 inches thick. B1-8 to 15 inches, dark-brown (10YR 4/3 ) silt loam, light yellowish-brown (10YR 6/4) dry; common; medium, faint, dark grayish-brown, brown, and dark-brown (10YR 4/2, 5/3 and 7.5YR 3/2) mottles; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure, slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; common very fine roots; many, fine and very fine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; clear, wavy boundary. 0 to 9 inches thick. B21-15 to 22 inches, dark yellowish-brown (10YR 4/4) silt loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) dry; common, fine, faint, ' Italic numbers in parentheses refer to References- • • In the original manuscript, there was a table in this space. All tables have been updated and occur at the end of the document. dark grayish-brown, brown, and dark-brown (IOYR 4/2, 5/3 and 7.5YR 3/2) mottles; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; firm hard, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; common, very fine roots; many, medium, fine and very fine, tubular pores; few thin clay films in pores; few black coatings on peds; few medium shot; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; clear, wavy boundary. 5 to 9 inches thick. B22-22 to 31 inches, dark yellowish-brown (IOYR 4/4) heavy silt loam, pale brown (IOYR 6/3) dry; many, medium, distinct, dark brown, dark-gray, and dark yellowish-brown (7.5YR 4/2, IOYR 4/1 and 3/4) moist mottles; weak, medium, subangular blocky structure parting to moderate, fine, subangular blocky; firm, hard, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; veil au.e roves; •iiany Vei y' fine pores and few, fine, tubular pores; few, thin, dark-colored coatings or cutans on vertical surfaces of peds and in pores; common fine shot; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; gradual, wavy boundary. 6 to 13 inches thick. 133-31 to 46 inches, vanegated brown and dark- brown IOYR 5/3 and 4/3) silt loam, pale brown (IOYR 6/3) dry; many, medium and fine, faint and distinct, dark grayish-brown and reddish-brown (IOYR 4./2, 5YR 4/4 ) moist mottles; weak,' coarse, subangular blocky structure, hard, firm, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; brittle; few fine roots; many very fine pores and few, fine, tubular pores; common, medium, black coatings; common fine shot, common micaceous fragments; few, thin coatings or cutans on vertical surfaces of peds; over 60 percent of the horizon exhibits gray, clean sand and silt particles in a patchy pattern along surfaces of peds and in the larger pores; medium acid (pH 6.0) ; gradual, wavy boundary. 0 to 18 inches thick. ri AG - cn ' ' ..i--rv W UV IIIULIcs, uarK yellowish-brown kluxlt 314) silt loam, pale brown (IOYR 6/3) and yellowish-brown (IOYR 5/4) dry; common, coarse, dark grayish-brown (1 OYR 4/2) mottles and streaks; few black coatings; massive; firm, 'slightly sticky, slightly plastic; slightly brittle; few, coarse, tubular pores and many, fine and very fine, tubular pores; micaceous; medium acid (pH 6.0) ; gradual irregular boundary. 12 to 16 inches thick. C2-60 to 65 inches, dark yellowish-brown (10YR 4/4) very fine sandy loam, light yellowish-brown (10YR 6/4) dry; massive, slightly hard, friable; nonsticky and nonplastic; common or many firm nodules; very fine tubular pores. The solum ranges from 30 to 60 inches in thickness. Depth to bedrock more than 60 inches. The A horizon is silt loam or loam. The B horizon is a silt loam or loam that is 18 to 27 percent clay and less than 15 percent rock fragments coarser than very fine sand. The lower part of the B horizon ranges from slightly brittle to strongly brittle. The C horizon is silt loam, loa or ve fin d, loam. s nearly level soil is on smooth terrac . f o r e described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Amity, Cornelius variant, Woodburn, Quatama, and Huberly soils which make up as much as 10 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Capability unit IIw-1; wildlife group 2. Amity series The Amity series consists of somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in old alluvium on valley terraces. Slope is 0 to 3 percent. Elevation is 150 to 240 feet. Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is grasses, low shrubs, and scattered Oregon white oak. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 45 inches, average annual air temperature is 52° to 54° F., and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is very dark brown over very dark grayish-brown silt loam about 12 inches thick and very dark gray silty clay loam 4 inches thick The subsurface layer is dark gray, faintly mottled silty clay loam about 4 inches thick. The subsoil is dark grayish-brown and grayish-brown, distinctly mottled silty clay loam about 20 inches thick: The profile is medium acid in the surface and subsurface layers and slightly acid in the subsoil and substratum. Permeability is moderately slow. Available water capacity is 9 to 12 inches. Water-supplying capacity is 18 to 20 inches. Effecti These soils are used for irrigated vegetable crops, irrigated strawberries, small grain, grass and legume seed production, hay, pasture, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Representative profile of Amity silt loam, located about 150 feet east of the road in SWl/4NE1/4 section 20, T. 1 N., R. 3 W.: Ap-0 to 6 inches, very dark-brown (10YR 2/2) silt loam, grayish-brown (10YR 5/2) dry; weak, fine, granular structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; many very fine roots; many, very fine, irregular pores; medium acid (pH 5.6); abrupt, smooth boundary. 5 to 8 inches thick. A12-6 to 12 inches, very dark grayish-brown (10YR 3/2) silt loam, grayish-brown (10YR 5/2) dry; weak, medium, subangular blocky structure breaking to moderate, fine and very fine, subangular blocky; hard, friable, nonsticky and slightly plastic; many very fine roots; common, fine and medium,) tubular pores; medium acid (pH 5.6) ; clear, smooth boundary. 5 to 10 inc es thick A13-12 to 16 inches, very dark gray (10YR 3/1) light silty clay loam, grayish-brown (10YR 5/2) dry, moderate, fine and very fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; many very fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 5.8), ; clear, smooth boundary. 0 to 7 inches thick. A2-16 to 20 inches dark-gray (10YR 4/1) light silty clay loam, light gray (5YR 7/1) dry; few, faint, dark-brown (7.5YR 3/2) mottles; weak, medium and fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; many fine roots; many, fine and very fine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; clear, smooth boundary. 5 to 7 inches thick B21t-20 to 28 inches, dark grayish-brown (10YR 4/2) silty clay loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) dry; common, fine and medium, distinct, dark reddish-brown (5YR 3/3) mottles; moderate, fine and very fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; few fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; slightly acid (VH 6.4) ; clear, smooth boundary. 6 to 9 inches thick. B22t-28 to 33 inches, dark grayish-brown (2.5Y 4/2 silty clay loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) dry; common, distinct, dark-brown (7.5YR 3/2) mottles; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; few fine roots; many, fine, tubular pores; common, black coatings on peds; thin continuous clay films on peds and in pores; slightly acid (pH 6.4) ; clear, smooth boundary. 4 to 8 inches thick. B3t-33 to 40 inches, grayish-brown (2.5Y 5/2) silty clay loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) dry; many, medium, distinct, arkbrown (7.5YR 3/2) mottles; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; few fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; many, medium, black coatings on peds and in pores; few, thin, clay films on peds and in pores; slightly acid (pH 6.4) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 0 to 10 inches thick. C40 to 60 inches, light olive brown (2.5Y 5/4) silt loam, very pale brown (10YR 7/4) dry; few, fine, faint mottles; massive; • 20G-Hembre silt loam, 60 to 90 percent slopes. This very steep soil is in rough, mountainous areas in the Coast Range. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Klickitat, Kilchis, Rock outcrop, and Astoria soils. Also included were soils more than 60 inches deep to bedrock. Included soils make up about 20 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is severe. Capability unit VIle; woodland suitability group 26; wildlife group 4. The Hillsboro series consists of well drained soils that formed in mixed, silty and loamy, old alluvium on terraces. Slope is 0 to 20 percent. Elevation is 160 to 240 feet. Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is Douglas-fir, hazelbrush, blackberries, grasses, and forbs. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 50 inches, average annual air temperature is 52° to 54° F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is dark-brown loam about 11 inches thick. The subsoil is dark-brown and dark yellowish-brown loam about 37 inches thick. The substratum is dark-brown fine sandy loam, loamy fine sand, and fine sand about 33 inches thick. The profile is medium acid in the surface layer, slightly acid to strongly acid in the subsoil, and slightly acid to medium acid in the substratum. Permeability is moderate. Available water capacity is 9 to 12 inches. Water-supplying capacity is 15 to 20 inches. Effective rooting depth is more than 60 inches. These soils are used for orchards, irrigated berries, irrigated vegetable crops, small grain, irrigated hay, irrigated pasture, homesites, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Representative profile of Hillsboro loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, located about 1/4 mile east of U.S. 99W on south side of Ore. 212, northeast comer of the NE1/4NWI/4, section 22, T. 2 S., R. 1 W.: Apt-0 to 4 inches, dark-brown (10YR 3/3) loam, brown (IOYR 5/3) dry; weak, medium and fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; many fine roots; many, very fine, irregular pores; com- mon fine shot; medium acid (pH 6.0) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 4 to 6 inches thick. Ap24 to 11 inches, dark-brown (IOYR 3/3) loam, brown (IOYR 5/3 ) dry, moderate, slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and nonplastic; common fine roots; many, very fine, tubular pores; common fine shot; medium acid (pH 6.0) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 5 to 7 inches thick. B1-11 to 15 inches, dark yellowish-brown (10YR 3/4). loam, yellowish brown (IOYR 5/4) dry; weak, medium, prismatic structure parting to weak, medium, subangular blocky; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and nonplastic; 0 common fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; few, very thin, patchy clay films; slightly acid (pH 6.2) ; clear, smooth boundary. 4 to 7 inches thick. B21t-15 to 25 inches, dark-brown (IOYR 4/3) heavy loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) dry; weak medium, prismatic structure parting to weak, medium and fine, subangular blocky, slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; few fine roots; common, medium and fine, tubular pores; thin patchy clay films on peds and in pores; slightly acid (pH 6.2) ; clear, smooth boundary. 8 to 12 inches thick. B22-25 to 33 inches, dark-brown (IOYR 4/3) heavy loam, pale brown (IOYR 6/3) ; dry; weak, medium and fine, su angular blocky structure; slightly hard, firm, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; few fine roots; many, fine and very fine, tubular pores; many, moderately thick, patchy clay films on peds and in pores; strongly acid (pH 5.5) ; clear, smooth boundary. 8 to 11 inches thick. B3-33 to 48 inches, dark-brown (10YR 4/3) loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) dry; weak, medium, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, fume, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; few very fine roots; many, fine and very fine, tubular pores; few thin clay films on eds, and few thick clay films in pores; medium acid (pH 5.6) ; clear, smooth boundary. 14 to 18 inches thick. IICI-48 to 57 inches, dark-brown (10YR 4/3) fine sandy loam; massive; soft, friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; few very fine roots; few, fine, irregular pores; medium acid (pH 5.6 ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 0 to 10 inches thick. RIO-2-57 to 63 inches, dark-brown (IOYR 4/3) loamy fine sand; massive; soft, very friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; few, fine, irregular Pores; slightly acid (pH 6.2) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 5 to 6 inches thick. IVC3-63 to 81 inches, dark-brown (IOYR 4/3) fine sand; massive; hard, firm, nonsticky and nonplastic; rounded, oblong lumps of loamy fine sand arranged horizontally in stratified bands make up about 15 percent, by volume, of the horizon; medium acrd (pH 5.9). The A horizon is loam or silt loam. The Bt horizon is loam or silt loam that is 18 to 27 percent clay; it is less than 15 percent sand coarser than very fine sand in the upper 20 inches. The B horizon has weak to moderate structure. Clay films _ ew to man x nd the n moder~ately t~hIck 'As . rb °~pr$n ^ 's nearly level "soil is on btda 'va ley td, R" Ms:~Fhe "Pn sdtkM. Ee profile described as representative of the series. • Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha and Quatama soils, which make up as much as 10 percent of this mappping unit. RunofF is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Capability unit I-1; wildlife group 2. 21B-Hillsboro loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes. This gently sloping soil is on broad valley terraces. This soil has a profile similar to the one described as representative of the series, but in about 15 percent of the acreage, there is loamy fine sand substratum at a depth of 30 to 50 inches. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha and Quatama soils, which make up as much as 10 percent of this mappin; unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Ca abili unit IIe-1; wildlife oup 2. is moderate y s o~tng~ts d "ro e" ce . Included with thts soil in mapping were areas of Aloha and Quatama soils, which make up about 10 percent of this mapping unit. unof~ is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. Capability unit He-1; wildlife group 2. 21D-Hillaboro loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes. This moderately steep soil is on broad valley terraces. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha and Quatama soils, which make up as much as 10 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. Capability unit Ille-1; wildlife group 2. a's-No We, The Huberly series consists of poorly drained soils that formed in mixed silty alluvium on terraces. Slope is 0 to 3 percent. Elevation is 150 to 250 feet. Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is ash, willow, hazelbrush, sedges, western redcedar, grasses, and forbs. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 50 inches, average annual air temperature is 52° to 54° F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is very dark gray silt loam about 8 inches thick. The upper part of the subsoil is grayish-brown, mottled silt loam about 17 inches thick, and the lower part is dark grayish-brown, mottled silt y loam fragipan about 13 inches thick. The substratum is ra dark grayish-brown, brown, and dark-brown, mottledgsilt, loam fragipan 4 inches thick or more. The profile is medium acid throughout. Permeability is slow. Available water capacity is 5.5 to 7 inches. Effective rooting depth is 20 to 30 inches. These soils are used for irrigated pasture and wildlife habitat. Representative profile of Huberly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, located at the end of Swant Road, 25 feet north of road, NW 1/4SW 1/4 section 15, T. 2 S., R. 2 W.: Al-0 to 8 inches, very dark-gray (IOYR 3/1) silt loam, ry (IOYR 6/1) dry; few, faint, dark-gray IOOYR 4/1) mottles; strong, fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky • and slightly plastic; many fine roots; many, fine, irregular pores; medium acid (pH .6.0) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 7 to 9 inches thick. B1-8 to 15 inches, grayish-brown (IOYR 5/2) silt loam, light gray (IOYR 4/1) and reddish brown (5YR 4/4) dry; moderate, medium and fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky and slightly plastic; common fine roots; many, medium and fine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; clear, smooth boundary. 5 to 10 inches thick 132-15 to 25 inches, grayish-brown (IOYR 5/2) heavy silt loam, light gray (IOYR 7/2) dry; many, distinct mottles of dark brown (7.5YR 4/2) ; moderate, coarse and medium, subangu ar blocky structure; hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; common fine roots; many, medium and fine, tubular pores; very thin continuous clay films in some pores; medium acid (pH 5.7) ; clear, smooth boundary. 6 to 15 inches thick. UBx-25 to 38 inches, dark grayish-brown (IOYR 4/2) silt loam, light brownish gray QOYR 6/2) dry, grayish brown (IOYR 5/2) silt and sand coatings on faces of peds; common fine distinct dark yellowish brown (IOYR 4/4) mottles; weak, coarse, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, nonsticky and slightly plastic; common fine roots; many, medium and fine, tubular pores; few, thin, continuous clay films in some pores; few, fine, manganese stains; medium acid (pH 5.6) ; clear, smooth boundary. 4 to 15 inches thick. IIICx-38 to 42 inches, mottled gray (IOYR 511), brown (IOYR 5/3), dark grayish brown (IOYR 4/2) and dark brown (IOYR 4/3) silt loam; massive; slightly hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; few fine, tubular pores; very thin continuous clay films in some pores; few black manganese stains; medium acid (pH 5.6). Faint mottles with chroma of 4 or less may occur throughout the A horizon or only in the lower part. The B horizon is grayish brown, brown, or dark grayish brown. Mottling is distinct to prominent. Texture ranges from silt loam to silty clay loam. The fragipan is at a depth of 20 to 30 inches and has weak, coarse, subangular blocky or prismatic structure or is structureless and has fracture planes forming polygons.. Brittleness ranges from weak to moderate and moist consistence from firm to very firm. s . s? o s-r o~mfhis nearly level soil is in concave positions on broad valley'terraces. It has the profile described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha, Verboort, and Quatama soils, which make up as much a's 10 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow to ponded, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Capability unit Illw-4; wildlife group 1. • able to firm and is brittle. The C horizon is silty clay or clay with 3 to 25 percent fine, weathered igneous rock fragments. 28B-Laurelwood silt loam, 3 to 7 percent slopes. This gently sloping soil is. on long, convex side slopes on uplands. It has the profile described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Kinton, Helvetia, Saum, Melbourne, and Jory soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Capability unit Ile-3; woodland suitability group 2o2; wildlife group 3. 28C-Laurelwood silt loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes. This moderately sloping soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Kinton, Helvetia, Saum, Melbourne, and Jory soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. Capability unit Ile-3; woodland suitability group 2o2; wildlife group 3. 28D-Laurelwood silt loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes. This moderately steep soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Kinton, Helvetia, Saum, Melbourne, and Jory soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. Capability unit IlIe-2; woodland suitability group 2o2 ; wildlife group 3. 28E-Laurelwood silt loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes. This steep soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Kinton, Helvetia, Melbourne, Saum, and Jory soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is severe. Capability unit IVe-2; woodland suitability group 2o2; wildlife group 3. 29E-Laurelwood silt loam, 3 to 30 percent slopes. This gently sloping to steep soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Jory, Kinton, Melbourne, and Saum soils, which make up as much as 20 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium to rapid, and the hazard of erosion is moderate to severe. Most of this soil is used for timber. The soil is suitable for cropland. Capability unit IVe-2; woodland suitability group 202; wildlife group 3. 29F-Laurelwood silt loam, 30 to 60 ercent slopes. This steep to very steep soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Jory, Kinton, Melbourne, and Saum soils, which make up as much as 20 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is rappid, and the hazard of erosion is severe. Capability unit VIe; woodland suitability group 2r2; wildlife group 3. ~The McBee series consists of moderately well drained soils that fonned in alluvium on flood plains. Slope is 0 to 3 percent. Elevation is 100 to 300 feet. • Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is ash, cottonwood, and willow. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 60 inches, average annual air temperature is 50° to 540 F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is dark-brown silty clay loam about 11 inches thick. The subsoil is silty clay loam about 34 inches thick. It is dark brown and has common to many, fine, dark yellowish-brown, gray, and dark grayish-brown mottles. The substratum is dark-gray clay loam about 20 inches thick. The profile is medium acid in the surface layer and slightly acid in the subsoil and substratum. Permeability is moderate. Available water capacity is 10 to 12 inches. Effective rooting depth is more than 60 inches. These soils are used for irrigated vegetable crops, small grain, irrigated hay, irrigated pasture, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Representative profile of McBee silty clay loam, located about 40 feet south of the road, NWI/4NE114SW1/4 section 36, T. 1 S., R. 4 W.: Ap-0 to 7 inches, dark-brown (IOYR 3/3) silty clay loam, brown (IOYR 5/3) dry; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and plastic; many very fine roots; many, very fine, irregular pores; medium acid (pH 6.0 ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 6 to 9 inches thick. A12-7 to 11 inches, dark-brown (IOYR 3/3) silty clay loam, brown (IOYR 5/3) dry; few, fine, faint mottles of dark yellowish brown (IOYR 4/4) ; weak, fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; many fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 6.0) ; clear, smooth boundary. 0 to 5 inches thick. BI-11 to 24 inches, dark-brown (IOYR 3/3) silty clay loam, brown (IOYR 5/3) dry; common, fine, faint mottles of dark yellowish brown (IOYR 4/4) ; moderate, fine subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; common fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; slightly acid (pH 6.2) ; clear, smooth boundary. 0 to 16 inches thick. 132-24 to 38 inches, fine variegated dark-brown, gray, and dark yellowish-brown (IOYR 3/3) silty clay loam, brown (IOYR 5/3) dry; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, firm, sticky and plastic; common fine roots; common, fine, tubular pores; slightly acid (pH 6.4) ; gradual, smooth boundary.. 8 to 16 inches thick. 133-38 to 45 inches, many, fine, distinct mottles of dark grayish brown, gray, and dark yellowish brown IOYR 4/2 511, 4/4) silty clay loam, brown 80YR 6/3) dry; moderate parting to weak, inedium, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, firm, sticky and plastic; very few fine roots; many, very fine, tubular pores and few, fine, tubular pores; slightly acid (pH 6.4) ; gradual, smooth boundary. 4 to 11 inches thick. C45 to 65 inches, dark-gray (10YR 4/1) clay loam, gray (IOYR 5/1) dry; many, medium and fine, distinct mottles of very dark brown and dark brown (IOYR 2/2 and 3/3) ; massive; many, very fine, tubular pores; slightly acid (pH 6.4). The solum is 30 to 48 inches thick. The A horizon is dark colored to a depth of more than 20 inches. Coarse fragments are commonly absent in the control section, but their content ranges to 20 percent below a depth of 35 inches and to 50 percent below a depth of 40 inches. The B horizon is silty cla loam or clay loam. The C horizon is clay loam to clay. ` Fit earl level soil is in areas a ong arger streams ig: Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Chehalis, Cove, and Wapato soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Flooding is frequent, and the hazard of streambank erosion is high. Capability unit IIw4; wildlife group 1. • Melbourne series The Melbourne series consists of well-drained soils that formed in residuum and colluvium weathered from sedimentary rock on uplands. Slope is 2 to 60 percent. Elevation is 300 to 800 feet. Vegetation is Douglas-fir, Oregon white oak, poison-oak, wild rose, shrubs, and forbs. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 60 inches, average annual air temperature is 51° to 54° F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is dark-brown and dark yellowish-brown silty clay loam about 10 inches thick. The upper part of the subsoil is dark yellowish-brown silty clay loam about 8 inches thick, and the lower part is brown silty clay about 32 inches thick. The substratum is yellowish-brown silty clay about 16 inches thick. The profile is slightly acid and medium acid in the surface layer, medium acid in the upper part of the subsoil, and strongly acid in the lower part of the subsoil and in the substratum Permeability is moderately slow. Available water capacity is 3.5 to 6 inches. Water-supplying capacity is 17 to 24 inches. Effective rooting depth is more than 60 inches. These soils are used for timber, irrigated berries, hay, pasture, wildlife habitat, recreation, and water supply. Figure 9: McBee silty clay loam on nearly level flood plain. Laurehvood soils on moderately steep uplands in background. C-55 to 60 inches, yellowish-red (5YR 5/8) silty clay loam with streaks of yellowish-brown (10YR 5/6), strong brown (7.5YR 5/8) dry; massive; slightly hard, friable, sticky and plastic; fe fine roots; many, very fine, irregular pores few moderately thick clay films on rock fragments and in pores; 50 percent weathered siltstone fragments; strongly acid (pH 5.4) . Depth to fractured, partially consolidated siltstone and shale is 40 to 60 inches or more. The Bt horizon is silty clay loam to silty clay and averages 35 to 50 percent clay. The C horizon consists of partially weathered, fractured siltstone or shale, with moderately fne textured material filling the fractures. 36C-Pervina silty clay loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes. This strongly sloping soil is on uplands. It has a profile similar to the one described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Melby, Melbourne, Olyic, and Tolke soils, gently sloping Pervina soils, and steeper -Pervina soils. Included soils make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil is used for pasture, timber, water supply, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Capability unit IIIe-7 ; woodland suitability group 201; wildlife group 4. 36D-Pervina silty clay loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes. This moderately steep soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Melby, Melbourne, Olyic, and Tolke soils. Also included were areas of Pervina soils that are steeper or less sloping than this Pervina soil. Included soils make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil is used for pasture, timber, water supply, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Capability unit IIIe-7; woodland suitability group 201; wildlife group 4. 36E-Pervina silty clay loam, 20 to 30 percent slopes. This steep soil is on uplands. It has the profile described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Melby, Melbourne, Olyic, and Tolke soils. Also included were areas of Pervina soils that are steeper or less sloping than this Pervina soil. Included soils make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runofff~ is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is severe. This soil is used for pasture, timber, water supply, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Capability unit IVe-3 ; woodland suitability group 201; wildlife group 4. 36F-Pervina silty clay loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes. This very steep soil is on uplands. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Melby, Melbourne, Olyic, and Tolke soils. Also included are areas of Pervina soils that are less sloping than this Pervina soil. Included soils make up as much as 20 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of erosion is very severe. This soil is used mainly for timber. Other uses include water supply, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Capability unit VIe ; woodland suitability group 2rl; wildlife group 4. MAIR • - - The Quatama series consists of moderately well drained soils that formed in mixed, loamy alluvium on old terraces. Slope is 0 to 20 percent. Elevation is 140 to 200 feet. Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is Douglas-fir, western redcedar, Oregon white oak, ash, Oregon-grape, grasses, and forbs. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 50 inches, average annual air temperature is 52° to 54° F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is dark-brown loam about 9 inches thick. The subsoil is dark yellowish-brown loam and clay loam about 34 inches thick. The substratum is dark. yellowish-brown loam about 19 inches thick. The profile is medium acid throughout. Permeability is moderately slow. Available water capacity is 8 to 10 inches. Water-supplying capacity is 18 to 20 inches. Effective rooting depth is over 60 inches. These soils are used for irrigated berries, irrigated vegetable crops, orchards, small grain, irrigated hay, irrigated pasture, homesites, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Representative profile of Quatama loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, located about 100 feet east of the road in the southeast corner of the SW1/4NW1/4NE1/4 section 9, T. 2 S., R. 2 W.: Ap-0 to 9 inches, dark-brown (10YR 3/3) loam, brown (IOYR 5/3) dry, modderate, fine and very fine, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky and slightly plastic; common fine roots; many, fine and very fine, irregular pores; medium acid (pH 5.6) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 7 to 9 inches thick. 131-9 to 15 inches, dark yellowish-brown (10YR 3/4) loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) dry; weak, coarse, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, nonsticky and plastic; very few fine roots; many, medium and fine, tubular pores; thin, continuous clay films in root channels and pores; medium and fine, tubular pores; • thin, continuous clay films in root channels and pores; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; clear, smooth boundary. 0 to 7 inches thick.'. B21t-15 to 21 inches, dark yellowish-brown (10YR 3/4) clay loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) dry; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; few very fine roots; many, fine, tubular pores; thin, continuous clay films in pores and few, thin clay films on peds; medium acid (pH 5.8); clear, smooth boundary. 5 to 10 inches thick. B22t-21 to 30 inches, dark yellowish-brown (10YR 3/4) clay loam, pale brown (IOYR 6/3) dry; few, fine, distinct, light brownish-gray (1 OYR 6/2) and I . 0 reddish-brown (5YR 4/3) mottles; weak, hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; very few roots; many, coarse, medium, and fine, tubular pores; continuous clay films in pores and on peds; common manganese stains; medium acid (pH 5.9) ; gradual irregular boundary. 6 to 18 inches thick. B300 to 43 inches, dark yellowish-brown (10YR 3/4) loam, pale brown (10YR 6/3) dry, common, fine, dark grayish-brown (10YR 4/2) mottles; massive in places parting to weak, coarse, subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, firm, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; com- mon, large and medium, tubular pores; thin continuous clay films on peds and in pores; medium acid (pH 6.0) ; gradual, irregular boundary. 10 to 20 inches thick. C43 to 62 inches, dark yellowish-brown (10YR 3/4) loam, yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) dry; common grayish-brown (IOYR 6/2 & 5/8 ) mottles; massive; hard, firm, sligghtly sticky and slightly plastic; common, fine, tubular pores; medium acid (pH 6.0). The thickness of the solum ranges from 40 to 60 inches. Texture of the A horizon is silt loam to loam. The Bt horizon ranges in texture from loam to clay loam. Structure in the Bt horizon ranges from moderate, coarse to fine, subangular blocky in the upper part and from nearly massive to weak, coarse, subangular blocky in the lower part. Clay films are thin to moderately thick, and they are in channels, in pores, and on vertical and horizontal ped faces. Stratified layers of sandy loam to loamy sand occur below a depth of 40 inches in laces. " mail a - r - n Ad- ----,,,This nearly leve soilis~terra e ` rofile`' described as representative of the series. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha, Hillsboro, and Huberly soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Ca abili unit IIw-1 wildlife,gr_ou"p 2. o"- e~sioiis gently sloping soi is on ekes. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha, Hillsboro, and Huberly soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. Capability unit'Ile-2; wildlife group 2. 37C-Quatama loam, 7 to 12 percent slopes. This moderately sloping soil is on terraces. Included.with this "soil in mapping were areas of Aloha, Hillsboro, and Huberly soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. Capability unit Ile-2; wildlife group 2. 37D-Quatama loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes. This moderately steep soil is on dissected terraces. Included with this soil in mapping were areas of Aloha, Hillsboro, and Huberly soils, which make up as much as 15 percent of this mapping unit. 0 Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. Capability unit IIIe-5; wildlife group 2. Saum series The Saum series consists of well-drained soils that formed in mixed colian material, old alluvium, and residuum from basalt on uplands. Slope is 2 to 60 percent. Elevation is 250 to 1,200 feet. Where these soils are not cultivated, the vegetation is Douglas-fir, Oregon white oak, hazelbrush, poison-oak, grasses, and forbs. Average annual precipitation is 40 to 50 inches, average annual air temperature is 51° to 54° F, and the frost-free period is 165 to 210 days. In a representative profile the surface layer is dark reddish-brown silt loam and silty clay loam about 14 inches thick. The subsoil is dark reddish-brown and reddish-brown silty clay loam about 18 inches thick. The substratum is yellowish-red silty clay loam about 18 inches thick Basalt bedrock is at a depth of 50 inches. The profile is medium acid throughout. Permeability is moderately slow. Available water capacity is 8 to 10.5 inches. Water-supplying capacity is 16 to 22 inches. Effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. These soils are used for irrigated strawberries, orchards, small grain, hay, pasture, timber, homesites, recreation, and wildlife habitat. Representative profile of Saum silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes, located about 25 feet north of the road in the SWl/4SE1/4SW1/4 section 7, T. 3 S., R 1 W.: Ap-0 to 8 inches, dark reddish-brown (5YR 3/2) silt loam, reddish brown (SYR 5/3) dry; moderate, medium, granular structure; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; many fine roots; many, very fine, irregular pores; 5 percent fine concretions; medium acid (pH 6.0) ; abrupt, smooth boundary. 