The URL can be used to link to this page

SUB2006-00012 WITTIDRAWN B S U 2pp6, 00o12 FIBER ° ODs SUBDIVISIOAr � f cf), 0007 HEUtIVED / 18 2007 CITY OF ( Ac ) 11 +.. A c-r it-ii'. Poi en lc1c hereby w 601,✓i£/0' app 1' c (0n O ekes �. a-006, 6L-r) d sJJV H-, ,ems✓ a-/) O0.6 cchocJl eci P -�ees c -sSoc4 „} `-'1.1 s j c=>_oo6vas is Rave . been 4-ra red a-Pf. it c //ni De-ve-lop ere el 1 )aifie.A/ d.:,, Plily EA °°.°6 ° E APPLICANT MATERIALS ---‘11111L - PRE-APP.HELD BY: Fri CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVION CD LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION Z 2006 City gr Tigard Penrit Center 13125 SW Hall Blzd, Tigard OR 97223 Phone. 503.639.4171 Fax: 503.598.1960 CITY v, rIt;AR0 PLANNING/EN(a I Iv E ERIN( . File#{I 31 V(o op°la. I Other Case a a_26 -oo01 x-11/44(9a-a(o'vOU$`7 11/iL LYJ‘, bi8e Date INZIRM By 5.rz rAi F ii.1 I Fee Date Complete TYPT A'YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ®Adjustment/Variance(I or II) r Land Partition(II) ❑ Zone ' E ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendmen• 14' .armed Development(III) El 7 .ation(IV) ❑Conditional Use(III) . 4Sensitive Lands Review(I,II or III) r � .:Amendment(IV) ❑Historic Overlay(II or III' , ❑Site Development Review(II) 1ec`� ❑Home Occupation(II) Subdivision(II or III) 4 G♦ w•1 •i •. v ► . ► •(�'i_ s a L- TAX k �,, 1D+"t. �.t A-vv o 0 Ls 1367. Z 7600 // .7606 • a(°,AcseS TOTAL S SIZE 7 ZONING CLASSIFICATION i (...7 E_ APPLI ot-ot oc��r�,, (e0�( y-`/G MAILING ADDRESS/QTY/STA^TE/Z`IP Q �y��j PHONE N.J. 71° S w rru s ac� Ip �i()e r Jc v OQ . l 7 5 FAX O. c3 T A�T7Y - 223 c 603 .- S 79- 2�3 cPlinARY PHONE NO. ew,r - S I 6-c".1SCI £o3— 110- -z n 3 S PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER(Attac t if it than one) k—"-Det`444‘4:0 -74:17) ••••/‘1\-44040%"--eS t(C.- MAILING ADDRESSIQTY/S'L'ATE/ZIP PHONE-MD. EAXNO. b3 7/10-223g *When the owner and the applicant are different people,the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Please be specific) ,.1.,,f — e / f..s,I.ltfc w _7,,r� / Ci ?%,•3s (5 lDcoe, - rn 6 9 LC/4-&. 5w i �ivihwov44- • CS•e k/Cu r APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS Ati DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS"INFORMATION SHEET. is\curpin\masters\land use applications\land use permit app.doc Aar THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: ♦ If the application is granted,the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. ♦ All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued,based on this application,map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application,including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. vaaagar'- C Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date RESPONSE TO COMPLETENESS REVIEW For AMBER WOODS I 7 LOT SUBDIVISION UNADDRESSED SITE TAX MAP 1S1 36DD, TAX LOT 7500 & 7600 NOVEMBER 15 , 2006 PREFACE On October 20, 2006 City of Tigard Planning and Engineering staff reviewed a Land Use Permit Application for the above referenced project citing ( 9) nine specific elements needing additional or revised information. The application was not only incomplete but was flawed in its review type requested. This response will briefly describe the efforts to rehabilitate the application. 1. Ownership Information: A deed of the property is included with this revised application. 2. Neighborhood Meeting: An affidavit of mailing/posting was submitted with the original application. The meeting notice, an attendance sheet and minutes of the meeting accompany this revised application. 3. Site Development Review: The original application erringly submitted a Site Development Review application for a subdivision. All pertinent drawings, narrative, Impact Study and supporting documents have been revised to properly support a Subdivision without Planned Development Application. A revised CWS Service Provider Letter, reflecting a 7 Lot Residential Development, amended November 14, 2006 also accompanies this submittal. 4. Sensitive Land Review: The narrative has been rewritten to be more comprehensive in describing how each Code requirement has been met. In particular, the standards of 18.775. 070.D. , Sensitive Lands within Drainageways, has been stated then responses to address compliance are described. 5. Administrative Variance: A Type II Administrative Variance request for reduction in minimum density in accordance with 18. 370.010.C. has been properly requested and the additional fee has been calculated (See 18. 390.040.B.c. narrative response, page 4) . It appears the statement..."submit an additional payment of $168.50" may be wrong. The 06/07 Fee Schedule lists an "Administrative Variance" as $602 thus requiring a fee of $301. Page 1 of 2 6. Development Standards : The standards addressing the base development standards for the MUE zone have been more thoroughly explicated in the narrative with an excerpt of Table 18.520.2. with respect to lot size, setbacks, height, and coverage standards. Responses are also more complete. 7. Tree Removal Plan: The arborist inventory map is an approximation of tree locations; a pinpoint location of trees by survey will be made after clearing of blackberry bushes. CWS staff requires one of their personnel be present during clearing as part of the approved Service Provider Letter. The Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan, Sheet 8, and the Landscape Plan, Sheet 9, have been reformatted to more clearly show trees to be preserved and trees to be removed. The inventory numbers are illustrated to provide a better reference. Also, a tree inventory summary has been added to Sheet 8 to indicate the total number of trees over 12-inches, number of >12" trees to be removed and retained, the percentage of trees >12" to be removed and retained and the total caliper-inch of >12" trees removed. With 77% of >12" trees retained, no mitigation plan is necessary. 8. Narrative: The narrative was revised to, first state the Code standard, then apply the response of how the standards was met. 9. Public Facility Plan Checklist: The drawings and the narrative have been revised to comply with the "Public Facility Plan Completeness Checklist" . The existing planter strips will have a grass lawn cover between driveways on 70th Avenue. The existing 58 ft. driveway approach will be removed and three 16 ft. wide approaches will be constructed per the access report (enclosed) . Four 2-inch Paperbark Maple trees will be planted in the planter strip on 70th Avenue. The existing fire hydrant at the southwest corner of Dartmouth/69th Avenue is shown and a new fire hydrant will be placed near the north driveway of Lot 5. Another new fire hydrant will be placed at the north edge of the 30 ft. access on 69th Avenue. Water meter size is shown to be i-inch meters. Once the application is deemed complete, 10 sets, collated and bound documents with 3 large plan sets ( 24" x 36" ) , will be submitted. Additionally, two sets of pre-addressed and stamped #10 envelopes with current addresses of property owners within 500 feet will be provided. Page2of2 10/23/2006 11:10 5032887875 KEARNEY BOWEN SHEA PAGE 131/et • Wa''hlnpton County,Oregon 20^4-116674 0989/7006 03:07,18 PM • RECORDING REQUESTED BY oow crr•1 etru IRee / Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon s+e.oese.oas++.00seeo.00-taro., N5 J GRANTOR'S NAME 1 ii IIIII NI ill 111111 111111 I IIIN ,, PACIFIC NW PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 0101 741 52 00601 1 66 74 0 030 033 L ft:0*rd Inob.mle^t.DInet,,ar a..wm.nl and ,•'.�:,y, notation and E.-Officio Ceunty Clerk to W..Mnaten Si..'> r3, GRANTEE'S NAME csunev,oha•n,dehuwynta,/dwlth•vathin .=;'E.• - tn.trurn.nl aW,111 WY ne•IV.d and'worded In No M Dartmouth Townhomes LLC esd.er newel er'•id + r`'' . , .-Q q 14,.....4t m dpq@� ,i moment W Meb•mkM,Dlnct.r a llaa•nm,nt arc' •%t;.r+"' Until Further Notice Send Future Tax Statements To: Taxation,E.lxa. County Ci Darthmout Townhomes LLC 2508 N.E. 24th Avenue Portland, Or 97212 :y' WASHINGTON COU∎TY AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: °�rk':8: REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX Darthmout Townhomes LLC •'. `"G,. S __l? 9'2_9-04_ 2508 N.E. 24th Avenue FEE RAID DATE Portland, Or 97212 •:1r - 1 0. • •'• - • STATUTORY SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED PACIFIC NW PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, an Oregon limited partnership,who acquired title as Pacific Northwest Properties LTD Partnerships Limited Partnership, Grantor, conveys and specially warrants to Dartmouth Townhomes LLC,an Oregon limited liability company,Grantee,the following described real property,free and clear of encumbrances created or suffered by the Grantor except as specifically set forth below, situated in the _ County of Washington. State of Oregon, SEE EXHIBIT ONE ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF QSubject to and excepting: Ci SEE EXHIBIT TWO ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF C.) w J I— BEFORE SIGNING R ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE Q ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS,IF ANY,UNDER ORS 197.352. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE Q PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. Q BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE 4PROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES, TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930 8 AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 197.352. THE TRUE AND ACTUAL CONSIDERATION FOR THIS CONVEYANCE I S $500,0'• I I (See ORS 93.030) DATED: September 25, 2006 PACIFIC NW •.e• - • ES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP an Orego 1/ • .artnership By: 4 J om . - ern, Trustee of the TKS Trust dtd 2/2 /83 its Managing General Partner STATE OF OREGON COUNTY OF (4)4t a kt4 • This instrument was ckno edged d b before me on by • This instrument was acknowledged before me on September 25 , 2006 by Tom K. Stern as azustee of S T u d .d 27 as Managing General. Partner 1 1,_"...4... OFFICIAL SEAL 9 Notary Public for Oregon ,,, p 1 t'% KRISTIN L SLOCUM 1) My Commission Expires: /6j .SIX f - NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON O 1 -o COMMISSION NO.383944 () MYCOM 1 • ,'I. •CT.1 t.8 f - 1, FORD-311 (Rov STATUTORY SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED I odpwdeo d.wpd)(05.06) 10/23/2006 11:10 5032887875 KEARNEY BOWEN SHEA PAGE 02/05 Escrow No. 10.1 115824-VK-28 title Order No.01 1 15824 EXHIBIT ONE Lot "B" and Lots 17 through 33, inclusive. Block 11, WEST PORTLAND HEIGHTS, in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon. Excepting Therefrom that portion of said lots taken for the widening and realignment of S.W. Dartmouth Street by judgment entered December 22, 1994 in the Circuit Court for Washington County, case no. C930171CV. And Further Excepting Therefrom those portions of Lot "B" and Lots 19 through 26 dedicated for road or street purposes by deed recorded November 3, 2005, Recorder's No. 2005-138308, and re-recorded January 31, 2006, Recorder's No. 2006-011329. And Further Excepting Therefrom those portions of Lot "B" and Lots 19 through 26 described in Dedication Deed recorded November 3, 2005. Recorder's No. 2005-138309, and re-recorded January 31, 2006, Recorder's No. 2006-011330. And Further Excepting Therefrom those portions of Lots 17, 18 and "B"dedicated for road or street purposes by deed recorded November 3, 2005, Recorder's No. 2005.138312, and re-recorded January 31, 2006, Recorder's No. 2006-011331. 10/23/2006 11:10 5032887875 KEARNEY BOWEN SHEA PAGE 03/05 Exhibit Two to Special Warranty Deed 1. Property taxes,which are a lien not yet due and payable,including any assessments collected with taxes to be levied for the fiscal year 2006/2007. 2. Easement(s)for the purpose(s)shown below and rights incidental thereto as granted in a document. Granted to: owner of Lots 34,35 and 36 Purpose: drain field Recorded: July 9,1971,Book 825,Page 744 Affects: . Lots 31,32 and 35. No location stated. 3. Any adverse claim arising from uncertainty in the effect of"Dedication Deed for road or Street Purposes",recorded November 3,2005,Recorder's No. 2005-138309 and re-recorded January 31,2006,Recorder's No.2006- 011330. Said document conveys to the public a"perpetual easement for reserve of Right-of-way for street,road and utility purposes..." 4. Covenants,conditions and restrictions,but omitting any covenants or Restrictions,if any,based on race,color,religion,sex,sexual orientation, familial status,marital status,disability,handicap,national origin,acestry, or source of income,as set forth in applicable state or federal laws,except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable law, as set forth in document. Recorded: September 6,2006,Recorder's No.2006-106678 5. All matters that would be shown by a true and correct survey,including any Such matters done or suffered by Seller that would be shown by a true and correct Survey. 10/23/2006 11:10 5032887875 KEARNEY BOWEN SHEA PAGE 04/05 ;Washington County,eregen 106-116675 RECORDING REQUESTED BY 09125/2006 09:07:19 PM Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon OO10 c"t°+ �". I" P $1000 80.80 e11.00•Taw.SZr.Do GRANTOR'S NAME 1111111/11I1 jIIJflIH IIIIIMIIIJII� f Marzie Salarie \� 01741 00601166750020021 GRANTEE'S NAME i,Rams H.I.mIeM,Dlmeter OA.....moot ens 'rotation and E.-0Inq.Ceumy Cleft lhr%%.hlnalen I Dartmouth Townhomes, LLC Ce` Or.a.n,ea h.n.ey entry eel m•wrthm * ;ii I,etr m.nt of WON wee ne.lvetl end.w..n/.e In C.E. IOW et r.wrw ef.eldyyyy.a (I, ._t w,:.,�.. , SEND TAX STATEMENTS TO: RKn,.vw Iaeo.mmntCp�+,.4uor.eMu�itln�lm.nll sod Y `••'/ Tpeyen,E,Orylc.Co,,.l CIeM T,••;•~ Dartmouth Townhomes, LLC 2508 NE 24th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97212 z# AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: John M.Kearney 2508 NE 24th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97212 - :sY - 1 e. .•. - s STATUTORY QUITCLAIM DEED Marzie Salarie, Grantor, releases and quitclaims to ar,O r e c�o r, \, - 4e4 l cclol; c.or•.t-xtn Dartmouth Townhomes,LLC Grantee,all right title and interest in and to the following desttlibed real property,situated in the County of Washington, State of Oregon, • SEE EXHIBIT ONE ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF.'^,r This Deed is being recorded to show release of any interest in, or use of a drain field easement over Lots 31, 32 and 33 diesclosed in Warranty Deed recorded July 9, 1971 in Book 825, Page 744, Deed Records BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS,IF ANY,UNDER ORS 197.352. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTM ENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES, TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930 AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 197.352. THE TRUE AND ACTUAL CONSIDERATION FOR THIS CONVEYANCE IS 0£170007000701,(See ORS 93.030) S3a0.00 DATED: September 27, 2006 OP 4. 11e 7 .I r11fs instrument filed for record by Fidelity Marzie Safari: /.tlonat Bile as an accommodation only.It E,!:not been examined as to its execution M its effect upon the Otte 0 t- 111 `I —L STATE OF OREGON DLZi. Cox Z CA LA.– COUNTY OF Clackamas This instrument was acknowledged before me on �` OFFICIAL SEAL Septe�be'r 29, 2006 ! t,'w -y:? i\' .-.:t t.nucrnAl by Marzie Salarie .�. ;: CAR/No 3:,cCN N0.. ^64505• Mi GSMISSIIII F.XPIAEB JAR.1$.?nn; This instrument wa��noedged before me on — SAN k5 , woo`7 as of Notary Public 77/ for Oregon 7 iC� My Commission Expires: //17 07 FORD 310(Rev 2196) STATUTORY QUITCLAIM DEED (oegdoe1 wpd)105-06) 10/23/2006 11:10 5032887875 KEARNEY BOWEN SHEA PAGE 05/05 Eecrow'No. 10-11158244X-28 Tltle Order No.01115824 EXHIBIT ONE Lot "6" and Lots 17 through 33, inclusive, Block 11, WEST PORTLAND HEIGHTS, in the City of Tigard, Washington County,Oregon. Excepting Therefrom that portion of said lots taken for the widening and realignment of S.W. Dartmouth Street by judgment entered December 22, 1994 in the Circuit Court for Washington County,case no. C930171 CV. And Further Excepting Therefrom those portions of Lot "B" and Lots 19 through 26 dedicated for road or street purposes by deed recorded November 3, 2005, Recorder's No. 2005-138308, and re-recorded January 31, 2006, Recorder's No. 2006-011329. And Further Excepting Therefrom those portions of Lot "B" and Lots 19 through 26 described in Dedication Deed recorded November 3, 2005, Recorder's No. 2005-138309, and re-recorded January 31, 2006, Recorder's No. 2008-011330. And Further Excepting Therefrom those portions of Lots 17, 18 and"B"dedicated for road or street purposes by deed recorded November 3, 2005, Recorder's No. 2005-138312, and re-recorded January 31, 2006, Recorder's No. 2006-011331. Neighborhood Meeting Notes C M, • 6:30 pm. Open meeting and reading of the Statement of Purpose. Meeting Questions 7:00 p.m • On 70th, are the street improvements going to go to Clinton or will they stop at the property line, • Is there a possibility to have extra screening by building a higher fence around your development? • What are the "Star"patterns representing on the design, • Who maintains the buffer area and the landscaping on the property? • Are the units for rent or are they for sale. • How much do you anticipate the sales to be? • How large are the units. • Have you built this project before? • When do you anticipate submitting an application and how long will it be before you start to build. • What is a"buffer" and why is it there. • Are the units going to have natural gas? • Will the units have yards? • What are common walls? • Why are you building"condos"and what is the difference between a condo and a townhome. • Why are we invited to this meeting what can we do to help. • Are there sewer and water available to your property? Meeting Close 8:45 PM AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE IMPORTANT NOTICE: THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MAIL THE CITY OF:TIGARD A COPY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE THAT PERTAINS TO.THIS AFFIDAVIT AT THE SAME TIME PROPERTY 1. OWNERS ARE MAILED NOTICE, TO THE ADDRESS BELOW: City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-8189 IN ADDITION; OE-APPLICANT SHALL;SUBMIT;THIS AFFIDAVIT SrtCUP,IES O AL;L NOTICES AT THI TIME OF APPLICATION. ( (LING: I, S G 6� , being duly sworn, depose and say that on the•W# day of /14a r�/L 20 I caused to have m il�d toeeash of the persons on t e attached list, a notic f a meeting to discuss a proposed 7 2 �� P P development at(or near) °1F1, o.T f►mc�,s�� , a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plaincl.yddressed to said persons and were dep ited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at ver�,�, ,TS f •S'.rree-,4 agz� with postage prepaid thereon. Signature ence • 'otary Public) PcOTING: "3 • 6,_ , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed affecting the id located at state thh approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently,regitered) 6.1111-- J%,, 7e and did on the 20 Pb, day of ►o". , 20 p personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a 574# application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at 6�f ( (1-(1-14'0 0-1'4 (state location you posted notice on property) r— ma • . - • Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF Or County of (Jck..s;,,rt ) ss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 2 / day of / 6s4 b z>r , 20 c OFFICIAL SEAL ,` g ICttISIIF J PEERMAN . NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON l.J '" COMMISSION N0.370962 MYCOMMISSIONEX'!RESJULY28,2007 NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON My Commission Expires: Applicant, please complete the information below: NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Address or General Location of Subject Property: Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): P C°5 (j ? ,. awq, / ) '7/ 90J !T$°% E 977 - t < <<> () c'F' // 2;77" /7(1 (h71?Af f • "9-°) ) u-Y) " Afai- - z - vs- -Jy / to/f(A7 /47i-zr. ft:3 \< File Number C1eanWater Services 06-002386 Our commitment is clear. Clean Water Services Amended Service Provider Letter Jurisdiction Washington County Original August 22, 2006 Amended November 14, 2006 Map & Tax Lot 1S136DD-07500, 07600 Owner Pacific NW Properties LTD Site Address Applicant VIC ACCOMANDO CONSULTING ENGINEER Tigard, OR 97223 Address 7250 SW Ashdale Dr Portland, OR 97223 Proposed Activity 7 Lot residential development Phone (503) 890-5483 This form and the attached conditions will serve as your Service Provider Letter in accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (R&O 04-9). ___I YES NO YES NO Natural Resources f • ' Alternatives Analysis Assessment (NRA) X Required X Submitted I (Section 3.02.6) District Site Visit Date: X Tier 1 Alternatives Analysis X Concur with NRA/or submitted information X Tier 2 Alternatives Analysis X , , Sensitive Area Present X ; Tier 3 Alternatives Analysis X On-Site • I - Sensitive Area Present I Vegetated Corridor Off-Site X , Averaging X Vegetated Corridor Vegetated Corridor X i Present On-Site Mitigation Required - Width of Vegetated On-Site Mitigation Corridor(feet) • 50 Feet 1,260 sf X Condition of Vegetated I Margi.^.al!Degraded ' Off-Site Mitigation X Corridor Enhancement Required X I Planting Plan Attached X I Encroachment into Enhancement/restoration Concurrent with site Vegetated Corridor X completion date • development (Section 3.02.4) Type and Square Footage i �.25s af.Total Geotechnical Report i X of Encroachment tfLot-1,23 required Ouall—24 4 s sf f. q I i Allowed Use X X Conditions Attached (Section 3.02.4) Outfall Lot . This Service Provider Letter does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your property. Page 1 of 5 F i/e N u m b e r 06.0 023e6 In order to °SpY with Cle th e /ces nt District)water quality protection requirements project RC �ptY wih tto/%wing c° d tiQ' �� fUres ant construction t vities, gard /nW ns' applrc t/ f chemica 0�a/n afs of hazardous materials as Y 0 e90 Department of of Envir onmental i�hst epet wastes, dumping t f mate aer: ici i , or other activities a/l � t ed within the sensitive may nel vel y impact of ual ity except those allowed by Section 3.02.3.No structures, development, construction activities, gbrdens Jaw application °f nmea Is,nt ad are s hazardous materials as de edO x°t partrn nv to al QU a pet es ap nmay n� a aai ' °the ct , sho/see pernitted within corridor 9ely impact ater quality, except the llow ed by Section 4. Rep/anting 3. prior to site grading �°ntruction corridor seas;ti ve a be � nda d temporarily per aap°ue During str 5 iege t corridor Shalea fenced and undlsturedexcept aS allowed by Section 3.02.5 and Plans. 4. aitivitY within the a / area the applicant gain authorization for the pr°le s at h Divisi on Satewds(Dgt)an op aArrps : w (USAC The pp/i�nS provide e Distrcos designee currently(appropriate city) with copies lDSC and OSACE project authorization p s, NO impacts proposd5. An approved Department of Forestry Notification /s re9uir for e more trees harvested u ant tfor a eO trade, or s y non-federal Ja aswithin the State Oregon.6 ' °pr;ate Best M genent Pea c i (B MP's) for�u Control, ;n a/nrd ance with a �os; nactol lhn al Guidance Manual shall b $�a pr/or to, d � and folJov�g disturb g ivles 7 p as to construction, 7,t Connection Permit from the District or its designee is required o Crdie 2Section 4 8 The District or City/County shall eQuire an easement over th s ated o nveYing storm, rfa e Wata�e eat, sewer to District conveying prevent owhV get from s and uses inconsistent t �purpose i°°r and any ease tents therein. 9 Act/vibes located within the 100-year fl°odpJa;n shall comp/y with Section 3.13 of RAC p 4 9 tg. Remo va/of native, woody vegetation shall be limited to the greatest extent practicable.17 Removl n invasive non-native species by hand required in all vegetated corridors rated "good".is required in any areas/argha square feet 92 Should final development plans differ f ° submitted for �v/ew by t e s r °� e p/ct shall provide updtd drawin9s, andne essary' °btan a r e viSe dseryice Pr ;a Letter.13 e corridor width or senslt/v de awithin the�° t n shall be a a inihum o f Sp feet wide, from the nete d bOUnday°f the areSPECIAL cO me Water Services shall se notified hours to t start and c n °f es �restO at oactivltieEnhancement/restoration t/Vts all comply the 9uldeJinepr°v/ded in Landscape Requirements(R&p 04-9:Appendb(0)corridor Page 2of5 File Number 06-002386 15. Prior to installation of plant materials, all invasive vegetation within the vegetated corridor shall be removed. During removal of invasive vegetation care shall be taken to minimize impacts to existing native trees and shrub species. 16. Enhancement/restoration of the vegetated corridor shall be provided in accordance with R&O 04-9, Appendix D. 17. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction, the applicant shall provide the District with the required vegetated corridor enhancement/restoration plan in compliance with R&O 04-9. 18. Maintenance and monitoring requirements shall comply with Section 2.11.2 of R&O 04-9. If at any time during the warranty period the landscaping falls below the 80% survival level, the Owner shall reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity and the two year maintenance period shall begin again from the date of replanting. 19. Performance assurances for the vegetated corridor shall comply with Section 2.06.2, Table 2-1 and Section 2.10, Table 2-2. 20. For any developments, which create multiple parcels or lots intended for separate ownership, the District may require that the sensitive area and vegetated corridor be contained in a separate tract and subject to a "STORM SEWER, SURFACE WATER, DRAINAGE AND DETENTION EASEMENT OVER ITS ENTIRETY"to be granted to the city or Clean Water Services. 21. The water quality swale and detention pond shall be planted with District approved native species, and designed to blend into the natural surroundings. CONDITIONS TO BE INCLUDED ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS 22. Final construction plans shall include landscape plans. Plans shall include in the details a description of the methods for removal and control of exotic species, location, distribution, condition and size of plantings, existing plants and trees to be preserved, and installation methods for plant materials. Plantings shall be tagged for dormant season identification. Tags to remain on plant material after planting for monitoring purposes. 23. A Maintenance Plan shall be included on final plans including methods, responsible party contact information, and dates (minimum two times per year, by June 1 and September 30). 24. Final construction plans shall clearly depict the location and dimensions of the sensitive area and the vegetated corridor (indicating good, marginal, or degraded condition). Sensitive area boundaries shall be marked in the field. 