Loading...
City Council Packet - 04/14/1992 C CITY OF TIGARD OREGON AGENDA PUBLIC NOTICE. Anyone wishing to speak on an ;agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up }ti ~ f sheet(s). !f no sheet is available, ask to be . t recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's Agenda items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Administrator. • WORKSHOP SESSION - LIBRARY BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL (5:30 PM) • STUDY SESSION (6:30 PM) 1. BUSINESS (MEETING (7:30) 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call ' 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. OLD BUSINESS 2.1 Approve Council Minutes - March 17 and 24, 1992 3. OATH OF OFFICE - COUNCILOR JUDY FESSLER • Mayor Edwards 4. PROCLAMATIONS (Mayor Edwards): 4.1 1992 Year of Clean Water (Presentation and Song to City Council) 4.2 Fair Housing Month C ti COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 1 P IM: 5. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 6. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 6.1 Receive and File: a. Council Calendar b. Certified Election Results - March 24, 1992 6.2 Approve Appointment to Park and Recreation Board - Resolution No. 92-_ 6.3 Approve Hearings Officer Contract Renewal 6.4 Approve Recommendation for No Rate Adjustment to Solid Waste Adjustment 7. APPEAL PUBLIC HEARING - SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 91-0013 PLANNED c DEVELOPMENT POR 91-0006 TRIAD DEVELOPMENT (NPO #6) An appeal of the Planning Commission's decision approving a request for Site Development Review and detailed Planned Development approval of a 348 unit apartment complex on a 27.2 acre property. ZONE: R-12 (PD) (Residential, 12 units/acre Planned Development) and R-25 (PD) (Residential, 25 units/acre Planned Development) LOCATION: SW Naeve Street between SW Pacific Highway and SW 109th Avenue (WCTM 2S1 10AD, tax lot 9300, 2S1 10AC, tax lots 600, 700, 800, 900, and 2S1 10DB, tax lots 100, 200, & 300) APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA: Community Development , Code sections 18.32, 18.54, 18.56, 18.80, 18.84, 18.92, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.120,18.150,18.164; Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 3.1.1, 3.4.2, 4.2.1, 6.1.1, 6.6.1, 7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.4.4, 7.5.1, 7.6.1, 8.1.1, and 8.1.3. The public hearing was was opened and testimony was received on March 10, 1992. Triad Development representatives submitted two documents: 1) Wildlife Habitat Resources Survey 2) Geotechnical Report The hearing was set over to April 14 to allow an opportunity for all parties to review the new material. • Public Hearing Continued from March 10, 1992 • Declarations or Challenges • Staff Report - Community Development Department • Public Testimony NPO 6 Proponents (Speaking in Favor of the CPA) Opponents (Speaking Against the CPA) • Staff: Response to Testimony and Recommendation to Council • Council Questions or Comments • Close Public Hearing • Consideration by Council: Ordinance No. 92- COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 2 i 8. PUBLIC HEARING - KONE CHANGE ANNEXATION ZCA 92-0003 S EENEY A request to annex one parcel consisting of 0.92 acres to the City of Tigard and to change the zone from Washington County R-5 (Residential, 5 units/acre) to City of Tigard R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Comprehensive Plan Policies 10.1.1, 10.1.2, 10.1.3,10.2.1,10.2.2,10.2.3,10.3.1,10.3.2; Community Development Code Chapters 18.32.020, { 18.32.040, 18.32.130, 18.136, 18.138, 18.138.020 (A)(B) LOCATION: 11455 SW Walnut Street CA/CTM 2S1 3AB, tax lot 600) ZONE: R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) The R-4.5 zoning f allows single family residential, public support facilities, residential treatment homes, farming, manufactured homes, family day care, home occupations, temporary uses, residential fuel tanks, and accessory structures among other uses. Public hearing opened } • Declarations or challenges. u. • Staff Report/Recommendation - Community Development Staff • Public Testimony: Proponents (in favor of annexation) Opponents (opposed to annexation) Staff: Response to Testimony and Recommendation to Council • Rebuttal to Testimony • Council Questions • Public hearing closed. • Council comments • Council consideration: Resolution No. 92-_; Ordinance No. 92 9. ORDINANCE CONSIDERATION - PARKING PROHIBITION ON S.W. 108TH AVENUE. Discussion continued from Council meeting of March 24, 1992. a. Staff Report - City Engineer b. Council Consideration - Ordinance No. 92- 10. NON-AGENDA ITEMS 11. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW/UPDATE • City Administrator 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session, under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. 13. ADJOURNMENT COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 3 3 Council Agenda Item P T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L r MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 i • Meeting was called to order at 5:40 p.m. by Mayor Edwards. ' 1. ROLL CALL Council Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Judy Fessler (Note: Councilor Fessler took "Oath of Office" at the beginning of the business meeting), Valerie Johnson (arrived at 7:36 p.m.), Joe Kasten, Jack Schwab (remained on Council until Councilor Fessler took "Oath of Office), and John Schwartz. Staff Present: Patrick Reilly, City Administrator; Irene Ertell, Library Director (present for Study Session only); Liz Newton, Community Relations Coordinator; Jerry Offer, Associate Planner; Michael Robinson, Legal Counsel; Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder; and Randy Wooley, City Engineer. STUDY SESSION Workshop with Library Board f Library Board Members Present: Amo De Bernardis, Chairperson; Board Members Yvonne Burgess, Jeri Cundiff, Marilyn Hartzell, and Carl Kostol. Council toured Library with Board members. The tour included demonstration on recently acquired computer software. Council and board discussed the growth the Library has experienced and continues to experience. Sunday hours are well received; in fact, Sunday is the busiest day of the week for the Library. Other items discussed included: • Scenarios on what the Library of the future could look like, especially when speculating about new technology availability and cost effectiveness. • Growing cooperation between schools and local libraries. • All aspects of relations among community, staff and board represent a teamwork approach and continues to work very well. Councilor Schwartz arrived at 6:25 p.m. Council meeting recessed at 6:30 p.m. r Council meeting reconvened at 6:40 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 1 Study Session Notes:_ ( Mayor Edwards appointed Councilor Fessler to the Historic Sites and Preservation Committee. • Council agreed that it was appropriate for City Administrator to discuss a joint venture with the Chamber Commerce, on a preliminary basis, concerning the future of the Community Center (on Commercial Street) now owned by the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District. (Note: Councilor Schwartz advised he would not comment or participate in any discussion due to his employment with the Fire District.) • City Administrator advised that Mr. Larry Bissett requested that Council initiate review and study of what was previously known as Note 9 on the Transportation Map. This issue deals with an overpass option to the transportation configuration in the Tigard Triangle locale. After brief discussion, Council decided to delay a decision on whether or not to initiate study as requested until after consultation with legal counsel because of unresolved legal issues in the subject area. Council advised Mr. Bissett they would discuss this with legal counsel at their April 21, 1992 meeting. • Council will meet May 21, Town Hall Conference Room, 8:30 a.m., reference Goal Setting. City Administrator will be meeting with Councilors individually for input for agenda for the day. Councilor Schwab arrived at 6:55 p.m. • City Administrator distributed a synopsis of the Blue Ribbon Task Force meeting on developing leadership in the community. Councilor Schwab reemphasized that the "Cityscape" represented a good tool to inform people of items of interest to them and items for which they could become involved. Legal Counsel, Michael Robinson, arrived at 7:02 p.m. • Council reviewed the business agenda. Triad Public Hearing: Community Development Director Murphy advised that the schools have reviewed this development with regard to growth concerns. He advised that the public hearing issue before Council was whether this development met the development criteria. The public hearing was not about zoning or transportation issues. Despite the fact that there may be an appeal of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the transportation issue at 109th and Naeve, the Community Development Director advised that chances of LUBA remanding this issue to city r Council was small. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 2 3 i There was brief discussion on the public hearing format. Legal Counsel would advise those present as to the appropriateness of testimony for this hearing. Councilor-elect Fessler advised that she would make a declaration at the beginning of the hearing to note that she had reviewed this information with regard to this public hearing item. She advised that she had viewed the video tapes of the previous meeting, during which the hearing was held and that she could hear the matter with an open mind. Consent Agenda - Hearings Officer Contract: Councilor- elect Fessler noted the hourly salary for the hearings officer; she suggested if the number of items concerning signs or sensitive lands were increasing, perhaps, if there were budgetary constraints, the Planning Commission could be utilized in these instances. City Administrator Reilly advised that this issue would be addressed by Council during their goal setting session in May. At this time, the Council will review the roles of the Boards and Committees. In the interim, staff will monitor costs to provide council information needed to make this decision Council meeting recessed at 7:12 p.m. C- Council meeting reconvened at 7:30 p.m. BUSINESS MEETING 2. OLD BUSINESS 2.1 Approve Council Minutes - March 17 and 24, 1992 Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Kasten, to approve the Council minutes from the March 17 and 24, 1992 meetings. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. SPECIAL PRESENTATION Mayor Edwards presented Resolution of Appreciation and an engraved desk clock to Jack Schwab for his service on council (October 191 - April 192). C CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 3 i d e C' 3. OATH OF OFFICE - COUNCILOR JUDY FESSL.ER Mayor Edwards administered Oath of Office for Council Position No. 3 to Judy Fesslere rn1»_i? or F; s--1t ci was G1CC.:GE:Q On March 24, 1992. Councilor Johnson arrived at 7:36 p.m. 4. PROCLAMATIONS (Mayor Edwards): 4.1 1992 Year of Clean Water (Presentation and Song to City Council) 4.2 Fair Housing Month 5. VISITOR'S AGENDA - No visitors. Mayor Edwards asked if anyone was present for the "Anderson Annexation" proposal which had been originally scheduled for this evening, but was now postponed until a later date. There was no indication that anyone was present for this hearing item. 6. CONSENT AGENDA: Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Kasten, to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: 6.1 Receive and File: a. Council Calendar b. Certified Election Results - March 24, 1992 6.2 Approve Appointment to Park and Recreation Board - Resolution No. 92-14 6.3 Approve Hearings Officer Contract Renewal The motion was approved by, a unanimous vote of Council present. 7. APPEAL PUBLIC HEARING - SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 91-0013 PLANNE'''D DEVELOPMENT PDR 91-0006 TRIAD DEVELOPMENT (NPO #6) An appeal of the Planning Commission's decision approving a request for Site Development Review and detailed Planned Development approval of a 348 unit apartment complex on a 27.2 acre property. ZONE: R-12 (PD) (Residential, 12 units/acre Planned Development) and R-25 (PD) (Residential, 25 units/acre Planned Development) LOCATION: SW Naeve Street between SW Pacific Highway and SW 109th Avenue (WCTM 2S1 10AD, tax lot 9300, 2S1 10AC, tax lots 600, 700, 800, 900, and 2S1 1ODB, tax lots 100, 200, & 300) APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA: Community Development Code sections 18.32, 18.54, 18.56, 18.80, 18.84, 18.92, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 18.120, 18.150, 18.164; Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 3.1.1, 3.4.2, 4.2.1, 6.1.1, 6.6.1, 7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.4.4, 7.5.1, 7.6.1, 8.1.1, and 8.1.3. C CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 4 OEM The public hearing was opened and testimony was received on March 10, 1992. Triad Development representatives submitted two documents: 1) Wildlife Habitat Resources Survey 2) Geotechnical Report The hearing was set over to April 14 to allow an opportunity for all parties to review the new material. a. Public Hearing Continued from March 10, 1992. b. Legal counsel advised the following: "The applicable substantive criteria are those listed on the agenda under Item No. 7. Testimony and evidence must be directed towards these criteria or other criteria in the Plan or Land Use Regulations which the person believes to apply to the decision. Failure to raise an issue with sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker and the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes an appeal to the Board based on that issue." C. Community Development Director reviewed the staff report. (The City Staff Report has been filed with the Council packet material.) He reminded all those present that this was not a hearing on the transportation issue, which had been heard at an earlier date by Council. He advised that the purpose of this hearing was not to talk about the zoning or Comprehensive Plan designations of this area. These designations, he advised, were actually set years ago (May 1987). This occurred when the Albertson's development was approved; there was a transfer of density. Community Development Director referred to some maps on an overhead projector. The maps depicted where the property was located. He also reviewed how the new transportation configuration would appea- in the surrounding area. The issue before Council was, "Should the City Council uphold the Planning commission's approval of a 348-unit multi-family residential development plan for the southern slope of Little Bull Mountain?" Both NPO 6 and Marge Davenport, a neighbor of the proposed development site have appealed the approval on different grounds. The grounds for the NPO 6 appeal and Ms. Davenport's appeal can be found with the packet meeting material; said grounds are summarized on the Information Summary of the Staff Report. C. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 5 Two reports were received at the March 10, 1992, meeting from the Triad Development representatives. These reports included a Wildlife Habitat Resources Survey and a Geotechnical Report. An April 6, 1992, letter was received from Doug Cottam, Urban Wildlife Biologist from the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife. The letter states, in summary, that as far as the plan for Arbor Heights, he recommended that the outlay of the complex save more open space than the current design, the non- native plants species to planted around the complex be replaced by native species and, if possible, a common area or play area for children be created so that the "kids will not heavily impact the remaining open area." A petition, signed by approximately 700 people, was referenced as being part of the City Council's meeting packet material. The heading of the petition stated: We, the undersigned residents of greater Tigard, petition the Tigard City Council to reject the Triad application to build 348 new apartments on "Little Bull Mountain" at this time for the following reasons: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (Highway Department figures) to Tigard's already grid-locked and traff is-j ammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on a proposed Fsite would destroy and desecrate Little Bull Mountain natural forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove, and destroy wildlife and natural areas at summit all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Comprehensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in Plan will support roads and three-story apartment buildings. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increases. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 6 Community Development Director advised that the schools had had an opportunity to comment on the development and have responded. Along with the 20 conditions of the Planning Commission, Staff was recommending that Council add a condition of approval requiring the developer to deposit $300,000 with the City of Tigard prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. This sum is to be utilized for construction of S.W. 109th Avenue, south of - SW Naeve Street and is to be compensated by a traffic impact fee credit. It was also recommended that Paragraph A be deleted of Condition of Approval No. 15 of _ the Planning Commission's Final Order, requiring the developer to construct street improvements on S.W. Naeve Street between the site and S.W. Pacific Highway. It was also recommended that a Condition of Approval be added requiring minor revisions to the site landscaping plans consistent with the recommendations of the submitted Wildlife Habitat Report. d. Councilor Fessler declared that she was a member of the Planning commission when Triad came before that body. Because new evidence has been provided to the City on this level, she said that she felt it would not be any different than if new evidence had been proposed to the Planning Commission. She advised that she would be objective to the new evidence presented in the packet and that she was well aware of all the previous packet material. Mayor Edwards advised that Councilor Fessler had also indicated earlier that she had reviewed all documents and video tapes available of prior meetings regarding this issue. b e. Public testimony: • Steve Pfeiffer, representing Triad Development, 900 S.W. 5th, Portland, OR 97204, noted that because this was an appeal hearing, their testimony would stand as what had been said at the previous hearing. He reserved the right for rebuttal. • NPO 6 testimony - Sue Carver, Chair of NPO 6. NPO 6 members were concerned that the Planning Commission's approval did not adequately address the 109th Street extension so, therefore, they appealed the approval on the grounds that the development and the road extension should occur at approximately the same time. The major issue was funding. The NPO wanted assurances that the funds would be available for this specific project. At the NPO's January meeting, Ross Woods of Triad presented the Board with a copy of the Triad Road CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 7 f I Improvement Agreement. This Agreement basically C stated that they would agree to deposit $300,000 with the City prior to issuance of Certificates of occupancy for any building in the development. The I NPO members then passed a motion to drop their appeal once this Agreement had been accepted by the Council. In response to a question by Ms. Carver, the Community Development Director advised that this draft agreement was before the Council in their packet. One of the conditions of approval was that Triad would be required to sign an agreement substantially the same as the one submitted. He s noted the Agreement was not completely finished at this time, but it would be substantially the same. Ms. Carver reiterated that NPO 6 would formally drop their appeal once the Agreement had been accepted by both parties. • Jack Polans, 16000 S.W. Queen Victoria Place, King City, Oregon testified concerning information he had put together on auto exhaust and air quality. Mayor Edwards advised that the Council was concerned about air pollution and he would welcome C a report to City Council. • John Slaughter, 15055 S.W. 100th, Tigard, Oregon 97224, testified that he was against the proposed Sattler extension. Mayor Edwards, in response to Mr. Slaughter's questions, reviewed the past transportation map decisions. There is no actual layout of where the Sattler extension would be constructed. • John Stanley, 15510 S.W. 109th, Tigard, Oregon 97224, advised that Marge Davenport was not the only one opposed to this development. Mr. Stanley referenced the petition (noted above). He said that he did not believe the LUBA remand had been adequately addressed; a new appeal to the transportation map final order was being filed. He noted that the NPO 6's condition that the Agreement for the $300,000 from Triad for the 109th Extension was not valid. He said that Triad would have to pay this money regardless. Y f CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 8 a i The Sattler Extension being proposed in the Transportation Plan did not resolve any immediate problems. Mr. Stanley recommended that the Triad development be rejected. • William Lindsay, 15505 S.W. 109th Street, Tigard, Oregon, questioned the prior Council action to increase the density in this area. Discussion followed; the density for this area had been changed at the time the Albertson's property was rezoned. In response to Mr. Lindsay, there was discussion on when rezoning would be possible for this property. Councilor Johnson summarized that it had been her understanding that a property owner has the right, once a site development review has been filed, to expect the property to remain as it was designated at the time of filing. • Howard Graham, 9410 S.W. Lakeside Drive, Tigard, Oregon 97224, reviewed that Summerfield had been closely involved in the process concerning this development. He advised of safety concerns. He said he believed that Council had made a mistake when they approved the high density development on Little Bull Mountain. Mr. Graham proposed a special traffic arrangement exiting the development to ht-.'p mitigate some of the traffic concerns which would affect the Summerfield neighborhood. • Richard Barton, 14915 S.W. 100th, Tigard, Oregon 97224, advised he was not against the development but had special concerns. He asked about the traffic configuration, and about future plans for Kable Street. Mayor advised that Kable and Hoodview were not proposed, in the current transportation plan, to be extended. Mr. Barton advised of inadequate improvements and safety concerns for pedestrians on Sattler and 100th streets if this additional traffic is added because of this high-density development. • Steve Davidson, 15040 S.W. 100th, Tigard, Oregon 97224, said he agrees with the statements made previously. He referred to earlier testimony requesting special consideration to not impact a certain neighborhood, then he should also be able CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 9 S Ile II1111 mum to make a request for traffic configuration to lessen the impact to his area. Mr. Davidson referred to past density transfers and the effect that the Boundary Commission decisions had on work done in the community. Mr. Davidson asked for clarification on the emergency clause for the transportation map ordinance adopted by Council on March 24. Community Development Director reviewed that action which was done because of a LUBA remand. In response to Mr. Davidson, Council could review this i action if it is appealed to LUBA and LUBA requires a review. For policy issues, the council would have to be convinced to call it up for review. • Ann Davidson, 15040 S.W. 100th, Tigard, Oregon 97224, noted her disagreement with staff that this project and the density was necessary. She noted her concerns with the proposed development and the appropriateness of it because of the topography. Additional concerns cited were traffic speed and water drainage. Councilor Johnson explained some of the State Land Use laws with which local governments must comply. Ms. Davidson disagreed with the State law requirements. now e Evelyn Kallstrom, 15025 S.W. 100th, Tigard, Oregon 97224, said she recognized things must change; however, she registered her concerns with traffic impacts. • Martin Cude, 15105 S.W. 98th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97224, advised he had witnessed at least five accidents at the corner of 98th and Sattler in the last year. He referred to his concerns for traffic safety. • Dave Anderson, 15240 S.W. 100th, Tigard, Oregon, 97224 said he has lived at this address for three years and traffic is of concern to him. He commented that he did not understand how traffic would flow with the addition of 348 apartment units. Mayor Edwards noted continuing concerns for traffic and efforts needed to resolve. Y CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 3.4, 1992 - PAGE 10 i 1 Sell • Ann Hartman, 9867 S.W. Kable Street, Tigard, Oregon 97224, relayed her concerns with contributions to the improvement of Sattler, school bussing and safety issues. • Norman Hartman, 9867 S.W. Kable, Tigard, Oregon, 97224 advised of his concerns with the traffic configuration in the area, development, and future problems. • Sam Gotter, 9855 S.W. Peppertree Lane, Tigard, Oregon 97224, commented on the concerns expressed by previous testimony about the Sattler Extension. He noted the effect this development will have on the neighborhoods and the need to look at the future and determine what should be done for Sattler. • Richard Whitman, attorney for Marge Davenport, 101 S.W. Main, Suite 1100, Portland, Oregon 97224 noted there were three major shortcomings to the staff report: 1) Little Bull Mountain natural forest area had not been adequately addressed. (Volume I of the Comprehensive Plan and Goal 5 Resources were noted.) He disagreed with staff in that he believes this is a significant natural resource area. 2) Concerns with regard to the geotechnical report; i.e., adequately addressing concerns with topography and soils. There was some discussion as to whether the Canterbury Square apartments were built on the same soil type. Mayor Edwards noted there had been no problems with these buildings. 3) He noted some issues with regard to the proposed road agreement with Triad and whether or not TIF dollars could be used. City Engineer noted that the 109th project was placed on the TIF project eligibility list last fall. Mr. Whitman said that the Council may want to add additional language regarding the road improvement. He said he was concerned as to what would happen if there was a further remand of the transportation plan map amendment. He said Council should provide for CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 11 t e contingencies; i.e., how would the transportation for this area be handled if there was no extension of S.W. A 109th Street. Mr. Whitman said this application must be judged under the existing standards (i.e., density, zoning), and based on the decisions made by the City. This does not mean, however, the City cannot change its mind. The City could change the Sattler Street extension, 109th Street extension and the zoning density appropriate for the site Section 18.32.020 the City Council can apply for a - zoning change on the property. The consent of the property owner is not needed for that to occur; the Council could deny this application and decide to reduce the density of the property. i Councilor Johnson advised she would be asking the Legal Counsel later in the hearing about the City ordinance just cited that would allow the Council to make a zone change in the middle of an application (18.32.020) • Marge Davenport, 15100 S.W. 109th, Tigard, Oregon, 97224, advised she has appealed the decision of the Planning Commission on Triad because she and others think it is not appropriate to build 348 apartments on Little Bull Mountain. Ms. Davenport referenced the concerns outlined in the petition submitted (referred to above). She submitted several pages from the Comprehensive Plan (filed with the packet material) on "Special Areas" and "Natural Areas." She also submitted written testimony from Paul Whitney (dated April 6, 1992), She -reiterated her concerns with the preservation of the old forest. Also submitted by Ms. Davenport was a letter from Bette and Charles Peck (dated April 14, 1992) who were opposed to the Triad Development. Ms. Davenport noted her disagreement with the City relying on reports (wildlife, geotechnical, traffic) which had been submitted by the developer. She believed the reports contained erroneous information. Ms. Davenport referred to a meeting with Triad people earlier. She said she had advised them she would have no objections to single family residences on this area. The Council, she advised, should consider the / Comprehensive Plan and work with the Nature Conservancy. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 12 I 1:1 OWNS I ill There were too many problems and unanswered questions; the development should be denied at this time. She also recommended that the decision on this issue be put on hold until the decision has been made by LUBA with regard to the transportation map amendment. • Paul Whitney, 12035 S.W. Bull Mountain Road, Tigard, Oregon, summarized the contents of his written testimony which reviews impacts to the forest eco system. (This material has been filed with the Council packet material.) • Steve Pfeiffer requested a brief recess to give them an opportunity to review the material submitted by Marge Davenport. Meeting recessed at 9:40 p.m. Meeting was reconvened. Mayor Edwards announced that Agenda Item No. 9 would be set over to April 28, 1992. Rebuttal Steve Pfeiffer, attorney for Triad Development, advised that they agreed with the staff recommendation and all of the recommended conditions including those in addition to C the Planning Commission. The condition offered by Mr. Graham on behalf of Summerfield with regard to traffic configuration (no left turn on Naeve coming southbound on 109th) would not be of concern. Triad would agree to this condition. Much of the testimony, rioted Mr. Pfeiffer, was general in nature. Most of the testimony related to legislative decision on the transportation plan amendment made in March. The Sattl.er Street extension when and how developed is not part of this project. There is extensive traffic analysis in the record from Mr. Kittelson, Traffic Engineer, as to the impact on those local streets. With regard to the issue of density, the land use designation, the change, how it came about, is it necessary, should the density be shifted to another part of the City, etc. This was a decision which was made earlier and is not a site plan approval issue. He said that there is some logic to putting high density on this site: It is adjacent to Highway 99, adjacent to good access, can be served by the new 109th collector. This property has ample access and proximity to retail services at Durham. Goal 10 mandates density CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 13 ism a r requirements and it may be difficult to find a better ~w site than this one. However, this really was not the issue before Council at this hearing. Mr. Pfeiffer noted Triad's work with NPO 6 and King City. With regard to testimony that Triad would have to improve 109th regardless of NPO's requirement for the Road Improvement Agreement, Mr. Pfeiffer advised this was not the case. The Planning Commission did not impose construction to the south of Naeve it was not a condition of the Planning Commission. The traffic study showed that the traffic from this development could be accommodated by the full improvements to Naeve. What is being offered by Triad goes beyond anything which is required to do. Mr. Pfeiffer reviewed the financing and traffic solutions for the area and the participation by Triad to resolve the concerns. Mr. Pfeiffer commented on Mr. Whitman and Ms. Davenport's testimony. He referred Council to the staff response written about two months ago to the appeal when it was originally filed. This report responded to each of the points in the testimony, including the Goal 5 analysis. "If there is wildlife habitat in the area, the site plan shall be reviewed to minimize impacts upon such habitat values to the extent practical." The preceding statement, advised Mr. Pfeiffer, was thrust of the Fishman report and the reason why it was suggested that buildings be moved and plant native vegetation. This has been done. The site plan has been modified. This site is not unique in Tigard. He suggested, with regard to the geotechnical report, that the "more specific should control." The Plan contains broad, general data. The City's ordinances call for, usually at the time of building permits, specific geotech analysis for each site. This was submitted, in this case, in advance because of concerns that people had. This is a far more specific analysis than offered in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Pfeiffer said with regard to the rezone of the property, he said that what he thought Mr. Whitman was saying that if this application was denied and there was a decision to entertain a rezoning to resolve the aarlier decision of years ago with the Albertson's site, then perhaps the Council could forward with that. He said he did not believe the Council was free to initiate a rezoning during the course of review of this application ! (State statute). CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 14 f In summary, Mr. Pfeiffer, said he did not think the City would find any merit in rezoning; this site is one of the most appropriate high-density around. If another site was chosen, these same concerns would be raised at any site. The existing inventory (state and federal), with regard to the wetlands, do not show any such area on the property. In reviewing the site, there is doubt as to whether there is any jurisdictional wetland requiring State/Federal permits to fill. Section 18.84.15 c. of the Tigard Community Development, says that Sensitive Lands does not apply if someone meets the permit requirements or otherwise is not regulated in a wetland at a State and Federal level. Triad would have no problem with a condition which would state: "Prior to the issuance of building permits, they would complete a wetland delineation of a more formal nature on the site and, if necessary, comply with the Sensitive Lands chapter." Councilor Fessler and Mr. Pfeiffer discussed the traffic analysis. It was Mr. Pfeiffer's recollection that the traffic analysis, even when before the Planning commission, did contain a trip-distribution impact to the Sattler area. Councilor Fessler noted the geotechnical report was completed on 1/31/90; the Planning Commission heard this issue on 10/7/91. This issue might not have become so confused if this report had been shared with the Planning Commission. Mr. Pfeiffer responded that the geotech analysis is typically required at the time of building permit information. This report has been in Triad's possession since they acquired the property. The geotech report surfaced in the Council proceedings in March, when a policy in the Plan was raised which said that prior to development there shall be assurances that development occurs on land that is capable of supporting it in a geotechnical sense. Triad submitted the report in response to that concern. • Fred Grimm, one of the three principals of Triad, testified that much of the testimony has not been relevant to the proposal before the Council. The Sattler extension was not a Triad proposal nor is it a part of their plan. At the time the plan amendment was made for S.W. 109th, engineering staff felt it was a good time to overhaul the entire network of streets. Much of the testimony could have valid input at a later date when actual modifications are made to Sattler. He recapped the process followed by Triad. The zoning ( had been in place for over 10 years. In addition, there CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 15 liq ft! 11 :1 had been subsequent discussion on the zoning 4 years ago when the Albertson= s development was proposed. There has been plenty of opportunity for the zoning to be change. Triad felt as long as they met the standards that the City set in creating that zoning, that their development would be welcomed. In es ^R^R *Triad feels that the City of Tigard has given them their word that as long as they do the right things, they can go ahead and build multi-family. None of the discussion has been against the Triad development; it has been against the zoning. Mr. Grimm advised he had met with Ms. Davenport and she did not have any objection to their proposal; her concerns were with the zoning. He said he thought the concerns with the zoning were being expressed too late. He advised they purchased the property over two years ago and have been in the process of working the City, NPO's a and various community groups. He advised it was time to make a decision. Mr Grimm noted the need for and the City's obligation to provide for affordable housing. Rebuttal • Marge Davenport - reminded council of the 700 people who signed the petitions who said they did not want the Triad development. • Richard Whitman - 1. The main substantive issue to deny the application is that it is clear that the City's Comprehensive Plan inventories, at least a portion of this site, as a significant natural resource. It is also clear that the Comprehensive Plan says that development on -this site will be limited to a ' density of one to five dwelling units per acre in order to protect the natural resource. Until this previous decision as outlined in the Comprehensive i Plan is changed, this project cannot be approved. Regarding wetlands: Council has received testimony that there is a possibility that there are wetlands on this site. Mr. Pfeiffer has suggested that you condition an approval on an inventory of the wetland area and the obtaining of appropriate permits from State and Federal government. It is true that the section cited by Mr. Pfeiffer does require a permit from the State and Federal government for wetland fill; however, the City code (Section 18.80.130) requires that wetland areas be CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 16 01 inventoried as part of the site planning for the C PUD. One of the findings the Council has to make in order to approve the project, is that it is feasible to build this project. Until the Council knows where the wetland area 4s, whether there is one, how extensive, how it interacts with the proposed site plan, he did not see how the City could decide that this particular proposal is feasible to build. 