5 to 8 inches thick. A12-8 to 14 inches, dark reddish-brown (5YR 3/3) silty clay loam, reddish brown (5YR 5/4) dry; moderate, medium, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; many fine roots; many, fine, tubular pores; 5 percent fine concretions; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; clear, smooth boundary. 5 to 8 inches thick. 132-14 to 23 inches, dark reddish-brown (5YR 3/4) silty clay loam, reddish brown (5YR 5/4) dry; moderate, medium and fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; many fine roots; many, fine, tubular ores; few pebbles; medium acid (pH 5.8) ; clear, smooth boundary. 8 to 15 inches thick. IIB3-23 to 32 inches, reddish-brown (5YR 4/4) silty clay loam, yellowish red (5YR 5/6) dry; weak, medium and fine, subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, slightly sticky and plastic; few fine roots; many, fine, tubular pores; 20 percent weathered pebbles and 10 percent stones; few, NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT REPORT Bonita Park Prepared For: City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard a Tigard, Oregon 97223 lphiffiffl KURAHASHI 9 ASSOCIATES,INC. Civil Engineering Water Resources Landscape Architecture Planning surveying 15580 SW Jay Street, Suite 200 Beaverton, Oregon 97006 Phone: (503) 644-6842 Fax: (503) 644-9731 July 17, 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 2 STEP 1: SENSATIVE AREA CERTIFICATE FORM .............................................................................2 STEP 2: DELINEATE BOUNDARIES OF SENSITIVE AREA .................................................................2 1. Wetlands 2 2 Intermittent and /or Perennial Streams . 2 3. Springs 2 4 Natural Lakes or Ponds . 2 STEP 3: DETERMINE THE VEGETATED CORREDOR WIDTH FOR EACH SENSATIVE AREA 2 STEP 4: DETERMINE THE EXISTING VEGETATIVE CORRIDOR CONDITION ..................................3 1. Identify the Plant Community Types Present in Vegetated Corridor 3 2. Select Representative Sample Points 3 3. Characterize Each Plant Community Type 3 4. Determine cover by native species, invasive species, and noxious species 3 5. Determine Existing Vegetated Corridor Condition for Each Plant Community 3 6. Transfer Results to Base Map 4 STEP 5: ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENTS ...............................................................................................4 STEP 6: PREPARE THE NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT REPORT 4 . Table 1: Vegetative Communities 5 REFERENCES . 9 FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP FIGURE 2: TAX LOT MAP FIGURE 3: WETLAND BOUNDARY MAP FIGURE 4: WETLAND DETAIL MAP WITH DATA POINT LOCATIONS FIGURE 5: PLANT COMMUNITIES APPENDIX A: SENSITIVE AREA CERTIFICATE FORM APPENDIX B: DATA SHEETS Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 .INTRODUCTION Kurahashi & Associates, Inc., while under contract with the City of Tigard, completed a wetland delineation / determination study. The on-site delineation study was performed March 17 and 24, 2002 between SW Milton Court and Fanno Creek (T2S RIW Sect 12 Tax Lots 200, 1800, 6200, and 6400) (Figure 1 and 2). The purpose of this study was to determine the possible environmental affects of creating a neighborhood park between SW Milton Court and Fanno Creek. This report is the result of the wetland study. STEP 1: SENSATIVE AREA CERTIFICATE FORM 1. The neighborhood park is being proposed on a site that has sensitive areas consisting of wetlands and a perennial stream that flows west of the determined wetlands. The completed Sensitive Area Certificate Form is attached in Appendix A. 2. Not applicable. 3. Sensitive areas were found, so continue to Step 2., STEP 2: DELINEATE BOUNDARIES OF SENSITIVE AREA 1. WETLANDS a. 22 wetland boundary points and 19 wetland data points were established to define 2 wetlands within the study area. An additional data plot was collected outside the area as a reference point (data point 20). The boundaries were flagged on March 17 and March 24 and surveyed. The surveyed wetland boundaries are shown in Figure 3 and 4. Approximately 0.28 acres are wetlands. The northern wetland is. approximately 0.21 acres. The southern wetland is approximately 0.07 acres. b. The wetland boundary was flagged, surveyed, mapped and is attached as Figure 3 and 4. 2. INTERMITTENT AND /OR PERENNIAL STREAMS a. Fanno Creek, a perennial stream, meanders through the middle of the studied are. There is a tributary stream the flows into Fanno Creek from the west outside of the proposed neighborhood park. b. The elevation of the top bank of the stream ranges from 130-140 feet above sea level. This is above the 2-year, 24-hour storm event. This area was delineated and surveyed. See Figure 3 and 4. c. Not applicable. The streams had defined channels. 3. SPRINGS a. No springs were found on the site or within 200 feet of the site. 4. NATURAL LAKES OR PONDS. a. No natural lakes or ponds were found on the site or within 200 feet of the site. STEP 3: DETERMINE THE VEGETATED CORREDOR WIDTH FOR EACH SENSATIVE AREA 1. The procedures in Chapter 3 of the Clean Water Service's Design and Construction Standards were used to determine the vegetated corridor width. 2. The wetland sensitive areas were surveyed, staked, and are mapped in Figure 3 and 4. The Vegetative Corridors Boundaries are mapped in Figure 5. This includes areas within 200 feet of the study area. Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 STEP 4: DETERMINE THE EXISTING VEGETATIVE CORRIDOR CONDITION 1. IDENTIFY THE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES PRESENT IN VEGETATED CORRIDOR a. Each vegetative community has been determined and described in Table 1. b. The location of each of plant community is mapped in Figure 5. 2. SELECT REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE POINTS a. A representative sample point was chosen for each plant community. b. The location of the sample points for the vegetative community includes data points 1-20 and additional points that are shown in Figure 5. c. At least one data point was established for each vegetative community and is shown in Figure 5. 3. CHARACTERIZE EACH PLANT COMMUNITY TYPE a. At the sample points, a visual determination was made of all species that provided greater than 5% cover within the plot boundary. This is shown in Table 1. b. A 10-foot radius plot for herbs and a 30-foot radius plot for woody vegetation was used. c. The boundaries were adjusted to avoid any community overlap. These boundaries are shown in Figure 5. 4. DETERMINE COVER BY NATIVE SPECIES, INVASIVE SPECIES, AND NOXIOUS SPECIES. a. For each community type, the percent cover of native and invasive species was determined and is shown in Table 1. b. The cover estimates for communities with more than one sample plot were averaged and are shown in Table 1. c. Native species are as defined by the Portland Plant List. d. Noxious species are defined by the Oregon Department of Agriculture's Noxious Weed List and the Portland Plant List. e. Invasive species were limited to Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), teasel (Dipsacus fullonum), English ivy (Hedra heliz), nightshade (Solanum sp.), and clematis (Clematis ligusticifolia and C. vitabla). 5. DETERMINE EXISTING VEGETATED CORRIDOR CONDITION FOR EACH PLANT COMMUNITY a. Each plant community was evaluated and each specific plant community was analyzed and evaluated for "tier" analysis purpose. The Natural Resource Assessment revealed that 2 of the communities are marginal, and one is good. The rest of the plant communities are degraded. This is shown in Table 1. b. Alder / Ash Vegetated Corridor Condition Community 1. 95 % cover by native species. 2. 70 % tree canopy cover 3. 25 % is covered by invasive species and noxious weeds 4. Vegetative Corridor Condition = Good c. Camas Meadow Vegetated Corridor Condition Community 1. 40 % cover by native species. 2. 10 % tree canopy cover 3. 15 % is covered by invasive species and noxious weeds 4. Vegetative Corridor Condition = Degraded d. Grass Land Meadow Vegetated Corridor Condition Community 1. 10 % cover by native species. 2. 0 % tree canopy cover 3. 5 % is covered by invasive species and noxious weeds 4. Vegetative Corridor Condition = Degraded e. Himalayan Blackberry Vegetated Corridor Condition Community 1. 0 % cover by native species. 2. 0 % tree canopy cover Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 • 1 100 % is covered by invasive species and noxious weeds 4. Vegetative Corridor Condition = Degraded f. Mixed Forest Vegetated Corridor Condition Community 1. 50 % cover by native species. 2. 5 % tree canopy cover 3. 10 % is covered by invasive species and noxious weeds 4. Vegetative Corridor Condition = Marginal g. Oak/ Ash Stand Vegetated Corridor Condition Community 1. 35 % cover by native species. 2. 30 % tree canopy cover 3. 10 % is covered by invasive species and noxious weeds 4. Vegetative Corridor Condition = Degraded h. Oak Forest Vegetated Corridor Condition Community 1. 125 % cover by native species. 2. 80 % tree canopy cover 3. 40 % is covered by invasive species and noxious weeds 4. Vegetative Corridor Condition = Good i. Reed Canary Grass Vegetated Corridor Condition Community 1. 0 % cover by native species. 2. 0 % tree canopy cover 3. 100 % is covered by invasive species and noxious weeds 4. Vegetative Corridor Condition = Degraded j. Scrub / Shrub Vegetated Corridor Condition Community 1. 50 % cover by native species. 2. 40 % tree canopy cover 3. 50 % is covered by invasive species and noxious weeds 4. Vegetative Corridor Condition =Marginal 6. TRANSFER RESULTS TO BASE MAP a. The condition of each plant community is shown on Figure 5. STEP 5: ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENTS 1. Development is not proposed within 35 feet from the top of a ravine. Therefore, "A through E" does not apply. 2. A Tier 2 Analysis is not proposed 3. A complete RSAT is not required. STEP 6: PREPARE THE NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT REPORT 1. The report documenting the site and adjacent property sensitive area, vegetated corridor conditions, and slope has been completed. 2. Table I has a description of the plant communities. They are also mapped in Figure 5. 3. The data sheets are attached in Addendum B. An RSAT was not required. The vegetative corridor analysis is included in this report and in mapped in Figure 5. 4. At least one copy of the site base map is included in this report. Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 4 TABLE 1: VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES Plant Scientific Name & % Cover of Native Invasive/ - Community Community Common Name Community Plants Trees Noxious Niche Alder / Ash Alnus rubra Stand Red alder 30 X X A/A Cornus sericea Red-osier dogwood 10 X Fraxinus latifolia Oregon ash 40 X X Galium spp E Bedstraw 10 X Phalaris arundinacea - Reed canary grass 10 X Physocarpus capitatus Pacific Ninebark 5 X Rubus discolor Himalayan blackberry 15 X 120% 95% 70% 25% GOOD Camas Alopecuruspratensis Meadow Meadow foxtail 10 C Agrostis tenius Colonial bent grass 20 Camassia quamash Common camas 5 X Crataegus monogyna One-seed hawthorn 10 X Juncus e dusus Common rush 15 X Juncus patens Spreading rush 25 Quercus garryana Garry oak 10 X X Rubus discolor Himalayan blackberry 5 X Vicia americana American vetch 10 X Trifolium repens White clover 5 115% 40% 10% 15% D EGRADED Grass Land Alopecurus pratensis 5 Meadow Meadow foxtail (GL) Agrostis tenius Colonial bentgrass 15 Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 0 Alopecurus pratensis Meadow foxtail Cardamine occidentalis 5 X Western bittercress Carex obnupta 5 X Slough Sedge Cirsium avense 5 X Creeping thistle Crataegus monogyna X One-seed hawthorn Daucus carota X Queen Anne's Lace Festuca arundinacea 45 Kentucky fescue Geranium dissectum Cut leaf geranium Juncus patens 10 Spreading rush Phalaris arundinacea X Reed canary grass Plantango lanceolata English latain Quercus garryana X X Garry oak Rubus discolor X Himalayan blackberry Taraxacunt of iicinale X Common dandelion Vicia americana X American vetch 90% 10% 0% 5% D EGRADED Himalayan Rubus discolor Blackberry Himalayan blackberry 100 X (HBB) 100% 0% 0% 100% DEGRADED Mixed Forest Acer macrophylum 10 X X Big leaf maple Alnus rubra 30 X X Red alder Corylus cornuta 10 X Beaked hazelnut Pseudotsuga menziesii 40 Douglas Fir Oemleria cerasiformis 10 X Indian plum Polystichum munitum 20 X Western swordfern Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 9 0 Quercus garryana 5 X X Garry oak Rubus discolor 10 Himalayan blackberry X. Symphorocarpos albus 10 X Common snowberry Trillium ovatum Pacific trillium 5 X 150% 50% 5% 10% MARGINAL Oak / Ash Agrostis lenius Stand Colonial bentgrass 25 O/A Alopecurus.pratensis Meadow foxtail 20 Crataegus monogyna One-seed hawthorn 10 x Festuca arundinacea 15 Kentucky fescue Fraxinus latifolia 10 X X Oregon ash Galium triflorum Sweetscented bedstraw x Juncus effusus Common rush x Juncus patens 10 Spreading rush Polygonum lapathifolium Weed willow Quercus garryana 20 X X Garry oak Ranunculus repens Creeping buttercup Vicia americana American vetch 5 X 115% 35% 30% 10% D EGRADED Oak Forest Agrostis tenius O Colonial bentgrass 5 Crataegus monogyna One-seed hawthorn 20 X Fraxinus latifolia Oregon ash 20 X X Juncus effusus Common rush 10 X Juncus patens Spreading rush 40 Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 • • Quercus garryana Ga oak 60 X X Rosa pisocarpa 5 X Swam rose Rubus discolor. Himalayan blackberry 20 X Rubus ursinus Dewberry 10 X Symphorocarpos albus Common snowberry 30 X 220% 125% 80% 40% GOOD Reed Canary Phalaris arundinacea ass Reed Canary Grass 100 X CG 100% 0% 0% 100% D EGRADED Scrub / Shrub Alnus rubra SS Red alder 10 X X Cornus sericea Red-osier dogwood 10 X Crateagus monog ma One-seed hawthorn 10 X Phalaris arundinacea Reed canary grass 10 X Rubus discolor Himalayan blackberry 20 X Salix spp. 30 X- X Willow Solanum dulcamara Climbing nightshade 10 X 100% 50% 40% 50% MARGINAL Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2002 REFERENCES Kollmorgan Corporation. 1995. Munsell Soil Color Charts. MacBeth Division of Kollmorgen Corporation, Baltimore, MD. Reed, Porter B, Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services Biological Report No. 88 (26.9) Reed, Porter B., Jr., et at. 1993. 1993 Supplement to List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. Washington DC. 10 pp. Oregon Department of Transportation. 2001: Washington County Atlas. Oregon Department of Transportation Geographic Information Services. Salem, Oregon. Page 34-1. U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Services, Springfield, VA. USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1975. Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station. Sheets 7A, 12A, 44, 47. USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1982. Soil Survey of Washington County, Oregon. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station. http://ice.or.nres.usda.gov/websitelwashingtonlviewer.htm. Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. July 17, 2602 9 • . • fit', iG- 36 ~4x 1 f ST. .3<sY u~x E3 k!IT v ' ~ .R ~ ssKzr ~ :,xµr~ t, r T SOURCE: ODOT GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SERVICES 0 1320 2640 SCALE: 1"= 2640 a -7/1 1/02 !O" SCAM I"=2640 KURAIUSKI BONITA PARK D"w" Or* EMH X0=40 9. INC. FIGURE Tat" nowum" Jaw obvo,, awto WO VICINITY MAP KS 1 at 1 O 2,350 4,700 SCALE: 1"= 4,700 DATE: 7-10-02 scar 14,700' KURAHASHI BONITA PARK MvM BY. EMH ac ~OCIATM. INC. a.n boa - rur R"Mwvm FIGME _ TAX LOT MAP 2 165M SR Jay Btaeey B%A" zoo e~ (W.).. KKAII 2035 1 of 1 • 0 APPENDIX A: SENSITIVE AREA CERTIFICATE FORM 07117l2U02 15.09 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard Duane Roberts - Sensative Areas Cettifca6rm-2035.doc 9001 t;r Services l a 001 eolumitratul is Clear. File Number Sensitive Areas Certification Form Property Owner Name City of Tigard (Duane Roberts) Address 13125 SW Hall Blvd City/State/Zip Ti and Oregon 97223 Telephone .Fax (503) 6394171 (503) 684-7297 E-mail duane@cLtigard.or.us . Authorized Agent - Name Kurahasht & Associates Ne. (Gregory Kurahashi) _ Address 15580 SW Jay Street Suite 200 City/State/Zip Beaverton Ore on 97008 Telephone Fax (503) 644-6842 (503) 644-9731 E-mail gregk@kurahashi"com Project Location Street, road, or other descriptive location Between SW Milton Court and Fanno Creek Legal Description: Quarter Section Township Range NE 12/(1) 2S 1W " In or near (city or town) County Tax Map # Tax Lot # Tigard Washington 2S112BA 200, 6200, 200, 1800, 6200, 6400 6400; 2SI12AB 1800 Waterway River Mile Latitude Longitude Fanno Creek 2 45°25' 32" 1220451141- Adjacent Property Information: Street, road, or other descriptive location 7775 SW Bonita Road Tigard WashIn ton 2S112BA06300 6300 Legal Description: Quarter Section Township Range SW 12 2S 1W In or near (city or town) County Tax Map # Tax Lot # U7%17/LUUL 14:34 FAA 5036847ZU7 - t:1ty oT 'Tigard 10002 r uane Waterway River Mile Latitude Lon itude Fanno Creek 2 4524' S4" 1245' 14" File Number An on-site, water-quality-sensitive area reconnaissance was completed on: Date By Title Company July 17, 200 Brent Davis Environmental Scientist Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. A. Existence of Water-Quality-Sensitive Areas As defined in the District's Design and Construction Standards, water-quality=sensitive areas: d% do not exist on site (check appropriate box). - do do not exist within 200' on adjacent properties, or unable to evaluate adjacent property (check appropriate box). • If water-quality-sensitive areas exist, complete Section B below. • If water-quality-sensitive areas do not exist, skip Section B, sign this form and submit to the District with plan approval package. B. Types of Water-Quality-Sensitive Areas The type(s) of water-quality-sensitive area(s) that occur on site or within 200 R on adjacent properties are (check all that apply): lands spring(s) intermittent stream(s) X perennial stream(s) ponds Sign this form and submit to the District with plan approval package and one (1) copy of the Natural Resources Assessment Report (information and forms are available through the District). • The Natural Resources Assessment Report includes: • Wetland Delineation Report per DSL / Corps reporting requirements (if wetlands present). • Rapid Stream Assessment Technique Form and maps or other District-approved assessment (if construction or discharge is proposed into, through, or across an intermittent or perennial streams). • Vegetated corridor documentation, including a base map and photographs showing the surveyed location of all sensitive areas, vegetated corridors, and vegetated corridor condition. I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this document, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, this information is true, complete, and accurate. Property Owner: ]Duane Roberts Print/Type Name PrintfType Title CJ / ~~~July 72002 Signature Date A7 /17/9AA0 trVn 19. e, r-,- - n.rni mAAo 0 • APPENDIX B DATA SHEETS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION ~Pr0j6ct/S t6 Bonita Park Date: 3 17 OZ Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County-: Washington Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? a No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes ® Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? ®e y N4 ` Plot ID: (if needed, explain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species % Cover / elative Indicator I Species , % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs - 90 J .•i tl J w 0Wpg,)TALA< C Saplings/S hrubs Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATrvE °/u COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC-:>OBL 0 - # ofDominants FAC-,*UPL L - - I - 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: FESTVC,A TOF i S 4P-E 01--t 00 M tM O Q<-C HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe iri Remarks): _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: Inundation ~ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: Secondary Indicators: Depth to Free Water in Pit: Z (in ) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches . _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: 0 (in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: I~JMN1~.6~5 SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase):. ~t. L~7CC- StL7 Taxonomy (Subgroup): OtKI ( t-t A -1 L[.~'{ LA ? La x G Api S N~. Drainage Class: Field Observations Mnpemv Confirm Mapped Type? Yes o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon unsell Moist Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, Size/Contrast etc n-10 Q 2,136 ►G.Jr GUN Lc't m - bar 41 In C. -S t- O 14 L6 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol. _ Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _T _ _ _ _ Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes (Rio (Circle) • Wetland Hydrology Present? (~q No (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? , No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? a No Remarks: A'S B iJ L ~.J E'-FL- fVJ Doan i nl R Tc D j3:( (!;g*5 bv3 dMw1tt--S W(TF1 D(ST'lnlcT Ij YPRcj~G¢ DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: fT o Project%Site: Bonita Park y County:.- Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area p potential Problem Area?, Yes Plot ID: if needed, ex• laiti do reverse.)' VFC_TiT ATT(1N Species Cover / (Relative Indicator S ecie$ . . - % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs tZ X f? OCT O L S LJ esoSE 9.61 j M 1+0-4 < J Saplings/Shrubs S ,5+ Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTERRELATNE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACr->OBL O - # of Dominants FAC- c* UPL - - - O Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100 Remarks: ?Z 12o Cj:,%16P- 1Z15Q%) I RGp F6 M 5T#L6VA- f-,A- t700& I A3gN4-6' NVDR ()T ,nr:V _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Aerial Photographs ~C Inundation _ Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: Z (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: O _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name ~Ahh n (Series and Phase): 'r lac- 51VN CLA-4 UA M Drainage Class: Field Observations IY1~`RA~'C ~EtL _ Taxonomy (Subgroup): &Ttc- ,P LOXE A~0"~& Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon Munsell Moist) unsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc 0 -C4 A mot ID~12 GooKmwi tw uA - 2• 3 Z 5-49 Z-5-17, CcmatorJ Co~(~S~ 'S It Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol. Concretions Histic Epipedon _ _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils . Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List ? _ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List )r- Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: Dav rt teas l n) C {Xo M jk' -2- Kk4TA tx WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? e No (Circle) ircle Wetland Hydrology Present? a No C) H dric Soils Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? es No Y Remarks: • • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site - Bonita Park Date: o Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: ,Washington Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID- Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es ?Qo§> Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: 3 if needed, ex` lain on reverse.) VEGETATION ^ Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs LE AC.- I J Gss ErJS S c toccn~SE e~ Japtn~ <5 O Saplings/S hrubs Woody Vi nes ,50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC*OBL # of Dominants FAC- -:,UPL - - 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 56 Q Remarks: FEhc~cq ON ~~nnMoGtGs HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: -2~ Inundation < Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits X( Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: L (in.) Secondary Indicators: D th F W i 4 Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches ep to ree ater n Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: O (in. _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: f~ J nrt N►v Cr- S • SOILS • Map Unit Name 2's (Series and Phase): tAtDi: 5►LT`( CtA-1 ( LAM Drainage Class: Field Observations t~wa~wt a Eu. Taxonomy (Subgroup): Ourt G 1AA1 P►-0KER0U.5- Confum Mapped Type? Yes o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon Munsell Moist (Munsell Moist Size./Contrast etc O -CA 3 4 A s: 1t, Ct-A LoAon -116t Sy '311- to 6 Cb&h*Oa oo !5&,-J0,4 CLA t Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol - T Histic Epipedon = Sulfidic Odor Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils `T Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: (&Leq Pc PLET(045 ►1J 2 Ctj"eAf4 *1ACTfRtx WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? - Yes ® (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? es No (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? es No Remarks: 56tj560,JL- WETLR~~S Db^& 44 4Tt= A 3~ ` c GROSS on1 F}L) e..MoG~S VO tTtj DtSTeNc-- . 14-1pr-zoLoG j b • • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date. oZ -Project/Site: Bonita Park County. Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes o Plot ID: ~i 3 (if needed, explain on.reverse.) I7V t419'T A TYnl%J Species % Cover / (Relative % Indicator Species . % Cover / (Relative Indicator Trees Herbs p~ 30 AG- t JM x n)$ v 03 6 CS FAC-VW3 vs a o c ICJ 5 Coto A.. ~ Saylings/Shrubs S 2.5 # 14 L. a wwA !cECTJrA LS N1--. Woodv Vi nes ,50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC-:>OBL # of Dominants FAC- c:~UPL 2 2 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 33 Remarks: FESNG/~ p t4 0,5 M M o CA< S UX7"D ns n(_V Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Aerial Photographs _ Inundation _ Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available Water Marks + Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (u►) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: hr M M oGbC5 13 % a Z>r 5 T r N c T j4 -(arz,oco a-t f ~~S~~T • SOILS Map Unit Name n(~ (Series and Phase): &e?6e 51t. Taxonomy (Subgroup): U(,(lC Drainage Class: T`( CLA,4 Ut^ M Field Observations t oyCEQt~l1.S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) unsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc o--1 wttx 3 '51 UtY a LA ,4 "oN M for 2 S`I 41t 'j- 'I P. 3 ILI afAMOM fwxs'a L Hydrio Soil Indicators: Histosol ` . ' Histic Epipedon 'Sulfidic Odor Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: C~ ~i+4vEL 1 Ca(3~LE 1 N j T WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes io (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? • ie No (Circle Hydric Soils Present? es No Is-this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes CO Remarks: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION • Date: 3 ~Zy~ ~Z. Project/Site: ' Bonita Park County:.. Washington Applicant/Owner. City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator: Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Quo Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Q . No Plot ID: S if needed, ez lain on reverse.) I71GU! iTi T A T7nN • •.,v aaaaa Species % Cover / (Relative % Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative % Indicator Tree s Herbs CS vG 07im ce o ( w3WS AT OS LvJ lO -CO. u fro o C CegMiOrA c, O e- S JJ t ND 10 Saplings/Shrubs WoodVN ines 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vme Total # of Dominants FACbOBL # of Dominants FAC- bUPL - l Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- SO'76 Remarks: F-Sro -A 6#Q . !4itA► m o cic uvnuni nnv - . Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs Inundation _ Other X Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: -7 (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NJMrA06 s 'g011'.q Map Unit Name n~ (Series and Phase):. ~Yk,F~6E J+LT`I C.A~1 1'0A w, Drainage Class: Field Observations 1.loacc~PrZE 1,.~i.t. Taxonomy (Subgroup): Ou tC. 1A> L0k-G toL4 "S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon unsell Moist unsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc 2.54 313 Vk. 416 mw-~ A6P. o ST- 51t,7-i LLB Lopo-N -16r f3 S'q 2 to N Hydric Soil Indicatois: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon _ _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor ' Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: G tZi OEPC;Et-(o-.) S l rJ 2 It "r%k t} N/1Arr(L t x WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes to (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? es No Circle) H dric Soils Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. Yes No Y Remarks: 5EASOrj9L OET"r.)p 1,6MI^J TtD ~'A. FAC.- (oa145s D/~ R')r1%"OCICS W(Tt+ ►DiSrINCT lj,(DRat_oc-y aEL~o-j t+j,,,,,vc.KS ( ptzoL3r,F,A 19'(-6-01 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site it B P k Date: '313M oZ : on a ar Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Was ington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? © No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: (o (if needed, ex o'lain on reverse) ' VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species, % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs Z: t N6 c~Cc.laEnYT S ~ 1 M I SSEGTod A 45, M t✓ Al, 5r%S vlet3 US 20 G n+1 ER-~ c A~J C ~a C, SMlings/Shrubs Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACr->OBL # of Dominants FAC- c:>UPL - - l - 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) o Remarks: HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other _ No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO INDIGAT6/LS 0 0 SOILS Map Unit Name _ A (Series and Phase): r+(, E S cL" Taxonomy (Subgroup): OLTIc- 4ArF (A,1jq LCP%'A Drainage Class: Field Observations AAP-up&0rTw JeU .o XC-P pu.,S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors unsell Moist Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, Size/Contrast etc - no. y c Nct4 wtc"A a(Sr. StLT%A Ct.A LU40 ► 16 Cww gp. 01ti IL LO,~,MON co.►RS A Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol , Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ _ _ _ _ Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes (9 (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes 8 t r K n i Remarks: 0 • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION ProjecUSite: Bonita Park Date: - 2, D Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County:. Washington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes o Plot ID: (if needed, ex lain on reverse. VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative % Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs Oin1 0 kAo a A N t.E t.3 ROGol Oil ca (_0 P_ f-A( J c. R.sw,a• ~~v~ aSE CS - J~ J Ert s S v►7 Saplings/S hrubs (kOME)'. A S 1,5 _ M 5 Woody Vi nes $0/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc:~OBL O - .0 # of Dominants FAC- c:~UPL - - 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) ©?o Remarks: HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _X Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) FAC-Neutral Test _ _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WAT6R- STAiNfip L-6'>}-3E5 IN SrA6LL F34PG pF.PXeSS1o0 SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): PEE Sic- rq C'-+4 (,o A Drainage Class: Field Observations ApczFWw q3g,,,{_ Taxonomy (Subgroup): UL41C. ~4Pl oxEbtOLUS Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, unsell Moist Size/Contrast etc 53 A Q 3 1-3 1 LT CL LoAm --16t -1 .S F. to K L L Lo rv► Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions _ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes (Circle o Hydric Soils Present? Yes Is: this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes 8 Remarks: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION -Date: Z Z Project/Site: Bonita Park Washington County. . Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard . State: Oregon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (S) Transect ID: Is'the area a potential Problem Area? Yes t~ o Plot ID: (if needed, explain on reverse.) [7 Ti1' rATInM Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Species.. % Cover / (Relative % Indicator Tree s Herbs f c> t-Ac% pj~w-s G rA44 E i 57 V 1 'rerJ10S I S: C- 015 EC M (21ekerdlJOK GS N Saplings/S hrubs u rA A*ytg50-i(_h-tJA 57 Fed, Wood Y ines_.. , .50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (Ai: rER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACr>OBL O O # of Dominants FAC- UUPL 1 - l Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- Q Remarks: uvnDnr nr_V Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs Inundation _ Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (in•) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ~JD /N p(Gf}TGR-S 0 0 SOILS Map Unit Name 5% (Series and Phase): (ZEt L" Taxonomy (Subgroup): 1)uTic- RA K Ck Aq -O"4 Drainage Class: qq Field Observations L~ooc RATS WGU- b Y-EA4L Confirm Mapped Type? Yes eg) Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, unsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc o 2 - S►t.r Lt,~~ LoF to -lbr 13 tz 412 S o D► r. L.T CA14 Z ~ ► tss Hydric Soil Indicators: 'Histosol Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing'Conditions xGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: R6Dohtw►oEtPt-~iL t-E9'~'J2E} i,rJ Ct}/L.arK~- 2 ►M~}tnlx WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes Tab (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes idD (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? <XgED No . Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes i Remarks: 0. 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION ' Date: 2 0 II(I Project/Site: Bonita Park ashington County: W Applicant/Owner. City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? a No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes tG) Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes N Plot ID: 9 (if needed, explain on reverse.) ATV fr T A rrlrn T Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species, % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s . Herbs Jc IJo V 3S 1:7 - Gt A'6lJ , 4 -r T'JO 05 N bo uJ N1 ,.its cu. 10&- 4U <5 0♦ wcxy, c A•*,PA -r 4 5 L Saplings/S hrubs rLA'aT Cvn 1 o A•C- Mcr~o6 O c. GAS-sr a TWIus 4k Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE'% COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACI*OBL - #-of Dominants FAC- c*UPL - Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: bn~ ({J.H oC(GS ZVp • wt►n1 (oJE2 psi STRH^fF Tb `&C Qoµe^/R'Nr uvnuni nr_v Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge. Primary Indicators: Aerial Photographs _ Inundation Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: , Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (in) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: (AJ MMa G t<S 5 o e-k-- ft-CE W04-T69-. E) 61LJC P X 1 1-7 NO (1' rOjcf)-T"op s 3 7A SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): 11 `GeME6 5 L-rA C .4-A Taxonomy (Subgroup): ~ jUrI C. (~Ar b kGR- LOP"'n Drainage Class: Field Observations AA012G .ATE XU,S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes 6 Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc 021 Z 5A LTJ C CAM - C 2e,~L-q 31-L Sif- L411 , -SIG11 CLg 1I Lo.tni Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol _ Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor = Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed" on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: PLEDoXIwwP-4tc- PCWrO44FS MaT1(' F, 0 IN tLp R '20rJ Ir A- P-) Cl11,4ZAAA Z MigT(LiY, L FA 4EP-S r,wv2 WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes (Circle) (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present. Yes o Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes Hydric Soils Present? es No Remarks: 11119X0E'0* .t S cJ'aT PE2StS?