25. Protection of the vegetated corridors and associated sensitive areas shall be provided by the installation of permanent fencing and signage between the development and the outer limits of the vegetated corridors. Fencing details to be included on final construction plans. This Service Provider Letter is not valid unless CWS-approved site plan is attached. Please call (503) 681-3613 with any questions. Julie Wirth Environmental Plan Review Attachments ( 1 ) Page 3 of 5 11164. 16,221 I B 20 r • �'. I PLANT LIST 0 t�st� II Z �q'7r— \ • - I I OREGON /7 •00 — LJOOO r iT•Z* •• • s.ar ►7i7%�Q 288 II�� sYMBOL NAME 51ze altANm Gc.♦+8+15 6,�,�it ,tj//• C)\ 11930 5W r .IDS 7 _ `te I� '� kV ii I `.AWl1B.5 �C• • 70th AVE r �2, I \/ I I 1 I 7 R5 RISES 5M6ANELM 3 bAL a GONTAIIER 7 1L f1�I�IVIIiI]i\L •\ I NOT A PART OF THIS PROJECT „ \ 22' W x 40' I I I,\ RED I;ONIQtN16 u.RIaANr 0'O.G. I. I 1BS�1_- 11 1 ,IDS -•——Q - `� it O AA WE5TAW 59tV1C.�87RY 3 6AL. 79 CONTANBQ 1650 S,WTT BERLANDE•^1 i I o I ■ll 0-so• I 2 (:p 7 ! �t 0 BD 31DDLEIA DAVIDII BLACK*DENY 5 6AL 20 CONTAINER BEAVERTON,OR WC • 40 0 40 80 ))01; IQ I 22' W x 40' r.o.• ?8t v'�i . II 3mEFFLY 13!54,BIAC.K KWONT 35'0t. PH: 50'3 8cf0-54e' S PC. PMLMELPFII5 CORONARAlS 3'HT.MIK 20 CONTAII@t t o - T-oE O D5 ■■ I I *1 FAX: 503-259-450. 1I C\ • - �' accomandot®msn-cor ■! w SPEED MOCK MANSE 35'O G. {tom L I ' I II 2 SO. FT. ENCROACHMENT •• 1111 3 r�� n < I e EA EUONTHA5 ALAN'COMPACTA' 5 6AL 13 CONTAINER • 22' W x 40' A■■ ' _ _ 1• DwARP aFPUN6 eUr}+ 6'OL.I 1�■■, ;1 0 • ; § 1 c if.- I I • _ II.DS _.__1 s :. .�,�. �. V7+-(p Stt EQL NAME SIZE fiIANTIrY CLIMB05• 0 I Ill �F<ti�••` I . �/� Pw 4 0 - Pc �'01��:� Pc 6Rawcoval > > > > - ,,$ 41 24 SQ. FT. ..�, .!;I;Y� IQ 22' W x 40' =, °1■ 2 AF ,>,d11LENA FOI�IOFaA 36AL. 58 CONTAINER ; I I l� 4` to ENCROACHMENT •/WIC 1,,1 II - �■ Yf5rH7NGOLLMBWE u it 1 `•j;�` (RIP-RAP) �;�;�;�,�, ,�♦ '' . r OS �;�s�o �f�1i A��'�.1 30 1-114 1 , i1 . 9�%��%�_ �1��'�►� RR "11 _ ,. �y�__�+„ e`� .-_■"} En ,,,k11 KIIWIKINAT GARfYLO5 WA-URril 16AL. 39 GONTANER F�,j i Es I . 660 SQ. F CROACHME 61 �� 9 .,�.:. - - �l<;� r Nt' 572 SO. FT. ENCROACHMENT { 1}\%Wj1,y^1�. hS- * � ■■ „ ,r, i I ' y 1,258 SO. FT. TOTAL ENCROAC MEN 14 _ A • P h \N„. �� '■■ l C 3 fl � ■./ ��,■■ 3 . SYMBOL NAME SIZE aawttlY LolrFxlS p � p O 8, , I+� 'iy\�jp�� ` �.1�iI I1 rREE5 § W•\ - - - -V - , 1�QE�,v , .•1Q ' AF .O$i . .`a ��\ �� ,■a"'I •• : i K f1 16a ■_■<Lr r r/1r p • .� aTr.T•):��`a , e� �" r„,�.'.'��\� . �,r•IT,..V.. �� , LL 1 -_, ... T�v.} ih_•i woo, �`♦ ,�` ,tvr 1n.. i■N : JJL/ A OCCIDF NTALI9 8•�RaNTMIN. S] B 1 B :^� iALD 6RE5t1 ARBORVITAE 1�Limi ®®®d . !PRI. 6 .1 I 24' W x 40' , .. - �...\ .f•'Rp . t . ,,,,,,:oovw.,,N....' .i•4 ■■ I W ” is ♦v I 1 1 I h 11 Q Ilk 1583 I,1 l f 74 -74.,,'.11, �,3 i •'r •,44d�,,17,4:♦:i`a�•,.'•♦d.■■ N.,t 0 5 Nai ►.•.' �S�� t► ki� ar''/..:;:ti i.♦s♦i I�i.••♦IC t.4 Q'•i i■■ ��B,../..,,....b,,,_4ird. •v■:•-W4*044:0•:•,••PAW 4.011 24' W x 4• s' It•` 2042 o ►:4' ,►,�` ` . 4.• • ..�\'41I' • •❑ ❑ =❖♦Oi,,,,,, •W,,,, r t•J►�� ∎� Aa..:177%.,7_,A740-A�j ,,ti t. '.•d.✓J' ..♦•!i♦•�w�■■ \ \•' ./tere �l D-A1�_�V.� • : r �� • •n ■• r •• O •�.•i,��i%♦�4•.'■■ \: : 1 I \z.:_■41.••„;•-• ... 4 ,,n, JO 0•0 0 ja---• d cf cf ■■ 111 '7_� ``�'```\'t4,��` P ., . .•,�0 e •❑ ,❑ ❑ ❑ ❑4.....,,,vi 11414, �\ ' \ �. �. C it, `�j: •6 ..�. III �'Al 4... . ,... * - Imo,." o..„*.cA , , 1 ' -11141611C11.-"W '7.1... Ar • •g- 4. ■ L. -- 0'"'"- • �� f�iii!/io.✓iianii> viimii_iL/ice /11//** �dc, R,,,,;,, ! �� I o ��■■■ ■■//■/1\ ■11//■■■■IS//p■■■■//11■■11■■■■■■I1/■B■■■//■�■■11////■/11/* I I ' 0 1 co)V~] 6 Q � � 1 I 1 ■ ■■/ If■■■■N■■■■/■II: ,■■■///9111/!1!1■/11■■■It/■11■■�1■ ■ _ 1 i — 1 /1 ! h / / l f I I � 1\ 1 l / 1 � I 1 �, 3 1 tol B �s5 ss ��:' , -(SS 0 ,iJ -S 11 I_SS -ti J ■ 1�� i\ I ,, 2 t o+oD' //: 1 1 SW DA TMO TH T 11 GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT NOTES 1. OWNER OR DESIGNATED PERSON SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROPER INSTALLATION 4. IF THERE ARE EXPOSED SOILS OR SOILS NOT FULLY ESTABLISHED FROM OCTOBER 1st THROUGH APRIL 30th, PRO.BCT BABB AND MA INTENANCE OF ALL EROSION ANO SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES. IN ACCORDANCE THE WET WEATHER EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES NIL! BE IN EFFECT. SEE THE EROSION PREVENTION WITH LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS. AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANNING AND DESIGN MANUAL (CHAPTER 4) FOR REQUIREMENTS. AMBER WOODS I 2- THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CLEARING LIMITS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN SHALL BE CLEARLY MARKED 5. SITE TO COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF CWS DESIGN 6 CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS (R60 04-9). TOWNHOMES IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. NO DISTURBANCE SUBDIVISION BEYOND THE CLEARING LIMITS SHALL BE PERMITTED. THE MARKINGS SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY 6. REMOVAL OF HIMALAYALAN BLACKBERRY VINES AND ENGLISH IVY SHALL COMPLY WITH THE THE APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. RECOMMENDATIONS OF CLEAN WATER SERVICES' "INTEGRATED VEGETATION AND ANIMAL MANAGEMENT rn.BLY"'BATON GUIDANCE" BOOKLET. TL 1500 d TL 1600 3. THE ESC FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL CLEARING AND GRADING ACTIVITIES. AND SUCH A MANNER AS TO INSURE THAT SEDIMENT AND TM ISI 36DD SEDIMENT LADEN WATER GOES NOT ENTER THE ORAINAGE SYSTEM. ROADWAYS OR VIOLATE TIGARD,OR 11223 APPLICABLE WATER STANDARDS. O•AYN Sr ...<2a Br VJA J5 10111 .. I1 11'," -- i, L.. ----A-- w zo-T-pAL -. -- .4----------4- z -14 F.L.,,IV A i. 1. .30. 1 0%Iiiiiiiice-..'*..40•• A,4 ' . Kr A..P A,/0.0.AMVIIS• 2'•7I 1 I 1 i-'-, ■'..--.1 4:'.A s 1..1I 1' . .1. 7,11.II o\ 0 WA36 l'AS11 3 3WAC3513, e 3. .A.4rCO.K.IA!.C2A. MANDO 1305,5131 CONSUL TIM ENGINEER 16150 5V1T1MXRLAND 00 1 ' ' IMMINI 'fir 1 ti 40 0 . .0 \■c? g*I „. . .. \ 1H. I a I %[ 'i4 o CV 0/311.WAWA 13./.1.5.0 ,.A, . ....., 5.0510,05.WA/AcK•Aw WO:. BEAVER`ON.OR 31001 ML 509 640 5463 FAX SCr3-2741-41b06 ,:- ii: 01, . .... mt.,.r....... N.FI■Mk . 0.30AWA -1.1 I! I , CACCner,na.‘7171.1,4,it,An t1\)(\e\sj „_,,, o- . r _4,i r. _.. , flIft I 47...1(.....5 33.3 11 \ I j. /4 LOT 2 t 's -I/ 3 • .1 • r... a.m.AL AI YorYTA:1K 5 OAL L2 WYMAN 1 7 SO el.13500,331.111 40. . PO i'fill t. Ww.0 0A. I i 1! il '1 h A I I, 1 4..v\ v . .4,.. 24 SI.f 1 0\1 .._. '.• : a--- ' 4 , I .•-7,..6*...Z ,.• 22' W o 40' , •' Mill Ell;,111-07-44.. .; (. 0333 PlAst 0.303030 " r'sr,r4-2.4..'"'' LPF qvarn7 M.O. •.-.-...---.---.. 5 AA S3 WON. '''.1°.".r.e..,"T ,•,,,,, • I r tot • > I L 1 ...,•_-$10 or,61 i•• . , if ■ .i eN5' 4 , - STte%,:e:i'so-k.'' t ..1.*.www., ' AI AK.Ard VA,OA 7.,-.AN I 6AI 3 "WAWA I I. .1\ i ••c 5.,e.. '--'trivi' - ■:,-`■- .&77. ...M4hori , -,--r1-4--P Eno-natl....64 IOWA AVM I SO IF L5.301 1 1 li, sm. wrf ............"_cf.*. WM \ A‘,.. ..At-A.... \via:'-'2K“.• . •ll• _ '_'=.•*... .'L.IVA....1, .5. .141%, ,... • . 1110. 1,1 : •ik l'.1,1. /1 i 1.1 1 0 r. mi...4.6.siss 5301., A W Mb 3 5 a 2 MACAO aKt,A•730.1:Ae 5 OG .,st\...), It i _.o„ . ;ilia .,+.,,,....,...: 4,k11,..it■-•, ,WI`v. ..0,,...-4j,\A.:4::,'..,`,.;01....... ..,_:. . ,, , i 1 eui.C.,A -.1 U/11/ . \ I\j tl-1 5 It*lir% 4 '" _4-1■■1*„,,)' •••S‘\- \ . ../.-r 6w4,2 I. '-110-4,1 *:.N\ IN"9 ..,SiONEN I • 1 t 1,- entsvett.i.en.t.1- , will 4143 1 \"It-1. .1 L .1 _._24 2.IVI§_'--4.-C;■ ‘,1 - .,, 4...,..,:*„.,,als>. 0,,...,. ...,,..\__,:f.04,4firp :.--,41.i....i ;-, vIri . ,r■ --4-- i t4 40 6! , • t::1-,-V1 . ■ 24' W 4 ' kl 11N'.4 \` ■.. .4,,'..e.i- ril,K4UlC ..;, ,• I L ', , , •' •< 4._ ....0 1583 7,-;!*,4,1'''...17.48Y.A: Ak.\\. '6-,,,,,jelifiiikik4sIgiVirie,. `I, , ' 'irlitfl W- -fl L.4:,-'.''''",,1.' ''' :'''4,‘'‘ \'‘b,,,44..4*.rfWell:,/k4. -i• ' 1' I \,/1-• ti, 1 N.,..-z,11=-47 i 7 ,, ' ,j.,,,%.4.' . ' , i'4'1;-, ,13 ' I ik I ilf ..__:,‘,.....L.....A.e._,_. „I_ . •_,.........,.....=.„......;........ , . . , . .. ,,,,_),.,.. .....•r ,, „... v.,,,,, 1 •••• I:r.- ' I 4/ ..Fe .51, (e..12.6.5 \/I - -4,- ...1 i 1"' •■ 2. '...: ii;■-' el, 44. . _ il- s Xik*C.J.,46.11,.\ ' _. 41. ■.:),iyi c•,? 91!1,,k.,_,32..i iii.. * I 4 , , , „ Approved p-,z • ,.,“ \- C1ean Water Services ...111;--1 ----1■ ,■ *-\V.:41i°'-...,.,'`-.':.1 ..1:fizrr j."' ,,,t''':?..-;,...u.s.''"'' `,,,..\ 7._./.4; i 1 c -, .1,cs,,.\ • ''' ----x-=`'.. -"I" *-'■ --. .7'.-‹ A, '...ii-1(i . , '', ,.. (.. , , y. % . LA ,T , Tsl Pale j./.7/1--A. r...1 •-,, , con TA-1 = 3 C.v.,'' _../V •:' . / 1 .1 ,-:-.4, .1"\'s-.__ -',.. ' ' , -• ' .. ..,,...,_. c , . .eY - :. •, •>, \ , .,,.,.. -,C 1-• >4 rez 478 pa e)„„e,CA. ,r‹,' , 11\ I‘. v. +./_-fropo-ft. j [-J.,It■rigl '''T''4'1.'Ili"- '08',111.1 II, 7-11,17,..77.:7,:-7,......„1.-x., AL.,,,,J,,,, 1‘..ii-i,i; 1...4.11,'.. i ii , ..!....,,,...71----) --) 1 7,-\\. -.7;.;..4: % - 14 i,;I .t2-.1..4- V • ..,,,,,\,,,_ • ;g;,;;,1.;111' r.t-.1-L.I- 1.70"..4W7T-. ' 1'..;"'''t ' I !i' 1 r I ..;;,- AtliMje 6 FL '4C1 fr%.tAlt , , , 1 ;; i if I I .',.; •/'.1 ! i i I i VI . sw A H 3 1 ;, 1 • , • f ' ; __ -(17_ _,2 .• i-) - .---(--4---=4,./-.:-i r -('‘---V-... ----1,- -t"--='-"=--I .----(7- -if 1\.--441:\-In-Irlri '`: liki ■ _1,-.1 „ D IM01,1 ■ i . , GRADING dr EROSION CONTROL PLAN NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT NOTES 1 WWI 04 5651044110 P1111014 WWI.) HE'AS1'01619E1 POO IMMO INNIALLAIION 4 IF 1•1114 10 LAPOLI 5 50115 00 0115 NOI rob r 1SIA14 MOD 110V 56700(4 ist 1104101•14711 VAI, .4444..44 AND A4INI01401 OF ALT c101DON AND SEILINFNI I190D0 *4711005 12:ACL0104170)1 INE 601*4174 11 Proir:000 Alt V1NIIO4 0(0057565 ND 1 LC IN(11-1^0 4, 174 110)111*14411101160 Will'?LOCAL, 5IA 11 AMY 111111741.1.44114411140 410 5E014E0';ONIYICA 154.000005 AM)0 I MON NINUA■ 104111101 10 100 111.1111114-114, MON Vt0005 i roottomcs , II*DOUNDARDS OF DAV CLI•APINL LBWS 5N0441 ON MI5 KAN 01411 lit•111414 1 ouiva-u 9 511f 10 0941 0 WIN 4.4 045011114:NIF 01 CNA:CM 1:1C.IY 6 comao,r,ta,514■04RD5 (HOT)04-00) IN bAt(17)0 POMO 10((95 114411115) 01.0110 III CONSIFitit ION■11160. HO DISTLABANCE WROIV 510A 114101111 DIE cteAmms 110115 511444 BE PLOINIIITO 111•14411111105'0011/I PE NAINTAINIO Or 6 NymOvAt 111 MINN AVID AN Elm:48E141?41N15 AM,AN 0 4501 IVY WAIL 'fret v VIM OE DE APR ILAN1/LON11144106 FOR 04f OURATION Of(94.571401 1110 141L6041A0111055 Or CC..11.40 5(1141,75 INILWAII0 NI a I A:DAV AV)ANINAt IMNAGFAIRD 6111114AC.•0I477177. P..7500 i IL 1600 1 (It(6T 14711111L).9490460 1)713 Pt AN mug/OL LONSDAL,111 IN LONANCIION HIM 4,, 04"51 3600 LLCADING 400 000(0140 AL110!ICS. AND 5101 A tumcn A5 TO Dan 10441.sintmEwt AND 51011*Ni 140104 VAUD 001`.Nor rtarki ric IINAMILE 545110 10404115 OP V10,•11 T164/40 OR 91279 ADIS((AS IC 414101 514104165 8 AN .0 I 2 wo '720 l''. t WAR Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue February 5, 2006 Dennis J. Grayson Allied Development, LLC 8790 SW Turquoise Loop Beaverton, OR 97007 Re: Amber Woods Townhomes Dear Dennis, Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed site plan surrounding the above named development project. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval: 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUILDING AND TURNAROUNDS: Access roads shall be within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. An approved turnaround is required if the remaining distance to an approved intersecting roadway, as measured along the fire apparatus access road, is greater than 150 feet. (IFC 503.1.1) 2) AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS: Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet in height. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. (IFC D105) 3) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS WITH FIRE HYDRANTS: Where a fire hydrant is located on a fire apparatus access road, the minimum road width shall be 26 feet. (IFC D103.1) 4) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi, whichever is less as calculated using IFC, Appendix B. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's Office. (IFC B105.2) Each of the required number of fire hydrants must be capable of supplying the necessary fire flow. 5) FIRE HYDRANTS — COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS: Where a portion of the building is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. This distance may be increased to 600 feet for buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system. (IFC 508.5.1) The required number of fire hydrants must meet this distance restriction. North Division Office 14480 SW Jenkins Road, Beaverton, OR 97005 Phone: 503-356-4700 Fax: 503-644-2214 www.tvfr.com TVA( Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue 6) FIRE HYDRANT NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION: The minimum number and distribution of fire hydrants available to a building shall not be less than that listed in Appendix C, Table C 105.1. Considerations for placing fire hydrants may be as follows: • Existing hydrants in the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants as approved. Hydrants that are up to 600 feet away from the nearest point of a subject building that is protected with fire sprinklers may contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants unless approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highways or freeways shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Heavily traveled collector streets only as approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the fire code official. 7) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. (IFC 1410.1 & 1412.1) We trust this letter will be helpful with the final design of this proposal insofar as fire apparatus access and firefighting water supplies are concerned. If there is anything about this letter you do not understand, disagree with, or wish to discuss further, please call me. Sincerely, John K . Dalby John K. Dalby, Deputy Fire Marshal II Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, North Division 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton, OR 97005-1152 (503) 356-4723 North Division Office 14480 SW Jenkins Road, Beaverton,OR 97005 Phone: 503-356-4700 Fax: 503-644-2214 www.tvfr.com ACCESS REPORT For AMBER WOODS I 7 LOT SUBDIVISION UNADDRESSED SITE TAX MAP 1S1 36DD, TAX LOT 7500 & 7600 NOVEMBER 15 , 2006 This access report is a response to the requirements of Code Chapter 18.705.030.H. "Access Management": 1. An access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO (depending on jurisdiction of facility.) Four separate accesses will be examined for this project, all located within the constraints of Code Chapter 18.620, "Tigard Triangle Design Standards". Four lots (Lot 1, Lot 2, Lot 3 and Lot 4) will be developed along SW 69th Avenue in this MUE zoning district allowing attached multi-family residential units and referred herein as 'Access I'. Three separate 16-feet wide driveways, also part of this project, are located on SW 70th Avenue providing approaches to three individual attached multi-family lots. These accesses are positioned at the eastern boundary of the C-G zoning district, abutting the lots, which are in the MUE zone and are referred to as `Access II'. Access I: Access I is a 30 feet wide driveway approach positioned on the west right-of-way line designed in accordance with the City's Standard Detail Drawing No. 141 for `Standard Driveway w/ Landscape Strips'. Located 254.30 feet north of the intersection of SW Dartmouth Street and 69th Avenue; the access centerline is 224.30 feet south of the intersection of SW 69th Avenue and SW Clinton Street. Under a previous land use permit, a 20 feet wide concrete access was constructed with centerline of access 17.67 feet from the project's north property line. To accommodate the new alignment, the access will be reconstructed with centerline 20.00 feet from north property line. This alignment provides 57 feet separation from the nearby driveway to the north (11905 SW 69th Ave.). Serving four multi-family residential lots, the number of trips expected to be generated by the proposed access is calculated as: Land Use Base Unit PM Peak ADT ADT Range Single-Family Per D/U .75 9.95 4.31 —21.85 Condo/TownHome Per D/U .52 10.71 1.83— 11.79 Source: Instititute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Trip Generation 43 average daily trips with left /right turn-in and turnout movements allowed. Sight distance is unimpaired on 69th Avenue, a local street (25 m.p.h.) and no safety related deficiencies are identified on this 25-ft. wide paved roadway with no diminished LOS at either the Clinton Street or Dartmouth Street intersection. Three Page 1 of 2 . other residential lots are served by o9th Avenue on this block and observations made October 17, 2006 during evening peak hour counted 82 trips. Arrival rate for southbound vehicles at the Dartmouth/69th Ave. four-way stop intersection was intermittent. All queues were five or less vehicles, which suggests a 95th percentile queue between 100 and 125 feet. The driveway will be 205 feet from the stop sign and out of the influence of the queue. Access II: Access II is three separate 16 feet wide driveway approaches, serving Lot 5, Lot 6 and Lot 7, positioned on the east right-of-way line with 24 feet separation from centerline to centerline (8 feet separation from edge to edge). The City's Standard Drawing No. 140 for `Driveway Approach Locations' indicates 6 feet minimum between adjacent property line and driveway approach. The design shows driveways 2.2 feet from property line on one side and 5. 8 feet from the property line on the other side to allow connecting sidewalk path to the front door. This report requests approval from the City Engineer to allow the less than minimum while implementing the Standard Drawing 141, 'Standard Driveway w/ Landscape Strips'. SW 70111 Avenue is presently barricaded at the north project boundary and no traffic is present, other than the occasional vehicle using the street for a turn-around. Once improved, 70th Avenue will connect Dartmouth to Clinton serving the three new parcels and two present residences with projected trips of 50 vehicles per day. The southerly most lot access, Lot 7, is 46 feet from the Dartmouth/70th future stop sign. While the driveway is not outside the influence of the southbound queue, it is possible for vehicles to exit Lot 7 with reasonable delays. SW 70th Avenue was previously improved with an 18 feet half-street improvement with curb & gutter, 3.5 feet planter and 8 feet wide sidewalk. Curb to opposing edge of pavement is 24 feet. The previous improvements constructed a 58 feet wide access which will be removed to allow the three approaches Endnote: Since the addition of the site traffic will have a negligible effect on traffic capacity and the southbound queue length on 69th Avenue and 70th Avenue, no improvement is required to mitigate the impact of the site development. Page 2 of 2 IMPACT STUDY For AMBER WOODS I 7 LOT SUBDIVISION UNADDRESSED SITE TAX MAP 1S1 36DD, TAX LOT 7500 & 7600 NOVEMBER 15 , 2006 INTRODUCTION The proposed site, adjacent to SW Dartmouth Street, spans two tax lots: Tax Lot 7500 is a 14,530.62 sq. ft. (0. 33-acre) parcel located at the west side of the site along SW 70th Avenue. Tax Lot 7600 is a 24, 132.20 sq. ft. ( 0. 55-acre) parcel at the east part of the site along SW 69th within the city limits of Tigard, Oregon. The total site is 0.89 acres. The existing use of the parcels is undeveloped urban forest. The City of Tigard has designated the parcels as within the MUE (Mixed Use Employment) zoning district and applies the "Tigard Triangle Design Standards" criteria to this application. SW 70th Avenue is aligned with the east edge of zoning district C-G, General Commercial with a Planned Unit Overlay. A Type II Subdivision Application and a Type II Sensitive Lands Review is submitted with this Impact Study proposing to build a (7) seven lot subdivision for attached multi-family townhome units, with front garages. Four (4 ) lots access SW 69th Avenue via a 30 ft. wide access and three ( 3) lots have individual 16 feet wide accesses on SW 70th Avenue. No access is proposed to SW Dartmouth Street. Half-street improvements along the frontage of SW 69th Avenue, SW 70th Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street have been completed under a separate permit. IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT Transportation system The Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) , adopted January 2002, addresses traffic related improvements in the vicinity of this project. The TSP identifies future improvements to SW Dartmouth Street to five lanes and SW 72nd Avenue to five lanes. The Dartmouth improvements were accomplished prior to this application, as were half-street improvements along SW 69th Avenue and SW 70th Avenue and required right-of-way dedication. An additional ( 11) eleven feet of dedication along SW Dartmouth Street is provided with this project. The project is within TriMet's boundary. No bus stops are available along Dartmouth or 69th Avenue. The closest service is Stop ID 7846, located 0. 13 mi. at 68th Avenue and SW Clinton and Stop ID 7849, 0.12 mi. at 68th Avenue and the Freeway entrance. The TSP identifies Dartmouth Street and 68th Avenue as alternative bike routes. Drainage System Presently, storm water runoff along the northern side of the site meanders southerly as overland sheetflow approximately 90 ft. to 120 ft. down a 16% slope to a perennial stream. The southeast quadrant of the site drains northwesterly at 20% to the stream from the other side. Provisions for street runoff was accomplished with curb inlets installed along SW 69th Avenue, SW 70" Avenue and both sides of SW Dartmouth Street. For purposes of water quality and water quantity, the site was divided into two basins; 69`h Avenue basin for the 4 lots with parking area and 70th Avenue basin for the 3 lots on 70`h Avenue. Using the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph analysis method, the 25-year runoff for each pre-developed basin was calculated. The 25- year developed runoff was then calculated to arrive at the individual detention requirement. Water quality requirements were analyzed per the provisions set forth in Clean Water Services ' "Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management", Appendix B: Water Quality and Quantity Facility Design. Sewer System An existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line is located near the centerline of SW 69" Avenue flowing south to Dartmouth Street. A new 8-inch sanitary sewer was constructed in SW 70" Avenue with a terminus at the project's northwest property line and flowing to Dartmouth Street. Individual service tees will be installed to provide sewer service to each lot. Water System The TVWD maintains an 8" water main in SW 69th Avenue and a new 8" water main was constructed in SW 70th Avenue. The proposed development will tap the existing water lines for domestic water needs. School District The project is served by The Tigard-Tualatin School District. Student residents of this development will attend Metzger Elementary School located at 10350 SW Lincoln and Fowler Middle School located at 10865 SW Walnut Street. High School students will attend Tigard High School, located at 9000 SW Durham Road with over 2, 000 students. Garbage Hauler Pride Disposal will service the project. Parks Potso Dog Park and Bonita Park are located within 1 mile of the project. Metzger Park, located at 8400 SW Hemlock Street, is a seven-acre fully accessible park with a variety of outdoor play equipment and indoor rental facility for weddings, parties, memorials and meetings. Environmental Impact Seventy-three vehicle trips' per day will be added for a 7-unit townhome multi- family project. Ambient noise level for multi-family units are estimated to be below single- family noise levels due to closer proximity of neighbors and less yard i Site Impact Traffic Evaluation Handbook, US Govt. Printing Office, 1985 maintenance tools (mowers, Trimmers, etc. ) Oil trap catch basins and a proprietary water quality feature will intercept point source pollutants from driveway and parking areas. CONCURRENCE WITH DEDICATION The applicant concurs with the dedication recommendations set forth in the pre- application conference notes and submits preliminary design with ( 11) eleven feet of right-of-way dedication along the frontage of SW Dartmouth Street. END OF IMPACT STUDY Page 3 of 3 NARRATIVE For "AMBER WOODS" SUBDIVISION REVIEW And SENSITIVE LAND REVIEW UNADDRESSED SITE TAX MAP 1S1 36DD, TAX LOT 7500 & 7600 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 NOVEMBER 15, 2006 INTRODUCTION This project proposes to build a (7) seven-lot subdivision to accommodate multi-family attached townhomes with a 0.60 acre tract reserved for sensitive lands and mitigation area. The proposed site, adjacent to SW Dartmouth Street, spans two tax lots: Tax Lot 7500, a 0.33-acre parcel located at the west side of the site along SW 70"' Avenue, and Tax Lot 7600, a 0.56-acre parcel on the east part of the site along SW 69th within the city limits of Tigard Oregon. The site prior to dedication is 38,662 sq. ft. (0.89-acres). The developed site after dedication (2,406.92 sq. ft.) is 36,255.60 square feet (0.83-acre). The existing use of the parcels is undeveloped urban forest with a perennial stream traversing the site. The City of Tigard has designated the parcels as within the MUE (Mixed Use Employment) zoning district and applies the "Tigard Triangle Design Standards" criteria to this application. SW 70th Avenue is aligned with the east edge of zoning district C-G, General Commercial with a Planned Unit Overlay. The 69th Avenue access is a single 30 ft. shared access and the lots on SW 70th Avenue have 16 ft. wide individual driveways. No access will be provided to SW Dartmouth Street. For purposes of water quality, 36% of the net parcel area will be impervious area (roof and paved) with 59% designated as landscaping and sensitive area. 5% of parcel area is perennial stream and wetland. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS ANALYSIS The property is located 0.2 mi. west of Interstate 5 and 0.4 mi. southeast of Pacific Highway (99W). SW Dartmouth Street is presently a 91 ft. wide right-of-way with 44 ft. wide curb-to-curb collector and bike lanes bordering the site to the south. SW 70"' Avenue is presently a 47.5 ft. wide right-of-way with an 18 ft. wide half-street improvement. 69th Avenue is a 60 ft. right-of-way width with an 18 ft. half-street improvement. All three streets bordering the site were recently widened and improved with curb, storm drain infrastructure, sidewalk and street trees in anticipation of this development. 