2. Regarding the Geotech Report: Extensive testing was done on this site as part of the purchase of the property by Triad in 1990. It was not clear to him that the Report that was done anticipated this particular site plan. 3. Mr. Whitman said he appreciated the extensive amount of time the Council has spent reviewing this proposal as well as the staff and applicant. Testimony tonight represented overwhelming sentiment that the density on the site is inappropriate that there will be serious impacts to the surrounding neighborhood as a result. The density issue was decided by the City Council four years ago, but the density is still relevant to this particular application in terms of the impact this proposal will have on the surrounding neighborhood. He referred to the petition signed by the residents. Mr. Whitman summarized that the Council, because of the Goal 5, geotechnical, and traffic issues, has substantial evidence before it upon which it can deny this application. The City Council can deny this application and then review the decision as to what is the appropriate density of this particular site. He urged Council to deny the application and then consider reducing the density in such a way that the Goal 5 issues are resolved, traffic concerns are addressed, and so the owner of the property can have clear direction as to what is and what is not appropriate for the site. f. Staff recommendation: Community Development Director advised - Transportation issues were addressed in the traff is report (dated February 19, 1990), from Wayne Kittleson. A supplemental report was completed in June 1991 which refers to impact on Sattler and other streets. Those streets have the capacity to take more traffic. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 PAGE 17 i t i No evidence has been presented that the traffic C impact would be greater than what those streets could bear. Mr. Graham brought up an interesting idea of no left turn on Naeve. of concern is that there has been a great reliance on Pacific Highway placing traffic on the Highway because people do not want traffic on local streets. Pacific Highway cannot handle the traffic either. Streets need to connect to each other more so the traffic can be spread out and a single arterial is not relied upon to handle all of the traffic needs. No contingency is needed if the LUBA appeal is remanded again. If this does happen, the transportation map is the law now and people have a right to develop within the constraints of that law. If LUBA remands, Triad and the Council would have to take appropriate action at that time. Staff has a basic disagreement with the opponents in terms of what the Comprehensive Plan says with regard to Goal 5. Staff agrees that the Comprehensive Plan lists the area as a potential resource and it was inventoried as a resource. It was not chosen as significant resource to be protected by the City Council. The staff, at that time, recommended some of the ways to protect it could be to have lower density or use other techniques or even purchase the property. The Council chose not to protect it or identify it as a significant resource to be protected. The Council attached a Planned Development overlay to it so the developer would have more flexibility to develop and protect the resources that are there. There are no restrictions in the Development Code against developing that particular piece of property. Staff suggests that the more specific soils tests should outweigh the generalized soils survey done previously. The survey completed suggests there would not be any particularly unusual restrictions on development. Staff does not believe there is a wetlands on this site. A staff member (Jerry Offer) walked this area earlier in the day. Additional language was drafted which could be used by Council and is recommended by staff is as follows: r. "No. 12. Prior to the receipt of building permits, Q, CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 18 "No. 12. Prior to the receipt of building permits, a delineation of wetland boundaries on the site shall be completed by the applicant and, if necessary, applicable provisions of Section 18.84 (Sensitive Lands) shall be u.ct prior to the issuance of such permits." The area is relatively small and probably does not qualify as a wetlands nor is listed on the City's inventory. Council, if they decided to reduce the density or deny the application, would have to make findings of fact based on the criteria in the comprehensive Plan as to why that decision was being made. This is to protect everybody from arbitrary decisions. Not much evidence appears to have been presented as to why any change in the density would change the impact on the forest or wildlife or soils. In fact, single family housing is often more destructive of those resources than multi-family housing. Jerry Offer, Associate Planner reviewed his findings with regard to walking the area to specifically note possible wetlands. The only wet areas are as described in Mr. Cottam's letter. The area is fairly small and could be filled with less than 50 cubic yards of fill. He noted he agreed with the condition of approval as noted by the Community Development Director to determine the extent of the possible wetland area. At the time Triad came in for a preapplication review, the staff looked at the Soil Conservation Service Map of Hydric Soils, the National Wetlands Inventory, and an assessment the City had prepared by Scientific Resources, Inc. None of these documents show any wetlands on the site. The City's decision was to plan and zone this area at t medium residential development (1982-83). Community Development Director summarized the staff recommendation was to uphold the Planning Commission's decision with their 20 conditions of approval. Also, staff recommends Council add three conditions as outlined in the staff report-with one of the Planning Commission's decisions deleted. (See staff report filed with the packet material for this meeting.) CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 19 i Mr. Richard Whitman said new evidence with regard to the size C of the wetland area had been introduced and under State law, t they had the right to request a continuance. Mr. Edwards denied the request for continuance. g. Council comments/questions: • Councilor Johnson referred io Yrc:~io»s questions with regard to Chapter 18.32.020, that there was an option of changing the zoning after an application had come into the City. Legal Counsel Robinson advised that he disagreed with Attorney Whitman's analysis. ORS 227.178 (3) provides that the Council must judge an application by the standards that are in place at the time the application is deemed complete. What the Legislature has said, and what this City Council has said in the past even without such legislation is that an applicant is entitled to "stationary goal posts." Once an application is complete, the Council will judge that application by the standards that are in effect at that time. Mr. Robinson said, therefore, that he did not agree that the Council has the option to change the Comprehensive Plan designation before they have acted on this application. He advised Council to act on the application based on the criteria, the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning designation, that are in effect now. The fact that the Council has the power to initiate a Comprehensive Plan change does not give the Council the power to do so during the middle of an application. Councilor Johnson asked what the change in density was on the subject property from the time the 1981 Comprehensive Plan was adopted. Associate Planner Offer responded that in 1987 the western half was redesignated from medium density to medium high density residential with an upzoning of 12 units per acres to 25 units per acre (4 acres of the subject site were affected). The remainder of the approximately 28-30 acre Triad site was kept at 12 units per acre. In 1989 there was request to rezone the eastern half of that same property to 25 units per acre; this request was denied by Council. C_ CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 20 i Y C Legal Counsel Robinson responded to the request by Attorney Whitman Is request for a continuance of the hearing. ORS 197.763 applies only if additional documents or evidence are presented in support of the application. None of the comments were in support of the application; they were simply a comment. • Councilor Fessler asked Legal Counsel about legal liabilities if a development were apprc,%ad and damages resulted from earthquake, rain, etc. If the findings of the geotech report were found not to be good enough, what would the City's liability be? Mr. Robinson responded that he did not believe t the City would have much liability, if any. The { Council is acting on a discretionary matter. The Council has no reason to know or believe that the information submitted is incorrect or false. Correcting any situation which might occur would be a matter between the landowners. Councilor Fessler asked several questions on the Geotech report. Mr. Ross Woods of Triad responded to Councilor Fessler's questions noting that specifics would be answered once the development had progressed into the final design stages. Councilor Fessler also expressed concerned about native landscaping and fill replacement. h. Public hearing was closed. i. Council consideration: - Councilor Johnson commended those who participated throughout this process and their carefully considered concerns. She advised she supported the Planning commission recommendation. - Councilor Fessler reviewed the options before Council and the ramifications of the decisions with regard to trade-offs which needed to be made. She advised she felt more study with regard to the reports submitted was needed. - Councilor Schwartz noted the comments that people would not object to single-family development. He advised this was a Planned Development area zoned R-12. In addition, the concerns expressed with regard to Sattler Road were not valid with regard to this development. He referred to Council's attempt through inclusion of Note 9 on the CITY COU14CIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 21 AMW J Transportation map to move traffic through the area f without burdening one area over another. He reviewed issues including the geotech report, zoning (1983), and the density transfer. He advised he supported the staff's recommendation to approve as outlined. Councilor Kasten noted the rights of a developer to _ ..Z,., uCVC1vp propa-~a..li y1VG1! 4liG icyitIai~aviau ua. ca y^1.'... Boom point in time. He said he supported the staff's recommendation to approve as outlined. Mayor Edwards advised he had voted, from the outset, "No" on this proposal. He cited his concerns with the traffic configuration. He disagreed with the amount of impact to the wildlife habitat as presented by the opponents to the development. He also disagreed with concerns about the geotech report noting that there was existing development on the hillside. The traffic issues are of concern and work should continue to try to mitigate these issues as much as possible. He advised he would be voting "Not" because of the transportation issues he cited previously. - City Engineer responded to questions concerning the suggestion that no left turn be designated on Naeve Street. He suggested this be reviewed separately from any decision on the Triad development. j. Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Johnson, to direct staff to prepare a final order with findings upholding the Planning commission's decision with addition of the three conditions proposed by staff and the deletion of the condition (as referenced by staff) of the Planning Commission; in addition the wording proposed on the wetlands shall be incorporated into the findings. The motion was approved by a majority vote; 3-2 (Mayor Edwards and Councilor Fessler voted "No.") CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 22 i i { 8. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION ZCA 92-0003 SWEENEY A request to annex one parcel consisting of 0.92 acres to the City of Tigard and to change the zone from Washington County R-5 (Residential, 5 units/acre) to City of Tigard R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Comprehensive Plan Policies 10.1.1, 10.1.2, 10.1.3, 10.2.1, 10.2.2, 10.2.3, 10.3.1, 10.3.2; Community Development Code Chapters 18.32.020, 18.32.040, 18.32.130, 18.136, 18.138, 18.138.020 (A) (B) LOCATION: 11455 SW Walnut Street (WCTM 2S1 3AB, tax lot 600) ZONE: R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) The R-4.5 zoning allows single family residential, public support facilities, residential treatment homes, farming, manufactured homes, family day care, home occupations, temporary uses, residential fuel tanks, and accessory structures among other uses. a. Public hearing was opened. b. There were no declarations or challenges. C. Community Development Director presented the Staff Report as presented in the Council packet. d. Public Testimony: None e. Community Development Staff recommended approval as outlined in the Staff Report. f. Public hearing was closed. g. RESOLUTION NO. 92-15 - A RESOLUTION INITIATING ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TIGARD OF THE TERRITORY AS OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT "All AND DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED (ZCA 92-03) (SWEENEY) Motion by Councilor Kasten, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to adopt Resolution No. 92-15. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. h. ORDINANCE NO. 92-10 - AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE (ZCA 92-03) (SWEENEY) AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Fessler, to adopt Ordinance No. 92-10. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 23 9. ORDINANCE CONSIDERATION - PARKING PROHIBITION ON S.W. 108TH AVENUE. Discussion continued from Council meeting of March 24, 1992. a. This item was set over to April 28, 1992. 10. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: None 11. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW/UPDATE - Canceled MUM 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. Canceled. 13. ADJOURNMENT: 11:20 p.m. A es. Catherine Wheatley, City R order ayor, City of Tigard Ira Date: =0414.92 r CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 14, 1992 - PAGE 24 i r r ,s m 'i i I COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice TT 7228 BEAVERTON. OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising CII Q3 > C n ~ City of Tigard O Tearsheet Ie ® c F' ~ $ PO Box 23397 C oo ® Tigard, OR 97223 ° 13 Duplicate N S F 0,05 10, El •v a. W x CLG M~ ~ ODD 3 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION x •s N b o U STATE OF OREGON, ) ' j I m" A COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss 0 •a 8 EQ o 3 -0U 1• Judith Koehler M 5-0 o cla being first duly sworn, depose and say at I e Advertising o C - o 2 -E^ 2 Director, or'his principal clerk, of the it~Nar-d--Ph s a, Aa a ~ co c ::z 0- CN a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 0 c A 3 U x a3i x H > and 193.020; published a+i gsrd in the o ~ L, o U° ° c a; < 1 aforesaid coun nd st te• that jhe e Z O =5: o " 1 44- City Counc]~ Business meeting 8 o 8 1✓ ~ g a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the E.5 t3 R, a dw ~c o 0 entire issue of said newspaper for_ a successive and 5 w EM o e3 c c U n = i consecutive in the following issues: ~ o c jggs-ai cy x- y 9 N o'O > ~U a>C7¢W H e0 - April 9, 1992 s o ° a • • H cum s Subscribed and sworn to efore.me this 9th day of April, 1992. s Notary Public for Oregon t My Commission Expires: 1 AFFIDAVIT I i 1,. C i L i i r l i COMMUNITY NEWSY PERS, INC. Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice TT 7228 BEAVERTON. OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising Yc ,'e9 t 6 r. x SQ 1 ~ . G,, I ° City of Tigard e ❑ Tearsheet fix, ~s I ®PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 ® ® Duplicate A"' „off t a gs~ B f AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )as a, E o t& G'': , I, Judith Koehler o x', o a ~,~c7 being first duly sworn, depose and say at I pe Advertisin ~ e ~ Director, or his principal clerk, of the i~ Qar lames g~ i-: tea. rrr al ra' 0 a q a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 o 3 a and 193.090; published ate and 8 > j $ in the aforesaid coup ,p nd st te• that the. City ~'OUnCll Business Meeting ,n :12 o r" x A „ H a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the _o g F entire issue of said newspaper for OC1e successive and c:_1 f consecutive in the following issues: April 9, 1992 F ! t Subscribed and'swom to efote,mia!this 9th day of April, 1992. Notary Public for Oregon 1 My Commissior . Expires: z~e AFFIDAVIT ' t I i C. I 1~ COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684.0360 Notice Tr 7221 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising PUBLIC HFAR]N Council on April; t4, • • 13 Tearsheet Noti The following will be considere d by the Tigard City City of Tigard 1992; at 7;30 P.M: at Tigard:City Center, Town:Hal3 R6om,13125 SW PO box 23397 Halt Boulevard, .Tigard, Oregon: Further informatidwinay be obtained ° Tigard, OR 97223 ® ❑ Duplicate Affid : from the Community Development Director or City 'R xo;de at the same` location or by.calling 639=4171. You arelinvited toJinbmit wi.itte'n tes- i o timony in,advance of the public hearing; 'written hnd oral testcmainy,will be considered at the hearing. The public hearing will be:conduct6d in ac- - cordance with, the, applicable Chapter: 18.32 of the Tigi rd Municipal :,Code: and any rules of prodedure adopted by tha Counciland' available,at city Hall.... . AFFI®AVIT OF PUBLICATION ?.ENE CiANGE RATION ~~A 92-0U02 ANDEgSON (NPO STATE OF OREGON, } #3) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, as. A requesa to annex fourparc6ls consisting of 3.37, 284;1.17, and 0.35 ' JuditYe Koehler acres to the-.City'of Tigard and,to change ttie zone from;Washington_ I. County R-6 (Residential, 6 u iiLgicre).to City of-Tigard R=4 5 (E idea being first duly sworn, depose and say thid i a the Advertising tial, 45 tintacre): APPLICABLE REVIEW/ CItrmWA::ComprehoS'We:. Director, or his principal clerk, of the Tigard Times Plan Policies 10.1:1,10:12;10.1:3;10 2.1 102.2;:10't.3,10 31,.70.3.2,' a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 Community'Development Coda Chapters 1,8.32.'020, ;18 32.040, and 193.020; published at-Tigard in the 18.32.130,.18136;18138;18138:020 (A):'(B) LOCATION South:Side. afore To county qnd tats; that the of Bull Mountain-Road, bet.ween_500 and i 100166i west of~Facitic Figh PLi zc HearingL 9l'a--0002 Anderson way.'(WCTM 2SI 10AC :tax lots -.1-300 1400,`and 291-1013U, tax; lets: . a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the 1600 and 2100).: entire issue of said newspaper for One successive and MURCHANGE ANNEXATION WCA 92-0003 SW1 EItiTEY A recjuest consecutive in the following issues: to annex one parcei'con. sisting.of 0.92'acres;to th6, iCy of Tigard t+std to change the zone from:Washington Count,!;R 5 {Resident 5 unitslacae);. April 2, 1992 to City of TigardR 4;5 (Residential, 4.5 unitslACre: AI?PLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA. Comprehensive Plan Policies l©.k 1, 14.12,.: 10.1.3; 10.2:1- 10.2:2, 10.2:3,'10:31,10:3:2; Community I36yelopment;. Code Chapters'1$:32:020;'18.32 040 =.18.32.130,`1,8:136, 18:138,: z/~ 18:138.024(A) (13). LOCATIOM: 11.455 SW Walnpt Street (WC'1`M 231 ` 3AB, tax lot 600) .ZONE:.R-4.5_(Residentid, 4.5. unit:4cre)the R-4.5' zoning allows single family, residential; pubtic'suppon ! aciHu'm reaiden= Subscribed and sworn 3 before me this 2nd day of April, 1992. tial treatment.homes warming, manufactured homes, famill day. caxe, home occupations, temporary uses, residential fuel.tan16' 'and accessory. sttuctures'among other uses + Notary Public for Oregon M221 Publish April 2,.1992,: - - My Commission Expires: AFFIDAVIT _ 3 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING I i In the Matter of the Proposed J STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss City of Tigard w begin first duly sworn, on oath, depose an ay: That I posted in the following public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number (s) which were adopted at the Council Meeting dated _ 1 t ) a Q s copy(s) of said ordinance(s) being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the.0 day of , 19 a- s 1. Tigard Civic Center, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 3 ,2. Washington Federal Savings Bank, 12260 SW Main Street, Tigard, Oregon 3. Safeway Store, Tigard Plaza, SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 4. Albertson's Store, Corner of Pacific Hwy. (State Hwy. 99) and SW Durham Road, Tigard, Oregon Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 19 I 2_2!~~= Le- Notary blic for Oregon My Commission Expires: ._2 =5 loginyo\c~ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 92-JD AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE (ZCA 92- 03) (SWEENEY) AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. C . WHEREAS, the City has received a request for annexation signed by Wallace and Eva Sweeney, who are the owner of the subject parcel; and WHEREAS, The City Council held a public hearing on April 14, 1992 to consider the annexation request and to consider zoning designations for the property; and WHEREAS, on April 14, 1992 the City Council approved a resolution forwarding the annexation to the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission; and WHEREAS, the zoning district designation as set forth in Section 1 below is that which most closely conforms to the Washington County zoning designation as provided in the Washington County-Tigard Urban Planning Area Agreement. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The recommendation of the planning staff as set forth below is consistent with policy 10.1.2 and 10.1.3 of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Tax Map/Lot Number Current Zoning Proposed Zoning 2S1 03AB/600 Wash. Co. R-5 Tigard R-4.5 Section 2: The property meets the definition for an established area as defined in Chapter 18.138 of the Community Development Code and shall be designated as such on the development standards area map. Section 3: This ordinance shall become effective upon filing of the annexation final order with the office of the Secretary of State. PASSED: By Un AnIrfto S vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this ILM" day of eee , City Re order APPROVED: This day of , 1992. ards, May or Approved as to form: M City Attorney 4111L/ 2 Date t F i i I 1 i 1 a 3 1 STAFF REPORT April 14, 1992 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TIGARD TOWN HALL 13125 S.W. HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OREGON 97223 A. CASE: Zone Change Annexation 92-03 REQUEST: To annex one parcel consisting of 0.92 acre of unincorporated Washington County into the City of Tigard, and for zone change from Washington County R-5 (Residential, 5 units per acre) to City of Tigard R- 4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units per acre). The applicant requests that the expedited process be used. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Washington County Residential, 5 units per acre. ZONING DESIGNATION: Washington County R-5 (Residential, 5 units per acre). APPLICANT: Wallace and Eva Sweeney 11455 SW Walnut Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 OWNERS: Wallace and Eva Sweeney 11455 SW Walnut Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 LOCATION: 11455 SW Walnut Street. (WCTM 2S1 03AB, Tax lot 600) 2. Background Information No previous applications have been reviewed by the City relating to this property. 3. Vicinity Information Property to the north of the site is in the City of Tigard and is zoned for single family residential development. Property to the east is zoned R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units per acre) and is in the . City of Tigard. All properties to the west are single family lots in Washington County. Properties to the south are in the City of Tigard and are zoned R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units per acre). 4. Site Information and Proposal Description The property to be annexed has one single family residence with the remainder of the property undeveloped. The property is primarily covered with some trees. The applicant requested that their parcel be annexed into the City of Tigard in order to connect to sanitary sewer. An existing sewer line is located at the northwest corner of the parcel to be annexed. ZCA 92-03 Staff Report 1 MAI" 5. Agency and NPO Comments Tigard Water District, Tualatin Valley Fire District, Washington County Land Use and Transportation, General Telephone and Electronics, N47 Natural Gas, Tigard School District 23J, Portland General Electric, and Metro Area Communications have reviewed the proposal and have offered no objections or comments. 6. Police Departments Consideration The Police Department have reviewed the proposal and have offered no objections or comments. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant criteria in this case are Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, Citizen Involvement; 6.3.1, Established Areas; 10.1.1, Service Delivery Capacity; and 10.1.2, Boundary Criteria and chapters 18.136, Annexations; and 18.138, Established/Developing Area Classification of the Tigard Community Development Code. The planning staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings noted below: 1. Plan Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because the Neighborhood Planning Organization and Community Planning Organization as well as surrounding property owners were given notice of the hearing and an opportunity to comment on the request. 2. Plan Policy 6.3.1 is satisfied because the annexation will be designated as an established area on the development standards map. 3. Plan Policy 10.1.1 is satisfied because the city has conducted the Washington County Island Urban Services Study which includes the subject property. This study indicates that adequate services are available in the vicinity and may be extended to accommodate the subject property. 4. Plan Policy 10.1.2 is satisfied because the annexation will not create an irregular boundary that makes it difficult for the police in an emergency situation to determine whether the parcel is within or outside the City. The land is located within Tigard's Area Of Interest, and adequate service capacities can be made available Zo accommodate the eventual development of the property as noted above. The planning staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of the Community Development Code based upon the findings noted below: 1. Section 18.136.030 of the Code is met because all facilities and services can be made available, the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies discussed above have been satisfied and the property has been determined to be an Established area in accordance with the criteria in Chapter 18.138 of the Code. The Urban Planning Area Agreement between the City and Washington County requires that when annexing land within the City's area of interest, the City adopt a zone designation which most closely resembles the County plan and zone designation. In this case, the properties are designated in Washington County for single family i" ZCA 92-03 Staff Report 2 RISK-! Affil 1 11 residential uce with a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet and a r maximum density of 5 units per acre. Via City of Tigard Low Density Residential plan designation and R-4.5 zone with a minimum lot size requirement of 7,500 square feet and maximum density of 4.5 units per acre are the most comparable to the present County designation. 2. Chapter 18.138 of the Code is satisfied because the properties meets the definition for an Established area and shall be designated as such on the development standards area map. C. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the findings noted above, the planning staff recommends approval of ZCA 92-03. PREPARED BY: Victor A , Development Assistant Planner i ZCA 92-03 Staff Report 3 }S { a,6-/3~13 o~6~o N UT C-7 VA IL s ~U) FrNC" 1 l RECEIVED PLANNING ~ FEB 12 1992 AGENDA ITEM NO. 5.,2Aki - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE: Aiarit 14r 1992" (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) i Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City Administrator prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. STAFF NAME & ADDRESS TOPIC CONTACTED F ogin 1o visi ors.s f Depending on the number of person wishing to testify, the Chair of the Council may limit the amount of time each person has to speak. We ask you to limit your oral comments to 3 - 5 minutes. The Chair may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Council to supplement oral testimony. Please sign in to testify on the following: t AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ ' ' ~ DATE: fiL,4 i y PLEASE PRINT Proponent a al Fug ea€on ~RvRJ'6296966 ot'Slaeakirtg.Agalrtst• 2ar~s.:.Char~g® ; eeney 26A 92-OW3 Sweeney)..,.. Name Name Y Address Address Name Name Address Address Name ame dress Address t Name Name Address dress Name ame Address Address Name Name Address Address Name Name Address Address i Name Name Address Address 1 's 4 Depending on the number of person wishing to testify, the Chair of the Council may limit the amount of time each person has to speak. We ask you to limit your oral comments to 3 - 5 minutes. The Chair may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Council to supplement oral testimony. Please sign in to testify on the following: AGENDA ITEM NO. DATE: April 14, iS92 ; PLEASE PRI:vi Proponent,- (Speaking in Favor of .Triad Opponent, (Agrees with one or more elements 136ye16 pment Proposal), of 'appeal(s) >i ame ame Address AdPress -Qe-, 1 1 bra A), Name -gyp ame l'C ~ ~ rrr .fin r ~ 1 Address Address v '-Name Ne q.. _ Address Addrea ame Name } Address Address ~ Sb S• f , ~ ~ ~ Lam' Name Name ~t Address Ad&dst ame Name r~~/~G~~ !ti ! x G1~S ~ Address Address /S Name Name r Address Ac [dress 0/- Name Na Address Address qnk IRISH! 11, 1: Ism C PLEASE PRINT Pr6,oorient (Speaking, In Favor of Triad Opponent (Agrees with one' or more elements DeveloprnentnProposal) of appeal(s) ame Name I GiOU) , (S wJ Address Address 150 c 4O c~ l mac, z'ti` I Q Name Name Address re 570 LAO S)Uv`/k Ti` r ame ame Address Address 16-0 25- `J• cv /~~/d0 Name Na"}~~ ~ " I fi rL n1 ~t1 c Address Address Name Name SL t E Address Address ISIos .s tJ _ Name N a ~U e. ~ rv ~ se iv Address Address 1 y ~c s~ y S Q0 n^ LrA32 l i Czn Name Address Addr ss V _ Name Namen ~`_L) r r Address Address lot sk Sk 7 Name Name Address dr ss _ Name N Address dress Name ame L' Address Address PLEASE PRIM t~ Namo Name S,,4 mn C--vr77- Address Ss 5. w. PS f'~°~~ rR~f L-V Address I-j4A!dfa" e Name Address Address Name Name Address Address 1 Nam Narne Ad rasa T-Address e e dran dress i Name Name r Address Address r C i Namc Name Address Address Name Name teas -Address n Name Name T-Address Address Name Address Address 5 PLEASE PRINT ,ppamr -in Name ` Name I Address Narno e i ~ less Tess e Address Address i Name (dame Address Address i Nam e Address Address r Name e _ i Address Address i ~ -Narrie e Address Address Name Name i i Address Name Name Address Address Name Name Address Address O Name Address Address s, lizi llj~ DRAFTS NOTES FROM THE MAYOR'S BLUE RIBBON TASK FORCE We asked the Mayor's Blue Ribbon Task Force to discuss the question j "How do we develop Community Leadership?" Nine of the nineteen members attended. Community leadership was defined generally as community involvement and the discussion focused on the challenge to get people involved in the community. Task Force members believe that citizens impact Tigard's city government, although there is a perception of citizens being disconnected from their community, generated by the Portland experience. The task force members spoke positively of their experiences with the city, citing the need for improvement especially in developing a bigger picture and arguing that education is necessary to improve the connection between citizen and local government and to attract involvement. Key elements of discussion: 1. there is the need to recruit, cultivate and groom; 2. there is the need to support the Chamber leadership series and Fanno Creek Conference and other types of events which introduce people to local government; 3. there is the opportunity to use Cityscape through individual testimonials and examples of citizen impact and promotion of board and committee opportunities to promote community involvement; 4. there is the opportunity to work with the school system and its volunteer list and outreach to new residents to promote city involvement; 5. we need to support NPO's as a training ground and help develop a bigger picture perspective for all Boards and Commissions; 6. regarding NPO's, there were comments about a lack of clarity about their role; the desire to expand their role; concerns that a few make the decisions for, many; that there was a need to strengthen the link between the NPO and the community; that the CPO process was better; there is a need to carve a role for businesses; there is a fragmented process; 7. there is a need to establish a business-government compact, modelled after the school-business compact; 8. there is the need to establish an incentive for involvement under-promise/over-deliver to participants; and 9. there is a need to provide greater training opportunities for all board and committee members. MINIM CITY OF TIGARD ( IN APPRECIATION TO JOHN E. SCHWAB COUNCILOR October 8, 1991 to April 14, 1992 I, Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor of the City of Tigard do hereby present to you this Acknowledgement of Appreciation for your contribution to the civic welfare of our municipality. On behalf of your fellow Councilors and I, please accept this expression of recognition as a symbol of gratitude for the splendid quality of public service which you have rendered. Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor Valerie Johnson, Councilor Joe Kasten, Councilor John Schwartz, Councilor OATH OF OFFICE •I i State of Oregon ) City of Tigard ) I, Judy Fessler, do solemnly swear that I will uphold and support the t Constitution and laws of the United States of America and the State of Oregon and the Charter and ordinances of the City of Tigard. I ! will faithfully, honestly, and impartially discharge the duties of office, of Councilorfor Council Position No. 3 during my continuance therein to the best of my ability, so help me God. o I further affirm that I am not now, nor have I ever been at any time, J ^ a member of any organization advocating the overthrow of the I United States Government. Judy Fes er, Councilor r' Council Position No. 3 ' ATTEST: ~ r , a City Recorder r I CL,~itc l ~ U. l~'9a. Date I ~ I h~ ' i tli PROCLAMATION 1992 - YEAR OF CLEAN WATER WHEREAS, clean water is a natural resource of tremendous value and Importance to us all; i WHEREAS, there Is resounding public support for protecting and enhancing the t quality of our rivers, streams, lakes, wetlands and marine waters; i WHEREAS, maintaining and Improving water quality is essential to protect public ` health, to protect fisheries and wildlife and to assure abundant opportunities for public recreation; I WHEREAS, it Is a responsibility of us all to provide clean water as a legacy for future generations; WHEREAS, substantial progress has been made In protecting and enhancing water quality since passage of the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act r i (Clean Water Act) due to concerted efforts by Federal, State and local governments, the private sector and the public; r ' WHEREAS, serious water pollution problems persist and significant challenges Ile ahead in the effort to protect water resources from point and nonpoint sources of a~ conventional and toxic pollution; WHEREAS, further development of water pollution control programs and r „ advancement of water pollution control research, technology and education are necessary and desirable; and WHEREAS, October of 1992 is the 20th anniversary of the enactment Into law of ' the Clean Water Act. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT 1, Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor of the _ City of Tigard, Oregon, do hereby designate calendar year 1992 as the "Year of Clean Water" and the month of October 1992 as "Clean Water Month" in the City of Tigard in celebration of our accomplishments under the Clean Water Act and reaffirm our commitment to the Nation to the goals of that Act. Dated this I "mot day of 1992. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto my hand u d the Seal of , - the City to be affixed. " p Gerald R. Edwar s, Mayor City of Tigard T ° Attest: City Recorder x yiy 5 ~ f PROCLAMATICN FAIR HOUSING MONTH f , WHEREAS, housing discrimination occurs when one Is prevented from living In a house or apartment of his/her choice due to race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status, marital status, or physical or mental handicap; and WHEREAS, under either Federal Fair Housing Laws or Oregon Civil Rights Statutes these forms of discrimination are Illegal; and 1 t WHEREAS, the month of April marks the 24th anniversary of Title VIII of the -Federal Civil Rights Act. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT 1, Jerry Edwards, Mayor of the City of Tigard, Oregon, do hereby proclaim April 1992 as FAIR HOUSING MONTH In Tigard, and encourage all citizens to join in this observance and further urge that they take Increased notice of the housing conditions in their communities and join In this effort to promote fair housing for all. Dated this day of 1992. I r IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seat of the City to be affixed. .2 , Gerald R. Edwards, ayor 11 City of Tigard I A est: City Recorder II I ' I d i f ~ f n i I I o + Ell COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 6 ! a-, MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Patrick J. Reilly, City Administrator DATE: April 6, 1992 SUBJECT: COUNCIL CALENDAR, February - May 192 Official Council meetings are marked with an asterisk If generally OK, we can proceed and make specific adjustments in the Monthly Council Calendars. April 192 14 Tue Council Meeting Workshop with Library Board (5:30) Council study session (6:30) Council Business Meeting (7:30) 16 Thur Multi-Jurisdictional Discussion Meeting on Tigard Water District (7:00) - Town Hall 21 Tue Metro Growth Conference (8 a.m. to 5 p.m.) - Convention Center 21 Tue Council Study Meeting (6:30) 27 Mon Budget Committee Meeting 28 Tue Board and Committee Interviews (5:30) Council Meeting Council Study Session (6:30) Council Business Meeting (7:30) 30 Thur Volunteer Dinner - Tigard Christian Church (6:00) May 192 4 Mon Budget Committee Meeting it Mon Budget Committee Meeting 12 Tue Council Meeting ' Council Study Session (6:30) Council Business Meeting (7:30) 19 Tue Council Study Meeting (6:30) 25 Mon Memorial Day Holiday - City Offices Closed 26 Tue Board and Committee Interviews council meeting Council Study Session (6:30) Council Business Meeting (7:30) June *92 9 Tue Council Meeting Council Study Session (6:30) Council Business Meeting (7:30) 16 Tue Council Study Meeting (6:30) 23 Tue Council Meeting Council Study Session (6:30) Council Business Meeting (7:30) C. h:Vogin\cathy\cccal \ PICINI cf i Council Agenda Item No. MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON l TO: Honorable M r & C'ty Council r 7 1 FROM: Cathy Wheat ey, Cit Recorder DATE: April 7, 1992 SUBJECT: March 24, 1992 Election Results Attached are the Certified Election Results received from the Washington County Elections Division for the March 24, 1992, election. cW C. r i r Ji f t S Y A T E M E N T O F V 0 T E S C A S T Page 10:08:58 30-Mar-1992 MARCH SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTION 1992 8 RICK LORENZ 1 Registered Voters - TOTAL 2 Ballots Cast - TOTAL 9 Overvates 3 Percent of Registered Voters 10 Undervotes TIGARD CITY COUNCIL REEDVILLE SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 3 - EXPIRES 12 POS 1 - 4 YR TERM 31 11 KEN FOOTE 94 12 Overvotes 4 JUDY FESSLER 13 Undervotes 5 JIM NICOLI CLACKAMAS CO ESD DIRECTOR 6 Overvotes ZONE 3 - 4 YR TERM 7 Undervotes 14 JACQUELINE BOSTROM GASTON SCHOOL DIRECTOR 15 Overvates POS 3 - 4 YR TERM 16 Undervotes 1 2......3 4......5......6......7 8......9.....10 11.....12.....13 14.....15.....16 0001 0001 ED BYROM S 582 139 23.88 9 0 5 0002 0002 SHERWOOD I 683 306 44.80 0003 0003 HOPKINS SC 368 128 34.78 0004 0004 TUAL COUNC 722 194 26.87 0005 0005 K CITY TOW 1,020 284 27.84 0006 0006 TUAL ELEM 761 122.. 16.03 0007 0007 DURHAM CEN 461 119 25.81 0008 0008 TERRA LIND 1,088 260 23.90 0009 0009 CHRIST KIN 1,117 282 25.25 0010 0010 K I NNAMAN S 1,221 204 16.71 0011 0011 GRONER SCH 497 175 35.21 0012 0012 GRONER SCH 986 420.. 42.60 0013 0013 WITCH HAZE 350 143 40.86 48 0 52 0014 0014 COOPER MTN 630 152 24.13 0015 0015 METZGER PA 773 143 18.50 0016 0016 MAISON ARM 847 1B9 22.31 104 54 0 31 0017 0017 TUAL COUNC 6 0 0.00 0018 0018 TUAL ELEM 996 201..20. 18 0019 0019 E HASSELL 1,172 177 15.10 0020 0020 ALO! PARK 778 146 18.77 0021 0021 MT VIEW IN 787 123 15.63 0022 0022 BUTTERNUT 955 376 39.37 192 0 164 0023 0023 BUTTERNUT 1,071 384 35.85 207 0 177 0024 0024 TUAL COMM 143 28..19.5B 0025 0025 K CITY TOW 729 219 30.04 0026 0026 GARDEN HOM 783 128 16.35 0027 0027 METZGER PK 693 152 21.93 0028 0028 FOWLER MID 627 171 27.27 _ 0029 0029 TUAL ELEM 1,060 260 24.53 0030 0030 C F T IGARD 785 186.. 23. 69 72..... 97...... 0..... 17 0031 0031 TIGARD COM 986 252, 25.56 134 93 0 25 CERTIFIED CERTIFIED TO BE A T;~ii 0032 0032 C F TIGARD 1,043 318 30.49 170 112 1 35 CQRRE(,1 CQPY THEE Ci '(~'1NAL 0033 0033 M WOODWARD 1,109 287 25.88 121 143 0 23 0034 0034 J TEMPLETO 972 241 24.79 121 82 0 38 Qdt8 , ✓'2 , 0035 0035 PHIL LEWIS 675 155 22.96 74 71 0 10 WAS!i114;,TQN COUNTY 0036 0036 GRACE COMM . 320 51.. 15.94 `S ~ RIVIS1011 0037 0037 HAZELDALE 883 160 18.12 ELECT{ 1 0038 0038 ELDORADO V 1, 156 246 21. 28 ! E'y 0039 0039 PIPERS RUN 195 17 8.72 0040 0040 711ALITY MI 1,000 250 25.00 126 98 0 26 D041 0041 1MERFLD 1,149 398 34.64 218 139 0 41 =Elm I Registered Voters - TOTAL 8 RICK LORENZ 2 Ballots Cast - TOTAL 9 Overvotes 3 Percent of Registered Voters 10 Undervotes TIIGARD CITY COUNCIL REEDVILLE SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 3 - EXPIRES 12 POS 1 - 4 YR TERM 31 11 KEN FOOTE 94 12 Overvotes 4 JUDY FESSLER 13 Undervotes 5 JIM NICOLI CLACKAMAS CO ESD DIRECTOR 6 Overvotes ZONE 3 - 4 YR TERM 7 Undervotes 14 JACQUELINE BOSTROM GASTON SCHOOL DIRECTOR 15 Overvotes POS 3 - 4 YR TERM 16 Undervotes 1 2......3 4......5......6......7 8......9.....10 11.....12.....13 14.....15.....16 0042 0042 GREENWAY E 711 134 18.85 0043 0043 ROYAL VILL 440 122 27.73 0044 0044 CENTRAL CH 1,038 220 21.19 0045 0045 1ST UNITED 784 165 21.05 0046 0046 M WOODWARD 861 113 13.12 69 29 0 15 004; 0047 M DAVIES C 1,279 267..20. 88 0048 0048 FIR GROVE 952 195 20.48 0049 0049 HITEDN ELE 1,141 171 14.99 0050 0050 FIR GROVE 962 226 23.49 0051 0051 VOSE SCHOO 1,071 246 22.97 0052 0052 VOSE SCHO0 748 168 22.46 0053 0053 HIGHLAND P 914 194..21.23 0054 0054 BETHEL CON 950 158 16.63 0055 0055 GREENWAY S 990 137 13.84 0056 0056 CHEHALEM S 890 140 15.73 0057 0057 BANKS HIGH 190 89 46.84 0058 0058 MCKAY SCHO 936 184 19.66 0059 0059 ALOHA PK S . 738 124..16. BO 0060 0060 CE MASON B 865 116 13.41 0061 0051 HITtON SCH 1,099 240 21.84 0062 0062 GAR6EN HM 348 82 23.56 0063 0063 MONTCLAIR 1,079 23B 22.06 0064 0064 RALEIGH HL 1,062 230 21.66 0065 0065 VALLEY COM 812 192..23. b5 0066 0066 RALEIGH PK 555 3 0.54 0067 0067 VALLEY COM 793 153 19.29 0068 0068 ST MATTHEW 678 120 17.70 0069 0069 W SYLVAN S 1,007 31 3.08 0070 0070 RIDGEWOOD 1,002 261 26.05 t 0071 0071 ST MATTHEW 93 21..22.58 0072 0072 C E MASON 979 196 20.02 0073 0073 W WALKER S 661 115 17.40 0074 0074 CEDAR PK J 421 98 23.28 0075 0075 CHEHALEM S 730 116 15.89 0076 0076 COOPER MT 6 2 33.33 0077 0077 CEDAR HILL 1,119 245..21.89 0078 0078 BARNES SCH 855 152 17.78 0079 0079 DEAVER ACR 1,139 197 17.30 0080 0080 MEADOW PK 936 153 16.35 0081 008' `tCKINLEY S 494 110 22.27 P092 008 SINCE OF 843 113 13.40 _ I Registered Voters - TOTAL 8 RICK LORENZ 2 Ballots Cast - TOTAL 9 Overvotes 3 Percent of Registered Voters 10 Undervotes TIGARD CITY COUNCIL REEDVILLE SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 3 - EXPIRES 12 POS 1 - 4 YR TERM 31 11 KEN FOOTE 94 12 Overvotes 4 JUDY FESSLER 13 Undervotes 5 JIM NICOLI CLACKAMAS CO ESD DIRECTOR 6 Overvotes ZONE 3 - 4 YR TERM 7 Undervotes 14 JACQUELINE BOSTROM GASTON SCHOOL DIRECTOR 15 Overvotes POS 3 - 4 YR TERM 16 Undervotes 1 2......3 4......5......6......7 8......9.....10 11.....12.....13 14.....15.....1E 0083 0083 CHRIST UNI 835 160 19.16 0084 0084 CEDAR MILL 288 74 25.69 0085 0085 CEDAR MILL 906 181 19.98 0086 0086 W TUALATIN 996 132 13.25 0087 0087 W TUALATIN 879 220 25.03 0088 0088 CHRIST UNI 869. 219..25.20 0089 0089 ST ANDREWS 1,020 174 17.06 0090 0090 CEDAR PK J 1,092 198 18.13 0091 0091 INDIAN HLS 419 161 38.42 86 0 75 0092 0092 RALEIGH PK 1,101 ISO 16.35 0093 0093 MONTCLAIR 673 114 16.94 0094 0094 GARDEN HM 715 138..19. 30 0095 0095 WHITFORD J 728 151 20.74 0096 0096 FAITH BIBL 742 103 13.88 0097 0097 HERITAGE V 801 163 20.35 0098 0098 MCKAY SCHD 812 171 21.06 0099 0099 GARDEN HM 482 83 17.22 0100 0100 WHITFORD J 461 BI.. 17. 57 0101 0101 ST MARY VA 565 87 15.40 0102 0102 DAVID HILL 639 236 36.93 0103 0103 HILLSBORO 709 282 39.77 0104 0104 BROOKWOOD 946 499 52.75 0105 0105 JACK,40N SC 949 482 50.79 0106 0106 PUB SERVIC 868 402..46.31 0107 0107 POYNTER JR 1,194 572 47.91 0108 0108 BROOKWOOD 11000 391 39.10 0109 0109 W HENRY SC 738 336 45.53 0110 0110 ECHO SHAW 770 204 26.49 0111 0111 CORN GRADE 734 IB8 25.61 0112 0112 DILLEY ELE 121 54..44.63 0113 0113 UNITED MET 830 171 20.60 0114 0114 N ARMSTRON 996 223 22.39 0115 0115 FG HIGH SC 783 151 19.28 0116 0116 1ST CHRIST 458 98 21.40 0117 0117 JOSEPH GAL 920 203 22.07 0118 0118 N ARMSTRON 344 117..34.01 0119 0119 SEXTON MT 1,135 181 15.95 0120 0120 BEAVER ACR 187 31 16.58 0121 0121 FARMINGTON 319 129 40,44 0122 012 JOSEPH GAL 361 86 23.82 9123 012 UAL VALLE 70 21 30.00 t t i Mommmm S T A T E M E N T O F V 0 T E S C A S T Page 10:09:02 30-Mar-1992 MARCH SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTION 1992 1 Registered Voters - TOTAL 8 RICK LORENZ 2 Ballots Cast - TOTAL 9 Overvotes 3 Percent of Registered Voters 10 Undervotes TIGARD CITY COUNCIL REEDVILLE SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 3 - EXPIRES 12 POS 1 - 4 YR TERM 31 11 KEN FOOTE 94 12 Overvotes 4 JUDY FESSLER 13 Undervotes 5 JIM NICOLI CLACKAMAS CO ESD DIRECTOR 6 Overvotes ZONE 3 - 4 YR TERM 7 Undervotes 14 JACQUELINE BOSTROM GASTON SCHOOL DIRECTOR 15 Overvotes POS 3 - 4 YR TERM 16 Undervotes 1 2......3 4......5......6......7 8......9.....10 11.....12.....13 14.....15.....1 0124 0124 DILLEY ELE 635 116 18.27 0125 0125 GASTON FIR 385 43 11.17 40 0 3 0126 0126 INDIAN HLS 865 284 32.83 179 0 105 0127 0127 GALES CREE 540 96 17.78 0128 0128 BUXTON SCH 523 248 47.42 0129 0129 BANKS ELEM 594 246..41. 41 0130 0130 T MCCALL M 156 36 22.78 0131 0131 BETHLEHEM 1,202 170 14.14 0132 0132 ALOHA CHRI 527 207 39.28 118 0 82 0133 0133 ORENCO PRE 334 133 39.82 0134 0134 EVERGREEN 333 148 44.44 0135 0135 WEST UNION 524 233.. 44.47 0136 0136 N PLAINS S 968 406 41.94 0137 0137 DIXIE MT G 147 53 36. 05 0138 0138 TERRA LIND 493 112 22.72 0139 0139 BETHANY SC 1,249 198 15.85 0140 0140 ROCK CREEK 889 209 23.51 0141 0141 BUXTON SCH 292 100-34.25 0142 0142 VIS PARISH 507 196 38.66 0143 0143 EVERGREEN 259 118 45.56 0144 0144 T MCCALL M 988 200 20.24 0145 0145 GREENWAY S 703 163 23.19 0146 0146 BETHANY BA 758 167 22.03 0147 0147 ROCK CREEK 669 152..22.72 0148 0148 MOOBERRY S 1,13B 567 49. 82 i 0149 0149 MOOBERRY S 761 300 39.42 0150 0150 WV MCKINNE 938 440 46.91 i 0151 0151 HILLSBORO 14081 505 46.72 0152 0152 FAITH BAPT 991 400 40.36 215 0 185 0153 0153 LENOX SCHO 1j014 369..36.39 0154 0154 HILLSBORO 686 356 51.90 0155 0155 BETHANY SC 1,247 225 18.04 0156 0156 OAK HILLS 269 49 18.22 0157 0157 ORENCO PRE 114 45 39.47 9 0 9 0158 0158 BROWN JR H 398 204 51.26 75 0 77 0159 0159 OAK HILLS 797 200..25.09 0160 0160 SOLARISE BA 189 95 50.26 0161 0161HITEON ELE 948 161 16.98 1 4 i I Registered Voters - TOTAL 8 RICK LORENZ 2 Ballots Cast - TOTAL 9 Overvotes 3 Percent of Registered Voters 10 Undervotes TIGARD CITY COUNCIL REEDVILLE SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 3 - EXPIRES 12 POS 1 - 4 YR TERM 31 11 KEN FOOTE tt 94 12 Overvotes 4 JUDY FESSLER 13 Undervotes 5 JIM NICOLI CLACKAMAS CO ESD DIRECTOR 1 6 Overvotes ZONE 3 - 4 YR TERM 7 Undervotes 14 JACQUELINE BOSTROM GASTON SCHOOL DIRECTOR 15 Overvotes POS 3 - 4 YR TERM 16 Undervotes 1 2......3 4......5......6......7 8......9.....10 11.....12.....13 14.. 15. 16 0165 0165 CHRIST THE 526 172 32.70 r 0166 0166 GRONER SCH 187 66 35.29 1 0167 0167 FARMINGTON 316 136 43.04 8 0 5 0168 0168 LADD ACRES 930 358 38.49 211 0 147 0169 0169 GASTON FIR 596 56 9.40 33 0 6 0170 0170 GRONER SCH 150 70..46.67 0171 0171 DAVID HILL 132 55 41.67 0172 0172 BEAVER ACR 608 117 19.24 0173 0173 ST ALEXAND 346 164 47.40 0174 0174 BANKS ELEM 949 420 44.26 0175 0175 FAITH BAPT 627 292 46.57 132 0 147 0176 0176 FARMINGTON 803 357..44.46 0177 0177 FG HIGH SC 106 13 12.26 0179 0178 UNITED MET 528 120 22.73 0179 0179 BROOKWOOD 39 20 51.28 0180 0180 SUMMERFLD 869 244 28.08 162 110 0 32 0181 0181 TUAL VALLE 56 18 32.14 0182 O1B2 SW BIBLE C 219 22.. 10.05 0183 0183 TUAL COMM 81 15 18.52 0184 0184 HOPKII S SC 119 46 38.66 6185 0185 TUAL CITY 24 4 16.67 0186 0186 PIPERS RUN 2 2 100.00 0187 0187 PIPERS.RUN 19 2 10.53 0 0 0 0188 0188 COOPER MT 705 124..17. 59 0189 0189 TUAL CITY 721 100 13.87 0190 0190 GARDEN HOM 209 28 13.40 0191 0191 MAISON ARM 47 6 12.77 0192 0192 METZGER SC 542 113 20,85 59 39 0 15 0193 0193 SW BIBLE C 130 32 24.62 0194 0194 PHIL LEWIS 596 102.. 17. 11 52.....48......0......2 0195 0195 FRIENDS CH 991 178 17.'96 75 67 0 36 0196 0196 OAK HILLS 884 193 21.83 0197 0197 MONTCLAIR 115 13 11.30 0198 0198 RIDGEWOOD 504 101 20.04 0199 0199 CEDAR MILL 795 180 22.64 0200 0200 MEADOW PK 281 61..21.71 0201 0201 ECHO SHAW 37 0 0.00 0202 0202 CORN GRADE 162 49 30.25 0203 0203 N P COMM H 404 156 38.61 0204 0204 W"" i CO MU 655 229 34.96 y 0205 0205 E >GREEN 4 0 0.00 IBM I i H C ~'I L' Iv u r• v u t b V H b I f' ag e 10:09:04 30-Mar-1992 MARCH SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTION 1992 1 Registered Voters - TOTAL 8 RICK LORENZ 2 Ballots Cast - TOTAL 9 Overvates 3 Percent of Registered Voters 10 Undervotes TIGARD CITY COUNCIL REEDVILLE SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 3 - EXPIRES 12 POS 1 - 4 YR TERM 31 11 KEN FOOTE 94 12 Overvotes 4 JUDY FESSLER 13 Undervotes 5 JIM NICOLI CLACKAMAS CO ESD DIRECTOR 6 Overvotes ZONE 3 - 4 YR TERM 7 Undervotes 14 JACQUELINE BOSTROM GASTON SCHOOL DIRECTOR 15 Overvotes POS 3 - 4 YR TERM 16 Undervotes 1 2......3 4......5......6......7 8......9:....10 11.....12.....13 14.....15.....1E 0206 0206 W HENRY SC 408 176 43.14 0207 0207 ED BYROM S 4 0 0.00 0 0 C 0208 0208 ROYAL VILL 151 37 24.50 0209 0209 RALEIGH HL 64 8 12.50 0210 0210 ECHO SHAW 698 119 17.05 0211 0211 MT VIEW SC 498 101..20.28 0212 0212 HILLSBORO 622 290 46.62 _ 0213 0213 ED BYROM S 994 202 20.32 0214 0214 E HASSELL 929 136 14.64 0215 0215 C F TIGARD 419 104 24.82 44 45 0 15 0216 0216 1ST UNITED 334 46 13.77 0217 0217 METZGER SC 27 5.. 18.52 0......4......0...... 1 0218 0218 POYNTER JR 295 87 29.49 0219 0219 FIVE OAKS 1,210 191 15.79 0220 0220 SEXTON MT 1,245 139 11.16 0221 0221 FOWLER MID 623 129 20.71 90 27 1 11 0222 0222 CHE4ALEM S 814 183 22.48 0223 0223 SHERWOOD I 850 365..42.94 0224 0224 FOWLER MID 467 96 20.56 45 36 0 15 0225 0225 CHUR OF CH 906 167 18.43 78 62 0 27 0226 0226 M WOODWARD 753 140 18.59 67 52 0 21 0227 0227 LENOX SCHO 579 205 35.41 0228 0228 W TUALATIN 611 1122 18.33 0229 0229 POYNTER JR 549 214..38.98 0230 0230 REEDVILLE 1,046 402 38.43 225 O 177 0231 0231 MCKINLEY S 481 88 18.30 0232 0232 FIVE OAKS 1,132 230 20.32 0233 0233 CEDAR HILL 0 0 0.00 0234 0234 LENOX SCHO B 2 25.00 0235 0235 ED BYROM S 46 11..23. 91 0236 0236 WEST TUALA 3 0 0.00 ® ~:M. =NEW 1 p f 9 ii t A C C U M U L A T E D T O T A L S Page 1 10:%53:04 30-Mar-1992 MARCH SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTION 1992 Count Percent Count Percent Precincts Counted - TOTAL . . 236 100.00 BANKS SCHOOL DIRECTOR ZONE 2 - 4 YR TERM Registered Voters - TOTAL . 154,742 WILLIS MEEUWSEN . 647 57.41 Overvotes 0 0.00 Ballots Cast - TOTAL . . 39,181 25.32 Undervotes . . 480 42.59 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL LAKE OSWEGO SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 3 - EXPIRES 12 POS 2 4 YR TERM 31 MARCIA H DONNELLY . 0 94 HUNT NORRIS . 0 JUDY FESSLER 1,821 49.66 Overvotes . • . 0 JIM NICOLI 1)408 38.40 Undervotes . 0 Overvotes 2 0.05 Undervotes . . 436 11.89 REEDVILLE SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 4 - 1 YR TERM(UNEXPIRED) GASTON SCHOOL DIRECTOR MARK KENDYER 1,717 54.91 POS 3 - 4 YR TERM Overvotes 0 0.00 RICK LORENZ . . 103 91.15 Undervotes . 1,410 45.09 Overvotes 0 0.00 Undervotes . 10 8.85 WEST LINN SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 1 - 4 YR TERM REEDVILLE SCHOOL DIRECTOR DIANE WUSTRACK . 10 71.43 POS 1 - 4 YR TERM Overvotes 0 0.00 KEN FOOTE 1,705 54.53 Undervotes . 4 28.57 Overvotes 0 0.00 Undervotes . 1,422 45.47 YAMHILL CO ESD DIRECTOR ZONE 1 - 4 YR TERM CLACKAMAS CO ESD DIRECTOR ARTHUR JOHNSON . 52 52.00 ZONE 3 - 4 YR TERM Overvotes 0 0.00 JACQUELINE DOSTROM 9 64.29 Undervotes . 48 48.00 Overvotes . ' 0 0.00 Undervotes . . 5 35.71 BANKS SCHOOL DIRECTOR ZONE 4 - 4 YR TERM COLUMBIA CO ESD DIRECTOR MARY M MOCK . . 552 48. 9a ZONE 1 - 4 YR TERM Overvotes 0 0.00 CANDY COLE . 6 40.00 Undervotes . . 575 51.02 Overvotes 0 0.00 Undervotes 9 60.00 BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIRECTOR ZONE 1 - 4 YR TERM COLUMBIA CO ESD DIRECTOR TOM WALT . . 11,067 76.05 ZONE 5 - 4 YR TERM Overvotes 0 0.00 ARTHUR M PARROW 0 0.00 Undervotes . 31485 23.95 Overvotes 0 0.00 Undervotes 7 100.00 FARMINGTON VIEW SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 5 - 4 YR TERM YAMHILL CO ESD DIRECTOR RANDY STEVENS . . 383 53.72 AT LARGE - 4 YR TERM Overvotes 0 0.00 MALCOLM L KOCH . 49 49.00 Undervotes . . 330 46.M Overvotes 0 0.00 Undervotes 51 51.00 SHERWOOD SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 2 - 4 YR TERM JOE MARTIN . . 935 70.57 Overvotes O 0.00 Undervotes . 390 29.43 KEN= 11 1 L If 11111 11111111111 1: l III N, il;:!iij il~i Is ill mi: Em's m A C C U M U L A T E D T.0 T A L S Page 2 10:53:06 30-Mar-1992 MARCH SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTION 1992 Count Percent Count Percent BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIRECTOR NEWBERG SCHOOL DIRECTOR ZONE 2 - 4 YR TERM ZONE 5 - 4 YR TERM SHERRE L CALOURI . 11,341 77.93 JANET L MILLER . 41 41.00 Overvotes 0 0.00 JEFF VANDERGEN . 31 31.00 Undervotes . 3,211 22.07 Dvervotes 1 1.00 Undervotes . 27 27.00 FOREST GROVE SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 2 - 4 YR TERM NORTH PLAINS SCHOOL DIRECTOR LINDA CLARK . 1,662 78.32 POS 4 - 4 YR TERM Overvotes 0 0.00 APRIL JOSSY . . 342 56.62 Undervotes . 460 21.68 Overvotes 0 0.00 Undervotes . . 262 43.38 LAKE OSWEGO SCHOOL DIRECTOR PDS 4 4 YR TERM VERNONIA SCHOOL DIRECTOR GLORIA M CLAUSEN . 0 PDS 5 - 4 YR TERM Overvotes 0 LANI VANDEHEY . 5 71.43 Undervotes . 0 JENELLE WIGGINS 0 0. OD Overvotes 0 0.00 NEWBERG SCHOOL DIRECTOR Undervotes . 2 28.57 ZONE 4 - 4 YR TERM BOB ALBULET . 26 26.00 NORTH PLAINS SCHOOL DIRECTOR HAWKIN AU 58 58.00 POS 5 - 4 YR TERM Overvotes 1 1.00 JERRY R FEAKES . . 254 42.05 Undervotes . 15 15.00 Dvervotes 0 0.00 Undervotes . . 350 57.95 SCAPPOOSE SCHOOL DIRECTOR ZONE 3 - 4 YR TERM GRONER SCHOOL DIRECTOR DONNA N ESPELIEN . 5 33.33 POS 4 - 4 YR TERM WILLIAM A KESSI 10 66.67 DOROTHY C JENSEN . . 316 57.62 Overvotes 0 0.00 Dvervotes 0 0.00 Undervotes 0 0.00 Undervotes 232 42.18 WEST LINN SCHOOL DIRECTOR SCAPPOOSE SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 3 - 4 YR TERM ZONE 4 - 4 YR TERM DAVID T EMMETT . 11 78.57 CANDY COLE . 13 86.67 WALTER J VAN ECK . 2 14.29 Dvervotes 0 0.00 Overvotes 0 0.00 Undervotes . 2 13.33 Undervotes 1 7.14 VERNONIA SCHOOL DIRECTOR BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIRECTOR PDS 6 - 4 YR TERM ZONE 5 - 1 YR TERM(UNEXPIRED) JIM BUXTON . 0 0. OD MARY JEAN HARMON . 4,703 32.32 STEPHEN ELLIS . 5 71.43 DON MCCOLLUM 4j554 31.29 Dvervotes 0 0.00 GARY WITHERS 2,729 18.75 Undervotes 2 28.57 Overvotes 96 0.66 Undervotes . 2,470 16.97 GRONER SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 5 - 4 YR TERM FOREST GROVE SCHOOL DIRECTOR RICHARD EAGLE . . 313 56.91 POS 3 - 4 YR TERM Dvervotes 0 0.00 JIM CURRIE 1,528 72.01 Undervotes . 237 43.09 Overvotes 0 0.00 Undervotes . 594 27.99 alml gill i0mm A q C U M U L A T E D T 0 T A L S Page 3 10:53:06 30-Mar-1992 MARCH SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTION 1992 Count Percent Count Percent WEST UNION SCHOOL DIRECTOR HILLSBORO H SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 1 - 4 YR TERM PDS 2 - 4 YR TERM JERROLD (JERRY) JONES . 617 48.74 RICHARD W BROWN 2,242 16.71 Overvotes 0 0.00 IGOR CROOK . . 845 6.30 Undervotes . 649 51.26 ROBERT L GANG . . 536 3.99 RICHARD GIRARD . 1,246 9.29 HILLSBORO EL SCHOOL DIRECTOR JAMES B TAYLOR . 1,859 13.85 PDS 2 - 4 YR TERM Overvotes 25 0.19 SUSAN BREMKAMP . 1,274 17.80 Undervotes . 6,666 49.68 DAVID P GALLAWAY . . 655 9.15 SHELLEY W GUSTAFSON . . 935 13.06 TIGARD JEFFREY A HILL . . 321 4.48 TUAL SCHOOL DIRECTOR KURT h KOEHLER . . 446 6.23 POS 3 - 4 YR TERM LARRY SWANSON . . 535 7.47 GARY B GASKILL . 1,101 17.24 Overvotes 35 0.49 DIANNE M KOSTUR . 914 14.31 Undervotes . 2,958 41.32 TOM SHARP 1.701 26.63 PATTI THOMAS 1.842 28.84 NEWBERG SCHOOL DIRECTOR Overvotes 26 0.41 ZONE 6 - 3 YR TERM(UNEXP) Undervotes . . 803 12.57 DON MCCORMICK . 26 26.00 MARY ANN SONTAG 50 50.00 WEST UNION SCHOOL DIRECTOR Overvotes 0 0.00 POS 2 - 4 YR TERM Undervotes 24 24.00 DAVE KIM . . 557 44.00 Overvotes 0 0.00 SHERWOOD SCHOOL DIRECTOR Undervotes . . 709 56.00 POS 3 - 4 YR TERM GEORGE G BECHTOLD . . 233 17.58 LSC FOREST GROVE HIGH GARY S DAWSON . . 508 38.34 POS 1 - 1 YR TERM STEVEN N LANDIS . 387 29.21 GEORGE HAWKES . 1,473 69.42 Overvotes 4 0.30 Overvotes 0 0.00 Undervotes . . 193 14.57 Undervotes . . 649 30.58 HILLSBORO EL SCHOOL DIRECTOR LSC ALOHA HIGH POS 3 - 4 YR TERM PDS 2 - 3 YR TERM CAL B GRAMER 3,214 44.89 ROSE LEE JAFFE . 1, 390 36.55 Overvotes 0 0.00 BILL SCHERMERHORN . 1,521 39.99 Undervotes 3,945 55.11 Overvotes 15 0.39 Undervotes . 877 23.06 HILLSBORO H SCHOOL DIRECTOR POS 1 - 4 YR TERM LSC FOREST GROVE HIGH MARTYN D BUTLER 2,287 17.04 POS 2 - 3 YR TERM JOHN HORN 2,530 18.85 RUTH W BUNKER . 1,532 72. 20 BI:IAN J KNOPF . 1,043 7.77 Overvotes ID 0.00 AL TAYLOR 1,305 9.73 Undervotes . 590 27.80 Overvotes 21 0. 16 Undervotes . 6,233. 46.45 LSC NEIL ARMSTRONG MIDDLE POS 2 - 3 YR TERM DEBORAH M HANEY 1,472 69.37 Overvotes 0 0. OD Undervotes . 650 30.63 1; .ACCUMULATED TOTALS Page 4 10:53:06 30-Mar-1992 MARCH SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTION 1992 Count Percent Count Percent LSC SUNSET HIGH LSC BEAVERTON HIGH POS 2 - 3 YR TERM POS 2 - 3 YR TERM RICHARD BURKE . . 850 16.52 JAMES M (JIM) MCCLEAN 1,509 26.92 JIM CAPE . . 496 9.64 KAREN MOEN . . 1,842 32.86 NANCY B HERPERS 1,799 34.97 LESLIE KLEIN PELTZ . 717 12.79 JEFFREY A MCKIE . 577 11.22 Overvotes 21 0.37 Overvotes 23 0.45 Undervotes . 1,516 27.05 Undervotes 11399 27.20 LSC GALES CREEK ELEMENTARY LSC TOM MCCALL MIDDLE POS 2 - 3 YR TERM POS 2 - 3 YR TERM DELBERT POTTS . 1,324 62.39 NO CANDIDATE FILED 5 0.24 Overvotes 0 0.00 Overvotes 0 0.00 Undervotes . . 798 37.61 Undervotes . 2,117 99.76 LSC HARVEY CLARKE ELEMENTARY TIGARD POS 2 - 3 YR TERM TUAL SCHOOL DIRECTOR FRED STALLARD . 1,302 61.36 POS 5 - 4 YR TERM Overvotes 0 0.00 KEVIN M ADAMS . 1,097 17.18 Undervotes . . 820 38.64 DAVID M BLAIR . . 852 13.34 - MERRILY HAAS 3,093 48.43 LSC JOSEPH GALE ELEMENTARY KARL R WHITE . 370 5.79 POS 2 - 3 YR TERM Overvotes 19 0.30 VAUGHN G TIDWELL . . 672 31.67 Undervotes . . 956 14.97 DORIE A WEAVER . . 791 37.28 Overvotes . 118 5.56 LSC CENTRAL ELEMENTARY Undervotes . 541 25.49 POS 2 - 3 YR TERM NO CANDIDATE FILED 3 0.14 LSC CEDAR PARK INT Overvotes 0 0.00 POS 2 - 3 YR TERM Undervotes . 2;119 99.86 BARBARA BELLANCA . . 933 29.08 ALICE POPE . 1,330 41.46 LSC CORNELIUS ELEMENTARY Overvotes 6 0.19 POS 2 - 3 YR TERM Undervotes . 939 29.27 SARAH ANN CASEY 1,366 64.37 Overvotes 0 0.00 LSC FIVE OAKS INT Undervotes . 756 35.63 PDS 2 - 3 YR TERM NO CANDIDATE FILED 1 0.05 LSC DILLEY ELEMENTARY Overvotes 0 0.00 POS 2 - 3 YR TERM Undervotes 11955 99.95 PHOEBE REINECKER . 1,333 62.82 Overvotes 0 0.00 #34-2 BANKS SCHOOL DIST Undervotes . . 789 37.18 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND YES . 474 42.06 LSC MEADOW PARK INT NO . 625 55.46 POS 2 - 3 YR TERM Overvotes 0 0.00 CHAD KNOWLDEN . . 432 22.31 Undervotes . 28 2.48 DIANA WUERTZ . 896 46.28 Overvotes 5 0.26 LSC BEAVER ACRES EL Undervotes . . 603 31.15 POS 2 - 3 YR TERM DAVID GRAF . . 317 76.57 11:C ECHO SHAW ELEMENTARY Overvotes 0 0.00 1100 2 - 3 YR TERM Undervotes 97 23.43 JANE KNOWLTON 11315 61.97 Overvotes 0 0.00 Undervo'"'-_-\ . . 807 3B.03 Page 5 ~ G C U M U L A T D T O T A L S MARCH SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTION 1992 Count Percent 10:53:08 30-Mar-1992 percent GROVE E 574 77.99 Count LSC FIR 0.00 TER RM 22 01 p05 2 - 3 YR 0 SUSAN DOTTARAR 162 LSC HIGHLAND PARK INT 2 0.08 Overvotes ll 0 0.00 Undervotes POs 2 - 3 YR TERM 99.92 NO CANDIDATE FILED 2,546 215 65.15 Overvotes LSC MCKI3LYR TERM 0 0.00 Undervotes 0.00 PqS 2 KAREN E DAVID 115 34.05 ~ LSC BARNES EL 0 Overvotes 2 YR TERM(UNEXPIRED) 0 0.00 Undervotes P05 1 100.00 No CANDIDATE FILED 572 384 72.1B Overvotes LSC ELMONIGA EL 0 0.00 POs 2 - 3 YR TERM POOR 148 27.E Undervotes LARRY J 204 71.33 Overvotes LSC BETHANY EL 0 0.00 Undervotes PC, 2 2B.b? , MARTI FITZGERALD 92 EL 615 75.E Overvotes L5C VOSE _ 3 YR TERM 0 0.00 Undervotes pas 2 W COWAN 200 24.54 00 THOMAS, L5C MCKINLEY EL O 0 gvervot-es 2 YR TERM(UNEXPIRED) 0 0,00 Undervotes POS 1 NO CANDIDATE FILED 330 100.00 268 77.46 Overvotes LSC ALOHA PARK EL 0 0.00 P05 2 - 3 YR TERM Undervotes JUDITH L BILISKO 78 22.54 MT IEW 884 48'13 Overvotes LSC V3 YRITERM 475 25.72 Undervotes POS 2 2 c COBB 10 0.54 69 KATHLEEN 25.61 2B0 .14 CORRINE BERG GROSS 473 LSC COOP3R YRT TERM 0 0.00 Overvotes POs 2 125 30.66 Undervotes BILL HOWELL b9 Overvotes LSC WHITFORD INT X977 28. Undervotes 2 - 3 YR TERM 627 20. 51 P05 44 41. ~ 20.51 LSC OAK HILLS EL 2 MARY C HARRINGTON 627 3 YR TERM 43.17 • 9 0.24 p05 2 - 257 DANELLE LEAVITT 30.00 DOWTY 1 0. 17 LINDA L SNEDDON 917 SUSAN 14.92 TOM FARLEY as Overvotes Overvotes Undervotes p, Undervotes 00 L5C BARNES EL TERM 0 0 0.00 190 35.06 P05 2 3 YR LOO.fld LSC WE57 TUALATIN EL 42.62 POS2-3WH 231 HARVEY 0.18 NO CANDIDATE FILED 572 THOMAS 1 Overvotes NELL 5IMKOFF 120 22.14 Undervotes Overvotes L5C CEDAR MILL EL 207 41.90 Undervotes 59 LOS 2 - 3 YR TERM 197 39.58 2 0, 40 PARK EL PIRED 265 76. GAIL F BOYLE 81 LSC ALOHA YR TERM(UNEX) 00 41 ROB LEWIS as 17 POS 3 0 KENNETH KURT HOLDER 81 Overvotes Undervotes Overvotes Undervotes gill Page 6 1992 Count Percent MARCH SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTION rACCUM U L A T ED T O T A L S : 53:08 30-Mar-199, 30 Count percent LSC RIDGEWDDD EL 244 37.41 POS 2 - 3 YR TERM 297 p, 13 DIANA GILMOUR 1 212 77 09 STEPHEN HILL 252 31.74 LSC P05 ERR03 YRSTERM EL 0.00 0 Overvates CHRISTINA BIRD MALAYA 63 22.91 Undervotes Overvotes CREEK EL 343 70.29 Undervotes LSC ROCKS YR TERM 4 0.00 PDS 2 iBOB) ZAFIROWSKI 145 29.71 321 71.49 ROBERT M LSC 2, - 3WYR TERM 0 0.00 PO5 Overvotes JONES L MCCDMMAS 128 28.51 Undervotes Overvotes L5C KINNAMAN EL 245 73'35 Undervotes - 3 YR TERM 0 0.00 p05 2 89 26-65 457 69. 03 1. L5C riCKAY EL TERM 0.00 ORALEE PRYOR POs 2 - 3 YR 0 Overvotes ROBERT JOY 205 30. 97 Undervotes dvervotes DA EL 521 66.OB Undervotes LSC TERRA LINTERM 0,00 PO52-3YR 0 339 76.35 JAN SC.ROGAN 256 33. 12 LSC MONTCLAIR EL 0,00 , PO. 2 - 3 YR TERM 4 Overvotes JOSEPH GEGA 105 23.65 Undervotes Overvotes HITE 175 33.72 Undervotes LSC - ON YR L TERM 189 36.42 519 74.14 POs THOMAS 2 L LEE 0 0. OD LSC RALEIGH PARK EL 0•00 155 29.87 PD5 2 - 3 YR TERM p MIKE LEOPOLD RICHARD TRACY 181 25'86 dvervote5 Overvotes Undervotes Undervotes LSC WILLIAM WALKER EL 472 64.39 A55 91.69 3 YR TERM 0 0.00 L5C CHEHALEM EL 0.00 POS 2 - DIBALA JR 261 35.61 POs 2 - 3 YR TSRM 0 PETER G BRUCE W MILLER 102 18.31 Overvotes Overvotes Undervotes Undervotes LSC WILLIAM WALKER EL 2 0.27 75.77 1 YR TERM(UNEXPIRED) 0 0,00 ILED LSC HAZELDALE EL 264 0.00 PUS 3 - 94.73 P05 2 - 3 YR TERM 0 NO CANDIDATE F 731 KATHY MCELDERRY 86 24.23 Overvotes Overvotes Undervotes Undervotes MT EL 136 27-87 42.58 LSC SEXTON 3 YR TERM 49.80 26.97 L5C liITEON EL KIM KATSION 242 0.41 POS 1 - 2 YR T ERM(UNEXPIRED) 221 140 pOS 2 . 0.00 DEBORAH L STONE 107 21.93 TERRY BRENNAN p 58 34,44 Overvotes DAN MAKS 1 Overvotes Undervotes Undervotes LSC RALEIGH HILLS EL 272 29.79 POS 2 - 3 YR TERM 422 46.22 +il BRYAN M CULLIVAN 2 0.22 JANE EGELSPFF 217 23.77 Overvote _ Undervotr COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM ~a CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: April 14, 1992 DATE SUBMITTED: April 1. 1992 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Appointment to PREVIOUS ACTION: None the Park and Recreation Board / L. M-U PREPARED BY: Elizabeth Ann Newton DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Mayor's Appt. Adv. VIN ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Consideration of an appointment to the Park and Recreation Board. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolution appointing Craig Dirksen to the Park and Recreation Board. INFORMATION SUMMARY ~W The Mayor's Appointment Advisory Committee met on March 24, 1992 to interview interested citizens for appointments to various Boards and Committees. The attached resolution, if adopted, approves the recommendation of the Mayor's Appointment Committee to appoir.}. Craig Dirksen to the Park and Recreation Board. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt the proposed resolution. 2. Decline action at this time. FISCAL NOTES - Y COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM C~~3 F* CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: April 14, 1992 DATE SUBMITTED: March 23, 1991 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Hearings Officer PREVIOUS ACTION: Initial Approval Contract Renewal June 25, 1990 PREPARED BY: Dick Bewersdorff'- DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Ed Murphy -------~~~r ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council renew its agree ent for professional Hearings Officer services with Larry Epstein, PC? STAFF RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the attached contract for professional services be approved. INFORMATION SUMMARY The City of Tigard entered into a professional services contract with Larry Epstein, PC to serve as Hearings Officer in June, 1990. That contract renews automatically for additional one-year terms unless canceled by either party. The Hearings Officer reviews subdivisions, sensitive land reviews, sign code exceptions, and conditional use permits. C ir. Epstein is requesting an increase in the rate of remuneration from $60 per hour to $65 per hour and the rate for mileage from $0.25 per mile to $0.275 per mile. The existing rates were established with the original contract two years ago. Mr. Epstein charges up to $80 per hour for work as a hearings officer. The proposed $65 rate is at the bottom of the scale for his services. The proposed rate reflects an 8.3 percent increase and reflects increases in his operating costs. An additional change in the contract is a provision where the Hearings officer agrees to be responsible for recommending an available replacement Hearings Officer subject to the approval of the City Administrator and subject to the provisions of the contract. This will provide for an alternate Hearings Officer where Mr. Epstein could not preside due to scheduling conflicts, sickness or similar circumstances. The need for such service has occurred only twice since 1990 but there should be an officially approved process to provide a replacement. Staff has found Mr. Epstein's work to be outstanding. He is flexible, fair and easy to work with. With his assistance, the hearings process is much more professional as well as timely for the development community. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve the attached contract 2. Reject the attached contract and renegotiate 3. Reject the attached contract, notify Mr. Epstein of nonrenewal and open interviews with other prospective Hearings Officers i FISCAL NOTES .In the fiscal year 90-91, Mr. Epstein billed the City for 85.8 hours of services for 19 cases, an average of 4.5 hours per case. Thus far for fiscal year 91-92, Mr. Epstein has billed the City for 72.75 hours for 14 cases, an average of approximately 5.2 hours per case. Cases have ranged from 1.75 hours for a simple sensitive lands review to 15.25 hours for a much more complex sensitive lands issue involving the Dr. Davis property. Subdivisions range from 3 to 7 hours depending on complexity, the amount of testimony and findings necessary. The proposed raise in rates will cost the City an estimated $500 to $1,000 more than the present rates assuming a similar caseload. MUM t CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by the CITY OF TIGARD, Oregon (the "City"), 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, PO Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97281, and LARRY EPSTEIN, PC ("the PC"), and Oregon Professional Corporation, professional services described below to be rendered by LARRY EPSTEIN (the "Hearings officer"), as an employee of the PC. WIiEREAS, City law provides for appointment by the City Council of a Hearings officer to consider certain land use applications and related actions consistent with Section 18.32.090(b) of the Community Development Code; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that Larry Epstein is qualified to act as, and is hereby appointed by the City Council to be, a Hearings officer; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Hearings Officer Duties. a. The Hearings Officer agrees to receive from and examine available information, conduct public hearings, prepare written findings and conclusions in accord with adopted City plans and ordinances, and render decisions that are clear, complete, internally consistent, factually accurate and legally sufficient. The Hearings Officer agrees to deliver one original or camera-ready copy of each decision to the City. s b. The Hearings Officer agrees to comply with all requirements, including time limits, of the laws of the City. C. The Hearings Officer agrees that he will accept all cases scheduled by the City for hearing, or notify the City as soon as practical prior to the hearing date of his inability to preside over the hearing. d. The Hearings Officer agrees to disqualify himself regarding any application if he has a conflict of interest with parties to that application, and to notify the City in writing as soon as practical prior to the hearing date of such disqualification. e. The Hearings Officer agrees that neither he nor other members of the PC shall offer or provide professional services relating to land use activities in the City. f. The Hearings Officer agrees to adopt a set of rules and procedures for the conduct of hearings, subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director. HEARINGS OFFICER CONTRACT - PAGE 1 -man g. During the course of a hearing,, the Hearings Officer agrees to be responsible for any and all exhibits accepted into the record, and to mark each exhibit with the date, case number, and his signature. All such exhibits will be entrusted to the City after the Hearings Officer has rendered his final decision in the matter. h. The Hearings Officer agrees to set all recessed or continued hearings to a date certain whenever possible. All such rescheduling shall be coordinated with the City to ensure that adequate meeting facilities will be available, and to assure that the provisions of ORS 227-178 are met. i.