-E'~T V f U &/10.4 //JG S C ftS 0'j t-.>6- S°, % ©I= w.g S DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date:' 3/Zy oz Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes dED Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: 10 y if needed, ex .lain on reverse. . VEGETATION Species ' % Cover / Relative Indicator Species, a(Relafive Cover / Indicator Tree s Herbs F 0'1k_A- ,,WAnr ~o /t J ✓EnJS G J+ ~c~aAsn r~cJs Saplings/Shrubs -Woody Vi nes •50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACbOBL p O # of Dominants FAC- c:~UPL - 1 - 11 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- Remarks: HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: Sediment Deposits _ _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: - (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: ' (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: I No/ (_t ;ass 1 0 0 SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): QJ P rA MIL} Taxonomy (Subgroup): ~z0ounc Drainage Class: 1 Field Observations tAWERkTC- ,,w IAA9MXeA4-t-FS Confirm Mapped Type? Yes QND Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, unsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc O- to R z - cc. CLPP L-oA-N - b t~ a ~nw.aN ( L ri t. (L4 L04M Hydrio Soil Indicators: Histosol _ Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: toEPLQTco,-JJf I t Z CeW-0AA AAATR-tX WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes )!E) (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes o (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes Remarks: 0 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION o Z Date: IE-11 Project/Site:" Bonita Park County: Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator: Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: ! f if needed, explain on reverse.)" ITT. d`V9`ATTf%W Species % Cover / (Relative % Indicator Species : % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs MtAA ltirio JaICE o FOG- AtaPCG~R~S cA-osr 's e-0 d X F x w M GPI= Q^1-E ~vM t e' .,m c s /Jl. Saplings/Shrubs NGJ F ur1CV of v J- VI(Aft tG 4,)W5 Cv0^Q- "T O L (AftZAAA0 = 0Cr_ i '7Jr4" C-A M E Lc Fncu + 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc*OBL - 2 # 'Of Dominants FAC- *UPL - - 1 - 1 . Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- to Remarks: uvnnnr nr_v Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs - Inundation Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): -OJA i A A Taxonomy (Subgroup): NLOO4-y%C. L-oAnA~ Drainage Class: Field Observations 6APt-0X~EQALf!S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes ©o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color inches Horizon unsell Moist Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, unsell Moist). Size/Contrast etc 0- Z• Q - w Mo %St' 51L- CLAq Lo 0 411 5 ~r. LA Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol _ Histic Epipedon - _ Sulfidic Odor - Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions DCGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Concretions = High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List -Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? es No (Circle) (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Hydric Soils Present? ? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes o Remarks: v No E4~PP~G t-o.~-( DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: 3 1,07- Project/Site: Bonita Park Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Washington State: Oregon Investigator: Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes OP Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: 1 Z if needed, explain on reverse. " VF.f F.TATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species : % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs ieo I rl roc T'JriCvg ATel5S O GVL"tovt X15segm~ M L L ►Gl~- mERtc. q b . Tuca4 RunlDtn? G to - Saplings/S hrubs GO C AAADVA 57 tJ ')(5P.L01 D UL LA6bAMi^)6 QeC u9 F v n7~ F WP-j i ENS I / c~ vJ Woodv Vi nes $0/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc~OBL Z # of Dominants FAC- bUPL Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- ~b Remarks: 2,0-A coed E pc~4. 5?/~/r7v~ ~1~= ~aM r f}NG E RE Rw TiVIIR(1111rf v Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ _ Aerial Photographs _ Inundation Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ No Recorded Data Available Water Marks Field Observations: - Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: -AL-(in.) Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): ~J/3TA~MA-- Taxonomy (Subgroup): 6%)O .T IC, ~M LJAPtA kEX Drainage Class: M,602-4t Field Observations 1,I$lL ALE-S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Q9 Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, inches Horizon unsell Moist (Munsell Moist)_ Size/Contrast etc 0--7 A o% IZ S t~~►«.•a - L.06M - Ibr o I, " FIJC Hydric Soil Indicators: Higosol _ T Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils T Sulfidic Odor T 'Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on,Local Hydric Soils List _ Reducing Conditions _ Listed-on National Hydric Soils List _~Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other Explain in Remarks) Remarks: LGoKS L41<6' Co1lE Sv I.t_ WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? (MD No (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? ~ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes 0 Remarks: .f40 H PAOC.06q • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/S te: Bonita Park Date: Z. 1 Q L Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Ye No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes I!B> Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes lib Plot ID: I3 if needed, ex lain on reverse) ' VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative % Indicator Tree s Herbs G O N L iroc s PATE^IS „J A o J nt J ~ S S ~tJS o AG SaplinQs/S hrubs ~uM l55 C. < NL ao 0 G" t 1 1J%Ci4 ME o PAC, f i& Tat F;btAJrA- A.S S Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACr*OBL - # of Dominants FAC- bUPL p Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- p Remarks: HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): - Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves i Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: No ll fa GiqL- i 0.a.-'s SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): QJf)TRMig . UyAeA Drainage Class: Field Observations Aeoo'R-VE "3,ts.. Taxonomy (Subgroup): too % ~.Tt Ap pu,xcLo t,P~S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Tt~o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist Size/Contrast etc l b b a Hydrio.Soil Indicators: Histosol ' Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic. Odor T Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ~Aquic Moisture Rbgid e T Listed on Local Hydric Soils List .Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soil's List __X_Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors" _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: L,62) S b t K C Co ~L WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? rM No (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes W (Circle Hydric Soils Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes 1 Remarks: No (~~{pAoLo6y DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: Z Projeci/Site: Bonita Park, Applicant/Owner City of Tigard County: ngton Wash State: Oreegogon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? es t! Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yeso Plot ID: y if needed, explain on reverse.) VF.C-1RT ATTnN Species T -/o Cover / Relative % Indicator Species : % Cover / Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs At, 4 ar->cN too .4 i=ACt~ Saplings/S hrubs Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYnROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC*OBL . # of Dominants FAC- c:>UPL - - O - O Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- I oo Remarks: r HVnunr.nc,V _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Aerial Photographs _ Inundation Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches, Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) J_ Water-Stained Leaves FAC Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (in) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: r4o InlOrcl iolLS SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): CjG G 5%L;VE (-Q`j Taxonomy (Subgroup): C0)+'►1 Drainage Class: Field Observations bOCeArS ~C-LL Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon unsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc v-I br a 2 C,(-" t-at*N Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol _ Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor - Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors _ Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: No E.Doxt-,novr}l ~PEF~TvR S tN 2 p^'9 WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Ift) No (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes VDO (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? Yes o Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yeso Remarks: 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Pioject/Site: Bonita Park Date: 2 oz County: %Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? a No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes o Plot ID: IS if needed, 'ex lain on reverse. XTV f'_' V'r A'rllnM Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species- % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs J JW5 :S 2-0- AF F&_0 JN co'S F S 5 -IkS- rvco4 A1Zan►4r'4i¢ - Gv S pmfp~!!Sks /0 ~~vs o Saplings/Shrubs tJ~fuC.c~S /Z E'jS '/5 t A)U S tAritzbL44- - 20 Cx') &40 ^4 S w►o G ..t -2jD FA(- 01-Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATIOiN (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc*OBL # of Dominants FAC- r*UPL - 2 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC- 0`-6 Remarks: i-TVi172nT .nr_V Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs _ Inundation - Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: << - Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in-). _ Water-Stained Leaves ~ i Depth to Saturated Soils: _(in.) FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: r SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): AMO-ef 0 Taxonomy (Subgroup): ft% tUyT%c- 04TRM O, LOPotA Drainage Class: 1 Field Observations Mwe"re u•0Eta. t~PtPl o k.gLfr~ Confirm Mapped Type? Yes do Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color inches Horizon unsell Moist Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, unsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc O - A 104f- 3 1 (-L LO P, i r 6 13 N too-60 • 01s r. ` 4 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors 'Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: L~ ~ L / ~ ~ Co~ft 17T'TT A WTil T IL-VIP"AAFTXT A TT/lAT %4F=--, • I y 1 LC 11 \ Y Y JJ 1 lIl \i f 111 \ [ ~ 1 1 V 1 \ • - Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? f (Circle) Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soils Present? ; . No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? es No Remarks: 7 k R r fl s, r, _y DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: 3 Z o z Project/Site: Bonita Park Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: , f%lasfiington State: Oregon Investigator- . Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? a No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes' Plot ID:: A, _ (if needed, ez lain on reverse.) VF(`_FT A TMW Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species. % Cover / Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs ECvRv S O Is n/1✓3 -40 UM c, ✓M v G ER/ o FAG Saplings/Shrubs AIM~06(1^-A J J ~ ✓ G ~G Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACI*OBL O # of Dominants FAC- r*UPL 1 - - l Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- Remarks: uvnunir.nrv Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs _ Inundation _ Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (in) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: /~o , r c,9-Tog s SOILS Map Unit Name p Q C (Series and Phase): (1 I~UEE )rc- Taxonomy (Subgroup): L .nC- N cl-l ( C 0AM Drainage Class: Field Observations lrs t Jvtc_ PLoJC~ LS Confum Mapped Type? Yes C Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc 0-110 - P7 ~ 2 511-p-1 Cd.! -L mm o -1w- Ib 1 o Y 6 0 0~ C E 1 r (-L4 Disr. Hydric $oil indicators: Histosol Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions XGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Othei (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? (0~ No (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Hydric Soils Present? es No (Circle) Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes QQ Remarks: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: Z1( OZ Project/Site: Bonita Park County: Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes CR-o-) Transect ID: Is the area.a potential Problem Area? Yes o Plot ID: 17 (if needed, explain on reverse.)' XT1W `_Ti'TA'TTnN Species Cover / (Relative % Indicator Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs ~4GOPc S a ~A~9cE -A A 6 ~/J ck C ~ v <S F Saplings/Shrubs GRd+cJWA 0611 - Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc*OBL 2 # of Dominants FAC- -:~UPL - Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- Remarks: _ t-ESTVc~- a~ m Ocu'=5 UVnunT.nnV Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs _ Inundation _ Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: 13 (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: f-IJMMaGKS SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): QdA-rROKA (Series Taxonomy (Subgroup): W30yr ► r (moo.4m 6~- PGo yCJIF-: X Drainage Class- Field Observations ~oG~~R,wT'E OrLFs Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors Munsell Moist) Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, Size/Contrast etc 9~-l 64-1 is o N~+ M6 . o s c. CL,H Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol T Histic Epipedon % Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions :.Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ _ _ Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ZCP No (Circle) Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? ~ No Hydric Soils Present? > No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? es No Remarks: .t a DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date. 3 Z Project/Site: Bonita Park County: Washington Applicant/Owner. City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator: Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (ID Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Vo Plot ID: yi if needed, ex lain on reverse. 17'V f''Ti T A TYnT%T ♦ a~viaraaava• Species % Cover / elative % Indicator Species ; % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs 1 Dt ~ Tksoo% VICyk- M C W 6- pwk4- Saplings/Shrubs Zo PAr-,) Woody Vi nes - 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc~OBL r' # of Dominants FAC- bUPL 2- Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- 3 3 3 Remarks: trvnnnr n!-!v Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Aerial Photographs Inundation Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Y- Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves ' Depth to Saturated Soils: (in) _FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 1'iO 1 rJ P tG tfjrT6l2.S O i 4, X -j 4-Prr,) OX 10 1 ZE D i2-L, SOILS Map Unit Name ~n (Series and Phase): 1~►1 [.gE~ ~t t,-[~( CLA4 L,6p~40 Drainage Class: Field Observations A1069 44F t36U- Taxonomy (Subgroup): Otl~%C_ 1-4P W XEQOCLS Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, inches Horizon (Mansell Moist unsell Moist Size/Contrast etc C7 - A $t LM L L L4A,%4 -16t _t; -4 LWL te- 4 MNJ co041sc at S 41joq L oft^A 7__ 7 7 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon T High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List __)~_Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: R~DOSCI wto(+-~r~t~- 1= c~ ~(L 3 1 r) 2 C ff2dv. Ar KA s+TlLl S_ Ok~i> t--Z-60 f2. C. ~1 S.. WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes. (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes- (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? No Is -this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes Remarks: 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park ` Date: Z Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard .County:. as ington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? a No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes o ( Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Do Plot ID: 19 (if needed, explain on reverse. VEGETATION. Species Cover / (Relative % Indicator Species,. . _ % Cover / Relative Indicator Trees Herbs N o J Pz o c /Jc~S O L Saplings/S hrubs LM-Mads FA Lu t Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC,*OBL # of Dominants FAC- bUPL ► - 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: HYDROLOGY 4 ~ %_3 _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: ----(in-) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: / (in. FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ro c---., t ,v 1) t G A Tc L S SOILS Map Unit Name ,~n (Series and Phase):_ 1!' lG gF.E !;It _ -r-`( "M Drainage Class: Field Observ ationstaD6It~4TEt t. Taxonomy (Subgroup): OV-r\L l-\A PLQX1E (L UkZ Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc (9 -H A-1 - 6 Z tt_ --7 2 lc, -I (or /o-f P, 2 5yt4 3 2 M01J F'an1E /L. t Hydrie Soil Indicators: „ Histosol Concretions _ Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils. _ Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _CGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ~-rENj 1) c`PGET1 0,3S In1 2 GI~r~Mf} WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? (X!5> No (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes M (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? 6s No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes ~o Remarks: 0. 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site'' Bonita Park Date: 3/2 y/oZ Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID: CAI< Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes <19 Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes (L9 Plot ID: REF cpff ar) (if needed, ex lain on reverse: . VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs NU d ~ ')2d~e~5 JFL ,N cis ~ ~A Tr S TEN i~ S ✓MC.~S . Enl L10 W un1CJ C= J to Saplings/S hrubs Pi o A056 5-- F*c- !m o 'Aptly a J Woody Vi nes I _T 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Wood Vine • Total # of Dominants FACbOBL 1 - 2- # of Dominants FAC- r*UPL 1 2 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) 33 TZ 2 Remarks: HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: !t vw t, ON-PAJ/v Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): 004 1 rAM*c ^A Drainage Class: " Field Observations 4coeam - wF~L Taxonomy (Subgroup): -AGO QLT1 C- I ~APt~cXERAtr ~S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: 'Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, inches Horizon unsell Moist) unsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc IO k. I aL ?/L S tp . x-omfic, pig L _ to e_c 2 t o s. it 9 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol _ Concretions Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List ' i :KGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors - Other (Eicplam- in Remarks) Remarks: Gm~s ~~k ~ c~E WETLAND DE'1'EKMMAI tvty Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes o (Circle) (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes d!D Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes ('off Hydnc Soils Present? es No v Remarks: \ o\ So 8 - - - AUVONnos 0 0 0 aNV-113M ~ j $ Y )IUVd VIIN®8 N = PW iC? O O V g 9 ~ < 1, • DP10 4`- DP15 "V 16 e.\ DP17---N 50' FANNO CREEK BUFFER 0 25 50 SCALE: V'=100' s~ WETLAND VARY 25' BUFFAND DP18 4 w ti 'e DP7 DP9 \ Ins I,?A r DP6 N m ® v'-B;U DAR 'n r r DP1 TOP OF HIGH CREEK BANK P2 / ''25' WETLAND '•~DP8 '-,,BUFFER KEY: DP - DATA POINT SS- SANITARY SEWER LINE (S - SANITARY MANHOLE 1111111111111011 DATE: 7/2/02 scAU: 1"= 50' KURAHAS ABASSOCIATES. T'HS. HI B O N I T A PARK DRAWN BY: EMH INC. Ci.O F.°p°etrl°g . water eeao s FIGURE twim Onme°4 - sw Pie°ning WETLAND 4 6n.w . s,i.a ,;.~g 15580 SR Jay Street, Suite MO (503)644- Roavertan. Dreg°° 97008 BOUNDARY DETAIL ~T (503)814-8842 tn= (503)844-9731 KAI8203 035 1 Of 1 > D ! ftl A ONITA PARK 0 0 o 0 p . lp m _ ~ PLANT ; . COMMUNITIES g N° , N ~p A~~-. CE SENSI~I~ ~+'ov, /1.7/2002 15:09 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard 141001 Clean«Tatel Services Out rolumitrttcid tS crear. File Number Sensitive Areas Certification Form Property Owner Name City of Tigard (Duane Roberts Address 13125 SW Hall Blvd City/State/Zip 71 Fax E-mail duane@ci.tlgard or us Authorized Agent Name _Kurahashl & Associates, Inc. (Gregory Kurahashi) Address 15580 SW Jay Street, Suite 200 City/Statelzip 644-6842 Fax E-mail greglc@kurahashi.com Protect Location Street, road, or other descriptive location Between SW Milton Court and Fanno Creek Legal Description: Quarter Section Township Range NE 12/0) 2S 1W In or near (city or town) County Tax Map # Tax Lot# Tigard Washington 2S112BA 200, 6200, 200, 1800, 6200, 6400 6400; 2SI12AB 1800 Waterway River Mile Latitude Longitude Fanno Creel: 2 45°25' 32" 122045' 14" Adjacent Property Information: Street, road, or other descriptive location 7775 SW Bonita Road Legal Description: Quarter Section Township Range SW 12 2S IW In or near (city or town) County Tax Map # Tax Lot # -Tigard Washin ton 2S112BA06300 6300 r-- _ - • n.., , Ut/11/4UUL 14: J4 rAA aUJ0641zV1 l:1Ly or rigara U U U Z Waterway River Mile Latitude Lon itude Fanno Creek 2 45024' 54" 1245' 14" 1 1 File Number An on-site, water-quality-sensitive area reconnaissance was completed on: Date By Title Company July 17, 200 Brent Davis Environmental Scientist Kurahashi & Associates, Inc. A. Existence of Water-Quality-Sensitive Areas As defined in the District's Design and Construction Standards, water-qualitysensitive areas: dam, do not exist on site (check appropriate box). ?Co do not exist within 200' on adjacent properties, or unable to evaluate adjacent property (check appropriate box). • If water-quality-sensitive areas exist, complete Section B below. • If water-quality-sensitive areas do not exist, skip Section B, sign this form and submit to the District with plan approval package. B. Types of Water-Quality-Sensitive Areas The type(s) of water-quality-sensitive area(s) that occur on site or within 200 ft on adjacent properties are (check all that apply): lands spring(s) intermittent stream(s) erennial streams ponds Sign this form and submit to the District with plan approval package and one (1) copy of the Natural Resources Assessment Report (information and forms are available through the District). The Natural Resources Assessment Report includes. • Wetland Delineation Report per DSL I Corps reporting requirervents (if wetlands present). • Rapid Stream Assessment Technique Form and maps or other District-approved assessment (if construction or discharge is proposed into, through, or across an intermittent or perennial streams). • Vegetated corridor documentation, including a base map and photographs showing the surveyed location of all sensitive areas, vegetated corridors, and vegetated corridor condition. I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this document, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, this information is true, complete, and accurate. Property Owner: Duane Roberts PrintlType Name Printrfype Title / July 17, 2002 Signature Date 07/17/2002 WED 13:31 (TX/R% NO 64571 16002 APPENDIX B : DATA SHEETS DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Pioject/~ite: Bonita Park Date: 3117102_ Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County.: Washington Investigator. . Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes ® Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? C -N4 Plot ID: if needed, ex lain on reverse.) • VEGETATION `f E5 ` Species % Cover/ (Relative Indicator Species /.cover/ I (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs !t nl hi - q0 ( - AJ J d J G 0-4rJ ^ D d tJ N a L 45Z FA( -%Oj - Saplings/Shrubs Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs . Herbs Woody Vine. Total # of Dominants FACr*OBL p - 0 # of Dominants FAC- *UPL - - I - I Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC- Remarks: FESTOCf} To PIPS ARE D t-•1 001'M 01 O c*-S HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in" Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: Inundation Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits ZC Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: L. ( (in.) Secondary Indicators: Depth to Free Water in Pit: Z (in ) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches . _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: Q (in. _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: I~JMMoc.~S SOILS Map Unit Name ~p (Series and Phase):. 1 t\t,&C- ~2!LT Taxonomy (Subgroup): ou" G A A Drainage Class: A L(, U LAVA 1V\. Field Observations ? LD w R am." Confirm Mapped Type? Yes o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc n-10 Q 1G-' tr G L--r tjcetwl -tbt 4 1 to C~ n3oA (-LA4 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol. _ Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Concretions .T High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ®o (Circle) (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present. (~D No Hydrie Soils Present? No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? es No Remarks: AS a A L ~J E' TL fw t> Do AA i nl Ar I c O ja` 9*5 b~ 5 WrTF1 Q1STlrJc PEL-a'J (~C> M M OGK S ~P~b 1, M I~~ C i J/ DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Sife: Bonita Park Date: t'Z D Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County::.. Washington Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: 'Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the areaA potential Problem Area?,. ~ Yes ~c Plot ID: Z. (if needed, explain do reverse A7L'I"L"7` A TTnXT y v Species % Cover / Relative Indicator S ecies % Cover / Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs Q x D WT o - L s SVV4 LJ sE Saplings/Shrubs .9 Woody Vi nes .50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPFIYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACE::~OBL O # of Dominants FAC- c*UPL - - - O Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) 100 Remarks: W 02o 0>116Pt 'R16-QJ 19, G P fG M STR-rtrk f-19 Down I iJ grJG6' rxvnunr n!_v _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs ~C Inundation Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water- Z (in.) _ Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: m ! Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ! 0 SOILS Map Unit Name a (Series and Phase): - bee 51UN C,UAA wA Drainage Class: M Field Observations Rte, C A LL Taxonomy (Subgroup): k)LVIC P LOY e t2ou-& , Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc A I Q 117-12 Goowwj cap uR N1 -2,.5-4 31-L S COMA064 40L% It. ~ ar 4 . Hydric oil Indicators: h Histosol. Concretions _T Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List 7 _ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on'National Hydric Soils List ' Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: D t''~-Et tflas n3 of 140 lk Z KkATIZ ix WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? e No (Circle) Circle Wetland Hydrology Present? a No ) Hydric Soils Present? 6s No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? es No Remarks: 0 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: 3 ~1-t 1 oZ Project/Site'. Bonita Park Washington County: Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard - State: Oregon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Quo Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: if needed, ex t lain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs ~xr*(ADA 'UC A NAIW( '75 AC.- , JI~1C•~S P TErn7S S C.1 lJ OA 14 EASE < r s4P0 94 A GS O Saplings/S hrubs Woody,\li nes ;,50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACbOBL O # of Dominants FAC- bUPL - - Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: FEsrUCA ow (4`"toGl<S . . HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Aerial Photographs Inundation Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches No Recorded Data Available Water Marks _ Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: O (in.) FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ~J rA Mo Ll--s OIT -S S 0 Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): 1! SS6 StLT`( Drainage C tJ°4 LOACA inage Class: u. Field Observations ~`t10~ rc_ E Taxonomy (Subgroup): ()UctG 4Af>v-oKE;e oLLS Confirm Mapped Type? Yes o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon (MunselI Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc O 3 414 4 r: 'S%L.-rj CLA LOAM -flat Sy 3 Z toC~ CbA*%op o0A. i40 CLA i Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol - Concretions Histic Epipedon r High Organic Content in Surface Layer' in Sandy Soils *Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: taLG`1 PcPc.ETIo~S tN 2 G.tfRoan~ $~1ACTft•~ri WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes (0 (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? es No Circle) H dric Soils Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland. es No Y Remarks: SE sba l✓ wErr_~~ 5 DOM',J AT OA 3~l ~p4c. G go-" S C'/'A H M o crams tN t T tj a t S T, N-. c-r- 14.1 vtz >LOG gc (-a &-0 H.a ek-t o c.4cS P9.0 6G E rv1 #}R_6} ) DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date., Bonita Park : 202 Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes o Plot ID: L4 (if needed, explain on reverse.) 77: 1-I T A r1 YnM Species Cover / Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs t om a as o cO at~w1jIG cs (-w+ ,,f o S to o C Sri RJ S comp. Saplings/Shrubs SS 25 !JL rJtuM c. rA N~ Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPIMIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc~,OBL # of Dominants FAC- c:~UPL - 2 2 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBI, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 33 Remarks: SVGA O t4 1i,~5 M M ° CA< S Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs Inundation - Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: 7 (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper_ 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit (in.) Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (m) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: t4ummoGK J- s 13o% Na Dr5 7 1 NC7' -tORe>c-o a Y ire-s~~T S(➢iI,S Map Unit Name Mc, (Series and Phase): IPEE 5It. Taxonomy (Subgroup): UltlCl T`1 C-A-( ?LD~C~Qt~Lt a lx*-% M Drainage Class: Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes o A'r Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon unsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc 0-1 to 0. 3 S1t_ ctA t Atm 77 -llor -Z-54 Lill 4%it _Tq Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol. . 4 Concretions 'Histic Epipedon - High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils 'Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Condition's - Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 6, PAvEL J( (_o6QLE 1 r--) pi'r P WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 10 (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? ° k No (Circle Hydric Soils Present? es No Is.this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes Co Remarks: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date: 3 iZy~ OZ Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County:, . Washington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes ®o Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? (fe) No Plot ID: S if needed, ex lain on reverse.) ' " VTi !''FTATTnN ' Species % Cover/ elative Indicator Species % Cover/ Relative Indicator Trees Herbs CS vC^ 01PINArC.E o c,- t..0 -C~RUS KR'S"~3 O C~1 G t rr• c, M S NL- tlt) /V 10 Saplings/Shrubs Woody. Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total _ # of Dominants FACbOBL # of Dominants FAC- c*UPL , - 1 - 1 Percent of Dominant S ecies that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) S016 Remarks: F~Sr~ CA 6tJ F4i NA M O CK S uvnnni nrv Li L L1~V IJVV i Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs Inundation _ Other X Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: -7 in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: - (in.) ' Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: HJ mrAoC,(GS ROTi N Map Unit Name nn AA (Series and Phase):,'Yk M(- 5%(-T4 ~ " ~..t.Aq LogM Drainage Class: " Field Observations I"►q?ep Wet. , Taxonomy (Subgroup): Quit C t4kt- Lo ke (ko Lt-S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes 1 0 Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon '(Munsell Moist) unsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc -5[ A 2.5 313 s- VK 4.16 mwo AEP. oisr Lt_44 LOPk^ fc f3 2 0~ ~nwanl - L Hydric Soil Indicators: 'Histosol Concretions _ Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: G LeI OEP(;ET-M-w) S l rJ 2 ~ tt Qro,v~ ft Kjk-r(L t X WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes To (Circle) Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soils Present? es No Remarks: SCASorj '9L VJ ET[,1j^3D 'Lb r-%14 ATtD 13 1 R-)rh"°c1eS wt-rt+ ►7t5r1r~cT I~~(DRocoGy C (9&j3(,G7rA 60 E# FAc..- G fLASS 0A aELo.,~ ~-},1,r. wt mac.. (cS • • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date: 2 oZ Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County; Washington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? © No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: (o if needed, explain on reverse:) VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs Fig-510CA O )4- E c.- C t N6 OCc.t4~C~i' S - C [VM 47ISSEGTV0A G AGRo s t► S rJ 1 u 5 2n L 114IZPG%G #94A, G k- Saplings/S hrubs Woody Vi nes -50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC*OBL # of Dominants FAC- r*UPL - 1 - .1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) o Remarks: HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Depth to Free Water in Pit: - (in ) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches . _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in. FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: N 0 N 01Cg7-6/Z SOILS Map Unit Name Q (Series and Phase): Ph f?!S%LVI Taxonomy (Subgroup): yL-T1Cr 4A,? Drainage (,j A4 LDAM Class: Field Observations _Abpcux }TG JOIL L o XL, P D .,S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc - 5-itz 414, !t LI N c Mct--~ roc A a~sr. C.LA LpAoA ~'1b till X34411 414 (wMav c'm as• tt. Lp,NMON co.1A.SE ASi Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosoi . _ Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes (0 (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes Remarks: v • • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Pfoject/Site: Bonita Park Date: 3 /Zy `O Z Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County Washington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (o Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes o Plot ID: if needed, ex - lain on reverse.) a z Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover (Relative Indicator Trees Herbs " S Jat~tnl o G- V~JALgkjktS A N c.6 A PT t-J Jt SGaLDIZ J C iLstow-- A/~~1~aS6 <S Jt ,JCJ En)S S Kf}Cu7 Saylings/S hrubs M - f~c S < F M 5 Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc*OBL O O # of Dominants FAC- c*UPL - 1 - Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) ©~o Remarks: UVnunT n!'