1 of 18 On-site analysis reveals a gently sloping plateau (-6%) at the northeast section of the property breaking to a steep (-16%) downgrade to a stream channel. The west half of the site continues a 16% percent slope to the stream. The portion of the site south of the stream slopes from SW Dartmouth to the watercourse at a 20% grade to the channel. The site exhibits no history of development or building. The unnamed perennial stream, with headwaters near SW 67th and Clinton, traverses the site from SW 69th Avenue southwestly to a ditch inlet near the SW Dartmouth ROW line and flows westerly 2,400 ft. to Red Rock Creek. The 25-year flow is z2.2 cubic feet per second (cfs) draining 2.75-acres as it enters the site. A Natural Resource Assessment conducted on the project site by Pacific Habitat Services in December 2005 defined a wetland along the stream banks. The site is populated with three distinct plant communities, identified as Community A, located south of the stream adjacent to SW Dartmouth; Community B, also located south of the stream near 69th Avenue; and Community C, extending along the north side of the stream. Community A has a 30% tree cover (Oregon white oak) with 35% native shrub cover (serviceberry, hazelnut, snowberry, one-seed hawthorn and Pacific ninebark). Invasive/noxious plants (English ivy and Himalayan blackberry) cover 35% of the area. Community B has a 20% tree cover (Oregon ash, hawthorns and less mature white oaks) with 50% native shrub cover (serviceberry, hazelnut, snowberry, one-seed hawthorn, Pacific ninebark, cherry laurel and snowberry). Invasive/noxious plants (English ivy and blackberry) inhabit +20% of the area. Community C has a 30% tree cover (Douglas fir and Oregon white oak with aged cherry trees and hawthorns) with a 95% tree canopy. Native shrubs (serviceberry, hazelnut, snowberry, one-seed hawthorn and Pacific ninebark) cover 30%. Invasive/noxious plants (English ivy and blackberry) infest 35% of the plant community with vines standing 15 ft. high. Observed fauna include native bird and raptor populations with limited numbers of ground mammals (squirrels, chipmunks and mice). No reptiles or amphibians (frogs) were monitored. PLANS REQUIRED COVER SHEET &VICINITY MAP A computer generated set of 24"x 36" drawings, including a Cover Sheet 1 with vicinity map, accompanies this narrative and application. EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP Sheet 2 depicts an existing conditions map with one-foot contours, existing trees 8" and larger, and perimeter streets with existing underground utilities. SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN Sheet 3 displays a site development plan indicating lot layout with dimensions and driveway/access. PRELIMINARY GRADING/EROSION CONTROL PLAN Sheet 4 depicts existing grade contours and proposed finished grades with spot elevations and surface drainage paths and catch basin placement. Sheet 4 also directs the erosion and sedimentation control measures to be implemented prior to and during construction activities. PRELIMINARY STORM DRAINAGE PLAN Sheet 5 characterizes the proposed storm drain on-site drainage system with water quality and water quantity structures installed for multi-family building construction. 2 of 18 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN Sheet 6 illustrates the existing and proposed utilities including sanitary sewer and domestic water resources. Existing fire hydrants are also displayed. NATURAL RESOUCE ASSESSMENT BASE MAP SITE PLAN EXHIBIT"A" Sheet 7 features an amended copy of the base map site plan submitted to Clean Water Services (CWS) as part of the Tier 1 Analysis (see attached "Natural Resource Assessment for Vegetated Corridor per Standard Site Assessment Method') crafted for the service provider letter. The drawing indicates the three areas of on-site Plant Communities A, B and C within the required (50) fifty feet water quality buffer. Also displayed are the two areas of buffer encroachment caused by development and the buffer mitigation area. TREE TRESERVATION/REMOVAL PLAN Sheet 8 depicts a tree inventory summary table, a tree protection plan and identifies trees in fair or poor condition as described by the project arborist with trees marked for removal. A separate arborist report (included with this application) provides a guideline for protection of trees on construction sites, LANDSCAPE PLAN Sheet 9 delineates the planned planting plan for revegetation of the vegetated corridor from "marginal" or "degraded" to "good" condition per requirements of CWS Chapter 3, Table 3.2 Vegetated Corridor Standards. Street tree requirements for SW Dartmouth and SW 69th Avenues were satisfied with the street improvements performed under a previous phase and are not a part of this project. On-site landscape improvements are shown indicating placement of trees, shrubs and lawn ground cover. Also, proposed buffering and screening elements are portrayed with elementary details. Required street trees for SW 70th Avenue are also shown. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS/STREET PLAN Sheet 10 depicts plan view and typical cross-section of improvements in the public right-of-way (ROW) pertaining to ROW dedication and driveway accesses. Required street trees along SW 70th Avenue are shown. CODE CHAPTER RELEVANT CRITERIA Pertinent Code Chapters will be recited in the following chronicle (not necessarily in numerical order) and a response applied to the standard will be described to demonstrate the standard has been met: Chapter 18.390 DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES 18.390.010 Purpose A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish a series of standard decision-making procedures that will enable the City,the applicant, and all interested parties to reasonably review applications and participate in the local decision-making process in a timely and effective way. Each permit or action set forth in Chapters 18.320 - 18.385 has been assigned a specific procedure type. TABLE 18.390.1 SUMMARY OF PERMITS BY TYPE OF DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURE Type Permit/Land Cross-Reference(s) I (18.390.030) Development Adjustments 1 8.370.020 B2 II (18.390.040) Sensitive Lands Permits - In 25%+ Slope 18.775 -Within Drainageways 18.775 -Within Wetlands] 18.775 Subdivision Without Planned Developments 18.430.070 Variances 18.370.010C 3 of 18 • In accordance with 18.390.020, Table 18.390.1 SUMMARY OF PERMITS BY TYPE OF DECISION- MAKING PROCEDURES,this narrative accompanies a completed Land Use Permit Application for a Type II Subdivision Review, a Type II Sensitive Lands Within Drainage Way Review, a Type II Administrative Variance for reduction in minimal residential density and a Type I Development Adjustment, 20% reduction of dimensional standards for rear yard and side yard setback required in the base zone. 18.390.040 Type 11 Procedure A. Preapplication conference. A preapplication conference is required for Type II actions. • A pre-application conference was held with City of Tigard Planning representatives and Engineering Section personnel on March 7, 2006. The preapplication conference provided materials to conduct a neighborhood meeting. As a result of the neighborhood meeting handout, all property owners within 500 feet were notified of the proposal for a townhome development. A meeting was conducted at Landmark Ford on April 5, 2006 from 6:30pm to 8:30pm with approximately 20 in attendance. Neighborhood Meeting Affidavits of Posting & Mail Notice, minutes of the meeting and sign-in sheets accompany the submittal. B. Application requirements. 1. Application Forms. Type II applications shall be made on forms provided by the Director as provided by Section 18.390.080 El; 2. Submittal Information. The application shall: a. Include the information requested on the application form: • A completed CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION LAND USE PERMITAPPLIC4T70N prefaces this submittal. b. Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; • This narrative addresses relevant criteria in detail. c. Be accompanied by the required fee; • The required fee based on City of Tigard Land Use Applications Fee Schedule, effective date 06/07, citing Preliminary Plat without Planned Development @ $4,990 + $88/Lot = $5,606.00. The Sensitive Land Review fee is 50% of $2357 = $1,178.50. The Type II Administrative Variance fee is 50% of $602 = $301.00. In addition, a Development Adjustment, in accordance with 18.370.020.B.b, "Interior Setbacks" fee of 50% of $265 = $132.50. Total fee is $7,218.00. A previous fee of $7,453.00 submitted on October 2, 2006 with a flawed application for this project results in an overpayment $235.00, which may be credited toward future fees. No additional monies accompany this application. d. Include two sets of pre-stamped and pre-addressed envelopes for all property owners of record as specified in Section 18.390.040C. The records of the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation are the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall demonstrate that the most current assessment records have been used to produce the notice list; • Once the application package is deemed complete, the required (2) two sets of stamped and pre- addressed envelopes for all property owners of record within a 500 ft. radius of the site and CPO 4B as provided by City of Tigard supplied database will be submitted. e. Include an impact study. • The application includes an Impact Study under separate cover addressing the elements defined in 18.390.040.B.(e). • This paragraph shall serve as notification of concurrence with the requirements to dedicate (11) eleven feet of right-of-way on SW Dartmouth Street to provide 92 ft. ultimate row width. No dedication is required on SW 69th Avenue or SW 70th Avenue. Page 4 of 18 Chapter 18.430 SUBDIVISIONS 18.430.040 Approval Criteria: Preliminary Plat A. Approval criteria. The Approval Authority may approve,approve with conditions or deny a preliminary plat based on the following approval criteria: 1. The proposed preliminary plat complies with the applicable zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations; • The preliminary plat submitted with this application complies with the requirements of Chapter 18.520 "Commercial Zoning Districts", 18.520.020.F MUE Mixed Use Employment and other applicable ordinances and regulations. 2. The proposed plat name is not duplicative or otherwise satisfies the provisions of ORS Chapter 92; • The subdivision name "Amber Woods" is a distinctive name not duplicated in Washington County. The final subdivision plat shall be made by a registered professional land surveyor and conform to ORS Chapter 92-Subdivisions and Partitions and Chapter 209-County Surveyors. 3. The streets and roads are laid out so as to conform to the plats of subdivisions and maps of major partitions already approved for adjoining property as to width, general direction and in all other respects unless the City determines it is in the public interest to modify the street or road pattern; • The subdivision requires no public streets. 4. An explanation has been provided for all common improvements. • All improvements are designed in response to the requirements of Clean Water Services, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, Tualatin Valley Water District and the Tigard Municipal Code-Title 18 Community Development Code. 18.430.050 Submission Requirements: Preliminary Plat A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application containing all of the general information required for a Type II procedure,as governed by Chapter 18.390. • The subdivision application conforms to the requirements of Chapter 18.390 as described above. B. Additional information. In addition to the general information described in Subsection A above, the preliminary plat shall contain specific information,the detailed content of which can be obtained from the Director. • The preliminary plat illustrates all required existing property lines, subdivision lot lines, tracts and easements with sequential lot numbers, areas and dimensions. Chapter 18.520 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS 18.520.020 List of Zoning Districts F. MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle,a regional mixed-use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway(Hwy. 99),Highway 217 and I-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services,business/professional offices, civic uses and housing;the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. TABLE 18.520.2 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS MUE R-25 STANDARD C-G MF DU Minimum Lot Size None - Page 5 of 18 MUE R-25 STANDARD (Cont'd) C-G MF DU - Detached unit - 1480 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 50 ft None Minimum Setbacks -Front yard 0 ft 20 ft -Side facing street on - 20 ft corner &through lots -Side yard 0/20 ft 10 ft -Rear yard 0/20 ft_ 20 ft -Distance between front of - 20 ft garage & property line Minimum Building Height N/A N/A Maximum Building Height 45 ft 45 ft Maximum Site Coverage 85% 80% Minimum Landscape 15% 20% Requirement • This project is a permitted use for multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25/units per acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. • The preliminary plat conforms to the MUE zoning district with respect to minimum lot size, maximum site coverage and minimum landscape requirement for Lots 1 through 7. A development adjustment for interior setback, 10 ft. side yard in accordance with 18.370.020B.b is requested for Lot 1, Lot 4, Lot 5 and Lot 7 to provide 8 ft. side yard. A development adjustment for interior setback, 20 ft. rear yard is requested for Lot 5, Lot 6 and Lot 7 to provide 16 ft. rear yard. ,C:V4,0-°5 Chapter 18.620 Tigard Trianale Design Standards 18.620.010 Purpose and Applicability B. Development conformance. All new developments, including remodeling and renovation projects resulting in uses other than single family residential use, are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described in this chapter and other development standards required by the Community Development and Building Codes, such developments will be required to: I. Dedicate and improve public streets,to the extent that such dedication and improvement is directly related and roughly proportional to an impact of the development: • SW Dartmouth Street, SW 69th Avenue and SW 70th Avenue have previously been improved in anticipation of this land use action. The Dartmouth right-of-way requires an additional 11 feet of dedication as provided in the preliminary plat. 69th and 70th Avenues require no further dedication. 2. Connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage; • The subdivision Utility Plan, Sheet 6, indicates improvements for sanitary sewer and water service connections to accommodate the layout for the 4-unit multi-family building facing SW 69th Avenue and the 3-unit multi-family building facing SW 70th Avenue. Sheet 5 illustrates storm water improvements including water quality and water quantity (detention). 3. Participate in funding future transportation and other public improvement projects in the Tigard Triangle, provided that the requirement to participate is directly related and roughly proportional to an impact of the development. • The public improvements previously constructed and the public facilities proposed as a part of this project are proportional to the impact of the development without further participation in funding future transportation projects. Page 6 of 18 18.620.020 Street Connectivity A. Demonstration of standards. All development must demonstrate how one of the following standard options will be met. Variance of these standards may be approved per the requirements of Chapter 18.370.010 where topography, barriers such as railroads or freeways,or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street extensions and connections. 1. Design Option a. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. b. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way shall be provided at intervals of no more that 330 feet. • Current spacing between SW Dartmouth Street and SW Clinton Street is 488 feet. Spacing between SW 69th Avenue and SW 70th Avenue is 280 feet. The existing spacing conforms to the design option. 18.620.030 Site Design Standards A. Compliance. All development must meet the following site design standards. If a parcel is one acre or larger a phased development plan must be approved demonstrating how these standards for the overall parcel can be met. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 C2,governing criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. 1. Building placement on Major and Minor Arterials - Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50% of all street frontages along Major and Minor Arterial Streets. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on Major and Minor Arterial Streets. • Development of this project occurs only along SW 69th Avenue and SW 70th Avenue, which are local streets. 2. Building setback-The minimum building setback from public street rights-of-way or dedicated wetlands/buffers and other environmental features shall be 0 feet;the maximum building setback shall be 10 feet. • Per the pre-application notes, setbacks were established as Front 20 ft. Side 10 ft. Rear 20 ft. Corner 20 ft. from street Garages 20 ft. 3. Front yard setback design - Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one street, the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to an L-1 standard on public streets and an L-2 standard on accessways. Hard-surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.520.040B and Table 18.520.2. • Landscaping to the L-2 standard and a 34.5 ft. wide access way separate the building from SW 69th Avenue. Hard-surfaced walkways connect each unit to SW 70th Avenue with L-2 groundcover landscaping in non-paved areas. 4. Walkway connection to building entrances - A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway. This walkway must be at least six feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner near a public street intersection are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.520.040B and Table 18.520.2. • A concrete walkway connects each unit's entrance to the public street/sidewalk. 5. Parking location and landscape design -Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50% of the street frontage and must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The minimum depth of the L-1 landscaped area is five feet or is equal to the building setback, whichever is greater. Interior side and rear yards shall be landscaped to a L-2 Landscape Standard,except where a side yard abuts a public street, where it shall be landscaped to an L-1 Landscape Standard. See Diagram 2. • The requirement for minimum off-street parking per Table 18.762.2 is 1.75/DU spaces for multi-family development for 3-bedroom units. The 4 units along SW 69th Avenue provide 2 spaces per unit, Page 7 of 18 exceeding the 7 space (4 x 1.75) preconditioned total. Per 18.765.030.E., visitor parking is required only when total exceeds 10 spaces. Therefore, there is no requirement for off-street parking. The 3 units Along SW 70th Avenue also require no off-street parking. 18.620.040 Building Design Standards A. Non-residential buildings. All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. • The residential buildings are exempt from this requirement. 18.620.050 Signs A. Sign standards. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development Code the following standards shall be met: 1. Zoning district regulations - Residential only developments within the C-G and MUE zones shall meet the sign requirements for the R-25 zone 18.780.130B; • If a sign is contemplated, it will conform to 18.780.130.B. which decrees that a platted subdivision may be allowed a sign not exceeding 32 sq. ft. 18.620.060 Entry Portals A. Required locations. Entry portals shall be required at the primary access points into the Tigard Triangle. • This project is not located at a portal location. 18.620.070 Landscaping and Screening A. Applicable levels. Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other sub-sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. 1. L-1 Low Screen-The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. 2. L-2 General Landscaping - For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. Trees shall be provided at a minimum 2-V2 inch caliper,at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2-inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. • Existing planters will have groundcover plantings. 70th Ave. will have four 2"caliper street trees. 18.620.080 Street and Accessway Standards • Dartmouth Street, a Major Arterial from Hwy 99 to 68t Avenue has been constructed to standards set forth in Table 18.620.1,"Street Classification and Function Table: Streets", Dartmouth — Hwy 99 to 68th Avenue. Half-street improvements for SW 69th Avenue and SW 70th Avenue have been constructed to Table 18.620.1, North-South Local Service Streets. 18.620.090 Design Evaluation • The Applicant does not elect to use this option. Chaoter 18.715 Density Computations 18.715.020 Density Calculation F. MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and Page 8 of 18 services, business/professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. • Net development area - The gross area of the site is 38,662.52 square feet or 0.89 acres. Sensitive land areas do exist (See Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter, a part of this application) and subtraction is calculated as 17,853 sq. ft., determined by using computer-aided drafting "area" command, or 0.41 acres. Land dedication for public right-of-way has been calculated using the same "area"command resulting 2,406 sq. ft. or 0.06 acres. No land is proposed for private streets. • The density calculations is: Gross area of site: 38,662 sq. ft. Subtracting sensitive lands: 17,853 sq. ft. Subtracting Public right-of-way: 2,406 sq. ft. Net development area: 18,403 sq. ft. = 0.42 acres Maximum units (per 18.520.020.F. equivalent to R-25 zoning district) = 25 units/acre x 0.42 acres = 10.5 units = 10 units (No rounding up is permitted) Minimum units = maximum (10 units) x 80% = 8 units • Implementing 18.370.010.C., an administrative variance, processed as a Type II procedure, for adjustment to minimum residential density is requested. See narrative response to Chapter 18.715 "Variances and Adjustments" below. The development proposes 7 units. Chapter 18.370 Variances and Adjustments 18.370.010 Variances B. Applicability of provisions. 1. The variance standards are intended to apply to individual platted and recorded lots only. 2. An applicant who is proposing to vary a specification standard for lots yet to be created through a subdivision process may not utilize the variance procedure unless otherwise specified in Section 18.730.030, Zero Lot Line Setback Standards, or Chapter 18.430, Subdivisions. 18.430.060 Adjustments Authorized Granting of adjustments. Adjustments to the subdivision regulations prescribed by this title may be authorized by the Director, and application shall be made with a preliminary plat application in accordance with Section 18.430.050. Criteria for granting such adjustments are contained in Section 18.370.020 C 1. 18.370.020 C. Approval process and standards. 1. Variances shall be processed by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, using standards of approval contained in Subsection 2 below. a. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; b. There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; c. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this_title.and city standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting reasonable ef omic use of the land; d. Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to-tfaffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the title; and e. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Page 9 of 18 • Type II Administrative Variance for reduction in minimum residential density — As computed in the above response to 18.715.020 Density Calculation, 8 units are the minimum allowed in this MUE zone. This application requests a variance to reduce the minimum to 7 units based on: a. The proposed variance will not be detrimental to other properties in the vicinity. b. There are special circumstances which the Applicant has no control and are not applicable to other properties, namely a sensitive area exists on the site of such size as not to allow building to an 8 unit minimum. The Service Provider Letter allows no structures or development, other than the approved encroachment area, in the vegetated corridor. c. Approval of the variance will not change the use as multi-family residence. City standards will not be compromised and all other criteria will be met excepting reduction of interior setbacks requested below. d. Existing physical and natural systems, including traffic and drainage will be enhanced with the reduction in development area. e. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum required to alleviate the hardship. 18.370.020 Adjustments B. Development adjustments. 1. The following development adjustments will be granted by means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030,using approval criteria contained in Subsection B2 below: b. Interior setbacks. Up to a 20% reduction of the dimensional standards for the side and rear yard setbacks required in the base zone 2. Approval criteria. A development adjustment shall be granted if there is a demonstration of compliance with all of the applicable standards: a. A demonstration that the adjustment requested is the least required to achieve the desired effect; b. The adjustment will result in the preservation of trees, if trees are present in the development area; c. The adjustment will not impede adequate emergency access to the site; d. There is not a reasonable alternative to the adjustment which achieves the desired effect. • Type I Development Adjustment for reduction of the dimensional standards for the side and rear setbacks required in th base zone — A 20% reduction in side yard setbacks from 10 ft to 8 ft. for Lot 1, Lot 4, Lot 5 and Lott will lessen the encroachment by 4 ft. (north side and south side reduction). A reduction from the 20 ft rear yard to 16 ft. along the back of Lots 5 through 7 will further reduce the encroachment into the vegetated corridor. No reduction for rear yard setback is requested for Lots 1 through 4. This application for a development adjustment is based on: a. The adjustment is the least required to achieve the desired effect. b. The adjustment will result in the preservation of a 22" Oregon White Oak and a 16" Oregon White Oak. c. The adjustment will not affect emergency access to the buildings. d. There is no other reasonable alternative which will lessen the encroachment. Chapter 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards 18.725.030 Performance Standards A. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.40.