• The Hearings Officer agrees to submit to the City monthly itemized bills broken down by case number and by activity. All billings shall be submitted to: Director of Community Development City of Tigard P. O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97281 j. The PC shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations on nondiscrimination in employment because of race, color, ancestry, national origin, religion, sex, marital status, age, medical condition or handicap. k. The Hearings Officer and the PC release to the City any and all rights to work products under the Contract. 1. The Hearings Officer agrees to recommend an available replacement Hearings officer subject to approval of the City Administrator and the provisions of this contract whenever conflict of interest, conflicts of schedule, sickness, or other good cause occur. 2. City Duties. a. The City agrees to pay $65 per hour for the Hearings Officer's labor, including time spent preparing for a hearing, visiting the sites for which applications are made, conducting the hearing and writing the decision. b. The City agrees to pay the PC the following amounts for the following direct expenses to the extent committed in the course of fulfilling the hearings officer's duties under the contract. (1) Mileage at the rate of twenty-seven and one-half cents (27.50) per mile., HEARINGS OFFICER CONTRACT - PAGE 2 (2) Photocopying at the rate of ten cents (100) per page for in-house copies, and actual charges for out-of-house copies as billed. (3) Long distance telephone charges in the actual amount billed by the phone service. (4) Clerical services at a rate of twenty-five dollars ($25) per hour. C. The City agrees to pay the PC for labor and direct expenses within 30 days after receipt of the PC's itemized statement, except such amounts as the City disputes may be withheld pending settlement, or else be subject to interest of 1.5% per months (18% APR). The City certifies that sufficient funds are available and authorized for expenditure to finance costs of this Contract. d. The City agrees to provide the Hearings officer with copies of all City documents relevant to the work called for and will make available and help coordinate meetings by the Hearings Officer with City and other officials whose knowledge and experience is relevant to his duties. e. The City agrees to designate the Director of Community Development as the City's liaison staff for the hearings officer, and that person will be the primary official responsible for coordinating the hearings officer's duties with the City. f. The City agrees to schedule all hearings in consultation with the hearings Officer and to provide the facilities for the conduct of hearings, including a room, appropriate furniture and, if appropriate, recording equipment. g. The City agrees to provide all notices required by law for the hearings at which the Hearings officer will act and for the decisions he makes, and to provide general administrative support. 3. Status of PC as Independent Contractor. a. Services of the PC shall be provided under the general supervision of the Director of Community Development or his or her designee, but the PC shall be an independent contractor for all purposes.and shall be entitled to no compensation other than the compensation provided for under paragraph 2 of this Contract. b. In the event the PC is to perform the services described in this Contract without the assistance of others, the PC agrees to file a joint declaration with the City to the effect that its services are those of an independent contractor, as provided under Chapter 864, Oregon laws 1979. HEARINGS OFFICER CONTRACT - PAGE 3 C* The PC acknowledges that, for all purposes related to this Contract, it is and shall be deemed to be an independent contractor and not an employee of the City, and shall not be entitled to benefits of any kind to which an employee of the City is entitled, and shall be solely responsible for all payments and taxes required by law. In the event that the PC is found by a court of law or any administrative agency to be an employee of the City for any purpose, the City shall be entitled to offset compensation due and to demand repayment of any amounts paid to the PC under the terms of this Contract, to the full extent of any benefits or other remuneration the PC receives (from the city of a third party) as a result of said finding and to the full extent of any payments that the City is required to make (to the PC or to a third party) as a result of said finding. d. Not withstanding the PC's status as an independent contractor, the City shall provide liability insurance covering the PC while it is acting within the scope of Hearings officer duties for the City, as provided in Section 1 herein. e. The PC represents that no employee of the City of Tigard or any partnership or corporation in which a City employee has an interest or will receive any remuneration of any description from the PC, either directly or indirectly, in connection with the letting or performance of this Contract, except as specifically declared in writing. f. The PC is not an active member of the Oregon public Employees Retirement System and is not employed for a total of 600 hours or more in the calendar year by any public employer participant participating in the Retirement system. 4. Term and Renewal. This Contract shall be effective June 1, 1992, and shall have an initial one-year term and, thereafter, shall be automatically extended for additional one-year terms unless the City provides the Hearings officer with a written notice of nonrenewal at least thirty (30) days before the end of any given contract year. 5. Cancellation. This Contract may be canceled by either party upon forty (40) days' written notice to the other party, provided the City agrees to pay for services rendered and expenses incurred by the Hearings officer in the performance of his duties pursuant to this Contract before the expiration of the 40 days and termination of the Contract. HEARINGS OFFICER CONTRACT - PAGE 4 t MWIM 6. Applicable Law. This Contract will be governed by the laws of the State of Oregon. 7. Complete Agreement. This Contract and any referenced attachments constitute the complete agreement between the City and the PC and supersedes all prior written or oral discussions or agreements. MTERED INTO THIS DAY OF 1992. FO THE Y F TIGARD OR LARRY TEIN, PC ) ~ f Gerald Edward, Mayor Larry E n President City of Tigard PC Fede N 93-0844350 PC Oregon Account No. 3329114-2 Approved as to form: By: _ M-W e, City Attorney M,GhtLE C..'(~pbjrysprl br/Contract.HG HEARINGS OFFICER CONTRACT - PAGE 5 - COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: April 14 1992 DATE SUBMITTED: March 30, 1992 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: 1991 Annual PREVIOUS ACTION: Report Review - Solid Waste Haulers PREPARED BY: Cathy Wheatley DEPT HEAD OR CITY ADMIN O REQUESTED BY: Patrick J. Reilly ISSUE BEFO THE COUNCIL Should the Council adjust solid waste rates based on findings from the 1191 Annual Reports submitted by the Solid Waste Haulers. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff concurs with the recommendation of SWAC to not adjust the rates. INFORMATION SUMMARY SWAC staff liaison, Loreen Edin, reports: "The Solid Waste Haulers submitted their 1991 financial reports to the C City. The aggregate report showed a profit percentage of 9.16%. The Solid Waste Advisory Committee reviewed this report on March 16, 1992. SWAC unanimously voted to forward to the Council a recommendation to not adjust the rates based on the results of the haulers' financial reports." - - - - PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES ;j. > Council approval of no rate adjustment at this time based on SWAC's recommendation. FISCAL NOTES N/A awacrat r III gill gl a . April- Fi 1_992 nCt,~rnr .-_____-Uregon IVtG PLANNING. . DEPARTMENT OF APR 0 s 1992 OREGON FISH AND Jerry Offer WILDLIFE City of Tigard ' Planning Department 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Jerry: I have visited the Arbor heights apartment project and have reviewed the wildlife habitat resources survey (Fishman Environmental Serv.) and the project design blueprints. The wildlife report does not accurately portray the existing wildlife and their habitats at the site. The site is an overgrown farm/orchard/coniferous woodlot with excellent wildlife habitat because of the variety of plant species that provide food and cover. While at the site,.. I viewed.several species of birds, 2 coyotes, squirrels, many deer tracks, raccoon tracks, tree frogs, and a racer (snake). The area that provided the greatest diversity of plant species and cover was the northern halves of lots 7 and 8 (B and C in the Fishman report) not the coniferous forest lot (A in the Fishman report). The coniferous forest lot has poor understory plant species composition and % cover (it is dominated by English ivy and holly). The combination of habitat types contributes to the overall value of the site to wildlife. Therefore, I disagree with the Fishman report on area B and C and their conclusions. Lot A is not the most valuable Goal 5 resource on the site and as a site on its own it provides little diversity and would probably be used primarily by birds (on this I agree with the Fishman report). Even if the other 2 lots are dominated by non-native and cultivated (orchard) trees they provide more food and cover for many i more species of wildlife than birds. The blueprints do not indicate wetlands on the site. However, there is an area directly to the east of the cement pond (cistern? that has been i fenced off that had sedges growing in it and l~. standing water. It is my guess there is a spring on the hillside that has been impacted by 2501 SW First Avenue tractors or heavy equipment in the past and the PO Box 59 Portland, OR 97207 (503) 229-5400 a?r COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: April 14. 1992 DATE; SUBMITTED: April 2. 1992 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Appeal of Planning PREVIOUS ACTION: Hearing continued commission A royal of SDR 91-0013 d from March 10, 1992 PDR 91-0006 T a d-Triad Ltd. / PREPARED BY: Jerry Offer, Planner DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK;' REQUESTED BY: Ed Murphy. C.D. Dir. ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL This item is continued from the Council's March 10, 1992 meeting. Should the City Council uphold the Planning Commission's approval of a 348 unit multi- family residential development plan for the southern slope of Little Bull Mountain? Both NPO 6 and Marge Davenport, a neighbor of the proposed development site, have appealed the approval on different grounds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Uphold the Planning Commission's approval of the Site Development Review/Planned Development Review application subject to the conditions of approval contained in Final Order No. 91-11 PC. Add a condition of approval requiring the developer to deposit $300,000 with the City prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. This sum is to be utilized for construction of SW 109th Avenue south of SW Naeve Street and is to be compensated by a traffic impact fee credit. Delete paragraph A of condition of approval #15 of the Planning Commission's Final Order requiring the developer to construct interim street improvements on SW Naeve Street between the site and SW Pacific Highway. Add a condition of approval requiring minor revisions to the site and landscaping plans consistent with the recommendations of the submitted wildlife habitat report. Adopt the March 2, 1992 and April 2, 1992 staff memoranda as appendices to the final order. Direct staff to prepare a resolution adopting the above for the Council's April 28, 1992 meeting. INFORMATION SUMMARY NPO #6 has appealed the Planning Commission's decision on Triad-Tigard's proposal for a 348 unit apartment complex on the southern slope of Little Bull Mountain. The NPO's appeal form states that the NPO members feel that the proposed development shnuld not proceed without concurrent construction of the road connection between SW Naeve Street and SW Pacific Highway at the Royalty Parkway intersection. At the March 10th meeting, NPO #6 offered to drop their appeal of the Commission's decision if the City and the developer formalize the draft agreement proposed by Triad which would require the developer to contribute $300,000 towards the cost of developing the proposed section of SW 109th Avenue south of Naeve Street to Pacific Highway. Marge Davenport has filed a separate appeal of the Commission's decision. Ms. Davei,port's appeal requests denial of the application based on concerns OREM related primarily to traffic impacts, effects on the existing neighborhood, and lack of analysis of various potential environmental impacts related to the proposed development. The Council's hearing on this matter is continued from March 10, 1992 due to the applicants submittal of a geotechnical study of the site and a wildlife habitat resources survey in response to concerns raised by Ms. Davenport. Attached are Ms. Davenport's December 10, 1991 written testimony detailing her concerns; a March 2, 1992 memorandum responding to those concerns; an April 2, 1992 memo responding to the recently submitted geotechnical study and wildlife habitat survey and the draft agreement proposed by Triad related to a proposed contribution by the developer towards the cost of acquiring right-of-way and improving SW 109th Avenue between SW Naeve Street and SW Pacific Highway. In addition, Planning Commission Final Order No. 91-09 PC which approved the development plan is also attached. The applicant's plans, traffic study, and other supporting documents along with written comments on the proposal have been included in the packets prepared for the prior Council meetings on this matter. Please contact the Planning Division if you need a copy of any of those materials. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES 1. Uphold the Planning commission's approval of the Site Development Review/Planned Development Review application subject to the conditions of approval contained in Final Order No. 91-11 PC. Add a condition of approval requiring the developer to deposit $300,000 with the City prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. This sum is to be utilized for construction of SW 109th Avenue south of SW Naeve Street and is to be compensated by a traffic impact fee credit. Delete paragraph A of condition of approval #15 of the Planning Commission's Final Order requiring the developer to construct interim street improvements on SW Naeve Street between the site and SW Pacific Highway. Add a condition of approval requiring minor revisions to the site and landscaping plans consistent with the recommendations of the submitted wildlife habitat report. Adopt the March 2, 1992 and April 2, 1992 staff memoranda as appendices to the final order. Direct staff to prepare a resolution adopting the above for the Council's April 28, 1992 meeting. 2. Uphold the Planning commission's approval of the site development review/planned development application with a modification to the conditions of approval contained in Final Order No. 91-11 PC to require the developer to construct a southwestern extension of SW 109th Avenue from SW Naeve Street to SW Pacific Highway at its intersection with Royalty Parkway. Direct staff to prepare a resolution adopting the above for the Council's April 28, 1992 meeting. 3. Deny the request on appeal, thereby overturning the Commission's decision. FISCAL NOTES None. i t f I MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Pat Reilly, City Administrator FROM: Ed Murphy, Community Development Director DATE: April 2, 1992 SUBJECT: Response to Issues on Triad Continuance Wildlife Habitat Resources Survey City staff has reviewed the Wildlife Habitat Resources Survey report prepared by Fishman Environmental Services for the proposed Triad development site. A copy of the study has also been Now forwarded to Doug Cottam, Urban Habitat Specialist with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, for comments. We are awaiting written comments from Mr. Cottam. His comments will either be included with this memo if received prior to copying, or else will i be hand carried to the Council meeting. The Fishman report concludes that the proposed development site has l low to moderate wildlife habitat value due primarily to prior human disturbance to the site and surrounding properties as well as its location not being near a stream or water,body, nor is the site connected to any other extensive undisturbed site. This determination is consistent with the prior decision within the Comprehensive Plan not to designate this area as an area with important value for wildlife (Comprehensive Plan Volume I, Diagram V, page I-41) despite text in the Plan generally identifying the Little Bull Mountain area as having some wildlife habitat area value. As previously stated in my March 2, 1992 memorandum to the council, this decision is an Oregon Administrative Rules Division 16 Statewide Planning Goal #5 1-A decision not to protect this area as a significant wildlife habitat area; therefore, no special limitations upon development of this area were required by the City's Plan and implementing measures. Nevertheless, the Fishman report recommends modifications to the approved Triad site plan with regard to minimizing effects upon habitat and scenic values of the.proposed development site. The Fishman report concludes that the northern and northwestern areas of the proposed development site have the greatest importance as both wildlife habitat and as a scenic value due to its mature native vegetative species composition, as compared to the remainder of the site. The Fishman report recommends revisions to the approved site plan to shift the northern-most row of buildings to the south in order to retain additional mature coniferous trees and to reduce the amount of grading that would be necessary. The report concludes that this revision should reduce impacts upon scenic and habitat values of the proposed development. We concur. Though not required by Plan Policy 3.4.2 or Volume i of the Comprehensive Plan as Ms. Davenport asserts, we believe this proposed modification would be consistent with the Planned Development approval standards of Community Development Code Section 18.80.120..A.3.a which states that site improvements shall be designed and located to preserve existing trees and topography to the greatest extent possible. Staff therefore recommends that the Council add the following condition of development approval if the Council upholds the Planning Commission's approval of Triad's site plan: - The site plan and landscaping plan shall be revised consistent with Figure 3 of the Wildlife Habitat Resources Survey report prepared by Fishman Environmental Services for the proposed Triad development site prior to any tree removal, grading, or site work. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division Soils/Geologic Concerns The City's Engineering Department has reviewed the geotechnical report submitted by Triad at the March 10, 1992 hearing and the concerns related to soils and geology of the Little Bull Mountain area raised by Marge Davenport in her letter of December 10, 1991 and orally at the March 10, 1992 hearing. Ms. Davenport refers to information found in the Volume I resource document of the Comprehensive Plan. The material in Volume I is a general description of the geology and soils of the Tigard area. It notes soils in the Little Bull Mountain area that may cause construction problems and also notes a possible inactive fault line to the east of Little Bull Mountain. 3 Triad has submitted a geotechnical engineering report prepared by Terra Associates Inc. dated January 30, 1990. This report is far more detailed than the Comprehensive Plan information regarding the Little Bull Mountain area. The Terra report is based on test pits dug at 28 locations on the Triad property and subsequent laboratory testing of soils samples. The types of soils reported by Terra Associates are consistent with the general soils description of the Comprehensive Plan. Based on their testing, Terra Associates have described the specific weight- bearing limitations of the soils and the methods that should be used during construction to assure soil stability. The design and construction restrictions recommended by Terra Associates are not unusual in the Tigard area. We find no evidence of geologic problems which should preclude approval of the proposed development. We see no problems in incorporating the recommendation`s, of Terra Associates when the detailed construction and grading plans are prepared for the proposed Triad development. SW 109th Avenue Construction At the March 10th City Council hearing, NPO #6 chairperson Sue Carver stated that NPO #6 was willing to drop their appeal of the Commission's decision if the City and the developer formalize the preliminary draft agreement requiring the developer to contribute $300,000 towards the cost of developing the proposed section of SW 109th Avenue south of Naeve Street to Pacific Highway. The draft agreement was proposed to the Council by Triad in early December, 1991, and has been discussed at several council meetings since that time. A copy of the draft agreement is attached. The draft agreement states that the City will provide the developer with a $300,000 credit towards required traffic impact fees in exchange for the contribution towards the cost of right-of-way acquisition and road improvements for this section of SW 109th Avenue. In addition, the draft agreement requires that the Council delete paragraph A of condition of approval 15 of the Planning Commission's final order which requires the developer to construct interim road improvements to SW Naeve Street from the western edge of the Triad site to SW Pacific Highway. As you know, the Engineering Department and outside engineers have already begun preliminary design analysis for this section of SW 109th Avenue. Staff believes that acceptance of this offer from Triad will assure that the NPO's and others' concerns related to the concurrence of road construction with development of the proposed apartments will be satisfied. Staff therefore recommends that the Council add the following condition of development approval if the Council upholds the Planning Commission's approval of the site plan: - Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer and the City shall enter into an agreement largely similar to the draft agreement proposed by Triad. Final wording of the agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. STAFF CONTACT: Randy Wooley, City Engineer. In addition, staff recommends that the Council delete paragraph A of condition of approval 15 of Planning Commission Final Order No. 91-11 PC which requires the developer to construct interim road improvements to SW Naeve Street from the western edge of the Triad site to SW Pacific Highway. Summary of Recommendations Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning commission's approval of Site Development Review SDR 91-0013 and Planned Development Review PDR 91-006 subject to the conditions of approval contained in Final Order No. 91-11 PC, except as recommended to be modified below. mom= Staff recommends that the Council add a condition of approval requiring the developer to deposit $300,000 with the City prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for the development, as described in the draft agreement. This sum is to be utilized for construction of SW 109th Avenue south of SW Naeve Street. The Council should also delete paragraph A of condition of approval 15 of Planning Commission Final Order No. 91-11 PC which requires the developer to construct interim road improvements to SW Naeve Street from the western edge of the Triad site to SW Pacific Highway. In addition, the Council should add a condition requiring that the site and landscaping plans for the project be revised to correspond with Figure 3 of the Wildlife Habitat Resources Survey submitted by the applicant. In addition, the Council should adopt the March 2, 1992 and April 2, 1992 staff memoranda as appendices to the Planning commission's final order. It is recommended that the Council direct staff to prepare a resolution adopting the above for the Council's April 28, 1992 meeting. f' All . l~}"L4•~•~' - Ali f ( N"Cfn -f -~~i~'i`.1IlO~L~ C,.y~,1,~ i f'e rn lulu. 1 ROAD IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 6 This Agreement is made this day of , 19_, by and between TRIAD TIGARD LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Washington limited partnership, hereinafter referred to as "Triad" and the CITY OF TIGARD, hereinafter referred to as the "City." WHEREAS ordinance No. 91-22 of the Tigard City Council approved an amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map providing for the realignment and extension of SW 109th Avenue to intersect Pacific Highway opposite the existing intersection of Royalty Parkway and designating SW 109th Avenue as a minor collector street. WHEREAS Ordinance No. 91-22•..has been appealed to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. WHEREAS Resolution No. 91-68 of the Tigard City Council found that the purpose of the proposed extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway is to mitigate traffic impacts of future development on the surrounding street system, including Pacific Highway and that the portion of the proposed extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway should be designated as an eligible facility and an eligible project under the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance and requested that Appendix "D" (Base Report) of the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance No. 379 be amended to include the portion of SW 109th Avenue extension between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway as an eligible facility in Table 2 of the Base Report and as an eligible project in Table 4 of the Base Report. WHEREAS the City of Tigard desires to commence construction of the extension of the SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway during the spring of 1992. WHEREAS the City Engineer for the City of Tigard estimates the cost of construction of the portion of the SW 109th Avenue extension between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway to be approximately $900,000. WHEREAS the Tigard City Council, on October 28, 1991, approved a budget authorizing the expenditure of $300,000 in fiscal year 1991-92 for the improvement of the extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway. WHEREAS it is anticipated that the City of Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee will recommend a budget authorizing the expenditure of an additional $300,000 in fiscal i-PP1340 i 11 1101M. t . year 1992-93 for the improvement of the extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway. WHEREAS Final Order No. 91-11 PC of the City of Tigard Planning Commission approved, subject to conditions, an application for Planned Development Review Detailed Development Plan Approval, Site Development Review Approval, and Access Variance Approval requested by Triad for the development of a 348-unit, 17 building multi-family residential complex on 26.2 acres of property located at 11165-11185 SW Naeve Street. WHEREAS Final Order No. 91-11 PC of the City of Tigard Planning Commission has been appealed to the Tigard City Council and the Tigard City Council has affirmed Final Order No. 91-11 PC and eliminated the condition in Final Order No. 91-11 PC which requires Triad to provide interim improvements on-Naeve Street from the realignment of Naeve Street west to the Pacific Highway. WHEREAS the Washington County Traffic Impact fee Ordinance (TIF) imposes a tax of approximately $292,960 on Triad's development. WHEREAS the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance (TIF) entitles a.developer to a credit against the / tax for constructing eligible capital improvement. t WHEREAS the City Engineer of the City of Tigard has determined that the extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway is within the impact area of Triad's development. WHEREAS the City Engineer of the City of Tigard has ' determined that the timing, location, design and scope of the extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway is consistent with and furthers the objectives of the capital improvements program of the City of Tigard. WHEREAS Triad desires to participate in the construction of the extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway and to receive a credit against the TIF tax for such construction. WHEREAS City desires for Triad to participate in the construction of the extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway. WHEREAS the parties desire to resolve the terms of Triad's participation in the construction of the extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway and to otherwise set forth their respective requirements and C obligations thereto. r i T-PP1340 2 ANN= NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and stipulations set forth herein, it is agreed between the parties as follows: 1. Construction of Road Improvements. Triad agrees to participate in the construction of the extension of SW 109th-Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. 2. Participation. Triad agrees to pay $300,000 of the cost of constructing the extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway. - - - - 3. Preconditions to Participation. Triad's obligation to participate is conditioned upon (i) the expiration of all periods for further appeal of the affirmance of Final Order No. 91-11 PC by the Tigard City Council; (ii) the expiration of all periods for appeal of the elimination by the Tigard city council of the condition in ` Final Order No. 91-11 PC which requires Triad to provide interim improvements on Naeve Street from the realignment of Naeve Street west to the Pacific Highway; and (iii) the ultimate affirmance of ordinance No. 91-22 and the expiration of all periods for further appeal of such affirmance. If the foregoing conditions are not satisfied, this Agreement shall terminate and all obligations of the parties under this Agreement will thereafter cease. 4. Deposit in Escrow. Triad shall deposit a pro rata portion of the $300,000 in escrow upon receipt of all required permits for each building in Triad's development to be held in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. The pro rata portion shall be based on the ratio that the value of such building (as set forth in the permit application) bears to the value of all buildings constructed and to be constructed in the development. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Triad shall deposit the entire $300,000 in escrow prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any building in Triad's development. 5. Escrow. Triad shall deposit the $300,000 in escrow with Title Insurance Company (the "Escrow") at its offices { in Oregon or at such other place as the parties may r-?=13LO 3 111gigrug !'III, !!I NAM ' i f • i mutually select. Escrow shall deposit the $300,000 in an interest-bearing account with interest accruing to Triad. The parties shall execute joint instructions to escrow directing it to disburse the funds in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. Triad shall pay the escrow fee. 6. Participation. The City of Tigard shall use the $300,000 solely for the purpose of constructing the extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway. The City shall spend such funds only on improvements which are eligible for credit under the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance (TIF). Escrow shall disburse the $300,000 to City upon presentation of invoices by the City, certified by the City Engineer as accurate, for the cost of constructing credit-eligible improvements to the extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naevd Street and Pacific Highway. Credit-eligible improvements may include right of way acquisition costs and survey, engineering and inspection costs as provided in the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance (TIP). 7. Credit. The City shall grant Triad a credit against the tax due on Triad's development under the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee Ordinance in the amount of $300,000 for Triad's participation in the construction of the extension of SW 109th Avenue between Naeve Street and Pacific Highway pursuant to this Agreement. The City shall direct the City Engineer to grant Triad such credit in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 8. Default. If either party defaults under this agreement the other party shall be entitled to such remedies for breach of contract that may be available under applicable law including without limitation the remedy of specific performance. 9. Miscellaneous Provisions. 9.1 Attorneys' Fees. In the event suit or action is - instituted to interpret or enforce this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party such sums as the court may adjudge reasonable as attorneys' fees at trial or on any appeal, and on any petition for review, in addition to all other sums provided by law. 9.2 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence of each and every provision of this Agreement. S-??13c0 4 9.3 Notices. Notices under this Agreement shall be " in writing and shall be effective when personally delivered, or if mailed, upon deposit as certified mail, postage prepaid, directed to the other party at the address shown below. Either party may change its address for notices by written notice to the other. Triad: Triad Tigard Limited Partnership City: City of Tigard 9.4 Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective successors and assigns. 9.5 Changes in Writing. This Agreement and any of its terms may only be changed, waived, discharged or terminated by a written instrument signed by the party against whom enforcement of the change, waiver, discharge or termination is sought. r' 9.6 Authority. The persons who have executed this Agreement have been duly authorized to do so by the party. The party has a good and legal right to enter into this Agreement and to perform all covenants of the party contained in this Agreement in accordance with its terms. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this 4 Agreement to be executed in duplicate as of the day and year first above written. Triad: Triad Tigard Limited Partnership a Washington limited partnership By Title: General Partner City: City of Tigard By Title r. r' T-PP1340 5 BROWNE= r^ ARBOR HEIGHTS APARTMENTS PROJECT f WILDLIFE HABITAT RESOURCES SURVEY f_ i~ Submitted to: Triad/Tigard Ltd. Partnership F.O. Box 88070 Seattle, Washington 98138 L Prepared by: Fishman Environmental Services L i March 1992 i. FES Project 441 f l Pishri Environmental Services • 434 NW Sixth Avenue • Suite 304 ® Portland, OR 97209-3600.503-224-0333 O O °~o MAN V IIXI~ •1 I , 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS E NEE f Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT OF THE PROJECT SITE 1 III. SUMMARY OF SITE WILDLIFE HABITAT VALUES 2 IV. CONCLUSIONS 3 Table 1. Existing Vegetation and Wildlife Observed on the Arbor Heights Apartments Site 4 Figure L Single Family Residential Site Plan following page 4 Figure 2. Preliminary Apartment Development Site Plan following page 4 Figure 3. Final Apartment Development Site Plan following page 4 s 1 l r. ~i I 1. INTRODUCTION The proposed Arbor Heights Apartments development project is located in the Little Bull 1 Mountain Natural Forest area identified in the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Tigard (1983, pg. I-96). The Comprehensive Plan Resource Document (pgs. 1-36 through I-42) makes general references to the wildlife habitat resources of the Little Bull Mountain area. The City of Tigard does not consider the Little Bull Mountain resource site.an important resource to be protected for wildlife values. Under Comprehensive Plan implementation strategy 3, following Plan Policy 3.4.2, the City is required to review proposed development adjacent to wildlife habitat areas "to ensure that adverse impacts on any wildlife habitat areas are minimized." This report discusses the existing wildlife habitat on the proposed development site and the minimization of impacts to wildlife habitat. II. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT OF THE PROJECT SITE ' The project site was surveyed on March 5, 1992, by Fishman Environmental Services to briefly evaluate the vegetation and wildlife habitat values. Three different habitat units, corresponding with different historical land use practices, were observed on the site. Table I is a list of the vegetation and bird species observed during the field survey for each area. Photographs showing typical vegetation for each habitat area are also included at the end of this report. AREA A: CONIFEROUS FOREST i The area identified as the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest area is a second growth coniferous L forest at the top of the slope on the north end of the property. This forested unit is not pristine, ' and appears to have been managed as a woodlot, leaving trees at fairly regularly spaced intervals. These trees are 50+ years old and average 18"-26" dbh (diameter at breast height). The closed canopy shades out the understory giving the appearance of an open, almost park-like effect under the trees. Diverse native species make up the scattered shrubs and groundcover layer. This area was determined to be the most visually aesthetic portion of the site, from off-site view points, by the Comprehensive Plan. The coniferous tree area is relatively small and not closely linked to a wildlife travel corridor or L other large, undisturbed forest. The tree canopy is used by several bird species (Table 1) and said to be used by squirrels. The understory is too open to offer much cover for wildlife. Fruit and seed-bearing plants used by wildlife are not abundant. Wildlife Habitat Value: The wildlife habitat value is moderate to low. Our survey concurs t with the Goal 5 determination that the coniferous forest is used mostly by small bird species. l_ AREA B: ORCHARD AND DECIDUOUS FOREST _ Southward, along the west side of the property, an old, senescent orchard is located. Apple, rARBOR IEIOfi'i'S WILDI.IPR HABITAT PACII I l i pear, and/or other fruit tree varieties were grown that now appear to be non-fruit bearing and declining in health. Other native deciduous trees have also colonized the orchard. The r understory consists of dense suckers and sapling fruit trees that have reverted to an earlier stock j ® variety and dense himalayan blackberries vines. Downslope of the orchard site, the land appears to have been kept more open and trees are widely scattered and consist mostly of larger, non- native, ornamental coniferous trees. The understory is very dense himalayan blackberries and some open areas of grass. Wildlife Habitat Value: The wildlife habitat value is moderate to low. The tree canopy is probably used by migrating insectivorous warblers and some year-round bird species. Deer sign, common in abandoned orchards that still produce fruit, was not found. This observation and the lack of rotting fruit on the ground led to the assumption that the trees are no longer producing fruit. AREA C: DECIDUOUS FOREST AND SCATTERED CONIFERS t Downslope of the coniferous area along the east side of the property, deciduous trees are also a_ dominant, but this area appears to have been managed as a woodlot also. Fewer coniferous trees were left and they are slightly smaller (younger) than those at the top of the slope. The understory is composed of mostly native species, but is brushier, and more himalayan blackberries have become established because of the open canopy. ` Wildlife Habitat Value: The wildlife habitat value is moderate to low due to the relatively low abundance of r_a_uu 1 t l..n.;..n JnP!`1PC ;n the underctnrv aiiu sccu-V. u,.,.b r.... III_ SUMMARY OF SITE WILDLIFE HABITAT VALUES The components of wildlife habitat that were evaluated and rated by professional judgment were: Water Quantity & Seasonality Low Quality Low Proximity to Cover Low Food Variety Moderate Quantity & Seasonality Moderate Proximity to Cover Moderate Cover Structural Diversity Moderate Variety Moderate Seasonality Low ' f Escape density Moderate The site is not located near a stream or large open-water body nor connected to extensive undisturbed sites which would provide greater habitat value for wildlife. Recent development j 4 ` ARBOR HEIGHTS WILDLIFE HABITAT PAGE 2 i r I 1 has already removed much forest cover on the north side of the Little Bull Mountain. The historical disturbance of the site to various degrees has altered the natural conditions of the forest. The wildlife species which use or probably use the site most are small birds and rodents. The overall assessment of wildlife habitat value on the site is moderate to low. IV. CONCLUSIONS Our review of the site and Tigard Comprehensive Plan documents lead us to the conclusion that Habitat Unit A, the coniferous forest unit, has more value as a Goal 5 resource due to its native species composition and its scenic values. This unit is not in pristine condition, but retains some characteristics of second growth Pacific, Northwest Douglas fir forest. The other habitat units on ' the site are much more disturbed by human activity, and are dominated by non-native and orchard species of trees. Under Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.4.2, Implementation Strategy 3, the City must review development proposals to ensure that adverse impacts on any wildlife habitat areas are minimized. An early site design by the developer was for single family residential use, as shown in Figure 1. It is likely that the single family development design, utilizing 7,000 square foot lots, would have resulted in more trees removed, and fewer tree/habitat groupings remaining after clearing and grading for home site development. The site design approved by the City for apartment development is shown in Figure 2. Discussions held between Fishman Environmental Services staff, Triad Tigard Ltd. and the project engineer resulted in additional changes to the site plan for the purpose of minimizing impacts to Habitat Unit A, the coniferous forest. As shown in Figure 3, the northern-most ^ groupings of buildings and facilities have been moved south, leaving a larger unit of coniferous forest intact than in Figure 2. This change will result in fewer trees removed, and, according to the engineer, less grading on the northern portion of the property. Impacts to wildlife habitat have been minimized by (1) changing the development plan from single family residential to apartments, and (2) working with the site plan to minimize impacts to the coniferous forest habitat unit. Open spaces of existing vegetation will be left between groups of buildings, and additional plantings of trees and shrubs are planned. The proposed development will leave a block of Douglas fir trees in the NW corner of the property, which, combined with trees left along the northern site boundary, will preserve some of the scenic values of the site when viewed from Highway 99 and other points to the north and west. ARBOR 141I101M WILDUPS 11AUITAT PAGE 3 BOB I a T~j i~' 7 0 1~ XTS'Y°TA7f: ~ ~:iuTiT.L W UT vv' ELDLIF E OBSr VgE ON THE A W-BO JrA HEIGHTS APARTMENTS SITE, LITTLE BUYS. MOUNTAIN, TIGARD r` MARCH 5, 1992 AREA A: Coniferous Forest TREES WILDLIFE OBSERVED • Douglas fir kinglets western red cedar house finch big-leaf maple robin scrub jay SHRUBS crow red huckleberry squirrel vine maple snowberry elderberry Oregon grape salal Indian plum hazel * laurel GROUNDCOVER _ inside-out flower sword fern bracken fern trailing blackberry Him * Himalayan blackberry toothwort * geranium * English ivy AREA B: ORCHARD AND DECIDUOUS FOREST TREES WILDLIFE OBSERVED apple winter wren pear robin other fruit species chickadee alder junco cottonwood scrub jay big-leaf maple Douglas fir I SHRUBS Himalayan blackberry fruit tree suckers hazel salal GROUNDCOVER grass mullein sword fern II( bracken fern trailing blackberry * Queen Ann's lace 1 ARBOR HEIGHTS WiLDLWH HABITAT PAGE 4 115111111 TABLE 1 (continued) AREA C; DECIDUOUS FOREST AND SCATTERED CONIFERS TREES WILDLIFE OBSERVED f • alder robin • big-leaf maple chickadee Douglas fir junco cottonwood mourning dove i scrub jay SHRUBS * Himalayan blackberry * fruit tree suckers L hazel GROUNDCOVER • sword fern bracken fern trailing blackberry • salal L * grass REM - = dominant species * = non-native species L MOM l 1 ! 1 i ARBOR HHIUiTi'3 WILDUPB HABITAT PAGE 3 f 1 i { i• h l~I p, 11 11 111 lic 11 111111, 1 1111'111~1 S4• 7•• j 93 • ,~•~';1 •x'14• : Z,l ..$9 8r 8w 1 83 ' • 27 2H• . 7A.' 60` . >2 31 ~t 7o yq 33 Ito N 63 • '6b I . -38 6 f . s'r. .45 'S3 • I i TRI.API-M&s ,RD aEUF-f-0Ph4F-NT 4~. sr I Preliminary Lot Lay®a~,f 98 Lot* - -7500 SF MIKI M ti 1\ SO S KAMPE ASSOCIATESY r o se o 1, ``"~G l L VA. 0 b•fn• A / o / 4 t ARBOR HEI'aHTS APARTMENTS Triad/Tigard Ltd. Figure l: Single Family Residential Site Plan r V a ~ y d o i~ w ~ a i i WNW M'e=' 6" PACrnC AY t i f% rr`. F i t~r' A v1 J r t c."1 tt 1 r r f ~ ~ ~ t ~ i tr ; r~ t f I T i S"z •1tji x c .,3 - .'.C,4 `f..s.~" o:yt :sL t ~ w!>j 4.. •l~ G t-_ m .v4 dg..9, Yi..: fi.~. µ ~q.(~(}gLgtt y♦`~^~t. 2~ .t~^Y _ ~c "3, y 7 y' A F f ds' - 115~ ME M ON ME =3 cm m MM MM 'I I atrn yw- I ~ lli ~I ) S .1~ ,~~y!. / J. tt. ~~4~1" •'~.1]1"~ •~it,'p.' Ism E-Fw~ i ~1 I. • 1, ~ ~ . a • . 1. ~ 1 Ate' +I I AREA C: deciduous forest with scattered conifers t r i M i i I i AREA SOUTH OF ORCHARD: cleared and ornamental conifers planted 1 1 TERRA ASSOCIATES Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology • and Environmental Earth Sciences January 31, 1990 Project No. T-1252 Ms. Suzette Fontana Triad Development, Inc. P.O. Box 88070 Seattle, Washington 98138 Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed Casa Verde Vista Apartments Naeve Street and Highway 99 Tigard, Oregon Dear Ms. Fontana: As requested, we have conducted a geotechnical engineering study for the proposed Casa Verde Vista Apartments in Tigard, Oregon. The location of the project is shown on Figure 1. The purpose of our study was to explore subsurface and groundwater conditions at the site in order to provide geotechnical information on the feasibility of this site for the proposed development and recommendations for site preparation, foundations for the proposed structures and site drainage. The scope of our study included site reconnaissance, excavation of several test pits across the site, laboratory testing of representative soil samples, engineering analyses and the preparation of this report. This report presents the results of our observations and studies along with supporting field and laboratory test data. SUMMARY Our study indicates that the site is underlain at a shallow depth primarily by stiff to very stiff clayey, sandy silts, which overlie weathered, basalt bedrock. Conventional spread footings may be used as foundation support for the proposed apartments. These footings may bear on the undisturbed competent native soils existing at the site or on compacted fills placed above the competent native soils. Minor thicknesses of old fill soils are expected in the vicinity of existing structures. These fills should be removed from building areas. 15301 N.E. 90th Street • Redmond, Washington 98052 • Phone (206) 881-5570 • FAX No. 869-9173 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 3338 . Redmond, Washington 98073 MIME= Ms. Suzette Fontana January 31, 1990 Light groundwater seepage was noted in many of our test pits throughout the site. Onsite soils are quite moisture sensitive and were noted to be moist near the ground surface. The soil moisture contents generally decreased with depth until bedrock was approached. To minimize difficulties in working with the native soils, we suggest that grading be performed during the dry season and when soil moistures are reduced. This will improve the chances for using the native materials as fill material. If grading is to be performed in wet weather, you should plan on importing considerable amounts of clean granular soils for use as structural fill. PROJECT DESCRIPTION We understand that the site is planned to be developed as a multi-family apartment complex. Details of the planned buildings were not available at the time of our field study. The structures will probably be two and three story, wood-frame buildings with slab-on-grade floors. At the time of our study, only a topographic survey of the site was available to us. Subsequent to our field investigation, a preliminary architectural plan became available, showing tentative building and roadway locations. No grading plans or building details are available to us at this time. However, we expect significant cuts and fills will be required to provide building pads and prepare pavement areas on the moderately sloping site. Considering the existing topography on the site, the cuts and fills may have magnitudes on the order of ten feet or so. Basement walls are likely to be needed for many buildings. When project plans are finalized, Terra Associates should be notified so that we can prepare supplementary recommendations, if necessary. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING The subsurface exploration for this study was conducted on January 10 and 11, 1990. Subs dace conditions on the site were explored by excavating 28 test pits using a backhoe provided by Loren Ricks of Gresham, Oregon. A dozer was used to provide access for the backhoe. The test pits were excavated at the approximate locations shown on the Test Pit Location Map, Figure 2. The locations of these test pits were approximately determined by pacing from property corners and surveyed lines. Elevations at test pit locations were determined by interpolation between contours shown on the topographic survey provided to us. The field exploration was monitored continuously by our geologist who classified the soils encountered, maintained a log of each test pit, obtained representative soil samples and observed pertinent site features. All samples were visually classified in accordance with " the Unified Soil Classification System described on Figure 3. The logs of the test pits are attached to this report as Figures 4 through 17. s Project No. T-1252 Page No. 2 Ms. Suzette Fontana January 31, 1990 AM- The soil classifications shown on these logs represent our interpretation of the field logs and reflect the results of visual examinations as well as laboratory tests performed on samples obtained from the test pits. Representative soil samples collected from the test pits were returned to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The results of our laboratory testing are shown on the test pit logs. SITE CONDITIONS Surface The project area occupies approximately 26 acres of moderately sloping terrain in the 10900 to 11100 block north of SW Naeve Street in Tigard, Oregon. The topographic relief across the southwestward sloping site is approximately 180 feet, rising from Elev. 230 feet in the southeast corner to Elev. 410 feet in the northeast comer. Slope inclinations average about 20 percent across the site, but steeper slopes up to about 30 percent are present in the northwest corner. The site slopes flatten to less than 15 percent in the northeast comer. Some cute and fills are present around the four residences and several outbuildings that occupy the perimeter of the site. Much of Tax Lot (TL) #200 is covered with dense brush and thick berry vine patches. TL #100 is densely vegetated with underbrush and alder, maple, and cottonwood trees. TL Nos. 600, 700, 800, 900, and 9300 are vegetated with middle-age fir, cedar and sparse underbrush. The yard areas surrounding the existing residences are landscaped with ornamental shrubbery and trees. At least two wells and possibly more exist on the site. The site is bounded on the south by SW Naeve Street. The southern 800 feet of west property boundary adjoins an undeveloped, forested lot. The remainder of the west boundary borders Highway 99. The north boundary adjoins undeveloped, forested land in the west and a newly developed plat in the east. The east boundary is formed by SW 109th Avenue. A small concrete pond fed by a drainage ditch contains the only surface water noted on the site. Subsurface Soil conditions across the site are quite consistent. In each test pit, an average of about eight inches of duff and topsoil were found to overlie about three feet of stiff to very stiff reddish brown, mottled, clayey, sandy silt. Below this surficial unit is reddish tan, sandy silt with clay and silty, fine sand with clay. Reddish brown, clayey silt with highly weathered, angular, volcanic cobbles grades into fractured, weathered, basaltic bedrock, which was encountered in many test pits at depths between four to twelve feet. The depth to bedrock appears to become shallower towards the southeast and deepens towards the southwest. However, this depth is not consistent in any area of the site. Project No. T-1252 Page No. 3 Ms. Suzette Fontana January 31, 1990 116 Ar!- fills were encountered in the vicinity of the house at 11165 SW Naeve Street. Fills L 1 are also expected to be present surrounding the other houses on the site. Groundwater was encountered in about half of the test pits excavated on the site. Light, spotty seepage usually occurred from the upper three feet in the test pits where roots provided passageways for groundwater. In general, the moisture content of the soils decreased below three feet until the clayey deposit overlying the weathered basalt was encountered, where moistures again increased. A possible groundwater channelway along the bedrock surface produced moderate seepage at a depth of 8.5 feet in Test Pit TP-26. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on our subsurface exploration and field observations, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed apartment complex. Buildings may be founded on conventional spread footings bearing on firm native soils or on compacted structural fill. Roadways may be built on recompacted native soils after removal of fills and organic rich soils or on structural fill. : r Due to the moisture sensitivity and relatively low permeability of the site soils, we suggest you plan to conduct the earthwork during the dry season and when surficial soils are not excessively moist. In wet weather, it will be virtually impossible to compact the onsite soils. In dry weather, the likelihood of using the onsite soils for fill will improve substantially. If grading work must be performed in wet weather, you should allow for import of substantial qualities of clean granular soil for use as fill. We anticipate that significant cuts and fills will be required for roads and building pads. Permanent cut slopes should be graded to 2:1 (Horizontal:Vertical). Temporary cuts up to ten feet high may be made at 1:1. Fills should be constructed in accordance with recommendations in the Site Preparation and Grading section of this report and should be made at inclinations of 2:1. If cuts encounter seepage during the initiation of earthwork, interceptor drains should be constructed on the uphill side of roadways and building pads to prevent the working area from becoming wet. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. It is the property of Terra Associates and is intended for spec application to this project and for the exclusive use of Triad Development, Incorporated. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. We do not guarantee project performance in any respect, only that our work meets normal standards of professional care. The following sections of this report describe our recommendations in greater detail. C Project No. T-1252 Page No. 4 I UAW Ms. Suzette Fontana January 31, 1990 Foundations Apartment buildings to be constructed on the project site may be supported on continuous and/or isolated spread footings bearing on the competent, native soils present below the topsoil and organic-rich layers or on compacted, structural fill placed above competent, native soils. The near surface soils below the topsoil are loose. Hence, depending on the depth of the excavation required to reach design footing grade, the native soils may need to be recompacted in place. Footings should extend to a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest, adjacent, outside finish-grade. Continuous and individual spread footings may be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot. A minimum width of 12 inches should be used for continuous footings and individual spread footings should have a minimum size of 18 inches. A one-third increase in the above bearing pressures may be used when considering wind or seismic loads. All footings should be provided with steel reinforcement in accordance with structural requirements. Old fills may be present in the vicinity of the existing buildings. For any structures to be constructed in these areas, foundations and slabs should bear on native soils beneath the existing fills. Altematively, the fills may be removed and replaced by structural fill. Any holes left by the removal of foundations of existing structures and septic tanks should be backfilled with structural fill in accordance with the recommendations presented in the Site Preparation and Grading Section of this report. Settlements We anticipate that the total settlements for the apartment buildings supported on the competent, native soils or on compacted, structural fill will be less than one-half inch. Long-term differential settlement of buildings should be less than one-quarter inch. The REM majority of the settlements should occur during construction. F Slabs-On-Grade Concrete floor slabs, if used, may be constructed as slabs on grade supported either on the competent, native soils or on structural fill. We recommend that four inches of a free- draining gravel, such as 1/4 to 3/8 inch pea gravel, be placed below the slab to act as a capillary break. In addition, a plastic membrane with a thickness of ten to twelve mils should be placed above the gravel to act as a vapor barrier for additional moisture protection. Basement and _R&taining Walls If lower level basements are planned, or if retaining walls are needed at grade changes on the site, the walls should be designed to resist the lateral pressure imposed by an equivalent fluid weighing 45 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). C 1. . Project No. T-1252 Page No. 5 Ms. Suzette Fontana January 31, 1990 If walls are restrained from free movement at the top, they should be designed for an additional uniform lateral pressure of 100 pounds per square foot. These pressures assume a maximum height of ten feet and that no surcharge loads will occur. Please contact us for supplementary recommendations if conditions are expected to be different. The basement walls and retaining walls should be provided with a continuous blanket of free-draining material at least twelve inches wide. A perforated pipe should be placed at the footing level to collect water and discharge it to the street. A generalized, representative drawing of retaining wall backfill and drainage is shown on Figure 19. Horizontal Loads Horizontal structural loads carried to the foundations may be resisted by both friction forces on the base of foundations and passive resistance on the sides of foundations. A coefficient of 0.3 may be used between concrete and soil. Resistance to lateral loads may also be computed as passive earth pressures exerted by the soils adjacent to the foundations. We recommend using an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot where the foundations are poured neat against undisturbed soil, or where the backfill is compacted in accordance with the requirements for structural fill. Site Drainage Surface gradients across the site should be created to direct runoff away from the apartment buildings and towards suitable discharge facilities. If cuts encounter seepage during the initiation of earthwork, provisions should be made to install interceptor drains or ditches along the uphill side of road alignments and building cuts. These drains will prevent shallow subsurface drainage from reaching the work area and creating unfavorable soil conditions. Once detailed grading plans have been prepared, we would be pleased to review them and provide our input for additional drainage requirements, if needed. Perimeter foundation drains should be installed and tightlined away from the apartment buildings. Roof gutter drains should be separately tightlined away from the buildings. All drains should be discharged into the storm drain system. Site Preparation and rading The building and pavement areas should be stripped and cleared of vegetation and topsoil. The stripped topsoils may be used as berms or in nonstructural areas. Old fill should also be removed from building and roadway areas. Following stripping, any loose areas noted should be over excavated and replaced with structural fill or crushed rock to a depth that will provide a stable base. If the over- excavated area remains soft and wet, a stable subgrade may be constructed by placing a geotextile in the bottom of the excavation and placing clean, crushed rock over it. Project No. T-1252 Page No. 6 Ms. Suzette Fontana January 31, 1990 Carts deeper than four feet may encounter bedrock in some areas of the site. The bedrock is weathered and fractured near the surface, but most likely grades into more competent bedrock with depth, which may be difficult to rip with heavy machinery. In addition, seepage may be expected near the bedrock. Surface and subsurface, drainage should be controlled to protect the existing soil conditions in the, work area. Permanent cut slopes should be made at stable inclinations of 2:1 (Horizontal:Vertical). Fill slopes should also be made at inclinations of 2:1. Temporary cuts upto ten feet high may be made at inclinations of 1:1. Slope areas should be properly prepared prior to placing fills. A keyed toe and horizontal benches should be cut into native soils and the fill placed in horizontal lifts, as shown on the Slope Fill Diagram, Figure 18. Structural fill should be placed in shallow lifts and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D-1557 (Modified Proctor). All on-site soils are high in fines content making them difficult to compact in moist conditions, during rainy weather or when placed over existing wet conditions. Import fills, if needed for use in wet weather construction, should be predominantly granular with a maximum size of three inches and no more than five percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve. To avoid excessive earthwork costs, we recommend conducting grading operations after the site soils achieve workable moisture levels during the dry season. ( Any existing wells on the site should be abandoned in conformance with State or local regulations, if they are not to be used. Pavement Areas Roadways may be constructed on the recompacted, native soils after stripping the surface of vegetation, topsoil, and fill or on compacted structural fill depending on the depth of cuts or fills required to reach design grades. Where structural fill is placed, the upper twelve inches of the subgrade should be compacted to 95% of the maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557). Below the top foot, a compactive effort of 90% is adequate. All subgrade areas should be in a stable, non-yielding condition prior to paving. ili i Where utility lines are to be excavated and installed in paved areas, we recommend that all bedding and backfill be placed in accordance with APWA specifications. Fill placement and compaction should be in accordance with the recommendations given earlier in this report under Site Preparation and Grading. Significant seepage may be encountered in any of the excavations, particularly if the excavation encounters bedrock. The onsite silty soils will be difficult to adequately compact if they become very moist. In addition, deep utility trenches will be difficult to excavate once bedrock is encountered. The contractor should be prepared to deal with C this likelihood. Project No. T-1252 Page No. 7 { i Nis. Suzette Fontana January 31, 1990 r Additional Services It is recommended that we be provided the opportunity for a review of the site layout, final design and specifications in order that earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design and construction. The analyses and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the test pits excavated on the site. The nature and extent of variations in the test pits may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, :A we should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations presented in this report prior to proceeding with the construction. It is also recommended that we be retained to provide geotechnical services during construction. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications and recommendations, and to allow design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. We recommend that Terra Associates, Inc. provide the following services during construction: 1. Examine all stripped subgrade areas and the proofrolling operations prior to the start of fill placement or earthwork. 2. Examine all foundation and slab areas prior to forming and concrete placement to evaluate that adequate foundation support is available. 3. Observe conditions exposed in excavations, particularly to assess the need and provide recommendations for drainage. 4. Perform field density testing of structural fill as needed during placement and observe the grading and earthwork operation. We request that a minimum of two working days notice be given to schedule our services during construction. The following figures are included and complete this report: Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Test Pit Location Map Figure 3 Soil Classification Chart Figure 4 through 17 Test Pit Logs Figure 18 Slope Fill Diagram Figure 19 Retaining Wall Drainage and ]Backfill Diagram Project No. T-1252 Page No. 8 f i Ms. Suzette Fontana January 31, 1990 G We trust the information presented herein is adequate for your requirements. If you need additional information or clarification, please call. Sincerely yours, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. ~„4S ~G 1 nl~rF Py' K/ 11394 Anil Buta%' P.E. 1 President t► o~~Fi6fEER 3, tiA JJ/AB:tc B UT r" Project No. T-1252 Page No. 9 giggi 1 Q' SW MERCSTOHC /S T HILL OR S.iJ FAL GON O.i ¢ H ' +Y- - SW MEADOW 5T V +,n 1n,., ; 'P1 St OR `W K A fxE <R!NE S7 hz s . S CH, ABRMEII a S RpNEI 5W PL tiyy N~- nC" S. O SY: 'r Ne•; W~ -.-erg aR_ --ie. i•WN'- SW ~'H I m 0 SYJ .1NN 57 H$ ^N 3 .aREN 5• f JACK NSw. - i t t F=- 17 sW a rpt t20~ SW ERROL ST + u v~IF MARIE CT < - Sv+z✓v` F 11000 9fi 4, y ~x9 ST SWWALNUT s m SW Q 7390 3 ¢ SN FONNER 1 Pf I? m SW ALBERTA ST ST ` m4 _ tL4}~~y opL' FONNER u. rsl~' gPS s S' c v/ ST i t Fya+ ` Q 5~~5 w N un!'/ DEERYOELL ?5 z SW JAMES RD CT SW MARION ST ?Q .r 'k ';.,P ,I. ¢pARK -5T P f SW °jz y T ♦e z Q MIRA SW ago z , ~T 3 ,-SW FAIRHAVEN ST N c o HAV FAIRVIEW V z SW -k r:: aoSE vlsrA y r = YIEWMOUNT WY 9 S, l = 1 CT 3 sN W `A GARDEN x S~wRWr}vr SW VIEWMOUNT ;:^1 G~AROE'~~"'. LH ST PRRK;PL, Q g> 12000 IISi Q tT000 ~ F y 'n' 2255- S SW DUCFIILLYI~SVJ f 1 ~ CT 3 = 2 MCFARLANO 5`q Irti a 1 - C9~ SW VIEW i N - j ll SIN W Sw BLU1> I > < C I Q 'NIIDWf~GO. I 1~9p - -4 I- -=15 - x Si - 1 _ EVANGLE Lq < LN I ~ mf v- S < R C = " J 1 / : S'W 'Q N A1UflDOCK ST SW r Q / Sw 9 J ] W U / CEL rF pp 1. ~N r yS a4 SITE N Fv~ .ti ' _ T ~~1 SW KABLE ST K I OR k "0 L iit S T, S~ •-Q 1 SUMMERFIELO TpIGH~' F9 ~5v: ?•^riF li Q~ r GOLF b COUNTRY ;;•.+::..:?OGRES-t CLUB DRC::.• 5 ~y ;!Ste' F erg hCh S . " .IOC ~O rl ~4Q•S,T.1 yJer c,. J9ap 1pRT OAK DR .s1 , > _ ~CSVd hLIP,Hq".1 RDnooo j o /r- Q $ p Z >N, SW DICLNON_ ,mN 7 ; -Z ZI j COURSE- ANSo >li Sw C 2 -f ' Z P ROYAL , V7 ZW.,r.: c• AV J VILLA M yIt71 E1~3-'~. 4.2 l-~OR-~~ SW MOROCCO G JJ~ =1 F' `-'T Sw .RU, d._,.:. I m Un a T 1 ! l TIN RIVE T"T" r SW FISCHER1hOty; ?`OpLA - Ref.: Thomas Bros. Maps - Portland 1980 TERRA Vlcinity Map ASSOCIATES CASA VERDE VISTA - A Tigard, OR. T t Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. 12 5 2 Date 1/9 0 Figure 9 .I ,I P ~I i I I l IM 46 #to `i. I C zc; r: r r to M'r - ~ / b • ~ ~ _ ~ i '~._=T,1'+- _ III ~ _-`--=--_.__._~J' ~/i- yam' / •,.J / ;,•/:/J i<! / i'i / i~~! ,'J d :~T r_'r.`• i ffl ti / , ~ : ///f ! / / / //J/ J/ /f / j ~'//✓?i' ! r• e'i. I 1~; p , < ll/// 1, / l/ l/I / / ~ ~ ail >l l// / r s HOP co 06 / / ; / , x,11 ! ' / Jf ,r (~I X;~// ! , J/ / f 0 3'4 _,~C//i; / ;f~'~,'~~ ~/~j//~j/// /~Ib'~/" ,iii/~/~~ ~/l/I / /t, ~ 1~ { 'i~~ ` 1 rl 17,1/f f//~// ~i, ,JJ///•/,,Ji//;~+~, ( I I ~_0, ~ jl,a ~y-yi,~~~ 1 1, ~ 11 /)I. J /I~1 ~ ( ' ~~i ' ' Li'f a•/ o ' 1 I ~ 'r~~! /J/ 7/;/ / % ~ ; i / J J~ /i / / r J l f / ~ IwJ~i f ;E s Frvnr. ' , / / / , f / i / J ! 1 / / co~ j + r f I'~ r 11 / J / / / / _ 'f / •/il !l ,r i r oc~ t R 1, I~if~ _QF IC,R7 Pk/ / 439.68 I }~6!2S , 1 ( / eap . 1 `''/.8 t / f/~/~ / / 'II JC t.'.. / : / /'y/I ~v J/ % 1 'f ;I. /•1P~f J '1, l~ ~ l~ ~~~~/j /~//~/~y~' / i//'/% ;i! / ) f ~l' 1 1 1 ~ if (i y ~ ~ 1. / r~. j < L ~ / 11 / `P`~ ~ 1 I { ''~'/J' ~ i•// %~j/,t/ J ~'"f ' ~'~~4" '/''/~'~'ri~- / l l l I ~ ~3'4 i4• r ~fl._/J/l l ~''/J~/ / j 1/~ /~j/~~ ~/i//r ~~~t ~/l if/ -JJ! l/~, f I !t ~ i/r ` ,e-. .fn..:. '/lil itl rlllll//%/' //'.J~~~~//.lT,,+/1//;//~/'/ r!T[•/ //1 ~I ///1 'z!-~i ',1 ~1 ~i w _ Y r1," a; ~ / f;'r /`~j' 9// ~ ~ i' ~ ~.l Ili ~ I / t f ( ~ ~ '1 , If 1r , 10 8 2 111 ( 43y 6 I / 5" pia Fd'QE 1GPI1dN / 439 66 76fi!2 - 4 ~ ACS` ~ ¢ ( r~ 13W '10-47H AVES We ~ I 0 zr t~ ro i n I ~ N Un o m Cl) 0 -s -0 ! t9s a 3 . CD © r Er m 0 0 M r R C) cu 9~ { t~ a m to a 21 (D m 7 , L,.1(li .•"y, m "tea 6 l;9 r SOIL Ck ASSIFICATION SYSTEM _ LETTIER GRAPH MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOL SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION GRAVELS Clean GIN Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, # C/) Gravels little or no fines. i -j More than SO% of (less thtt^ GP Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, M coarse fraction 5% fines). little or no fines. t 1 4_1 Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, It j Q -a is larger than Gravels Gdvl non-plastic fines. i Z 2: M 0) y No. 4 sieve, with fines. GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures. j <t E a plastic fines. .N Clean Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, 0 0 °o SANDS Sands _ little or no fines. i' - "a G a (less than SP Poorly-graded sands or gravelly sands, C'j C5 More than 50% of ° a 5 /o fines). little or no fines. < 2 coarse fraction SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, % ' o ca Sands non-plastic fines. is smaller than U with fines. Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, No. 4 sieve. Sc plastic fines. i n t garlic silts and very fns sands, rock flour, 4 SILTS AND CLAYS ML srlt or clays fine sands or clayey sites with F C) Inorganic clays of low to. medjum plasticity CO m °o Liquid limit is less than 50%. CL ravelly clays, sandy clays, silty :lays, lean V///z ilays. E o ;i;i;1;1;i;: Organic silts and organic clays of low Z C QL plasticity. `r' SILTS AND CLAYS Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous. m :E N MH fine sandy or silty soils, elastic. I C S m F C Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. !11 ar -2 a• Liquid limit is greater than 50%. C 2 C 'U) Organic clays of medium to high p'a :~sticety, L, OH i i organic silts. t Peat and other highly organic soils. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS I 2" OUTER DIAMETER SPLIT SPOON SAMPLER C TORVANE READING,-tsf 2.4" INNER DIAMETER RING SAMPLER OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER aU PENETROMETER READING, tsf P SAMPLER PUSHED W MOISTURE, percent of dry weight ? SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED PCf DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic fort `1 Q WATER. LEVEL (DATE) LL LIQUID LIMIT,percent a WATER OBSERVATION WELL PI PLASTIC NDEX N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot i. is }t •'~r=f' TERRA CASA VERDE VISTA ASSOCIATES TIGARD, OREGON F , Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. 125 Date 1/90 Figure 3 't TEST PI B NO. T P-1 Logged By JJ Date 1-10-90 Elev. 238 Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description 0 0.1g" ILL: B ow~1 or anic-rich SILT w1tTi w ite, asiy layer. Reddish brown, mottled, clayey, sandy SILT, ML very moist, stiff.' 24 qu=1.25 5 TSF Grades to brown, sandy SILT with clay, very moist, non-plastic,medium dense. 10 34 Test pit completed at 12 feet; ML Light seepage at 18", spotty to 6 feet; Minor caving. 15- TEST ■ IT ■ O. TP-2 Logged By JJ Date 1-10-90 Elev. 254 - . PSO L and.SOD ML Brown, mottled, sandy, clayey SILT, very 26 moist, stiff. 5 Grades to reddish tan with small rounded gravel, very moist, stiff. 28 qu= 1.75 10 TSF ML Test pit completed at 12'; No seepage or caving. 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERRA CASA VERDE VISTA ASSOCIATES TiGARD,. OREGOIU Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. 1252 Date 1/90 Figure 4 TEST PIT NO. TP-3 Logged By JJ 1-10-90 Elev. 244 Date Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description 0- 0-b- DUPP and 1UPSUIL ML Reddish brown, sandy SILT, trace gravel, 24 qu.