_`V _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs - Inundation Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ No Recorded Data Available Water Marks Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water. (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ _X Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WAi6R- STAIN6p t-16A-'JE5 1 N SrA6LL 1342c- DF.P/LESSto-3 0 SOILS Map Unit Name .Drainage Class: (Series and Phase): t r1r~ SwT~I CLA-1 ~~t11 uJ~ Field Observations Taxonomy (Subgroupl)LIf r- Jj4 PL DXG AQLUS Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon unsell Moist) Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc q -7. k '51LTq Q11-4 L -16r b 7.5 y it 413 sqg t. Lo ,h Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic Epipedon _ Sulfrdic Odor _ Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions _ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils. _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes o (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes o Hydric Soils Present? Yes 6P (Circle Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes no Remarks: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION ProjecUSite: Bonita Pa k Date: Z Z r Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: _ Washington Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (ND Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: (if needed, explain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Trees Herbs G tAirJ i rAt uA AGAC.Sn5 T'ENtos G nltom O15 EC M S N Saplings/S hrubs C,1 4,Vj6X((_J1CA)At 57 L60rA R SE 45 AL~ Wood Vc nes_.. 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACc*OBL of Dominants FAC- *UPL L - 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): -Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: - - (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: FAC-Neutral Test _ _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ~Jo /nl p~cq-T~R.S 0 0 SOILS Map Unit Name 2 ` (Series and Phase): &ZEF, Drainage Class: ~G~ <ung M Field Observations Aooc RATG Taxonomy (Subgroup): OuriL 14AK OXEX0c .-S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc $ 1040t 31'L SILT*,( L44 Lo&r-% B -lbr 3 1(:>1(7-412- S o a. r. t.T C.tA N z ► ti ts. Hydric Soil Indicators: . F •Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Sulfidic Odor 'Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List xGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: R600'XimoRpilte- t'6-ArTo A, E-,!) 1V3 Ct PrAr4- 2 In~trR.tk WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes T) (Circle) (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Hydric Soils Present? <XgED No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes ~o Remarks: 0 • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: 0-L Project/Site: Bonita Park Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard Investigator: Brent Davis County: Washiugton State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes 45) Is the area ?k potential Problem Area? Yes & Transect ID: Plot ID: 9 (if needed, explain on reverse.) VTi !`_FT A TTnN Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Trees , Herbs FEZT0r_A N 3S - GiAi>"3 (50 56 L To,~c.0 N 1 to rA Oa V WCOea c z Sahli g /Shrubs K4WTHN) Cvv (0 66'_rc nAo►~o6 to c. GAb -.0 05 - tkoi 2~ r Woody Vi nes $0/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACr~>OBL - - #"of Dominants FAC- c*UPL - Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: F£~'~CP1r en)JM ni oC.l-cS 2,0 V6 MIN CoJ62 POX- StRH^f} -Ta 8E 0044r 4/vr' uvnunT nnv _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Aerial Photographs _ Inundation Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: f Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: lA J MN1a C (,G S S t3 reJe ft-CE WA-169- e %S E 2Jt= c> ~ l t-1 NO ( ,J 0 tc.A 10RL5 -3 7A • 0 SnAi,S Map Unit Name n~ (Series and Phase): 11 c es:'G 5%t-rt C P,-A Taxonomy (Subgroup): .1 J LLT t C_ I- A eun < G 2 uoy~nn Drainage Class: y Field Observations NAonft2AI t.JK11. au,S Confwm Mapped Type? Yes t Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc 0_-1 Z- c, C LOAM - M- 3 t t. CLAq to4m Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol _ Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List 'Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: J>-EOoxt"pp-4tL Pe To2ES MDTI l- R 'zo~1'r t9t-. to C090,,A A 'Z nnrrr( tY, LA~fERs t.t ovJ WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 495) (Circle) (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes Hydric Soils Present? es No. Remarks: 1PXo(-0*-j t S 0a-T- PElLStSt-C1-?T Fox s-,% 1-If E &/Lo.a C. S C q-S 0,j • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date: 3 JZ y loz Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (E) Transect ID: Is the area a potgntial Problem Area? Yes (!T Do Plot _ID: T - (if needed, ex .lain on 'reverse). VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs ~ ~A-•~c~4- uv~A~ go ~R ✓ ✓~,,sc Saplings/S hrubs Woody Vi nes •50120 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) " Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACbOBL p p # of Dominants FAC- ~*UPL - ( - Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) Remarks: HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in ) Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches . _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: . 10,' 1 N Jl co- ; oas • SOILS • Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): 00A i ArA A- Taxonomy (Subgroup): ~1JL t yt L Drainage Class: ~AA 11_ Field Observations N1ofl6(ihTC- w~Ei.l.. (AA9MX<AA-L-FS Confirm Mapped Type? Yes cl!D Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc D- 10 -fa- z - (LT c.L4 UDA►h - b c7 O4 A 'L ~on.r«aN (s~JIR ~i (.L 4*4 La4at Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol _ Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: DEP(,Q-r(0~/J4 ltj Z GE-W44A A Mf4TR-(Y- WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes kE) (Circle) (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ~o Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes d9 Hydric Soils Present? (MR No Remarks: • • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Z-{ Project/Site:" Bonita Park Date: County: 3 o 2 Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: 11 (if 'needed, ex lain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover- (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs STU GA A-.W 0#,J.9C6 D /Zl9C..- cA4=.sr'Is ?or~j a X I=&- Y. ICJM of=i-u aLE L KIM ( CC UM S ILL Saplings/S hrubs ~'J NGJ T-„) t` J CJ IJ IJ C S J - I G nl Z - R,3COS CA-a4 T p L tMw nt = ocr.1 ~rRU F M JGn3 C- Egcti + 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC,*OBL - - Z # 'Of Dominants FAC- *UPL - - 1 - Percent of Dominant S ecies.that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) (o Remarks: HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other _ No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 1J Z) ~rCA-T_6/CS • SOILS 0 Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): i JAS PtAXA Taxonomy (Subgroup): Jc,-c- I C. Drainage Class: L-oAi%A Field Observations 14ooc"M4t t 1JCU- APLOxC-(1 t& ES Confirm Mapped Type? Yes ©o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, Munsell Moist Size/Contrast etc 0-8 A Z• g- y FEW P4G `isr: 51c- -LAq L,04*1 g-1~t o 1 s - tL LA Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol _ Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions D-r,Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors' _ Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) . Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? es No (Circle) (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Hydric Soils Present? esNo Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes CC Remarks: No t-~~ P(2-OLD DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Pr1 'ect/Site: Bonita Park Date: 312.-4 IoZ County: .'Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator. Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes QV Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes (o Plot ID: j Z if needed, explain on reverse.) XMICI TATMAN Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Trees Herbs G n w FA& 3-30 Wg f?, En~S -0 10" pt OM L L ►Cth AIAGRkCA13A b TocA AJn101n1 c ' l o - SaplinQS/S hrubs QqJC05 C AAA* -A N 0(594-o-3 6MMAJA o UL rJ CxLIQ v No F COR.~ Raq; DNS t / ca Woody V ines 50/20 RULE DETE"11NATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC1*OBL # of Dominants FAC- OUPL Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: ZPl~ God E,c pct 5?~•r~-ur• ~ar• t n1 LNG E R,EQulR-C'~ II`(7nD111r nr_v JUL L L K\ V L V V L Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs _ Inundation _ Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ No Recorded Data Available. _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in) _ _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: ~_(in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): QJAT#0PoAA- L-oI},.^ Drainage Class: Field Observations PAbpFAi%-m t`15LL. Taxonomy (Subgroup): 00400LT it- I-APIA X5AA t.ES Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Q9 Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon unsell Moist unsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc Om ,IQ. S t2 ►a•a a L-04 M - Ibr o 6 nv F~ac ic.~T Hydric Soil Indicators: Hip.tosol _ Concretions y Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils T Sulfidic Odor _ -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Reducing Conditions _ _ Listed `on National Hydric Soils List _Y leyed or Low-Chronic Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: La~KS L/K.6 Ca1lE s~ 1 L, WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ~ No (Circle) (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Hydric Soils Present? No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes Remarks: 00 HOAC(P6q • • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date: 2 OZ Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Ye No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes IS> Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes I-jr Plot ID: I . (if needed, explain on reverse')-' a~ VEGETATION Species % Cover % Relative Indicator Species 7 % Cover //T (Relative % ndicator Tree s Herbs C -&&q O N L oocos S J( „J - RU6,35 DuscouUX A1.o W -t erYs p 0 J nt J U S S f}C~J (0S .O M` /}G Saulings/Shrubs e(? ,ft %,j 155 6( -WA S - rJ FgG14fi I VICIpf M6 FAI , Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC-~-OBL # of Dominants FAC- *UPL p Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- p Remarks: HYDROLOGY Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in ) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches . _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in) - FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: No /^'Iaco-~o,¢~ • • SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): UJ+: T-6rA14 Taxonomy (Subgroup): NtaJ)%) t~ (,DhPA of omF&Pt Drainage Class: ~A Field Observations P~epo'RSeE ps Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Qo Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist) Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions; Structures, Size/Contrast etc I G w~or~ Q nt O G ►4 d a 1 u Hydric .Soil Indicators: Histosol ' Histic Epipedon Sulfidic. Odor Aquic Moisture Rgie ..Reducing Conditions -)~-Gleyed of Low-Chroma Colors' _ T- _ _ Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List y Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ~~IGS LtKc ~o~c% WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? es (Circle To HYdric Soils Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a-Wetland? Yes Remarks: No (~j t) AO t, 0 G y • • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date: 2.4 Applicant/Owner. City of Tigard County: V ashington Investigator. Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Pes No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? to Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes ~o Plot ID: y (if needed, explain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Species 7 T(Relative ver / Indicator Tree s Herbs k{AL A 404N {DO Saplings/S hrubs Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYI'IC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACr*OBL # of Dominants FAC- bUPL - - O - 0 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) / Do Remarks: HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other _ No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: _ FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: / o 4o r f c4 ol_.S s • SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): ease S%L:t,( (-QH Taxonomy (Subgroup): Drainage Class: coq Field Observations DOcRAtr~ f-~L Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol _ Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions _ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed onLocal Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: "D Rs ooxt ^Ao0L r}t PE~4?vR~~ tn! 2 C- boa.. H WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? la~) No (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Hydric Soils Present? Yes o (Circle) Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yeso Remarks: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Ptoject/Site: Bonita Park Date: 312y11p•7- County Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard :Washington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? a No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes o Plot ID: 15' (if needed,'ex lain on reverse.) VRC.RTATION Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species , % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs TJ r-JW 5 ( n)S 2-0 o rjNcUS f= JS S QF&- a'-vcr} /1ZjN01Ni1r ,-410-3 F Saplings/S hrubs tlN43C.u5 /ZEPc~S ~S k bus L4riPqLjjj 20 s (.0 6&ggM GS aoG .J ?_c~ F L~ t Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine T-btal # of Dominants FACbOBL 2, # of Dominants FAC- bUPL - - 2 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) p Remarks: RVnunr .nrV _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Aerial Photographs _ Inundation _ Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches ! Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils:9 /1 in•) FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: SOILS Map Unit Name ,A,-- (Series and Phase): ! 0 Taxonomy (Subgroup): N.wV1 %L ,34T6-^A- (_UI*M Drainage Class: Field Observations Mwe"re u tWw)cgiEg. c< Confirm Mapped Type? Yes do Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon unsell Moist) Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc O - A 1046 3 ► (-LAr!A LoAqv\ 9-16 13 N '31 !2-41e 416 rA~~a m o. C)IST. G ~ Hydric Soil Indicators:' Histosol _ Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions a(,Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors 'Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils r Listed on Local. Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: C-cx K L / K C Co~~ 111L VT A XT" 7nVrr `D1%XYXT A TYd-%M yF="C, Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? <T (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? ' o Circle) Hydric Soils Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? es No Remarks: DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Projec0Site.` Bonita Park Date: 3 1-W10 Z Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County:. as ington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes two Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes 0) Plot ID: , . A, (if needed, ex lain on reverse. V1W..V-RTATInN Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs iG7, D t L .✓A•.~flCt o - E-CoRuS S 0 F196.0 1-'/ S rA5,-,L/,)3 O 64 44 am 'f ✓M J / G /►~ER to Fi4G Saplings/S hrubs p J d G d G ~L . Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATivE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC~OBL d - - -2- # of Dominants FAC- *UPL 1 - - 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) Remarks: uvnunr nr_y _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs _ Inundation Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves 1 FAT-Neutral Test (in) Depth to Saturated Soils: Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: N~ ~o ~.groR 5 SOILS Map Unit Name 4&-6 (Series and Phase): 5.,(-r Taxonomy (Subgroup): LXTX- P 4 CL, &j Loi9irt Drainage Class: Field Observations 619r6 A; LC-- Ad "'k - Au-S Confirm Mapped Type? Yes ® Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc c &AC 2 511-rl- r-L4 L . to -16 Ib I o Lf 6 orw a.~ ! G st [ T (-L4" D Hydric $oil Jndicatois: Histosol Histic Epipedon ? ' Sulfidic Odor _ Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions :KGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? (0~ No (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? es No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes CQ Remarks: No l-~`(~Ra-~C~~{ DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date: 21oZ Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes o Transect ID: Is the area.a potential Problem Area? Yes o Plot ID: 17 (if needed, explain on reverse.) tTL`!"~T. T A TTl17~T Species Cover / Relative Indicator Species % Cover/ (Relative % Indicator Tree s Herbs ~}GOPcS lavwfp~m Armxg 30 F4c--- ck L 1s v <S F GI125tuP►1 ✓CNSC <S C d- Saplings/S hrubs GRlAtJ` 1 5 A&db6ldA 51 _ Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPE YTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FACctOBL 2 # of Dominants FAC- UUPL - 1 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC- Remarks: ~-ESTV~- awl n, nI oGtc S ya a a~ a..v a. v v Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: _ Aerial Photographs _ Inundation _ Other Saturate in Upper 12 Inches go-Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: Sediment Deposits )I- Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water. (in.) Secondary Indicators: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: I3 (in•) Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: ~J(in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: f-I~MMD~.t~S • • SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Qjq-T-RKA Taxonomy (Subgroup): $Q,3\) I C CRWt ~ ~ Ci'+~ Lc> M#- Drainage Class: ~ ~6~T'C v11G~. Field Observations ~ 6I,FS Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color (inches) Horizon unsell Moist) Mottle Colors Munsell Moist) Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, Size/Contrast etc D -S oq z S ~K 3 COAX e* - 5 t t T%1 CL 44 O 1 .~oa MEP. I DI S L -T-1 Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor _ Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions ~Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors - _ _ _ _ Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on'National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? No (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? es No Remarks: • • DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date. 3 O Z Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County: Washington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes ~ Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes (Do Plot ID: (if needed, explain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Species, ; % Cover / (Relative Indicator Tree s Herbs E 1 F. of- t,J ~ 3s nn c 4 c. Saplings/S hrubs G 1k5 tVyv~ e✓n~SE 70 J Woody Vi nes $0/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total #o f Dominants FACbOBL ~ # of Dominants FAC- c~UPL 2 - 7- Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) '3 97 3 Remarks: HYDROLOGY _ Record Data (Describe in Remarks): - Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other _ No Recorded Data Available Weiland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: - Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: No I.3 f)tciPr_r6A_S Ot 41EA- 1 krr,~ 0k1012.ED iZ-C. a • • SniLS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Itl 1 ~ r Drainage Class: I.OhT~RA Field Observations A%oeav~ Au, Taxonomy (Subgroup): QL-f'1L W)QCXQLAnS Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc 6_ l4 O 2 --4- S%.LT{ c i, UAm ,Ile- 4 comic As, S j$i-J o,( Lo qoA O 12 2 1 u r, R~1 l.~ [eeb Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol _ Concretions Histic Epipedon J _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List __)~_Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: a Oak t mchq- tPq 60r-,,) ()-C 5 I N 2 C Vh2Qnn Of W& A-TILI V- W Ok~O~Z.tIJ A. C. 1 WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes. (Fj!5:> (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 1~c (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? Ye No Is .this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes Remarks: • 0 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Bonita Park Date:' Z Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard County:. as ington Investigator: Brent Davis State: Oregon Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? a No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes o Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Plot ID: Ir{ (if needed, explain on reverse.) VEGETATION Species Cover / (Relative Indicator Species % Cover / Relative Indicator Trees Herbs 'Ptnl o - v (LJ O c n~t~S o L O tC A Rtr-ArJ < t~- Saplings/Shrubs L T FA c.t,t t 'Woody Vi nes. 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine Total # of Dominants FAC*OBL - 2 - 2 ' . # of Dominants FAC- *UPL - l - I Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) Remarks: HYDROLOGY - Record Data (Describe in Remarks): _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge _ Aerial Photographs _ Other No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators: _ Inundation _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in ) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches . _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soils: / (in. FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: t ,v V C- ~-I-~ S 0 • SOILS Map Unit Name NA (Series and Phase):. I" IG Q-66 t t_ - ~~~`E M Drainage Class: l' Field Observations 1"IODEg4TE' . Taxonomy (Subgroup): OVr\L t-\A 9( OK1E(k0LA- S _ Confirm Mapped Type? Yes ®o Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc 1' 6 2 t(- K--7 42- 1 i q t(-r Af4A Apr pr 10-f 2 5 y1= 3 2 Connoni, Fi j-e (L uh-i !moo M Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions _ Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List __XGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: F115^17- DcPGETiaJS 2 G~MA WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? (Y!p No (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes d~ (Circle) Hydric Soils Present? ' s No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes ~u Remarks: nl-q • i DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Date: - 3/Z Nloa • Project/Sife: Bonita Park County: Washington Applicant/Owner: City of Tigard State: Oregon Investigator: Brent Davis Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID: CA I< kAZcpLta Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yeso Plot ID: _REF (if needed, explain on reverge:) V P 4 20 ~rGr_>~•rA•rlrnty - • Species T % Cover / Relative Indicator Species % Cover / (Relative Indicator Trees Herbs o.l ~L J Ot Goto Zo U9 NQ :R~r3~s ~t2 vS f~ FAW Tt S 7~.N S ✓NwS ph-i-A End L10 Saplings/S hrubs o Pi o S n a PACO Woody Vi nes 50/20 RULE DETERMINATION OF HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION (AFTER RELATIVE % COVER CALCULATION) Trees Shrubs Herbs Woody Vine . Total # of Dominants FAC1*OBL 1- O 2- # of Dominants FAC- c*UPL 1 2 1 - 14 2 Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC excluding FAC-) 35 TZ Remarks: uvnnnr nr_v Record Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: _ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators: Aerial Photographs _ Inundation Other _ Saturate in Upper 12 Inches _ _ No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Field Observations: - Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Secondary Indicators: _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves FAC-Neutral Test Depth to Saturated Soils: (in.) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 0 0 SOILS Map Unit Name (Series and Phase):_ QJ4T A M o - Taxonomy (Subgrou ftAk' OL'Tt L t LpA rn Drainage Class: Field Observations 4'0E&&C wE~ W LC>m"L~PS Confirm Mapped Type? Yes To Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions, Structures, (inches) Horizon unsell Moist) Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast etc 10 ~ ~ 5 [p wa+ Ce a ~ - 6t 10 ~c L' L Lf r4- 2 Hydric Soil Indicators: - 'Histosol _ Concretions _ Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils _ Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils _ Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explaiti in Remarks) Remarks: LeOXS Ll rc E c~~E WL'l'LAND 1,10N Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes (E (Circle) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes _o Hydric Soils Present? es No Remarks: (Circle) Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes (SI i TETRA. TECH/ICCM,1 NC. 7080 SW Fir Loop, Portland, Oregon 97223 (503) 684-9097 • FAX (503) 598-0583 May 13, 2003 Mr. Duane Roberts Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: Bonita Park Project Floodway Analysis Dear Duane: The following is a description of our analysis to determine whether the proposed Bonita Park Project will have an effect on the Fanno Creek floodway or floodplain. This technical memorandum is the formal submittal for this analysis and is submitted for City review. If more information is required, please feel free to call. In summary, we conclude that the, proposed park, as shown on the drawing obtained from the City and attached, will have no effect on the Fanno Creek floodplain or floodway. ANALYSIS The analysis included three Hydrologic Engineering Computer (HEC)-2 computer runs. The first run, the base FEMA model, was the existing model from the flood study. Once results. from this model were generated, the seven cross-sections outlined in your request were inserted into the model from our survey effort. These cross-sections (A through G) are shown on the attached figure. The seven cross-sections replaced cross-section 15320 (Section AB) from the flood study model. The relationship between the existing flood study cross-sections and the Bonita Park analysis cross-sections is as follows: Station Flood Study Station Bonita Park Analysis 14799 Section Z .14799 14919 No Section New Section A 15059 No Section New Section B 15147 No Section New Section C 15272 No Section New Section D 15320 Section AB Not Used for this study 15752 No Section New Section G 15912 No Section New Section E 15982 No Section New Section F 16224 Section AC 16224 • • Mr. Duane Roberts May 13, 2003 Page 2 The model with these new sections became the existing-conditions model for this study. Water surface elevation predicted by this model compared closely with the results of the base FEMA model. Small differences between the two models are to be expected because more detailed information is being used and conditions may have changed since the flood study. A future-conditions model was created by changing the new cross-sections to reflect the proposed park. The proposed park would not alter ground elevations for four of the cross- sections and it would lower ground elevations for .two. of the cross-sections. The ground elevation for the final cross-section would increase about 0.2 feet, but this is outside the major flow area. The flood elevations calculated by the existing-conditions model and the future-conditions model were compared to determine the flood impacts of the proposed park. RESULTS The analysis results are attached in tabular form. The entire HEC-2 input and output files are not provided since they include the entire Fanno Creek model and each printout would be hundreds of pages. Included are printouts of the portion of each HEC-2 input and output file that includes the sections affected by the Bonita Park project. The only results provided from the HEC-2 runs are for the cross-sections affected by the Bonita Park project. The results show that the proposed park would have no impact on the floodplain or floodway. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (503) 684-9097. Sincerely, Tt/KCM, INC. )irm Harper, P.E. Project Manager #2340032 • • CITY OF TIGARD BONITA FLOODWAY ANALYSIS RESULTS • Bonita Park Floodway Analysis Existing Conditions Results X-Section Distance to Channel Flow Water Energy Channel Flow Number next U/S Bottom (cfs) Surface Grade Velocity Area (Creek Station) X-Section Elevation Elevation Elevation (fps) (sq. ft.) 12160 2047 118.42 2913 131.99 132.03 1.78 1804.71 3792 132.8 132.85 1.65 2370.91 4174 133.15 133.2 1.61 2615.34 5069 133.93 133.98 1.54 3183.36 4174 134.12 134.21 1.93 1770.24 13054 894 116.93 2913 132.48 132.58 3.16 1433.76 3792 133.2 133.31 3.34 1710.92 4174 133.51 133.62 3.38 1833.14 5069 134.23.. 134.34 3.44 2121.15 4174 134.54 134.66 3.24 1774.66 14516 1462 119.28 2913 135.28 135.78 5.65 515.33 3792 136.2 136.9 6.72 564.55 4174 136.51 137.31 7.18 584.7 5069 137.14 138.18 8.21 633.92 4174 137.01 137.74 6.86 609.07 14614 98 123.93 2889 135.89 136.28 5.04 573.35 3749 137.04 137.51 5.51 680.26 4125 137.47 137.98 5.73 723.16 5009 138.46 138.94 5.75 1048.1 4125 137.78 138.31 5.85 704.55 14692 60 123.93 2889 136.06 136.43 4.9 589.05 3749 137.16 137.62 5.42 691.12 4125 137.55 138.05 5.67 734.24 5009 138.9 139.26 5.11 1246.51 4125 137.91 138.36 5.37 792.98 14799 125 123.93 2889 136.62 136.67 2.36 1744.64 3749 137.82 137.87 2.33 2292.14 4125 138.26 138.31 2.33 2518.57 5009 139.41 139.45 2.23 3147.44 4125 138.53 138.63 3.02 1661.46 14919 120 121.21 2889 136.68 136.73 2.38 1701.67 X-Section A 3749 137.87 137.92 2.36 2136.72 4125 138.3 138.36 2.38 2296.28 5009 139.44 139.5 2.35 2711.23 4125 139.63 142.52 0 302.3 15059 140 119.72 2889 136.75 136.76 0.94 3635.43 X-Section B 3749 137.94 137.95 1.04 4232.69 4125 138.38 138.39 1.08 4454.75 5009 139.51 139.53 1.14 5034.26 4125 143.14 143.18 0 2558.99 15147 88 121.64 2889 136.75 136.78 1.84 2191.01 X-Section C 3749 137.94 137.97 1.83 2753.25 4125 138.38 138.41 1.85 2965.77 5009 139.51 139.54 1.82 3525.51 4125 143.14 143.21 0 1936.74 • Bonita Park Floodway Analysis Existing Conditions Results • 15272 125 119.64 2889 136.78 136.81 1.71 2312.69 X-Section D 3749 137.97 138 1.74 2841.47 4125 138.41 138.44 1.76 3037.86 5009 139.54 139.57 1.76 3561.45 4125 143.17 143.25 0 1804.68 15752 480 121.3 2889 136.92 136.95 1.67 2296.35 X-Section G 3749 138.09 138.12 1.64 2927.28 4125 138.53 138.56 1.65 3164.17 5009 139.65 139.68 1.61 3780.44 4125 143.36 143.4 1.52 2712.4 15912 160 122.68 2889 136.97 137.02 2.46 1651.99 X-Section E 3749 138.13. 138.18 2.32 2141.55. 4125 138.56 138.61 2.3 2325.93 5009 139.68 139.73 2.21 2806.76 4125 143.33 143.53 0 1149.13 15982 70 122.96 2889 137.01 137.08 2.75 1414.52 X-Section F 3749 138.16 138.23 2.73 1795.91 4125 138.59 138.66 2.74 1946.43 5009 139.69 139.77 2.69 2337.5 4125 142.46 144.47 0 362.36 16224 904 122.84 2889 137.58 137.64 2.91 2089.03 3749 138.66 138.71 2.94 2620.39 4125 139.07 139.13 2.97 2832.1 5009 140.12 140.17 2.94 3394.23 4125 145.18 145.2 1.77 3850.71 18358 2134 125.87 2889 139.11 139.14 2.27 2458.73 3749 140.07 140.1 2.34 3063.18 4125 140.45 140.48 2.37 3319.11 5009 141.35 141.38 2.38 3957.19 4125 145.53 145.56 1.66 3777.29 19928 1570 127.57 2889 140.09 140.17 2.91 1419.2 3749 140.93 141 2.83 1786.65 4125 141.26 141.34 2.82 1936.98 5009 142.06 142.14 2.75 2307.04 4125 145.73 145.77 1.59 2789.77 20298 370 124.64 2889 140.8 141.23 5.59 622.79 3749 141.51 142 6.14 787.6 4125 141.81 142.31 6.28 868.02 5009 142.53. 142.97 6.19 1197.24 4125 145.84 145.95 3.16 1831.76 21352 1054 129.89 2889 142.83 142.87 2.22 2005.33 3749 143.56 143.61 2.3 2425.19 4125 143.85 143.89 2.34 2593.5 5009 144.41 144.46 2.44 2936.36 4125 146.44 146.48 2.02 2549.95 • • Bonita Park Floodway Analysis Future Conditions Result X-Section Distance to Channel Flow Water Energy Channel Flow Number next U/S Bottom (cfs) Surface Grade Velocity Area (Creek Station) X-Section Elevation Elevation Elevation (fps) (sq. ft.) 12160 2047 118.42 2913 131.99 132.03 1.78 1804.71 3792 132.8 132.85 1.65 2370.91 4174 133.15 133.2 1.61 2615.34 5069 133.93 133.98 1.54 3183.36 4174 134.12 134.21 1.93 1770.24 13054 894 116.93 2913 132.48 132.58 3.16 1433.76 3792 133.2 133.31 3.34 1710.92 4174 133.51 133.62 3.38 1833.14 5069 134.23- 134.34 3.44 2121.15 4174 134.54 .134.66 3.24 1774.66 14516 1462 119.28 2913 135.28 135.78 5.65 515.33 3792 136.2 136.9 6.72 564.55 4174 136.51 137.31 7.18 584.7 5069 137.14 138.18. 8.21 633.92 4174 137.01 137.74 6.86 609.07 14614 98 123.93 2889 135.89 136.28 5.04 573.35 3749 137.04 137.51 5.51 680.26 4125 137.47 137.98 5.73 723.16 5009 138.46 138.94 5.75 1048.1 4125 137.78 138.31 5.85 704.55 14692 60 123.93 2889 136.06 136.43 4.9 589.05 3749 137.16 137.62 5.42 691.12 4125 137.55 138.05 5.67 734.24 5009 138.9 139.26 5.11 1246.51 4125 137.91 138.36 5.37 792.98 14799 125 123.93 2889 136.62 136.67 2.36 1744.64 3749 137.82 137.87 2.33 2292.14 4125 138.26 138.31 2.33 2518.57 5009 139.41 139.45 2.23 3147.44 4125 138.53 138.63 3.02 1661.46 14919 120 121.21 2889 136.68 136.73 2.38 1701.67 X-Section A 3749 137.87 137.92 2.36 2136.72 4125 138.3 138.36 2.38 2296.28 5009 139.44 139.5 2.35 2711.23 4125 139.63 142.52 0 302.3 15059 140 119.72 2889 136.75 136.76 0.94 3635.43 X-Section B 3749 137.94 137.95 1.04 4232.69 4125 138.38 138.39 1.08 4454.75 5009 139.51 139.53 1.14 5034.26 4125 143.14 143.18 0 2558.99 15147 88 121.64 2889 136.75 136.78 1.84 2191.01 X-Section C 3749 137.94 137.97 1.83 2753.25 4125 •138.38 138.41 1.85 2965.77 5009 139.51 139.54 1.82 3525.51- 4125 143.14 143.21 0 1936.74 Bonita Park Floodway Analysis Future Conditions Result 15272 125 119.64 2889 136.78 136.81 1.71 2312.69 X-Section D 3749 137.97 138 1.74 2841.47 4125 138.41 138.44 1.76 3037.86 5009 139.54 139.57 1.76 3561.45 4125 143.17 143.25 0 1804.68 15752 480 121.3 2889 136.92 136.95 1.67 2296.35 X-Section G 3749 138.09 138.12 1.64 2927.28 4125 138.53 138.56 1.65 3164.17 5009 139.65 139.68 1.61 3780.44 4125 143.36 143.4 1.52 2712.4 15912 160 122.68 2889 136.97 137.02 2.46 1651.99 X-Section E 3749 138:13 138.18 2.32 2141.55 4125 138.56 138.61 2.3 2325.93 5009 _ 139.68 139.73 2.21 2806.76 4125 143.33 143.53 0 1149.13 15982 70 122.96 2889 137.01 137.08 2.75 1414.52 X-Section F 3749 138.16 138.23 2.73 1795.91 4125 138.59 138.66 2.74 1946.43 5009 139.69 139.77 2.69 2337.5 4125 142.46 144.47 0 362.36 .16224 904 122.84 2889 137.58 137.64 2.91 2089.03 3749 138.66 138.71 2.94 2620.39 4125 139.07 139.13 2.97 2832.1 5009 140.12 140.17 2.94 3394.23 4125 145.18 145.2 1.77 3850.71 18358 2134 125.87 2889 139.11 139.14 2.27 2458.73 3749 140.07 140.1 2.34 3063.18 4125 140.45 140.48 2.37 3319.41 5009 141.35. 