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. B. Visible emissions. Within the commercial zoning districts and the industrial park (IP) zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack or other point- source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property line. Department of Environmental Quality(DEQ)rules for visible emissions (340-21-015 and 340-28-070)apply. C. Vibration. No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles,trains and aircraft is permitted in any given zoning district which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. Page 10 of 18 D. Odors. The emission of odorous gases or other matter in such quantities as to be readily detectable at any point beyond the property line of the use creating the odors is prohibited. DEQ rules for odors(340-028-090)apply. E. Glare and heat. No direct or sky-reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, F. Insects and rodents. All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. • The development is a residential use which will not produce inordinate emissions, vibration, odors, glare and heat or insects and rodents (See response to Chapter 18.755, "Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage") below. Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening 18.745.020 Applicability Applicability. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all development including the construction of new structures, remodeling of existing structures where the landscaping is nonconforming(Section 18.760.040.C),and to a change of use which results in the need for increased on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes the access requirements Site plan requirements. The applicant shall submit a site plan. The Director shall provide the applicant with detailed information about this submission requirement. • Sheet 9, "Landscape Plan" demonstrates detailed information regarding landscaping and screening to achieve sensitive land mitigation and conformance to Tigard Triangle design standards for L-2 General Landscaping. The plan also displays a Buffer Level "A"along the north boundary line. 18.745.040 Street Trees Protection of existing vegetation. All development projects fronting on a public street, private street or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length approved after the adoption of this title shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the standards in Section 18.745.040.C. • Street trees have been planted along Dartmouth Street and 69th Avenue. The Landscape Plan, Sheet 9 indicates placement for four 2-inch caliper Paperbark Maple street trees along 70th Avenue. 18.745.050 Buffering and Screening Buffering and screening requirements. 4. The minimum improvements within a buffer area shall consist of combinations for landscaping and screening as specified in Table 18.745.1. • Per Table 18.745.1, `Buffer Matrix", multi-family 1-5 units proposed abutting detached single-family units requires lawn/living groundcover 10 ft. wide. The project elects to provide visual screening with 4-ft. high Emerald Green arborvitae on 5 ft. centers with 3-gallon Dwarf Burning Bush shrubs on 5 ft. centers. • The revegetation plan for the sensitive area and the mitigation area will adhere to Clean Water Services R&0 04-09 Appendix D, Landscape Requirements. Chanter 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage 18.755.040 Methods of Demonstrating Compliance Minimum standard method • Pride Disposal is the franchise hauler and will provide containers. Multi-family residents will place containers at street-side for pick-up. Chapter 18.705 Access, Egress and Circulation Page 11 of 18 18.705.030 General Provisions Access plan requirements. No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and approved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. • The Site Development Plan. Sheet 3 illustrates the ingress/egress provisions for the 4-unit building along 69th Avenue with a 30 ft. wide access and a 29.5 ft. two-way maneuvering area for garage access. Individual 16 ft. wide driveways are provided at each unit accessing 70th Avenue. Joint access. Owners of two or more uses, structures, or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same access and egress when the combined access and egress of both uses, structures, or parcels of land satisfies the combined requirements as designated in this title,provided: 1. Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented in the form of deeds, easements, leases or contracts to establish the joint use;and 2. Copies of the deeds, easements, leases or contracts are placed on permanent file with the City. • The plat will describe a cross-over easement for the joint access serving Lots 1 through 4. A Home Owners Association will be formed to provide maintenance. F. Required walkway location. On-site pedestrian walkways shall comply with the following standards: 2. Within all attached housing (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling shall be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, and common open space and recreation facilities; • Two 5 ft. wide concrete walkways will provide connection from the accessway to the existing public sidewalk. H. Access Management 1. An access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County,the City and AASHTO(depending on jurisdiction of facility.) • An access report accompanies this submittal. I. Minimum access requirements for residential use. 1. Vehicular access and egress for single-family, duplex or attached single-family dwelling units on individual lots and multi-family residential uses shall not be less than as provided in Table 18.705.1 and Table 18.705.2; 18.705.1 VEHICULAR ACCESS/EGRESS REQUIREMENTS: RESIDENTIAL USE Not applicable 18.705.2 VEHICULAR ACCESS/EGRESS REQUIREMENTS: MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE Dwelling Units Minimum Number of Minimum Access Minimum Pavement Sidewalks,Etc. Driveways Required Required 1-2 1 15' 10' 3-19 1 30' 24' if two-way, 15' if one way: Curbs and 5' walkway required • A single 30 ft. wide modified driveway per Drawing) 141 with a paved 29.5 ft. wide two-way Page 12 of 18 maneuvering area provides access from Lots 1 through 4 to 69th Avenue. Lots 5 through 7 facing 70th Avenue will access the street via individual 16 ft. individual driveways per Drawing 141. 2. Vehicular access to multi-family structures shall be brought to within 50 feet of the ground floor entrance or the ground floor landing of a stairway, ramp, or elevator leading to the dwelling units; • Each unit entrance is within 5.3 ft. of the garage and accessway. Chapter 18.765 Off-street Parkin and Loadina Requirements 18.765.030 General Provisions Vehicle parking plan requirements. No building or other permit shall be issued until scaled plans are presented and approved as provided by this chapter that show how access, egress and circulation requirements are to be fulfilled. The applicant shall submit a site plan. • The Site Development Plan. Sheet 3 illustrates the ingress/egress provisions for Lot 1 through 4 along 69th Avenue with a 30 ft. wide access and a 34.5 ft. maneuvering area for garage access. Per 18.765.030.E., there is no off-street parking requirement for less than 10 required spaces. Lot 5, Lot 6 and Lot 7 has individual 16 ft wide driveways for access to 70th Avenue. 18.765.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards A. Location and access. With regard to the location and access to bicycle parking: Bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. • Bicycle racks will be installed in each garage with direct access to driveway. 18.765.070 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Parking Requirements H. Specific requirements. (See Table 18.765.2) • Table 18.765.2 "Minimum and Maximum Required Off-street Vehicle and Bicycle Parking Requirements" requires that 3-bedroom multi-family units provide a minimum 1.75 spaces/DU. Each unit of this 3- bedroom multi-family development provides 2-car garages which fulfills this requirement. Chapter 18.775 Sensitive Lands 18.775.020 Applicability of Uses: Permitted, Prohibited, and Nonconforming A. CWS Stormwater Connection Permit. All proposed "development", must obtain a Stormwater Connection Permit from CWS pursuant to its "Design and Construction Standards". As used in this chapter, the meaning of the word "development"shall be as defined in the CWS "Design and Construction Standards" • It is likely a Stormwater Connection Permit will be issued to release collected stormwater runoff into the on-site stream. A discussion with CWS Environmental Review staff indicates their acceptance of the storm drainage structures and outfall location. D. Jurisdictional wetlands. Landform alterations or developments which are only within wetland areas that meet the jurisdictional requirements and permit criteria of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Division of State Lands, CWS, and/or other federal, state, or regional agencies, and are not designated as significant wetlands on the City of Tigard "Wetland and Streams Corridors Map", do not require a sensitive lands permit. The City shall require that all necessary permits from other agencies are obtained. All other applicable City requirements must be satisfied, including sensitive land permits for areas within the 100-year floodplain, slopes of 25%or greater or unstable ground, drainageways, and wetlands which are not under state or federal jurisdiction. • The wetlands that have been determined to exist on the site do not appear on the City of Tigard "Wetland and Stream Corridors Map" and a sensitive land permit for wetlands is not required. A CWS Service Provider Letter is required and a Natural Resource Assessment and Alternatives Analysis Page 13 of 18 (copied enclosed) was conducted. An amended Service Provider Letter was issued November 14, 2006 recognizing a 7 Lot subdivision for multi-family residential development. A sensitive land permit, issued by the City, is required for areas within the drainageway. 18.775.070 Sensitive Land Permits A. Permits required. An applicant who wishes to develop within a sensitive area, as defined in Chapter 18.775, must obtain a permit in certain situations. Depending on the nature and intensity of the proposed activity within a sensitive area, either a Type II or Type III permit is required, as delineated in Sections 18.775.020.F and 18.775.020.G. The approval criteria for various kinds of sensitive areas, e.g., floodplain, are presented in Sections 18.775.070.B— 18.775.070.E below. • A Type II Sensitive Lands Review for Drainageway is a part of this application and the appropriate fee is submitted. D. Within drainageways. The appropriate approval authority shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application request for a sensitive lands permit within drainageways based upon findings that all of the following criteria have been satisfied: 1. The extent and nature of the proposed land form alteration or development will not create site disturbances to an extent greater than that required for the use; 2. The proposed land form alteration or development will not result in erosion, stream sedimentation, ground instability, or other adverse on-site and off-site effects or hazards to life or property; 3. The water flow capacity of the drainageway is not decreased; 4. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to land form alteration or development, the areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted to prevent erosion in accordance with Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening; 5. The drainageway will be replaced by a public facility of adequate size to acconunodate maximum flow in accordance with the adopted 1981 Master Drainage Plan; 6. The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands, and CWS approvals shall be obtained; 7. Where land form alterations and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian bicycle pathway plan. • 1. The project will not create disturbances beyond the minimal activities to develop improvements for building, parking and restorative efforts within the vegetated corridor. 2. An erosion control plan is a part of this application. The development will not result in erosion or stream sedimentation. There are no improvements creating ground instability or other on-site or off- site activities affecting life or property. 3. Employing a detention system, the water flow capacity of the drainageway will not be increased beyond pre-developed levels for 2-year, 10-year and 25-year storm flows. 4. A part of the Service Provider Letter requires removal of invasive/noxious plants and revegetation of the vegetated corridor. Replanting will also conform to the City's Chapter 18.745. 5. The drainageway will not be eradicated, buried or replaced but maintained in its natural state. 6. CWS approval has been obtained as evidenced by the Service Provider Letter. 7. There are no 100-year floodplains or floodways within the project. 18.775.080 Application Submission Requirements A. Application submission requirements. All applications for uses and activities identified in Sections 18.775.020.A— 18.775.020.G shall be made on forms provided by the Director and must include the following information in graphic, tabular and/or narrative form. Page 14 of 18 • 1. A CWS Stormwater Connection permit; 2. A site plan; 3. A grading plan; and 4. A landscaping plan. • 1. Per CWS Chapter 3.02.1 Service Provider Letter and Permits Required, Paragraph D., No person shall perform construction without first obtaining a Storm Water Connection Permit from the District or its designee as required pursuant to Ordinance 27, Section 4.B. The Storm Water Connection Permit shall be issued upon District approval of final construction plans showing that all of the applicable conditions from the service provider letter have been met. 2. A site Plan, Sheet 3, has been prepared for this permit. 3. A Grading and Erosion Control Plan, Sheet 4, has been prepared for this permit. 4. A Landscape Plan, Sheet 9, has been prepared for this permit. Chapter 18.780 Sians 18.780.130 Zoning District Regulations 3. Every platted subdivision shall be allowed one permanent, freestanding sign at each entry point to the subdivision from the public right-of-way, with the site properly landscaped and not exceeding 32 square feet per face in area. Illumination may be approved as long as it does not create a public or private nuisance, as determined by the Director considering the purpose of the zone; • A "subdivision monument" or sign may be erected near the 69th Avenue access on private property. If so desired, the sign will conform to the 32 sq. ft. maximum size and adhere to the requirements for visual clearance. No signage is contemplated for development along 70th Avenue. Chapter 18.790 Tree Removal 18.790.030 Tree Plan Requirement A. Tree plan required. A tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal wherever possible. • David D. Hunter, Registered Certified Arborist #408, performed a tree identification/inventory, tree removal plan, tree preservation plan and a "Guidelines for Protection of Trees on Construction Sites". B. Plan requirements. The tree plan shall include the following: 1. Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; • The Tree Preservation Plan, Sheet 8 shows location, species, size in inches and canopy cover. No significant trees have been identified by the City .The plan also shows trees to be preserved and trees to be removed with a tree inventory table indicating: TREE INVENTORY SUMMARY TREE PRESERVATION/MITIGATION PLAN )SHEET 8) NO TREES NO. TREES PERCENTAGE NO. TREES PERCENTAGE TOTAL >12" >12" >12" >12" >12"TREES CALIPER-INCH REMOVED REMOVED PROTECTED PROTECTED REMOVED 26* 6* 23% 20 77% 113 INCHES *TREE#3, 20"DBH, OREGON WHITE OAK— DEAD,NOT COUNTED Page 15 of 18 2. Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060D, in accordance with the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: d. Retention of 75%or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation. • 77% of trees larger than 12-inch diameter have been preserved —no mitigation plan is necessary. 3. Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; ▪ All trees scheduled for removal have identified on the Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan, Sheet 8. 4. A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. • The arborist has provided a "Guidelines for Protection of Trees on Construction Sites"report. 18.790.050 Permit Applicability A. Removal permit required. Tree removal permits shall be required only for the removal of any tree which is located on or in a sensitive land area as defined by Chapter 18.775. The permit for removal of a tree shall be processed as a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030,using the following approval criteria: 1. Removal of the tree must not have a measurable negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters or water quality as evidenced by an erosion control plan which precludes: a. Deposits of mud, dirt, sediment or similar material exceeding 1/2 cubic foot in volume on public or private streets,adjacent property, or into the storm and surface water system, either by direct deposit,dropping, discharge or as a result of the action of erosion; • A tree removal permit will applied for (separate from this application) when trees within the vegetated corridor are scheduled for removal and a separate erosion control plan will be provided from the tree removal service. 2. Within stream or wetland corridors, as defined as 50 feet from the boundary of the stream or wetland, tree removal must maintain no less than a 75%canopy cover or no less than the existing canopy cover if the existing canopy cover is less than 75%. • The Landscape Plan, Sheet 9, identifies 21 new Cascara tree(growth to 33 ft.) plantings to maintain 75% canopy cover. Chapter 18.795 Visual Clearance Areas 18.795.030 Visual Clearance Requirements A. At corners. Except within the CBD zoning district a visual clearance area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to the intersection of two streets, a street and a railroad, or a driveway providing access to a public or private street. 18.795.040 Computations B. Non-arterial streets. 1. Non-arterial streets 24 feet or more in width. At all intersections of two non-arterial streets, a nonarterial street and a driveway, and a non-arterial street or driveway and railroad where at least one of the streets or driveways is 24 feet or more in width, a visual clearance area shall be a triangle formed by the right-of-way or property lines along such lots and a straight line joining the right-of-way or property line at points which are 30 feet distance from the intersection of the right-of-way line and measured along such lines. • Sheet 3, Site Plan displays the visual clearance area for the individual driveways along 70th Avenue. The visual cone is 30 ft along the right-of-way setback 10 ft. from row line to building setback line. The Page 16 of 18 visual cone at the 30 ft. wide access at 69th Avenue 30 ft. along the right-of-way line setback 20 ft. to the building setback line. The 250 ft. intersection sight distance line is also indicated on 69th Avenue based on 25 m.p.h. with driver's eye at 15 ft from face of curb set at 3.5 ft. and an object height of 4.25 ft. Chanter 18.810 Street and Utilitv Improvement Standards 18.810.030 Streets A. Improvements. 1. No development shall occur unless the development has frontage or approved access to a public street. • A 30 ft. wide access is proposed from 69th Avenue to a 34.5 ft. wide accessway fronting the garage of each unit. Each lot on 70th Avenue has direct access to the public street. 3. No development shall occur unless the streets adjacent to the development meet the standards of this chapter, provided, however, that a development may be approved if the adjacent street does not meet the standards but half-street improvements meeting the standards of this title are constructed adjacent to the development. • Public street improvements were provided along SW Dartmouth Street, SW 69"' Avenue and SW 70th Avenue to fulfill the requirements for this project. Street trees along 70th Avenue were not installed and 4 Paperbark Maples will be planted as a part of this application. B. Creation of rights-of-way for streets and related purposes. Rights-of-way shall be created through the approval of a final subdivision plat or major partition; • No right-of-way or public street is necessary for access. An easement will be described on the plat for the accessway at 69t Avenue. AC. Traffic study. • Less than 2,000 vehicle trips per day will be added to onto the City streets from this development and no traffic study is required. 18.810.050 Easements A. Easements. Easements for sewers,drainage, water mains,electric lines or other public utilities shall be either dedicated or provided for in the deed restrictions, and where a development traversed by a watercourse, or drainageway,there shall be provided a storm water easement or drainage right-of-way conforming substantially with the lines of the watercourse. • All necessary or required easements will be perfected on the plat B. Utility easements. A property owner proposing a development shall make arrangements with the City, the applicable district and each utility franchise for the provision and dedication of utility easements necessary to provide full services to the development. The City's standard width for public main line utility easements shall be 15 feet unless otherwise specified by the utility company,applicable district,or City Engineer. • Services for electrical, communications, gas and tv cable will be a part of the engineering design with appropriate easements. 18.810.090 Sanitary Sewers A. Sewers required. Sanitary sewers shall be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments)and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Page 17 of 18 • Sanitary sewers are indicated on the Utility Plan, Sheet 6,connecting each lot to a sewer main. 18.810.100 Storm Drainage 1. The storm water drainage system shall be separate and independent of any sanitary sewerage system; • A storm drain system is shown on the Utility Plan, Sheet 6, with catch basin, pipe conveyance, storm manholes, water quality catch basins, detention pip and outfalls for discharge to stream. 3. Surface water drainage patterns shall be shown on every development proposal plan. • Surface water drainage patterns are shown on the Grading Plan, Sheet 4. B. Easements. Where a development is traversed by a watercourse, drainageway, channel or stream, there shall be provided a storm water easement or drainage right-of-way conforming substantially with the lines of such watercourse and such further width as will be adequate for conveyance and maintenance. • The drainageway traversing the site will be within a described storm water easement. C. Accommodation of upstream drainage. A culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area,whether inside or outside the development, • The existing 18-inch CMP culvert provides for potential runoff from the entire upstream basin. D. Effect on downstream drainage. Where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by the Unified Sewerage Agency in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments). • A detention system will restrict developed stormwater runoff to pre-developed release rates. 18.810.110 Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways A. Bikeway extension. • SW Dartmouth, a Major Arterial, was improved to the standards set forth in the Tigard Triangle, Table 18.620.1,"Street Classification and Function Table: Streets"and provides bicycle mobility. Clean Water Services desires that no pedestrian path or bicycle mobility be provided in the vegetated corridor. 18.810.120 Utilities A. Underground utilities. All utility lines including, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction,high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, • The developer will pay a fee in-lieu of for any necessary moving overhead utilities to underground. All on-site utilities will be underground. 18.810.150 Installation Prerequisite A. Approval required. No public improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the plans have been approved by the City, permit fee paid, and permit issued. • Engineering plans will be submitted for review and approval upon planning approval of the project. END OF NARRATIVE Page 18 of 18 • • N r .. y 1.71 a i a e..t Neale, a ge . 4. S,g g OF.4-4-n Olikt:::; FOOn AMBER WOODS I °� »r�"` r'' l °' ' `•7—LOT SUBDIVISION • I.„;. »~e 14 VIC ACCOMANDO ..... ..r..} .,., f C016JLTINS EN5INEER y 1 16750 50 TNberloM Dr WEST PORTLAND HEIGHTS BLOCK 11 i 4 +... e.ev�ton,OR47001 TAX MAP IS1 380D TAX LOTS 7500 & 7800 r+". Q• t p M,SOS 690-5+69 ....,.�4, __ t J y_ �A%�501-239-9506 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 1.. . 11 g r ,,. .Li ""�a°Iem'n`°" a I VICINITY MAP 1 I s 1,—.—;—. ......� _ _ _I..r.,,.. I NO 6Ce1t 1 I PROJECT ENGINEER r -- -- -- — -- --e-- — SHEET INDEX I Vie Accomenr.. Con•ulting Engin•er 0 is I 2 I.!.,. • ' I C1 COVER SHEET dr VICINITY MAP 15750 SW Timberland Drive f (503) ton• Oregon 97007 -- ----- -- r-- I�I# I C2 EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP (503)690-5483 I C3 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN yp 'lips fe I 3 I C4 GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN -' IOR,AK PROJECT SURVEYOR (M01♦FM1 A'T lt'RtKXC1Y'' -- --,-- -- --�-- S CS PRELIMINARY STORM DRAINAGE PLAN C6 PRELIMINARY UTILITIES PLAN Caswell/Hertel Surveyors, Inc. I I 4 _I C7 NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SASE MAP 6150 SW 124th Aveiro-le I 1.73 i PLAN — EXPIIBIT "A" Beaverton, Oregon 97006 I C6 TREE PRESERVATION/MITIOATION PLAN (503)544-3179 — -- --T— — ---- 1 CO LANDSCAPE PLAN I ..J ' � p J C70 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS/STREET PLAN & PROFILE APPLICANT I I ii — — — } / Aul•a Development L.LC I �� a r' / y :i 6790 Turquoise Loop 'i' 5 I —11:.-- -. . Beaverton. Oregen 97007 — �I 503-740-2235 ID — -- _— —�.-� ''' TRACT "A' �'. I. I 14 i 1B: J �..L.:I OWNER I III 6 I'� ' :y < I TC Northwe•t Propertl•., LLP a: — -- -- -- --I,� Qe' i iw 1 OStn Avenue. 51e. 175 I Orton. Or•gon 97005 I I" 7 I I I ^ I PROJECT NOTES 503—626—3500 '�� J {{r.,.1 �r SITE AREA: 36.603 S.F. (0.69 ACRES) ." I ZONE: MUE MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT T i " + \ / . / -p� J URISD ICTION: CITY OF TIGARD, OREG ON I 7 1Eis :r4 rT r1i.x. s.L . • ,`w....,»« .,.I...,....,.v.ri,.,..,.�. C-2 A"CFR 142075 TgWN:Y-£5 • . ......v.• • •�` n 1500 411 woo SIN DARTMOUTH ST '"'� '.^^' --� TH 151 9600 +rte n��\ .. i. T16ARV,OR 223 - .... • ........... SITE PLAN & SURVEY CONTROL Cl ' Q Old B� 1 o �' S 1 dVY( SNOLLIQNOo �NLLSIX3 1rd ;FIT zg q `e r kr a�AAvaRR ......e.4..:.,„....AbbAbaAA... AA 4t4t,b44�b: e4A�;rot,fls N . 6 M_ _ 67. 1 .511 IV U li>,Lli�t$ii71aa 4:.�.ia'v-v3:iis70'di::>=ilia::::�}�+.::i�i :3ab:biic::ah ib:b:ob* G/4 IV F * i li is ii i ii ill "fil if i gQ - 2..m ac .RARRARAKRG1.:^.2A 2262EV+:?322:222.22122122141212 1 G.1 Sy, .4e Rs rt g; 1 8' - - - - 1 ` • 'ssO - 3AV 4769 MS -I .11,! o6 2nS 661,.. W' ..-_.- — — .— — — - � M 2 2.I i.r us Isar - - ..e: X, .� \ F 6 W 2i444//1 : / Ai t 2 !' 