= 0.5 wet, loose. Grades to very moist, medium dense.- TSF 5 ML Tan, sandy SET., angular gravel, dense. 15 Weathered, fractured BASALT. 20 Test pit completed at 6.5 feet; Light seepage 0-3 feet; 10 No caving. 15 TEST PIT NO. TP-4 Logged By JJ Date 1-10-90 Elev. 239 0 0-8 DUFF and TOPSOIL Brown, mottled, sandy SILT, wet to moist, loose to medium dense. 28 Roots to 1 foot. ' S Tan-brown, sandy SILT and silty, fine SW SAND, moist, medium dense. Grades to dense at 6 feet. 10- 26 qu.= 4.5 Test pit completed at 1. feet; TSF Light, spotty seepage 0-3 feet; No caving. 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERM CASA VERDE VISTA ASSOCIATES TIGARD, OREGON Geotechnical _Consultants Proj. No. 1252 Date 1/90 Figure 5 r TEST PIT NO. TP.-.°J Logged By Ji Data 1-10-90 Elev. 280 Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description (0/0) 0 0-4 DUFF and TOPSOIL ML Reddish brown, sandy SILT with clay,wet to very moist, loose to medium dense. 22 Tan, sandy SILT and silty, fine SAND, 5 SMft very moist to moist, medium dense. 10 Becomes dense. 22 Test pit completed at 12 feet; Light seepage at 2 feet. 15 Logged By Ji TEST PIT NO. TP-6 Date 1-10-90 Elev. 302 0 0-6" DUFF and TOPSOIL ML Mottled, reddish brmm, clayey, sandy SILT, some vea volcanic gravel., wet to very moist, stiff. 26 4u= 1.0 "TSF ' Tan, sandy SILT, moist, dense. ML Becomes very moist, medium dense. 10 Occasional angular volcanic cobbles. Fractured weathered BASALT Test pit completed at 12 feet;: Light seepage at 0-3 feet; No caving. 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERRA C CASA VERDE VISTA - ASSOCIATES TICARD,.OREGOiV Geotechnical Consultants J Proj. No. 1262 Date 1/90 Figure 6 ' i i TEST PIT NO. TP-7 Logged By JJ i Date 1-10-90 Elev. 322 t Depth W (ft.j USCS Soil Description N 0 U-6" DUFF and TOPSOTE ML Mottled, reddish brown, sandy SILT with clay, wet to very 24 qu x.75 moist, loose to medium dense. Roots to 1.5 feet. TSF 5 ML/SM Tan, sandy SILT and fine, silty SAND, 13 moist to damp, dense. ML/CL Reddish-brown, sandy, clayey SILT with angular volcanic cobbles. 10 Weathered, fractured BASALT. Test pit completed at.10 feet; Light, spotty seepage 0-3 feet; No caving. 15 , TEST PIT NO. TP-8 Logged By JJ Date 1-10-90 Elev. 322 0 0-10 DUFF and TOPSOIL ML Mottled, clayey, sandy SILT with volcanic gravel, wet to very moist, stiff. 26 Roots to 2 feet. 5 ML/CL Tan, sandy, to clayey SILT and fine, sitly SAND, moist to damp, stiff to very stiff. 10 Weathered, fractured BASALT Test pit completed at 10 feet; No seepage or caving. 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERRA CASA VERDE VISTA a ASSOCIATES TIG4RD, OREGON A e Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. 1262 Date 1i9® Figure 7 7~ TEST PIT NO. TP-~9 - 1 r. r JJ . I..V~~y" vy Date 1-10-90 Elev. 280 Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description ML/0 B0-3" SOD and TOPSC)TT. ra4t-gray, organic-rich, sandy SII , some clay, wet, . ML%C Mottled, reddish tan, clayey, sandy SILT and fine, sitly SAND, very moist, stiff. 5 Grades to very stiff. 10 Weathered, fractured BASALT Test pit completed at 10 feet; Minor seepage at 0-3 feet; No caving. 15 TEST PIT NO. TP_Y =®1 Logged By ii Date 1-10-90 Elev. 306 0 0 DUFF - and TOPSOIL ML Reddish brown, clayey, sandy SILT, very moist, stiff.' r Abundant angular volcanic cobbles. Weathered, fractured BASALT Test pit completed at 6 feet; No seepage or caving. 10- 15 TEST PIT LOGS =,--777 TERRA CASH VERDE VISTA ASSOCIATES TIGARD, OREGON A - s s Geotechnical Consultants =Proj.o. 1252 Data 1/89 Figure 8 1 TEST PIT NO. TP-11 Logged By JJ 1-10-90 282 Date Elev. Depth W IN USCS Soil Description N - DUFF and TOPSOIL ML Reddish brown, sandy,'clayey SILT, wet to 21 very moist, medium stiff to stiff, 4 = 0.5 uTSF 5 ML Tan, sandy SILT, moist to damp, dense. Minor interbed of volcanic ash. ML/CL Reddish brown,cla ey SILT with sand and angu 22 r v 10 Weathered, fractured BASALT. Test pit completed at 10 feet; No seepage or caving. 15 Logged By JJ TEST ■ IT NO. TP 12- _ Date 1-11-90 Fjev, 269 0 0-8" UUFF aand TOPSOIL ML Reddish brawn, mottled, clayey SILT with SAND, mmdvr& volcanic gravel, wet to very moist, stiff. ML Tan, send SILT, moist, dense. 5 Test pit completed at 4.5 feet; No seepage or caving. 10- 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERRA CASH VERDE VISTA ASSOCIATES TIGARD, OREGON Geotechnical Consultants Prob.No. 1262 Date 1/80 Figure 9 INSWIS WANIN TEST BIT°NaTi-13 Logged By ii Date 1-11-90 Elev. 254 Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description 0 -1 DUFF and PSO L ML reddish brown, mottled, clayey, sandy SILT, wet to very moist, medium stiff. :Becomes tan, moist, stiff to very stiff. 5 Weathered, fractured BASALT. Test pit completed at 6 feet; Light seepage at 0-3 feet; No caving. 10 15 TEST PIT NO. TP-14 Logged By JJ Date 1-11-90 Elev. 364 0 n_411 ML Reddish brown,. mottled sandy,. clayey SILT, wet-to very moist, stiff. 24 Roots-to 1 foot. ML Reddish tan, sandy SILT, very moist 5 - to moist, medium dense. PiL/C Reddish brown,. clayey SILT with angular' volcanic cobbles, very mAst, stiff to very stiff. 30 fractured BASALF 10 Test pit completed at 9.5 feet; Light spotty seepage 0-2 feet; No caving. 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERRA CASH VERDE VISTA ASSOCIATES TIGARD, OREGON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. 1252 Date 1/@0 Figure 10 t TEST PIT NO. TB15 Logged By JJ Date 1-11-90 Elev. 347 Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description M 0 0- DUFF and TOPSOIL ML Reddish brown, mottled, clayey, sandy SILT, angular volcanic gravel, wet to 24 qu= 1.25 very moist, "stiff.' TSF 5 SM/ Tan, fine, silty SAND and sandy SILT, mist, medium dense to dense. ML/C_ Reddish brown clayey SILT with rock. Weathered, fractured BASALT. 10 Test pit completed at 9 feet; No seepage or caving. 15 JJ TEST PIT N®. Tip-16' Logged By Date 1-11-90 Elev. 334 0 0-10" DUFF and TOPSOIL ML Reddish brown, mottled, clayey, sandy SILT, with volcanic 29 gravel, wet to very moist, *stiff. Roots to 1.5 feet. to 1.5 feet. 12 5 ML/S Reddish tan, sandy SILT and fine, silty SAND, moist, medium dense to dense. 10 Some angular volcanic cobbles. Test pit completed at 10.5 feet; No seepage or caving. 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERRA CASA VERDE VISTA Y: ASSOCIATES TIGARD, OREGON r Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. 1252 Date 1/90 Figure 11 TEST P 1 T N0. TP 1 7 JJ Logged By Date 1-11-90 Elev. 315 Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description (~i6) 0 o.-In" DU and TOPSOIL Reddish brown, mottled,'clayey, sandy SILT, volcanic gravel, very moist; stiff. Roots to 1 foot. Qu,= 1.5 ML/SM Reddish tan to tan. sandy SILT and fine, TSF 5 silty SAND, moist, medium dense to dense. Reddish brown, rlayey STLT with rock, 10 Weathered, fractured BASALT Test pit completed at 9.5 feet; Light, spotty seepage 0-3 feet; No caving. 15 TEST PIT NO. TP-18 Logged By JJ Date 1-11-90 Elev. 341 0 0-6" SOD and TOPSOIL Reddish brown, slightly"mottled, clayey SILT 25 v=0.75 very moist, medium stiff. TS' ML Tan, sandy S , very moist to moist, madium dense to dense. 5- UL Cb-, Reddish brown clayey SILT with rock. Weathered, fractured BASALT. Test pit completed at 5.5 feet; No seepage or caving. 10- 15- TEST PIT LOGS "r TERRA CASH VERDE VISTA ASSOCIATES TIGARD, OREGON s Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. 1262 Date 1/00 Figure 12 ' TEST PIT NO. TP-19 Logged By J_ Date 1-11-90 Elev. 355 Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description and*TOPSOIL 0 L-8" DUFF ML Reddish brown, clayey, sandy SILT, very moist stiff. Roots to..1.5 feet. Ash bed at 3 feet 24 ~uTSF 0 Tan, sandy SILT and fine silty SAND, moist 5 to damp, medium dense to dense. Clayey, fractured BASALT 10Test pit completed at 8.5 feet; No seepage or caving. 15 JJ TEST PIT NO. TP-20 Logged By Date 1-11-90 Elev. 294 - F an TOPSOIL ML Reddish brown, mottled, clayey, sandy SILT very moist to moist,.stiff. 23 Roots to 1.5 feet. 5 /SM Reddish tan, sandy SILT and fine silty SAND, moist, medium dense to dense. 1 10 Becomes reddish brown, very moist. 23 Test pit completed at 12.5 feet, No seepage or caving. 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERRA CASA VERDE VISTA ASSOCIATES TIGARD, OREGON Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. 1252 Date 11190 Figure 13- TEST PIT NO. TP--21 Logged By JJ Date 1-11-90 Elev. X34 Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description (96) 0 0-6' DUFF and TOPSOIL ML Reddish brown, clayey SILT, wet to very moist medium stiff. Roots to 1.5 feet. ML Tan, sandy SILT, damp, medium dense to dense. 11 5 Some anular volcanic cobbles and boulders, becoming abundant. Test pit completed at 7 feet; No seepage or caving. 10- 15 TEST PIT NO. TP-22 Logged By JJ Date 1-11-90 Elev. 404 0 0-12" DUFF and TOPSOIL ML Brown, sandy, clayey SILT, very moist, stiff. ML Reddish tan, sandy SILT with clay, moist, 5 medium dense to dense. ML/CLI Reddish brown, clayey SILT, very moist, very 10 stiff . Test pit completed at 10.5 feet; No seepage or caving. 15 TEST PIT LOGS =17- TERRA : CA8A VERDE VISTA ASSOCIATES TIGARD, OREGON Geotechnical Consultants Proi. No. 1262 Date 1/90 Figure 14 TEST PIT NO. Ti P-23 Logged By JJ Date [-11-90 Elev. '176 Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description 0 -10" D 4- - an TOPSOIL MnL rown, clayey, sandy LT, wet to very moist,. medium stiff. Roots to 2 feet. 28 qu =0.75 TSF NL Tan, sandy SILT, damp to moist, medium 5 dense to dense. -Reddish brown, clayey SILT with rock. Weath red 10 Test pit completed at 8.5 feet; No seepage or caving. 15 1 TEST PIT NO. TP 24 ; Logged By IT 1 Date 1-11-90 Elev. 0 0-10" DUFF and TOPSOIL ML Brown to reddish brown, clayey, sandy SILT, wet to very moist, very stiff. 27 q =2.0 NSF _ ML Tan, sandy SILT, moist, medium dense to dense 5 Reddish brown clayey SILT with rock. Test pit completed at 6 feet; No seepage or caving. 10- 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERM C, CASH VERDE VISTA Y - ASSOCIATES TIGARD. OREGON Figure 15 Geotechnical Consultants Proj. No. 12¢2 Date 1/90 IF TEST PIT NO. TP-25 Logged By 1.1 Date 1-11-90 Elev. 358 Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description 0 _ ML Brown to: reddish tan, mottled, clayey, SILT to sandy. SILT, wet-very. moist, stiff. ML Tan, sandy SILT, moist, medium dense to dense. 5 Ash bed at 3 feet. Reddish brown, clayey SILT with rock. Test pit completed at 8.5 feet; 10 No seepage or caving. 15 TEST PIT NO. TP-25 w Logged By JJ Date 1-11-90 Elev. 163 0 U-8" DUFF an TOPSOIL ML Reddish brown, mottled, clayey, sandy SILT, wet to very moist, stiff. ML Tan, sandy SILT with clay, moist, medium 5 dense to dense. Becomes very moist at 6 feet. /CL Reddish brown, clayey SILT with rock, wet. 10 Weathered, fractured BASALT. Test pit completed at 10 feet; Moderate seepage at 8.5 feet; No caving. 15 TEST PIT LOGS TERRA CASA VERDE VISTA ASSOCIATES TIGARD, OREGON j .ems , Geotechnica! Consultants Proj. No. 1252 Date 1/80 Figure 16 r TEST PIT NO. TP-27 Logged By JJ 1-11-90 Elev. 344 Date Depth W (ft.) USCS Soil Description 0 0-6" PUFF and TOPSOIL ML Reddish browl mottled clayey, SILT. with SAID, very-moist, staff: Roots to 1.5. feet. ML Tan, sandy SILT with clay, raoist, medium 5 dense. Ash bed at 3 feet. Abundant angular volcanic cobbles. Test pit completed at 7 feet; No seepage or caving. 10- 15 JJ Logged By TEST PIT NO. TP-28 ~ Date 1-11-90 Elev. 240 0 0-10" TOPSOIL and DUFF Iq, &own-to reddi.sa brown, mottled, clayey, sandy SILT, very moist, stiff.. Roots to 1.5 feet.. 25 4u 1.25 ML Brownish tan, sandy SILT with clay, TS moist to very moist, medium dense. 5 Test pit completed at 8 feet; 10 No seepage or caving. 15 ' TEST PIT LOGS TERRA CASA.VERDE VISTA ASSOCIATES TIGARD, OREGON Gpotechnical Consultants Proj. No. 1262 Date 1/90 Figure 17 k 1. ~ TYp/CqL CROSS SecTICN M NEW SrfRUCT.URAL FILL AXIMUM SLOPE GRA01ENr EXISTING NEW SrRUCT 2 2 7 (H.V) GRADE FILL VAAL y C~ EXISTING GRADE • TYPICAL BENCH GRAD Alr F KEY OF TOPSOIL AND PT HE REMOVAL FREE DRAINING 8 IS ENCOUNTER LANKET r HER LOOSE SOILS NOTE F, _ ED IF GROUNDWATER 7. SLOPE S AND HO 2. gENC RGgNICSPR ORrR1PPED OF TOPS KEY` HES+ SHOULD O PLACING gOIL AND MIN 4. FIHE FSHOULD B MW UM 2I FUM 6 Freer I OR UNSUITASLE SOIL, NAL H OF T He DE R ONE EQUIP wrrH D LOPE FACE ^ . HE SLOPE F EP AND MENT ACE y'VIDTI-I FEET WIpF ZER OR aHOULp Be S. °FA NTING ROLLER, DEIVSIF/Ep BY WIOE. EX7-ENDING s• ALL OPE AOF? R gYDROSEEDINC COMPACTION OF &10 MAL FILL PLAC FACE WILL REDUCE E XIMUM DRY EN RSHOUL, YA BE COMPBOSTON POTENTwL 'rE~~ STM. D-1667).-' D TO .9,% ASSOCIA rE Ceorechnicai JA LOPE FILL dlgG consul RAM rants SA VERDE VISTA Prof. No. 72S T/GARD, OREGON 2 pare 7/90 Figure 7. IMPERVIOUS SOIL 6' \r. o•:c . iii:':;:%:•ir.~i; i:~i S! 0 0 °°o EXCAVATED SLOPE 12' MINIMUM FREE °.:p o°'0 0 DRAINING GRAVEL OR MANUFACTURED •D'' o MAXIMUM SLOPE DRAINAGE BOARD °0 V-°' DEPENDS ON SOIL 'DQ °o ° ° °o•o is CONDITIONS. IN NO •°0 ° , ° ° • o ' H CASE SHOULD IT BE n, °•o, o ' ; STEEPER THAN 0.5:1(H to V) a 00 v ° UNCLASSIFIED BACKFILL .0 0 0 0 .0 0 o o • 90% RELATIVE COMPACTION o' ° 00°•00 0. o~" ASTM D-1557 ^I = 0 0 0 0° o c PERFORATED PIPE 'p o^ 1' WASHED ROCK OR PEA GRAVEL. WRAP ROCK WITH FILTER-FABRIC SUITABLE BEARING SOIL Retaining.Wall Drainage and Backfill NOT-TO-SCALE OTES 1.-Free Draining Gavel should consist of granular soil having. no more than 2 percent passing the No. 200 sieve based on the 3/4-Inch minus. fraction and no particles greater than 3-Inches in maximum dimension. The percentage of particles passing the No.4 sieve should be between 25 and 75 percent. 2. Unclassified backflll should be free of organics, clayey soil, debris, and other deleterious materials. It should be placed within 2 percent of the optimum moisture content. 3. For tree-standing walls, weep holes may be used. Weep holes should be surrounded with at least 18 Inches of free-draining gravel. F y TERRA RETAINING WALL'BACKFILIJDRAINAGE CASA VERDE VISTA ASSOCIATES TIGARD. OREGON Geotechnical Consultants Proi. No. 1252. Date 1/90 Figure 19 04i14i92 15:14 '503 220 2480 STOEL, RIVES PDX y~y CITY OF TIGARD [~J60?_ L~ ~ y~~~(~~z C No. Pri©r to tho reoeipt ~f building permits, a delineat~.on of wetland boundarfes on the site shall be completed by the applicant and, if ne~se.ssary, applicable presvisie~ns of Section 1$.84 (Sensitive ]rands) shall be met prior to the issuance of such permits. a~ld' ~ ~ Gv nd~~v''`- ~ ~ z I_U ~ CI/ IL W7 _ Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area/Triad Development C Testimony presented by Paul Whitney April 6,1992 I am Paul Whitney. I live at 12035 S.W. Bull Mountain Road about a half mile from the Little Ball Mountain Natural Forest Area. I am a professional wildlife ecologist / biologist, I hold a PhD in Zoophysiology. I have worked as a wildlife ecologist in Portland for 16 years. I first learned about the little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area about three weeks ago during a Tigard City Council Meeting. While I was waiting to talk about a proposed subdivision across the street from my house, I heard about three hours of discussion about the proposed Triad development which includes part of the little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area. As I listened to the testimony, I decided to learn more about the Natural Area, The Natural Features & Open Space Comprehensive Plan Report, and The Triad Development. Since then I have visited the Natural Area, the extensive open spaces adjacent to the Natural Area, and the area proposed for development by Triad. I have also read the portion of the Natural Features Report that addresses the little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area and the Arbor Heights Apartments Project Wildlife Habitat Resources Survey that was prepared for Triad. This evening I would like to share some of my findings. Natural Features & Open Space Comprehensive Plan Report I found two references to wildlife in the Natural Area. One reference on page I-96 stated: "The wildlife within the site is limited to small birds and animals." and another reference on page I42 stated: "This area has a heavily-wooded with undergrowth providing cover for a variety of animals including deer, raccoon, and pheasant." I believe these two references are contradictory. The first reference implies there are no medium- and large-sized animals and this is the reason for not preserving wildlife resources of the Natural Area. The second reference states medium-sized (raccoon and pheasant) and large-sized (deer) animals are present. When I visited the site on April 2, 3, and 4, I found deer tracks in the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area as well as on the Triad property. The deer tracks were most noticeableiI h ekposed mud in the wetland area of the Triad property. The wetland area is covered by hydrophytic vegetation and there is evidence of standing water (surface water was not present dunng my visits). Based on my observation of deer tracks and other medium-sized animals, I believe the decision not t6 .preserve the ]Little Bull Mountain Forest is not based on good data: Furthermore---o t believe this cntena is adequate for judging the value of an-area for wildlife. More suitable criteria should'include the presence of rare, threatened, or endangered species; the diversity of wildlife habitats; the structure (e.g., layers of cover such as ground, shrub, and tree) and function (e.g. forage, cover, reproduction) of habitats present ; as well as the amount of similar type of habitat in the city. Arbor Heights Apartments Project Wildlife Habitat Resources Survey I reviewed the wildlife survey prepared by Triad. This survey is based on a site visit on March 5, 1992. Below, I discuss the summary statements presented in the Triad report. 1 1 VANIcIIIIII 7sm - Area A. Coniferous Forest. My visit in early April, 1992, left me with a slightly different impression than presented in the Triad report. For example, the mature Douglas r trees in Area A and the adjacent Natural Area are very old. I counted the rings of a 27 inch diameter fir tree that aii een cue with a chain saw. The tree was at least 175 years old. The forest is very old and is just starting to take on characteristics of old growth. Figure 4-1 from Ancient Forests of the Pacific Northwest (Raven, 1990 p. 93) indicates that as this forest continues to age; there will be more and more forage that will provide high quality habitat. As an old forest continues to mature new openings in the forest canopy will let in more sunlight and will likely result in more layers in the canopy. Dead and downed trees, snags, forest openings, and increased forage will result in better wildlife habitat than is now present. To summarize, medium-and large- sized animals are present in the Uttle Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area an t is' ana aajacent-s~nds may be the only opportunity for preseiving an old forest in the Tigard City Limits. - Area B: Orchard and Deciduous Forest. The wildlife assessment for this area of the Triad property appears to be based on the presence of an abandoned/senescent orchard and the lack of deer sign. I own an old (approximately 60 year old trees) apple orchard on Bull Mountain and the trees have rotten heartwood (cavities) that provides nesting habitat for birds. My trees are not maintained but none the less they produce a lot of fruit every year there is a good fruit set. Last year the weather was bad when the apple trees blossomed and the flowers were apparently not fertilized. There was hardly a bushel of apples produced per acre. The year before, a good fruit set year, the same acre of apple trees produced hundreds of bushels. It is not surprising that apples were not found on the Triad property after a poor fruit set year. I am interested that the Triad report identified this area as, a senescent orchard. While I observed a lot of irregularly spaced fruit trees in bloom I would not call this area an orchard and the trees I observed did not show sign of heart rot, snags, or cavities that one would expect in an old orchard. Had the trees on this area been senescent they would have been even better for wildlife. Area C: Deciduous Forest and Scattered Conifers. The Triad report judged this area as moderate to low habitat value due to the relatively low abundance of fruit and seed-bearing species in the understory. I find this to be a most unusual statement for every plant on the site with the exception of the ferns, mosses, and algae produce fruits and or seeds. When I was on the site, I observed a variety of fruit and berry producing species such as strawberry, thimbleberry, huckleberry, dogwood, blackberry, snowberry, elderberry, rose, holly, Oregon grape, and salal. I'm not too sure its appropriate to place so much emphasis on fruit and seeds because a lot of wildlife depend more on other parts of plants such as leaves or don't even eat plants at all. SUMMARY 2 1 The Triad report examines function of the wildlife habitat in this summary section. I agree that, save the small wetland, there is not much water on the site. However, the site is an upland site with a southern exposure and southern exposures are typically dry. The lack of a stream or lake should not be used as a criteria to rate an upland southern exposure as low quality habitat. This site is judged by the Triad report as having moderate food present. While the mature forest portion to the north may not have optimal forage in the understory, this certainly is not a concern as one proceeds down slope. I would judge the non coniferous portions of the site! as very productive (see Figurfl). The mixed forest portions of the site have a dense ground cover, abundant shrub cover and an open tree canopy. All of this productivity is in close proximity to the dense thermal cover of the mature forest. The entire site is interspersed with small pockets of open wet areas and blackberry thickets. The Triad site is closely linked to the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area, the stand of mature conifers to the west of the Natural Area, other woodlands, and a large open manicured forest and tree farm to the south and east. I would not be surprised to hear that wildlife moved from this area across the golf course to the Tualatin River. The summary statement that: "The wildlife species which use or probably use the site most are small birds and rodents "is open to alternative interpretation. The Triad report does not take into account that there are medium- and large-sized birds on the site. For example, I observed crows on the site, extensive woodpecker excavations that were similar to the excavations made by pileated woodpeckers, and the Natural Features Report sites pheasant as being present. I live a half mile away on a somewhat manicured parcel and I regularly observe a variety of raptors including red-tailed hawk, Cooper's hawk and great horned owl. While on the Triad site I observed sign of several non-rodent species. For example, mole sign was abundant, I heard frogs (probably treefrogs) calling, and I observed coyote scat. I am very confident that there are weasels eating rodents and that bats forage over the site. As I mentioned above, I observed deer tracks on the Triad site and raccoons have been reported on the site. To conclude, there is apparently no rare, threatened, or endangered plants or wildlife on the Triad site. The site is not pristine, but if this were really a criteria for preserving a site for wildlife in the City, I'm afraid no site would be preserved. Since the site is not pristine and not by a stream or lake it has been judged as having moderate and low wildlife value. I do not agree with this assessment for the reasons present above. I could argue that the value of the wildlife on the Triad site and in the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area ranges from low to excellent but I feel its more important to examine the value of the wildlife habitat within the context of the other upland wildlife habitat within the City of Tigard. I believe the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area and the adjacent conifer stand is the best example of old forest in the City and the value of the habitat is going to improve every year. I believe the City Council should take a second look at the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area and the criteria used to recommend areas for preservation. I also believe the Triad site has a lot more than small birds and rodents. The northern portion of the Triad site is just starting to display signs of excellent old/mature habitat (see Figure 1), snags and rotting logs are common. The likelihood that the wildlife habitat in Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area will increase in value will be greatly enhanced if the northern portion of the Triad site (Area A) is managed as a buffer for the summit. This type of management includes preserving not only trees but also the shrubs and ground cover. 3 F f The Biological Values of Ancient Forests, Part 1 93 M Herb Grass Shrub Young Mature Ancient +Closed Closed Ancient Forest II Forest Forest Forest • q eH Ma ~ o r_7: I u ap `o w o 1 0 30 6D 90 120150190100 300 400 5D0 600 700 Years After Clearcutting or Major Fire Figure 4-1. Deer forage during succession in Westside forests. Food becomes plentiful a few years after clearcutting or a major fire because much light reaches the ground. Then, after the forest canopy closes, food plants decline to a very low level. They remain scarce for several hundred years, until old trees begin to die, creating sunny spots on the forest floor where forage plants prosper for centuries. In managed forestlands, the old-growth stage is eliminated, and most of the landscape is covered with closed-canopy young forest, the stage with the lowest forage levels. a i C Effective Approaches- L4 62 muc~h,,_ if not most, of tom„ h~e~aaaasAS atural area in Ti4ard could -completely disappear as the,,, community,.._.approaches Jfull -,dgvelopment. However, LLjs pi ssi~bblee t2_-p-roes serjee_sia!2i~t portions p, .t~l~ a 1ral~ifg 1FQursd ,here despite this general trend. To do so the community will need to: 1. Protect existing natural ve eta 'off, (trees, shrubs,• and grasses) Q w erever possible e.g. in parks) especially along watercourses. 2. Use native plants in landscaping. 3. Leave wetlands and riparian areas in their natural state (e.g. discourage filling, channelization, drainage, etc.). 4. Control runoff and erosion to protect aquatic habitat and wetlands. 5. Provide corridors for wildlife movement (e.g. as through the Greenway System). 6. Leave non-hazardous snags along streams and in wetlands. Puny of these measures to provide future natural areas and values also accomplish another useful functions as outlined elsewhere (e.g. see sections on Runoff and Erosion, Scenery, Ground Instability, etc.). C. Special Areas In addition to the general policies to help protect natural vegetation and wildlife, specific areas have been suggested by specialists for preservation, through fee purchase if necessary. These areas were singled out for priority attention because of: 1) their particular vegetation and wildlife values, and/or 2) their relative uniqueness. Other factors such as the cost of preservation will, of course, also have to be considered. The six areas which were identified are the: 1. Summer Creek marsh (east of 130th and south of Scholls Ferry Road). This unique 12 acre marsh-pond complex was suggested for preservation by both the district field biologist for the state Department of Fish and Wildlife and a field biologist with the Nature Conservancy. 2. Forested Northeast sL9Ves-of_._Bu 1-Aiqurtain. The heavily-wooded steep slopes contain some large Douglas Fir which are up to 100 feet tall and three feet in diameter. The site connects with other similar sites outside the plan area. It was recommed or res rvation by the Nature Conservation Biologist 3. Summit of Little Bull Mountain. This area has a heavily-wQ,,ded__Wi h un "nowt prove, ing cover for a va e y o anima s Inc siding deer, raccoon, 6 pheasant. C t 1 -42 2. Historic structures and cultural sites are placed within the Historic Overlay District (HD) which prescribes standards and procedures for development within each (HD) area. The purpose of { the standards and procedures are to preserve the structure on C, site, whenever possible, and ensure that any development within the district is compatible with the character of the district; both architecturally and through the overall-site plan. Y ! 3. Areas designated for residential and within the Fanno Creek F, 100-year floodplain are protected from development encroachment and will be preserved for greenway, open space and recreational uses. These safeguards are specifically addressed within policy language of the comprehensive plan and within the Sensitive Lands overlay 'chapter of the Tigard Community Development Cade. Some of the area designated for commercial or industrial use within the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain will accommodate development provided that they meet the applicable planning policies and the requirements set forth in the Sensitive Lands chapter of the r Tigard Community Development Code. 4. The provisions of these policies and ordinances will be i implemented administratively by the City staff. and through the Hearings Officer, Planning Commission and City Council. 1. Identified Resources e Bull Mountain Natural Forest TheJ,ittle Bull Mountain naturar fo ~,a ea located on the west side of Little Bu un ain was determined to be a significant Go_al 05 resource as an outstanding scenic site. The size'of the treed area { includes approximately 24.9 acres.. The wildlife within the site is limited to small birds and animals. The major significance of this area is its visual impact viewed from many vantage points within Tigard. This area is the largest stand of nature calif us *_rees within the Tigard active urban planning area, and, therefore, serves as a City visual landmark. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area north of Naeve load, a Low Density Residential (1-5 units to the acre) with a Planned Development overlay zone required of any type of residential R development. If the r_esou~,rce ii1-preserved, it will be necessary to situate any ' structures in a manner that minimizes the loss of the trees. The land also has economic value. Given its proximity to Pacific r Highway and adjacent residential areas and its topography, the land ' does lend itself to a low density residential use. The staff recommendation for this site is to it.,-conf-Jj,;JJ g uses. The ng}e family detached limited conflicting residential unitg, reviewed through the Planned Development prowess, C 1 -96 Wind - Commercial scale wind power generators have also not ~ yet been developed. Potential sites include wind-prone areas such as the coast, rather than the relatively calm Tualatin Valley. r Thermal Power Plants - No conventional or nuclear power plants are currently planned in the Tigard area, nor will any conceivably be suggested in the future, according to officials of Portland General Electric and Pacific Power and Light. IV NATURAL AREAS Yithin the past sever aehP vat~,o ~f do w; ~~t71 f~ana natural vegetation M13 L~ enre° c° g an increase ro ortion of - e -blic, especia y with rega to their place in the urban environment. Large numbers of people enjoy the overall presence of birds, the color of w ldflowers, or a sounds of animals, whi° e of er more actively engage in nature RQ ootoqrap y, y ac chi , or bird watching. Urban natural areas are ado a pas"`rTm*of the outdoor c a1 ssrooms for teachi d en world us. The ready accessibili o 't dwellers u es the necessity i MI ua s or families to travel many miles by car in order to appreciate the wonders of wild life. Natural areas, especiall imcmac etation, also provide ( visual amenities to a community by softe of the man-made env t. All of these contributions.o natural areas func ion oge er o heTp blur the distinction between the City and the country, to bring into the City some of the most attractive features of the country. Vegetation and Wildlife Wildlife is dependent upon +m!ral__vpaptat;nn for d shelter, and in some cases. for~or®o~ coon. Since each animal species s special requirements, the greater the variety of habitats (and natural vegetation,) the more different kinds of animal life can be found in an area. There are four general kinds of habitat which are particularly important for a diversity of wildlife: 1. Woods (which provide cover for deer, for example).. 2. Brush (an often mistaken ued esource of great importance as cover or many animals). 3. Riverside areas (known as Riparian) 4. Wetlands (lands seasonally wet or with water close to the surface). The riverside areas and wetlands are the most critical for a wide diversity of animal life because they are places where extremely different- kinds of environments (aquatic and terrestrial) interface. Non-living components of C the habitat can also be of great significance for some animals. Dead standing trees, or snags, are particularly valuable. In the Tigard area there are at least two mammals and nine birds (e.g. wood duck, screech owl), which are totally or heavily dependent on snags. 1 -36 I DIAGRAM III - i - _ F L_ SE c-I115~fell t n~ t i t~::. qtl-a+a.....l1 r Rif ~•N• f 1 , i GSt.~ , t TOPOGRAPHY .r p 12-255. SLOPE I so - ■1 . 25% r SLOPE ! s SCALI V.~ -3 3 DIAGRAM IV ' .LilLllt'~l,''IL Ililllili::ii~l1~'! r... HERO HERN 90 poll r 3}'r:Svr.=`a •cr ...r F{!?: f rpm n •t T}t}i r -19Y t" I - ( y1 ~y. EXISTING VEGETATION Cl CONIFEROUS 13 mwEo-coweRoustomovws o ter t~ MARSH 1 h I i G ; .,c % i ~ ~ jlye as// r,__... Sk ion-t-kUR ~-I l L-c «Z OEM BALL, .SAN I K & NOVAOK C ATTORNEYS AT LAW ONE MAIN PLACE 101 S.W. MAIN STREET, SUITE 1100 IOrw rLOOR, 1101 PENNSYLVANIA AVE. N.W PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3274 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20004 TELEPHONE 45031 228-2525 TELEPHONE 12021636-3307 RICHARD M. WHITMAN TELECOPY (503) 295-1058 TELECOPY 12021763-6947 t April 14, 1992 BY NAND DELIVERY Honorable Gerald R. Edward, Mayor City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: SDR 91 0013/PDR 91-0006 (Triad/Appeal of Marge Davenport) Dear Mayor and City Council Members: I am submitting the following written testimony on behalf of Marge Davenport. There are three main issues in this appeal: protection of significant natural resources, geotechnical suitability of the site, and the proposed agreement for the construction of the SW 109th extension. 