141.38 2.38 3957.19 4125 145.53 145.56 1.66 3777.29 19928 .1570 127.57 2889 140.09 140.17 2.91 1419.2 3749 140.93 141 2.83 1786.65 4125 141.26 141.34 2.82 1936.98 5009 142.06 142.14 2.75 2307.04 4125 145.73 145.77 1.59 2789.77 20298 370 124.64 2889 140.8 141.23 5.59 622.79 3749 141.51 142 6.14 787.6 4125 141.81 142.31 6.28 868.02 5009 142.53 142.97 6.19 1197.24 4125 145.84 145.95 3.16 1831.76 21352 1054 129.89 2889 142.83 142.87 2.22 2005.33 3749 143.56 143.61 2.3 2425.19 4125 143.85 143.89 2.34 2593.5 5009 144.41 144.46 2.44 2936.36 4125 146.44 146.48 2.02 2549.95 • Bonita Park Floodway Analysis Cross-Sections • Surveyed Proposed Point # Station Elevation Description Elevations Cross Section A 104 100.0 136.27 (14 Points) 105 112.7 135.89 106 135.3 133.45 107 201.6 132.22 108 210.8 131.10 top 144 222.7 122.07 toe 1 235.7 121.21 cl 128 246.3 122.83 toe 127 252.4 129.42 top 129 262.3 129.84 130 272.1 131.80 131 310.3 133.10 132 361.5 132:61 103 465.1 134.39 Cross Section B 109 100.0 137.63 (23 Points) 110 107.9 136.31 111 130.6 133.46 112 180.9 133.25 113 222.3 132.02 145 248.6 131.69 146 264.7 129.48 147 277.8 129.31 top 148 284.9 121.82 toe 85 301.0 121.11 toe 86 306.3 121.14 cl 89 319.3 119.72 toe 88 331.1 126.50 top 87 '342.4 130.01 90 359.1 127.70 91 370.7 124.56 158 407.9 124.64 159 433.0 131.85 160 484.5 132.62 161 504.0 124.74 162 535.8 124.86 156 580.1 137.77 157 610.9 128.41 Cross Section C 123 100.0 138.34 (23 Points) 122 114.5 137.63 121 137.6 135.49 134.00 120 178.1 134.42 133.00 119 223.4 133.04 118 251.0 132.37 114 294.2 133.17 115 2962 132.95 116 305.0 129.43 117 3102 128.90 top 82 321.7 122.01 toe 81 332.9 121.64 d 80 335.3 121.95 toe 79 344.4 124.71 toe 78 348.9 128.87 top 77 351.6 133.05 94 391.0 134.51 151 426.8 134.31 150 471.9 134.08 102 511.3 132.52 101 533.1 125.42 100 544.6 126.17 67 588.8 137.17 • Bonita Park Floodway Analysis Cross-Sections • Surveyed Proposed Point # Station Elevation Description Elevations Cross Section D 0 100.0 0.00 (20 Points) 7 8.1 137.96 8 18.4 136.16 9 67.3 134.98 10 76.4 134.26 11 86.0 133.55 13 128.7 132.59 14 198.4 133.11 15 204.6 132.08 16 209.1 130.66 top 64 211.3 122.88 toe 163 226.1 119.64 cl 73 235.3 121.21 toe 72 241.4 125.18 top 71 250.0 131.28 96 265.5 130.00 97 277.8 131.88 98 397.6 130.05 99 433.8 130.53 68 473.0 141.97 Cross Section E 27 100.0 139.18 (15 Points) 28 108.7 138.35 29 122.0 137.01 136.00 30 175.9 135.79 135.00 31 239.8 134.05 32 241.8 133.56 33 248.1 131.15 34 257.0 130.37 top 45 261.4 123.86 toe 46 270.3 122.68 G 47 276.6 123.55 toe 48 284.2 131.23 top 49 346.7 132.08 50 433.6 133.40 155 532.5 134.42 Cross Section F 35 100.0 138.88 (12 Points) 36 107.8 137.97 37 172.4 136.24 38 177.1 135.34 39 190.6 130.16 top 40 198.9 123.32 toe 41 203.7 122.96 cl 42 214.4 123.97 toe 43 224.7 131.47 top 44 238.7 131.65 164 344.8 133.16 154 453.0 133.73 Cross Section G 17 100.0 138.99 (17 Points) 18 107.3 138.37 19 119.5 136.63 20 173.4 134.68 21 241.4 133.31 133.50 22 307.2 13125 23 342.7 131.94 24 370.1 133.01 25 3882 133.51 26 399.3 133.44 top 61 403.0 124.78 toe 56 412.9 121.30 cl 57 420.8 123.35 toe 54 464.7 130.66 top 53 487.1 131.94 51 563.6 134.20 52 651.9 135.49 • • CITY OF TIGARD BONITA FLOODWAY ANALYSIS HEC-2 INPUT AND OUTPUT (For Section Affected By Bonita Park) • EXI STJ~/~ ~v~ SrvD y (Copy of i~v~~lc. fG. K) NC 7 9.1 352 543 X1 14799 46 404 77 434 7 135 14 ( x -7 C T) 0J/"/ L) 3 I . . 1 125 - • X=Sta ch elev ob elev. br lc br top sv wsel SVPTS DTMPTS DTMOIAP GR146.00 6.88 144 12.57 142 16.9 140 22.74 140 25.26 GR140.00 115.71 138 170.57 136 292.59 136 311.81 136 317.9 GR134.00 328.24 132 374.06 130.49 394.72 128.85 404.77 125.74 409.62 GR124.29 413.43 123.93 422.72 124.57 432:96 125.12 434.7 128 447.66 GR130.00 477.23 132 505.6 134 626.14 136 657.83 138 685.08 GR140.00 712.12 142 752.49 . 144 801.62 146 834.12 148 861.52 GR150.00 894.84 150 975.98 150 1021.7 152 1055.42 154 1066.78 GR156.00 1076.59 158 1110.62 160 1133.75 162 1248.41 164 1285.32 GR166.00 1308.6 168 1334.43 170 1362.47 172 1377.91 172 1468.86 GR172.00 1479.23 NC 0.057 0.06 0.2 0.4 ET 9.1 412 . §.93.. Xl 15320 44 515.66 558.84 552 547 521 ( S FG r1 dN .f • X-Sta ch elev ob elev br lc br top sv wsel SVPTS DTMPTS DIMOLAP GR146.00 11.4 144 23.28 142 33.14 140 210.39 138 314.7 GR136.00 337.47 134 395.47 132.73 435.26 132.73 435.31 132.77 486.75 ' GR132.76 515.66 125.93 524.91 122.98 527.34 119.19 534.74 118.84 543.13 GR119.18 547.65 122.14 548.64 120.63 548.71 125.91 554.98 130.45 558.84 GR132.00 712.51 134 735.03 136 745.64 138 757.37 140 771.11 GR142.00 785.21 144 803.88 146 832.19 148 844.52 150 862.5 GR152.00 891.8 154 924.2 156 931.36 158 934.81 158 951.36 GR158.00 1033.1 160 1136.45 162 1153.39 164 1170.99 166 1188.96 GR168.00 1219.87 170 1258.04 172 1335.78 172 1362.61 NC 0.11 0.107 ET 9.1 376 677 X1 16224 31 441.11 468.02 541 504 904 C~ r~ VN IIII • X-Sta ch el" ob elev br lc br top sv wsel SVPTS 774M DIMOLAP GR148.00 9.04 146 15.81 144 22.86 142 153.39 139.16 256.77 GR131.73 379.03 131.33 406.57 130.97 430.45 129.78 441.11 128.8 445.57 GR126.26 447.87 123.21 448.36 122.84 '451.41 123.01 454.69 123.45 461.06 GR126.15 463.57 131.26 468.02 132.39 476.1 132.89 494.25 133.83 536.17 GR134.00 638.39 134 720.6 134 736.71 136 751.48 138 766.27 GR140.00 783.12 142 801.83 144 820.14 146 839.22 146 846.69 GR146.00 901.08 QT 5 2889 3749 4125 5009 4125 1=►c~ x i 5frAi6 C30/-)i7lv./A Sec F,u Af ° v^ c/ H FC-Z ~30not" NC 9.1 352 543 X1 14799 46 404.77 434.7 135 114 125 • X-Sta eh elev ob elev br lc br top sv wsel SVPTS DTMPTS DTMOLAP GR146.00 6.88 144 12.57 142 16.9 140 22.74 140 25.26 GR140.00 115.71 138 170.57 136 292.59 136 311.81 136 317.9 GR134.00 328.24 112 374.06 130.49 394.72 128.85 404.77 125.74 409.62 GR124.29 413.43 123.93 422.72 124.57 432.96 125.72 434.7 128 447.66 GR130.00 477.23 132 505.6 134 626.14 136 657.83 138 685.08 GR140.00 712.12 142 752.49 144 801.62 146 834.12 148 861.52 GR150.00 894.84 150 975.98 150 1021.7 152 1055.42 154 1066.78 GR156.00 1076.59 158 1110.62 160 1133.75 162 1248.41 164 1285.32 GR166.00 1308.6 168 1334.43 170 1362.47 172 1377.91 172 1468.86 GR172.00 1479.23 NC 0.057 0.06 0.2 0.4 ET 9.1 412 .693 X1 14919 14 210.8 252.4 135 110 120 • New Section A for Bonita Park Analysis GR136.27 100.0 135.89 112.7 133.45 135.3 132.22 201.6 131.1 210.8 GR122.07 222.7 121.21 235.7 122.83 246.3 129.42 252.4 129.84 262.3 GR 131.8 .272.1 133.1 310.3 132.61 361.5 134.39 465.1 ET 9.1 412 693 X1 15059 23- 277.8 331.1 180 160 140 • Bonita Park Section B GR137.63 100.0 136.31 • 107.9 133.46 130.6 133.25 180.9 132.02 222.3 GR131.69 248.6 129.48 264.7 129.31 277.8 121.82 284.9 121.11 301.0 GR121.14 306.3 119.72 319.3 126.5 331.1 130.01 342.4 127.7 359.1 GR124.56 370.7 124.64 407.9 131.85 433.0 132.62 484.5 124.74 504.0 GR124.86 535.8. 137.77 580.1 128.41 610.9 Er 9.1 412 693 X1 15147 23 310.2 348.9 70 100 88 • Bonita Park Section C GR138.34 100.0 137.63 114.5 135.49 137.6 134.42 178.1 133.04 223.4 GR132.37 251.0 133.17 294.2 132.95 296.2 129.43 305.0 128.9 310.2 GR222.01 321.7 121.64 332.9 121.95 335.3 124.71 344.4 128.87 348.9 GR133.05 351.6 134.51 391.0 134.31 426.8 134.08 471.9 132.52 511.3 GR125.42 533.1 126.17 544.6 137.17 588.8 ET 9.1 412 693 X1 15272 20 309.1 341.4 150 105 125 • Bonita Park Section D GR138.86 100.0 137.96 108.1 136.16 118.4 134.98 167.3 134.26 176.4 GR133.55 186.0 132.59 228.7 133.11 298.4 132.08 304.6 130.66 309.1 GR122.88 311.3 119.64 326.1 121.21 335.3 125.18 341.4 131.28 350.0 GR130.00 365.5 131.88 377.8 130.05 497.6 130.53 533.8 141.97 573.0 Er 9.1 412 693 X1 15752 17 399.3 464.7 560 565 480 • Bonita Park Section G GR138.99 100.0 138.37 107.3 136.63 119.5 134.68 173.4 133.31 241.4 GR131.25 307.2 131.94 342.7 133.01 370.1 133.51 388.2 133.44 399.3 GR124.78 403.0 121.3 412.9 123.35 420.8 130.66 464.7 131.94 487.1 GR134.20 563.6 135.49 651.9 ET 9.1 412 693 X1 15912 15 251.0 284.2 110 155 160 • Bonita Park Section E GR139.18 100.0 138.35 108.7 137.01 122.0 135.79 175.9 134.05 239.8 GR133.56 241.8 131.15 248.1 130.37 257.0 123.86 261.4 122.68 270.3 GR123.55 276.6 131.23 284.2 132.08 346.7 133.4 433.6 134.42 532.5 OA✓ rg" r I9r-r h ,-L1-r_ EP 9.1 412 693 X1 15982 12 190.6 224.7 70 70 70 • Bonita Park Sect GR138.88 100.0 137.97 107.8 GR123.32 198.9 122.96 203.7 GR133.16 344.8 133.73 453.0 NC 0.11 0.107 BT X1 16224 31 441.11 468.02 ` X=Sta ch elev ob elev GR148.00 9.04 146 15.81 GR131.73 379.03 131.33 406.57 GR126.26 447.87 123.21 448.36 GR126.15 463.57 131.26 468.02 GR134.00 638.39 134 720.6 GR140.00 783.12 142 801.83 GR146.00 901.08 ion P 136.24 123.97 541 br lc 144 130.97 122.84 132.39 134 144 172.4 135.34 177.1 130.16 190.6 214.4 131.47 224.7 131.65 238.7 9.1 376' 677 504 904 br top sv wsel SVPTS DIMPTS DIMOLAP 22.86 142 153.39 139.16 256.77 430.45 129.78 441.11 128.8 445.57 451.41 123.01 454.69 123.45 461.06 476.1 132.89 494.25' 133.83 536.17 736.71 136 751.48 138 766.27 820.14 146 839.22 146 846.69 OT 5 2889 3749 4125 5009 4125 F O TV ✓Z F Cv~r~ i ri~.c9 (Cut' Y/ G f SeC ~"i Jr~ ~lo ~n~ HrC-2 rn~r • NC ET 9.1 352 543 X1 14799 46 404.77 434.7 135 114 125 • R=Sta ch elev ob elev br lc br top sv wsel SVPTS DTMPTS DTMOLAP GR146.00 6.88 144 12.57 142 16.9 140 22.74 140 25.26 GR140.00 115.71 138 170.57 136 292.59 136 311.81 136 317.9 GR134.00 328.24 132 374.06 130.49 394.72 128.85 404.77 125.74 409.62 GR124.29 413.43 123.93 422.72 124.57 432.96 125.72 434.7 128 447.66 GR130.00 477.23 132 505.6 134 626.14 136 657.83 138 685.08 GR140.00 712.12 142 752.49 144 801.62 146 834.12 148 861.52 GR150.00 894.84 150 975.98 150 1021.7 152 1055.42 154 1066.78 GR156.00 1076.59 158 1110.62 160 1133.75 162 1248.41 164 1285.32 GR166.00 1308.6 168 1334.43 170 1362.47 172 1377.91 172 1468.86 GR172.00 1479.23 NC 0.057 0.06 0.2 0.4 ET 9.1 412 •693.. . R1 14919 14 210.8 252.4 135 110 120 • New Section A for Bonita Park'Analysis GR136.27 100.0 135.89 112.7 133.45 135.3 132.22 201.6 131.1 210.8 GR122.07 222.7 121.21 235.7 122.83 246.3 129.42 252.4 129.84 262.3 GR 131.8 272.1 133.1 310.3 132.61 361.5 134.39 465.1 ET 9.1 412 693 X1 15059 23 277.8 331.1 180 160 140 • Bonita Park Section B GR137.63 100.0 136.31 107.9 133.46 130.6 133.25 180.9 132.02 222.3 GR131.69 248.6 129.48 264.7 129.31 277.8 121.82 284.9 121.11 301.0 GR121.14 306.3 119.72 319.3 126.5 331.1 130.01 342.4 127.7 359.1 GR124.56 370.7 124.64 407.9 131.85 433.0 132.62 484.5 124.74 504.0 GR124.86 535.8 137.77 580.1 128.41 610.9 ET 9.1 412 693 %1 15147 23 310.2 348.9 70 100' 88 Bonita Park Section C GR138.34 100.0 137.63 114.5 134.00 137.6 133.00 178.1 133.04 223.4 GR132.37 251.0 133.17 294.2 132.95 296.2 129.43 305.0 128.9 310.2 GR122.01 321.7 121.64 332.9 121.95 335.3 124.71 344.4 128.87 348.9 GR133.05 351.6 134.51 391.0 134.31 426.8 134.08 471.9 132.52 511.3 GR125.42 533.1 126.17 544.6 137.17 588.8 ET 9.1 412 693 X1 15272 20 309.1 341.4 150 105 125 • Bonita Park Section D GR139.86 100.0 137.96 108.1 136.16 118.4 134.98 167.3 134.26 176.4 GR133.55 186.0 132.59 228.7 133.11 298.4 132.08 304.6 130.66 309.1 GR122.88 311.3 119.64 326.1 121.21 335.3 125.18 341.4 131.28 350.0 GR130.00 365.5 131.88 377.8 130.05 497.6 130.53 533.8 141.97 573.0 ET 9.1 412 693 X1 15752 17 399.3 464.7 560 565 480 • Bonita Park Section G ' GR138.99 100.0 138.37 107.3 136.63 119.5 134.68 173.4 133.5 241.4 GR131.25 307.2 131.94 342.7 133.01 370.1 133.51 388.2 133.44 399.3 GR124.78 403.0 121.3 412.9 123.35 420.8 130.66 464.7 131.94 487.1 GR134.20 563.6 135.49 651.9 ET 9.1 412 693 X1 15912 15 257.0 284.2 110 155 160 • Bonita Park Section B GR139.18 100.0 138.35 108.7 136.00 122.0 135.00 175.9 134.05 239.8 GR133.56 241.8 131.15 248.1 130.37 257.0 123.86 261.4 122.68 270.3 GR123.55 276.6 131.23 284.2 132.08 346.7 133.4 433.6 134.42 532.5 rl L/: ET 9.1 422 693 XI 15982 12 190.6 224.7 70 70 70 • Bonita Park Sect GR138.88 100.0 137.97 107.8 GR123.32 198.9 122.96 203.7 GR133.16 344.8 133.73 453.0 NC 0.11 0.107 BT X1 16224 31 441.11 468.02 • X=Sta ch elev ob elev GR148.00 9.04 146 15.81 GR131.73 379.03 131.33 406.57 GR126.26 447.87 123.21 448.36 GR126.15 463.57 131.26 468.02 GR134.00 638.39 134 720.6 GR140.00 783.12 142 801.83 GR146.00 901.08 ' on P 136.24 123.97 . 541 br lc 144 130.97 122.84 132.39 134 144 172.4 135.34 177.1 130.16 190.6 214.4 131.47 224.7 131.65 238.7 9.1 376 677 504 904 br top sv wsel SVPTS DTMPfS DTMOLAP 22.86 142 153.39 139.16 256.77 430.45 129.78 '441.11 128.8 445.57 451.41 123.01 454.69 123.45 461.06 476.1 132.89 494.25 131.83 536.17 736.71 136 751.48 138 766.27 820.14 146 839.22 146 846.69 OT 5 2889 3749 4125 5009 4125 L9'£Z£T 6Z'Z►OZ C9'Z IL'6 £8'►►I 00' 9L'►►T 00'SZT► 68'6ZT 00' 00' 00'►SOT 000'ZSETZ . T►'►69T LC'T M S►'Z ►L'9 S►'►►T 00' 0►'►►T 00'6005 68'6ZT 00' 00' 00'►SOI 000'ZS£IZ . Z6'8001 9£'LBSZ ►C'Z LS'B 99'E►T 00' ►B'C►t 00'SZT► 68'6ZT 00' 00' 00'►SOT 000'ZS£TZ . Z6'BLZT 9S'OZ►Z TE'Z 65'8 09'C►T 00' SS'E►T 00'6►L£ 68'6ZT 00' 00' 00'►SOT 000'ZS£TZ . S►'►L6 99'ZOOZ EZ'Z 6L'8 99'Z►T 00' £8'Z►T 00'6882 68'6ZT 00' 00' 00'►SOI 000'ZSETZ CZ'99S OL'SL9 50'9 LO'£S ►T'£►I 00' 99'Z►T 00'SZT► ►9'►ZT 00' 00' 00-OL£ 000'86ZOZ 80'699 E9'19II E£'9 SS'6S Z6'Z►T 00' 9►'Z►T 00'6005 ►9'►ZT 00' 00' 00'0L£ 000'86ZOZ T8'6O5 EL'ES8 90'9 W S9 LZ'Z►T 00' 9L'T►T 00'SZT► ►9'►ZT 00' 00' 00'OLC 000'86ZOZ 9£'999 OS'LLL OZ'9 Z9'09 L6'T►T 00' L►'T►T 00'6►LE ►9'►ZT 00' 00' 00'0L£ 000'86ZOZ 50'9L£ O►'BT9 Z9"5 09'85 ZL'IDT 00' SCOOT 00'699L 09'CZT 00' 00' 00'OL£ 000'86ZOZ s WHIT ES'90LT S6'Z 88'TT ►Z'Z►T 00' ►T'Z►T 00'SZT► LS'LZI 00' 00' 00'OLST 000'BZ66T ►9'OOST LZ'95ZZ Z8'Z ►T'TT ►0'Z►T 00' S6'I►T 00'6005 LS'LZT 00' 00' 00'OLST 000'9Z661 y 9E'ZSTT ZE'669T 68'Z TS'ZT 9Z'T►T 00' 8T'T►T 00'SZT► LS'LZT 00' 00' 00'OLST 000'BZ66T 8C'6TOT 9T'ZSLI I6'Z CS'ET £6'0►T 00' SB'O►t 00'6►LE LS'LZT 00' 00' 00'OLST 000'BZ66T EO'BZL OZ'86£T L6'Z SL'ST ZT'0►T 00' ►0'0►T 00'688Z LS'LZT 00' 00' 00'OLST 000'BZ66T T9'OLCI ►T'LT►Z T8'Z 90'6 ZZ'T►T 00' LT'T►T 00'SZT► LB'SZT 00' 00' 00'►£TZ 000'8SEST L8'CO6T L►'0►8C 9►'Z Z6'9 ZZ'T►I 00' 6T'T►T 00'6005 LB'SZT 00' 00' 00'►ETZ 000'BSEBT C9'COST 6Z'9TZ£ S►'Z ES'L E£'0►T 00' OE'0►T 00'SZT► L8'SZT 00' 00' 00'►ETZ* 000'BSEST TC'ESCT ►9'L96Z Z►'Z L9'L 96'6ET 00' Z6'6CT 00'6►LE L8'SZI 00' 00' 00'►ETZ 000'9S£8T T8'OZOT 68'COCZ ►C'Z TO'8 ZO'6EI 00' 66'BCT 00'689Z LB'SZT 00' 00' 00'►CTZ 000'85COT STO' yaw HOA SHOT Da SMIID lases 0 xiwm Xm aiUga HO= OtmS 69 amd 6Z°85=60 £OdHHLO T ►S'ZSTT 66'L►OZ 89'f TB'ZT 6Z'6ET 00' 6T'6ET 00'SZT► ►8'ZZT 00' 00' 00'906 000'►ZZ9T 9£'ZOLT E►'OZZE TT'E 99'8 98'6ET 00' 08'6CT 00'6005 ►8'ZZT 00' 00' 00'606 000'►ZZ9T 05'96ZT ►9'ZS9Z 6T'£ ZT'OT 6L'8ET 00' ZL'8£T 00'SZT► ►8'ZZT 00' 00' 00'906 000'►ZZ9T s 98'SSTI L►'6E►Z 6T'E ZS'OT 9C'8EI 00' OC'8ET 00'6►LE ►8'ZZI 00' 00' 00'606 000'►ZZ9T SE'EZ8 ZT'E68T ►Z'C IE'ZT ►Z'LET 00' LT'LET 00'68BZ ►8'ZZT 00' 00' 00't06 000'►ZZ9T + £L'►EZZ 90'SZ£Z 90'2 T►'C 68'BET 00' ►8'8ET 00'.SZT► 68'811 00' 00' 00'TZS 000'OZEST 9Z'OSZE 09'LGEC 8L'T BU Z 09'6ET 00' LS'6ET 00'6005 ►8'8TT 00' 00' 00'TZS 000'0ZEST ZT'BZSZ 9L'SEBZ 6L'T 99'Z 90'9ET 00' S►'8ET 00'SZT► ►8'8TT 00' 00' 00'TZS 000'OZ£ST 9E'LLZZ ZZ'8£9Z LL'T TL'Z SO'BET 00' ZO'8ET 00'6►LE ►8'8TT 00' 00' 00'TZ5 000'OZESI Z8'TL9T 6►'OETZ 9L'I 66'Z 88'9ET 00' ►8'9ET 00'689Z OS'8TT 00' 00' 00'TZS 000'0ZEST S►'Z09T 9►'T99T ME E9'9 C9'9ET 00' £S'SET 00'SZT► E6'EZT 00' 00' 00'SZ1 000'66L►T 99'S►LZ ►►'L►TC EZ'Z ME 5►'6ET 00' T►'6ET 00'6005 E6'EZT 00' 00' 00'SZT 000'660T 8T'OSOZ LS'BISZ ££'Z SO'► TC'8ET 00' 9Z'8ET 00'SZT► £6'EZT 00' 00' 00'SZT 000'660T W TUT ►T'Z6ZZ £E'Z ►Z'► LS'LET 00' Z8'LCT 00'6►LE E6'EZT 00' 00' 00'SZI 000'66L►T Z6'OOCT ►9'►►LT 9C'Z C6'► L9'9ET 00' Z9'9ET 00'688Z E6'EZI 00' 00' 00'SZT 000'66L►T TT'►Z9 SC UL LC'S 89'E► 9C'8£T 00' T6'LET 00'SZT► E6'£ZT 98'8£T ►E'L£T 00'09 000'Z69►T TO'9►8 TS'90ZT IT'S SO'SE 9Z'6EI 00' 06'8CT 00'6005 E6'EZT 98'9ET ►E'LCI 00'09 000'Z69►T 56'SLS ►Z'►CL L9'S O£'TS SO'8EI 00' SS'LET 00'SZT► £6'EZT 98'8ET ►£'LET 00'09 000'Z69►1 SS'ZES ZT'T69 Z►'S 95'66 Z9'LCT 00' 9T'LET 00'6►L£ E6'EZI 99'9ET ►£'LET 00'09 000'Z69►T EB'LT► 50'685 06'9 T9'L► E►'9ET 00' 90'9ET 00'688Z E6'EZI 98'9EI ►£'LCT 00'09 000'Z6901 TO'96S SS'►OL 58'5 06'L► TE'9ET 00' BL'LEI 00'SZT► E6'EZI 00' 00' 00'86 000'►T9►T LB'ZEL OT'B►OT SL'S TL'9► W SET 00' 9►'BCT 00'600S E6'EZT 00' 00' 00'86 000'►I9►T SS'L95 9T'CZL EL'S ZB'ZS 86'LCT 00' L►'L£T 00'SZT► E6'EZT 00' 00' 00'86 000'►I9►T TL'6TS 9Z'089 TS'S ►0'ZS TS'LET 00' ►0'LET 00'6►L£ E6'EZT 00' 00' 00'96 000'►I9►T 6T'TO► SE'ELS ►0'S 98'TS 9Z'9ET 00' 69'SEI 00'698Z C6'EZT 00' 00' 00'86 000'►T9►T T9'►SS LO'609 98'9 69'95 ►L'L£T 00' TO'L£T 00'►LT► 8Z'6TT 00' 00' 00'Z9►T 000'9TS►T . ZO'L9S Z6'C19 IZ'8 Z6'6L 9T'8ET 00' ►T'LCT 00'6905 BZ'6TT 00' 00' 00'Z9►T 000'9T5►T . E6'9T5 OL'►8S ST'L OZ'S9 IE'LET 00' IS'9EI 00'►LI► 8Z'6TT 00' 00' 00'Z9►T 000'9T5►T . CZ'E6► SS'►95 ZL'9 TT'65 06'9ET 00' OZ'9EI 00'Z6LE 8Z'6TT 00' 00' 00'Z9►T 000'9TS►T . OE'90 EC'STS S9'S 95'06 SL'SET 00' 8Z'SET 00'ET6Z 8Z'6TT 00' 00' 00'Z9►T 000'9TSOT . 58'99ZT 99'►LLT ►Z'E 98'OT 99'9ET 00' OS'►ET 00'►LT► E6'9TT 00' 00' 00'968 000'►SOET . TL'CZ►T St'TZTZ VVE 89'ZT ►E'►ET 00' EZ'►ET 00'690S E6'9TT 00' 00' 00'968 000'►SOCT . 6T'O►TT ►T'CCBT BC'C O►'CT Z9'CCT 00' TS'ECT 00'►LT► E6'9TT 00' 00' 00'968 000'►SO£T . 88'8ZOT Z6'OILT WE 85'ET TE'EET 00' OZ'££T OVULE E6'9TT 00' 00' 00'968 000'►SOEI . ZE'L6L 9L'C£►T 9T'C SUET 8S'ZET 00' 80'Z£T 00'ET6Z £6'9TT 00' 00' 00'968 000'►SOET . ►6'►SOZ ►Z'OLLT £6'I ET'► TZ'►CT 00' ZI'►EI 00'►LT► Z►'BIT 00' 00' 00'L►OZ 000'09TZT . ZL'T60C 9E'EBTE ►S'T 69'2 86'EET 00' E6'EEI 00'690S Z►'BIT 00' 00' 00'L►OZ 000'09TZT . L8'►OCZ ►C'ST9Z T9'T 9Z'E OZ'EET 00' ST'CET 00'►LT► Z►'9TT 00' 00' 00'L►OZ 000'09TZT . OS'Z66T T6'OLCZ S9'T Z9'E SB'Z£T 00' 08'ZET OVULE Z►'BTT 00' 00' 00'L►OZ 000'09TZT . 69'6CET IL'►OBT BL'T EL'► CO'ZET 00' 66'T£T 00'ET6Z Z►'BTT 00' 00' 00'00Z 000'09TZI . XT0' Yd11B HOA SY.01 0a SMIUD ISSM3 0 wtwm J'I'T3 aB.L113 H-M OfmS P6'99ST ZS'OZEE Lf'Z £6'9 811'0111 00' S►"09T 00'SZT11 L8'SZT 00' 00' 00'►£IZ 000'8SEST SE'OTOT 6V'V90E 11E'Z LO'L TT'O►I 00' LO'OPT 00'6PLE L8'SZT 00' 00' 00'11ETZ 000'85£8T SI'E90T E9'65PZ LZ'Z 8£'L ►I.6CT 00' TT'6CT 00"6882 LB'SZT 00' 00' 00'11CIZ 000'8S£BT 96.050£ TL'OSSE LL'T C8'I OZ'SPT 00' BI'SPI 00'SZT11 PH'ZZT 00' 00' 00.1106 000'11ZZ9T ►E'11E8I 11P'96EE f6'Z 90'L LT'011T 00' ZT'OPT 00.6005 P8'ZZT 00' 00' 00.1106 000'PZZ9T P9'OZPT PE'►EOZ L6'Z £11'8 EI'6fT' 00' 80'6ET 00'SZT11 ►8'ZZT 00' 00' 00'1106 000'PZZ9T T►'9LZT OL'ZZ9Z P6'Z E9'8 ZL'8£T 00' 99'8LT 00"6►LE 118'ZZT 00' 00' 00'1106 000'►ZZ9T 06'8£6 TT'I60Z T6'Z LP'6 P9'LET 00' 6S'LLT 00'688Z P8'ZZT 00' 00' 00.1106 000'11ZZ9T 60'ZOE 9E'Z9E 00' SP'98T LVPVT 00' 911"Z►T 00'SZTP 96"ZZT 00' 00' 00"0L 000'Z865T L£'9TTZ 6T'BEEZ 69'Z 09'S LL'6ET 00' OL'6ET 00'6005 96'ZZT 00' 00' 00'OL 000'Z865I C6'6T9I LT'L116T 11L"Z BP'9 L9'8CT 00' 65'8fT 00'SZT11 96'ZZT 00' 00' 00'OL 000'Z865T 99'SPPI TL'964I EL'Z EL'9 PZ'SET 00' 9T'8ET 00'6PLE 96'ZZT 00' 00' 00'0L 000'Z86ST u 8P'8EOT ZI'STPT SL'Z PL'L 60'LCT 00' TO'LET 00'688Z 96"ZZT 00' 00' 00'0L 000'Z865T LP'S9TI ET'6PTT 00' CS'ZI CS'E11T 00' £E"C►T 00'SZTP 89'ZZI 00' 00' 00.091 000'ZT6ST . 60'66£2 TZ"LZLZ 6Z'Z 9E'11 EL'6ET ' 00' 89'6ET 00'6005 89'ZZT 00' 00' 00'09T OOO'ZT6ST . 6S'06LT OP'9PZZ 6E'Z 8Z'S Z9'8ET 00' 9S'8ET 00'SZIP 89'ZZT 00' 00' 00'09T 000'ZT65T . 61'CBSI TZ'Z90Z TP•Z T9'S 6T'BCT 00' ET"SET 00'69LE 89'ZZT 00' 00' 00'09T 000'ZI65T . 06'P80T T9'9LST SS'Z 60'L CO'LET 00' L6'9ET 00'688Z 89'ZZT 00' 00' 00'09T 000'ZT6ST . ZP'ITOC OP'ZILZ ZS'T 88'I OP'EPT 00' 9C'CPT 00'SZT► OE•TZT 00' 00' 00'080 000'ZSLST SE'ZPSC S9'L6L£ 09'T 00'2 89'6CT 00' S9'6ET 00'600S OC'TZT 00' 00' 00'0811 000'ZSLST LZ'80LZ 80'ZSTE £9'1 Z£'Z 9S'8ET 00' £S'8£T 00'SZTP OE'TZT. 00' 00' 00'08P 000'ZSLST 6S'ETVZ 6P'SP6Z C9'T TP'Z ZT'BCT 00' OT'8ET 00'6PLE OC'TZT 00' 00' 00'0811 000'ZSLST SP'90LT 60'SICZ 99'T L8'Z S6.9ET 00' Z6'9ET 00'688Z O£'TZT 00' 00' 00'08P 000'ZSLSI OT'TLIZ WPM 00' WE SZ'EPT 00' LT'CPI 00'SZTP P9'6TT 00' 00' 00'94T 000'ZLZST I8'T8SC LC OS£ 9L'T 96'T LS'6CT 00' PS'6ET 00'6005 P9'6TI 00' 00' 00'SZT 000'ZLZST OT'ZZBZ T6'.OPOC 9L'T PT'Z PP'BCT 00' TP'SET 00'SZTP 119'6TT 00' 00' 00'SZT 000'ZLZST ST'ESSZ 6Z'ZPBZ PL'T 9T'Z 00'8fT 00' LC M 00'611LE P9'6TT 00' 00' 00'SZT 000'ZLZSI OS'S68T 65•ETEZ TL'T ZC'Z TB'9ET 00' 6L'9ET 00'6882 P9'61T 00' 00' 00'SZT 000'ZLLST 6L'ZTEZ PL'9E6T 00' 8T'£ TZ'£PT 00' PT'EPT 00"SZT► P9'TZT .00' 00' 00'88 000'LPTSI PT'11LZ£ Z6'TT11£ T6'I P£'Z SS'6CT 00' TS'6ET 00'600S P9'TZT 00' 00' 00'88 000'L►TST . 50'11ZSZ 08'9S8Z 116'T L9'Z TP'8ET 00' LC'8CI 00'SZTP P9'TZT 00' 00' 00.88 OOO'LPTST . ZS'T9ZZ SZ'P119Z Z6'T SL'Z L6'LfT 00' ►6'LET 00'6PLE P9'TZT 00' 00' 00'88 000'LPTST . 8Z'ZE9T 6S'£80Z P6'T £T'E SL'9ET 00' SL'9fT 00'6882 09'TZT 00' 00' 00'88 000'LPTST . ' XTO' V3" RDA SX.OI 03 Smrw IMMO 0 IZILPI3 DTM anims HJ'IX OH03S 69 2!)Yd 60:LT'01 EOAVHET T P6'E6Z£ 66'BSSZ 00' LS'T EV EPT 00' ►T'fPT 00'SZT► ZL'61T 00' 00' 00'011T 000'6SOST . SC'6T6S 9Z'PEOS 11T'T ZL' ES'6ET 00' TS'6£T 00.6005 ZL'6TT 00' 00' 00'011T 000'6SOST . SO'TZ6P SL'PSVP 80•T OC 6E'8EI 00' 8£'8CT OO'SZT11 ZL'6TT 00' 00' 00'001 000'6SOST . 9L'T9SP 69'ZEZP PO'T 89' S6'LCT 00' P6'LCT 00'6PLE ZL'61T 00' 00' 00'OPT 000'6SOST . 11L'ZL9C C11'S£9£ 0,6' Z9' 9L'9CT 00' SUM 00'6882 ZL'6TT 00' 00' 00'011T 000'6SOST . OL'60Z OE'ZOE 00' 116198C ZS'ZPT C9'6CT C9'6ET 00'SZTP TZ'TZT 00' 00' 00'OZT 000'6I6PT . L8'6LSZ EZ'TILZ S£'Z LL'C OS'6ET 00' PP'6EI 00'600S IZ'TZT 00' 00' 00'OZT 000'6TGPT 6Z'000Z 8Z'96ZZ B£'Z SZ'P 9E'8CT 00' OE'8fT 00'SZIP TZ'IZI 00' 00' 00'OZT 000'6TOT 8S'S6LT ZL'9ETZ 9E'Z 9C'P Z6'LET 00' LB"LET .00'60LC TZ'TZT 00' 00' 00'OZT 000.6T6►T 6L7Z6ZT L9'IOLT BE'Z 66'0, £L'9ET 00' 89'9ET 00'6882 TZ'TZT 00' 00' 00'OZT. 000'6T6PT SP'Z09T 9P'T99T ZO'C E9'9 C9'8ET 00' ES'SET 00'SZTP C6'CZT 00' 00' 00'SZT 000'66LOT . 99'SPLZ PP'LOTE CZ'Z CC'C 5P'6ET 00' T11'6ET 00'600S E6•EZT 00' 00' 00'SZT 000'66LPT . 8T'OSOZ LS"BTSZ C£'Z 50'11 TC'BET 00' 9Z'BfT 00'SZIP E6'£ZT 00' 00' 00'SZT 000'66LPT . PP'TZBI VT'Z6ZZ £E'Z PZ'P LB"LET 00' Z8'L£T 00'6PLC C6'£ZT 00' 00' 00'SZT 000'66LPT . Z6'OOCT P9'11PLT 9C'Z E6'P L9'9ET 00' Z9'9ET 00'688Z E6'EZT 00' 00' 00'SZT 000'66LVT . TT'PZ9 OV UL Lf'S 89'£11 9C'8fT 00' T6'LET 00'SZTP E6'£ZT 98'8£1 ►E'LET 00'09 000'Z69PT TO'9P8 TS'90ZT TT'S SO•SE 9Z'6ET 00' 06'8ET 00.6005 E6•EZT 98'9£T P£'LET 00'09 000'Z69PT S6'SLS PZ'PEL L9'S OUTS SO'BET 00' SS'LCT 00'SZTP E6'CZT 98'8ET PC'LET 00'09 000'Z6911T SS'ZCS ZT'I69 ZP'S 9S'6P Z9'LET 00' 9T'LET 00'60LE E6'EZT 98.8ET PE'LET 00'09 000'Z69PT £8'LTP 90'68S 06'0, I8'LP f►'9E1 00'. 90'9ES 00'688Z £6'CZT 98'9CT PE'LET 00'09 000'Z69PT 10'96S SS'POL 58'S 06'L11 TC'8ET 00' 8L'L£T 00'SZTP E6'EZI 00' 00' 00'96 000'PT9PT L8'ZEL OT'BPOT SL'S TL'911 P6'8ET 00' 911'8£1 00.6005 E6'EZT 00' 00' 00;86 000•PT9►T SS'L9S 9T'EZL CL'S ZB'ZS 96'LET 00: LP'LCT 00'SZTP E6•EZI 00' 00' 00'86 000'PT9PI TL'6TS 9Z'089 TS'S 110'ZS TS'LCT 00' PO'LET 00'6PLC E6'£ZT 00' 00' 00'86 000'PT911T 61'TOP SE"ELS PO'S 98'TS 8Z'9ET 00' 68'S£I 00.6882 C6'EZT 00' 00' 00'86 000'11T911T T9'PSS LO'609 98.9 119.95 PL'LET 00' TO'LET 00'PLT11 8Z'6TT 00' 00' 00'Z9PT 000.9TSPI . ZO'L9S Z6'EE9 TZ'8 Z6'6L 8T'8CT 00' PT'LET 00'6905 8Z'6TT 00' 00' 00'Z911T 000'9TSVT . E6'9TS OL'P8S ST"L OZ'S9 TC'LET 00' TS'9fT 00'PLIP 8Z'6TT 00' 00' 00'Z9PT 000'9TS►T . EZ'£61, SS•1195 ZL'9 TT'6S 06'9ET 00' OZ'9£T 00'Z6LE 8Z'6TI 00' 00' 00'Z9PT 000'9ISPT . OE'9E► EC'STS S9'S 8S'PP 8L'SET 00' SZ'SET 00'CT6Z 8Z'6TT 00' 00' 00'Z911T 000'9TSPT . ' SB'99ZT 99'PLLT 11Z'E 98'OT 99'PET 00' PS'PfT 00'PLTP E6'9TT 00' 00' 00.0,68 000'PSOET . TL'EZPT ST'TZTZ P11'E 89'ZT PE'PET 00' EZ'PET 00'690S £6'9TT 00' 00' 00.1168 000'PSOCT . 6T'011TT PT'££BT 8E'C 0P'ET Z9'EET 00' TS'CfT 00'PLTP C6'9TT 00' 00' 00.1168 000'0SOCT . 88'SZOT Z6'OTLT P£'E 8S'CT TE'EET 00' OZ'EET OVULE E6'9TT 00' 00' 00.968 000'PSOET . ZC'L6L 9L'EfPT 91'E SUET BS'ZET 00' 8P•ZET 00'CT6Z £6'91T 00' 00' 00"1168 000'PSO£T . P6'PSOZ PZ'OLLI E6'T ET'► TZ'PCT 00' ZT'PET 00'PLTP ZP'8TT 00' 00' 00'LPOZ 000'09TZT . ZL'T60E 9E'C9TE PS'T 69'Z 86'E£T 00' C6'ECT 00'690S ZP'8TI 00' 00' 00'LPOZ 000'09TZT . LB'►OCZ PE'ST9Z T9"1 WE OZ'EET 00' ST'CEI 00'11LTP Z11'STT 00' 00' 00'LPOZ 000'09TZI . OS'Z66T 16'OLCZ S9'T Z9'E SB'ZET 00' 08'ZET OVULE Z11'8TT 00' 00' 00'LPOZ 000'09TZT . 69'6EET TL'PO8I 8L'T EL'P f0'ZfT 00' 66'TCT 00'CT6Z ZP'8IT 00' 00' 00'LPOZ 000'091ZI . XTO' Y38Y HJA SX.OT 93 SMIB, 13SMO 0 NIWM J'ITd CnLLIM HJ'IX OMM 0 9L'LBBT S6'6pSZ ZO'L LL'1 89'96T 00' 17;97,1 00'SZT7 68'6ZT 00' 00' 08'869T Sp'9E6Z WC 69'8 97'7pT 00' T1'0/T 00'6005 68'6ZT 00' 00' 88'EI1I T9'f6SZ /E'Z TS'8 68'£pT 00' WEPT 00'SZTp 68'6ZI 00' 00' ZS'ZBZT 9Z'SZ7Z 0£'L PS'8 WEPT 00' 99'E7T 00'67LC 68'6ZT 00' 00' TC'9L6 LC'SOOZ ZZ'Z 9L'8 L8'Z7T 00' EB'ZVT 00'6882 68'6ZT 00' 00' 9S'SLLI 9L'TE87 9T'C 97'OT S6'S►T .00' 18'S7T 00'SZT7 /9'/ZT 00' 00' ZC'999 T8'L6Ti 6T'9 TS'9S L6'ZVT 00' CS'Z7T 00'6005 79'1ZT 00' 00' 9I'8TS ZZ'898 8Z'9 BE'C9 TE'ZpT 00' Z8'11T 00'SZT7 79'/ZT 00' 00' 9T'LLp SL'LOL PT'9 50'E9 00'Z7T 00' IS'T7T 00'67L£ p9'7ZI 00' 00' W OBE S8'ZZ9 65'S S9'LS VZ,TfT 00' 08-0VT 00'688Z 79'7ZI 00' 00' XTO' vaw HDA SHOT Da SMIM TiSMJ O NIWM J'173 OZLLM OL 291id MOM LL'68LZ 65'T TV'Z LL'S/I 00' EC OT 00'SZi7 LS'LZT 00' 00' 89'ESST E9'LOCZ SL'Z 6E'O1 7T'Z7T 00' 90'ZpT 00'6005 LS'LZT 00' 00' /8'LSIT Zp'LE6T Z8'Z 90'ZT 7C'I7T 00' LZ'T7T 00'SZTp LS'LZT 00' 00' 07'OSOT 7T'L9LT E8'Z PL'ZT 00'T1T 00' E6'01T 00'OLC LS'LZT 00' 00' EC'7/L 6p MT I6'Z 90'ST LT'OVT 00' 60'07T 00'6882 LS'LZT 00' 00' S6'S6LZ 6Z'LLLE 99'T 8T'Z 95'SpT 00' ES'Spi 00'SZT7 L8'SZT 00' 00' 9L'CBGT TL'8S6E 8£'Z 8C'9 8E'T1T 00' SUM 00'6005 LS'SZT 00' 00' 00'/SOT 000'ZSETZ 00'7SOT 000'ZSETZ 00'/SOT 000'ZSCTZ 00'750T 000'LSETZ 00'7SOT 000'ZSETZ 00'OLE .000'86ZOL 00'0LE 000'86ZOZ 00'OL£ 000'86ZOZ 00'OLE 000'86ZOZ 00'OLE 000'86ZOZ OHMS 60:LT:oT EOJLVWET i 00'OLST 000'8Z66T 00'OLST 000'SZ66T 00'OLST 000'8Z66T 00'OLST 000'BZ66I 00'OLST 000'BZ66T 00'7ETZ 000'SS£BT 00'pCTZ 000'85E8T • . SECNO XLCH ELTRD ELLC ELMIN 0 CWSEL CRIWS EG 30•KS VCH AREA OIK ` 12160.000 2047.00 .00 .00 118.42 2913.00 131.99 .00 132.03 4.73 1.76 1804.71 1339.69 • 12160.000 2047.00 .00 .00 118.42 3792.00 132.80 .00 132.85 3.62 1.65 2370.91 1992.50 • 12160.000 2047.00 .00 .00 118.42 4174.00 133.15 .00 133.20 3.28 1.61 2615.34 2304.87 • 12160.000 2047.00 .00 .00 118.42 5069.00 133.93 .00 133.98 2.69 1.54 3183.36 3091.72 • 12160.000 2047.00 .00 .00 118.42 4174.00 134.12 .00 134.21 4.13 1.93 1770.24 2054.94 • 13054.000 894. 00, .00 .00 116.93 2913.00 132.48 AD 132.58 13.35 3.16 1433.76 797.32 • 13054.000 894.00 .00 .00 116.93 3792.00 133.20 .00 133.31 13.58 3.34 1710.92 1028.88 • 13054.000 694.00 .00 .00 116.93 {174.00 133.51 .00 133.62 13.40 3.38 1833.14 1140.19 • 13054.000 894.00 .00 .00 116.93 5069.00 134.23 .00 134.34 12.68 3.44 2121.15 1423.71 • 13054.000 894.06 .00 .00 116.93 4174.00 134.54 .00 134.66 10.86 3.24 1774.66 1266.85 • 14516.000 1462.00 .00 .00 119.28 2913.00 135.28 .00 135.78 44.58 5.65 515.33 436.30 • 14516.000 1462.00 .00 .00 119.28 3792.00"; 136.20 .00 136.90 59.11 6.72 564.55 493.23 • 14516.000' 1462.00 .00 .00 119.28 4174.00 136.51 .00 137.31 65.20 7.18 584.70 516.93 • 14516.000 1462.00 .00 .00 119.28 5069.00 137.14 .00 138.18 79.92 8.21 633.92 567.02 • 14516.000 1462.00 .00 .00 119.28 4174.00 137.01 .00 137.74 56.64 '6.86 609.07 554.61 149f'C'.000 98.00 .00 .00 123.93 2889.00 135.89 .00 136.28 51.86 5.04 573.35 401.19 .14'614.000 98.00 .00 _.00 123.93 3749.00 137.04 .00 137.51 52.04 5.51 680.26 519.71 14614.000 98.00 '.00 .00 123.93 4125.00 137.47 •'.00 137.98 52.82 5.73 723.16 567.55 14.614.000 98.00 .00 .00 123.93 5009.00 138.46 .00 138.94 46.71 5.75 1048.10 732.87 14614.000 98.00 .00 .00 123.93 4125.00 137.78 .00 .138.31 {7.90 5.85 704.55 596.01- 14692.000 60.00 137.34 138.86 123.93 2889.00 1316.06 .00 136.43 47.81 4.90 589.05 417.83 14692.000 60.00' 337.34 138.86,X-:123.93 3749.00 137.16 .00 137.62 49.56 5.42 691.12 532.55 14692.000 60.00 137.34 138.86 123.93 4125.00 137.55 .00 138.05 51.30 5.67 734.24 575.95 14692.000 60.00 137.34 136.86 123.93. 5009.00 138.90 .00 _ 139.26 35.05 5.11 1246.51 846.01 14692.000 60.00 137.34 138.86 123.93 4125.00 137.91 .00 138.36 43.68 5.37 792.98 624.11 • 14799.000 125.00 .00 .00 123.93 2889.00 136.62 .00 136.67 4.93 2.36 1744.64 1300.92 • 14799.000 125.00 .00 .00 123.93 3749.00 137.82 .00 137.87 4.2{ 2.33 2292.14 1821.44 • 14799.000 125.00 .00 .00 123.93 4125.00 138.26 .00 138.31 4.05 2.33 2518.57 2050.18 • 14799.000 125.00 .00 .00 123.93 5009.00. 139.41 .00 139.45 3.33 2.23 3147.44 2745.66 • 14799.000 125.00 .00 .00 123.93 4125.00 138.53 .00 138.63 6.63 3.02 1661.46 1602.45 14919.000 120.00 .00 .00 121.21 2889.00 136.66 .00 136.73 4.99 2.38 1701.67 1292.70 14919.000 120.00 .00 .00 121.21 3749.00 137.87 .00 137.92 4.36 2.36 2136.72 1795.58 14919.000 120.00 .00 .00 121.21 4125.00 138.30 .00 138.36 4.25 2.38 2296.28 2000.29 14919.000 120.00 .00 .00 121.21 5009.00 139.44 .00 139.50 3.77 2.35 2711.23 2579.87 • 14919.000 120.00 .00 .00 121.21 4125.00 139.63 139.63 142.52 386.94 .00 302.30 209.70 • 15059.000 140.00 .00 .00 119.72 2689.00 136.75 .00 136.76 .62 .94 3635.43 3672.74 ` 15059.000 140.00 .00 .00 119.72 3749.00 137.94 .00 137.95 .68 1.04 4232.69 4561.76 • 15059.000 140.00 .00 .00 119.72 4125.00 138.38 .00 138.39 .70 1.08 4454.75 4921.05 • 15059.000 140.00 .00 .00 119.72 5009.00 139.51 .00 139.53 .72 1.14 503{.26 5919.35 • 15059.000 140.00 .00 .00 119.72 4125.00 143.14 .00 143.18 1.57 .00 2558.99 3293.94 1 13MAY03 13:22:42 PAGE 69- SECNO XLCH ELTRD ELLC ELHIN O CWSEL CRIWS EG 10•KS VCH AREA .01K • 15147.000 88.00 .00 .00 121.64 2889.00 136.75 .00 136.78 2.83 1.84 2191.01 1717.89 • 15147.000 88.00 .00 .00 121.64 3749.00 137.94 .00 137.97 2.50 1.83 2753.25 2372.81 ` 15147.000 88.00 .00 .00 121.64 4125.00 138.38 .00 138.41 2.43 1.85 2965.77 2644.23 • 15147.000 BB.00 .00 .00 121.64 5009.00 139.51 .00 139.54 2.14 1.62 3525.51 3422.77 15147.000 88.00 .00 .00 121.64 4125.00 143.14 .00 143.21 3.16 .00 1936.74 2312.79 15272.000 125.00 .00 .00 119.64 2889.00 136.78 .00 136.81 2.33 1.71 2312.69 1894.45 15272.000 125.00 .00 .00 119.64 3749.00 137.97 .00 138.00 2.16 1.74 2841.47 2552.07 15272.000 125.00 .00 .00 119.64 4125.00 138.{1 .00 138.4{ 2.14 1.76 3037.86 2817.90 15272.000 125.00 .00 .00 119.64 5009.00 139.54 .00 139.57 1.96 1.76 3561.45 3577.96 15272.000 125.00 .00 .00 119.64 4125.00 143.17 .00 143.25 3.61 .00 1804.68 2171.10 15752.000 480.00 .00 .00 121.30 2889.00 136.92 .00 136.95 2.93 1.67 2296.35 1686.66 15752.000 480.00 .00 .00 121.30 3749.00 138.09 .00 138.12 2.46 1.64 2927.28 2391.06 15752.000 480.00 .00 .00 121.30 4125.00 138.53 .00 136.56 2.36 1.65 3164.17 2684.83 15752.000 480.00 .00 .00 121.30 5009.00 139.65 _00 139.68 2.03 1.61 3780.44 3516.78 15752.000 480.00 .00 .00 121.30 4125.00 143.36 .00 143.40 1.88 1.52 2712.40 3011.42 • 15912.000 160.00 .00 .00 122.68 2889.00 136.97 .00 137.02 6.61 2.46 1651.99 1124.08 • 15912.000 160.00 .00 .00 122.68 3749.00 138.13 .00 138.18 5.20 2.32 2141.55 1644.59 • 15912.000 160.00 .00 .00 122.68 4125.00 138.56 .00 138.61 4.90 2.30 2325.93 1863.45 15912.000 160.00 .00 .00 122.68 5009.00 139.68 .00 139.73 4.06 2.21 2806.76 2485.31 • 15912.000 160.00 .00 .00 122.68 4125.00 143.33 .00 143.53 12.53 .00 1149.13 1165.47 15961.000 70.00 .00 .00 122.96 2889.00 137.01 _00 137.08 7.75 2.75 1414.52 1037.66 15982.000 70.00 .00 .00 122.96 3749.00 138.16 .00 138.23 6.73 2.73 1795.91 1444.76 15982.000 76.00 .00 .00 122.96 4125.00 138.59 .00 136.66 6.49 2.74 1946.43 1619.05 15982.000 70.00 .00 .00 122.96 5009.00 139.69 .00 139.77 5.61 2.69 2337.50 2115.44 • 15982.000 70.00 .00 .00 122.96 4125.00 142.46 .00 144.47 186.45 .00 362.36 302.09 16224.000 904.00 .00 .00 122.84 2889.00 137.58 .00 137.64 9.49 2.91 2089.03 937.65 16224.000 904.00 .00 .00 122.84 3749.00 138.66 .00 138.71 8.65 2.94 2620.39 1274.87 16224.000 904.00 .00 .00 122.84 4125.00 139.07 .00 139.13 8.45 2.97 2832.10 1419.08 16224.000 904.00 .00 .00 122.84 5009.00 140.12 .00 140.17 7.47 2.94 3394.23 1832.66 • 16224.000 904.00 .00 .00 122.84 4125.00 145.18 .00 145.20 1.83 1.77 3850.71 3050.96 18358.000 2134.00 .00 .00 125.87 2889.00 139.11 .00 139.14 7.39 2.27 2456.73 1062.64 18358.000 2134.00 .00 .00 125.87 3749.00 140.07 .00 140.10 7.07 2.34 3063.18 1409.57 18358.000 2134.00 .00 .00 125.87 4125.00 140.45 .00 140.48 6.94 2.37 3319.11 1566.06 9L'L88T S6.605Z ZO'Z LL'869T 9E"9E6Z 09'Z 6C'ETOT OS'E65Z OE'Z L0'ZBZT 6T'SZOZ OE'Z 8Z'9L6 EE"SOOZ ZZ'Z • 9S'SLZT 96'TE8T 9T'E 00•:999 0Z'L6TT 6T"9 DO`BT5 Z0'898 8Z'9 80~ ZL0 09"1.BL OI'9 •;`99'08£ 6L'ZZ9 65.5 XTO' vaw HOA • lea OL 8O@d ZZ'8S9Z LC"69LZ 6S'T „ LO'ESST 00'LOEZ SL'Z E0'L9TT 86'9E6T ZB'Z 96.6001 99"98LT ME TT'OOL OZ"61PT T6'Z S6'96LZ 6Z"LLL£ 99'T CL'Z86T 6T'CS6E 8£"Z GL"0 80"90T. 00' 00'90T 00-SZIO 68.6ZI 00" 00' 00'OSOT 000'ZSETZ . 69.8 90'00T 00' TO'OOT 00'600S 68"6Z1 - 00'' 00' 00'OSOT 000'ZSETZ . TS'8 WEPT 00: S8'£0T 00'SZTO 68'6ZT 00" X00• 00'OSOT 000'ZSETZ . SS's WEPT 00' WEPT 00"60LE 68"6ZT 00' 00' 00'OSOT 000"ZSETZ . 9L'8 L8'Z0T 00'. EB'Z0T 00'688Z 68"6ZI 00' 00' 00'OSOT _000"ZSETZ . 90'OT S6"SOI 00' 08'S0T 00'SZTO 09'9ZT 00' 00' 00"OLE 000'86ZOZ . 9S"99 LC UT 00' ES'Z0T 00'600S 09"OZT 00' 00" 00'OLE OOC'86Z02 . 00"E9 TE'ZOT 00' T8'T0T 00'SZTO 09'0ZT 00' 00" 00'OLE 000'86ZOZ . LO'E9 00'ZOT 00" TS"TOT 00"60LE 09'0ZT 00' 00' 00'OLE 000'86ZOZ . 99'LS EZ'T0T 00' 08.00T 00.6882 09'0ZT 00' 00' 00'OLL 000'866Z . sx.OT `J3 SMI1D IMSMJ 0 Niva olm aILLM Halix Ot=S ZO'ZZ:ET COAVRET T T0'Z LL'SOT 00' EL'S0T 00'SZTO LS•CZT 00' 00' 00'OLST 000'8Z66T 00"OT WEPT 00' 90'L0T 00.6005 LS'LZT 00" 00' 00'OLST 000"8Z66T WET 0E"T0T 00' 9Z'T0T 00'SZTO LS"LZT 00" 00' 00"OLST 000'BZ66T SL'ZT 00'TOT 00' E6'001 00"60LE LS"LZT 00' 00' 00'OLST 000'8Z66T LO'ST LT'00T 00" 60"00T 00'688Z LS'LZT 00' 00" 00'OLST 000"SZ661 8T"Z 99'S0T 00' ES'S0T 00'SZTO L8'SZT 00" 00' 00"OETZ 000"BSEST 8E'9 8E'T0T 00' SUM 00.6005 L8"SZI 00' 00' 00'OETZ 000.8SEBT t I CITY OF TIGMW TA FLOOD'WAY ANALYSIS BONI MAPS FANNO CREEK GREENWAY TRAIL ACTION PLAN III ..7 ! • ,41 January 2003 Prepared for: Metro Regional Parks and Greenspaces Department Prepared by: Alta Planning + Design METRO PEOPLE PLACES OPEN SPACES METRO COUNCIL David Bragdon, President Rex Burkholder Carl Hostica Susan McLain Rod Monroe Brian Newman Rod Park • METRO AUDITOR Alexis Dow, CPA METRO REGIONAL PARKS AND GREENSPACES DEPARTMENT Jim Desmond, Director Heather Kent, Planning and Education Division Manager ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN George Hudson, Principal Arif Khan, Senior Planner Daniel Lerch, Assistant Planner • PROJECT MANAGER Mel Huie, Metro Regional Parks and Greenspaces Department For more information or copies of this report, contact: Mel Huie, Regional Trails Coordinator (503) 797-1731, huiem@metro.dst.or.us FANNO CREEK GREENWAY TRAIL ACTION PLAN WORKING GROUP MEMBERS Commissioner Dick Schouten, Washington County Joanne Rice, Washington County Land Use and Transportation Aisha Willits, Washington County Land Use and Transportation Anna Zirker, Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District Margaret Middleton, City of Beaverton Transportation Roel Lundquist, City of Durham Administrator Duane Roberts, City of Tigard Community Development Justin Patterson, City of Tualatin Parks Jim Sjulin, Portland Parks and Recreation Gregg Everhart, Portland Parks and Recreation Courtney Duke, Portland Transportation Don Baack, SWTrails Group of Southwest Neighborhoods, Inc. Bob Bothman, 40-Mile Loop Land Trust Dave Drescher, Fans of Fanno Creek Sue Abbott, National Park Service Rivers and Trails Program Heather Kent, Metro Planning and Education Division William Eadie, Metro Open Spaces Acquisition Division Bill Barber, Metro Planning Metro Regional Services 600 NE Grand Ave. Portland, OR 97232 (503) 797-1700 www.metro-region.org Alta Planning + Design 144 NE 28th Ave. Portland, OR 97232 (503) 230-9862 www.altaplanning.com FANNO CREEK GREENWAY TRAIL ACTION PLAN Contents I. Introduction I-1 II. Existing Conditions II-1 Affected jurisdictions II-1 Project Partners II-1 Project History II-2 Area History II-3 Project Setting ......................................................................................................................................................................................................1I-3 III. Gap Descriptions ...................................................................................................................................................................................................III-1 IV. Implementation Measures ....................................................................................................................................................................................IV-1 V. Maps V-1 VI. Funding Sources VIA VII. Summary of Maintenance Guidelines................................................................................................................................................................ VII-1 is VIII. Design Details and Crossings VIII-1 Appendix A. Fanno Creek Greenway Survey Results Appendix-1 B. Summary of Planning Process Appendix-2 Fanno Creek Greenway Action. Plan Section I. Introduction 1. INTRODUCTION 10 • The proposed Fanno Creek Greenway Trail extends 15 miles from the City of Tualatin to the City of Portland, connecting the mouth of Fanno Creek at the Tualatin River in Tualatin to Portland's Willamette Park adjacent to the Willamette River. The trail consists of both on-street and off-street sections, many of which have already been constructed. Approximately one-half of the trail has been completed. The proposed route begins at the Tualatin River, then heads north for about nine miles through Durham, Tigard, and Beaverton, and unincorporated Washington County. The trail then veers away from Fanno Creek and follows various alignments, heading east for approximately six miles from the Garden Home Recreation Center to the Willamette River. The trail can thus be divided into two distinct segments, the multi-use path segment between the Tualatin River and Garden Home, and the "urban" segment from Garden Home east through built-up southwest Portland neighborhoods to the Willamette River. The first segment mainly follows an off-street alignment adjacent to the Fanno Creek, while the second segment uses low-volume roadways for the'waWng route, arterials with striped bike lanes for the biking route, and a former inter-urban rail alignment for a proposed multi- use path segment. For planning purposes, the Fanno Creek" Greenway Trail has been divided into 11 "gaps". Each gap is about 1 mile in length. These gaps are located along the proposed greenway where the trail is incomplete in terms of the trail segments and/or roadway crossing treatments. The existing conditions and history of the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail are summarized in Section 2. The descriptions of the gaps, recommended trail improvements, and corresponding maps are included in Sections 3 and 4. Section 5 includes details about proposed design standards and maintenance guidelines for the trail. 