2 • 't m 4011 � n f T. F m _ ` / L - l • a 'ray -7, ti--_-- ; : _ - - a_ .- _ ,,.......44, .: :, , . _ r . N �.y r F ,kar I : . I . gA i-g e - 3N i s :iF • — — t I �• M i'ii, } Ns)''' it UMW Y - g: N c� VIOL MS t _ d1 -- ----- k •z] I 1 • jo tt - t- I o t'8 Nx I Y.. 1 s - si i - R I z rt I o i v a.r F• t t t � . i Ei • . . ..1■11. it.effeol i ■ I I iig Ir.-.1 -r•s,,,,,P4'.... '. VIC ACCOM/LNDO i 1 I - - — — .:. I ' C.0991LTIN5 D45114:ER itos,Sri Tetwricod Dr - ' ' I i i diamorton,OR 91001 I 27' i\,, I 1 I FTC WS 13,40-5,389 FA.3■50S-2SA-4,500 I ' , Accomcnclol•mon corn Si' 1 i r 1 . N eirsor t e — ,, ' . I \ I 1 1 k"IA .1 - •.., 1 1 1 4 r 3.0os Si. r. sv Nib' „ 1 ■ i 1' -2.7 — 1,r12 27: i.10 ... 110.0 2 ii1 'RI Y4,t0 I 1 I r: I I . Co I- '520 5. 0.1\ i ——. — ——fl.— 1 3 i i + N,•PO,Or 11105 1,110XCI) I II • i 'I 11 I I = (,.•) 4 3.000 Sr .. . A W ...../ , *co j f SOL YAM ic i !I. %.... .DSSI'LL E , .... 11. V — ..... 4'INK now ACCESS j',,11". N 39,03'5C t 5. 40"/ TO VON 11311UOUSI ',' sic.2?°01■4;404e • AZ; \ 1 i / / i\r Ltd ''''''' li 1 INIIII,.", S .4 904'--- ..- 1 / i i t.. A /--- r 1 I . IIIII 2.,35 sr. 16, / "r.i.21-... t i ?.!Ur -TT -- -.T.T.T.'7. . // TRACT -A' / I. -33C in40' ,... i_ ... MON s F. 1 I , In 6 n 584 II. /i, ... /**- -"-- E-3 It' VI::'''- -- -iR — T ENKLan iiii c,...) 11111,7' ; 2.0E2 sr i 1 A , 1 1 ' . :..:....................:..• .,./.13/41 11 , a•RIX YARD CRP ,•//6 KW'S* 90ns., ''',...., I,/1 1 1 el,,) r( 1 ,, I Cie 0 ,-1 ;AZ WI =1 ...., EY•S,D.,,w , 3'RIOC WORE AcDEDS illay .A ..., ,, RY.r., 4/ •• ' l• \ L..... I, ,f ' :Al, 1 10 310111.1 SYRUCTRK ,. ,,.....- Ri.„.• ,—, ' I 4 illi ..' - -------— '•'. KW KO , '','.1. MP s'31 ■ 3AA„,„,,,,,,,‘„ ' i I '••-, \ SCOW .,, -.,. -... 1..oi4p*.tes „.......,.... ...,r,,r..' r.y ■ ■ ; ..,,.,.. ..„„,....,...........-- , Mr 0111. MIT Vitt . ■ i 1 ...' ' ....,,.... .414.. th•'t ..., . ...,....... ,. . -- ... ......,.N. SW DAW1UOUTS4 ST I EVISI IN\ Totweiomes •.. • -- . . . ... .-- .. . ...,. . . .,.. •„,,,,,_, SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TL 1300 4 TL IWO . TM i5i 36012 ToARO,OR 91223 Org. ":"...".......••• VA .71■4"'...71. C.3 . • NM 444 1441-4• .I I =MEOW.• ■ . ,.... .. Ii■• ...NM 3 ............".....,./...................:0 !Mb .0 1 ralii1121 5 % IIIIMIMI■ 4 SIA 1447.70 ,,..1.......... , 1 r . EN/RA • 11C11 011a 143 141 1 '•.;•'A.,•■14..,.1 VIC ACCOMANDO ---- , I IF..2133 15 . WAIL A It .. .-- RAN.WNW ''"-:■'.0.4.':1"'''''' CON5U-TIN515161WER 4, AY WI' .41.•• 11 ' CO tO- 2 - i7411111114,11161- 44 ' 0,-room...co .• , .,.....00 ..o..... •''''',••• 16750 5Y4 Thberiond Or .010' Rirovetar,OR rem CLASEA .., . . I I 00''' IR.,506 0.10-6406 AP . 70 . • IDICOVZ: PA,SM-25A-41508 1- I accomcncMl•rAw5 con, . 4- , . - , 3 1 I 1 ORM45 memo.* "7,■,,Inger . . '`.. ' - WNW. sow SwAw A-, 1,,,,w44.4n. , 4-i, I 0405•POI 01 11115*maw-' -0c. -.-!le:Pa_ __ •._.A.1 _ .1..1 •.I 1', . crrnoni 4.-A 14:,al:=44,1* i I •..' ' ■ 1 1 1 I Y T 5 1.61 . , ; - purl 4mm --.. wee I , 4 .wwwws...A..,.o.1•...a.cl,Ixo n ono 71./S I e ...''''' r i I . . , -,. . ...„•WOK.....ow■tr 1.09 nORI.IN.0 GUN • . - Oh VINIIIIMIlmr:-:•"..,, . 40o, ••,,, \' IP 1 I I i 1 ittrIrT44.5*"aartagN4(14.744tr ....... . * *I.4--, ■••• , I . L•../O.Y.001.2.Moans.torarn ea. . ,■*: lbajimmii■I 1 I 1 T•4366.0 ..• ' .- ) ,/ VON1 MEW px ON F ., •404 250 7 .,,,,,,,•;;,441.. r . 1 1 • • 7,,_ 51,4_ - -- I . .. . .,/ nit;run.•W. !II' P Roo.• ,1 .11413/ -•-•00.--.., 54110440 011.1.1 .1.41 rat 1.2,0.0 • .W. '0 // P.72.1"2111."I. f ....."741 kw... , on o w.ou.2 *40M1 15.426/1 4 all r7.6. ' • 1 1 I •rligits.•.' 1/ NNE(POO • •oom. 7" . , , •=:r.lr,- - , .,::::' Iiik,_45,-.,,,, (5LE . • 5) \ ,„A.( 1 1 . .r441".......".'' mut •itizr.s4d* /i I 4.5444 k iy TRACT i Cliti-WLY . 311S 4 I . I 21N 11,1.54 III!r* , i MOWN,MICE I NNE 4.44.44, .;"s• -11, i 6 ,--A , ,.......,..'' ,, -\ o-,L.6-. likilt 3 1 ' i RR 0410 NO IA .. 4 1.42711 50 t • * #1111114. ' 44 < .... ,-I ' / :MB l' ry ._.-All7,110 : o i •,'•-• RIIIIIIItik:O *57,... C45405 01.1 .1.5..110 , • • , OK 4114 , PER ERA NO 14 EOM ,1.11 42N.145 (TYP) .....,..,/,.. R Mr a w„„)..., 0 ,J I z IERT7CAL 1000 PII • _ _f_t_...., c., ,.--s, . _ o-A 1fr/ ,' • ' .''''''' -.) -11 ■..• • P. 11•E4511051111r / , r ' I le^ •‘ \ ' ; "OrwA4.1o444( "- - : ) j• '''- 1 I I I 110110 I I ISII•Iktil I I I I I I I I 111*6. 4 141 I I I I I 110 SM54111YIECORSZ2a011430SMAM. -- •I . .."' ...' . , .) .., „., ••• '.., '. ') '•• s.1---- , ---/-..---• / , ...............-"-. Ili 0 _.11._,. ...,... 4 ;4 -a.E.'ASPHALT CONCRETE 4 110 ,,,,•_,-...-,......,.. \04,71,11:41.-„Tai,,,.,.• ....4.1.,..... ., _ . ..-„,......•„, ,---- -". ..........,-- . . z 1 c• TYPICAL PARKING LOT SECTION DAN VIEW 6 (yet eijo Er„,1051„V 1NCE S . .. . - 1:4 mu E..4 - . ..., . . SW DARTMOUTH ST GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN 1ES: WOFILE FR F.'*OM TN.OP 0.1/040 COM 1NR WI EROSION CONTROL NOTES ,.woroct WI OE MON MR•45.4501•14 CNECN MI I.SAFER OR DESIGNATED PERSON SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROPER INSTALLATION 5.THE ESC FACILITIES SHORN ON THIS PLAN ARE MINIMAL REDUIREMENTS TOP ANTICIPATED SITE MO YIVER IV ON*OHM".11 AND MAINTENANCE'Or ALL EROSION AND SEDINENT CONTROL MEASURES. IN ACCORDANCE CONDITIONS DOMINO CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. THESE ESC FACILITIES SHALL BE UPGRADED AS Km...... ROTH LOCAL. STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS. NEEDED FOR UNEXPECTED STORM EVENTS AND TO(NB/RE THAT SEDIMENT AND SEDIMENT LADEN RATER DOES NM LEAF!'THE SITE. 2.THE NOLENENTATION OF THESE ESC REAMS MC CONSTRUCTION KAINTENANCE REPLACENEN1 AKER R0005 I AlC1 LPGRAOING OF THESE ESC FACILITIES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF NE CONTRACTOR UNTIL B THE ESC FACILITIES SHALL N INSPECTED DAILY BY NE 0.1 ICANT/CONTRACTOR AND RAINTAINED 10.RAVENENT SLAP-AC E 5'•A'N'D v.Ear.TA'',ION IN TO BE PLACED AS RAPIOL v AS POSSIBLE TOENHOP-E5 ALL CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED AIE APAPOKD BY THE CITY OF TIGARD AND AS tErE..SSARY TO ENSURE TNEIR CONTIFRED FUNCTIONING. VEGETATION/LANDSCAPING IS ESTABLISHED. II.SEEDING SHALL OF PERFORMED NO LATER THAN SEPTEMBER I FOR EACH PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION 7,AT NO TIME SMALL SEDINENT BE ALLOWED TO ACCUMULATE MORE THAN 1/3 THE BARRIER'EIGHT. PR-'--- 3.TIE LOOVIOARIES Or TIE CLEARING LIMITS SNOB(ON 5115 PLAN SHALL RE CLEARL r NARKED ALL CATCH BASINS AND CONVEYANCE LOSES SHALL BE CLEANED SHALL BE CLEANED PRIOR TO PAYING. 12.IF//411E ARE EXPOSED SOILS OR SOILS NOT FULLS ESTABLISHED FROM OCTOBER lift THROWN APRIL 30tn, Ti. 4 it 7600 IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. MIRING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. NO DISTURBANCE TIE CLEANING OPERATIONS SMALL NOT/L USE,SEDIMENT LADEN WATER INTO THE DOMNITREATI SISTER. THE A57 TEA 77(0W EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES KILL BE IN EFFECT SEE THE EROSION PREVENTION BEYOND NE CLEARING LIMITS SHALL BE PERMITTED. THE MAPPINGS SHALL BE NA INTAIIED By IND SEDIMENT CONTROL BINNING RANI/AL (CHARTER II FOR REWIRE/EN/TS TM 15/56017 THE APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR FOR NE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. B.STABILIZED CRAVES ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION AND ToARD,OR.7225 MAINTAINED FOR THE 0/RATION or•THE PROJECT. ADDITIONAL NEASUFES MAT BE REQUIRED TO 13.THE DEVELOPER SHALL REPOSE ESC WARMS IINETv VEGETATION IS FULL,'ESTABLISNED. M THE E.5C FACILITIES svomv ON THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL INSURE THAT ALL PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN FOR THE DURATION OF NE PROJECT. Lao. we. CLEARING AND GRADING ACTIVITIES. AND SUCH A MANNER AS 70 INSURE HIT SEDIMENT AND IA.EROSION CONTROL.WRITTEN PROCEDURAL LOSS ARE TO OE MAINTAINED OF/SITE AND AVAILABLE TO CI Ty . A SEDIMENT LADEN MATER DOES NOT ENTER THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM. ROADWAYS OR VIOLATE 9.5,01144 DRAIN INLETS BASINS AND AREA DRAINS SHALL BE PROTECTED Mon PAVEMENT 9/TEALS'S INSPECTORS UPON REQUEST. APPLICABLE WATER STANDARDS. APE CQWLETED ARC/OW VEGETATION IS RE-ESTABLISHED. .T.602 ...., 15.SITE 75 COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF CMS DESIGN F.CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MAO HA-St. • ,H,,,,,,,,. C4 ..,=,.. 1t/ ELI �� ._ WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS UNITS 5 THRU 7 WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS UNITS 1 THRU 4 i3O°001 ■�4 r__ avatar cuslltY r2I * 14/1 •0.36(ml+•••aryl, Mater 20011t7 reluea rc,J •0.3OJN•er.(.1) 4 7/ I�� 12 r10/,tl 1l 110/It) /�I�I I�^I •0.96 Jr J.37B •0.36•3672 a.I. 0100•3.421 D.I. nor Inp/a,aM1k �ILJ ��\\ -� 12 12 VIC ACCOMANDO �.�--0�■ •261.33 c1 •0.36•7,293 a.I. GON6U.Des mom war—. Water 0wlxr 110. Ic•u •IOW 000111,ro1woe It') 11 16150 SW Thbor(6M Or .arm.-w.a © 161.3314 100 •216.72 of 660vKt6n,OR m1001 M,609 610-6Y6 FA%,006.2111,006 .'+ 4 14,400 niter O.nIJtr I1ew kW •Witte pull Jtr 001100 (C/, oscomandoli•eraicaT .„F �a4 • 0.0197 crs 14100 i� G'S`:" • 111.76 r N, 14 4D0 1 • 0.016 elm {` SSA 61RL 1 aggLAI6g1IIIL,JIVAILISL- I I Egli I I a,-•.. a ■ C y( 1 ,1 . 11 - 1 + tlup n 3 N .w._ 7611.•'{ ....� -'f ! . L�°- � I (600 PAM ea VW!UXC(j...., _ , appor �3 I " D _ ,. 63%, ,p,;„:-. t I �,/ _epwl �— 'j 'r r �.I. 3D-. lrre .,,. �Y% D r a: D.. Gflwln, a �� w / cD car.— n ; p.• • — I ii c0.0 3 coil i Z 61i— ° W-m+« - ..2 1 rMU 2 DS ' 00r,1µ. �•' �-. Y I � 111 5 J • -- ./ OM+T CLIP I PC d a'',War 'll - -- -- -09 7 TRACT "A' �� l'...'..,1.. I PG III Y I '� 1 '6 _ lases aa•a .Drn..we. ,ME - -- -- 1 , / ..�; -- it ' > 6.� �'" r I i_. J I •.�...rw� ._—..n._..r .CII3 , D�• 0-Lr3!•�,::On ..1fw) JJ . , / 1 } ......., .. ..._.. ......... _......._ nu •nT.u'.c6.a / new ,� our✓ku`/ / tT_ 1 / I ,,1• M DOL GPA r( .-cDanaW alnvlawa .-oulnrec araa�wr I�'fC l X D w - 1...., "r I. l ��jj� 6°b { �1 S 111 Y ASEER WOODS; y.�� '1 I 1- ........ ►016 Titilr.!1tV itSII.' '.Ii.C,,Ye tiilI.` 1. TO■4•401ES CO CD W CE Mr CUPS Ay, ~' 41 ....w'.. .,.,.; '' 600 nleooln. %D � D I •- --_ , TM 151 • dpo- OR 11273 • i�mTK SW DARTMOUTH ST k 1 .f o-_— �- _ PRELIMINARY STORM DRAINAGE PLAN C5 VIC ACCOMANDO CONSULTING ENNREER � NEW FH ." MTA 9W ThYterlord Or I _ _ l.. ' ' I .wwr,on OR mOm P19 SOS 690-s.ea 1 riw eoe-x•,we ■ ossowwnoolom.n e om 2 ",V■ ,'WTR I 1 1 n.ao n/ ,,� 3 —— — - -— , a I- ••••,•4 I +Ir I (MOT•►7li4IN ERRyf..... 4' AN Y_PI '.;..p 1 4 7 I eS 4" SAN r •t , '.,......:............i ....lig, ■■ °w; 1�■ x wt.!.] i+ r.r • ill 5 ' I _yam- // r. l• -hill i �%/' ""i ,'�; : `� -—- .-_.,. .� �; TRACT W ...../,/ `l y...(.• i 111 a a. I I All l / / i ,. I i Et I • 1 a / . / :nww. I cxm e'w /' /' is��' '/ II sy vow, f_i , ,---- , ..- -- - /../:-,� , .. [x S�6'w�y� SiLEw- �v y y,L j Mr �` I ‘ um L=i C.:S i S •LC 7 ■ 1 far PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN n O t a 1b00 THIN MOO TIGARD,OR V20 • r I....m8 15201 • w...0 V I_ 10-r_0 . I T PLANT LIST A • .,K... .i 1 t e' T.T.T•I. .,. ..r., T IonmoM Ik `I w I.... snw WC ra a�Mmn ca,ons n•b SMT_[A •• 'ti.,. I 1.101 O07 AIR NOT.PART p1.THIS MOLCT tx 22• W x 40 I 0 p MCI Swamp 0 1 N1 ' I i / I ,u Nowxrrer rNra,4 a er. b usrtw�eL CQRLLTIN6 R16RE6t 0 J 2 �• roreAM eervresa, bfl0 SW TR'INSRLAND DR AO a BO ICI 22' W • a0' y 0 59101°ar1 na w ,Amcor 11•91. m wrnra EGvIRTON OR.41001 O .1. WS.SOS MF7466• : •,�I I ro nuwTw�cwawm en.rw TO cam•a Mx.706-J61�700 . Y 1.¢11+x..MAW sr ac. •s•w,wr°Iewnaeu•2 SQ rI�LTN�wCW4NT • •I J �.. I L I • LA BPMMA,4An LLVKTA' 1404 u LOWAM 11111 ' _��I 22�W x so'— --. M. \ _ 8131' �1 "92.°"""4/ wa ww1.M 1.a wwmT La.ao jo,{ I [[a I r.� '��1 VIII n.SO.rT. O IIII .. 4 ��• ��H I!. >♦>f f'� i OHCnoALwAENr 22' W x 40' P.. AouIArN.roMO.n W•4. re LartA•et ■ I ,..I (IMP-PAP) ( r^. •V10M t0.MMt , l0 •• ` •.�-- .. '•_TAM <'� Al AK L06 WAU•. a. >A LOMTAStR• l0T) 680 s0.r C•OALMNeHT �-y � - 11 1 m so.Yt LNrnobautxT r � .—. • 1.256 w rc,Tosx E3 oA uENA ,._M• V .. .... V�' DPEMR[ N e /♦r I r^ �� » •• R,e I fi I Q n ea MR• es ow a e Mai n 'Nov 111100 x<mn4*1.01wD 69 6.• r e B•vn oc 1 • 6 Np•r aoD •• Aiiii < —, 24�W x 40' �� .;Clnottn..ii, ` Mar i4- .. .aw •• I 0 11 ; 1 ' ' S " � • • �' . �\ CF+ I • • • • ... HI I f \ • I!r r�'r .°� %' jl © � . 1� �' ----.--'". Kkel .-Au 1;3 I •Ocy-4— r t_ .�" 100.90 SW DARTMOUTH ST � ' •r' GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT NOTES I.OWES O.OESIGNATED PERSON SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROW,INSTALL•'ILIN • IF MERE ARE E+POSED SOILS 0.0 SOILS nor FuLLY E5TABL!SHED POOR OCTOBER 1•W TH OuGH APRIL 30Th. Ate MAINTENANCE OF ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES IN ACCORDANCE TIE MET*ANEW EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES MILL BE IN EFFECT. SEE TIE EROSION PEEVEIVTIOM WITH LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS. AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANNING AND DESIGN MANUAL !CHAPTER I/ POP IEO.'IREMENTS. AMER WOMB I 5.THE BOLYCARIES OF NE CLEARING LIMITS SMMN ON THIS PI AN SHALL BE CLEARLY MARYED P. SITE TO CORM Y WITH ALL REOUIPENENTS OF CM5 DESIGN E CONS IRNCTION STANDARDS 10OD 0A-BI. TOWNHOHES IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. DURING NE CONSTRUCTION PERII0. No DISTURBANCE SUBP,V,S-ON BEYOND THE CLEARING LIMITS SHALL BE PERMITTED. THE MARKINGS SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY 6.REMOVAL OF HIMALAYALAN BLACFBLSRr WINES AND ENGLISH IVY SHALL COMPLY WITH TIE THE APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR FOP TIE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. RECON/ENDATIONS or CLEAN MATER SERVICES "INTEGRATED VEGETATION AND ANIMAL MANACEIENI ` GUIDANCE'B005LET. IL TAO I T-1600 3.THE ESC FACILITIES 51,0570 DV THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSTRVCTED IN CONJYMCTION WITH ALL CLEARING AND GRADING ACTIVITIES A/C SUCH A MANNER AS TO INSURE THAT SEDIMENT 4ID -- • SEDIIENT LADEN MATER 00E5 NOT ENTER TIE DRAINAGE SYSTEM. ROADWAYS OR VIOLATE ',ot'`.c,"::? APPLICABLE MITER STANDARDS. . l i I 1.1 m A; > I ,._,LITii:r< 1 of c. SW iOth _ •- - AVE�rna67 - •-1 .- _ t_ 1��(Mel - 1 e — —a —l({ t >C 1 ...-'4 if, 10 � � 1 1--001P")-- d a' 0 IA . - i , 'A , . , .0,..1.-,S I . i : ,, ,,, , , 111 >. , I , i I \. .-- y `'�. to - ■ ' s \` ` __ 1�T Z ' r I I 4' 1 . :-. f iii4 1 , ., -,t, . oir . . thik„.. 0+4 : , ! : , , .. , : : , i , i. ,,,,,, 4 WOI Ai' I . r I _ � ' \ 1 � YI I y �-r - _-'-- -- ._ - a si \[m OM \[tT,,R Wm S'.t. I't7 v. ,,...r.4 Z a r SW MK AVE /c.m c/. '2 [s7 C -0 4 K 14 i g 141 n I. ali i F xi xi ass.als,l.TK, gist sacs s=si4,,.v ;e.gus,lisvuu.v...sz...s -od 11111011001Y1!!!!!/!!!!0!11111111!!!(1111111111141!!!!!!!! - 1 i. e X WXxxx xxxx WW W WWWWWW ! , IAA ys ,4b4R-,R44eyeti{R!Re4e4g4e FOilFs•..ee{44ieiR11>P4*.gn 44ei44RacIEERI 44114 N * gl 6 a• O 410,4*( S 3' as n R.gq..•atllSa6g%t; tit; ..t 4.ggaallaat{aa.. .g..4.4.44.4VV444% iii s1i 14? it fi g T e §S 3 Rll z iiii iii;iii$;;i$iigliitiiiiiiii'situ::+.. iigl ii$i:iiis'sigii$iiiigli 44 44 =fit ,Ig"( ww� _ N R �II >ti AS701 ii i & S' TREE PRESERVATION/MITIGATION PLAN s 0.1000 EXISTING TREES PRESERVED N0. rwo roq • 04.41 M,10. 20• VIC ACCOMANDO • i1MO1 MIS O. r CLABOLTIN5 e/oMeR 7 1 00,1040 4 16TO 9W Th.rime Or • 11.401101n 0. f• Beaverton.OR 87007 O 01•J2«/d r r40 509 000-5+49 w 4041 4' (An,005-15914500 • 0•0004.1 r occono00o1•m0n crm N 047141 M,1040 I.' 70 411'400 MR 040 0' 2 41000 MIT O. W b 0441(MR O.R r ■ I M I r 00w1n 2r ... .......I.. a van�bn y. S S 6 2 MOON AN 02 *MN MS QbpQQl d156.ri. .t. ..:..�.., I a 00.*1.a r r 0000744 e11 Q 2.2::- 011.00 1.11 1' r add Ml r rlfl I O ', 00 ada.w r ... ... 10 MOM MO r I 20 0 20 0 J1 00 0111.01 AS N' II Y ....,. .. \,,, G:.'^ M 0440 MIe0. 22' C I,� u • 0. •' ..-.ems-�4 �•. MUM O47 0!101 MR 0K 0• - ✓ 00 Odd 1.71 000 r - 110]0!M { •• 44 00,1 '. n I . 0 04, 0•0. Ir 101n•K 1 n adal.e, Ir �( :1 0 ae•aN.w a Mm.rMn Oi,IM 1110:[!•1"'•.•. - -..-_.__ -- _tee J. I O [ ` f * 0400,MR OK r f.!. b - • 02 C.42014 �W0 r i b h V l . .:.:.-.:. _f�" a awnnln o' ' - • , - ." - . � ��`- V PLANT LIST j _ NM( 10- ''.a� �.,p dK S�, 9 I - nerd MK MC MOM CAS41A OM w ; s y e r # " f f •_ .w•1 r 7021* !ter r$040 2 Ij( yy• y f y . f •,- ! 16 noteeee cower ea. •04.mre 1 ,11 �''I 5 r'I Kµ1110 _0$ �" ./� I I 0 r ■W11N�.n1Nw 1.. a cartwal Q+ ,ii �� * y y 56 •t ///i! I 0 10 nD010n0nn01LAµ..4 O.K II &MAIM W An I .i■ y^ T-:-T r I IW11•1r M.,Iva 10 oc. I I o 01 y , 1►+ ... y K .INAOe$2004 2004 rNr NM a 470401 p11t *or N0µ040+1 IV 1 + ;1 I1 y 1.. "el Cr ` .. / In n[ !! "t I u .w.'t''i non •w , 4rrw1 .. y i■ ,1# 0 . 10117/ w f!! I ',ea ws WI arNn `I Bete J yam- w� • !+ • I I y w .4r1w0MOO. 0M. n ...al• P.-.} 4I`_-1R t i -•• �/ / ; fI•• ! •dT-_-" .area c I.. 4 e • • •./ ^. y.� * CI r • AO 44440V/WW-0.wnUS I•N. n ra,rc..a• } �! y f / N•1!!! lam/ •n,4a ww on & I woo. "j ". ( - 0 to ,nu.alcoaro4.6 7200000 •Nr AN. 10 •1• _ 'rr 1.■ sliiTtilF�r .N 4 '..k= oa..owm.welrwrt rM. 1 ovMHOMES F. ;.....: ...e.'''', IL 1700 4 IL 7600 .._ SW DARTMOUTH ST „•%1. - LANDSCAPE PLAN 166 7600 TI6ARD,OR R1218 • C9 H i Q 1 EAR - ,- 1 . I.- _,_.. t,. .. — ORM _. VIC ACCONANDO coraLrino ENGIEEER lop. :rraJrn!`wrr�:uw6r -- pp 16750 SW Timberland Dr (. 'I.r /'., 02 _- �, -yy-''_ ]ION'�i dslANC[ y� l',"•,.", ,..: _ eat. LM[ Vs4vwFan.OR nom cONE r..SOD 1190-SASS :e I t FAX HON-7'YI-*5011 �'`ll � a �'�. � t, � �� I a $ k S.W. 70th AVENUE PLAN S i f EM 1,• TR.T CU'-&•Ti 1•„'PVT CH 70. TA,II....39 NUT 1 R9 I GOITER 9 C• 1• .- ` �)3a'NeeeeeE I —w 111/ ^ IIIIIIIIIMIIIEIII RRESIRK FIT S9Ylerll� An Sip '-'a nom 1 -6'." ORAOE e' "Emu 1 i....wt_m...tuiaminimil�� 1 SIP HS 1 ill= is..AR.[Na Cr"V .i[NO e'x.)[Yr _. III bo —, TIM Wee S.W. 70th AVENUE PROFILE — 200' BEYOND PROJECT SCALE: E^'20 HORIZONTAL 'j ';:k;:., .,,yy � �+ I.= 5 VERTICAL ` • �'�N fr...« •{ • `,.\ , f. I X, ,�CLLMAtiCE Asa � F ;rrir�i a RAC � _ . N t - _- \ MALL 5 wa -_ 20_ 0 ,E[ , CERCIE[i[E/x u: m MR) CO•KCTgN ? -u... ww--- a...i. - SW 6910 AVE .«. (COUNT,MAO HO 1560 ...� �R•.. . ............................`.._...........,. cs... • - ,.r.. — - ■ - - I - - - - i 1:24 i� - - T S.W. 69th AVENUE PLAN an no E 51ST SPADE• .. F :Sex R 8 MyEER WOODS m 2 PPP aatlnlle ',. 0 S,CRAG[• .e • .... ......,.. YID ,00 00 M TL 9500 1 TL 7600 < . ST .roc , a e ! TM Si 5600 v ..... ..-,.. .................. Tb AHD,OR*7379 . ...... Mi NO W HM NO S.W. 89th AVENUE PROFILE — 200' BEYOND PROJECT Scan 1"A ir MMrdN7AL 1�s2 1•.11' C1� - 'VERTICAL LANCASTER yC Ix° 4ir, R engineering �� O ay 64983PE January 31, 2007 OREGON Vic Accomando � A 1��pQ9 EL 16750 SW Timberland Avenue Beaverton, OR 97007 t EXPIRES: 12/311 RE: 6 h/70h Avenue Subdivision - Letter Report Dear Vic: This letter is written to provide trip generation and distribution information for the pro- posed residential subdivision on the north side of SW Dartmouth Street between SW 690h Ave- nue and SW 70th Avenue. In addition, this letter discusses the safety and operation of each of the proposed site access locations. Trip Generation The proposed site plan calls for subdivision of the existing property into 7 total lots, each of which would contain one single-family dwelling. To estimate the number of additional trips generated by the proposed subdivision, trip rates from the manual TRIP GENERATION, Seventh Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), were used. The trip rates used were from land-use code 210, Single-Family Detached Housing. The trip generation rates are based on the number of dwelling units proposed for the site. It is estimated that a total of 5 trips will be generated during the morning peak hour, with 1 entering and 4 exiting the site. During the evening peak hour, it is expected that 7 trips will be generated, with 4 entering and 3 exiting the site. The expected daily traffic volume is 66 trips, with half entering and half exiting. The following table provides information on the net increase in site trips associated with the proposed development. Detailed trip generation calculations are attached to this letter. 321 SW 4th Avenue,Suite 400•Portland,OR 97204•Phone 503.248.0313•Fax 503.248.9251 Vic Accomando January 31, 2007 Page 2 of 5 TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY Additional Additional Additional Entering Exiting Total Trips Trips Trips 7 Single-Family Dwellings AM Peak Hour 1 4 5 PM Peak Hour 4 3 7 Weekday 33 33 66 Trip Distribution City of Tigard staff have requested information regarding the number of site trips that will pass through three specific locations near the proposed development during the evening peak hour. The locations include the intersections of SW Dartmouth Street at SW 68th Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street at SW 72"d Avenue as well as the SW 72nd Avenue bridge over Highway 217. The directional distribution of the site trips from the proposed development was esti- mated based on the existing traffic patterns in the study area as well as the locations of sur- rounding commercial development and major transportation facilities. A diagram illustrating the area street network and the existing travel lanes and traffic control devices at the study locations is included in Figure 1 of the attached technical appendix. The trip distribution pattern and assignment of site-generated trips to the study locations is shown in Figure 2 of the technical appendix. The intersection of SW Dartmouth Street at SW 72' Avenue is expected to have four additional entering vehicles during the evening peak hour upon development of the proposed subdivision. The intersection of SW Dartmouth Street at SW 68th Avenue is projected to have three additional entering vehicles during the evening peak hour upon development of the pro- posed subdivision. The SW 72"d Avenue bridge over Highway 217 is not projected to have any additional vehicles crossing during the evening peak hour as a result of development of this subdivision. Vic Accomando January 31, 2007 Page 3 of 5 Site Access According to the City of Tigard's Community Development Code (18.705.030.H.2), "The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street shall be 150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway." For locations where the minimum setback standard cannot be met, the code also states "If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersec- tion as possible." The throat of the southernmost site access location on SW 69`h Avenue is approximately 140 feet north of the SW Dartmouth Street right-of-way line. Although this distance is less than the minimum standard established in the development code, shared access is not practical at this location, since the required setbacks for residential development in the Tigard Triangle are insufficient to accommodate a shared access and driveway parking for the proposed resi- dences. The proposed access locations on SW 69`h Avenue are located as far from the intersec- tion as possible. Based on the traffic volumes at the intersection of SW 69' Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street, southbound queues are not expected to exceed five vehicles, and the proposed site ac- cess locations will not be within the anticipated queue lengths. The throat of the southernmost site access location on SW 70th Avenue is approximately 34 feet north of the SW Dartmouth Street right-of-way line. Again, this does not meet the minimum standard established in the development code, however shared access is not possible and the proposed accesses have been located as far from the intersection as possible. Since the proposed access locations on SW 70" Avenue are within 50 feet of the inter- section of SW 70th Avenue and SW Dartmouth Street, it is anticipated that as adjacent proper- ties develop, southbound queue lengths will extend beyond the proposed access locations. These conditions cannot reasonably occur, however, until SW 70th Avenue has been improved to become a through street. During periods when southbound queues extend beyond the pro- posed access locations, drivers exiting from the accesses will be prevented from turning to the south. These vehicles will still have an unobstructed exit path to the north, and with the future street connections in place can navigate to any destination. Although the potential queue blockages may impact access for the residences, there will he no significant impact to through traffic on SW 70th Avenue. Vic Accomando January 31, 2007 Page 4 of 5 Sight Distance Intersection sight distance standards are typically used to identify the minimum required sight distance for intersections and accesses onto roadways. For residential driveways, how- ever, the basic assumptions used in establishing intersection sight distance standards do not ap- ply. Intersection sight distance is an operational standard based on minimizing interruptions to through traffic on the major street. It relies on the assumptions that drivers entering the street are moving forward into the roadway rather than backing, and that oncoming drivers should not have to slow or stop to accommodate side-street vehicles. For residential accesses on local streets, however, most vehicles back into the roadway and oncoming drivers expect to slow or stop periodically to allow other drivers to enter and exit from driveways. Stopping sight distance standards identify the minimum sight distance required for safe operation of a driveway or intersection, allowing oncoming drivers adequate sight distance to avoid collision with vehicles stopped in the roadway at the proposed access location. As long as the minimum stopping sight distances are available at the proposed site access locations, the driveways can operate safely. Stopping sight distance standards are based on the speed of on- coming traffic approaching the potential conflict point. For a speed of 25 mph, the minimum required stopping sight distance is 152 feet. In accordance with AASHTO Green Book procedures, stopping sight distance at the proposed access locations was measured using a driver's eye height is 3.5 feet and an object height of 2.0 feet—the height of an average tail-light. Stopping sight distance was measured to be a minimum of 217 feet for southbound ve- hicles approaching the proposed access locations on SW 690 Avenue. Adequate stopping sight distance is available for southbound traffic at each of the proposed access locations on SW 69`h Avenue. The effective sight distance to the south at each of the proposed site access driveways is limited by the distance to the nearest intersection from which traffic can enter the roadway. Vehicles turning from SW Dartmouth Street must slow to make the turn, and through vehicles crossing SW Dartmouth Street must stop prior to crossing the roadway. As a result, the speed of vehicles approaching the proposed access locations from the south is limited to less than 25 mph. Right turns onto a minor street are generally made at speeds of up to 13 mph, requiring a minimum of 64 feet of stopping sight distance. Left turns are generally made at up to 18 mph, requiring a minimum of 98 feet of stopping sight distance. Vic Accomando January 31, 2007 Page 5 of 5 Stopping sight distance for northbound vehicles traveling on SW 69d Avenue was measured based upon the travel path of oncoming vehicles approaching from the west and east on SW Dartmouth Street. For the access locations on SW 69th Avenue, stopping sight distance was measured to be a minimum of 189 feet for westbound right-turning vehicles entering from SW Dartmouth Street and a minimum of 210 feet for eastbound left-turning vehicles entering from SW Dartmouth Street. Adequate stopping sight distance is available for northbound traf- fic at each of the proposed access locations on SW 69`h Avenue. Stopping sight distance standards do not apply for southbound vehicles traveling on SW 70'h Avenue, since the roadway currently ends just north of the subject property. There is cur- rently no traffic that approaches the proposed site access locations on SW 70th Avenue from the north. When the roadway is extended in the future, the design should provide adequate sight distance for the site access locations. For northbound traffic traveling on SW 70`h Avenue, the effective sight distance is again limited by the distance to the nearest intersection from which vehicles can enter the roadway. Stopping sight distance was measured based upon the travel path of oncoming vehi- cles approaching from the west and east on SW Dartmouth Street. The minimum available sight distance for westbound right-turning vehicles entering from SW Dartmouth Street was 103 feet. The minimum available sight distance for eastbound left-turning vehicles entering from SW Dartmouth Street was 190 feet. Adequate stopping sight distance is available for northbound traffic at each of the proposed access locations on SW 70th Avenue. If you have any questions regarding this information, please don't hesitate to call. Yours truly, Michael Ard, PE Transportation Engineer LEGEND 4 • STUDY LOCATION T p 4‘ -i STOP SIGN �+ r J PROJECT SITE ,F SW Baylor 5� a ai a r N O^ N..' SW Clinton St. 3 In 1:........................