1. Protection of Significant Natural Resources. The facts are that the "Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest" is inventoried in the City's Comprehensive Plan as a significant natural resource, that the Comprehensive Plan requires that this area be protected from conflicting uses, and that the Triad project would eliminate this resource, which is one of the few remaining significant forest areas in the City. The value of this natural area is confirmed by the analysis prepared by Mr. Douglas Cottam, Urban Wildlife Biologist for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (Exhibit 1), and by an analysis performed for Ms. Davenport by Mr. Paul Whitney (Exhibit 2). A. Is this Site Inventoried as a Significant Natural Resgurce Area Requiring Protection Under Goal 5 and the City's Comprehensive Plan? The memorandum from Ed Murphy, dated April 2, 1992, states that-the Comprehensive Plan does not "designate this area as an area with important value for wildlife (Comprehensive Plan Volume I, Diagram V, page I-41)." The memorandum also states C that modification of the Triad proposal is "not required by Plan Policy 3.4.2 or Volume I of the Comprehensive Plan. " BALL,.JANIK Sc NOVACK This reading of the Comprehensive Plan is without any support. The following Plan provisions make it clear that this area is inventoried as a significant natural resource area under Goal 5, and that it must be protected from conflicting uses: a. Inventory. The Goal 5 ESEE analysis done by the City as part of its adoption of its Comprehensive Plan begins at page 94 of Volume I. Section II of the ESEE analysis is entitled "Identified Resources." The first identified resource listed and described is the "Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest." Plan at 1-96. This area is described as a 24.9-acre area, north of Naeve Road, and as "the largest stand of mature coniferous trees within the Tigard active urban planning area. Plan at I-96. Looking at the Plan map at page I-39, which shows existing vegetation, it is clear that the only coniferous area north of Naeve Road is the Triad site. This area has been inventoried as a significant natural resource area, and for staff to suggest otherwise is ludicrous. Staffs' sole basis for avoiding these requirements is their assertion that the only natural resources inventoried as significant by the Comprehensive Plan are those on the map at page I-41. This map is labeled as a map of areas having important values for wildlife, according to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Staff have overlooked the map at page I- 109, which is labeled as the City's map of Goal 5 Resources. This map clearly shows the Little Bull Mountain Natural Area, and shows it as being on the Triad site. b. Goal 5 Derision to Limit Conflicting Uses. The ESEE analysis for the Little Bull Mountain Natural Area states that "the staff recommendation for this site is to limit conflicting uses. The limited conflicting uses allowed will be single family detached residential units, reviewed through the Planned Development process. , . Plan at I-96 to 97. To our knowledge, no further ESEE analysis has been prepared to account for the fact that multi-family residential use, at a much higher density, is now allowed on this site. In order to comply with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Goal 5, a new ESEE analysis must be prepared for this site. Until this is done, the existing text of the Comprehensive Plan limits conflicting uses to single family residential at a density of 1 to 5 units per acre. Plan at I-96. C. Applicability of Plan Policy 3.4.2. Finally, regarding Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.4.2., as noted above, the staff memorandum appears to indicate that this is not an approval criterion for this application. In contrast, the staff report for the Planning Commission lists Policy 3.4.2. as an approval criterion. Furthermore, two of the Implementing 21 BALL, JANIK 6 NOVACK Honorable Gerald R. Edward, Mayor April 14, 1992 Page 3 Strategies for this Policy have not been complied with in the review of the Triad application. The first of these is Implementing Strategy 3 (Plan at II-17), which states that "[t]he City shall review all development proposals adjacent to wildlife habitat areas to ensure that adverse impacts on any wildlife habitat areas are minimized, and if need ba, request that other federal, state, and local agencies review the development proposals." Plan at II-17. The City has requested ODF&W comment on this proposal, and the ODF&W recommendation is that "the outlay of the complex save more I open space than the current design, [and that] the non-native plant species to be planted around the complexes be replaced by native species. Exhibit 1, at page 2. j The second applicable Implementing Strategy is Strategy 4, which provides that "[w]here there exist large or unique stands of trees or major vegetation area within the planning area on undeveloped land, the City shall ensure that development proposals do not substantially alter the character of the vegetation areas. . . The extent to which the Triad site is covered by an inventoried major vegetation area is shown on the map enclosed as Exhibit 3. According to the City's own inventory, over half this site is in a major vegetation area. There has been no showing of how this development can proceed without "substantially altering the character" of this vegetation area. Finally, both ODF&W and Mr. Whitney have identified what may be wetlands on the Triad site. Section 18.80.130 of the Tigard Code requires that wetland areas be inventoried in the site plan. No such inventory has been prepared, and the City has not analyzed whether the proposed site plan would require filling of this possible wetland area. 2. Geotechnical Suitability. According to the staff memorandum, the geotechnical engineering report prepared by Terra Associates is "far more detailed than the Comprehensive Plan information regarding the Little Bull Mountain area." Memorandum at 2. At the same time, according to the memorandum, "[t]he types of soils reported by Terra Associates are consistent with the general soils description of the Comprehensive Plan." .1d. The Plan describes the Little Bull Mountain area as containing soils in the Helvetia and Upland Silt categories. Plan at I-72. The Plan C characterizes Upland Silt in the following manner: MEMO= BALL, ..IAN I K Ss NOVACK Honorable Gerald R. Edward, Mayor April 14, 1992, Page 4 "Although stable when dry, Upland Silt is unconsolidated and is unstable when moist. It also has low permeability. Some settling is to be expected even for light loads supported by spread footings, and heamty loadings cannot be supported. . . . Mud flows and slumps are often observed on surface slopes of 15% or more." Plan at I-72. The Plan descriptions of soils are based on the U.S. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey for Washington County. Plan at I-76. A copy of the Soil Survey map for this area is attached as Exhibit 4. This map shows that much of the site is over the 15% level where mud flows and slumps are often observed. i In addition, the Soil Survey describes the soil types mapped for the Triad site as severely constrained for building development (the applicable narrative portions of the Soil Survey are included as Exhibit 5). According to the Soil Survey, "a severe limitation indicates one or more soil properties or site features are so unfavorable or difficult to overcome that a major increase in construction effort, special design, or intensive maintenance is required. For some soils rated severe,, such costly measures may not be feasible." Soil Survey-at 92. The soils and geologic conditions on the Triad site are hardly typical of the rest of the Tigard area as suggested in the staff memorandum. A geotechnical report that responds to the specific concerns regarding feasibility listed in the Soil Survey needs to be prepared before the City can determine that this project is feasible. 3. Agreement to Reimburse Triad for its Contribution Towards the Cost of the 109th Extension. Triad has proposed, and staff have recommended, that the City enter into an agreement with Triad to reimburse the developer for the contribution of $300,000 towards the cost of completing SW 109th. The TIF credit that would be given to Triad is dependent on SW 109th qualifying for addition to Washington County's listing of "base facilities" in the TIF ordinance. To our knowledge, no action has been taken to add the SW 109th extension to the County's TIF base facility list, and until such action is taken it is not clear that the City has the authority to make the commitments proposed in the agreement. For the reasons stated above, we respectfully request ( that the City Council deny the Triad applications. In the alternative, these applications should be sent back to the Planning Commission so that the Goal 5 and geotechnical issues 211111 1111§ 111 R1111 i it i BALL, JAN1 K Sc NOVACK ± C Honorable Gerald R. Edward, Mayor 1 April 14, 1992 i Page 5 i I t raised in this appeal can be fully and adequately addressed before development on this site is allowed to proceed. f Re ectfully submitted, r Richard Whitman Attorney for Marge Davenport f i i i 1 i I I i f i i t i i April 6, 1992 PARTMENT OF OREGON FISH AND ' Jerry offer City of Tigard _ WILDLIFE Planning Department j 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Jerry: I have visited the Arbor heights apartment project and have reviewed the wildlife habitat resources survey (Fishman Environmental Serv.) and the project design blueprints. The wildlife report does not accurately portray the existing wildlife and their habitats at the site. The site is an overgrown farm/orchard/coniferous woodlot with excellent wildlife habitat because of the variety of plant species that provide food and cover. While at the site, I viewed several species of birds, 2 coyotes, squirrels, many deer tracks, raccoon tracks, tree frogs, and a racer (snake). The area that provided the greatest diversity of plant species and cover was the northern halves of lots 7 and 8 (B and C in the Fishman report) not the coniferous forest lot (A in the Fishman report). The coniferous forest lot has poor understory plant species composition and % cover (it is dominated by English ivy and holly). The combination of habitat types contributes to the overall value of the site to wildlife. Therefore, I disagree with the Fishman report on area B and C and their conclusions. Lot A is not the most valuable Goal 5 resource on the site and as a site on its own it provides little diversity and would probably be used primarily by birds (on this I agree with the Fishman report). Even if the other 2 lats are dominated by non-native and cultivated (orchard) trees they provide more food and cover for many more species of wildlife than birds. The blueprints do not indicate wetlands on the site. However, there is an area directly to the east of the cement pond (cistern? that has been fenced off) that had sedges growing in it and standing water. It is my guess there is a spring on the hillside that has been impacted by 2501 SW Fast Avenue tractors or heavy equipment in the past and the PO Box 59 Portland, OR 97207 (503) 229-5400 i, water spreads out quite a bit. The area should have its soil profile examined for hydric• soils to determine if the area would qualify as a wetland. If so, a DSL permit will have to be obtained for the project. As far as the plan for Arbor heights, I recommend that the outlay of the complex save more open space than the current design, the non-native plant species to be planted around the complex be replaced by native species, and, if possible, a common area or play area for children be created so that the kids will not heavily impact the remaining open area. Sincerely, Doug Cottam Urban Wildlife Biologist cc: Nerb McEwen - r a r 0III! POP !,I III a -@= . 9 Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area/Triad Development Testimony presented by Paul Whitney April 6, 1992 I am Paul Whitney. I live at 12035 S.W. Bull Mountain Road about a half mile from the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area. I am a professional wildlife ecologist / biologist, I hold a PhD in Zoophysiology. I have worked as a wildlife ecologist in Portland for 16 years. I first learned about the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area about three weeks ago during a Tigard City Council Meeting. While I was waiting to talk about a proposed subdivislon ` across the street from my house, I heard about three hours of discussion about the proposed Triad development which includes part of the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area. As I listened to F the testimony, 14decided to learn more about the Natural Area, The Natural Features & Open Space Comprehensive Plan Report, and The Triad Development. Since then I have visited the Natural Area, the extensive open spaces adjacent to the Natural Area, and the area- proposed for development by Triad. I have also read the portion of the Natural Features Report that addresses j the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area and the Arbor Heights Apartments Project Wildlife ' Habitat Resources Survey that was prepared for Triad. This evening I would like to share some of any findings. Natural Features & Open Space Comprehensive Plan Report I found two references to wildlife in the Natural Area. One reference on page I-96 stated: 'The wildlife within the site is limited to small birds and animals " and another reference on page I-42 stated: Mils area has a heavily-wooded with undergrowth providing cover for a variety of animals including deer, raccoon, and pheasant." I believe these two references are contradictory. The first reference implies there are no medium- and large-sized animals and this is the reason for not preserving wildlife resources of the Natural Area. The second reference states medium-sized (raccoon and pheasant) and large-sized (deer) animals are present. When I visited the site on April 2, 3. and 4, I found deer tracks in the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area as well as on the Triad property. The deer tracks were most noticeable in the exposed mud in the wetland area of the Triad property. The wetland area is covered by hydrophytic vegetation and there is evidence of standing syater (surface water was not present during my visits). Based on my observation of deer tmdm and other medium-sized animals, I believe the decision not to preserve the Little Bull Mountain Forest is not based on good data. Furthermore I do not believe this criteria is adequate for judging the value of an area for wildlife. More suitable criteria should include the presence of I rare, threatened, or endangered species; the diversity of wildlife habitats; the structure (e.g., layers j of cover such as ground, shrub, and tree) and function (e.g. forage, cover, reproduction) of habitats present ; as well as the amount of similar type of habitat in the city. Arbor Heights Apartments Project Wildlife Habitat Resources Survey I reviewed the wildlife survey prepared by Triad this survey is based on a site visit on March 5, 1992. Below, I discuss the summary statements presented in the Triad report. 1 Area A: Coniferous Forest. My visit in early April, 1992, left me with a slightly different impression than presented in the Triad report. For example, the mature Douglas fir trees in Area A and the adjacent Natural Area are very old. I counted the rings of a 27 inch diameter fir tree that had been cut with a chain saw. The tree was at least 175 years old. The forest is very old and is just starting to take on characteristics of old growth. Figure 4-1 from Ancient Forests of the Pacific Northwest (Raven, 1990 p. 93) indicates that as this forest continues to .age, there will be more and more forage that will provide high quality habitat. As an old forest continues to mature new openings in the forest canopy will let in more sunlight and will likely result in more layers in the canopy. Dead and downed trees, snags, forest openings, and increased forage will result in better wildlife habitat than is now present. To summarize, medium-and large- sized animals are present in the little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area and this and adjacent stands may be the only opportunity for preserving an old forest in the Tigard City Limits. Area B: Orchard and Deciduous Forest. The wildlife assessment for this area of the Triad property appears to be based on the presence of an abandoned/senescent orchard and the lack of deer sign. I own an old (approximately 60 year old trees) apple orchard on Bull Mountain and the trees have rotten heartwood (cavities) that provides nesting habitat for birds. My trees are not maintained but none the less they produce a lot of fruit every year there is a good fruit set. Last year the weather was bad when the apple trees blossomed and the flowers were apparently not fertilized. There was hardly a bushel of apples produced per acre. The year before, a good fruit set year, the same acre of apple trees produced hundreds of bushels. It is not surprising that apples were not found on the Triad property after a poor fruit set year. I am interested that the Triad report identified this area as a senescent orchard. While I observed a lot of irregularly spaced fruit trees in bloom I would not call this area an orchard and the trees I observed did not show sign of heart rot, snags, or cavities that one would expect in an old orchard. Had the trees on this area been senescent they would have been even better for wildlife. Area C: Deciduous Forest and Scattered Conifers. The THad report judged this area as moderate to low habitat value due to the relatively low abundance of fruit and seed-bearing species in the understory. I find this to be a i most unusual statement for every plant on the site with the exception of the ferns, + mosses, and algae produce fruits and or seeds. When I was on the site, I observed a t variety of fruit and berry producing species such as strawberry, thimbleberry, huckleberry, dogwood, blackberry, snowberry, elderberry, rose, holly, Oregon grape, and salal. I'm not too sure its appropriate to place so much emphasis on fruit and seeds because a lot of wildlife depend more on other parts of plants such as leaves or don't even eat plants at all. SUN04AR`l C 2 The Triad report examines function of the wildlife habitat in this summary section. I agree that, save the small wetland, there is not much water on the site. However, the site is an upland site with a southern exposure and southern exposures are typically dry. The lack of a stream or lake should not be used as a criteria to rate an upland southern exposure as low quality habitat. This site is judged by the Triad report as having moderate food present. While the mature forest portion to the north may not have optimal forage in the understory, this certainly is not a concern as one proceeds doves slope. I would judge the non coniferous portions of the site.- as very productive (see Figurgl). The mixed forest portions of the site have a dense ground cower, abundant shrub cover and an open tree canopy. All of this productivity is inclose proximity to the dense thermal cover of the mature forest. The entire site is interspersed with small pockets of open wet areas and blackberry thickets. The Triad site is closely linked to the little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area, the stand of mature conifers to the west of the Natural Area, other woodlands, and a large open manicured forest and tree farm to the south and east. I would not be surprised to hear that wildlife moved from this area across the golf course to the Tualatin River. The summary statement that: 'Me wildlife species which use or probably use the site most are small birds and rodents "is open to alternative interpretation. The Triad report does not take into account that there are medium- and large-sized birds on the site. For example, I observed crows on the site, extensive woodpecker excavations that were similar to the excavations made by pileated woodpeckers, and the Natural Features Report sites pheasant as being present. I live a half mile away on a somewhat manicured parcel and I regularly observe a variety of raptors including red-tailed hawk, Cooper's hawk and great homed owl. While on the Triad site I observed sign of several non-rodent species. For example, mole sign was abundant, I heard frogs (probably treefrogs) calling. and I observed coyote scat. I am very confident that there are weasels eating rodents and that bats forage over the site. As I mentioned above, I observed deer tracks on the Triad site and raccoons have been reported on the site. To conclude, there is apparently no rare, threatened, or endangered plants or wildlife on the Triad site. The site is not pristine, but if this were really a criteria for preserving a site for wildlife in the City, I'm afraid no site would be preserved. Since the site is not pristine and not by a stream or lake it has been judged as having moderate and low wildlife value. I do not agree with this assessment for the reasons present above. I could argue that the value of the wildlife on the Triad site and in the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area ranges from low to excellent but I feel its more important to examine the value of the wildlife habitat within the context of the other upland wildlife habitat within the City of Tigard. I believe the little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area and the adjacent conifer stand is the best example of old forest in the City and the value of the habitat is going to improve every year. I believe the City Council should take a second look at the Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area and the criteria used to recommend areas for preservation. I also believe the Triad site has a lot more than small birds and rodents. The northern portion of the Triad site is just starting to display signs of excellent old/mature habitat (see Figureyl), snags and rotting logs are common. The likelihood that the wildlife habitat in Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest Area will increase in value will be greatly enhanced if the northern portion of the Triad site (Area A) is managed as a buffer for the summit. This type of management includes preserving not only trees but also the shrubs and ground cover. C 3 jj 1 • r t k 7 t The Biological Values of Ancient Forests. Part 1 93 Herb _ Grass Shmb Y Mature Ancient Closed Closed Ancient Forest Forest Forest Forest r . 0 w • o V G v, 7 I I 0 30 60 90 1101501602W 300 a00 sm, 600 700 Years After Clearcutting or Major Fire i Figure 4-1. Deer forage during succession in Westside forests. Food becomes plentiful a few years after clearcutting or a major fire because much light reaches the ground. Then. after the forest canopy closes, food plants decline to a very low level. They remain scarce for several hundred years, until old trees begin to die, creating sunny spots on the forest floor where forage plants prosper for centuries. in managed forestlands, the old-growth stage is eliminated. and ! most of the landscape is covered with closed-canopy young forest, the stage with the lowest forage levels l e ' J~l LL) .4 10 p1e ~ e ® r I 0 I- L iae aeh"Mu wr rmaeeaona oAOOmu~w■r off r' ^ p a ° °Ita: t OMMPp° c i ~ Ip N r. ' R r r Y `"^V ~ PAS ~ ••y' ~ ; I i.. f, ~,~t• • ~ ' e oo lip oil' >v y a S ~ r s I: ~s fD A O. At ptrptAPlt►P ~ iSMf . tet /9W11 , • 9rf8r5meMO1 p`~ 4N J 0 r ~ I, I0 b • Q'O~ ~ x! d k P 10111. A~r* ABC 4 -0~ 0 ~'a~ Ilk, lip i•: . ;.f ,}A~'y'~r PRA. 'T~ .a►+sra' _ ~ N ~ f ' e ~ S . ' ~ t • i f " 1 : t•~{ r •c W i 1 ` 4:1 f ~ ~ Cill) MEMO I MINIM L SURVEY Wash ington.County, e C own" i 1 i a United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service On cooperation with Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station (joins sheet Ad) 4! T NUMBER S 7D t •"+i`tl ` e r t~~ c r f . ! 1 _ d + jl~ { 2 21"R ` How I c 82 SOIL SURVEY TABLE 6.-Recreational development--Continued Soil name and Camp areas Picnic areas Playgrounds Paths and trails map symbol Xerochrepts: ' 46F: Xerochrepts part Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. Haploxerolls part. Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. ' 47D: Xerochrepts part Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: depth to Moderate: slope. Rock outcrop part. rock, slope. ' This mapping unit is made up of two or more dominant ki da of soil. See mapping unit description for the composi on and behavior of the whole mapping unit. water table, depth to bedrbek, _and susceptibili to risk of polluting ground water, and traffca lity affect flooding. Stones, boulders, and a shallow depth to d- the suitability of a soil for this purpose. T e best soils rock interfere with installation. Excessive slo may have a loamy or silty texture, have mod ate or slow cause lateral seepage and surttdng of..the effl eat in permeability, are deep to bedrock and a asonal water downslope areas. Also, soil e;osToia .and soil ippage table, are free of large stones and bo ders, and are are hazards where absorption Melds are i lled in not subject to flooding. In areas wh a the seasonal sloppin soils, water table is high, water seeps into he trenches and Son a soils are underlain by loose sand d gravel causes problems in excavating and ing the trenches. or fractured bedrock at a depth less than feet below Also, seepage into the refuse in eases the risk of the the lines. In these soils the absorpt' n field does pollution of ground water. Clayey oils are likely to be not adequately filter the effluent, and as 4 result ground sticky and difficult to spread. Sa dy or gravelly soils water supplies in the area may be co inated. generally have rapid permeabi ty that might allow Pereolation tests are performed determine the noxious liquids to contaminate 1 ground water. absorptive capacity of the soil and suitability for Unless otherwise stated, the atings in table 7 apply septic tank absorption fields. Thejj6 tests should be only to soil properties and f tures within a depth of performed during the season whe the water table is about 6 feet. If the trench i deeper, ratings of slight highest and the soil is at minimu absorptive capacity. or moderate may not be slid. Site investigation is In many of the soils that ha moderate or severe needed before a site is sele d. -limitations for septic tank abso Lion fields, it may be In the area type of san' ry landfill, refuse is placed possible to install special sys that lower the sea- on the surface of the it in successive layers. The sonal water table or to ine a the size of the absorp- limitations caused by it texture, depth to bedrock, tion field so that satisfacto performance is achieved. and stone content do t apply* to this type of landfill. Sewage lagoon areas a shallow ponds constructed Soil wetness, howeve , may be a limitation because of to hold sewage while bac 'a decompose the solid and difficulty in opera tin equipment. liquid wastes. Lagoons ve a nearly level flow area Daily cover for l fill should be soil that is easy to surrounded by cut slo or embankments of com- excavate and sprea over the compacted fill during both paaced, nearly impervi soil material. They generally wet and dry weal er. Soils that are loamy or silty !a~nd are designed so that pth of the sewage is 2 to 5 feet. free of stones or `boulders are better than other zoils. Impervious soil at I t 4 feet thick for the lagoon Clayey soils m be sticky and difficult to spread; floor and sides is r uired to minimize seepage and sandy soils ma be subject to soil blowing. contamination of 1 al ground water. Soils that are In addition o these features, the soils selected for very high in orga c matter and those that have stones final cover o landfills should be suitable for growing and boulders are ndesirable. Unless the soil has very plants. In c parison with other horizons, the A hor- slow •permeabil' y, contamination of local ground izon in mo soils has the best workability, more or- water is a ha rd in areas where the seasonal high ganic matt r, and the best potential for growing plants. water table is above the level of the lagoon floor. In Thus, for ither the area- or trench-type landfill, stock- soils where water table is seasonally high, seepage piling m terial from the A horizon for use as the of ground ~v ter into the lagoon can seriously reduce surface ayer of the final cover is desirable. its capacity or liquid waste.. Slope, depth to bedrock, Whe it is necessary to bring in soil material for and susce ibility to flooding also affect the location daily final cover, thickness of suitable soil material of sites f sewage lagoons or the cost of construction. avail le and depth to a seasonal high water table in Shear s ength and permeability of compacted soils soils urrounding the sites should be evaluated. Other affect t e performance of embankments. fact to be evaluated are those that affect reclama- Sani ry landfill is a method of disposing of solid do of the borrow areas, such as slope, erodibility, waste, either in excavated trenches or on the surface an potential for plant growth. of th soil. The waste is spread, compacted in layers, Building site development and c vered with thin layers of soil. Landfill areas are g subject to heavy vehicular traffic. Ease of excavation,` /The degree and kind of soil limitations that affect V =1 88 SOIL SURVEY TABLE 8.-Building site development ["Depth to rock" and some of the other terms that describe restrictive soil features are defined in the Glossary. See text for defini- tions of slight, moderate, and severe. Absence of an entry means soil was not rated] Dwellings Dwellings Small Soil map and Shallow without with commercial Local roads map symbol excavations basements basements buildings and streets Aloha: Severe: wetness Moderate: Severe: wetness Moderate: Moderate: wetness, low wetness, low wetness, strength. strength. low strength. Amity: 2 Severe: wetness Severe: wetness Severe: wetness Severe: wetness Moderate: wetness. Astoria: 3E. 3f r--------- Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe. slope Severe: slope. Briedwell: 48. 58 Severe: small slight Slight Slight Slight. stones. SC Severe: small Moderate: slope Moderate: slope Severe: slope Moderate: stones. slope, 50 Severe: small Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. stones, slope. Carlton: 68 Severe: wetness Moderate: low Severe: wetness Moderate: low Moderate: strength, strength, low strength, wetness, wetness, shrink-swell. shrink-swell. shrink-swell. 6C Severe: wetness Moderate: slope, Severe: wetness Severe: slope Moderate: low strength, slope, low shrink-swell. strength, shrink-swell. Cascade: 711 Severe: wetness Moderate: Severe: wetness Moderate: slope, Moderate: wetness, low wetness, low low strength, strength. strength. wetness. 7C Severe: wetness Moderate: slope, Severe: wetness Severe: slope Moderate: wetness, low slope, low strength. strength, wetness. 70, 7E, 7f Severe: slope. Severe: slope Severe: slope, Severe: slope Severe: slope. wetness. wetness. Chehalem: CC Severe: wetness, Severe: Severe: wetness, Severe: low Severe: low too clayey. shrink-swell, shrink-swell, strength, strength, low strength. low strength. shrink-swell, shrink swell. Chehalis: 9, 10 Severe: floods Severe: Roods Severe: floods Severe. floods Severe: floods. Cornelius: '118: Cornelius part Moderate: Moderate: Moderate: Moderate: slope, Moderate: wetness. shrink-swell, wetness, low shrink-swell, low strength, low strength, strength. low strength. shrink-swell. Kinton part Moderate: Moderate: low Moderate: Moderate: slope, .Moderate: wetness. strength. wetness, low low strength. low strength. strength. I IC: Cornelius part Moderate: slope, Moderate: slope, Moderate: slope, Severe: slope Moderate: wetness, shrink-swell, wetness, low slope, low low strength. strength. strength, shrink swell. 1 WASHINGTON COUNTY. OREGON 89 i TABLE 8.-Building si±e devekPment,--Continued Soil map and Shallow Dwellings Dwellings Small Local roads bol excavations without with commercial and streets map a3~ basements basements buildings i $inton part Moderate: slope, Moderate: slope, Moderate: slope, Severe: slope Moderate: wetness. low strength. wetness, low slope, low strength. strength. i 110. 211E.' IIF: Corncllus part Severe: slops Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. Waton part Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. ns Variant: -1211, 128 Severe: wetness - Severe: wetness Severe: wetness Severe: wetness Moderate: wetness, low strength. te: _12C Severe: wetness Severe: wetness Severe: wetness Severe: wetness - MBlo wetness, low strength. 11.14 Severe: floods, Severe: floods, Severe: floods, Severe: floods, Severe: floods, wetness, too wetness, wetness, wetness, wetness. low clayey. shrink-swell. shrink-swell. shrink-swell. strength. -Dayton: Severe: wetness, Severe: wetness, Severe: wetness, Severe: !s • 15 Severe: wetness, shrink-swell, shrink-swell shrink-swell, shrink-swell. too clayey. low strength. low siren gt low strength. low strength. Delena: 16C Severe: wetness Severe: wetness Severe: wetness Severe: wetness Severe: wetness, low strength. Goble: 17e _w------- Moderate: Moderate: low Moderate: Moderate: slope Moderate: wetness. strength. wetness, low low strength. strength. 17C Moderate: slope, Moderate: slope. Moderate: slope, Severe: slope Moderate: wetness. low strength. wetness, low slope, low strength. strength. 17D. 17E. I8E. 18F Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. Helvetia: 1911 Severe: too Severe: low Severe: low Severe: low Severe: low clayey strength. strength. strength. strength. OC Severe: too Severe: low Severe: low Severe: slope, Severe: low clayey. strength. strength. low strength. strength. 19D. 19E Severe: slope, Severe: slope. Severe: slope, Severe: slope, Severe: slope. too clayey. low strength. low strength. low strength. low strength. Hembre: 20L 20F. 20G Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. Hillsboro: 21/1 Slight - Moderate:. low Moderate: low Moderate: low Moderate: low strength. strength. strength. strength. 216 Slight Moderate: low Moderate: low Moderate: slope, Moderate: low strength, strength. low strength. strength. 21C Moderate: slope Moderate: slope, Moderate: slope, Severe: slope Moderate: low strength. low strength. slope, low strength. 21D Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. a 1 t WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON 91 ! TABLE 8.-Building site developmmt--Contlnued h' Soil map and Shallow Dwellings iDvvellings Small Local roads trap aymbol excavations without with commercial and streets basements basements buildings 3SF.33G 33E. Severe: slope, Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. - too clayey. olyie: Moderate: 81 Moderate: slope, Moderate: slope, Severe: slope Moderate: depth to roc' low strength. depth to rock, s?ope, low too clayey. low strength. strength. 34D. 34E, 3SE, 3SE 3SG _ Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope ere: slope _ Severe: slope. gervina: 36C Severe: too ^ Severe: low Severe: low Severe: slope, Severe: low clayey. at_rength, strength, low strength, strength, s -swe1L shrink swell. shrink-swell. shrinks-swell. ' 36D. 36L 36F Sev~ re 1•-90yi6': Severe:.. slope, low Severe: slope, Severe: slope, Severe: slope, too elayW. strength. low strength low strength, low strength, -swell. ahrints-swell. shrink-swell. shrink-swell. Quatama: 37A Severe: wetness . Moderate: low Severe: wetness Moderate: low Moderate: strength, strength, wetness. low strength. wetness. 378 _ Severe: wetness ~ Moderate: low Severe: wetness Moderate: elope, Moderate: it strength, low strength, low strength. wetness. wetness. 37C Severe: wetness _ Moderate: slope, Severe: wetness Severe: slope Moderate: low strength, slope, low C wetness. strength. 37D Severe: slope, Severe: slope Severe: slope, Severe: slope Severe: slope. wetness. wetness. Scum: 388 Moderate: depth Moderate: depth Moderate: depth Moderate: slope, Moderate: to rock, too to rock low to rock low depth to rock, low strength, clayey. strengtSt, strena. low strength. shrink-swell shrinnkk swell. shrink-swell. 38C Moderate: depth Moderate: slope, Moderate: depth Severe: slope Moderate: to rock, too depth to rock, to rock, slope, slope, low clayey, slope. low strength. low strength. strength, shrink -swell. 38D. 38E. 38F Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. Tolke: 39E. 39F Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. Udiflavents: 40 Severe: floods, Severe: floods, Severe: floods, Severe: floods, Severe: floods, wetness. wetness. wetness. wetness. wetness. Verboort: 42 Severe: wetness, Severe: floods, Severe: floods, Severe: floods, Severe: too clayey, wetness, wetness, wetness, floods, wetness, floods. shrink-swell, shrink-swell. shrink-swell. shrink-swell Wapato: 43 Severe: wetness, Severe: floods, Severe: floods, Severe: floods, Severe: floods, floods. wetness. wetness. wetness. wetness. Willamette: 44A Slight Moderate: low Moderate: low Moderate: low Severe: low strength, strength, strength, strength. shrink-swell. shrink-swell. shrink swell. 448 Slight Moderate: low Moderate: low Moderate: slope, Severe: strength, strength, low strength, low strength. 1 shrink-swell. shrink-swell. shrink-swell. 82 SOIL SURVEY TABLE 8.-Building site development-Continued Dwellings Dwellings Small Soil map and Shallow Local roads without with commercial map symbol excavations basements basements buildings and stree 44C. 440 Moderate: slope Moderate: slope, Moderate: slope, Severe: slope -vere: low low strength, low strength, strength. - shrink-swell. si.rink-swell. Woodburn: 4SA Severe: wetness Moderate: Severe: wetness Mode Moderate: wetness, low ess, low strength, strenath, ow strength, shrink-swell. shrinliswell. shrink-swell. wetness, low wetness, low strength, 4S6 Severe: wetness Moderate: rSevere:slope, Moderate: slope, Moderate: low strength, strength. shrink swell. shr.nnk~ swell. 45C Severe: wetness Mod-crate: slope, Severe: slope Moderate: wetness, low slope, low strength. strength, ahrin& swell. 