1 Red Electric Trail feasibility study to be conducted by the City of Portland Alta Planning + Design 1-1 January 2003 Trail segment near Main St. in Ti gard Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section il. Existing Conditions II. EXISTING CONDITIONS AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS The Fanno Creek Greenway Trail extends through the following jurisdictions. WORM Region Metro Regional government representing over 1.3 million residents in Clackamas, Multnomah and Washington counties, and the 24 cities in the Portland metropolitan area. County Multnomah County, The alignments in Multnomah County are all under the jurisdiction of the City of Portland. pop. 660,486 County Washington County, Alignments in Washington County are primarily under the jurisdiction of THPRD, and the cities of Beaverton, Tigard, pop. 445,342 Durham and Tualatin. The trail alignment also runs through areas of unincorporated Washington County: the area between Oleson Road and Scholls Ferry Road, and a portion at the southern end surrounded by Tigard, Durham and Tualatin' District Tualatin Hills Park and Provides parks and recreation services to 200,000 residents within 55 square miles of eastern Washington County, Recreation District (THPRD) including Beaverton. - District Clean Water Services Service district serving -450,000 residents in 122 square miles of the Tualatin River watershed in urban Washington (formerly Unified Sewerage County and small portions of Portland, Lake Oswego, Multnomah & Clackamas Counties. Agency) City City of Portland, pop. 529,121 Bureau of Parks and Recreation, Portland Department of Transportation, Bureau of Environmental Services (water (Multnomah County) quality), and SWTrails Group of Southwest Neighborhoods, Inc. are involved in the project. The alignment runs from Willamette Park in Southwest Portland via various alignments through Southwest Portland to the western city limits. City City of Beaverton, pop. 76,159 Park services in Beaverton are managed by THPRD. The greenway alignment runs along Fanno Creek for 4 miles from (Washington County) Allen Blvd. to Scholls Ferry Rd. at the southern City limits. Street crossings of the trail are managed by the City. City City of Tigard, pop. 41,223 The alignment runs along Fanno Creek from Scholls Ferry Rd. for 4.25 miles to the southern city limits located near (Washington County) Durham Rd. City City of Durham, pop. 1,382 Alignment runs along Fanno Creek to the Tualatin River and makes a loop for a total of 2.25 miles. (Washington County) City City of Tualatin, pop. 22,791 The greenway alignment ends in Tualatin's Community Park after crossing the Tualatin River from Durham on a (Washington County) proposed bike/ped bridge. PROJECT PARTNERS The Fanno Creek Greenway Trail is a partnership project involving many public and private organizations, including the cities of Portland, Beaverton, Tigard, Durham and Tualatin; Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District; Washington County; Clean Water Services; Fans of Fanno Creek; Southwest Neighborhood, Inc.; Audubon Society of Portland; Three Rivers Land Conservancy; 40-Mile Loop Land Trust; National Park Service and Metro. 0 9 Alta Planning + Design II-1 January 2003 Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section II. Existing Conditions PROJECT HISTORY 0 • Plans for the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail have been proposed and developed for over 30 years: 1972 Columbia Region Association of Governments (CRAG) "Urban Outdoors Plan" _ mapped out portions of the_greenway and trail. 1974 CRAG produced the "Bikeway Plan for the Columbia and Willamette Region" which included portions of the trail. 1970s -7 Local Comprehensive Plans and Park/Trail Master Plans -1988~ Washington County Transportation Plan 1989 Metro's "Recreation Resource Study and Natural Area Mapping Project" J 1992 Metro's "Metropolitan Greenspaces Master Plan / Regional Trails & Greenways System Map 1994 j City of Portland Environmental Overlay Zones 1995 C Metro Regional Urban Growth Goals and Objectives / 2040 Concept 1995 . r._._._......_..__.____._.___.__.__.._._._._..__.__..... Regional Vote Approving Open Spaces Bond Measure (included funds for Fanno Trail) _ ...J 1995-2002 Purchase of Trail Right-of-Way by Metro - 1995-2002 _ Construction of Trail by local jurisdictions 1995-2002 Federal Transportation Funds allocated to build the trail 1999 _ - City of Tigard Park System Master Plan - _ 1998 Hillsdale Town Center Plan 1998 1999 _ ..TualatinHills Park and Recreation District _TraiIs Master Plan - - Fanno Creek G reenway Trail Working Group established 2000 - _ _ Metro Re Tonal Transportation Plan RTP Update _ _ 2000 _ _ City of Portland Southwest Trails Plan 2000 Southwest Portland Urban Trails Plan 2000 Southwest Portland Community Plan Policies adopted 12001-20_0.2_ _ Community Outreach / Local Ambassadors program 2001 City of Portland Parks 2020 Vision Plan 2001 Metro's Green Ribbon Committee Funding Recommendations 1 _ 2002- + _City of Beaverton Comprehensive Plan and Transportation System Plan - - 2002 City of Tigard Transportation System Plan _ 2002 - Washington County 2020 Transportation Plan _ _20_02 - - _Metro's Update of Regional Trails and Gr_eenways System Map _ __2003 Action Plan for Completing Fanno Creek Greenway Trail -v- - _ Alta Planning + Design II-2 January 2003 Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section II. Existing Conditions AREA HISTORY Fanno Creek is named after one of Oregon's earliest settlers, Augustus Fanno, a native of Portland, Maine, who settled in the area of 8300 SW Highway 217 in 1847. A 640 acre donation land claim he settled that year was on the lowlands along Fanno Creek. Native Americans used parts of his claim to pick huckleberries; and with their help, he cleared the dense forest and started an onion farm in the rich bottom land. The Fanno family farmed portions of the original claim until 1971, when the last 83 acres was sold. Early settlers of the area were mostly woodsmen, farmers and dairy farmers. The pace of settlement of the Fanno Creek watershed increased with development of the Southern Pacific railway in the late 1800's and the Oregon Electric railway in the early 1900's. Communities with stations along these interurban passenger lines continue to bear the names of the stops, and the location of the old rights-of-way can still be seen on the city zoning maps. The route of the Oregon Electric Railway originated at SW Jefferson and Front Street and followed the Interstate T be mouth ofPanno Creek • Five alignment up out of Portland, along Multnomah Boulevard through Maplewood to Garden Home, where it split into Salem and Forest Grove branches. Most of the 49 mile system was built between 1903 and 1915, with passenger revenues reaching a peak of $891,000 in 1920. The opening of Multnomah Station at SW 35th Avenue and Capitol Highway in Portland in 1908, coupled with the paving of Slavin Road in 1903, opened up the Fanno Creek watershed to more rapid development. Multnomah residents could travel to SW Broadway and Washington Street in 15 minutes on the rail line. The population around Multnomah, Maplewood, Hillsdale, and West Portland Park increased to 2,000 by 1915 when the Portland General Electric Company installed electricity to the area. In 1926 the Oregonian described growth in the Multnomah area as "phenomenal," as large numbers of houses were being built for speculation. The Southern Pacific lines began electrification in 1912, becoming the Red Electric trains. The last train ran in July of 1929, after which Southern Pacific replaced interurban rail passenger service with electric trolley buses. The last full year of inter-urban operations was 1932. PROJECT SETTING Topography, Geology, Soils and Precipitation The approximately 20,510-acre Fanno Creek watershed drains water from the Tualatin Mountain Range, Sexton Mountain and Bull Mountain which . flows down to the Tualatin River. There are approximately 117 miles of streams in the Fanno Creek watershed, including two major tributaries (Ash and Summer Creeks) and twelve smaller tributaries. Fanno Creek at its headwaters drains the southwest portion of the Tualatin Mountains in Portland. The highest part of the Fanno Creek basin is 1,060 feet above sea level at Council Crest, and the upper portion of the watershed contains streams in deep ravines. Fanno Creek and its upper tributaries flow west as they leave the Portland city limits, at which point all creek elevations are less than 300 feet. The southwest slope of the Tualatin Mountains (commonly known in Portland as the West Hills) is composed mostly of Columbia River Basalt. Basalt flows are exposed in ravines, while in other places the basalt is covered by up to 25 feet of wind deposited silt. Underground streams, or aquifers, are stored in fractured basalt throughout the area. Alta Planning + Design II-3 January 2003 Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section II. Existing Conditions Fanno Creek watershed soils are mostly silts and clays. Much of the northwestern portion of the watershed is composed of Cascade Silt-loam, a wind- deposited soil that erodes easily and does not absorb storm water very quickly. In the steep headwaters of Fanno Creek, forests hold soil to the sides of the hills; although even in fully vegetated sites, a high natural rate of soil erosion is common. Hydrology The Fanno Creek watershed receives approximately 50 inches of precipitation (98% rain and 2% snow) per year. Almost all (881/o) this rain falls between October and May, with half the annual total falling in November, December, and January. Fanno Creek has not experienced a 100-year flood since urbanization, although significant flooding did occur in 1977, putting portions of SW 56th, 60th, Oleson Road and the Beaverton-Hillsdale Highway under water. Some stream segments flow to culverts and pipes which are too small to pass a large flood and property could be submerged • during such a flood. The majority of the greenway trail is in the 100-year flood plain from Scholls Ferry Rd., south to the Tualatin River. During the 1996 flood many portions of the trail were covered by water. Vegetation The Fanno Creek watershed is in a transition area between the Western Hemlock and Willamette Valley vegetation zones. Although western hemlock is the dominant species in the first zone, Douglas fir, western red cedar, or grand fir are just as likely to dominate mature stands. Immature stands have a great deal of red alder and big-leaf maple. The understory is dominated by a lush growth of herb species including sword fern, wild ginger, inside-out flower, Oregon oxalis, trillium, and Smith's fairybells. Understory shrubs include: red huckleberry, Oregon grape, vine maple, red elderberry, wood rose and salmonberry. Early observations of Portland's forests point to the dynamic pattern- of successional stages.active within the forest community over the past two centuries. The predominantly old growth coniferous forest that Lewis. and Clark recorded in 1806 has been transformed through logging and fire into a younger, mixed hardwood and coniferous forest. Despite these disturbances, signs of a returning western hemlock climax forest are widely apparent. The forest types occurring in the Fanno Creek watershed may be viewed as a sequence of successional stages of forest regeneration following logging and fire. • Fish and Wildlife The Fanno Creek watershed is used by about one hundred bird species, several small-and-medium sized mammals, and a few fish species. Commonly seen mammals include beaver, raccoon, opossum, spotted skunk, Douglas Squirrel, and Townsend's chipmunk. Occasional visitors include black-tail deer and coyote. There was one coyote sighting in 1993. The last elk sighting was in 1992. The last black bear sighting was about ten years ago. The last cougar sighting was about 30 years ago. Fanno Creek contains Cutthroat trout. There are different types of these trout, and each type has a distinct life cycle, one of which spends its entire life in small streams and only grows to approximately seven inches. These small fish are full year residents of Fanno Creek and may only migrate a few hundred yards in an entire lifetime. Ocean and lake dwelling cutthroat do not visit Fanno Creek, but an occasional large trout will spawn there. The spawning beds for both these cutthroat types are in the faster, gravel-bottomed headwaters. Flat-land creeks further downstream have mud bottoms that are not suitable for spawning, but are very important for rearing and feeding, especially during seasonal low water and droughts. Other fish species known to be in Fanno Creek include sculpins, dace, and mosquito fish. Alta Planning + Design II-4 January 2003 Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section III. Gap Descriptions III. GAP DESCRIPTIONS Gap 1: Tualatin River to Durham Rd. This area is located north of the Tualatin River, at the mouth of Fanno Creek. The. existing and planned trail segments will provide connections to the Tualatin River, Tualatin Park, Durham City Park, Cook Park in Tigard, and Tigard High School. The most notable features of this area include the constructed wetlands in Cook Park and the open fields owned by Clean Water Services. Some odors exist near Clean Water Services' Treatment Plant. Key issues in determining alignment/ crossings: property ownership, slope of terrain, connections to existing trails. Gap 2: Durham Rd. to Bonita Rd. This corridor is primarily an industrial district that parallels Fanno Creek. A number of the properties appear to have vacancies or are otherwise under-utilized. 74th Avenue is a low-volume roadway. The railroad parallels 74th Ave. to the east. This railroad corridor is slated to carry the proposed Washington County Commuter Rail Line. Metro has acquired easements along a number of properties that border Fanno Creek in this section. This section contains a number of wetlands along Fanno Creek. Key issues in determining alignment/crossings: property ownership, environmental constraints, slope issues, traffic volume. Existing multiuse patb north of Bonita Ave. - Gap 3: Bonita Rd. to Tigard City Hall The City of Tigard is constructing a new park along Bonita Rd. near the intersection with Milton Court. Gap 3 also encompasses the recently Metro acquired 13-acre Brown-McDonald property. This forested property straddles Fanno Creek and its associated wetlands. To the west of Fanno Creek are residential neighborhoods. The City of Tigard also is constructing a new library between Hall Blvd. and Fanno Creek, just north of Regina Rd. Key issues in determining alignment/ crossings: wetlands, property ownership, connections to planned library. Washington County Commuter Rail A commuter train is planned to run between Beaverton and Wilsonville on the existing track near the trail. The train will operate on the existing single track. The projected commuter passenger train speed in this area wiU be 54 mph (Top speed 79 mph). Portland & Western Railroad will continue to operate freight trains on this corridor. (Source: TriMet) • • Alta Planning + Design III-1 January 2003 Clean Water .Services properly near the railroad trestle SW 741h Avenue looking north Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section III. Gap Descriptions Gap 4: Main St. to North Dakota St. This area in Tigard contains mostly completed segments of the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail as well as a designed and funded segment between Grant St. and Main St. The primary issues in this gap are the trail roadway crossings of: Tiedeman, Tigard, and North Dakota Streets. This segment includes downtown Tigard. Key issues in determining alignment/ crossing treatments: Traffic volume and roadway geometry. • Gap 5: Hall Boulevard Crossing This gap is essentially a roadway crossing. Currently, there is no crossing treatment (signalized or unsignahzed) for trail users that wish to cross Hall Boulevard, a wide, high-volume roadway. The Fanno Creek Farmhouse is located south of Hall Blvd. along Creekside. Users may use the intersection at Greenway, which is roughly 400' west of the trail. Signal warrants exist at Creekside to the east, but a trail though the office center parking lots to the north of Creekside may be difficult to implement. A bicycle-'pedestrian bridge over Hall, however expensive, may provide the safest crossing treatment for trail users. Key issues in determining alignment/ crossing treatments: Safely crossing Hall, traffic volume and roadway geometry, feasibility of trail easement acquisition. Gap 6: Denney Rd. to 92°d Ave. Gap 6 is situated next to Hwy. 217 in Beaverton. The first gap exists between the existing trail south of Denney Rd. and the newly completed trail north of Denney Rd. on the Greenwood Inn property. The second gap parallels Fanno Creek to the south of commercial properties along Allen Blvd. This gap should be completed by the fall of 2004. Key issues in determining alignment/crossing treatments: Traffic volume, vehicular turning movements, safe crossing of Highway 217. Existing path east of .SW192,,A looking at intersection with.S' I Allen Blvd. Alta Planning + Design III-2 January 2003 E.xisdng boardwalk near Main St., Tigard Bigcist crossing Hall Blvd in Beaverton Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section III. Gap Descriptions Gap 7 marks the beginning of the Portland section of the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail. These trails mainly consist of on-street walking routes. Some of the streets contain sidewalks and others require the "trail" user to walk along the roadway. The designated bike route primarily follows Multnomah Boulevard, which has existing, striped bike lanes. However, the volume of traffic is relatively high, making this route inappropriate for less experienced riders. The proposed Red Electric Trail, being studied by the City of Portland, . will potentially provide a multi-use path connection through SW/ Portland. Gap 7: Garden Home to SW 60th "Demand"path to Fanno Creek Trail from the Frank E.staieApar&ient; Walking Route: Gap 7 exists at the border between Multnomah and Washington County in the Garden Home area. Gap 7 is the first segment to veer away from the Fanno Creek. The area is primarily residential and the on-street route follows local, low-traffic volume roadways. The off-street route will connect to the existing Fanno Creek Trail near the Garden Home Recreation Center. The trail will need an easement on private property to connect to Vermont Street and eventually the Red Electric Trail. During fall of 2002, improvements to Oleson Rd. were being planned and designed by Washington County. Existing destinations in this area include the Garden Home Recreation and sports fields, Oregon Episcopal School, and a shopping complex. .S W1 Maplewood near the elementary school Biking Route: The biking route follows Oleson Rd. to Garden Home, and then to Multnomah Blvd. Multnomah has striped bike lanes and is signed as a bike route. Due to relatively high traffic volume and speed, this route may not be appropriate for novice or young bicyclists. Key issues in determining alignment/ crossing treatments: Traffic volume and geometry, sight distance, previous designation in Portland's ,Southwest Urban Trails Plan. Gap 8: SW 601h to Gabriel Park Walking Route: This route continues through a residential neighborhood between April Hill Park and Gabriel Park using local residential streets. Steep slopes exist east of April Hill Park. The trail passes by Maplewood Elementary School. SW Maplewood has a 50' right-of-way and could be improved with a sidewalk. Biking Route: The biking route continues along Multnomah Blvd. Key issues in determining alignment/ crossing treatments: Traffic volume and geometry, sight distance, existing designated route in Southwest Urban Trails Plan. Alta Planning + Design III-3 January 2003 Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section III. Gap Descriptions Gap 9: Gabriel Park to SW Bertha Blvd. Walking Route: East of Gabriel Park, the walking route passes through a residential neighborhood and follows Nevada with the exception of the crossing of Capitol Highway. Here, because of grade issues, a bicycle-pedestrian bridge would provide the most safest crossing for trail users. If a bicycle-pedestrian bridge proves to be unfeasible due to engineering issues or right-of-way restrictions, stairs and a marked mid-block crosswalk (accompanied by signs alerting drivers) would improve the Capitol Highway crossing. In absence of either treatment, users will need to cross Capitol Hwy. using Texas St.. to the north. Adjacent to the Greater Portland Bible Church, the route will use the existing gravel trail on unbuilt Nevada St. right-of-way. Heading east, the route will cross Capitol Hill Rd. and pass through Stephens Creek Park before crossing Bertha Blvd. Entrance to Wilson Fligb School Biking Route: The biking route continues along Multnomah Blvd. until the intersection with SW 25th. Because of the difficult crossing at the intersection with Barbur, eastbound bicyclists can head south on SW 25,h and SW 24th, and then head east on SW Barbur Blvd. Key issues in determining alignment/ crossing treatments: Traffic volume and geometry, elevation differences, right-of-way ownership, existing designated routes in Southwest Urban Trails Plan. Gap 10: SW Bertha Blvd. to SW Terwilliger (at George Himes Park) Walking Route: After crossing Bertha Blvd., the walking route will use existing sidewalks and an existing crossing at Vermont St. onto an existing path on Wilson High School property. The route will use the roadway of SW Burlingame Ave. and SW Burlingame Place. The route will'then follow the undeveloped SW Terwilliger Place right-of-way to access the entrance to George Himes Park, where a soft-surface path exists.. Biking Route: The biking route follows the bike lanes on SW Barbur Blvd. to SW Miles St.. The route follows SW Miles to SW Brier St (which are relatively low-volume streets without bike lanes). Key issues in determining alignment/ crossing treatments: Traffic volume and geometry, sight distance, existing designated routes in Southwest Urban Trails Plan. Gap 11: SW Terwilliger (at George Himes Park) to Willamette Park (at SW Nebraska) Walking Route: From SW Terwilliger (at George Himes Park) to Willamette Park (at SW Nebraska), the pedestrian path goes under one of the oldest wooden bridges still in active use. Passing under Barbur and I-5, down about 100 steps to SW Iowa, SW Corbett, SW Carolina, SW Virginia and SW Nebraska Streets to the Willamette Park. Biking Route: Following SW Brier Place, SW Custer, SW Corbett, SW Laview, SW Taylors Ferry and SW Miles. Key issues in determining alignment/ crossing treatments: Traffic volume and geometry, sight distance, existing designated routes in Southwest Urban Trails Plan. Alta Planning + Design III-4 January 2003 Unbuilt right-of--way near George [limes bark Entrance to pedeshian stairs near 1-5 Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section III. Gap Descriptions Table 1: Trail-Roadway Intersections Current Crossing Number Sight Road Posted Traffic Volume Recommended Roadway Treatment of Lanes Distance Width Speed Dail Average) Sidewalks Bike Lanes Treatment Durham Rd. at 74th None 3 Good 48' 35 High 15,900 6' 6' 5' s 4' n Type III Signal (no crosswalk on Durham Rd. at 85th east side 3 Good 48' 35' High 16,000 6' 6' 5. 5' Use Existing Signal None (crosswalk Planned Type I crossing w/ Bonita Rd. planned) 3 Good 40' 30-40 High 13,900 6' 6' 5' 5' overhead warning Hall Blvd. None 2 Good 42' 40 High (16,000) None 6' _Le 11' w Type III with median Main St. Crosswalk 2 Good 37' 20 Med 8' 8' None None (existing Type 1 Grant St. None 2 Good 31' 20-30 Low None 5'(s) - T e 1 I Type I- with median and Tiedeman St. None 2 Fair 43' 25 Med 6000 6' 6' 5'(n) overhead warning Tigard St. None 2 Good 22' 35 Med 3900 None None T e I North Dakota St. None 2 Good 20' 25-30 Med 4000 None None T pe 1 None (410' Hall Blvd. to signal) 5 Good 60' 40 High (27,000) 6' 6' None T pelt Greenwa Denney Rd. None 3 Good 40' 35 High 14,400 7' s 8'(s). None Type IV Scholls Ferry Rd. Signal 3 Good 40' 30 High 19,100 5' _ 5' None 92nd Crosswalk 2 Good 46' 35 Med 5' 5' None Type Ill 63' Signal at narrows Allen Blvd Scholls Fer 2,3 Good near 92nd 35 High 7' (s) 5' n None WA3HINMT?,ON CO:UN TOW x _ ' ? "*rfy~ IM Signal at Oleson Rd. Garden Home 3 Fair 40' 35 High (13,000 6' 6' None T pe II-Garden Home PORTLAND' V. ` -''l.. , ' 1'A J:3.i7~i+%Y`3'~`a? ,"~'3i. .x+~-'.'~+src4': ~8 wr'"'"'!~s tsC •..i~L,mFkt1'.a','„~` Maplewood None 2 Fair 20' 25 Low 1250 None None Type I SW 45th None 2 Good 20' 30 Med 7290 None None T e I Type II Texas St.; Type I Capitol Hwy. None 2 Fair 28' 30 Med 9760 5'(e) w/ overhead warning Type I w/ overhead Capitol Hill Rd. None 2 Poor 20' 30 Med None None warning Type I w/ median and Bertha Blvd. None 3 Good 36' 30 High 15,200 6' 6' I 5' overhead warning Treatments: Type I: Unprotected mid-block crossing Type II: Divert to Signalized Intersection Type III: Signalized Crossing Type IV: Grade Separated (undercrossing or overcrossing) • Alta Planning + Design III-5 January 2003 Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section IV. Implementation Measures IV. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES Implementation measures for the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail are outlined in the following matrix, organized by gap. • • Alta Planning + Design IV-1 January 2003 FANNO CREEK GREENWAY ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES FANNO CREEK GREENWAY ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES f F'_ kn'4','✓i. 'k~. S}"X4 ~11• `Syv 1' il'r - h7r.AV k Y4 r4..s~i. i `n. Capital Costa (ExeludesProparty Im lamentation Measures f t AC ulattloNEasement c gns, Bollards, Gap ^ AcqutNtioN RlgMof-Way Length Ease of Trallheod or 0 Se menu Irderaeetlon Igo Desert tlon - Easement Im rovement Other =91 Implementation Rea onslblli Trail Costs 22 sin s Other Total Cost Gap 1: Tualatin River o.Ourham R d m ard' , - . 1 A-B: Build a Bike-Pad Bridge Bridge Two options have been studied to provide a bike/pod To be River 400' Difficult City of Durham, $250.000 $ 1 million $300 $1,250.300 over Tual. River next to crossing. The preferred option calls for a single bridge determined crossing City of Tigard. existing railroad bridge that diagonally spans the Tualatin River. Would City of Tualatin, connect Tigard. Durham, and Tualatin. Wash. Co.. Metro 1 B-C: Tualatin River Path Off-street This alignment will follow the Tualatin River. An 0.3 Moderate City of Tigard $157.500 $600 $158,100 earthen trail exists, but a regional (paved) muti-use trail will need to be set back from the riparian area to avoid wetlands and meet Metro's Title 3 re uirements. 1 C-E: Cook Park Path Existin 1 E-F: 85th Ave On-street This segment connects Durham Rd. and the existing Wayfinding 0.4 Easy City of Durham, $2,500 $2,500 path on the Clean Water Services property. City of Tigard 1 F-G: Durham Rd. On-street This segment uses the sidewalks and bike lanes on Wayfinding 0.4 Easy City of Tigard $600 $600 Durham Rd. 1 H-J: Fanno Creek Alignment Existing 1 J-G: Fanno Creek Alignment Off-street This alignment begins at the recently completed Negotiate Wayfinding Wetlands 0.4 Difficult City of Tigard. $210.000 $180,000 $1,200 $391,200 Durham Park Loop Trail and would cross Fanno easements delineation, Clean Water Creek four times. Will cross railroad using existing with Taylor, mitigation. Services underpass. Bartlett, Four creek crossings. 1 H-0: Clean Water Services Off-street This segment would conned the Durham Park path Negotiate 0.1 Easy City of Tigard. $52,500 $600 $53,100 Connector and the Cook Park path. with CWS Wash. Co. Clean Water Services 1 B-I: Durham Park-Clean Existing Water Services Path 1 I-1 Durham Rd. (at 74th) Crossing- A signal at this intersection would allow users to cross Signalized Moderate City of Tigard $150,000 $600 $150,600 Roadway Durham Rd., which carries over 15,000 cars each da . Gasp) 2 ;:Durham - au.:~:., <_.~r5i)q:~ ra,N,~,star, r~~;a:.K ~•,s~ Xs ,a^s;.,~-•: . , ~rxx -r;:a - - 2 AFanno Creek Alignment Off-street This alignment follows the Fanno Ck. riparian corridor Easements Wayfinding Wetlands 1.1 Difficult City of Tigard $577,500 $1,200 $578,700 to the west of the industrial properties on 74th. Steep w/ multiple delineation slopes may require cantilevering sections of this trail. properties 2 A-C: 74th Ave. On-street This option follows 74th where traffic volumes are Wayfinding 0.8 Easy City of Tigard $900 $900 low. 2 A-C: Rail with Trail Off-street This option would use the rail ROW to provide an off- Easement w/ Wayfinding 1.1 Moderate City of Tigard $577,500 $1,200 $578,700 street path adjacent to the future commuter rail line. COOT & coordination w/ Commuter Rail plans 2 i-2 Bonita Rd. Crossing. This crossing will allow nearby residents to safely Planned Mid- Construction City of Tigard Roadway cross Bonita. Block crossing planned for 2003 w/ pedestal (funded) warning 0 9 IV-2 FANNO CREEK GREENWAY ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES 0 ;r. p _ a :.x m h 4r Y r Jt - -'t »3 S.a .-a .N x t X 2 { x qi fir; f~5 r c.<,~ <,t ' y' , r ~~t#~ £ Sr* ,rte "Al ' Caphal.Costs.(Excludes'Property Im lementatlonMeasures 3-.'.. .k. Ae ulelUoNEssemant _ : - Signs, . . s Gap Aequisltlonf r Right-61`-Way'. Length Ease of Tretlhead or # mentl Intemactlon T Dsatat tlon ` • . ' ' : ' Easement Improvement Other : miles Im Iementatlon R nalbill Trail Costs Crossings Other Total Cost Gap 3 • Bonita Rd. a .CI al =.T a "r'" - - 3 B-K: Milton Court Existing $225 $225 3 K-G: Fanno Creek Alignment Off-street This alignment would take users through the Metro- Fields Wayfinding Wetlands 0.7 difficult City of Tigard, $367,500 $1,200 $368,700 owned "Brown-McDonald" property and continue Properties delineation, Metro behind the proposed site for the Tigard Library. mitigation 3 B-G: Bonita to Hall On-street This option would travel along Bonita and cut across Wayfinding 1.2 Easy City of Tigard $5,000 $5,000 Fanno Creek Drive to Hall Blvd. Bike lanes and sidewalks exist on Bonita and one side of Hall. 3 ILibrary Connection Off-street This connection would connect the existing multi-use Solares, Wayfinding One creek 0.3 Moderate City of Tigard $157,500 $50,000 $500 $208,000 path and the future Tigard Library. Zander, crossing Fields Properties 3 H-G Library to Hall Off-street This segment would connect the future library to Hall 0.3 Moderate City of Tigard $157,500 $500 $158,000 Connection Blvd. 3 JJ-KK Bridge Connection Off-street This path and bridge would connect the existing path One creek 0.1 Difficult City of Tigard $52,500 $50,000 $102,500 With the proposed path on the east side of Fanno crossing Creek. 3 i-3: Hall Crossing Crossing- A signal at this intersection would allow users to cross Signalized with Moderate City of Tigard $180,000 $2,000 $182,000 Roadway Hall Blvd., which carries over 16,000 cars each day at median this location. Gap 4 : Mein SL to North Dakota S 1 s r•. ; . 4 B-C: Main to Pacific Hwy. Off-street The City of Tigard received a grant to upgrade the 250' Planned for City of Tigard Undercrossing existing 4' path in this section construction in 2003 4 C-D: Pacific Hwy. to Grant Off-street This off-street alignment would parallel Fanno Creek Ball Property 0.2 Moderate City of Tigard $105,000 $105,000 behind the Morlan and Ball Properties, 4 D-E: Grant to Woodard Park On-street This connection uses Grant St. and Johnson St., two Wayfinding 0.3 Easy City of Tigard $5,000 $5,000 low volume streets. 4 D-I: Fenno Creek Route-west Off-street Runs along the west side of Fanno Creek. 3 properties 0.3 Difficult City of Tigard $275,000 $1,200 $276,200 4 0-1: Fanno Creek Route-east Off-street Runs along the east side of Fanno Creek. 4 properties 0.3 Difficult City of Tigard $350,000 $1,200 $351,200 4 F: Tiedeman Trailhead Trailhead off of Tiedeman on Metro Property would Moderate City of Tigard, $250,000 $250,000 provide arkin for 6-8 cars Metro 4 1-4 Grant St. Crossing- A striped mid-block crossing would allow pedestrians Mid-Block Easy City of Tigard $6,000 $2,000 $8,000 Roadway to cross safely. 4 i-5 Tiedeman St. Crossing- This crossing would have users cross Tiedeman to Mid-Block, with Moderate City of Tigard $120,000 $4,000 $124,000 Roadway the west of Fanno Creek. Bike lanes and sidewalks median and exist on this portion of Tiedeman. A median would overhead - allow users to cross one side of the street at a time. warning. Curb cuts are necessary. An overhead warning is needed due to the limited sight-distance. 4 i-6 Tigard St. Crossing- A striped mid-block crossing would alert drivers of the Mid-Block Easy City of Tigard $6,000 $2,000 $8,000 Roadway trail crossing here. 4 i-7 North Dakota St Crossing- A striped mid-block crossing would alert drivers of the Mid-Block Easy City of Tigard $9,5 00 $3,000 $12,500 Roadway trail crossing here. . Gap 5 : Hall Blvd. Crossing- Beav erton. 