- r -, auth St -' Q ___ i SW Elmhurst St. 2 A u' T41115IVi T. SW Hermosa Wok, ¢ t . SW Franklin St. I 3 (• h SW Bevetond St. SW Gonzo90 St. �` ¢ N. b N Nn 3 SW Hampton St. r. i I \\,............_ 1_______"" gyp; i 1 VICINITY MAP FIGURE Transportation System & IV Intersection Configurations °° scale APPENDIX ENO t1 oo^ E—1 EJ,L c0 0 i Ei Tr� 1-) o00 0 if \ '1 N o I N SW Baylor t. L Q a N n NO K................ SW Clinton St. 2� SW Dore_ r _l/^ h se. _..) ," c boll '' ',t > L SW Elmhurst St. to 3 ^ E— 1 O sG° ' 1_1' EITf� SW Hermosa Way a L 0 0OO e SW F,anktin St. n 0-1 3i to SW Seveland St. t SW Gonzaga St. N.. v N n 3 SW Hampton St. O 1 i i I , O T O lel TRAFFIC VOLUMES / FIGURE Site Trips ling PM Peak Hour no scale APPENDIX TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS Land Use: Single-Family Detached Housing Land Use Code: 210 Variable: Dwelling Units Variable Value: 7 AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR Trip Rate: 0.75 Trip Rate: 1.01 Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Directional 25% 75% Directional 63% 37% Distribution Distribution Trip Ends 1€ 4 Trip Ends 4 3 7 WEEKDAY SATURDAY Trip Rate: 9.57 Trip Rate: 10.10 Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Directional 50% 50% Directional 50% 50% Distribution Distribution Trip Ends 33 33 06 Trip Ends 35 3S 70 Source:TRIP GENERATION,Seventh Edition David Hunter,Consulting Arborist 8/19/2006 Project Name: Amber Wood Townhomes SW 69th and Dartmouth Tigard, Oregon Vic Accomando, PE 7250 SW Ashdale Drive Tigard, Oregon 97223 Rhone: 503-890-5483 Fax: 503-452-0910 Email: acomando 1 @msn.com Here is the Tree Identification and Report for Amber Woods Townhomes. This document is a supplement to the Tree Inventory and the Guidelines for the Protection of Trees on Construction Sites. Tree Identification Common Name Code Scientific Name Bigleaf Maple BLM Acer macrophyllum Oregon Ash OA Fraxinus latifolia Oregon White oak OWO Quercus garryana Douglas Fir DF Pseudotsuga menziesii Hawthorn H Crataegus monogyna California hazelnut HZ Corylus cornuta White birch WB Betula populifolia English Ivy EI Hedera helix Serviceberry SB Amelanchier alnifolia Poison oak PO Rhus diversiloba Willow W Salix lasiandra Cherry CH Prunus species Mountain Ash MA Sorbus aucuparia Inspection Date: August 15,2006. This report is a companion to the tree inventory data collected. The data collected is on an excel data sheet document.Trees or shrubs not noted on the excel sheet were noted as to being on site,and adding to the site characteristics. DBH: This is a measurement of tree diameter at breast height,a standard measurement taken at 4.5 feet above ground. Tags: Tags were placed on the trees for aid in location and identification. Tags should be removed once the project has been completed. Pink ribbon was placed with the tags. Condition. Good: Trees rated as good are in apparent good health and appear structurally sound. No apparent problems or immediate concerns. DDH/06-298 1 David Hunter, Consulting Arborist 8/19/2006 Project Name: Amber Wood Townhomes SW 69th and Dartmouth Tigard, Oregon Fair: Trees rated as fair are in a state of decline. It can be possible to remedy some of the trees' problems, but the fact is,once tree decline starts it is difficult to remove/remedy all aspects of the tree decline. Poor: Trees rated as poor are in poor health or have structural problems that it difficult, if not impractical to save the tree. Removal is recommended. Dead: These trees are dead and may pose an immediate risk due to the extent of decay in the main trunk, stem or larger branching. See hazardous. Hazardous: Trees rated as hazardous are not in good shape either structurally or health condition. Some of the hazards can be taken care of by proper pruning, if practical. Usually,REMOVAL IS RECOMMENDED as soon as possible to avoid injury to life or property. Trees that are in poor health usually have a low landscape value or even a negative value. The mitigation value for these trees should be similar value of low or none. The Tree Protection Plan is finalized with exact markings of where the site and development will be on the ground. An accurate assessment of protection measures can be done for the trees to be protected,with the consulting arborist on site for tree protection fencing placement,and during the removal of trees in the work area, and during the construction activities as needed or required. I inspected the site on August 15,2006. Observations and conclusions are as of that date. This narrative is to add additional information to the tree survey data. The site located off SW 69th and SW Dartmouth. The area is north of SW Dartmouth. The tree mix is Oregon white oak,Oregon ash,Douglas fir,cherry,and willow with a mix of hazel nut, hawthorn,mountain ash,sword fern,English ivy,poison oak,and black berries as the main understory. The inventory started on the west side,worked north and around the perimeters,and then through the middle of the site. The creek bed was dry at time of inventory. Poison oak and English ivy vines are adversely affecting the canopies of many trees, and this is many of the reasons the trees ratings are fair or poor. Recommendations. Follow the Guidelines for the Protection of Trees in Construction Sites,work on some eradication of the English ivy and other noxious weeds,and the site would be enhanced compared to what the site is now. DDH/06-298 2 • David D. Hunter, RCA#408inveri,-,y-amber wood townhomes Tigard, OR8-19-2006 2 Tag # Species DBH Canopy Condition Remove Remarks 1 SP 12 10 Poor X 10 degree lean 2 OWO 10 0 Dead X English ivy 3 OWO 20 0 Dead X English ivy 4 OWO 20 5 Poor X English ivy 5 OWO 20 5 Poor X English ivy 6 OWO 18 20 Poor 3 stems, 1 base 7 OWO 14 30 Fair 8 OWO 28 10 Poor English ivy 9 OA 6 10 Poor X 10 OWO 13 20 Poor 2 stems at 8' 11 CH 10 20 Fair ? property line ? 12 CH 12 10 Poor X 15 degree lean to north 13 OA 12 15 Fair X 14 CH 14 10 Fair X English ivy 15 OA 15 15 Fair English ivy 16 H 8 5 Poor storm damage 17 OWO 10 10 Poor one-sided 18 OWO 10 5 Fair 19 OWO 14 10 Poor 6 stems, 1 base 20 OWO 6 5 Poor English ivy 21 OWO 12 5 Poor English ivy 22 OWO 18 20 Fair 23 W 10 5 Poor 4 stems,90% dead, hazard 24 DF 28 20 Fair 25 DF 28 15 Fair 26 DF 18 15 Poor understory 27 OA 9 10 Poor 2 stems, 1 base 28 OA 6 10 Fair 29 OA 17 20 Fair English ivy 30 OA 12 15 Fair 31 OA 12 15 Fair creek bed 32 OA 16 20 Fair creek bed 33 OA 8 15 Poor 2 stems at 3' 34 OA 11 15 Fair 3 stems, 1 base 35 OWO 11 20 Poor X 3 stems, 1 base 36 OWO 11 20 Poor X 37 H 6 15 Poor X disease 38 OWO 20 10 Poor X English ivy and P. oak 39 OWO 22 20 Poor X English ivy 40 OWO 12 20 Fair X 3 stems, 1 base, E. ivy 41 OWO 14 15 Poor X English ivy 42 H 6 15 Poor X 43 OWO 10 0 Dead 44 OWO 22 20 Fair English ivy and P. oak 45 OWO 16 20 Fair 3 stems, 1 base, E. ivy 46 OWO 6 0 Dead 47 OWO 12 20 Fair 2 stems, 1 base, E ivy 48 H 8 15 Poor 3 stems, 1 base 49 OWO 13 20 Poor 2 stems, 1 base 50 H 6 10 Poor 51 OWO 13 10 Poor diseased inventory-amber wood Townhomes Tigard, OR 8-19-2006 Page 1 David D Hunter, RC 52 A#405inven,...�_a,n6 53 oW er wow townhomes 55 AB 2 20 Fair Tig ara pR8,J y`2006 56 ty 6 20 Fair 57 10 p X OA oar 58 OA 8 15 Fair X 2 sterns, 2 6p 014/0 J12 Poor X English base Fair H 0 Poor X 6J 15 10 OA 62 H2 1 20 Fair 2 stems. 1 7 s JS Poor 3 stems, 1 base HZ 64 H 65 H 6 10 Poor 6 10 Poor 7 10 Poor 3 stems Total 10 Poor multiple , 1 base Significant �gnifi n 5 trees Multiple stems Significant Trees Trees: Tot trees s removed 807-, Total Percent removed Percent retained removed �2 Total canopy 8 J5, 33.85 0 Canopy r e •15 r 3 4.3 5%Significant 4 35 Canopy retain,d 5351 65.64% invento rY an'aer wood Townho mOS Tigard, OF?8-19_ 2006 Page 2 David D. Hunter,Retu .fired Consulting Arborist#408 1 Project Name: Amber Woods Townhomes August 19, 2006 SW 69th and Dartmouth Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 Guidelines for Protection of Trees on Construction Sites To preserve certain mature trees within a construction site some precautions must be taken to assure that neither the trunk, limbs, nor root system of the tree are excessively damaged. The root system of a tree is the most vital, the most delicate part of the plant, and the most easily damaged. The root system extends far from the trunk, often beyond the drip line of a tree. The fine absorbing roots, those that collect water and nutrients for the tree, are located primarily within the top eight to twelve inches of the soil. The roots and soil in this surface layer must be protected from injury. Any encroachment, disturbance, or compaction of the soil around the tree will damage or destroy the fine absorbing roots. Injury caused by cutting,crushing, suffocation, poisoning, or moisture stress by inundation or dehydration can result in the death of the tree. Injuries caused during construction projects may not be finally apparent for many years after completion of the project,but can ultimately kill the tree. The following guidelines are minimum standards recommended for the preservation of trees. These guidelines should be incorporated in construction contracts, and details made available to all parties involved with the work on the site, including equipment operators. Other guidelines and protective measures may also be appropriate, in addition to those listed below. 1. Protection Barrier: A protection barrier shall be installed around the tree or trees to be preserved. The barrier shall be constructed of durable fencing material such as chain-link fencing. This project: the fencing should be chain-link fencing. The barrier shall be placed as far from the base of the tree(s) as possible,preferably at the drip-line. The fencing shall be maintained in good repair throughout the duration of the project,and shall not be removed,relocated,or encroached upon without permission of the arborist involved. There shall be signing on the fencing that states who the project site arborist is and a contact phone number, and that no encroachment occurs without the written consent of the site arborist. 2. Storage of Materials: There shall be NO storage of materials or supplies of any kind within the protection barriers. Concrete and cement materials,block, stone, sand,and soil shall NOT be placed within the drip-line of the tree. 3. Fuel Storage: Fuel storage shall NOT be permitted within 150 feet of any tree to be preserved. Refueling, servicing, and maintenance of equipment and machinery shall NOT be permitted within 150 feet of protected trees. 4. Debris and Waste Materials: Debris and waste from construction or other activities shall NOT be permitted within the protected areas. Wash-down of concrete or cement handling equipment, in particular, shall NOT be permitted within 150 feet of protected trees. DDH/06-297 Tree Protection Guidelines and Construction Sequence David D.Hunter,Regib—red Consulting Arborist#408 2 Project Name: Amber Woods Townhomes August 19, 2006 SW 69th and Dartmouth Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 5. Grade Changes: Grade changes can be particularly damaging to trees. Even as little as two inches of fill can cause the death of a tree. Lowering the grade can destroy major portions of a root system. Any grade changes proposed should be approved by an ISA Certified Arborist or a Registered Consulting Arborist of the American Society of Consulting Arborists before construction begins, and precautions taken to mitigate potential injuries to trees attempting to preserve. 6. Damages: Any damages or injuries to the trees should be reported to the project arborist as soon as possible. Severed roots shall be pruned cleanly to healthy tissue, using proper pruning tools. Broken branches or limbs shall be pruned according to International Society of Arboriculture(ISA) Pruning Guidelines and ANSI A-300 Pruning Standards. 7. Preventative Measures: Before construction begins, fertilization of the affected trees is recommended to improve the tree vigor and health. Soil analysis testing should be completed to assure fertilization with appropriate fertilization products. Pruning of the tree canopies and branches should be done at the direction of the project arborist to remove any dead or broken branches,and to provide the necessary clearance for construction equipment. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 1. Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownership's to any property are assumed to be good and marketable.No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property is appraised or evaluated as though free and clear,under responsible ownership and competent management. 2. It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances, statutes,or other governmental regulations. 3. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources.All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. 4. The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report,unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement. 5. Loss or alteration of any of this report, invalidates the entire report. 6. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any other than the person to whom it is addressed,without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser. 7. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report,nor copy thereof, shall be conveyed by anyone, including the client,to the public through advertising,public relations,news, sales,or other media,without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser-particularly as to value conclusions, identity of the consultant/appraiser,or any reference to any professional society or institute or to any installed designation,conferred upon the consultant/appraiser as stated in his qualifications. DDH/06-297 Tree Protection Guidelines and Construction Sequence David D. Hunter,Regis.-red Consulting Arborist#408 3 Project Name: Amber Woods Townhomes August 19, 2006 SW 69th and Dartmouth Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 Construction Sequence 1. Before: Before work is started, the tree protection fencing must be installed,with guidance of the project arborist. Any pruning to avoid conflict with the fencing can be done by the project arborist during installation. 2. During: The tree protection plan is to save the adjacent trees in the project area, and to have as little impact as possible. Any pruning or removals should follow the Guidelines for the Protection of Trees on Construction Sites must be followed. Large roots over 2" diameter should be dug under or around instead of shear cutting with equipment. If larger roots must be cut the Guidelines must be followed. The project arborist will be notified of the cutting of larger roots over 2" of diameter. Project arborist can be on site,with reasonable notice,to be able to aid in the pruning of tree limbs or roots. Project arborist will write report(s)to document tree protection work done. 3. After: Project arborist to verify that tree protection standards were met as pertaining to the Guidelines for the Protection of Trees,and write report as needed to document results. DDH/06-297 Tree Protection Guidelines and Construction Sequence V - f IN-BK w0 0I>$ 7 c,U ik)1 fps till\: - ' - - - \----.. ... \.. \-- 1 . . . . 1.11 C I k`'.4 ri Q! - -. f? _7-Wu t , v1Z-V III iao ' �� — �. 1 I .L \\L_ _ — _ \ .-*- f Lt �� / car�_ , RC/4�yo �,`\� _. __ 11 •. . - ` t \\- pD BO)C Z5/ II \ 280 \� —� '4\ � °?s�6/26j P/ a/� 941/, 4' -- \ 40 . - . ' '-') 14" . . .. . itia4/212,ay*_," etiti40,,Lir ..,„ ..)-ic,1/44 i 18" j ; j - D. try• ( . \ \ ? ''-.� :71' ; t 4" -Q - \ �3 ss f - _ v n � � �. _ - 2/0- • .i. ti \ 1-n _ - - , (f�(: pi, 1 . im 4. AVIA — 04,,....-1.11 , ,. . -.; - - cr 4i; • • - • - i;-,. ‘ i )64 w- Lem ii,, ,! _________ 4 ..,, ....T.-... .. i 1 , . .C.,„" 1 • . _ , ,,.. , fp; / f\ �. > . - ' ,.4.-4 -,___ • /to — i', `141k. fi.0-74-i.i-i , , ,,,,)- %Ii, N—.—?.`,,Er.,,, —•' 1 449= ,' rp,-iv.. Ng. ,,,,, fe,„...7-1.- ._� ■ \z /' 2 X74 l cil 0 . � j , i I d L -1 i ' LI glil" • • • ‘ • I - \- /.4 - 7 ./. ...-. L9. - 3,.- :.. ,- . -- R.. -,7. :,--. .4 - CO: . --J-1.1 .. /4-.I.;`• 1..-1....1'. . .".(.31. . \ 1 . ' f. . .4 - ."4 .- CV:- . '-, (t. .- : . -s7.1`j4.- . - gi:44.1.;:ii .-‘\1.; 4- ..(. -4 .:.• .. - c(3. . . \ '.A ' F}` + . . . .i 1 - - , - .. . -\ fill\ -i* Y- tr-''-' 6' ' ;-'\-- - . —. _ -4_ ?._. 1.... c r / v_ , .._ _ . ________ twos Re Regulated buffer for the _ 4 proposed road widening on SW 69th 1 FIGURE i Avenue and. SW Dartmouth in Tigard. Oregon (base map provided 7 1 ►... T AI o ')nnR\ ..... /qtnege t i u o o7).__.c.) id ury r.o.i • --, .,._ ii \I'? ....... s' IM 44 11111141 II" . T i 11930 SW 701A AVE NOT A PART OF THIS PROJECT \ \ \V Ili 1 Ili" II 1 , iNsTALI. - 5 , t I '11\ ...t,..)(z.) C1,-, ...., , r---P:....„,/, -\I • 22' W X 004°' 100'1 DEEITAILANC419ERI ...4 II 45---.4__N :: 202 .117111.61i 4 ,iii fi: 1.) --X I li .....m•''' .1■1.. eo 2 k...‘..1 ("-{\ 20 0 20 0 L 11 22' x 40' i bs , F.F..2153.00 A 10. 136 MN IOW 1 PMF/i i / ..-,. ...- 7/17-6 1 111 41P. as c III n Ine, 1:■'. ...,0 1.1 • le! s.. , 7-7 0 . 0 22' W x 40'm .,,,,!p : •, - t , Al. 11■ .16 ,......ci, , ,cx Y...280 75 M 'Ly- .3 OE - • - VD Ui (\). ' '103 C TIE 1----It 1 2 71.--••••••1 7.5 "II \ I ' • '91 Law 1 4 .4 ,e, , , 1 H 221'..r.W.24.7540tAlit., ,ipi- • "NUE 1 ( A '..' .' Via. it ...I ^c) N\ *.■1 1 . A ,1'.,• .,• 4;( 124 50 65•- . ENcso A CHNENT 1.,'0,*-;0)..N.2);..1ZP■‘.C T .' . y \1 i -4t„,.-%.4*-•:;1,4''-'•1 1'Q..1'M1.:1-w,r 4.v1 ib o11 1'-\.4 yw•r•-Y...''..I,v ft%•,,, EesE„s•o ll _o 41,a 0 _At: T , .Q...... . Ai amiLe6 .. ...11iA., ■ -"Lt... - .i -,,, 4,0,„,.. -,...r ‘---,"Am millit. . - •- * 4146: ``''"'""igiUllisof .7-r ‘•44/ :I k 'c,''' "4-c-.. 1 1-libtir. - ,-2 - UN k 1 Arl taiiiii- TW 26 i iieillfret - "11! .. ... '''' ‘7‘ .;‘ ‘AA. 77%, >•d'i le '-4\ "r--- \ \i I 5 % -3 7-. ----- .1-7\ . \ , _ 'IttljP Nil _ , 7'r-----, - '''\ 've■\, ,iivi \ Ai ilk .A 241...L:0 40' h iiiir . _.. . .. . ....ix, 4,6 (,.. ... „, 1 1 .,..._ ..7. „... .m., 7 ... v, Ii . .., - 7.... \ ‘..." 4.: a ,,A . 6 •' --4-9"7;■- 4,e4744P•'%t•f 1" \ /II , ik,.. 24 W x 40' t• ,- - . N.) \114 ..-:.. ,'" ,..-4',"SA 4140.4;,'‘'il II: -----: A i 1 ., 4-4,‘' is :4',4 . 1 , 4 I _ Ab, Pi 258 So 1144. .. .._ t.t., - • /pp . . . ...N,- . ..\-•,..„ •• „ 4,4,,,,,,o.:144,9,„,.::1;4: .. ..., „ ___ -4- \ 1 01 - 1.14,,,,.. ...um 1.2111.,1 '.::,.........\ . s4‘ - , ,, ;' ---,4,.41,0v.xtirre.!...1,-• (I) fril 'k) \I J • 4e6 VVA.,101111 IP ,5 t, , \i,) •.$ Z,. 1 „Ilk . 1 7 pip,. - .,. ...,._ - ..,,, .,, . ..,,_,,,,, , .,,, ma 41elb' , %,.. ,eg:'n 94,-P-,7#"-r:te,■le low c, - hi. __ Aim A F.F..254.20Arde FA,'1., Iv At,0 p.:1,I- .Uri •:1 ,,•,' ‘..‘ .4„,.?4:,....,:,,lw ME I I t i7 N C S..\\ low*soi • -' sordi tx,'..,".74,kwirfir .. •, -. '• ---\\\ti 1111111 \ (our u 1 I.4 I k 1 , ■741110,,■17 11111 N,,,o.a. T I :: , ..,.... •-..,..,c ::„.4,,, ..,,,,:...i4,- . / )qhfr4 1.*•,'''''t 1171-1r 1,:i% • ..i. pn 1/41,4 S-1 r c. . de Ita 0.......■ \,...\ ' / : 1 14,"'`=leffor 4 , AP . • 1 .., . _ ,/.1 i \ :: % k '..."\ Mit \-.'" / II, , • 'al%,,,,' 4.-. • // * • ..,--. k „ . . . 0-..,:mir _...... / ilk,1.11 , 40' I'. • . :"'F' -- "'"'"".•.arAcyfe...: ,.:. r • MM . \--- --••••VA -Aga,- , i .... \ 4-•••••••••• liiiiiiii' Iv imaiiii...iiii•ifirmilsormmoratiresto. ro, 0 t--- i •• ) # 11 *maw or r rum moivairgEr. imm. co now warm • . roc V ...I. Ma. iliBil ? I -.1. .111.111.111111111010:0211111 INIUM111- ,., 1 " I / / / / ill / 0 4/1 ,_. ... _,i't / / ifl. 1 I s" I 1 I / zi 114 0 4,, I -iss-c-, 0 Am= _ (_5s --..( -1---1-55.1 ; 4 ‘ 1 ' \ rt.)) .. ..„.. . , , _1..49 • ilii-,--- ‘SW\DATIACVTH T `,..., , 1 , I , 01./:-d), GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN ......--- i ./ 0-T-FC /.,FG'`J i /61 2000 1 AMBER WOODS TOWNHOMES UNADDRESSED SITE TM 1S1 36DD TAX LOTS 7500 & 7600 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PRELIMINARY STORM DRAIN REPORT SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 Presented to: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION 13125 S.W. HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OREGON 97223 Prepared by: VIC ACCOMANDO, CONSULTING ENGINEER 16750 SW TIMBERLAND DRIVE BEAVERTON, OREGON 97007 Contact Vic Accomando, P.E. Phone: 503-890-5483 Fax: 503-259-9508 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1 . Proiect Description: The proposed site, adjacent to SW Dartmouth Street, spans two tax lots: Tax Lot 7500 is a 14,530.62 sq. ft. ( 0. 33-acre) parcel located at the west side of the site along SW 70" Avenue. Tax Lot 7600 is a 24, 132.20 sq. ft. (0. 55-acre) parcel on the east part of the site along SW 69th within the city limits of Tigard Oregon. The site prior to dedication is 38, 662.52 sq. ft. ( 0. 89-acres ) . The developed site after dedication (2,406.92 sq. ft. ) is 36,255.60 square feet (0.83-acre) . The existing use of the parcels is undeveloped urban forest. The City of Tigard has designated the parcels as within the MUE (Mixed Use Employment) zoning district and applies the "Tigard Triangle Design Standards" criteria to this application. SW 70th Avenue is aligned with the east edge of zoning district C-G, General Commercial with a Planned Unit Overlay. This project proposes to build (7) seven 3-story attached multi- family townhome units, with front garages. (4) four units access SW 69" Avenue and ( 3) three units access SW 70th Avenue. The 69th Avenue access is a single 30 ft. shared access and the units on SW 70th Avenue have 16 ft. wide individual driveways. No access will be provided to SW Dartmouth Street. 36% of the net parcel area is impervious area (roof and paved) with 59% designated as landscaping. 5% of parcel area is perennial stream and wetland. 2. Site Topography Information: On-site analysis reveals a gently sloping plateau (-6%) at the northeast section of the property breaking to a steep (-16%) downgrade to a stream channel. The west half of the site continues a 16% percent slope to the stream. The portion of the site south of the stream slopes from SW Dartmouth to the watercourse at a -20% grade to the channel. The site exhibits no history of development or building. The unnamed perennial stream, with headwaters near SW 67th and Clinton, traverses the site from SW 69" Avenue southwestly to a ditch inlet near the SW Dartmouth ROW line and flows westerly 2, 400 ft. to Red Rock Creek. The 25-year flow is =2.2 cubic feet per second (cfs) draining 2.75-acres as it enters the site. A Natural Resource Assessment conducted on the project site by Pacific Habitat Services in December 2005 defined a wetland along the stream banks. Amber Woods Town homes 2 Project No. 15202 September 29, 2006 3. Existing Site Specific Drainage Information: The area described, illustrated on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Community Panel Number 410238 0517B is identified as Zone "C" , an area of minimal flooding. The National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey lists the on-site soils as Woodburn silt loam (Hydrologic group "C" ) and Quatama loam (Hydrologic Group "C" ) . The portion of the site south of the stream is listed as Cove silty clay loam (Hydrologic Group "D" ) . See attached exhibits. Clean Water Services has determined that sensitive areas do exist and, in response, a Natural Resource Assessment with a Tier 1 analysis was conducted and approved. A Service Provider Letter was issued August 22, 2006 and is a part of this application. 4 . Proposed On-site Drainage System: The storm drainage system for the multi-family site will be designed in accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management, March 2004 (Resolution and Order 04-09) and The City of Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.810. 100, 'Storm drainage' . a.Drainage design — The drainage design recognizes two distinct areas of development or "basins" , the west developed 3-units with individual driveway access and the east developed 4-units with a common 30 ft. wide access and parking area. All roof drains and parking area runoff will be collected and conveyed by underground storm drain lines to a proprietary water quality structure manufactured by Stormwater Management, Inc. and referred to as a "Steel Catchbasin Storm Filter" . The storm flow will then continue to an oversized 36" diameter detention pipe with a controlled release rate manhole. The controlled release flow then continues to the stream with rip-rap outfall protection. Amber Woods Townhomes 3 Project No. 15202 September 29, 2006 b.Hydrology and hydraulics - The surface water runoff quantity and characteristics were analyzed using the hydrograph method. The "HYD" computer program (developed by King County, Washington and described in their January 1990 Surface Water Design Manual) was used to generate, add and route hydrographs. A 24-hour, standard SCS Type IA rainfall distribution design storm was used to generate the hydrographs. Runoff parameters - The soil type and land use were evaluated, as described above, to determine the curve number, per the SCS soil- cover complex method. The curve number (used in the HYD program) or CN value for pre-developed conditions was set at CN 81, secondary growth forest. The CN value for the developed site was set at 86, landscape good conditions for pervious surface and CN 98 for impervious surfaces. Travel Time and Time of Concentration - The time of concentration, Tc., was evaluated for runoff to travel from the hydraulic most distant point in the basin to its corresponding catch basin at the end of the basin. Time of concentration for pre-developed surfaces was calculated by the travel time, TT, for flow segments through the basin. Travel time for developed conditions was set at 5 minutes. Travel time, calculated as sheet flow, was applied to a length of 106 feet, using Manning's Kinetic Solution: 0.42(n LY 8 7%hi = lD 105 fe ‘04 (EQUATION C-1) V-21 Where: n5 = sheet flow Manning's effective roughness coefficient; 0. 