4SD Severe: slope, Severe: a Severe: slope Severe: slope. wetness. Xerochrept : ' 46F: Xerochrepts part Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. Haploxerolls part Severe: s Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope Severe: slope. '47D: Xerochrepts C part ere: depth to Severe: depth to Severe: depth to Severe: depth to Severe: depth rock, slope. rock, slope. rock, slope. rock, slope. to rock, slope. Rock outs part. ' This mapping unit is made up of two or more dominant kinds of soil. See mapping unit description for the composition and be- havior of the whole mapping unit. shallow excavations, dwellings with and without base- by slope of the soil and the probability of flooding. ments, small commercial buildings, and local roads and Ratings do not apply to soil horizons below a depth of stre^.ts are indicated in table 8. A slight limitation 6 feet unless otherwise noted. indicates that soil properties are favorable for the In the soil series descriptions, the consistence of specified use-, any limitation is minor and easily over- each soil horizon is defined and the presence of very come. A moderate limitation indicates that soil proper- firm or extremely firm horizons, usually difficult to ties and site features are unfavorable for the specified excavate, is indicated. use, but the limitations can be overcome or minimized Dwellings and small commercial buildings referred by special planning and design. A severe limitation in- to in table 8 are built on undisturbed soil and have dicates one or more soil properties or site features are foundation loads of a dwelling no more than three so unfavorable or difficult to overcome that a major in- stories high. Separate ratings are made for small com- crease in construction effort, special design, or intensive mercial buildings without basements and for dwellings maintenance is required. For some soils rifted severe, with and without basements. For such structures, such costly measures may not be feasible. (fig. 14) soils should be sufficiently stable that cracking or sub- sidence from settling or shear failure of the foundation Shallow excavations are used for pipelines, sewer- do not occur. These ratings were determined from lines, telephone and power transmission lines, base- estimates of the shear strength, compressibility, and ments, open ditches, and cemeteries. Such digging or shrink-swell potential of the soil. Soil texture, plastic- trenching is influenced by the soil wetness of a high ity and in-place density, potential frost action, soil 1 seasonal water table, the texture and consistence of wetness, and depth to a seasonal high water table were soils, the tendency of soils to cave in or slough, and also considered. Soil wetness and depth to a seasonal C the presence of very firm, dense soil layers, bedrock, high water table indicate potential difficulty in pro- r large stones. In addition, excavations are affected viding adequate drainage for basements, lawns, and WASHINGTON OOUNTY, OREGON 93 v r f I Figure 14--Homesites on Laurelwood silt loam soils. gardens. Depth to bedrock, slope, and the large stones ratings of good, fair, or poor. The texture, thickness, in or on the soil are also important considerations in and organic-matter content of each soil horizon are the choice of sites for these structures and were con- important factors in rating soils for use as construction sidered in determining the ratings. Susceptibility to materials. Each soil is evaluated to the depth observed flooding is a serious limitation. and described as the survey is made, generally about Local roads and streets referred to in table 8 have 6 feet. an all-weather surface that can carry light to medium Roadfill is soil material used in embankments for traffic all year. They consist of subgrade of the under- roads. The ratings reflect the ease of excavating and lying soil material; a base of gravel, crushed rock working the material and the expected performance of fragments, or soil material stabilized with lime or the material after it has been compacted and adequ- cement; and a flexible or rigid surface, commonly of ately drained. The performance of soil after it is stab- asphalt or concrete. The roads are graded with soil ilized with lime or cement is not considered in the material at hand, and most cuts and fills are less than ratings, but information about soil properties that 6 feet deep. determine such performance is given in the descrip- a The load-supporting capacity and the stability of tions of soil series. the soil as well as the quantity and workability of fill The ratings apply to the soil profile between the A material available are important in design and con- horizon and a depth of 5 to 6 feet. It is assumed that struction of roads and streets. The AASHTO and soil horizons will be mixed during excavation and Unified classifications of the soil and the soil texture, spreading. Many soils have horizons of contrasting density, shrink-swell potential, and potential frost ac- suitability within the profile. The estimated engineer- tion indicate the traffic-supporting capacity used in ing properties in table 11 provide more specific in- making the ratings. Soil wetness, flooding, slope, depth formation about the nature of each horizon that can to hard rock or very compact layers, and content of help determine its suitability for roadfill. large stones, all of which affect stability and ease of Soils rated good have low shrink-swell potential, excavation, were also considered. low potential frost action, and':pw cobbles and stones. Construction materials They are at least moderately well drained and have slopes of 15 percent or less. Soils rated fair have a The suitability of each soil as a source of roadfill, plasticity index of less than 15 and have other limiting sand, gravel, and topsoil is indicated in table 9 by features, such as high shrink-swell potential, high C~VeA pa6~ City Council Members Tigard City Hall Tigard, OR s Enclosed please find petitions with 369 voter signatures opposing approval of Triad's propo.sed.development of 348 apartments on Little Bull Mountain. (Additional petitions are out). We hope that you will listen to the concerns of concerned citizens, and delay any decision on Triad until further consideration is given to the impact of such a development on this area. f tk 19 f t ~ t 2 `~'~t~ ~ z& ~V-11~ c J Y, Ty r ~ , s - i i i • Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITIOIN THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348NEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept. figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on proposed site would destroy and destr-rate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at summit--all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Compre- hensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in Dlan will support roads and 3-story apartment buildings. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increases, 2iAMF ADDRESS ~ f le) rs , ~lyf4217 v~1ii`l. % JGO. ~`J ~J•'~.eGtN ~U~~ 7 1 { cr f7~. j .a f ✓ r" w L. s ' i f "f .i9 ~ " : rt ; 'V I ~ ~G _ ) C_, 6 ~ s. / L C.i~l Oz .010 Page 1. Petition to Tigard City Council NAME _ ADDRESS Q e -Co~-,c i i f E GL~et ~-C . / 7/ o S rte,.' d ~-I I t ' n2 c am"'- `z 7G~ 5 #L7 ~'Y? ,&ateJ~ %~Y~z1 j ~•7 3 S S y~1 ~n~,w Lf/'a.~ 7' 973~~ - gym /s ~fgD sz cam. 1' ue 0 ,7 2- /i'M t f y~4 ~`C / i F ~ ~ e''~J ~ t~ ;.~1 ~.1 ~L ~ ~ r• ~ r" Iwe.- ~,~,,+f~ ~ A \..y..J S• ' 1 Petition to Tigard City Council NAME ADDRESS Is-kgo i i -yam 7 } X~W 2Z.L~,"'2-k9- L 5 'e'l, z 7 F e,, ./e Pic VA~Le /0 gas %S ~1A)1 M ~LJ©U)6i,rv. E E f ( i i 1k i Page 1 Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGAPD: PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENT UNITS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips (highway dept figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction would destroy and des0ccra.te Little Bull Mountain, Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas. at summit, all, areas that Council is charged with protecting under Comprehensive plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done on unstable soils (that will not support heavy loading) as calked for in Comprehen- sive plan. 4.Tigard schools are already overcrowded. Family apartments will be unacceptable increase.of students. 5. Putting estimated 3,000 cars per day onto unsignaled Naeve Road is unacceptable. Extension to Royalty Parkway must be completed before consideration is given to Triad development. Name Address " - i s -7 C/ 41, 160 i t~ ~ @;, tom/` •~,4.,~.._ j mum 1 fi ' Name Address olo 17 ~✓~~'~C?~~i mil' ~ ±C. ~ .C.,l~ / r,1 ~ ' f; i ~ - ii s Petition to Tigard City Council qq WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION, THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348NEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE HULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: i 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept, figures) to Tigard's j already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. f 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on proposed site would destroy and desecrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and r natural areas at summit--all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 3, Independent studies have not been done as called for in Compre- hensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in Dlan will support roads and 3-story apartment buildings. 4. Tigard schools are already s-riously overcrowded. Family apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student d. increases, NAME ADDRE S S L (d J Al el 7- 1 7-1 t ` 7, 421 2,L_ V6 : y Z r / S L-A-i-P CT Page 1. 11,1151 Petition to Tigard City Council NAME ADDRESS Z. F s ~c lt.Y ~~o c 15 v - , / ~97 Z a 6 Z,7-5- u~~G 7, f i f i \ T l' Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION, THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348NEW APARi71,1ENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: ; 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept. figures) to Tigard's c i already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. i 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on proposed site would r destroy and desecrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact ± the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and i natural areas at summit--all areas that Council is charged with i protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 1 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Compre- hensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in t)lan i will support roads and 3-story apartment buildings. 't 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family i apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increases. E NAME ADDRE S'S '~-~i.~~ ~f ~ ~ --l ~~/-rim ~C~~' ~ij' f , ~_,4" l i r / 'S S 7 b S. (.J / b A y c. / i y yz t~ 5' J 2 Z `4 c , 727 -7 6A 26, Ley t . j _ 01 1` z -F,z~2 y Page 1. law Petition to Tigard City Council . ...ADDRESS NAME .J S vZ 5 • cj 5 c u ' ~ t J -L L Owl J 244 7 i/1 ~S. S' w J7y ~4~✓ . d / 361 5 :1 r A ~ -9 Ov. lo6ao Petition to Tigard City Council NAME ADDRESS d l Ile y i 9 z5~ 2G 6 zo L. T i OEM= mill Petition to Tigard City Council J~ . WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER, TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348NEW APAR1,ENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept. figures) to Tigard`s already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on proposed site would destroy and desit~crate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at summit--all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Compre- hensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in Ulan will support roads and 3-story apartment buildings. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increases. 4 a 23AME ADDRE S'S f / T'--w PC- <;S, o Sw ti Pte, ~U / 0A K 0 11- L_ A/. Page 1, Petition to Tigard city council ADDRESS - - - r1AME J ~ r" - mss -161 CA r? ~iGIZ ~d Ja Lav o - v Su) S S~J (12P- ti u C rc! r Oti Petition to Tigard City Council it• lYI / WE, THE UNDERSIGI.ED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348NEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLO[W]ING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept. figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable, 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on proposed site would destroy and desicrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at summit--all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Compre- hensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in plan will support roads and 3-story apartment buildings, 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increases. FAME ADDR~ S S r' / l~yt' ~ /CJ/{"?.Fib ~L~/' :.JCS-~/ =-~1•C_Cs z.G.'{. A /L ~P o i s S -j /fL_i1~ 1' vw~l Page 1. mom Petition to Tigard City Council NAME ADDRESS ]Pi~/1 ~fZG' : ' GAG' GO J /4G"G-t~', "0' lboe.o L 0 J J Z 722- S zZ. J r _ U: )Lzzt4i~1 ~72 Z~ Z.. ° ✓ yr , 160 oo ~ It) CL C~• J > a 4~ V S 4J . C~J 1, v r b S W, C ' h rte. D d i~ l MEN= Petition to Tigard City Council NAME ADDRESS 0 C-2 1 - % 2-2 2~ G(/- i i l._L ,%Llf J ~ t v ` / ~~~...JJJ C+'-"^/tel.-~6.c - = : )l G % C L•', , f 2,-0 3 r t Ot/ Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348_dEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept, figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on proposed site would i destroy and desecrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and t natural areas at summit--all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 3, Independent studies have not been done as called for in Compre- hensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in Dlan 4 will support roads and 3-story apartment buildings. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increases, UAME ADDRE S S 4j, r E 6-( r~.c. ✓ f.. % prs~p ` J t - t $47 5' ,fU 1116 Page 1. Petition to Tigard City Council NAME 'ADDRESS Ss tea. O 1 0 ~ s5 s~ r v s.. Petition to Tigard City Council NAME ADDRESS . ~ .38.5 &--r6I,4,V,2p /?q. ~ G ,S ~ 0 ; ~;+1,.. . ~~e i o a C .r ;mac ~ • p . . jd3.yS sw ,z 47 I K 4 Page 1 0 Petition to Tigard City Council WE THE UNDERSIGNED RESTDENTS OF GUATER 7IGARD PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENT UNITS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN'S AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips (highway dept figures) to Tigard`s already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction would destroy and desecrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fi.r Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas.at summit, all, areas that Council is charged with protecting under Comprehensive plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done on unstable soils (that will not support heavy loading) as called for in Comprehen- sive plan. 4.Tigard schools are already overcrowded. Family apartments will be unacceptable increase.of students. 5. Putting estimated 3,000 cars per day onto unsi_.gnaled Naeve Road is unacceptable. Extension Co Royalty Parkway must be completed before consideration is given to Triad development. Name ..Address f.S,S-8 z b iv i i 5- T Sys' Ti y.4.f' o D.P 99-2 z5r a ; 1 ~~7"~"~~~'~!< l7?y V a" 14 s- (-2 2 S ~r 'Name " Address 'ej yf t ;r 9 it ~yL ~t5 Page 1 Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENT UNITS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips (highway dept figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic -jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction would destroy and desiccate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas.at summit, all areas that Council is charged with protecting, under Comprehensive plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done on unstable soils (that will not support heavy loading) as called for in Comprehen- sive plan. 4.Tigard schools are already overcrowded. Family apartments will be unacceptable increase.of students. 5. Putting estimated 3,000 cars per day onto unsignaled Naeve Road is unacceptable. Extension to Royalty Parkway must be completed before consideration is given to Triad development. Name Address Qoa yct /SaA 4~12 _,~r 5 ),j _w k, 0 v J MEN= L . ' f Page 1 Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TI,GARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENT UNITS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips (highway dept figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction would destroy and desicra.te Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas-at summit, all areas that Council is charged with protecting; under Comprehensive plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done on unstable soils (that will not support heavy loading) as called for in Comprehen- sive plan. 4.Tigard schools are already overcrowded. Family apartments will be unacceptable increase.of students. 5. Putting estimated 3,000 cars per day onto unsignaled Naeve Road is unacceptable. Extension to Royalty Parkway must be completed before consideration is given to Triad development. Name Address /BBL scd .(P 91ZLS~ l n n 1 ~`i ~j a w e L'L !YJ CX~i.I I u~~~ c~: dCr ~G'!f«~U~J ~v~ 97Zzq j 1 Name Address e - Gtl,~-5,:~, 1 U ~ o S it.s ~1ws~.~.d..u~'~t--f~-~~~ C • ~ ~U 5f " E o .S S Lt/ /._7i ~'-~a' .1.~ , ~rl i G4 ` J ,72? j QA j ~ F 5? de2 !q o ef- q7 7 ~ i s {i C. i { Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION, THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348NW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS; 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept, figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. F 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on proposed site would ! destroy and des&crate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at summit--all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Compre- hensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined'in plan will support roads and 3-story apartment buildings, i 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family i apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increases. s UAME ADDRESS SS5✓ ~Cu }Fl y.z { ~ic Cc.c.~-~: U ,~,L~i-c_e.-(_G~J f C ~C/ 1~C.G-~~~ f " ~C-r,•~", 5 e-1 -7~ Q I ~ tJ~ ~ ~ 'l~~J![ t'om' C£ r' ~0 1.~~ / i T~<. S . ~ V • ~ r-r. ~ ~ i Page 1. Petition to Tigard City Council NAME ADDRESS en oz/. W i Y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r Petition to Tigard City Council NAME ADDRESS . . . . . . ti. Petition to Tigard City Council NAME ADDRES'S . . _ Y . . . . . . . Page 1 Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDZNT$ OF GREATER TIGAAD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENT UNITS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS T111E FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips (highway dept figures) to Tigard`s ' already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction would destroy and des&ra.te Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas.at summit, all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Comprehensive plan. 4 3> Independent studies have not been done on unstable soils (that will not support heavy loading) as called for. in Comprehen- sive plan. 4.Tigard schools are already overcrowded. Family apartments will Age& be unacceptable increase of students. 5. Putting estimated 3,000 cars per day onto unsignaled Naeve Road is unacceptable. Extension to Royalty Parkway must be completed before consideration is given to Triad development. Name .......Address . S1 ~4 4114L / 6 -17 i Address N ame ~f' ~lL > 7 2- 2- 0 r ~u 1 Lam- ~ c / ; e ?4/ -Ale C( m~ 7 l J 4-7 7, 7 Clf VW. loo - 41 r e~ City Council Members-- These additional petitions bringing the total number of Tigard signers asking; you to deny Triad's application for 348 apartments on Little Bull Mountain to almost 700. ;t Volunteers who circulated the petitions report only two persons among the many contacted who believed it should be allowed at this time. Main concerns reported were lack of valid, independent studies; failure to uphold comprehensive plan which designates summit and Little Bull Mountain forest as "special area"; ignoring previous staff recommendation in plan which says only single family residential should be allowed; traffic concei-Is putting more cars on already congested r streets; unacceptable overcrowding of schools. r 3 k a i 9 4 3 3 3 A` a r i i 3 K 1 1 i lP ~4 Petition to Tigard City Council 7 a WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER, TIGARD, PETITIOIN THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348NEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING RLASON.S: i ! 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept. figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on proposed site would destroy and desecrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at summit--all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan. j 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Compre- hensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in plan will support roads and 3-stc•-•y apartment buildings. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increases. NAJZ ADDRESS CA. Al 54, T f Cry k : `,5z(l % % y~~ 7 S, Lv _ l i c~ rod- 9 gL Y 0 ~W U SW Gc.h c YC~ 8^ etti 7. } /Cdr ,<4l 1 nr- Z12. A7. OA r~ Page 1. aim aim Petition to Tigarc? City Council NAME ADDRESS I _ Lff ~01 q 72- r.. /D 3 3 y 7zz r / D j~3U S GJ ..9.72 z L/ f i J,~ Cj Ya_4 / 1 /LoAzo S~ g' z a O-J , :I 11D 7 i3_? Petition to Tigard City Council ADDRESS NAME r 92,9 i jv, s i. a s r~ t~J ~I oa- v Q ~,.1 ' ,BIZ 7 7 z z 2- Xy 2-.3 S" rJ § "10 121 i i i , t Petition to Tigard City Council REM WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348NEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TINE FOR THE FOLLO[W]ING REASONS : 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept. figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on proposed site would destroy and desicrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at summit--all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Compre- hensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in plan will support roads and 3-story apartment buildings. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family f apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student' - increases. NAME ADDRESS %7 udg r~d 1 9:~L~ ke,~~ZJ k C11 l fG ~ J ;!W1)9r J7-e e Z-4 L cr 2, 1 - 1~e 7, ~o _jzr 9 CY~~7 Z) F6~ 9867 5PV Pgp &x7-,e ~ LN o,e 7zZ4 C~2dr-~ Z SSW (mil J Ag-eLka 04 9 7.Zz V L/ 9 ~ .StJ oZc, i 76W r 'In 98~`~ SGI~,oa~✓~~~/~ c, roC ,Q 97ZZQ' r l/ y d w i -tc fir y 7 ~y~ Page 1. rel-LLLUll LU LLrcLLU t,.LLy tiVLLL►%.i,i. WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348NEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE-FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept, figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on proposed site would destroy and desicrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at summit--all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Compre- hensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in elan will support roads and:3-story apartment buildings. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. "Family apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increases. Petition to Tigard City Council NAME ADDRESS . s Q~ 1 71/ Ago r C + s. av . NAME :.:...ADDRESS , 9 S- 60: 'All 6i:l) sc~irt r oil ~Z~, 4 elL. 1 'GAt C4 C l Il'1 S~(~ ScP rl,eC" I ~GGt~ OP G722(-/ !"•.~~1, = Lc' ki' 1; 7 G~ J ~C . `O !X 7 2 C-( C NAME ADDRESS -5 4,j q c-aD- ~~~Z,4 I6~1~CULGoL6 . 790 c.l `7'8 i22 Z~y1,v ~j:s Zvi i 467 . ~ ~ •~•~;~~~-~-~-c,,;-- • ~ try S ~ .lL'~ . ~ ~~~►;~.-r . .......L ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ C k Crs Ca3 q - 09-Z1 Petition to Tigard City Council NAME 'ADDRESS C.~ c.~ ~~~•n, 15G'~{-() (.C,~ /OC~~' Ti 9 Q r c.~; ~ 1 ~ .~l 7 Z .a y SLJ 1 67~3- i b 2~~t z 2 i LZZZ 77~ 75- ( 1497 7 sc,- (O-D 7 7,7 oz s 6 0 Z. ° `v /06774 E t / O S/.{J lee, ~~jQ fJ ~ /r cj'7a~L f i Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348_dEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING R:,ASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept, figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on proposed site would destroy and desicrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at summit--all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Compre- hensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in Dlan will support roads and 3-story apartment buildings. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increases. ADDRESS NAME Y-IL v C D ~9 " ' IQ & 41 46,1 6d S -J- Page 1. Petition to Tigard city council Il ADDRESS . 1 p NAME Lam'"!-` {J// 4/1 ~ CGC e» tGY/ . Petition to Tigard City Council AM~ NAME ADDRESS hla:L / ' -L,4) 574 1 141 Ire 7 6 G7 1P rr !r lc rc r~ Ocv 111;11 1111itle, ,;1Z;-,r 4- a t l 1 C~ 3 9- Sb 3 ~ ~-~Ci?f 14 J ~.wlu.rt~ v f~- 'L/ ~ •-r /~J °.l G I Page 1 Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TTGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENT UNITS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips (highway dept figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction would destroy and desiccate Little Bull Mountain, Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas.at summit, all areas that Council is charged with protecting; under Comprehensive plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done on unstable soils (that will not support heavy loading) as called for in Comprehen- sive plan. 4.Tigard schools are already overcrowded. Family apartments will 0 be unacceptab iE; j acrease .oi stuu(::-.t&. 5. Putting estimated 3,000 cars per day onto unsignaled Naeve Road is unacceptable. Extension to Royalty Parkway must be completed before consideration is given to Triad development. Name Address , . ZZ e5y - ~tvl Address ,rwv' Name 1 /®8 ~j IJ~~~$ ✓ (.V. /I ~ eta C!:O"Qe j r ~ z3 3 6 11 lit $ ~ t /lam 1 17- A 7Z , 61 7'- 35- ~C~ sd fin Address Name ~ , ~ r.- C- < < -U-- q 464 03 Ji cj -1 ICY 5 -L ce S - ~r~th c.fi 7g 5 Cr/ l/ 'y i 7 Address Name IN! U Page 1 Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TI•GARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENT UNITS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips (highway dept figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction would destroy and desicrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas.at summit, all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Comprehensive plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done on unstable soils (that will not support heavy loading) as called for in Comprehen- sive plan. 4.Tigard schools are already overcrowded. Family apartments will be unacceptable increase.of students. 5. Putting estimated 3,000 cars per day onto unsignaled Naeve Road is unacceptable. Extension to Royalty Parkway must be completed" before consideration is given to Triad development. a Name Address 3 , / C / / r { • f Flame Address All Al? s rJ Q , ~I f f ~x~3~ SKr 977;2f 1 '/77 /;2- 70V i s Sam/ j7_ 7? ~~i 7-4 r i S D S CL~ i O S _ %7Z zV Slu L q~ 9/;Z Z~4 72 Name Address 9~7 LAL 310 j,-. i~, C U~ I Name Address 7 .7- ; gi jll~li!;Ilill , Petition to Tigard City Council i i WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: a 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept. figures) to Tigard's ' already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. y 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on the proposed site would destroy and desicrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, im- pact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife i and natural areas at the summit--all areas that Council is char- i ged with protecting under Tigard's Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Com- prehensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in the plan wil support roads and 3-story apartments. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apart- ments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increaseses. Name Address ^ CL TAI -A 60 15 ~U iss _*Iei -~w=X17,g2 - - --~1-----`---- rE---- r,. i t I Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept. figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on the proposed site would destroy and desicrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, im- pact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at the summit--all areas that Council is char- ged with protecting under Tigard's Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Com- prehensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in the plan wil support roads and 3-story apartments. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apart- ments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increaseses. Name Address u2? -J--------S6QS JL✓,~ f "C:L_ a/ _ 1_ vl?___~7z t------ !/Y.z eL,~ L! i~ ~G - -~~-w = - J -___LS %1~ C i L L31`-? _Cr,__ I)z_Z / - % - _,i--------a=------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - . r ~ t Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept. figures) to Tigard`s already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on the proposed site would destroy and desicrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, im- pact the character of hallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at the summit--all areas that Council is char- ged with protecting under Tigard`s Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Com- prehensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in the plan wil support roads and 3-story apartments. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apart- ments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increaseses. Name Address 14 1-y I? •%?l_c.z.~ _f :d'....~-mss = - - - - -1-~ - ~ `=~'-1!~`-~~ ~ _ = 7 i _ C-?- - _ _ I+ i kiiiiagign! s I ~ t Sam Petition to Tigard City Council HIM WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept. figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on the proposed site would destroy and desicrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, im- pact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at the summit--all areas that Council is char- ged with protecting under Tigard's Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Com- prehensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in the plan wil support roads and 3-story apartments. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apart- ments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increaseses. Name Address ~SG______________________ KvLc: __✓~/~.Z.~i ~i~-- //!f ---`--F-------- ( C_ Petition to Tigard City Council WE; THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept. figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on the proposed site would destroy and desicrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, im- pact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at the summit--all areas that Council is char- ged with protecting under Tigard's Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Com- prehensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in the plan wil support roads and 3-story apartments. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apart- ments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increaseses. Name Address -y-----__----=R '~~✓~-0~1~ _ t -~v Z?k _ a7e? Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GREATER TIGARD, PETITION THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE TRIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348 NEW APARTMENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept. figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on the proposed site would destroy and desicrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, im- pact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at the summit--all areas that Council is char- ged with protecting under Tigard's Comprehensive Plan. 3. Independent studies have not been done as called for in Com- prehensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in the plan wil support roads and 3-story apartments. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apart- ments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increaseses. Name Address - - - V..---------..._------------------------_-_-----------_-------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MOM i Petition to Tigard City Council WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF GRATER TIGARD, PETITION; THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THE 'T'RIAD APPLICATION TO BUILD 348NEW APAR VENTS ON "LITTLE BULL MOUNTAIN" AT THIS TINE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Adding 2,088 car trips a day (highway dept, figures) to Tigard's already gridlocked and traffic-jammed streets is unacceptable. 2. Construction of 348 apartment units on proposed site would destroy and desicrate Little Bull Mountain Natural Forest, impact the character of Kallstrom Fir Grove and destroy wildlife and natural areas at summit--all areas that Council is charged with protecting under Tigard Comprehensive Plan, 3e Independent studies have not been done as called for in Compre- hensive Plan to determine if unstable soils defined in D_lan will support roads and 3-story apartment buildings. 4. Tigard schools are already seriously overcrowded. Family apartments added at this time would result in unacceptable student increases. I.+ 1, ADDRESS "Ov 411 LLa4 Cz i Page 1. Son+ in e+1 ,l4"% 140d4_ April 6, 1992 ' RECEIVED PLANNING APR U $ DEPARTMENT OF ~gg~ OREGON FISH AND Jerry Offer WILDLIFE City of Tigard Planning Department 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Jerry: I have visited the Arbor heights apartment project and have reviewed the wildlife habitat resources survey (Fishman Environmental Serv.) and the project design blueprints. The wildlife report does not accurately portray the existing wildlife and their habitats at the site. The site is an overgrown farm/orchard/coniferous woodlot with excellent wildlife habitat because of the variety of plant species that provide food and cover. While at the site, I viewed. several species of birds, 2 coyotes, squirrels, many deer tracks, raccoon tracks, tree frogs, and a racer (snake). The area that provided the greatest ' diversity of plant species and cover 'was the ! northern halves of lots 7 and 8 (B and C in the Fishman report) not the coniferous forest lot (A in the Fishman report). The coniferous forest lot has poor understory plant species composition and % cover (it is dominated by English ivy and holly). The combination of habitat types contributes to the overall value of the site to wildlife. Therefore, I disagree with the Fishman report on area B and C and their conclusions. Lot A is not the most valuable Goal 5 resource on the site and as a site on its own it provides little diversity and would probably be used primarily by birds (on this I agree with the Fishman report). Even if the other 2 lots are dominated by non-native and cultivated (orchard) trees they provide more food and cover for many more species of wildlife than birds. The blueprints do not indicate wetlands on the site., However, there is an area directly to the east of the cement pond (cistern? that has been 'fenced off) that had sedges growing in it and standing water. It is my guess there is a spring on the hillside that has been impacted by 2501 SW First Avenue tractors or heavy equipment in the past and the PO Box 59 Portland, OR 97207 (503) 229-5400 I _ - cs~tear Grwr~a.~~_ ;aia a bit. The area should have its soil profile examined for hydric soils to determine if the area would qualify as a ,wetland.-...;If so, a DSL permit will have to be obtained for the project. As far as.the'plan for Arbor heights, I recommend that the outlay, of the complex save more open space than the current design, the non-native plant species to be planted around the complex be replaced by native species, and, if possible, a "common. area _ or play area .for children .be created so~ that.'. the kids- will . not heavily impact the remainingR• open.- area:. . Sincerely,.. Doug Cottam Urban Wildlife Biologist cc: Herb McEwen r r i pi COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 0 Oka CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: April 14. 1992 DATE SUBMITTED: 4/01/92 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Sweeney Annex. i PREVIOUS ACTION: None ZCA 92-0003 Zone Change Annexa o ft N- /1 h1l PREPARED BY: Victor Adonri DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK QUESTED BY: Ed Murphy ISSUE BEFO THE COUNCIL - ti Should the City Council forward a request for annexation of one parcel consisting of approximately 0.92 acre located at 11455 SW Walnut Street to the Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary commission? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolution and ordinance to forward the annexation to the Boundary commission and to assign a zoning designation of R-4.5 to the property. T, - INFORMATION SUMMARY This annexation request consists of one parcel totaling 0.92 acre that is contiguous to the City of Tigard on Walnut Street. The owners of the property requested annexation in order to obtain sanitary sewer service. The applicants requests annexation of their property via the "expedited method". The "expedited method" requires no public hearing by the Boundary Commission, and will allow annexation approval within 28 days, instead of the customary 45 days. There has been no response from neighboring property owners. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES ~ y 1. Adopt the attached resolution and ordinance to forward the annexation to the Boundary Commission and assign a zoning designation of R-4.5 to the property. 2. Deny the proposal. FISCAL NOTES The City of Tigard will pay the Boundary Commission fee of $140 for annexation. The current tax assessment is $92,650 The City could increase its tax base by approximately $173. (Assessed value multiplied by City tax base portion of tax rate of $1.87/1000 as of 1/1/90 = $173.25). va/ZCA92-03.Sun 1