5 F-E: Creekside On-street This new route would encourage trail users to access Wayfinding 0.1 Easy City of $600 $600 the Fanno Creek Trail at the Fanno Farmhouse. A Beaverton, signal is warranted at Creekside. THPRD 5 E-D; Parking Lot Route On-street This route would go through the Blackstone Blackstone Wayfinding 0.2 Difficult City of $8,000 $4,000 $12,000 properties and access a bridge over Fanno Creek Properties Beaverton, north of Hall. (easement THPRD needed IV-3 FANNO CREEK GREENWAY ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES "M W u i r x 5 . ~ i g x ~r:Y+ xT , c tT r ~ ?C!Pltal.Cosu (Excludes Pro perty fl::. x nfl ; _ 3 Im Iementsgon {y 4 y~ ~ ~ Meafsures . Ae uishlonlEasemenl gn0. 1 r : . = Bollards, Gap Ac on/ Right-of-Way Length Ease of Trollhead or p Segment/ IntaraecUon Type ` 08scription Easement Improvement: Other (miles) Implementation Responslbiii Trail Costs Crossin s Other Total Cost 5 i-8 Hall Blvd. Crossing - Crossing- A signal at Creekside is warranted due to traffic on Signalized with Difficult City of $225.000 $4,000 $229.000 Alternate Roadway Hall. This would provide a safe place for Fanno Trail median Beaverton alternate users to cross Hall Blvd. 5 i•8 Hall Blvd. Crossing Crossing- A new bike-pad bridge would be constructed to lake Bike-ped bridge Difficult City of $750.000 $750,000 Roadway trail users over Hall Boulevard Beaverton . 6 C-E: Hwy 217 Bike-Pad Crossing- This option calls for a new bike-ped bridge over Hwy. Negotiation Highway 0.3 Difficult ODOT, City of $1,750,000 $1,750.000 Bridge Roadway 217 that accommodates bicyclists and pedestrians with COOT Overpass, Beaverton, safely. Stream crossing THPRD, Metro 6 E-F: 105th Off-street Off-street This path would parallel the roadway and connect Negotiation 0.1 Medium THPRD. City of $55.000 $600 $55.600 with either Denney Rd. or a new bike-ped bridge. with ODOT Beaverton. ODOT 6 F-G: Greenwood Inn Existin 6 B-F: Denney Rd. to On-street This portion follows Denney and 105th. Add bike lanes 0.5 Medium THPRD. City of $51,042 $600 $51,642 Greenwood Inn and improve Beaverton sidewalks 6 G-H: Greenwood Inn to Off-street This segment would follow Fenno Creek behind a Numerous Wayfinding Wetlands 0.5 Moderate THPRD. Metro $1,200.000 $1,000 $1,201,000 Beaverton Maintenance number of industrial properties on Allen Blvd. properties delineation Facility Easements in negotiation. including and Goodman mitigation and Schnitzer properties 6 I•J: Allen Blvd Off-street A path would provide a route between 92nd and Possible Sidewalk 0.1 Difficult City of $30,000 $600 $30.600 Scholls Ferry. acquisition/ widening Beaverton, easement of Metro Wilson, McWilliams properties 6 i-9 Denney Rd. Crossing- This crossing crosses Denney Road by looping users Negotiation Grade- Wetlands 0.2 Difficult City of $135,000 $2,000 $137,000 Roadway under the Denney Rd. overpass and alongside Fanno with Clean Separated delineation, Beaverton Creek. Water Boardwalk mitigation Services 6 00 92nd Crossing. Multiple crossing issues: intersection redesign study Potential Moderate City of $50,000 $50,000 Roadway should identify Intersection and trail crossing issues roadway re- Beaverton, and propose appropriate long-term solutions. alignment Washington Ct . Gap Garden Home to SW M - Beaverton P n r 7 A-B: Firlock to Vermont Off-street This connection would cut through the Frank Estates 0.9 Difficult THPRD, City of $540.000 $1.200 $541,200 and follow Firlock along Oregon Episcopal School F Beaverton ro ertto SW Veront St. Z 7 B•C: Vermont Off-street This route would follow the unbuilt Vermont St. right- 0.4 Difficult City of $240,000 $600 $240,600 of-wa . . Beaverton 7 H•C: Oleson Rd. Off-street This segment would follow Oleson Rd. and be 0.7 Moderate Washington Planned Im. constructed along with other roadway improvements. nd County (funding sidewalk/multi- has been use path reserved) 7 D-F: SW Canby On-street This connection follows SW Canby east to 64th Wayfinding 0.7 Easy THPRD, City of $600 $600 Beaverton 7 E-G: SW 68th On-street This segment provides a bicycle connection between Wayfnding 0.3 Easy City of Portland $9,000 $600 $9,600 SW Multnomah and Canby. 7 i -11 Multnomah and Garden Crossing- Add traffic signal to intersection- warrants exist to Difficult City of Portland $150.000 $150.000 Home Roadway provide signal 9 IV-4 FANNO CREEK GREENWAY ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES 0 S e•1•. ~9 _.:..{l,s 'rJ' 311 " LLtr .fi 'Y3~ ,1'. 13Tf'Y+arf•.,rG'~• f:• •~J 5, Jr- ' r,: '"::tia':7,ei f,.:,.:i4 ti•a' i ~'r~~S:ro', .e > r - ~ uM,{. al. SN,~. _ , H?:•7s'~' :.Ca ksl.Costs Excludes Pro P. ( DertY r , ,.T. ; Im . -6 ' Irirtientetlon Measures r `F.. . . 'A IsltlonfEasement ` r' ti ? Signs, Bollards, Gap ` ' . M ; Aegalslion/ Rlghtof Way Length Ease of Trailhead or q Segmsntllnterse n ' T e`:- . Desrxf tlon?:'`; _ - Ea`eement:: Improvement Other _ collet Im IemaMatlon Res nsibgl Troll Costs Crossl s Other Total Cost Gap 8 : SW 60th to Gabriel Park - Po an . , r : 8 A-B: SW Canby to April Hill On-street This connection makes use of an existing trail in April Wayfinding 0.6 Easy City of Portland $600 $600 Park Hill Park 8 A-D: April Hill Park Off-street, Walking Path: This route cuts across the southern Wayfinding Environment 0.1 Difficult City of Portland $60,000 $300 $60,300 _ On-street section of April Hill Park. at issues 8 C-E: Custer/ On-street This connection is primarily on-street, with a 01 mi Multnomah Wayfinding, 0.7 Moderate City of Portland $60,000 $600 $60,600 Maplewood/Miles gravel off-street section on MCC property. Comm. sidewalk Church- improvements Easement on Maplewood 8 E-F: MCC to Gabriel Park Off-street A short walking path is needed to connect from the Gravel path Stairs on 0.1 Difficult City of Portland, $40,000 $300 $40,300 Multnomah Com. Church to Gabriel Park. steep slopes SW Trails 8 1-12 Maplewood Crossing- A striped mid-block crossing Mid-Block Easy City of Portland .$7.500 $7,500 Roadway 8 i-13 SW 45th Crossing- A striped mid-block crossing Mid-Block Easy City of Portland $7,500 $7,500 Roadway Gap 9 : Gabriel Park to SW Berths - Portland. 9 G-H: Nevada On-street This route follows Nevada Wayfinding 0.3 Easy City of Portland $1,200 $1,200 9 H-K: Capitol Hwy at-grade On-street/ This route diverts users north to cross Capitol Hwy. Wayfinding 0.2 Easy City of Portland $7,500 $1,200 $8,700 crossing @ Texas Alt. Crossing 9 L-M: Greater Portland Bible On-street This portion uses the unbuilt Nevada St ROW. Coordination Nevada St. Bridge over 0.4 Moderate City of Portland, $24,000 $75,000 $99,000 Church to SW Bertha with Portland ROW wetlands in SW Trails ' Parks and improvements Stephens BES Wayfinding Creek 9 M Trailhead A small trail head off of Bertha could provide trail $200,000 $200,000 Arkin for 4.5 cars 9 A-B-C: Multnomah Blvd. Bike Route This bike route provides a way for bicyclists to travel Wayfinding n/a Easy City of Portland $10,000 $10,000 On-street between SW Barbur and Multnomah Blvds. Westbound cyclists can ride straight to Multnomah, but eastbound cyclists will divert South along 24th and 23rd to reach Barbur. 9 i-14 Capitol Hwy. Crossing- A bike-ped bridge would allow users to cross Capitol Property to Difficult City of Portland $300,000 $300,000 Roadway Hwy., overcoming grade issues. If infeasible, stairs east of and a miblock crossing would improve the crossing. Capitol Hwy. 9 i-15 Capitol Hill Rd. Crossing- A striped mid-block crossing with overhead warning Mid-Block w/ Moderate City of Portland $60,000 $60,000 Roadway due to traffic volumes overhead warning 9 i-16 Bertha Blvd. Crossing- A striped mid-block crossing with overhead warning Mid-Block w! Moderate City of Portland $90.000 $90,000 Roadway and median. The median acts as a pedestrian refuge median and for pedestrians crossing Bertha. overhead warning Ge 1 0: SW Bertha to Gooroo Him a Perk- )and . ems. 10 A-B: Bertha to Wilson HS On-street This route follows sidewalks on Chestnut and SW Wayfinding 0.5 Easy City of Portland $600 $600 13th to Wilson HS. 10 C-D: Burlingame Pl. On-street This segment follows the low volume street. Wayfinding 0.1 Easy City of Portland $300 $300 10 D-E: SW Terwilliger Pl. Off-street Gravel Trail: This route follows an unbuilt ROW Communicate 0.1 Moderate City of Portland, $25,000 $25.000 between residential properties. This ROW exists on w/ surrounding SW Trails an extremely steep grade (30%). neighbors, build stairs due to steep slope 10 E-F: SW Terwilleger On-street This short segment follows the roadway to George Wayfinding 0.1 Motlerale City of Portland $300 $300 Himes Park. IV-5 FANNO CREEK GREENWAY ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES , n a Sep ?'t x N c s, rcz " r a 4 r. , . ~ Capital Coats'(Excludes'Property. , > Im lementatlon Measures 3' - Ac ulsllloNEasement Y Signs, Oa P A ulsitloN cci RI of-Wa p M y Length Ease of Bollards, Trallhead or rY So menu lnterseetlon ` T pe De6crfpti , ' 'T I . Easement " Improvement Other miles Implementation Responsibility Trall Costs Crossings Other Total Cost 10 G-H: Miles Bike Route Bike Route This route connects Barbur and Miles. Wayfinding 0.4 Easy City of Portland $1,000 $1,000 On-street 10 i-17: Terwilliger Crossing Crossing- A striped mid-block crossing with overhead warning Mid-Block w/ Moderate City of Portland $40.000 $40.000 Roadway due to traffic volumes. Sight distance may limit overhead crossing treatment. warning Gs 1 1• Geo Himes Park o I I Par k- o 11 A-B: George Himes Park to Off-street This walking route crosses 1.5, descends a flight or Wayfinding 0.9 Easy City of Portland $600 $600 Willamette Park stairs, and travels on neighborhood streets to Willamette Park. 11 H-I: Brier to Miles On-street The winding route includes a 300' elevation gain. Wayfinding 1 Easy City of Portland $2.000 $2.000 TOTAL $11,553,967 0 0 IV-6 Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section V. Maps V. MAPS The following maps describe implementation of the Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan, ordered by gap. Alta Planning + Design V-1 January 2003 . , -Y _ I_ I I I rl ^I j ~ --_Ill I ^+t I I I I I 1 ~ I rl I I+ rt I r I I Beave 2 17 --L- J~~ fl ac IJJtI I IT"'ZI ~ I ~ -J Sri~~4! I 1 k~ I /y.. w Litz I --L I f ' L { Tig 'arc I - I r _ J , ! I J I I ~ , r.- ~a -L L- I I - r1--~ Tual~i r_I I \ 1~ I \t P r I - - I: z+ s I I i -r I r~l )f I)J, Red Secft M IU- ue Path Feasibility to be studded by Gry of Portland F: r I Portia T~F` _ I ' s... I I d I I-I ~ J r.-- I \ I I I I ~lrf--I fir o S n f_ LL\ t3 : ~ ``/J ' L '"aKe~gYde9C Fanno Creek GreenwaY Trail Gap Index Sheet I ! ~y ■~IM \ mot/ ' rL J I~ ■ f I 4* ':P \ YG I I- J ~:3 L-I-1 i~ r l ^y I I 41 Fanno Creek Greenway Trail NCompleted Segments Potential Routes NFanno Creek 0 1 Miles Source of data: Metro RLIS OW-A M: Jno Map created 12115/02 0 .9 Fanno Creek Greenway Trall Action Plan 1 Tualatin River to Durham Rd. LEGEND Proposed Wayfinding Markers ® Information Map/Kiosk o Signs O Pavement Markings Trail head Parking Current Proposed Proposed Crossing Treatments ® Roadway Crossing Roadway Crossing-Signal ® Stream Crossing Fanno Trail Alignment Preferred Off-street Preferred On-street ~~~~Alternate Route N Completed Route Trail Requires Easement Railroad Fanno Creek Property Ownership Easement Needed Easement Acquired 0 500 Feet O Map created: December 15, 2002 Source of data: Metro RLIS N MW-M MITT O Fanno Creek Greenway Trail Action Plan 2 Durham Rd. to Bonita Rd. LEGEND Proposed Wayfinding Markers n Information Map/Kiosk ~~TT Signs o Pavement Markings Trailhead Parking Current Proposed Proposed Crossing Treatments Roadway Crossing Roadway Crossing-Signal ® Stream Crossing Fanno Trail Alignment Preferred Off-street Preferred On-street Alternate Route N Completed Route Trail Requires Easement Railroad N Fanno Creek Property Ownership 0 Easement Needed 0 Easement Acquired 0 500 Feet O Map created: December 15, 2002 Source of data: Metro RUS N MW-M MLTAO Fenno Creek Greenway Trail Acdon Plan 3 Bonita Rd. to Tigard City Hall LEGEND Proposed Wayfinding Markers Information Map/Kiosk Signs O Pavement Markings Trail head Parking Current Proposed Proposed Crossing Treatments ® Roadway Crossing Roadway Crossing-Signal 19 Stream Crossing Fanno Trail Alignment Preferred Off-street Preferred On-street Alternate Route N Completed Route Trail Requires Easement Railroad Fanno Creek Property Ownership 17-71 Easement Needed = Easement Acquired 0 500 Feet O Map created: December 15, 2002 Source of data: Metro RLIS N MLTAO Fanno Creek Greenway Trall Action Plan 4 Main St. to North Dakota St. LEGEND Proposed Wayfinding Markers © Information Map/Kiosk O Signs o Pavement Markings Trailhead Parking Current Proposed Proposed Crossing Treatments Roadway Crossing 0 Roadway Crossing-Signal @ Stream Crossing Fanno Trail Alignment Preferred Off-street Preferred On-street Alternate Route N Completed Route Trail Requires Easement ` Railroad N Fanno Creek Property Ownership Easement Needed Q Easement Acquired 0 500 Feet Map created: December 15, 2002 Source of data: Metro RLIS 0 N MLTY o + Im Fanno Crook Greenway Trail Action Plan 5 Hall Blvd. Crossing Beaverton LEGEND 4 Proposed Wayfinding Markers © Information Map/Kiosk o Signs O Pavement Markings Trailhead Parking 0 Current M Proposed Proposed Crossing Treatments ® Roadway Crossing Roadway Crossing-Signal Stream Crossing Fanno Trail Alignment Preferred Off-street Preferred On-street Alternate Route N Completed Route Trail Requires Easement z v Railroad Fanno Creek Property Ownership 0 Easement Needed 0 Easement Acquired 0 500 Feet I In Map created: December 15, 2002 Source of data: Metro RLIS N MLTAO ,°,,.e! Fanno Creek Groenway Trail Action Plan 6 Denney Rd. to 92nd LEGEND Proposed Wayfinding Markers Information Map/Kiosk Signs o Pavement Markings Trailhead Parking Current Proposed Proposed Crossing Treatments ® Roadway Crossing Roadway Crossing-Signal ® Stream Crossing Fanno Trail Alignment Preferred Off-street Preferred On-street o Alternate Route N Completed Route Trail Requires Easement Railroad Fanno Creek Property Ownership Q Easement Needed 0 Easement Acquired 0 500 Feet I Map created: December 15, 2002 Source of data: Metro RUS N aw-M MLTA0 Fanno Creek Greenway Trall Action Plan 7 Garden Home to SW 60th LEGEND 4 Proposed Wayfinding Markers Information Map/Kiosk Signs o Pavement Markings Trail head Parking Current Proposed Proposed Crossing Treatments ® Roadway Crossing Roadway Crossing-Signal ® Stream Crossing Fanno Trail Alignment Preferred Off-street • Preferred On-street ****Alternate Route N Completed Route Trail Requires Easement Railroad N Fanno Creek Property Ownership Q Easement Needed 0 Easement Acquired 0 500 Feet a Map created: December 15, 2002 Source of data: Metro RUS N M61AO Fanno Creek Grwnway Trail Action Plan SW 60th to Gabriel Park LEGEND Proposed Wayfinding Markers Information Map/Kiosk Signs O Pavement Markings Trailhead Parking 48 Current Proposed Proposed Crossing Treatments I Roadway Crossing 0 Roadway Crossing-Signal 19 Stream Crossing Fanno Trail Alignment Preferred Off-street Preferred On-street Alternate Route w~ Completed Route Trail Requires Easement Railroad I • Fanno Creek Property Ownership Easement Needed 0 Easement Acquired 0 500 Feet a Map created: December 15, 2002 Source of data: Metro RLIS N M4Tpo =anno Creek Greenway Trail Aedon Plan 9 Gabriel Park to SW Bertha LEGEND A Proposed Wayfinding Markers © Information Map/Kiosk o Signs G) Pavement Markings Trail head Parking Current Proposed Proposed Crossing Treatments Roadway Crossing Roadway Crossing-Signal ® Stream Crossing Fanno Trail Alignment Preferred Off-street Preferred On-street ®e+~ Alternate Route Completed Route Trail Requires Easement Railroad Fanno Creek Property Ownership Q Easement Needed Easement Acquired 0 500 Feet O Map created: December 15, 2002 Source of data: Metro RUS N + Im M~i nC Fanno Creek Greenway Trail Action Plan 10 SW Bertha to George Himes Park LEGEND Proposed Wayfinding Markers I I Information Map/Kiosk 'IIII'' Signs O Pavement Markings Trailhead Parking • Current Proposed Proposed Crossing Treatments ® Roadway Crossing Roadway Crossing-Signal Stream Crossing Fanno Trail Alignment Preferred Off-street Preferred On-street ~ee* Alternate Route /V Completed Route Trail Requires Easement Railroad • Fanno Creek Property Ownership Easement Needed 0 Easement Acquired 0 500 Feet O Map created: December 15, 2002 Source of data: Metro RUS 0 N M~Tl O Fenno Creek Greenway TraH Action Plan 11 George Himes Park to Willamette Park LEGEND 4 Proposed Wayfinding Markers It Information Map/Kiosk Signs G) Pavement Markings Trail head Parking Current Proposed Proposed Crossing Treatments ® Roadway Crossing Roadway Crossing-Signal ® Stream Crossing Fanno Trail Alignment Preferred Off-street *Preferred* On-street Alternate Route NCompleted Route Trail Requires Easement Railroad Fanno Creek Property Ownership Easement Needed Easement Acquired 0 500 Feet a Map created: December 15, 2002 Source of data: Metro RLIS N + aw-M MLTAO Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan VI. FUNDING SOURCES Section VI. Funding Sources The following is a table that summarizes public funding sources for the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail. Some of these funds are restricted as to the type of improvements that qualify for assistance. Typically state and federal funds require trail and roadway improvements to comply with current Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) Guidelines for accessibility. MTIP Funding Federal transportation funds coordinated by Metro. Funds can be used for 2 years Preliminary Engineering, ROW acquisition and construction. Recreational Trails Grants Coordinated by Oregon State Parks. Funds can be used for ROW acquisition and Annual construction. Land and Water Conservation Fund Federal funds coordinated by Oregon State Parks. Funds can be used for ROW Annual (LWCF) acquisition and construction. Measure 66 funds from Oregon State Coordinated by Oregon State Parks. Funds can be used for ROW acquisition and 2 years Lottery construction. Transportation Enhancement Projects Administered by Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). Must serve When federal funds transportation need. available .Oregon Bike / Ped Grants Administered by ODOTs Bike Program Project. Must be in a public ROW. 2 years Community Development Block Grants Federal funds administered by the counties and City of Portland for areas with low Annual and moderate income households. Parks projects are eligible. System Development Charges (SDCs). Fees on new construction allocated for parks, streets and public improvements. Varies Where available, funds can be used for ROW acquisition and trail construction Local / regional bond measures approved Funds can be used for ROW acquisition, engineering, design and trail construction. Varies by the voters Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) Districts are typically created by local property owners, imposing a "new tax" to fund Varies improvements. Funds can be used for ROW acquisition and trail construction. Tax Increment Financing / Urban Renewal Park or trail project must be located in an urban renewal district which meets Varies Funds certain economic criteria and is approved by a local governing body. Local Traffic Safety Commissions Funding for street crossings and signals. Varies • • Alta Planning + Design VI-1 January 2003 Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section VII. Summary of Maintenance Guidelines • • VII. SUMMARY OF MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES The following table summarizes a recommended maintenance schedule for the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail. These guidelines address maintenance on the off-street portions of the trail. On-street portions should be maintained as per the standards of the responsible jurisdiction. I ILe Inspections .Y - ~ ~ b~~M Seasonal - at both beginning and end of summer Signage Replacement 1-3 years Pavement Markings Replacement 1-3 years Major damage response, fallen trees, washouts, flooding clean up Should be scheduled based on priorities Pavement Sealing, Potholes 5-15 years Introduced tree & shrub plantings, trimming/fertilization Every 1-3 years Culvert inspection Before winter and after major storms Cleaning ditches As needed Trash Disposal Weekly during high use season, twice monthly during low use season Lighting Luminalre Repair (Existing trail segment with lighting) Once a year Pavement Sweeping/ Blowing As needed, before high use season. Weekly during fall. Maintaining culvert inlets Inspect before the onset of the wet season and after major runoff events Shoulder Mowing (Weed encroachment into trail clearance area) Twice a year, middle of growing season, then again in early fall Waterbar maintenance (Earthen Trail Segments) Annually Site Furnishings, replace damaged components As needed. Annual maintenance check Graffiti Removal Weekly, as needed Fencing Repair (Rail with Trail Segment) Inspect monthly for holes and damage, repair immediately. Shrub/Tree Irrigation for introduced planting areas Weekly during summer months until plants are established Litter Pick-up Weekly for high use season; twice a month for low use season Alta Planning + Design VII-1 January 2003 Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Section VIII. Design Details and Crossings VIII. DESIGN DETAILS AND CROSSINGS The following pages describe design details and sample intersection treatments for the Fanno Creek Greenway. • • Alta Planning + Design VIII-1 January 2003 DESIGN GUIDELINES Fanno Creek Greenway Trail M[E1i '.c to ti Typical Trail Sections Remove All Loose Debris Which Might Slide.Down onto r" The Trail Tread 1.5 . 1 Slope 1'-6' to 4'-0' 2 ; 1 Is Rswmmendca if II IS Loose ;j4 \ Minus Crushed Rack • Width of Tread Varies ; ' , • \ with Topography, Traffic and use Trend :r. Conuction RA Tic or 6' Dla. RR Tie Bulkhead Or Larger Log With Metal Stakes 4' or Longer 3' Metal stake e r 04 Max Ht. Z Edge Stabilization Retaining Wall. (Only Where Necessary) • 0-17 rntnlmwn uartcst de~ararak roe maintenance 60uprnef'rl 3A .C cf Reclsbd A.C. AE324u i~raM+KN 2% slope vaaf'"creel:Or ` - n19.ralf.-IlOUR{afea G' a lull ~~e-Gred6 ~~,•r - N ~ ~ NQgra~, `fn1~1RS1 ~ logo' t ImpliefrWAjoklon on i R.R. Ties Staked In 0 0 place 9 Qrill Holes For. • 1B-24TL Max. ` stakes-2 stakes !per Tie section Plan . 10X Max. Slop . 3' MJr, V 0, 77 y , e i. Section Plan Railroad Tie Steps For Hiking Trails Forxing or sa-Kiscapin it +s~ir~J i~r pr.nacy pip 2 1 yk" Impieft Matlon on Sloped Orovnd E- Grim& Earthen Trail Designs Typical Multi-Use Trail Section 0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Fanno Creek Greenway Trail MtETR(0 Boardwalk/ Bridge, RWT, and On-Street and Off-Street Concepts Boardwalk/Bridge Concept i R wQ MV'r.~ Mpv.Iw 1 ~n.a1 R.^AW~~rw 1 .roes 1 Off-Street Concepts Typical Steered Use Path Provkies a completely separatso righl W way for the exclusive u5q as bsc~c4e~s •arid pads Ir►ans wim Cr 10 rtvnlmlied. Rail-with-Trail Section (SW 74Th Ave. section, in Tigard) Typical ®IW Larw Prpvidas p slripod; I.irw Im one-way bike Moon a r SUld WtWo WX 5V6et or htghti►~ey: fir I ~y aIKFLkkE r_y Py{org ne On-Street Concepts Typical 64mrvd Vie Roadway Provkt'es W diared use with ah o► Wotar vehicle tmWk, Typical Sldawalk r}Ts IV' on leaner volurne rcaowap Blln flouro Bien Ord .d W X7 fir. ' ~ ; w .,r~3LYF `:;7r?~fJ?;c;&3;.'~<<:•,3' irc~c i~:: aP+•rCj', u , .c~ } - s,:. lgmvt ■dih 1~N1lD I~► 0 • DESIGN GUIDELINES V 11.C[S am Fanno Creek Greenway Trail MtEITRcO Interpretive Sign, Bollard, and Trailhead Concepts 0 Interpretive Sign • F,ewst concrete 8o11ond Fluted Comm Wayfinding Si9nage Finish Erode Porto-Potty Bike Rack Trail Information Trail Handicapped Parking Pedestrian Access Entry Sign Bollard Potential Trailhead Design DESIGN GUIDELINES Fanno Creek Greenway Trail McEeTR(O Typical Intersection Treatments • 0 DESIGN GUIDELINES Fanno Creek Greenway Trail METRO FIDPLI IN 0.t. f1.(tl RfAMO. L=1'NI • • lashing rnds •d) Typical Intersection Treatments W Q ~ ~ c,cct ri~nn ' ~ ~conct ~ o.cw s.,cc+ reenw° y T ra Franno C reek vi INES GU ID men 64 'cat Intersect DES~~~ ion Treat .q.'i ~otk f'ro$s WP~ ~R„ `K br« U3t(~ 3 ~9 .b Y 1. i0^'yk ME TA, All I ~y4n~'y y~~Y ~,yL l r, r~~'`~ My&r, i. • en sc"ut U ~ K Y ~4 ',r 5 Est ~"'u~ _ n: as e. t 1 ,.r jen Side`I,atk Ip~~ter spor-9 y~lt. a t•~: tak.inc~ ip with Curb Extension Unprotected Crossing Blvd in $eaverton) (92na Ave. and Allen $ JspT t °TT z rf r { it ¢-y~wkR ix ~x j, arm vt, y,3+{ng Tra{`• •ln~J{ L*t{J • DESIGN GUIDELINES Typical Intersection Treatments • Refit Min• 1~lidth 7 t'4i1 'f s i f t j giY~e ne4tor LOOP tit r Warning Sign Street `ding ME7Ro o.+r e. cn .,,,..p Creek GreenwQY Trail Fanno Cre 4 q-. z r (f C:--- 8oltnrdS • ~fQtfY ~t~l Aclucted 5igral with Push ggt-tan~trr,~C~ S'gn Lighting. & - yR: Bike krq Wa-nirq 5iQn Fully Signalized Crossing g (Hatt Blvd. DESIGN GUIDELINES Fanno Creek Greenway Trail 0,tETR(O Signage 1. _ 111 i 't j44z~ -~ia 1 • 0 Trail Map Sign age Wayfinding and Informational Signage Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Appendix APPENDIX A. Fanno Creek Greenway Survey Results Alta conducted a survey to determine which segments of Fanno Creek Greenway community members wanted to prioritize for completion. The survey listed 56 trail segments clustered into eleven different `gaps', and asked respondents to assign low, medium or high priority to segments they wanted to weigh in on by giving them scores of 1, 2 or 3, respectively. Of over 50 surveys distributed, 23 were returned. Not every respondent voted on every segment. The top and bottom ten segments are listed below, ranked by average score. The three highest segments were Gap 1, Segment i3; Gap 2, Segment i8- long term; and Gap 3, Segment i8-short term. The three lowest segments were Gap 10, Segment GH; Gap 10, Segment CD; and Gap 10, Segment EF. Ten Most Prioritized Segments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 3 5 5 6 1 3 6 7 4 6 S ' 13 181t* i8st* GH III KG IJ BC i5 Ho 2.92 2.92 2.80 2.80 2.73 2.64 2.64 2.64 2.62 2.62 12 12 10 15 11 14 14 14 13 13 "It" = long term option; "st" = short term option) Ten Least Prioritized Segments 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 ap.. 9 2 9 9 11 11 10 10 10 10 A" AG AC GH LM AB HI AB GH CD EF W-91 W N 1.89 1.85 1.75 1.70 1.70 1.67 1.60 1.60 1.40 1.40 'S Off 11 9 13 12 10 10 12 10 10 10 10 Alta Planning + Design Appendix-1 January 2003 Fanno Creek Greenway Action Plan Appendix B. SUMMARY OF PLANNING PROCESS During the past two years (2001-02), Metro Regional Parks and Greenspaces has coordinated a partnership of cities, counties, special districts, nonprofit organizations, and citizens to develop an action plan to complete the trail. To date, approximately one-half of the 15-mile trail has been completed. Funding for the action plan came from the local partners previously listed (and Clean Water Services of Washington Co., Portland's Bureau of Environmental Services, and Audubon Society of Portland). A working group of the partners has been meeting almost monthly for the past two years to develop the plan. Alta Planning + Design was retained by Metro as project consultant. The Action Plan will be used as a "living" implementation document and guide for local, state, and regional agencies, nonprofit organizations and citizen based groups to complete the trail (e.g. where to purchase needed right-of-way; and where to make capital improvements). The maps in the plan will be updated once a year by Metro from information it receives from the local partners. The working group of partners will meet a least once a year to discuss the progress of completing the trail. Uniform signage, maps and kiosks were recommended in the plan, but further collaboration will be required among the partners to carryout these tasks. More than Sixty Public Meetings, Outreach and Involvement Activities Were Held • Briefings to governing bodies, planning commissions and park advisory boards • Briefings to agencies, including planning, transportation, engineering, and maintenance staff • Briefings to neighborhood groups, community planning organizations (CPOs), parks and trails groups, and other interested parties • A series of four public workshops conducted in April and September 2002 • Monthly guided bike and walking tours along the trail • Articles in local and neighborhood newspapers, including the Oregonian and Metro's GreenScene • Direct mailings to interested parties • Cable television rebroadcast of some of the briefings for governing bodies • Products • Fanno Creek Trail Action Plan (including maps) in hard copy and on a CD. • The Action Plan and maps will be on Metro's Web Site with links to local partners' web sites. • Virtual Tour of the Trail (produced by Dawn Uchiyama and Matthew Hampton and available at cost from Metro on a CD) For more information or questions, contact: Mel Huie, Regional Trails Coordinator, Metro Regional Parks and Greenspaces (503) 797-1731, huiem@metro.dst.or.us Alta Planning + Design Appendix-2 January 2003 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON PLANS FOR PROPOSED PROJECT BONITA PARK INDEX OF SHEETS 1 GRADING PLAN 2 LAYOUT 3 IRRIGATION PLAN 4 BASKETBALL COURT 5 PLAYGROUND AREA 6 DETAILS 7 IRRIGATION DETAILS ATIENTIQk Oreyon foe reguves y~r to tabor ndes adapted by the Oregon Utidy Notircotion Cantu. lAose rolm are sat forth in OAR 952-001-0010 through OAR 952-001-0090 You may obtain copies of the ndes by corFrq the center. Oregon unity Notification f~l~er is (503 -19 i} QD CALL BEFORE YOU MG I-800-332-2344 AT MILTON COURT TO BE SUPPLEMENTED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD DESIGN STANDARDS DATED JULY 16, 1998 V O N BONI TA RD \ , e W r Q 1 , , r I II BENCHMARK VICINITY MAP A brass disc in the North curb of Bonito Rood near the extension of the centerline of SW 74th Avenue, indexed of City of >rgord as No 261 with on ete Ya ttan -Jr 14.%14 OtN~ VANNIE T. NOUTEN, P.E. t>toatra srrra,p ~+IlI~1 ei o•s: assaae N 02-12 PRO= "a t N BONRA PARK esvo~ aVa/w ~ root CITY OF TIGARD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 13125 S.W. HALL BLVD. TIGARD. OREGON 97223 VOICE: 503-639-4171 FAX: 503-684-7297 WINKUT1GARD.OR.US i \ lk I J~so Tf \ 1 ~ \ ~ 39.00 \ \ ` ` r~6 ~ ' fJ6.50 ~ \ \ TO \ 1 1 I J4 60 ~ \ 3 9\ I \ JT \ I '1T 134 I 1, 13e ✓S. rl„ i . 1 ' 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~8 r r 1 1 Ir f C♦♦ I 6p I / 14 133.27 r 37.80\ \ \ l r 1 1 ~ • 1JJ.oD Playground 1 ~q Finished Grode ♦ \ 1J310 F/er-f330 ♦ ro \ w \ \ 33.00 ` 3300 ~ 133 \ 131 132-~ ~ 40. GRADING LEGEND --XXX--- Proposed Contours ~Xyy~ Existing Contours /-•XXXXX Spot Elevation r.XXN Top of Nor Elevation -'Wt Fence N'etlond Area DATE I REWSON I No. I BY ME LOCATIOW. L\ENG\2002-2003 FT Install SW Fence-1056LF . _ 1301 1? Lown Edge (ryp) NOTE 1.. Designated wetland areas are off limits to construction machinery and grading sport. OES GNEO Br ET DRAW Or ET CHECKED Br VTII DATE. 01-18-03 SCALE AS SHOM pIM~~ ouwK s K.tt~ 00/3DAy Comm PROJECT N0. W 02-12 CITY OF MARI) ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 13125 S.W. HAIL BLVD. TIGARD. OREGON 97223 VOICE: 503-639-4171 FAX: 503-684-7297 WWW.CI.TIGARD.OR.US R~ 001 BONITA PARK AT MILTON COURT GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL SHEET Gt OF 135. 33.E I . ?0 l \ ~ \ 1 j '1 39 1 1 1 1,35 ...0 r '1 \ down Edge Bore under existing sidewalk I Drinking Water i' ' fnsfoN f}' Mefr per Drinking Fountain / Std Dwg Na 510 See detoD sheet C2 1Yt e Irrigation I / / Water I 1 Install 2' Double Chec \ Valve per Std Dwg No.530 I I I Restroan Pod ` - It f / See datod-Sheet CJ / / Live top exist 11' 01 Pipe lift-wide Concrete Pathway ` \ See defod sheet C3 1 .-30 Sowcuf 17LF Exist AC / \ \ \ Remove 17CF of exist Curb & Gutter and sidewalk. \ \ u X'= 1 - - - \ Construct 17LF Curb & Cutter per Sfd Dwg No .126 _ Construct Sidewalk romp (5" to 0 drop)-6ft wings \ \ u See Std Dwg Na 128 for concrete section and joint notes. \ - Accessible Parking Space \ See Sheet C3 for striping CDUp - - _defoB Restroom Pod ~fRT ` See detod-Sheet C3 ` " _ Drinking Fountain / See detail sheet C2 / \ ~ - Picnic table area 6' 5 Install PC, in _ 6(Tjp) See defor / Sheet C P1019round area • g1 F 4 ,y ~ Co Lown area boundary _ Per/ p n • i" ~J 4 ^ (T)P) I / `er Ser Wetland Boundary " (!)P) / !6pLf 9. ~O Dry Well Nal • \ , ° P~ o•~See detod•sheef C3 \ \ oo • u Erie • j5L 1Cv/ b ` o \ \ Basketball Drinking Fointom Drain Court 62.60LF 4 FDC Lawn Area Qo (!1P) See detod sheet C1•: \ / Seeded with Pro Tine Supreme r • \ at 71b per 1000 sq. ft. Y. Y. ~3 y~•j,,y'~o x •s j`.. xx xx xx xk * 1' ° % %x x x - \ ` ` x / % xxx x 1; xx x x%x xxx%x x / ` \ d ` x x x x x x x /.s•, . / x x% x x x x x x% x x x x x~~ x x x x x x x ~ ',4 ♦ p \ x x x x y Well No 2 xx xx % x xn x x a \ ` \ \ x hti.0 \ See detail sheet C3 x x x x \ \ • / r_ TOP F NIGH CRFfK BANX ~ e \6~•' • \ \ , \ \ / / rInsfon Pork FANNO CREEK - (B,~otners) / - P ' Stream Mde=1. t - \ ' e / P-cnc Shelter eroa \ (}0J \ L 25ft Wetland buffer (TJp) \ ` d 0P' \ - - Welland (T)p) t - - " DBAWJNG PLOTTED AT • D HALF THE NOTED SCALE ~ o DATE FVM9DN NO- By PAD SHEET DESIGNEDer ,+e e CITY OF 11GAR0 BONITA PARK DRAWN BY: ET ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 13125 S.W. HALL BLVD. Or VT" ` nGARD, OREGON 97223 AT MILTON COURT DAATE: TE: 01-18-03 VOICE: 503-639-4171 2 SCALE: AS SHOW K t' FAX: 503-684-7297 LAYOUT OF .T1GARD.OR.uS FILE LDCARDN:N"\CNG\2402-"e447 (T CI2\BONI7F FpRK\60NIlp PARK-$11C.tl.g QI/I4/43 O~e7SE rM PSI PROJECT N0. IF 02-12 WWW.a LEGEND 1v2•0 Z Woter Meter Scole. I'=JOft 1' Double Check ♦ Check Valve Drinking Woter I 1 l i--2 112'1 Irrigotion water I I I I I 1 1 I h Adpsted rotor, quarter spray ongle d% Adjusted rotor, half spray angle ® Adjusted rota, full spray ongle • Spray head, full spray angle Spray head, quarter spray ongle Ah Spray head, half spray ongle Rotor head, half spray ongle ® Rotor head, full spray ongle Rotor head, quarter spray angle a Electric valve and box 0 Quick connect coupler valve I~ © Irrigation station (9 Station with 2' Electric valve and 1' Quick coupler valves. xis 1 1 -1 -f 1 T_mcp n .~®0 N ti N '3 I 'IV 1' N 5 O O6 1" N © V1. 09 2•_40'sP Iy7 I 5°s tr, ~r• 10 E+a/ 1 1' _ - ° " Exis_t6 6 "RCP u 2' i 4' Iy2' + + 11 + + + + + ~Yt + + + + + + +T + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 'N 12 2. 2' + + + + + d N / iv 114" •N 19 DATE RENSION NO. BY ~+IAl DESIGNED BY. sY ORANN BY: ET OIECNED BY' Sid , DATE: IDI-TOI_XX so J't SCALE: AS SHDNN a t'~ FILE LOCA1tON: (\ENG\2002-2003 FY CIP\BONRA PARII\br19oRom_E9mdAw9 PROJECT Na o2~s mm a~nw 14 IRRIGATION DATA HEAD SPRAY DJU57E0 ROTOR-Eo ROTOR-Ea SPRAY-£a LATERAL PIPE-LF ELECTRIC VALVE STA710N TYPE RADIUS ' ' ' (Fl] ; FULL J FULL LL 10 0 11 2 0 0 2# EA O HUB R 30 1 1 4 1.42 25.44 20.00 1 O R 1800 NBIRD 15 13 6 08.18 26.52 I O 15 2 17 4 89.3 12.50 1 O 15 1 8 ..0 IJJ7 1 5 15 4 7 3 1 16.0 5.00 1 6 15 12 12.50 30.00 15.00 1 7 HUN7ER 1-25 45 1 2 1 18J50 1 g 45 4 1 80.3 1 09 • 45 5 1 J 5 140.00 1 I 45 5 90.00 4500 0.00 1 47 45 6 5.00 46.50 140.0 I Q 45 5 6 44.50 154.0 64.00 1 Q 45 6 1 91.00 79.45 40M 1 t4 25 4 2 75J1 24.71 Q 7 45 7 4 - 100.00 150.0 150.0 16.00 I NOTES + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + `\?t ` + + + + + + + + 16 +th u-~- t~-+ y + + + + + + + \ 4 F.Y/SI, 6 ..,A...`111• ` ` + + + + \~,RCP \ \a ) \ 4 \ 1. Ap lines shown are diagrammatic and dimensions approximate. Adjist line location per Field conditons. 2. Tree locations shop be verified by contractor and approved by owner before installation of new irrigation system. J. All spray heads shall be Roinbird 1800. 4. All rotor heads shall be Hunter full circle and odusted 4. Each station shall require 2" electric valve, swing joints and riltings. 5. Stotion 20 shall hove on electrical valve as well as 2' gote valve. 6. Stations 16, 17, l8, 19 and 20 shill hove 2' electric vanes and I' quick-coupler valves. 7. Lateral lines shall be pass 100 PVC-bury at 11' minimum. 8. Main Line shall be pass 100 PVC- bury of 18' minimum. 9. Sleeve shall be pass 160 PVC-sire 6' 10. All irrigation pipes under concrete structures shall be buried through 6' PVC conduit. CITY OF 11GARD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 13125 S.W. HALL BLVD. TIGARD. OREGON 97223 YOKE: 503-639-4171 FAX: 503-684-7297 WWW.CI.7IGARD.OR.US BONITA PARK AT MILTON COURT IRRIGATION PLAN r r SHEET G1 3 OF 7 Stripe Dimension Line N White Point Stripe A A 67X6"Timber Edge (TYP) 1 CJ 0 COURT STRIPING NTS Connect Drain Pipes 60' iE=132.15 IYP / 4 "PVC Perf Pipe 50, TYP Z-Slope=0.005 Min !E= 3313 12' Connect Drain Pipes TYP 7OLF 4" Perf behind wall Slope= 0.005 4 "PVC Perf Pipe BASKETBALL COURT I"-- 10, 67W Timber Edg 20 15' 15' 20' 1/2"0 Rebor 2ft below subgrode L=13380 I EL=134.60 AWA1.l,,LL1 I Slope=l% 2" Asphalt HL3 Mix' r U 40% Rubber Pellet~~ 2% 2~ Keystone Wall 6"Thick 3/4"-0 Rock` i%\~j - - Compocofed subgrode Geotextile Fabric Slope (TYP) 2% N 4" Perf Pipe (TV) EL 133.13 Drain Rock Wrapped in Fabric (TYP) M COURT SECTION AND SUBSURFACE DRAIN rl --Retoining Wall See detail sheet C2 Grout Post in 3 112"0 X 5" Hole Elev=139.00 Portable Exist Toilet Pad SideWOlk, v v Trosh Receptacle Zl-(By Others) o C1 PStairwoy See detail Sheet C1 \-Sidewalk expansion joints (TYP) See detail Sheet C3 Bike Rocks See detail Sheet C3 nking Fountain e deta7 Sheet C3 3' 6.20' 1 1/2"0 Pipe 14 Bars Eo. Woy Eo. Nosing D ; ; (TYP) D 11" ~ TYP j\/\/ • o • D • ,q5 ® 12" OC Eo. Way • 10 9' 3 STAIRWA Y AND RAIL NTS Keystone ° Basketball court- 'Drain Rock o. 4"PVC Perf Pipe 12" eotextile Wrap GENERAL OES 1. Use chNoinlink type fence post and roils. 2. Provide handrail at each side of stairway 1.60' N o ~ Ele v-- 135. 00 -Londing Area Tensor Geogrid Attach tensor geogrid over pins 4 Perf Pipe wrapped in fabric See detail-this sheet (nKEYSTONE RETAINING WALL \-4"thick 314"-0 WALL DRAIN PIPE U1 NTS Leveling Pod DATE REVPMN No. By PA7 CITY OF TIGARD SHEET DESWED Or ,+o ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT B 0 N I T A PARK C, BY. ET W 13125 S BLVD CHECKED ~ " ~ • ~o° . . . TIGAR TIGARO. OREGON 97223 ON AT MILTON COURT DATE: 01-17-03 VOICE: 503-639-4171 4 SCALE: AS SHOWN FAX: 503-684-7297 WWW.CI.TIGARD.OR.U$ BASKETBALL COURT DETAIL OF 7 FILE LOCATIO CW\BONRA PARK\WNITA PARK-WLDW N: x: zooz-tow n G PROJECT NO. Y 02-12 ' Ct ' ' N 7 v R=6- _ TYP N =6' 13.50'/ ro ~ R=2', R1 i .a ; m k n i i ~ - N a a L a II ~ L ' ~ \8 8, 0 ' ' Ui N - Or SE 25' TYP I IE=131.53 IE=131.68 Connect underdroin to underdroin 4"PVC See sheet Ll Access romp: Slopes down from Soft surface fiber. The perimeter walk finished surface down Finished surface elevation to meet soil grade at bottom of play stous the some an comes area. 5% Max gradient. Medium broom cover ramp and curb finish with score lines of 5ft O.C. Expansion joint with water proof Romp Edge Curb sealant with color to motch~ Perimeter Wolk and Curb -~ZQ 14' 8, J3, N h X09 ~Lr. / A . 40:4 ::J Pea 24.90' 133 00 J Subsurface drain. See detail Sheet C3 q), r- -94 ape i Min Q-: Slope 1% Min h 2 v;h C2 132.00- toI 48.81' f 314"-0 Rock-, Compacted Subgrode 3/4"-0 Rock Cmpocted subgrode-1 Pea Gravel- 3 PLAYGROUND ACCESS RAMP I.-11-0. Bike Rock See detail Sheet C3~ ry~ Drinking Fountain See detail Sheet C2 Shelter Areo--- 0 U) ro r ~ 0 N L JO 0 h "i 4 c2 V2 Sidewalk See detail Sheet C2 Picnic Table and Bench Area (Typ) DATE I REVISION , , Finish Grade Surface to be flush with walk Concrete Perimeter Wolk with broom finish Wood fiber safety material minimum depth 12" (After settlement), top surface to be level across poly area- -Drain Rock 470 PVC Perf Pipe toward drain trench 1E at 1%'F r4 YGROUND EDGE AND FILL 12" deep X 12" ode of Exist Sidewalk C2 Compocted Subgrode drain trench - stairway SUBSURFACE DRAIN TRENCH See detail Sheet C2 C2 GENERAL N07ES 1. Use choinlink type fence post and roils. 8.3' 2. Provide handrail at each side of stoirwoy Sidewolk expansion See sheet C1 Access See det 3' C3 a h v; ~ N e H ` 4~133 Pork Be Area (T, See det ro 14.38' Playground Area See detail Sheet C3 14 for typicol section 42.76' PLA YGROUND 1"=10' NO. I BY DESIGNED BY: ET DRAWN BY: ET CHECKED BY: V01 DATE 01-17-03 SCALE: AS SHOWN FILE LOCATION: N:\ENC\2002-2003 FY C1P\80NRA PARK\BONRA PARK-SREAWG PROJECT NO. N 02-12 Connect underdroin to 4 PV See sheet L1 . MR mma d/+eAw i1 STAIRWAY AND RAIL CITY OF TIGARD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 13125 S.W. HALL BLVD. TIGARD. OREGON 97223 VOICE: 503-639-4171 FAX: 503-684-7297 WWW.C.TIGARMORMS, SHEET BONITA PARK C2 AT MILTON COURT 5 PLAYGROUND DETAIL OF 7 FINISH SURFACE OF 12" Trip nF rnNCRETE II III I TTTTT Mill IIII IIII IIII III (II I i l l l l l l l l I I I. I I I I I 11 .1 Kill, I i ['1 !~i VALN V1TH / / EDGE A 1/2' RADIUS SMOOTH FINISH ('SHINERf--'1'l// ' CONCRETE PATHWAY FINISH White Point 14 I- - Symbol 4 Stroke width=3' T1p 2' VIDE 'SHINER' 13N BOTH SIDS OF SCORE LINE AND EXPANSIOM JOINTS. NO EP TOOLED SCORE LINE- WATER PROOF SEALANT: CCYOR SHINER WITH EXPOSED AT LEAST 1/3 DEPTH OF TO MATCH CONCRETE AGGREGATE- CONCRETE. PREMOLDED EXPANSION JOIN ROOM FINISH CONCRETE e e' • a..a 'a• ,•d a • PATHWAY JOINT DETAIL GRAD f-VALK P.C. CONCRETE 3/4 -0' COMPACTED CRUSHED STONE COMPACTED OR UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE PREM0.DD EXPANSION JOINT WITH WATER PROOF SEALANT; COLOR TO MATCH CONC. CONCRETE PAVING-, COMPACTED BASE AGG. AS INDICATED - COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL AS SPECIFIED 1-i/2" R O 4" PVC Pipe from foundation STRIPING DETAIL VALL/CURB OR DISINILAR MATERIAL Motive Soil Filter Fabric NI =11~i11 FLO- WELL NDSIFWAS24 (Typ) Drain Rock (Typ) 4" Sch-40 Pipe 4' N c f TYPICAL CONCRETE PATHWAY !III IfITE EXPANSION JOINTS AT WALLS ,IE11~111r=11 =1EIIt ,I~II~JIk~l~llt SECTION c~~ EB I 11 `III: AND EMBEDDED ITEMS DRYWELL-PLAN DRYWELL-SECTION DATE REw90N N°- BY CITY OF TIGARD SHEET °0~` 1°01 ~`°D>~1~• ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT B 0 N I T A PARK C3 DRAMN BY: IDOL 13125 HALL BLVD CHECKED BY• I= 01~ a . 97722 223 i1GARD. OREGON AT MILTON COURT BATE XX-lot-%I( +o ~1a VOICE: 503-639-4171 6 SCALE: SHOW" IL FAX: 503-684-7297 TIGARD.OR U$ WWW G CONSTRUCTION DETAILS OF FILE LOCATION: M\ENC\2002-2005 NY CIP\BOMOA PAR4t\BOMRA PARR-SITE.DM C PROJECT NO Y 02-12 eaves a/aia . . . 7 1-3 4' 5' no 1- 1412' I 18, PARKING WITH D M.Y. DISABLED PERMIT ONLY.. VIOLATORS SUBJECT TO -1 5/16" TOWING UNDER __T ( 20" SCORE LINE AS ORS 811.610 AND FINE _I INDICATED UP TO $150 UNDER 3/4' _ -DIRECTION OF SWEEP ORS 811.615 C5 w 2 2" o_ L_ -f ca_i REINFORCE NYLOBRNC SIGN BACKGROUND: BLUE REFLECTIVE SHEETING BROOM a MEDIUM SWEPT OF , SIGN LEGEND: WHITE REFLECTIVE x TUBING FINISH. DIRECTION ON ° SWEEP AS INDICATED- r White Point GENERALLY TO BE Typ / M PERPENDICULAR - DIRECTION OF TRAVEL ~ 0 0 V White Point Border ACCESS Blue Point 36" v0WOviesuu°ic DOOR (S)mbol background) on f0 w. O@ MUDANDFW wToMeL." 0 0 oNene4 ue.KaHae h 1. N `a i n PARKING IGN S - - I ~ r.. 97.38" a N07ES = 1. Bike Rock to be Nuntco SRP7 Series or equal 2. Rock to be hot dipped galvanized J O SCORE LINE TO RUN FULL LENGTH [IF RACK, CENTERED ON RACK POSTS (IN CONC. PAVI O tC ING PCC PAVtN VIDE SHINER L AROUND. EXPANSION JOINT ALL AROUND m CONCRETE v FOOTING 4 , BIKE R ACK,• POST •.4 14' DIA I + 14_DIP, 11 BIKE RACK POST r ACCESS ON T OPPOSITE SIDE SHOWN WITH OPTIONAL UNATTACHED 12" X 11" VALVE BOX AND OPTIONAL VALVE 10 " v AGGREGATE DRINKING FOUNTAIN MDF ADA-3700 OB AGGREGATE DRINKING FOUNTAIN SHOWN WITH OPTIONAL KIT UAVB AND COV W/LPD Tit- NOTES 1.) LOCATION OF DUCK COUPLER WITHIN VALVE BOX 5 SHOWN FOR CIARIFKATION ONLY. INSTALL OFF-SEr FROM MAINLINE. 2.) EXACT FITTING REQUIREMENTS. COMPONENT SHAPES AND SEOICNCE MAY DIFFER FROM THAT SHOWN. z 7 d FINSHED GRADE LINE S12E GATE VALVE IF POSSIBLE LOCATE OUICK COUPLER WITH VALVE IN BOX INSTALL ASSEMBLY PER DETAIL AND ATTACH WITH 1/2' GALV. PPE X 3' LONG-ATTACH TO RISER WITH TWO S.S. IRRIGATION BANDS AMETEK STANDARD VALVE BOX WITH GREEN CV LOCKING LID 18' COIL OF WIRE SPECIFIED AUTO. VALVE IRRIGATION LATERAL UNION. EACH SIDE OF VALVE 6' MIN 3/4- ROUND WASHED GRAVEL 4' X B' X 16' CONCRETE BLOCK. 4 REO'D TIP. MAINLINE SCHED. 40 CROSS OR TEE 1 CONTROL VALVE ASSEMBLY SCALE: NTS Section FINISH GRADE- RUBBER COVER MODEL 1-25/31 PLU! GEARED ROTOR 1' STREET ELLS 1' SCH 80 NIPPLE (LENGTH AS REWIRED) I' STREET PVC TEE PVC LATERAL LINE 5 HUNTER 1-25 ROTOR VALVE-SWING SCALE: NTS Section REMOTE CONTROL VALVE Ulf SCALE: NTS Section 1/2' CONDUIT FOR GROUND WIRE "6 p _1/2' CONDUIT FOR ELECTRICAL POWER CONDUCTORS PER LOCAL AND NATIONAL CODES FRONT ~2' CONDUIT FOR REMOTE -J CONTROL VALVES AND RIGHT-SIDE SECTION/ELEVATION SENSOR WIRES SECTION/ELEVATION NKT.Es: 1. INSTALLATION TO BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE VATH MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. 2. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. 8 REMOTE CONTROL STATION SCALE: NTS DATE REV1510N N0. BY ~ CITY of TIGARD SHEET oEpaED Or na ~ # MQNEERING DEPARTMENT B O N I T A PARK C4 CHEF Brr 'x` W HALL 13125 S BLVD CHECKED er. ~ / . . . TIGAR nCARD. O OREGON 9722 7223 AT MILTON COURT DATE: Ix-Kx-KK W;e ~ VOICE: 503-639-4171 84 7 SCALE: AS SHOWN - FAX: 503-6 297 wWW.a.nGARD.~R.U$ CONSTRUCTION DETAILS OF F N:\ENG\2002-2003 FY CIP\BONrTA PAAN\BONITA PARK-SRE.DWG PROJECT N0. N 02-12 TOP OF BARK MULCH FINISHED GRADE OR TOP OF SOD TIE - POP-LP ASSEMBLY Ipll~l LIE alr~l EiI~~TI I ~ 3 C-I i-I 3 Ir a I - - P.V.C. SCHED. 80 NIPPLE ~ I I SCHED. 40 P.V.C. STREET EL F jIp4irr SCHED. 40 P.V.C. T X T 90 DEG. EL P.V.C. SCHED. 80 NIPPLE LATERAL LINE CL 200 PVC SCHED. 40 ELBOW OR TEE lt~__ SCHED. 40 P.V.C. STREET EL SWING JOINT 2 ASSEMBLY FOR ROTOR HEADS SCALE: NTS Section DE/TOP OF MULCH PRAY SPRINKLER: ID 1803 VO2nE 10 NIPPLE AS REOUIRED) W ELL 10 STREET ELL 10 NIPPLE AS REQUIRED) ID STREET ELL AL PIPE 10 TEE OR ELL -4- FINISHED GRADE FLUSH IN LAWN 10' ROUND VALVE BOX SPECIFIED OMCK COUPLK VALVE MOUNTED 3/4' ABOVE DIRT MADE SCHED. 80 P.V.C. NIPPLE, 3/4' X 8' MIN. SCHED. 40 P.Y.C. STREET EL SCHED. 40 P.V.C. T X T 90 DEG. EL SCHED. 80 P.Y.C. NIPPLE. 3/4' X 8' MIN. 40 P.V.C. STREET EL 40 ELBOW OR TEE 3 OUICK-COUPLER VALVE ASSEMBLY SCALE: NTS Section 30 -INCH LINEAR LENGTH OF WIRE. COILED WATER PROOF CONNECTION OF 2) ID TAG VALVE BOX WITH COVER: NCH SIZE FINISH GRADE/TOP OF MULCH REMOTE CONTROL VALVE RAIN BIRD PES 3" MIN. PVC NCH 80 NIPPLE (CLOSE) PVC CH 40 ELL PVC NCH 80 NIPPLE (LENGTH AS REQUIRED) BRICK (I OF 4) SCH KI NIPPLE (2-INCH LENGTH. HIDDEN) AND SCH 40 ELL PVC MAINLINE PIPE PVC NCH 40 TEE OR ELL PVC 4;H 40 MALE ADAPTER PVC LATERAL PIPE 3.0-INCH MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3/4-INCH WASHED GRAVEL 6 POP-UP SPRAY SPRINKLER-RAINBIRD SERIES 1800 SCALE: NTS Section i 4' MIN. FROM EDGE OF PAVING. CURB. OR BUILDING FING0 GRADE OR TOP OF SOD TOP OF BARK MULCH POP-UP ASSEMBLY MARLEX STREET ELBOW W/SPRAL BARB SWING PPE (POLY PPE 4' MAX. FT 14' MIN. LENGTH) MARLEX STREET ELBOW W/SPIRAL BARB ELBOWS SCHED. 40 TEE LATERAL PIPE- CL 20D PVC POLY-PIPE ASSEMBLY FOR SPRAY HEADS 4 SCALE: NTS Section TORO CUSTOM COMMAND IRRIGATION CONTROLLER MODEL NO. CCM-XX & CC-PED N I I I (-SLOPE TO DRAIN FINISHED GRADE uni / to i unr.. i nPF-. i .l - ':}'''~VM1"rVti e d + + + _ + + ORIfHERN WIETLAND+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + /,-v Pacific Willow: ltuvr JWagn .>euge (10) Groups Of (20) Each (300) Small Fruited Bulrush (150) Spreading Rush (150) Slender Rush (80) Comas Lily i SEE SHEET L2 FOR THE PLANT MATERIAL LEGEND 1 (24) Oregon Grope (30) Noolka Rose (10) Redtwig Dogwood - -(10} Douglas- ir---- ~F-(20) Indian Plum (20) Solmonberry~ f-(10) Douglas Spiroea e tp X ® + + + + + + + + + + + + + + OU eR TL+A D+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 5 ~y + V i BaI y Between orested Welland" i and "Riporion Forest/Stream Buffer" Planting Zones 7M1 ' . ~ Northern Welland Plantings: , Provide The Following Plant Material In the Wetland and Welland Buffer On The Street Side Of The Buffer Line. Install Where Directed In Field By Landscape' Architect IZ Trees (3 Gallon) Shrubs (1 Gallon) (20) Oregon Ash (20) Sotmonberry (10) Block Hawthorne (10) Indian Plum t % (20) Western Red Cedar (17) Nootko Rose (20) Oregon White Oak (20) Woods Rose (5) Douglas Fir (25) Oregon Grope Willows (Live Stem Cuttings) (15) Douglas Spiraeo (15) Redtwig Dogwood 2 Scouler Willow: / in, (10) Groups Of (20) Each Emergents (Conservation Plugs) (1500) Small fruited Bulrush (300) Camas Lily (800) Doggerleof Rush (800) Sawbreok Sedge (800) Dewy Sedge (500) Salol (500) Sword Fern (500) Western Yarrow (500) Grooved Rush (120) Soft Rush Willows (Live Stem Cuttings) Scouter Willow: (150) Groups Of (10) Each Pacific Willow: (50) Groups Of (10) Each i/ i DATE REVISION N0. BY PERpVAI 6 9HAPa10 ~~G1STPgFO SHEET DESIGNED BY: JaP 171 RONITA PARK Ll DRAWN BY: JDP xdlYaxRDwan r• xrsne D. KRWAL anua a 9 d4 CHECKED BY. xxx 'y OREGON CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS Ixi9 Tn-rm DATE: xx-xx-xx C ~,1~ Isnyn-am SCALE: AS SHOWN 9PE A_ CITY OF TIGARD PLANTING PLAN OF Y (g) Tupelo Indian P um Noah a Rose \ \ ' ` Amelut shier J Western Red Cedar Scouter 'Willow Oregon Ash-, W ~ es s Jet, Typical "Stream Buffer" oundory Between Planting Area Forested Welland" All Emergent/Her ceps and 'Riporion Plants Are Planted Where Forest/Stream Directed In Field Buffer' Planting By Landscape Architect Zones - (30) Oregon Ash (10) Scouler Willow 'Groupings With (20) Live Stem Cuttings Riparian Forest/St in Each Pad . Provide The Following Plants In The / (10) Pacific Willow 'Groupings With (20) Live Stem Cuttings Stream Buffer Area. Instoll Where Directed In Field By Landscape Architect in Each Pod. Trees (100) Western Red Cedar Provide the Following Emergent Plants In The (200) Oregon Ash Southern Welland. Planting Locations Shall Be (30) Block Hawthorne As Determined in Field By Landscape Architect (20) Oregon White Oak (200) Slough Sedge (160) Small Fruited Bulrush Shrubs (150) Spreading Rush (64) Salmonberry (150) Slender Rush (200) Nootka Rose (100) Comas Lily (30) Indian Plum (13) Red Alder (30) Amelonchier (50) Oregon Grope (12) Western Red Cedar (50) Redtwig Dogwood (50) Douglas Spiroea Emeroents / Herbaceous Plants J 7-0P o f Sf,,-, ~ A E raper( Line Buffer Planting / 0 L I 5)4Amelonchier ~ - ~ ) TI TimM N .-i-iN Llo - -War - re (3) Tupelo tdA-.aoo 18) - 1 - ~F7(124) Nootka Rose--` ` Future Pork / Development Area ; (23) Western Red Cedar M1s 1 r ~t. (24) Oregon Grape (5) Tulip Poplar (30) Nootku Rose (10, --f1iTrpooglasiir---- j" [-(20) Indian Plum (20, % (10) Douglas SP~oeo ru _ 2r `t > ' y + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + -4k, + + + + + + + 'i'~•~-'I + + + + + + + + + + + + + O"HENN WETLAND+ + ® + + + +~F! v+ + + OU eR TU + + + + + + + + + + \ J 1 Bou y Between / + + + + + + + + + + orested Wetland- \ %f = o + + + + + + + i and "Riparian e = + + Forest/Stream i Buffer" Plonting Zones Northern Wetland Plantings: Provide The Following Plant Material In the Welland and Welland Buffer On The Street Side Of The Buffer Line. Install Where 1 -i ' Directed In Field By Landscape Architect (12) Plant Material Legend' \ t: i y " y Trees (3 Gallon) Shrubs (1 Gallon) (20) Oregon Ash (20) Salmonberry Trees Emer ents 'Herbs ous Plants (10) Block Hawthorne (10) Indian Plum Black Hawthrone Crotaegus douglasii: 3 gallon Comas lily / Camassio a. brevifolio: 1 gallon (20) Western Red Cedar (17) Nootku Rose Douglas Fir / Psuedotsugo menziesii: 4 ft. Doggerl~af Rush / Juncus a Yolius: Conservation Plugs - 1 (20) Oregon White Oak (20) Woods Rose Oregon Ash Fraxinus loiifolia: 3 ollon (5) Douglas Fir (25) Oregon Grape 9 Deyy Sedge / Carex deweyona: 6Qnservation Plugs Douglas Spiroea Oregon Nhl2 Ook / Quercus gorryona: 3 gallon Grooved Rush / Juncus patens: Con vation Plugs f ` (15) 1N Willows (live oStem w: Cuttings) (15) Redtwig Dogwood Red Alder / Alnus rubra: 3 gallon Salal / Goullherio shollon: 1 gallon Scowle Tulip Poplar / Liriodendron tulipifero: 3"caliper Sawbeok Sedge /Carex siipota: Conservat.. Plugs % = S r Willow: Tupelo / Nysso sylvotica: 2" caliper Smallfruited Bulrush / Scirpus microcorpus: Conservation Plugs m1o. (10) Groups Of (20) Each Emergents (Conservation Plugs) Western Red Cedar / Thujo Plicato: 4 Fl. / Sword Fern / Polystichum munitum: 1 gallon \ r ~ Pacific Willow: (200) Slough Sedge Pacific Willow / Salix lasiandro: 3 Ft. Live Stems Westem Yorrow Achilles millefolium: 4" pots r (300) Small Fruited Bulrush / ! N Scowlers Willow / Solix scouleriona: 3 Ft. Live Stems (10) Groups Of (20) Each (150) Spreading Rush Lown Ground Cover Seeding \ 7l (150) Slender Rush Shrubs Lown: Seeded with ProTime Supreme of 7 Ibs (80) Camas Lily ~C per 1000 sq. it. Amelonchier / Amelonchier olnifolia: r5 gallon Douglas Spiroeo / Spines douglasii' 1 gallon Kinnikinnick / Arctostophylos uva-ursi 'Mossocluseits" Indian Plum / Oemleria cerosiformis: 1 gallon ® 4" Pots 018" On Center SEE SHEET L2 FOR THE PLANT MATERIAL LEGEND Nootko Rose / Rosa nutkono: 1 gallon Oregon Grape / Mahonia ogpifolium: 1 gallon Wet Area Seed: Mix Per "Clean Water Servicesf- j t Ztedlwig Dogwood / Cornus''stolonifera: 1 gallon + + Design and Construction Standards - Appendix E Solmoberry ] Rubus spectobilis: 1 gallon Page 10 1 Ibs per 1000 sq. ft (see note below) Woods (Boldhip) Rose / Rosa gymnocarpa: 1 gallon Dry Area Seed: Mix Per "Clean Water Serviced - Design and Construction Standards - Appendix - Page 10; 3 Ibs per 1000 sq. it (see note below) Note: Add Tufted Hoirgross / Deschampsio cespitoso Seed ` At 0.1 Ibs Per 1,000 sq. ft To The Wet and Dry Area Seed Mixes. , DATE REVISION NO. BY SHEET DESIGNED BY: JDP B O N I T A PARK L2 DRAWN BY: JDP CHECKED BY: XXX CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS DATE: XX-XX-XX X SCALE: As SHOWN CITY OF TIGARD PLANTING PLAN OF X . ENGINEERING DEPARDJENT -4 • • MEMORANDUM TO: Duane Roberts FROM: Matt Stine, Tigard City Forester, ISA Certified Arborist (MA-3221) RE: Bonita Park Tree Management Plan DATE: June 13, 2003 Here is the arborist report that you requested for Bonita Park. The instructions provide guidelines for the protection of trees before, during and after construction. Before Construction 1. Identify the number of trees to be protected and verify their locations on a map. Record the diameter at breast height (DBH), the species, health, structural conditions and any other pertinent information. 2. Follow any and all requirements set forth in the Public Tree Ordinance and Tree Manual. 3. Remove any low limbs that may be in the way of construction equipment. The limbs shall be pruned according to standards set forth by the most current edition of American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A-300. 4. Notify all other contractors that there are trees onsite that are to be protected and indicate to them which ones they are. 5. All tree protection devices shall be located on the Tree Protection Plan. Any tree that will not be removed onsite that is within the limits of disturbance of this project must be protected 6. All tree protection devices shall be: ■ Visible. Constructed of 11 Gauge steel chain-link fencing supported on at least 2" O.D. steel posts. Each post shall be no less than four feet high from the top of grade. Each post shall be driven into the ground to a depth of no less than two and a half feet below grade. Each post shall be spaced no further apart than four feet. Between each post, securely attached to the chain-link fencing, shall be a sign indicating that the area behind the fencing is protected and no construction activity, including material storage, may occur behind the fencing. 0 0 Approved in the field prior to clearing, grading, or the beginning of construction. Remain in place and maintained until all construction is completed and a final inspection is conducted. 7. To determine the size of the tree protection zone follow the guidelines listed below: For individual trees follow the trunk diameter method. For every one-inch of diameter at breast height (DBH), or 4'/2 feet above the ground, allow 12 inches of space from the trunk of the tree. For example, a tree that is 15" at DBH must have at least 15' of tree protection zone around the entire canopy of the tree. For groups of trees the tree protection zone must be outside of the dripline of the trees on the edge of the stand. If there are conifers with narrow crowns on the edge of the stand follow the trunk diameter method or the dripline method, whichever is greater. 8. Identify, on the Tree Protection Plan, the location of the stockpile area and the staging area. 9. All of this information must be included in the final plan's notes or drawings. During Construction 1. If it is necessary to enter the tree protection zone at any time with equipment (trucks, bulldozers, etc.) the City Forester must be notified before any entry occurs. Before entering the protection zone a layer of at least five (5) inches of wood chips or mulch must be placed over the root zone where the vehicles will be driven. This method will minimize the adverse impacts of compaction from the equipment. When access to this area is no longer needed the wood chips or mulch must then be dispersed (somewhere onsite is okay) down to a level of not more than four (4) inches deep. 2. Include in the notes on the final set of plans that equipment, vehicles, machinery, dumping or storage, or other construction activities, burial, burning, or other disposal of construction materials must not be located inside of any tree protection device or outside of the limits of disturbance where trees are being protected. No grading, filling or any other construction activity may occur within the tree protection devices at any time or outside of the limits of disturbance where trees are being protected unless approved by the City Forester. i 3. If roots or limbs are cut or damaged have them inspected by the City Forester. i • • After Construction If landscaping is planted within the tree protection zone, install the plants carefully. Avoid cutting any roots over 1 Y2 inches in diameter. If necessary, move the location of the hole for the plant. 2. Avoid irrigation around existing mature trees. Choose plant material that does not require irrigation. 3. Do not place more than three inches of soil or mulch over the root systems of existing trees. Too much soil or mulch can suffocate the existing roots. 4. Remove all fencing and tree protection devices after all construction has ceased and the heavy equipment has been moved from the site. TREE SURVEY SPECIES DBH CONDITION ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 1 Oregon white oak 12" Good 2 Oregon white oak 10" Good 3 Oregon white oak 17" Good 4 Oregon white oak 14" Good 5 Oregon white oak 9" Good 6 Oregon white oak 9" Good 7 Oregon white oak 16" Good 8 Oregon white oak 14" Good 9 Oregon white oak 18" Good 10 Oregon white oak 18" Good 11 Oregon white oak 26" Good 12 Oregon white oak 37" Good PROJECT TOTALS Number of trees over 12" DBH onsite affected by construction Number of inches at DBH for trees >12" DBH Number of trees being removed Site tree retention Inches of mitigation required 9 172 .0 100% 0 Bonita Park Tree Management Plan The attached survey map depicts all existing trees located within the project site. All exiting trees are to be preserved. Trees to be planted within the project area are depicted in sheets L1 and L2 (titled Planting Plan) of the Bonita Park Construction Documents. _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 0 w GENERAL NOTES ' N N 5 A. ALL POWER AND TELEPHONE SERVICE WORK TO BE Q o T COMPLETED PER UTILITY COMPANY REQUIREMENTS. ~ v 3'-0" MIN, o 3 2 - ~ N r` o I NOTES THIS SHEET ~ Z O r------- P I NEW METER ~1 PROVIDE (1) 4" SCHED. 40 PVC UNDERGROUND PRIMARY ~ o CONDUIT WITN NYLON PULL CORD FROM PGE POWER POLE o ~ I ~C21-11/5014 TO PAD MOUNT TRANSFORMER. 90' Q z M I I ELBOWS TO BE STEEL OR FIBERGLASS. NO MORE THAN - SC - ~li I- - L---------~ i -----J 270' TOTAL ELBOWS. VERIFY SIZE AND QUANTIT( ~ g I I of REQUIREMENTS WITH PGE. W a I NEW ADMINISTRATION BUILDING I 7 ~2 PROVIDE ALL ROUTING, TRENCHING, VAULTS, ETC. PER ~ ~ o 7 I UTILITY COMPANY REQUIREMENTS, SEE DETAIL 2/E10. ~ N ~ Z 1 I ~3 PROVIDE (1) 4" SCHED. 40 PVC UNDERGROUND ~ Z ~ SECONDARY CONDUIT WITH NYLON PULL CORD FROM PAD ~ g o PAN€L- '2A' 1 I ~ ° MOUNT TRANSFORMER TO PANEL 'A', VERIFY SIZE AND I ~ ~m E30 o ~ QUANTITY REQUIREMENTS WITH PGE, ~ ~ I ~ & T I ~4 PROVIDE (1} 4" SCHED, 40 PVC UNDERGROUND CONDUIT w ~ I ONE TERMINAI BOARD WITH NYLON PULL CORD FOR TELEPHONE. VERIFY SIZE ~ o z t - AND QUANTITY REQUIREMENTS WITH VERIZON. Q U N ~ I _ _ 5~ PROVIDE TRANSFORMER PAD PER PGE REQUIREMENTS. ~ Q 0 N I 'SC - - EXISTING CHURCH -----J ~ PROVIDE 12"X12"X6" FLUSH-IN-GROUND CAST BOX WITH ° ' ~ I I 2A-37,39. WATERPROOF COVER FOR FUTURE SIGN POWER. PROVIDE ~ I I P 3/4" CONDUIT. WITH NYLON PULL CORD. MIN. 24" BELOW n I i t T ~ 'Y~✓ II GRADE TO PANEL '2A'. TAG PANEL END OF CONDUIT TO ~ I IDENTIFY FOR FUTURE. ~ I I 7 7 ~7 CAREFULLY PROTECT EXISTING SITE LITE AND ALL L1J CIRCUITING DURING NEW CONSTRUCTION. I ~ %i~~ ~i ~ ~ RELOCATE EXISTING SITE LITE, EXTEND CIRCUITING AS L_l_ ~ II REQUIRED, ~ H II I I II P z ~ I II FINISHED GRADE (GRAVEL, PAVEMENT OR SOD AS REQUIRED) O (,L P T I i I I ~ w ~ - - ----------J YELLOW ~ WARNING TAPE ~ ? o ~ ~ w J > > ~ ~ ~ Q I BACKFILL 951 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 11 COMPACTED 11 1 2 1.1 2 4 PROVIDE 4 OF 1~ 11 ROCK FREE SOIL 12" o ~ ~ ~ O ~ P ABOVE AND BELOW Q T SERVICE MIN. Q p p ~ o T P Z ~ ~ ~ o Q ~ ~ _ 0 ~ II 0 REVISIONS 0 0 I I ~ 1 -Iv I- -Iv I- I P =POWER 2 _ P T =TELEPHONE 3 T 4 0 ~ TRENCHING SECTION 5 o E1® SCALE: NONE DATE 3-7-03 - JOB NO. 544,021.001 i~p~ i DRAWN MMW 0 PGE POLE ~C21-11 APPROVED GLR 5014 SWEEP CONDUITS UP ° SERVICE RESPONSIBILITY SITE PLAN AT BASE ITEIU DIV: 1 ~ l1Tll ITY ~W Q Q SW 98THA!/EM(IE ~Q PRIMARY CONDUIT X ELECTRICAL PRIMARY CONDUCTORS X -®C~ TRAN5FORMERS X tIT1Lfl'Y CONTACTS o ~W m TRANSFORMER PAD X BOLLARDS POWE PGE TRANSFORMER CONNECTIONS X KEN GUTIERREZ SECONDARY CONDUIT X 9480 SW BOECKMAN RD. WILLSONVILLE, oR 97070 SCALE; AS SHOWN SECONDARY CONDUCTORS X 503-570-4420 C/T ENCLOSURE ~~`~D PROF~f~i C/T TELEPHONE ~~~~~~N~~ Oy VERIZON ~ METER BASE X KEN PERDUE METER X PO BOX 1100 OREGON BEAVERTON, OR 97076-1100 1~ 1 TRENCHING X PH. 503-469-9626 vq~ ~~14,~g £S E, M`~C~ ~ E1Q SCALE: 1 "=20 -0" EXPIRES 12/31/ 4 DRAWING N0. L~ ~ ~ 9400 SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Highwoy, Suite 250 ~ Beaverton, Oregon 97005 Phone• (503) 292-6000 ENGINEERING INC Fax. (503) 2sz-1422 'Engfnearing Integrated 3olutla~e' E-mail; rweng0rwang com  lProject No 544.021.001 Contact: GREG ROBERTSON I I L J 1 ~ - ---1- ~i- _ _ _ - - - _ tir, v 1, ~ ~ HORS ~ / o fSHr o 26 F. 30 F, \ Z o 6 0 58"F ~ 40 i; h~ / c, ~ + ~ 0 44 F. ~ ^ ~ , ~ 0 ` l.C. V S .r r~ ~ o° ro ~ °38~F. N 4 N r W 28 AND 40 f. o38"f 4 0 ~ W ~ ~ ~ VAULT hy' 0 33"f ~ 1 .ti Z ~ 1 a PLAY ~ u h ~ o58"f. 224 W ti 225 i ~ AREA ~ h a~ ~ ~ ~ h ~ \ v 2 i ~ 2 - AWNING L/NE- ~ a ~ ~ , h ~REMOD' ~ ~ N •s ' , ~ r-. 1 N / N iV6'N~''CO CXEr 1 _ I ~ NN REMO I + ',TERRAt"£ ~ ~ N ®54"FIR ' ;:;.ti, RISER ~o ~ 1 ~ (WATER) N RAIN •~,~,~,h,•, h i D RELDC TE RGAT/ON / REMOVE E,1 ~ , , - - - - ,RELOCATE AS CONT OL L £ AS 3 W/DE H[ ONC. WALK &MHR. ~ , ~ i ~ REQUIRED ~ ~ T 1' i / b tit; ~ I ~ NE'W INIST/~ a 1 //t~T~~ ~ HANDICAP S/GN ! ~ ~ RE OVE EXI ; NEW 9/KE RACK ~i - ' / BU ~ DING CO CRETE ~ ~ 0 • , ~ o ' NEW CONC. PAD ~ / ~ ~ ~ , , , ~ _ i F/Nr FL OtA,4 128 88 r Q W ~ ' ~ REMOVE EXISTING HAND/CAP S/CN " i',~,:°~;>, ~ 1 f - ~ ~ ~ r~, n • / CONCRETE STEPS ANDI SIDEWALK i ' ~ ~ ~ ~z„ ''r~' , -z.r,, Q 6 /ON ~ ~ ' ~ 1 ~ ~R£ OCATE /RR/GAT 9' ~ ~ C NTROL VAL VEiAS ~ / ~ REQU/RED ~ 1 ~~4. PLANT/NG 3`TR/P EXISTING CHURCH ~ .1. HAND/CAP SIGN , , p " ~ I~ M.VW, i f/N/SHED f100R li ;''i.' ~ BRICK WALL / NEW ELEVATION = ?18.91 ELEVATION = 11888 I~ ' ~ CONS ON CARPET ON HARD f100R I + ~ Z RISERS l 0 ~ ~ i 227 i i I i ~ 26 / ,W Z ~ ~ 0 ~ ^ ~ I ~ y, NEW I - M W ~ , ~ h DEWA~K a ~ ' ~ ~ ~ 1' I ' ~ I N ~ ~ h i , 2 op ~ ~ y6 h I ~ 2; ~ "7 y. p I i ' I hh 0 K i EX/STINf^i v ~ i dL tip, , ELEC. BOX S/DEW m v ~ 'W; I ; I o ~ ~ ~ ; I ~ NOTE' FOR LANOSCAP v E[EC. aoX Z N I ~ AND ORA/NAG'S REFER ~ ;v: Q ~ " a~ ELEC. eoX I 70 Cl ~lL AND LANOSCA ~ i h' PLANS ! ry N I 0 tih ~ V ~ - o . Wr I ~ ~ v, o i ~ v I ~ 4 s ~ o @7 26 ~ L_ ~ a v ~ I ~ 2 ''c ~ 1 ~ N N I i 0 2 < -'--M.V,W, i 4 s. + , 0~ , c i ~ ~ ~0 1 2 y y y'~ - 0 Z ~ hti i hh ti h - --T- ~ ~o CONCR ~ ET£ LANOINC ~ ~ o & STEPS W MHR S ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ r~ 225 2 4 a _ ~ _ _ _ ~N hh i F 5 ~ ,~y N ~ f1(11'~ Jr' ~•',r ,li 1 hh N ~ AWN/NG N ,r~ ~i~ b~ '1 h~' 6' BRICK WALL 6' RICH ~ :~i y ti bh ( ) ~ APANES o EXTRUDED CONCRETE C h G N e OSS/BL£ N ~ r Q UT/UTY PATCH M W i°~' 11 N ~ (J W1D£) N A ~a ~ SPHA T 0 m + ~ ~ + W ~ N M y o ~ h y N t i 0 0 ~ ~o hh N ~ 14 16 1 l N N ~ sN 15 N y! ~r - M ANDIC HAND/ P , ~ ~-~-LC. Y 18 M T ~ 38 F. o, 5 WIDE EASE 6 S/ N S/ N 6. ~ ND D£DICATlO h " 1 A ti h h h >0 X 10 h t3 ~ b ';v; 19' h ~ THE PUBLIC „ 1, P.G.E. EAS£MNENT h 8-042483 6 CH. ' BK. 951, PG. 711 ~ _ ~ ~ 11-2-73 h6 - " ~ • TOP I 1~ h y of SLOPL~"------_ r ry ,r TOP a0F SLOP N ~ d '7 ~ r C° r `'y o y q ~ , c r, ° ~ 1' N 5.6' HIGH ( ) t ~ r, 225 f0/ N h nh N ' 1 1 "j; 4'x,';4 ' ,a, ~ iii" 1."' :s~, ~~t'' rr .1 h ~V ""'1. G~'v: ,=,~,Y r~,~,1 +1,•!~ '45oi.'tliA'~y1:,,.'.' r. ~'}A,ry i'~t,~~''ll '.4i''7~4+.r'iC"`i~ ,'vSJ:,•~,yn r~r'tt .5 ,v, r „ ',1! , ~r, 'N .t ,Y".'Ir !~n ''n'et •i,i ,'r ,e'i. 1. d~.w~ ti i ,t • ~'1'• ,t. ~',f, rYy ''i ',V~•,,.W 1, i, w~ y f~1 1' d" i'~~ ,it n:•: ,QN4RrT .5 y+.~.M;~' S~'ro ,y,, '1'';, y+i nii s~.(~. ,i r,r i,~' ~~~i i; ii, r~l~ 1~,'r eo.e:°1• 'r , }~~~r,' "t i tirlly S ;e. ~l ,1' ,,i 'Irr 4 ~,r.. ~t„~' .q"~r L c ~yJ • r~r„ "f 1,, ,~l ii' ~i' ~r ,A't T' •d~' i4}, 'r.i w ! ,1• r, .r" •r1} .•Y/,~~.`3f1, Y'i' '~S~A: "n"i. ~,in'~.'i ^o-, '~'i„~ ,,f a In,,.+., SP dry ~ u. ,i. ,A~' y 1~h J, M^~, r~'' '}''""'~i . 1~•'i i r~i'~~'+i t','1• i ,'i'~{'~t,~•i •"r ~s' ~J►'~ rl,~{„ A~J„i ,t~T„or, K, Cy, J~yd~7/II,~r>~IOQ~,"ri ,N "ri,.fi~, ;w f', tin,. ~r r .~J'. ,~wl~. f, •f, •:Y;~°i'j,.~ ,,.,h„ ~t ,,}y,, i ~r AY;..,r Z J a ~ ~ yr • p'~ ,JZ N h ~~v ~ ~ b h~ N SZ ro o ~ i ~ N Z ~ ~ i ~ ~ - ~ " 1 `~~~~T" ~ b N ~ . ~ W ~ ~ GUTTER N L/NE N ~ H ,y ~ N  b a N i y----`__ A ~ ~ ~ , ~ , 48.8 \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ i \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` l ~ r S ~ / - , ~ ~ ~ o~ V `F ~ ~ ~ 0~ ~ l ( 1 ,n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~ , ~ ~1 ~ X A ' ~ ` ~ ~ _ -j ; i ~ -1 t." ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ' ~ \ \ ~ 1 4~'6 ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ilt rt2J B7 ~ ,o.-..-.r. -,..o-..,,..~ I 10 ~ B~.% t i xi9tcw ~p30tb t, ~ 1 I 5roo t ~ytN :133. ~ i ~ ~ xt ~ ~ \ l . A r I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i i q ~ ~ r---f----_ ~ ~ r ~ 1 ~ 0 ~J ~ ~ A ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ \ ~ A ~ I r,5 I ~ ~ , ~ / i i ~ 1 579 ~ '3 :i ~ t. s ~ ~ ~ x,:~,z ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ , .~s ) ~ - ~ ~ t ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ i ~ ~4, ' ~ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ , 1 / I ~ ~ ,x,.9~~ ~ ~ ~ ,~~,r. ~ ' ~ ~ ~ A f t ~ 1 ~ r ~ ~ ~ / / / / ~ \ h 19 \ 1 , ~ i ~ / ~ / , ~ ~ x ~ x ea ~ ~ r ~ ~-.,-,..E-~ ~ x ~ q ~ ~ ~ ~Y ro~ ~ ~ ~i s ~ TS 4 ~ q~ ~ ' ~ ~ x~3~45 9 01 ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ F t II g+ xi~~ l ~ _ t r p x,v7e ~ ~ ~ l .~1tJ t ~ Na:6 'T~ ~ / / ' ~ ~ ~ ~ o - ~ ~ ~ ~ ; . / i / ~ ~ f ~ t ~ 1 ~ ~ / / ~ ~ ~ 1 x ~4 sa l ~'`J ~ ~ ~l n ~ 1 ~ ~ c--" \ \ 55~ ~ 1 ~ / I x . ~ I d ~ . 4 5~ ~ ti ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~'i C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~i d ~7i I \ ~ t 1 ~`y ~:t ~U }t 1 ~ ~ T ' ~ 1 ue 1~ _l ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ l ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i __--r ~ ~ ~ r'~~-~,i ~ r _~.r.....- ~ V ~ i s V ~ ~ _ I - ~ ~ ~,:9~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ae: i1~197 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 t r7 .i- ,.c / i ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ 1 `~,r rQ ~ ~ ~ \ ~t ~ ~A A \ ~ V i \ ~ ,u ~ ~ ~ V A ~ ~ ~J ~J ~ t A~ A ~ _ ' ~ ~d~ ' t,~.2 ~ O t^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,9 ~ ~~i ~~E V' -1 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ \ \ ti ~ - ~ x u ~ s~ y ,1 ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ r= ~ < ~ ` \ ~'or ~ ~ - A ~ ~ V ~ r A \ k ~ W, ~ y Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ti ~ ~ A \ ~ ~ J ~ 7 p ~ I ~ I 1 a ~ ~ - i ~f~ V \ l / , ~ \ ~ 1 ~ _ _ A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 _ - ~ i ~ ~ ~a ~1 , I ~ i~ ~ 9 d rte. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - C ~ _ i a ~ ~ ~ ` i L~ ~~t F t ' ~ ~ i ~ ~ x,~»z i ~ , ~ ~ \ "tu ~ s_ ~ \ ~ i ~r ~ 't, ~ x~i xt1t 95 ti } a ~ l ~ ~ V ~ \ ~ V ~t ~t J -1 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v A, \ v ~ v \v v~~ ~ 1 t~ A t ~ ~ \ ~ ~ ~t i ~ ~ t~ ~ - ~ ~ <t 1 ~t. ~ i I ~ ~ ~ I V ~ ~ it ~ l b t, ~ ~ ~ ` ti l' I t ~ ~ ~ ~ ltd _ ~ ~V 1 ~t ~ i r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~y. ' ~ ; i ~ i~, i III ~ ~ I ~ ~ i ~ ~ . i~ t U ~~i I~ ~ ~ i 1 ____r - r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ , ~ / ~ ,,t1ea ~ ~l', i ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ j , ~ l ~ 5c 17 t ~ / t. _ _ ~J, ti i~ 1 ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~i ~ i ~ i ~ I , ~ 1777 ~  e,2; ilia 1 i ~ 1 s ~ 1 ~ - ~ ~V A~ , r ~9 _ I - , I _ 7 _ _ ~ ~ v _ _ ~ I I 4, ~ ` ~ 1 ~ ~ - ~ ~ l I ~ ~ ~l , , _ i , I ~ ~ il~ ~ ~ - r%~ _ I ~ . ~ ~ _ ~ ~ - i A _ i ~ ~i - _ ~ i ~ i A _ ~ i ~ 'i ~ r 11 ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ I ~ - r , 1 ~ ~ 4 I ~ i rA~ ~ i ~ ~ ' ~ ~ A ~ ~ ~ _-f" ~ ~ i ~ 1 ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ - i ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ l i ~ \ y . _ i ~ ..agar- _ ~ _ _ _ ~ ~ 5 '7-~ _ ._,_~~--...W,.. . i i 1 t e~'e ~ 5~4 . pa ~ ~ ~~m k tT~ o fti. afi ~a~ a~ e~'°~ ~ 6 ~ ' Areo. h Pi sa' thw yid o ~ l ~ es ~ ; ~ ~ ~,,t ~ap0 i Pstro Ppth F• ~~T e AP 1 A A I~C e TGP r OGR ~ ~ 3 Po .and ..,a~ ~,or ~ „do ~ La .,ted er APH ~ c .C o S U ~ P VEY c de ~I~e ~c a,` r • n,l ' r t ~ ~ ~~t ~j8~ ~K~~ ;list ~ r ~e2 1~~~ pf e GF Guib _ ~c~t 1~ i So ore ti7 folk ~ s~ rn ct de 1 o D ~ r ~ ~ ~ Go ~s~rl1 ~y7~ ~~~~e t~ ~ ' ~ 5tid ces eE ~ ~ 12 ~ ~ See . P~ Sn ° ~ f / en's ~ ~ 5e' ~,l ~ t'", t ~ v~ate WN / / l de--= e ~ y~,n9 ~ . G ~ ~ 1 ~ I~ - n ~ pry ~~,0~1 / 1 ~ ,.-r- ~ v~r~q~-- / ~ ~i , ~ ~G Zv2 ~ r ~ _ - i~ G CpJ „ ~ ~-r-' - 20 ~ ~ ~ ~ - , i ~ f f 5 _ _ - ~ 1 ink ta' - - ~ ~ _ - I jy~ gee ~.q,.;,<<~-°-= i r~ 5 (T~ p.- a _ - - 6 ~ ~ _ _ - - i ~..~-d-~ - - - - - i i i I _ _ _ - - - ~ 7 I I ' i ~ I i r ~ - - - - - _ ~ ~ yiG~' i b ~ - - _ _ _ q" G _ - _ ~ j 4 ; - - ~(o - - - - - ~ r- ~ ~ r ~ - - ~ = fi ____-----o ~ sa ~ G ~i i i vae s o ~ , ~ F :a~yr ~ ~ { ° ~~po(f ~~F 4 ~G7P Qr p(tP~~L ti ~ 6 m ra 4 ~ ~"PVC ~ _ ~ u r ` o f" ti ti ~1 a G'k ,~,r ~ ,~o ; z ti - r.is. e r r i r i ~ , _ 4 ~ + 4- f ''k k -I- i r~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ! a. ~ - + ~ + I- ~ t ~ r ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° e~ i'` ti ~ ~ ~ / v .Q` i ~,-.i ~ v ~ tibo~~ t G~ ~ r ~4 (ti Sh ~ u ~ c~u det c,~P v ~ ~ i / s ~ art S ~ / i ~ Sa eti G ~be~l S~,e rxos~e etp'l d S~, i_ ~ icn`~ / P 4 ~ ~t ~ z h 1 s. Y 1'L~ 'r i I ice} f. 1