40 for secondary growth forest L = flow path length (feet) P2 = 2-year, 24-hour rainfall = 2. 5 inches So = land slope (ft. /ft. ) Amber Woods Town homes 4 Project No. 15202 September 29, 2006 Conveyance system design - The conveyance system was designed to convey and contain at least the peak runoff for the 25-year, 24- hour storm with a total Precipitation of 3. 9 inches. Design peak flows obtained from runoff hydrographs for each basin. Manning's equation was used to calculate the "Maximum Flow" rate for each pipe run, based on the proposed pipe slope and geometry (see Equation D-1 1.49 2 Q = AR3(S")2 (EQUATION D-1) Where: Q =Peak flow (cfs) n = manning's roughness coefficient A =cross-sectional area of pipe (sf. ) R = Hydraulic radius (ft. ) So = slope of the energy grade line (ft./ft. ) The design velocities in each pipe have a minimum value of 3. 0 fps. A Manning's roughness coefficient of 0.012 for PVC pipe was used in the conveyance calculation. 5. Developed Runoff Developed runoff was computed by calculating overland flow across landscaped yards and combining flow from the impervious area for roof, driveway and concrete walks areas. Results are tabulated in the attached hydrograph printouts (page 11 and 12. 6 . Water Quality Water quality requirements are provided according to CWS Appendix B:Water Quality & Quantity Facility Design, 3.2 Proprietary Pre-treatment Devices and sized in accordance with Amber Woods Townhomes 5 Project No. 15202 September 29, 2006 the manufacturer' s recommendations recognizing minimum treatment flow as: Water quality volume (cf) = 0.36(in) x area (sf) 12 (in/ft) Water quality flow (cfs) = Water Quality volume 14,400 Seconds Water quality calculations are displayed for each basin on Sheet 5, "Preliminary Storm Drainage Design" of the drawing set. 7. Detention The hydrographs were routed through a 36-inch diameter pipe with three release orifices, set at increasing elevations designed to detain a 2-yr, 10-yr and 25-yr storm event creating a detention facility. Computer generated hydrographs and detention routing computations are included with this report. END OF REPORT Amber Woods Townhomes 6 Project No. 15202 September 29, 2006 HYDROLOGIC GROUP RATING FOR CLACKAMAS COUNTY AREA, OREGON; MULTNOMAH COUNTY AREA, OREGON; WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON Soil Survey Map - Hydrologic Group iat i ul , - 0 1 SW BAYLOR ST 1Q ' • . b 9 4 r, I .. OEM= SW CLINTON ST } i` I l' II. . t IV SW DARTMOUTH ST �ltalc sw nnku;_AS oR i� I t rim*" -11' lillb4 1 -—.-._.._ �ff// Meters i Feet 0 35 70 140 0 100 200 400 600 800 Web Soil Survey 1.1 10/2/2006 National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 4 HYDROLOGIC GROUP RATING FOR CLACKAMAS COUNTY AREA, OREGON; MULTNOMAH COUNTY AREA, OREGON; • WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON Soil Survey Map-Hydrologic Group MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Hydrologic Group {Dominant Condition, 81t;} Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service A Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov �D Coordinate System: UTM Zone 10 B Bp Soil Survey Area: Clackamas County Area, Oregon Spatial Version of Data: 1 ) C/o Soil Map Compilation Scale: 1:20000 Soil Survey Area: Multnomah County Area, Oregon Not rated or not available Spatial Version of Data: 1 Soil Map Units Soil Map Compilation Scale: 1:20000 0 Cities Interstate Highways Soil Survey Area: Washington County, Oregon Roads Spatial Version of Data: 2 � ---I Rails Soil Map Compilation Scale: 1:20000 Water Hydrography Oceans Map comprised of aerial images photographed on these dates: 7/29/2000; 8/5/2000 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. I S1).t. Natured He.lnurr` Web Soil Survey 1.1 10/2/2006 t',ci r`alieu Bernice National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 4 Hydrologic Group Rating it Survey Map-Hydrologic Group Tables - Hydrologic Group Summary by Map Unit-Multnomah County Area, Oregon Soil Survey Area Map Unit Name Rating Total Acres in Percent of AOI Map Unit AOl Symbol 8B Cascade-Urban land C 5.8 6.7 complex,0 to 8 percent slopes 11B Cornelius-Urban land C 0.4 0.5 complex,3 to 8 percent slopes 55 Wapato silt loam D 0.1 0.1 Summary by Map Unit- Washington County,Oregon Soil Survey Area Map Unit Name Rating Total Acres in Percent of AOI Map Unit AOI Symbol l Aloha silt loam C 0.5 0.6 7B Cascade silt loam,3 to C 17.7 20.3 7 percent slopes 13 Cove silty clay loam D 11.3 13.0 22 Huberly silt loam D 2.8 3.2 37B Quatama loam,3 to 7 C 36.4 41.8 percent slopes 37C Quatama loam,7 to 12 C 1.0 1.1 percent slopes 45B Woodburn silt loam,3 C 4.1 4.7 to 7 percent slopes 45C Woodburn silt loam,7 C 5.6 6.4 to 12 percent slopes USDA Nalral Resources Web Soil Survey 1.1 10/2/2006 fwrnake.Senirr National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 4 Hydrologic Group Rating :1 Survey Map-Hydrologic Group Summary by Map Unit-Clackamas County Area, Oregon Soil Survey Area Map Unit Name Rating Total Acres in Percent of AOI Map Unit Symbol AOI 13B Cascade silt loam.3 C 0.8 1.0 to 8 percent slopes 25 Cove silty clay loam D 0.6 0.6 Description - Hydrologic Group Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential.Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation,are thoroughly wet,and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are placed into four groups A,B,C,and D,and three dual classes,A/D,B/D,and C/D. Definitions of the classes are as follows: The four hydrologic soil groups are: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate(low runoff potential)when thoroughly wet.These consist mainly of deep,well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands.These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet.These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture.These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C.Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet.These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture.These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate(high runoff potential)when thoroughly wet.These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential,soils that have a high water table,soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface,and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material.These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group(A/D,B/D,or CID),the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas.Only soils that are rated D in their natural condition are assigned to dual classes. Parameter Summary - Hydrologic Group Aggregation Method:Dominant Condition Component Percent Cutoff: Tie-break Rule: Lower USDA Naomi Resneries Web Soil Survey 1.1 10/2/2006 Commstia.Sersire National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 4 Tri-Land Design Grout Inc. VJA _7:53 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS DETENTION ROUTING DETENTION: 2-year flow (cfs) 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 time (hr) DETENTION TUBE (stage-volume calculated) diameter = 3.00'; length = 80.00'; slope = 0.25%; invert = 271.00'MSL STAGE VOLUME 271.0 0 271.5 62 272.1 165 272.6 283 273.1 400 273.7 504 274.2 565 OUTLET TYPE ELEVATION SIZE circ. orifice 271.0 dia.(in) = 1.13 inflow hydrograph: e:\rhino\2amberd.hyd outflow hydrograph: e:\rhino\2amberu.hyd peaks: inflow = 0.13 cfs @ 7.83 hr. outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 9.17 hr. stage: 1.42 ft. volume: 243 c.f. T4-i • na► Grog; In s. ti'J.A . ¢O 30-sep'4the 6 ArojMt 1$2 2 AMBEP W O2 R4 bY Undeveloped 2�r Rt f f Rp�48 2 Year, 24-hour paihfa11 a 2,50•.e2ove fie �s�2Ptj� c�f �s & 8 $2 /c 1 °,er/an Sheet w°°ds (119ht) n�p,oo 1O p ,'$ 25.0' tote/ of Concentration storra s return years duration � i otal r 2.50 in. Peis rea 0.24 A CN 81 G c.se . ° h forest ryou area CN 9g P C9rt 2 site area 0.24A f 12e_ e'lrhi n°` erg.hYd Pu a flow , .04 Cfs pp hr. noff V°l e° 8pg °�ft Tri.-Land Design Grain Inc. VJA _7:59 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS DETENTION ROUTING DETENTION: 10-year flow (cfs) 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 Vi)\ 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 time (hr) DETENTION TUBE (stage-volume calculated) diameter = 3.00'; length = 80.00'; slope = 0.25%; invert = 271.00'MSL STAGE VOLUME 271.0 0 271.5 62 272.1 165 272.6 283 273.1 400 2/3. / 504 274.2 565 OUTLET TYPE ELEVATION SIZE circ. orifice 271.0 dia.(in) = 1.13 circ. orifice 272.4 dia.(in) = 1.25 inflow hydrograph: e:\rhino\l0amberd.hyd outflow hydrograph: e:\rhino\loamberu.hyd peaks: inflow = 0.19 cfs @ 7.83 hr. outflow = 0.08 cfs @ 8.83 hr. stage: 1.97 ft. volume: 366 c.f. 7'2'i~'Land Prject 152 �si9ri Grou� ER WooDS ZOO. 2\UadeV by.Pe�y 1A yJ Year. 2 pec/ Year i14� .6:46 30.. 1 �2�r,► ur raln fa _ � g 30--Sep-06 11 oz erland sheet 2.5 pry gto w°°as description (1 t�eo� ��Ye l°oa aph• SCS i gh t) ri�� diet-440e otal ra n fiO� 2 years 'erA 40 206.0 2fip pervious area all 45 2n. total '-carte of 8.0' ssa total ioo area -,0.4 0 ON \ Concentration 5$ 15.0'C hyarograPh area 0'2g A �t81 GP 15.0. Peak file; e; 98 �•sec•gr runofflow' ne .08 cfsi ) 8.0 ZDa eru ° h forest Z,,433 cu.,�0 hr. h Yd Tri-Land Design Grouj Inc. VJA _6:58 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS RUNOFF by the SANTA BARBARA URBAN HYDROGRAPH developed 10-Year Runoff - 4 UNIT total Time of Concentration = 5.0' storm hyetograph: SCS TypelA return period = 10 years storm duration = 24 hr. total rainfall = 3.45 in. pervious area = 0.07 A CN = 86 Gp C:landscp,good cond. impervious area = 0.17 A CN = 98 total site area = 0.24 A hydrograph file: e:\rhino\l0amberd.hyd peak flow = 0.19 cfs @ 7.83 hr. runoff volume = 2,472 cu.ft. • Tri--Land Design Group, :nc. VJA 3:04 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS DETENTION ROUTING DETENTION: 25-year flow (cfs) 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 Q 5 10 15 20 25 30 time (hr) DETENTION TUBE (stage-volume calculated) diameter = 3.00'; length = 80.00'; slope = 0.25%; invert = 271.00'MSL STAGE VOLUI4E 271.0 0 271.5 62 272.1 165 272.6 283 273.1 400 273.7 504 274.2 565 OUTLET TYPE ELEVATION SIZE circ. orifice 271.0 dia. (in) = 1.13 circ. orifice 272.4 dia. (in) = 1.25 circ. orifice 273.0 dia.(in) = 1.25 inflow hydrograph: e:\rhino\25amberd.hyd outflow hydrograph: e:\rhino\25amberu.hyd peaks: inflow = 0.22 cfs @ 7.83 hr. outflow = 0.10 cfs @ 8.67 hr. stage: 2.19 ft. volume: 411 c.f. Tri-Land Design Group, .nc. VJA 3:48 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS RUNOFF by the SANTA BARBARA URBAN HYDRO(RAPH Undeveloped 25-Year Runoff 2-year, 24-hour rainfall = 2.50" flow type description coeff. distance fall slope TIC 1 overland sheet woods (light) n=0.40 106.0 8.0' 7.55% 15.0' total Time of Concentration = 15.0' storm hyetograph: SCS TypelA return period = 25 years storm duration = 24 hr. total rainfall = 3.90 in. pervious area = 0.24 A CN = 81 Gp C:sec.growth forest impervious area = 0.00 A CN = 98 total site area = 0.24 A hydrograph file: e:\rhino\25amberu.hyd peak flow = 0.11 cfs @ 8.00 hr. runoff volume = 1,751 cu.ft. Tri-Land Design Group, .nc. VJA .:56 30-Sep-06 Project 15202 AMBER WOODS RUNOFF by the SANTA BARBARA URBAN HYDROGRAPH developed 25-Year Runoff - 4 UNIT total Time of Concentration = 5.0' storm hyetograph: SCS TypelA return period = 25 years storm duration = 24 hr. total rainfall = 3.90 in. pervious area = 0.07 A CN = 86 Gp C:landscp,good cond. impervious area = 0.17 A CN = 98 total site area = 0.24 A hydrograph file: e:\rhino\25amberd.hyd peak flow = 0.22 cfs @ 7.83 hr. runoff volume = 2,846 cu.ft. Vic Accomando, P.E. 7250 S.W.. Ashdale Drive Portland, Oregon 97223 accorrmando 7 C)msn.corn 503-890-5483 Natural Resource Assessment For Vegetated Corridor Per Standard Site Assessment Method For Amber Woods Townhomes Seven Unit Development Tax Map 151 26DD Tax Lots 7500 & 7600 Tigard, Oregon 97223 By Dartmouth Development, LLC 8790 SW Turquoise Loop Beaverton, Oregon 97007 Contact Dennis Grayson 503-740-2235 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 54.16, iv oh This analysis of sensitive areas precedes a iikerfikomisoment Review and Sensitive Lands Review Application to the City of Tigard, Oregon. The development proposes to integrate (2) two tax lots, 1S1 36DD07500 & 07600, into (1) one tax lot with (7) seven condominium units (see attached site plan). An unnamed perennial stream with adjacent riparian wetlands has been identified on the site. A Natural Resource Assessment, conducted for the proposed widening on SW 69th and SW Dartmouth Street, by Pacific Habitat Services, Inc. (PHS) of Wilsonville, Oregon is applicable for this site. While this assessment is valid, it does not attempt to address on-site requirements for site development or the process to secure a service provider letter prior to land use permit application. The referenced Natural Resource Assessment prepared December 2005 is hereby made a part of this analysis and a copy is attached. This Natural Resource Assessment investigates the perennial stream traversing the 0.91-acre site from the east at a storm culvert outfall and recently constructed retaining wall at SW 69th Avenue, 170 linear feet southwesterly to an existing storm ditch inlet, approximately 24 feet beyond the midpoint of the south right-of-way line. The stream and vegetated corridor is displayed on an attached Exhibit"A". STANDARD SITE ASSESSMENT METHOD Because development will add more than 500 square feet of impervious area, this report will conform to the fundamentals of the Standard Site Assessment Method, Appendix C, 4.2. as follows: 4.2 b. Step 1: Conduct a reconnaissance of the project area and complete the Sensitive Area Certification Form. 1. Determine presence of Water Quality Sensitive Areas on the site... Response: An inspection of the site concurs with the December 2005 PHS report that a perennial stream with wetlands does exist. Step 2:Delineate the boundaries of the Sensitive Area Response: As a part of the PHS assessment, the wetland limits were established and flagged and subsequently the flags were included in a survey as depicted in the Sensitive Areas Map, Exhibit"A", a 24"x 36"drawing included with this report. Step 3:Determine the vegetated Corridor width... Response: Per Chapter 3, Table 3.1 Vegetated Corridor Widths, Figure 3.1 — Graph 2 determines that streams with perennial flow shall be (50) fifty feet per side. The regulated vegetated corridor is (50) fifty feet wide on the site with slopes 15% to 20°k. Step 4: Determine the existing Vegetated Corridor condition Response: The PHS Vegetated Corridor Plant Community commentary acknowledges (3) three distinct plant communities identified as Community A located south of the stream adjacent to Dartmouth Street, Community B also located south of the stream near SW 69th Avenue and Community C extending along the north side of the stream. Vegetated corridor Plant Community A has a 30% tree cover (Oregon white oak) with 35% native shrub cover (serviceberry, hazelnut, snowberry, one-seed hawthorn and Pacific ninebark) and 5% native herbs (cascade Oregon grape, Sword fern and California dewberry). Invasive/noxious plants were present (English ivy and Himalayan blackberry) occupying 35% of the area. Vegetated corridor Plant Community B has a 20% tree cover (Oregon ash) with 50% native shrub cover (serviceberry, hazelnut, one-seed hawthorn, Oregon ash, Pacific ninebark, cherry laurel, rose and snowberry). Sword fern exists on 5% of the Community B space. Invasive/noxious plants (English ivy and Himalayan blackberry) inhabit 21%. Vegetated Plant Community C has a 30% tree cover (Oregon white oak) with a 95% tree canopy. Shrubs (serviceberry, hazelnut, one-seed hawthorn, Pacific ninebark and snowberry) cover 30%. Herbs (cascade Oregon grape, Sword fern and California dewberry) cover 5%. Invasive/noxious plants (English ivy and Himalayan blackberry) cover 35% of Community Plant C. The following table summarizes the condition of the (3) three plant communities per Chapter 3, Table 3.2 Vegetative Corridor Standards. TABLE A - SUMMARY OF PLANT COMMUNITIES Corridor Community Conditions A B C Good >80% cover-native plants and i 95% tree >50% tree canopy canopy 50-80% cover-native plants 59 60%60% native 59% native Marginal and 26-50% tree canopy cover and 30/o cover cover tree canopy Degraded <50% cover-native plants and 20% tree <25% tree canopy canopy Plant Community A is in marginal condition and there will be no impact due to development of this project. Plant Community B is in degraded to marginal condition and no impact will occur due to development. Plant Community C is in a marginal to good condition, however with non-native Himalayan blackberry so dense and pervasive (30 to 35% of Community C area), manual removal is not practical. Therefore, a non-selective mechanical removal with hydro-axe or dozer with blade will be required. With anticipated encroachment due to development, Plant Community C requires a Tier 1 Alternatives Analysis which follows. Step 5:Additional assessments 1. If development is proposed closer than 35'from the break in slope at the top of the ravine, a geotechnical analysis is required. Response: No development will occur closer than 27 feet from the break in slope at the top of bank. A Tier 2 Alternatives Analysis is not proposed. Step 6: Prepare the Natural Resource Assessment Report Response: This report is accompanied with a scaled 1 inch equals 20 feet base map site plan showing: Property lines and dimensions Location of proposed buildings, decks and driveways Existing and proposed conditions for property and surrounding area Location and dimensions of roads, driveways, utilities, parking areas and buildings Location of yards Locations, boundaries and conditions of existing Sensitive areas and drainageways Locations, boundaries and conditions of the Vegetative Corridor including Plant Communities, contours and notation of slopes TIER 1 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS Plant Community C is considered in a marginal condition due to only 59% native groundcover and populated with a dense cover of Himalayan blackberry. A development of (4) condominium units at the north end of the site with a common access to SW Dartmouth Avenue and (3) condominium units at the site's west side along SW 70th Avenue necessitates an encroachment on the 50' wetland buffer. As the base map site plan depicts, the 1,070 sq. ft. north encroachment and the 124 sq. ft. west encroachment (1,194 sq. ft. total) is mitigated with a 1:1 replacement area of 1,197 sq. ft. As a result of discussions with Environmental Review staff, it has been determined that the development and the resultant mitigation for encroachment minimizes incursion into the vegetative corridor. With conformance to the criteria explicated in CWS Design & Construction Standards R&O 04-9, Chapter 3, Appendix C and Appendix D, it is likely a Storm Water Connection Permit will be issued based on the proposed plans. NATIVE PLANT REVEGETATIVE PLAN A July 7, 2006 telephone conversation with Damon Reishe suggested that a revegetation plan conforming to requirements of Appendix D, Landscape Requirements appropriate to the site conditions and restoring the Plant Communities to"a good corridor condition"could be submitted after a Service Provider Letter is issued. The design team will coordinate with Clean Water Services and the City of Tigard to propose a landscape plan for the development that recognizes the screening and buffering and revegetation requirements. END OF REPORT Vic Accomando, P.E. 16750 SW Timberland Drive Beaverton, Oregon 97007 accomando 1 @msn.corn 503-890-5483 Alternatives Analysis For Vegetated Corridor Description of why Encroachment is Needed Amber Woods Townhomes Seven Unit Development Tax Map 151 26DD Tax Lots 7500 & 7600 Tigard, Oregon 97223 By Dartmouth Development, LLC 8790 SW Turquoise Loop Beaverton, Oregon 97007 Contact Vic Accomando 503-890-5483 SITE REQUIREMENTS In conformance with the requirements of the City of Tigard Community Development Code, side yard setback (10'), front yard setback (20') and rear yard setback (20') dimensions must conform to the MUE (Mixed Use Employment) zoning district. Accordingly, positioning of the attached residence buildings resulted in constricted space while recognizing minimum floor space needs. Several iterations were performed with varying size buildings. As a result, building footprint dimensions were reduced from 24 ft. wide to 22 ft. wide along SW 69th Avenue to minimize encroachment in the vegetated corridor. Additionally, parking area and access to garages was reduced to minimal functionality. Implementing a retaining wall further reduced trespass into the buffer area. To minimize impact to the buffer near SW 70th Avenue, a decision to place (3) three units at 24 ft. wide was selected instead of (4) four 22 ft. wide units, which would be possible, if not for the buffer. DESCRIPTION OF WHY ENCROACHMENT IS NEEDED The major force driving the encroachment into the vegetated corridor is the density of development mandated by the City of Tigard, demonstrated as: Gross area of site: 38,662 sq. ft. Subtracting sensitive lands: 16,631 sq. ft. Subtracting Public right-of-way: 2,406 so. ft. Net development area: 19,625 sq. ft. = 0.45 acres Maximum units = 0.45 x (R25) 25 units per acre = 11.26 = 11 units Minimum units = 11 units (maximum) x 80% = 8.8 units = 8 units The minimum units for this site are 8 units. A variance has been requested to reduce the number of units to (7) seven units, due to the inordinate area allocated for vegetated corridor. GRADING IN THE VEGETATED CORRIDOR As discussed in a meeting with Environmental Review staff Friday August 18, 2006, any grading activity within the buffer will only entail removing invasive/noxious plants without disturbing native plants and will only occur at natural or native ground level. Mechanical brush cutters or hydro-axe will be employed without any herbicides due to the close proximity of the drainage way. CWS staff will be notified 72 hours prior to any brush cutting. END OF REPORT Natural Resource Assessment t 69 h and Dartmouth Street in Washington County, Oregon (Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Section 36DD Tax lots 7500 and 7600) Prepared for Gene Mildren Tigard, OR 97223 Prepared by Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Wilsonville, Oregon (503) 570-0800 December 19, 2005 ..1 Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street in Washington County, Oregon (Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Section 36DD Tax lots 7500 and 7600) 1 i} Prepared for Mildren Design Group Attn: Gene Mildren 7560 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 Tigard, OR 97223 Prepared by John van Staveren Shawn Eisner Amber Wierck Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. 9450 Commerce Circle, Suite 180 Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 (503) 570-0800 (503) 570-0855 FAX PHS Project Number: 3254 December 19, 2005 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT 1 2.1 Regulatory Jurisdiction 1 2.2 Natural Resource Assessment Methodology 1 l2.2.1 Delineation of Sensitive Areas 1 2.2.2 Determine Vegetated Corridor Width and Condition 2 l 3.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS 2 4.0 VEGETATED CORRIDOR ASSESSMENT 3 4.1 Vegetated Corridor Width Determination 3 4.2 Vegetated Corridor Plant Community 3 4.3 Vegetated Corridor Plant Community Condition 5 4.4 Vegetated Corridor Discussion 6 5.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 6 5.1 Site Plan 6 6.0 CONCLUSION 6 7.0 REFERENCES 7 APPENDIX A: Figures ii 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION I Pacific Habitat Services, Inc. (PHS) conducted a Natural Resource Assessment for the proposed road widening on SW 69th and Dartmouth in Washington County, Oregon (Township 1 South, Range 1W, Section 36DD, Tax lots 7500 and 7600). The generalized location is shown in Figure 1. All figures are in Appendix A. PHS identified a perennial tributary of Red Rock Creek with small areas of adjacent creek-side wetlands on the site. The field work for this natural resource assessment was conducted by PHS staff on September 23, 2004. The site was revisited on November 21, 2005, to verify the wetland I boundary and document current site conditions. i 1 2.0 NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT _is 1 2.1 Regulatory Jurisdiction - Clean Water Services (CWS) as part of their Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order 04-09 (R&O 04-09)requires that natural resource assessments be conducted for Sensitive Areas within their jurisdiction. Sensitive Areas include intermittent and perennial rivers, streams, and springs, existing and created wetlands, and natural lakes, ponds, and in-stream impoundments (CWS, 2004). CWS requires a wetland determination/delineation and a vegetated corridor assessment on projects that contain or are within 200 feet of a Sensitive Area. i 1 There is a perennial tributary on the western portion of the property which necessitated the completion of this natural resource assessment prior to site development. 1 �? 2.2 Natural Resource Assessment Methodology The NRA contains two components: a delineation of the water quality sensitive areas and a vegetated corridor evaluation. A detailed discussion of the methodology is included in Chapter 3 and Appendix C of R&O 04-09 (CWS, 2004). A brief description of each component is included below. 2.2.1 Delineation of Sensitive Areas S A delineation of water quality sensitive areas (wetland, intermittent/perennial streams, springs, and natural lakes or ponds) must first be conducted. For wetlands,the required criteria and suggested methodologies of the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual Technical Report Y-87-1, (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) must be used to delineate the boundaries. This manual defines wetlands as requiring indicators of hydric soils, a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, and wetland hydrology. A determination as to whether streams are intermittent or perennial must be made. The extent of all streams, springs, and natural lakes or ponds must also be determined. Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 1 - 1 - 2.2.2 Determine Vegetated Corridor Width and Condition The vegetated corridor width can range between 15 and 200 feet and is measured horizontally from the outer edge of the water quality sensitive area. The boundaries of the sensitive areas and their vegetated corridors must be staked, surveyed, and mapped within the site and within 200 feet of the 1 property line on a base map. The vegetated corridor width is based on the type of water resource (wetland, lake, stream), the size and nature of the water resource (acreage and/or perennial/intermittent), the size of the watershed, and the adjacent slope. The existing condition of the vegetated corridor must be determined. This is accomplished by 1) identifying the plant community types present in the vegetated corridor, 2) documenting representative sample points, 3) characterizing each plant community type, 4) determining the cover by native species, invasive species, and noxious plants, and 5)based on this information determining whether the existing vegetated corridor condition for each plant community is good, • marginal, or degraded. 3.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS The site is forested and undeveloped. A perennial tributary of Red Rock Creek flows east to west across the southeast corner of the study area. Adjacent land use includes residential development to the north and west. In addition, there is industrial development across SW Dartmouth to the south and a vacant parcel across SW 69th Avenue to the east. Upslope groundwater sources contribute to the perennial nature of the tributary. The primary source of hydrology that influences water levels within the study area is seasonal water level fluctuations in the perennial drainage. The drainage flows from a culvert at the east side of the property, and then traverses the property to continue off-site under Dartmouth Street to the south. A wetland area in the vicinity of the culvert is apparently the result of ponding and scour that result when the culvert grate becomes blocked with debris during periods of high stormwater runoff. Existing site conditions are shown in Figure 2. The forested riparian area adjacent to the stream is dominated by Sitka willow(Salix sitchensis, FACW), Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra, FACW+), and Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia, FACW). Vegetation just upstream from the culvert inlet includes common cattail, (Typha latifolia, OBL), American speedwell (Veronica americana, OBL), swamp smartweed(Polygonum hydropiperoides, OBL), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus, FAC), bitter dock(Rumex obtusifolius, FAC), bittersweet nightshade (Solanum dulcamara, FAC+), small-fruit bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus, OBL), and Watson's willow herb (Epilobium watsonii, FACW-). The dominant vegetation in the forested uplands on both sides of the drainage includes Oregon white oak, (Quercus garryana, UPL), Oregon ash, snowberry(Synzphorica pos albus, FACU), Saskatoon service berry (Amelanchier alnifolia, FACU), one-seed hawthorn(Crataegus monogyna, FACU+), cherry laurel (Przazus laurocerasus,NI), sword fern (Polystichum nzunitum, FACU), English ivy(Hedera helix, UPL), and Himalayan blackberry(Rubus discolor, FACU). Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 - 2 - The Ordinary High Water(OHW) line was flagged as the potentially jurisdictional limits of the tributary of Red Rock Creek within the study area. The limits of the OHW were identified by a combination of the following field indicators: topographic changes, scour, drift lines, and evidence of sediment deposits. Wetland benches along the edge of the channel are influenced by lateral groundwater seepage, but these areas appear to be below the elevation of OHW. 4.0 VEGETATED CORRIDOR ASSESSMENT 4.1 Vegetated Corridor Width Determination The vegetated corridor is 50 feet wide on the site, except in the southeast corner, where the structural embankment of the street truncates the buffer.Project surveyors identified the toe of the slope west of the street as the limits of structural embankment west of SW 69th Avenue (Figure 3). The width of the vegetated corridor is measured 50 feet from perennial streams if the adjacent _3{ slopes are less than 25%. The slope within 50 feet of the creek averaged 15 to 20. Slopes increased to greater than 25 percent along the structural embankment of SW 69`h Avenue,but the regulated corridor does not extend beyond the base of the embankment. 4.2 Vegetated Corridor Plant Community There are three plant communities present within the vegetated corridor on-site. Community A is located south of the tributary and it extends to the southwest corner of the site. This forested community is dominated primarily by native species. Community B is also south of the tributary throughout the eastern portion of the vegetated corridor. This forested community has less tree cover than Community A. Community C is on the north side of tributary and has a very high tree canopy cover. Each community was documented in one location as shown in Figure 4. The data from these sample points is presented in Tables 1 and 2 below. Figure 5 is photodocumentation of the vegetation communities. Table 1. Vegetated Corridor Community A Botanical Name Common Name Cover(%) Trees: 20% Fraxinus latifolia* Oregon ash 80 Pseudotsuga menziesii* Douglas fir 20 Shrubs: 40% Acer circinatum* vine maple 10 ( Amelanchier alnifolia* serviceberry 10 Cornus stolonifera* red-osier dogwood 5 Corylus cornuta* hazelnut 10 Crataegus monogyna one-seed hawthorn 15 Prunus laurocerasus cherry laurel 15 Prunus sp. cherry or plum 5 Rosa sp*. rose 15 Symphoricarpos albus* snowberry 15 Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 - 3 - Table 1, continued Botanical Name Common Name Cover(%) Vines: 30% Hedera helix** English ivy 30 Rhus diversiloba* poison oak 3 Rubus discolor** Himalayan blackberry 37 Rubus ursinus* California dewberry 30 Herbs: 10% Berberis nervosa* Oregon grape 15 Polystichum munitum* Sword fern 85 % Cover by Natives 59% %Tree Canopy 30% %Invasive/Noxious 20% *=Native species**=Invasive species or noxious weed(ODA) Table 2. Vegetated Corridor Community B Botanical Name Common Name Cover(%) Trees: 20% Fraxinus latifolia* Oregon ash 100 Shrubs: 50% Amelanchier alnifolia* serviceberry 15 Corylus cornuta* hazelnut 10 Crataegus monogyna one-seed hawthorn 25 Fraxinus latifolia* Oregon ash 10 Ilex aquifolium English holly 8 Physocarpus capitatus* Pacific ninebark 2 Prunus laurocerasus cherry laurel 5 Rosa sp*. rose 10 Symphoricarpos albus* snowberry 15 Vines: 25% Hedera helix** English ivy 20 Rubus discolor**r Himalayan blackberry 65 Rubus ursinus* California dewberry 15 Herbs: 5% Polystichum munitum* Sword fern 100 % Cover by Natives 60% %Tree Canopy 20% %Invasive/Noxious 21% *=Native species **=Invasive species or noxious weed(ODA) Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 - 4 - i I Table 3. Vegetated Corridor Community C Botanical Name Common Name Cover(%) i Trees: 30% Amelanchier alnifolia* serviceberry 40 ! Quercus garryana* Oregon white oak 60 ' Shrubs: 30%° Amelanchier alnifolia* serviceberry 25 Corylus cornuta* hazelnut 40 Crataegus monogyna one-seed hawthorn 15 Physocarpus capitatus* Pacific ninebark 10 Symphoricarpos albus* snowberry 10 Vines: 35% q Hedera helix** English ivy 20 _II Rubus discolor** Himalayan blackberry 80 Herbs: 5% Berberis nervosa* cascade Oregon grape 33 Polystichum munitum* Sword fern 33 1 Rubus ursinus* California dewberry 33 ' % Cover by Natives 59% %Tree Canopy 95+% %Invasive/Noxious 35% *=Native species **=Invasive species or noxious weed(ODA) 1j 4.3 Vegetated Corridor Plant Community Condition The following table summarizes the condition of the plant community present in accordance with Clean Water Services' standards. Table 4. Summary of the Plant Communities Community Corridor Condition A B C Good >80%cover of native plants, and 95+%tree >50%tree canopy canopy Marginal 50% -80%cover of native plants, and 59%native cover 60%native 59%native 26-50% tree canopy 30%tree canopy cover cover Degraded <50%cover of native plants, and < 20%tree 25%tree canopy canopy Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 - 5 - • 4.4 Vegetated Corridor Discussion The vegetated corridor adjacent to the stream, Community A has 59%percent cover of native species and 30% tree canopy coverage therefore it is in `marginal' condition. Vegetated corridor Community B is in a `degraded' to `marginal' condition because there is 60%native cover and only 20% cover provided by the tree canopy. Community C is in a `marginal to good' condition due to the large amount of cover provided by the tree canopy(95+%), however, the understory has only 59% cover of native species. 5.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN 5.1 Site Plan The proposed road widening project at 69th Avenue and Dartmouth will employ a wall to retain fill material. This wall will be constructed without extending the existing culvert or otherwise impacting the drainage. There will be no need for permits from either the Oregon Department of State Lands or US Army Corps of Engineers for this project. The current design of the retaining wall places it within the structural embankment of the existing road prism. Thus, there would be no impacts to the regulated vegetated corridor under the jurisdiction of Clean Water Services (CWS). Buffer mitigation would have been necessary for any portion of a wall or fill slope within 50 feet of the drainage located outside of the existing structural embankment. No buffer enhancement within the study area is proposed at this time since the proposed project corridor does not impact vegetated corridors and the proposed street widening does not constitute development of the site. i 6.0 CONCLUSION A perennial tributary of Red Rock Creek exists on-site, flowing east to west. Seasonal water fluctuations in the perennial drainage are the main source of hydrology. In addition, a wetland area in the vicinity of the culvert is apparently the result of ponding and scour when the culvert grate becomes blocked with debris during periods of high stormwater runoff. The Ordinary High Water (OHW) line was flagged as the potentially jurisdictional limits of the tributary of Red Rock Creek within the study area. Three plant communities were found on-site and the condition of each community are as follows: Community A is in `marginal' condition. Plant Community B is in `degraded to marginal' condition and Plant Community C is in `marginal to good' condition. The wall for the road widening project is proposed to be within the structural embankment of the road and therefore there would be no impacts to the vegetated corridor. No buffer enhancement or mitigation is required as no impacts to regulated vegetated corridors are proposed. Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 - 6 - ,i 7.0 REFERENCES f Clean Water Services (CWS,Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order 04-09 Oregon Department of Agriculture, 1998. Noxious Weed Policy and Classification System. y Pacific Habitat Services, 2005. 69`h and Dartmouth Delineation Report. Prepared for Mildren 1 Design Group. t I U.S. Geological Survey. Beaverton, Oregon topographic quadrangle, 1961,photorevised, 1984. 1 U.S. Geological Survey. Lake Oswego, Oregon topographic quadrangle, 1961, photorevised, 1984. X11 11 1 . I 11 1 i .a p i i i Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. Natural Resource Assessment 69th and Dartmouth Street/PHS#3254 - 7 - Appendix A Figures J 1 • . l y+ it =• 11 t nit` t(F4.1rii i ;,�1 fi l I` ' °` . ri<<',1!":".• �g i WT; •Y, j,..• c S,r i' ,_•- '?all ..r IY { k jr *• +) -0[S mk a.v..:.ic ;+t Pit } �i,_e { r,. ?s ▪}k i"if e, •11 � ', ••T i ii;,' , P 4b. here •'i •I. i .1 .a.'1 ,.4 l,i '',;;..` a 7oii• #�; ' , ti 'i [1.i j.)4c:,: L•----. •••• l .••'.I. r� ',j' t:i�r ..r a t�yra...a ;)usi} :k.t.:t s .,�. . .• V 1,d- :1a SITE It t,�,; �. _:• - •,IA Svc. R:• � , ` •e�;;•4/'• :6..;' .J • Jti.,` 1• • 'p•�.: 1 • r, ,' ,. � 'ere ,' a/ ,t -. q. •1 : ,••• • =4y 11 g '. �.:" ,• ', '_i• 1 . • 4. i.• ...,.I''. @ a--.-"A's . C: • y :i 1' .pry's : ;i..5 i$\� �•.. 44'. • .f t'. [•' • i. ;411._:0•, :. •; ,t ' • :.,F_ f .s• y�kci` , •J 1 ANN• L�1 „;,• •y I.::4 '-w'? :04•111.1.:1:.ti i �1 1.� .•� ,w ` l p ;,.1:, " •::.4• ,;ja' ' t...L i. .. _ J'J �'3 _ 'Flt rY 1•i'1l1NrA' . '�� E •- , t�',�• t,, 2 ..,,••'- .•,?. .-.._ --�`k ._. .T 1.- x i -ti .• — w- ei.M I..AAAS,cam•,r`:, ' T — s 1_ ,. I .*:: :ti=:111.01 ''a i. , • • 4 (i, Y•;1 in • S-! t :",b 1C.' ` u' } �°"'t••.� -3r !1 • tg., !,;:,I."'.=:,• S.. • 1•,`. y .`1 `• '• n•1sV (Not4 :l• 1s 1:�t+e-.rh i.xs i -r N.O. , .�1 t ..~�w• • . . J 'i %� ,I ::' .�•., 1 • A .•�(;F X111 a • 4 y �• 11 e —Q. 1.,„. ,,p?4 '. 46 , € ,w J t }..;4S w I =,t ff't- • • - N 4 1 \ 'I. *\ \:,,.,,z '?�?, _\ •��i `} p„1 -T>�k,^` 'j� %.,, ,'i�:�'<- ,�� ',- T., k'i�f�.` „s,� ,:� �� l-, `�� \,� �'r � ` ^ t' � ' ;•i .. •: we ., \ i,.•t �j + f ..:.' ,'(�''�.. cr. �':�Y f.r�,_�. 'i�;�,¢,I J :v.,„.,,,,:,:,,▪ ,,.: •• `• i ,_'j• _fit, ""�'. P1,i I sf J` ;`I : .•3 N �g r: ( 1 ' •\k t ,i I 4 f i .�� is., Y• •� i `%•_ '• 3 ��,4.S.,1■ '.1a f,�, .C'•i„r ' �•',l.t+', lr.. +I. _,. 1i J I )-; 7. • g 1? ate. ty°''.1 .4 •:. _ '. 9•, i -•i• y. • f3tlrtitlyr, /4..•,..( t `1 ' �'• ..j ('`a•{• �. . `' i a e• G,i.• •: ,• • a .4•''' ; � •1,'° i!}gi J,`IF,t• nt�is a , •F 1' i tint• `E •... ;.r•s .rr:i..� .f. i� tom`{ •i. �1Y .s • "�� J .� '.:I •:x,,,.414 1: •r..• it s• t i `; t :,! :i..1 • 4':. •:11(' `id +,. .:s su �1•'• r1. '•'.e'�::i.• `•�.�iiLl l��a '!'n' • .•} $.41' ;ti.. . .. d •xv ri C'r. 1 r: 1 N � (: �` it 1 ' 1 • ,.. a in :mss •� • :s �, „i 1 . L •/ . •1p,• ti t,,' -F l ,p l r :lai r^yrk • 7. rrF•a.�,t. �•i 4 •a jf 1,F• 'r 1t6 ,- ifs :ii` _ .i: y � •'IJ. N 'i' i. is ,..! .� e: : �� qiK .f• ira.h +,h I r y: s ,w ee �; •J ,, ,J'RN1 Jj �••1 t• ..$ ,j j,,: ..y d , 1 � ''..f:i' t '.'▪t„..•'s"�7,'/�rpp t . ..,4 T, , ! - `,ia '!M •:▪ ,''•;6••' • 10/3/05 3254 Location and general topography for the proposed road widening on 69th Avenue and FIGURE Dartmouth Street, Tigard, Oregon (USGS, Beaverton and Lake Oswego quadrangle, 1961 photorevised, 1984). 1 —Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. ....... 1 • . . , --- •ii ., 1 �\ I. • tia` ❑ -1 .. ��i gm aril- \ r.. m ar. y �\ 0 20 80 �\ \ / 1 4- +5 I• ``r 3 i di ..,-, .--, )— i \ \_ ~\\ _ =�� I SCALE IN FEET \`� 1 `-111I,. .•. - - 1 : � - 11 111 _ X280- \ \- \ 1 • •.•.• _____\ \ \ , , I l ,8 kti Ai -• 1 1 p\ \ �\ >14,.11 \\ \\\\ Q \ 1 275 i , \–\ \7-jarrs \ lis ' ,i■'—iim - �_. it 'I 7- 1� o�` 14 s" '� —270 s" �� \t ,,/,,.. v\\ —.tom — — e..\I\ ,_ \.� �, 4 _ � _ --_______s2 5 6 , 6/ i . I r°.\` ` y \\ T\f�T12LLlT�� Y% ! / 1 \\ IX f‘) -I -------...\PRISDICTIO ' -<....‘ `NATE6 OF 11-1 T-E / i �_ 11� X260 1 ( / /'` ii, • 1...` — �/ • /_4-->f�/� 7` / ' Vii' i., / I •mot.' . • , ) i I L I i -,--/ ---, ,--", ---; 4.7 -fi ,.1-7 .1-7 .17.,5. Li.. -7- -7.''.ri\''.7. •)..• . 1 ...\.•. ,\,, •? _i . > .,,, . . \i•1 I . . • ( . : 1 • S. ,; .. f.V.• . •.. . .• .•. . .'.Y 1." . ' - : . •.t 'I . .1 .. i 4 1 1 '. ‘. . . . . c . . . • t .) • • 1.: : . SV1YD RT O HOST E J.: .1 `.• 1 •. 1' 4a .•.• . . -LP . ' ( ( ••• . • ( • .. ' ••• 1-i \ • ..C3 \.' \ •' • K: . • \. \.--\ ..- i • s • v A; -•(-' 4 ..-- \ -=,_\- - \- • ••• ... .:. . ..\ , ... .. .., . , . .3, __, .r.\ •,._, - \ :,: .: . .. , 4.3 ,-5 •--: ••1 .'• t ..1 - i-1 ' . 1 -r r 1 I i ") 7 ' ''' ' t [ I ( ( F1 , ,... ,. i 12/14/05 Existing conditions, sample points, photodocumentation points and FIGURE 3254 location of potentially jurisdictional waters of the state/US for the proposed road widening on SW 69th Avenue and SW Dartmouth in 2 , T igard, Oregon (base map provided by T.M. Rippey, 2005). IJ- Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. N , `` y ., t .� .. M.. .,, ' � . 0 'u 40 80 . _ \ 2 \ \ / g /`\��: SCALE IN FEEI \V-• \ I t 'i 7.4 1(1 - ---\ \\,, — --\----- ------\ I) s\—i ._ j`( _ \ 280---\ \. -\ 1 I.. • -11 iili - ,:i.i \ `-1 ji ) I ' \ 18" ( A.,. ..... Zi \iiiv.."\-----_ . z . " , j ci/ \ �' ti{ I „,-....../♦ 4 �— _i I-\,5,r \ \ 270 �. l �.. , Qi.0”\"...,-„, \ ---.-........_----■.= & r i. ,7. _ _____ -- A% —__- 4 I I 1/ . 'l N. ... .• . 1- ? \ )\."--....1---- g- f—,-,p-4 --\...... ,-- ----■ OA' i -,1 ,,?16' ji 1 N . . --, 1'1/4, \--..„ li,-, ---r--- -- ag s\- --,_ ------ .,,,,c,,fr i II, ) • . . . 1, ' �� - / v ,4,-,G-- ,, J / /)J • ,... � \ ♦ p TENT / ♦/ ) J \ i_ ]Ofil CTIONAL ♦ / 1' .,. 2S� \ r� v�IATEas e� T / , j` �r 17 „4,1 , , ---- _l___--- -4- -.-ST\zUz //--, ..-----://0 77/ / ".).-r... \\ ))) _i — -4.____,-- ' , L 4- -_-/jAi , •-._ ,:: ., , I 1 I 1,1 -. ... //// G' -.4•1\', _, . , I 1 --I--- . . . , I i /,___,___ ...- , ,, 1//, _7( ( ( // <•• <, ' __„, • • • { ` I— i ra ji` mi� i rim r ii ..fii' 7 "� r '� \' 1\ i ' J J 1 / 4'• r. ., w k 1 0 . 'c. . .a, . • I -1I /... .4. • .y.t• . I . r Aa i \ i • I 1•(. . .d 1 ( �� 1 S DART OWTHI ST EE •: .� `..,, 1.� ',� . } . \ ' .\ \ \ . — 1 ' . \ . - '\ IL,S, . • ..., \• .,c\. V' : . . ),\. ._\„.\ - • . .1. . ... -.... . .:: • ‘e ...•\ . .v. . :,-, • _tt. . . . . . ' V \4' ' ... \' • I 1 .2.. ) 1 , 12/14/05 Regulated buffer for the proposed road widening on SW 69th FIGURE 3254 Avenue and SW Dartmouth in Tigard, Oregon (base map provided by T.M Rippey, 2005). - J tilm_i-= Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. ---- 1@ • R. , , ; ■ ILI 1 , 0 - ... . . • - --..-. - -- . -- Ti--. ',.. ....--- . . .... . _ • - 1- l) , _.....,._.._ .___ ft 1.5---- - ,„.. ,. . - . ,,,) ... ,. --4,„ . : . . . ... . f..i...■ ...... ,- s'Ami oars-:s.. . .. . ,. . ,- . . mus ihr, C.ok ten.; ..■..;-- N i - . . : • MIR ....arp.",1111110; 1710.3 VIMI, 9.10,..., :..7•Acr f ' . ' ' ' •, i :....,4.."1:- • ' ' 0 . -0 CD , .:',1.••&•'.4!' ' . V '. , , w . . _ :13 m c : g . L, ii -... . / - C...-7 4:.... 4... :-'-. - - En - 0) 0 ,. . _ ... ...- .. . t • 40040w',- .'-' +k ,, i - 110111190 ,;1111* .........Ve44 . , . . . *Se **fa .•-•4•i" '- , • ' •'' - - > - -.,....- .. _ ,...5,, . t--.,-: . ,12.......,'.7,:i4k,....,.. : .1' ■ w *IP 11.0.0+10*- 4 4"444.4 Met --ars , - _ _4.11e, - : , o_• i • ..,, - :•.--'-'-v4.K..;. ' •••■•••••• ••••••• metoo•s 1\1.4.*„•.44.44.„-. •....•.•••■■••••••••• 4,••+.,-,t... •. ,...,..g..:::- , ,..7.; , , 1 (,) 0 . •••••••*•••••■••••••••‘ ••••••••,4 ,,,,•,, ......:;,-, 0:e-,'''-...-,- "---- - t!..' ' i 1 -.• •,,. , seesomoeseesorioseese Ist-•,-.404-,-..4%.*,---,---:"ritrw* --,:,-, ,--,.. -,,, :-.4 , ' - ___. c E • .44.......44,-,'•Vits'itp o co o tit '-''-`--''.- -^-, ■•••• 1111411•0461111•011111111111r A •+44A.:7,11>ioarioporf,-,.. :-... .",-- . , I 0 a) • \•4~44. , '. 0.41410.*****0111.0000 • \i-tArt*f a a P P a a a a."'-'' all.';.';■*..7:'.;:T- . 0) ()) i---,li, ... . i.' • . .4:: I.: -.:.,,,':.- 1 ., *MP tee00011110110****** v t:',4.,..•0 0 0 0 0 in r.1 0.,..aca-, , c ° Ne141:11141110****M1******** ' *******6********Ovo, 1,.. 4',.• otic)a 0 0 13 0 D 0 u ,t:, - -,:.:,.--,_, .)... , _) ******yr********* ■ • -,-- '..,.,, -z.T„,-••• ••.-.--it.%.,,:•!= goes.ost, .....6....,„ .,.0000130000000.:,-- - : .I:I e o a nw oc3c1 . 73 c • I 'ewes* *****044400,0* ma-m .,-:-1 ,. ° . ,Z.f.. , ,1,...,,:,-,1;:._... : ..,.'—" • ,11,16**0010104i*MD deett..*(10.00_ co e cnonci•r2 so ricio-.-•;.,:-• 01 I . 111•111416/00:00**6gAvelv***** .1313130.001:10 000a. . Illit' it a) , ...SS .1".. 7414%.**4' „.,',_,-;ti o o Cl Cl Cl ob,13 rici',f- ,... :. -0 L - ! 'i.- / ......7.....,,. ., , , ., 0 . . / ... ....... ...... ...,..t. C3 0 CI C)a cm el acc.R._..1/4_, f„:__gr„,..... t 14** $0041041111000•006 .1,-,:-.., .a a rpopplo ct ci , ' - .7c.„-I-u ----L.--4 o . . .,, - ,.•- / :: t-''' . -1111***1111041,••••••••• - - 01300413000 L_ - i low Z.!Ire. IA..,rt;,.■ WO, • \ (00.1111.1010110.4101010110. t. '' •• '13 i ...5! 1" . . -6 -, ,...,•,_ 4.'' ''' ''•Fr. zlimr--4.1 .- sessesooksetee : v, - 9- - E3 919 1 ir- A*0011104.1■41ruelb***, . v.) .. 'a 1.- ■ . . - i ***110********* \ ,, :.,.:f,' ,a t-0 LI a a' . - I tilik- •11*****11******0 - ' o cf0-oo • ...-.... A . -0•10•041•1111(000111***6 . \ -- -4, -, •-- • 0 i...= .., , , ' . .,..,.... U —' / I / • ***1■11011100***01411 - •CI' .0 . . a ,, ..,.c j ire%sit*at to of bag hi a ta a% i.: .-. ,4 i.„.1 1..I-A...,„.,.,..* 0 ' 0 c ' [ ;....:.',.-,:iyhkitisi,,, * '-:, -4.•''' ›- Z ••••; ,'1 • 010.1140.161.0********* '...-..A.-,-*tz' r., ''':-N.= Z . a , , ,-,14%... ---.. -,— 0 ••••.4 -4041111•4140.111414•410 • : 1 .-- , < '_Ii.F.ji, a) -1-' , . • ' , • -:.-,"-4"--'- ,-' - L.. ce : 1 0***"..stl****11****11110**FLV 1 ..;--:, .c , : 0111•0114•111110000■000111011114111 - , ,, -...? ..";r7-09-,. a . "; • . -4--, 0 E " . . oseetteassoasosseses ' , f _.i. . --....> ' . ' 4z1,Iiez,. , • „:„. . • 0•41100•4100111.0000 , . . ,.., .- ..-..,..,4:11-1,1,;•._ ,.. : .,,E ,..4, ,.. ' 0/10*******1111406000110_. ,its il i I el••••••• •••••••••••046,,, ,z,.. .' ,,, • (n 0 ,, ow i •., -', ,,.., .....,.,, . :--. , , ••••setstimposseevo . 4,...k.' • -,-..,.1::- L'. •--'' , V i , ***** 018011.641•011A.* -- ,::: MI ••• ° cC ,,' SOO* 010041111411041410" ,A6''--, ' - 11144•011011141410010..„ e , : — (9 LLI ,„ 41_41.111100•0040SC*, ---:7-;., Z ° , U- VIAW*1141111000*(.":.•,' ._ . -, 0 a c2 1..J- D wal••••••04ar, , 4 '.- t 0014111111*Mbri.",'-1-- 1 ,:' E g CC- rts . i.., .,.. i , N..._, 0 ) "A'-'1' Y.:4‘'1_..•-s,,1•i;-•',.:,/y.:,:%,'4..i.•..4 f 1-i e,.' til,k '''.:'•• •,..* ,.c.. ' .!" '''''' •••.-,.......,.,-:,,-,,( 1 . . I 4 E-1c--, <(D 9 1 1l- - . 0 > / 7 >3• ... , PI :1111,fr'• i ',1 • . .. , ... , • • . ._ ... .. -Mr. =a i- - , m... . .,. ) ... .. , , 1 0 . ,.,....,...._.....,. y , , . , . ,.. .._........ -. 1..., :i.••'''"PIV'',,:. ' ! ' . •... _ . . • I . ''3. .' ''...--:'- . .. ._ .. ................ - • •' ,. ........ . ■ . 1 . I , -.:7•4'.-rn,'.::7:c ,4'...-;•-•,, ' . ' . • � � _ �_�____— __ _ '� I ! G. ,,...:j' ' ( � . � ` 20 SO ! | ' SCALE IN H,..ET • ' i . . . / `. ' . -^ - 'WALL SECTION-STA.' -B , ..._, , LOU—\ ‘._.- ----\ • il TOE OF EXISTING ---- ---__ . / . • . � . ! \ ` ; \-`\,-,‘lloy tale-t'kesia\1•951 ;lig, 47,941 ___. ,,, ., i‘,..,./________ ----_--- ---' tr---, - / I ....„ i \ \ li CP "ss•-e• \ A -,.-\_ '''••• 1.-•:: --•-•.•-- .25" -------e--•-•---- -- ---___1_:___LT\i—,;:.----- -,%: ,L, k ( I. .. (1/ . 1 1 )1 \ \'..,,,,:-',. >c '''.' . i / | m ---,1::::_ ----,, /e,I i \.. ) / I / . { -^I ``~ ` • i \O , 1 -___4 .....,_.--- , . `,..--- ...-N-...... -. -,-/./ / I I ,. ill I . ... -. ,.... ----<, 7 , /) / / i , WIC\ C 1 / - >, ,-, • ( / . I...) 47...-•.:- I 1 I r ( stir— I . . •::—.— - - : ...) i li / ,----____ .---_, --- ,./. ,// ( (. ,AL. ( <\ ' ,,w wr -.\\ -\ .. ./ / / • • .° / • 0,. / I ( . • 1- 1:• ••(. . Ntr)' . . . ( • , •// / "" ( �� \ ^ \ � \ \ \u"« u/��»/ ` � � . \ \ | ` \� � .\ � \ \ \ \ \ . ` ` � \ �C • \ � ` \ ` ` � � | • \ 1 ' \' � ` \ \ � � � \ \ . �/ �\ • � \ \ � \ \ • ` � ) [ 1 |--. /---'--,,/ , ,,/j. 2'•...://' -PrkP't / ' 'l / ` [ � -|�� ( ' � ` \ \� , ' � [• ^ '^ \ \- i \ / | .[ . `' •! . \_ , ` �_ ; � \ i / \ ( i / ., . ~ ~~~~_�� ___ _____ 12/1*/05 Proposed retaining wall at the road widening on SW 69th Avenue FIGURE | 3254 and SW Dartmouth in Tigard, Oregon (base map provided by T.M. Rippey, 2OO5l k~� prm/'� ' /' \_� . . ,-_.4.1k,-.. „g...;#1:4 -I:. .."./144..,%-..--:0- - ....or ,IP'....,:.I '',',.:1; t`j 1...,1.';-•i*',,.._-... ,:.,,,,,x,,,o, } ki- ,i t r' 4:. r% 4 4, ' t 4, • K ,, . . _ ir , ' � './1• t w 1` 7 Y f•.,..... � t Q � t 1 j I i ;'i v} `' : ' "'" " V'i ; . ,_7 4 : 4i ; 1 t, " ' t i ,' • 2C..' i • � A� ..,• # " R e . `•• ' A—• ..k.!' • ' - Y ' if• ; 4.sq rtti*'fir^ 1t *} , ". °;f <' . 7 t ., 1 4 i * a if pS � ia ' , . r $. r 0.97. r ►r r .3"".' ! Y .i : r N , -. H *i , k.(i4 .`7 : F ` a x t jT, r_y" • _ y_ l ,`h .-e� ' r y • _i p i` yew� T . ,, 1 y 4 .,, r> r / • ' M 'dy:: .v- . , ' , `. i ; •,H $ -A Y , [, ,r / ,¢ y v p ' ';, I . r 21 ` 1 it .t. } .._..7,,,:t... •-c- r.: f - • :: —:;/►• _ ',J r }ifL.,' �,y�. - 1, s _:.• j ",T..,. t r .. .A�. _.!'eF �+'rit..Ft - • 4, '4 4 ro `: s -' . •1, :ch r k•'!ls,l,�.' ;� or 1• �str {. '*S'f+ !�S i'i� i -a�4j;. '�•, v.• 'j ¢,,- .b �j,� ty 'ate -' •: f•. , .'yy,� y rZ. - •. _ .Z►. (,-• `', ;�... ,I' .L . r .J� -1' •�.. 1. 5r r.. t iar x f-. Photo 1 4 i ,..,(+•7 r _." ' 'C." ` r•� i` r Cam' .t,in- t;rstHj ` ! t f + y: a [t i , 7C.. ,N . _ s.. .r'', ' .-41 r';- 1 errn� i,'-"_H Z. "1'1,14 '. P.- -'�' e, a {. t(f' y�S •,alf. � � Pt. : �f • ` a t• 1 1 b • ,. i $ y� r a IS 7t,4 3J y ' ♦ i1 , c � �. 7. I "M ` l . h - am ' + C T + ! e*?,•', s M yi � ? r � :.1T .: � r . . .� a b . Ir j � : j•tV . . ., Pholn _ - ...._,,k: _ . ,. . , : _ . . s,,:f.. L: .. --5"::,..44--'. —'''''.,.'''. , .:-: 2.„.-/1.-.....„.. .. . ..... Photo ; 11/16/05 3254 Photodocumentation of the Vegetation Communities at 69th Avenue and Dartmouth. Photo 'I depicts Community A looking northeast. Photo 2 documents Community B looking to the Figure ns west. Photo 3 shows Community C looking south. All photos taken 9/23/04. 5 jii �^ —Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. -- -___._.S_- ._ ._ _ scan- .-,- �_�, 15 l `3(0 b D -1560 PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN Project: . .ber Woods —1 (4006 COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST Date: 10/20/06 GRADING ® Existing and proposed contours shown. ❑ Are there grading impacts on adjacent parcels? III Adjacent parcel grades shown. ❑ Geotech study submitted? STREET ISSUES ® Right-of-way clearly shown. Z Centerline of street(s) clearly shown. Z Street name(s) shown. ® Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown. ❑ Street profiles shown. ❑ Future Street Plan: Must show street profiles, topo on adjacent parcel(s), etc. ® Traffic Impact and/or Access Report ❑ Street grades compliant? ® Street/ROW widths dimensioned and appropriate? ❑ Private Streets? Less than 6 lots and width appropriate? ❑ Other: 1) Planter strip, 2) 18.705.030.H.2, 3) Street 1) The existing planter strip must meet the trees Triangle Standards (ground cover must be planted), 2) The driveway on 70th Avenue was Att- 3 j gAUISA ► (c J d 1J 7 taik not approved under the previous land use and therefore is non-comforming. The u4I IJ l0FL,(,(, k Aka% driveway must be removed, reduced to a shared drive or the applicant should address the code section adequately. 3) Streets trees are required on 70th Avenue. SANITARY SEWER ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines shown. ❑ Stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? WATER ISSUES Existing/proposed lines w/sizes noted? Existing/proposed fire hydrants shown? Show existing and proposed hydrants Proposed meter location and size shown? Show typical meter size. Provide easements for private water lines or move the meters to front of each parcel. ❑ Proposed fire protection system shown? Provide a letter or a-mail from TVFR approving layout for hydrants and fire protection STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines shown? ® Preliminary sizing calcs for water quality/detention REVISED: 10/20/06 provided? ® Water quality/detention facility shown on plans? ❑ Area for facility match requirements from calcs? ❑ Facility shown outside any wetland buffer? ❑ Storm stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? The submittal is hereby deemed ❑ COMPLETE ® INCOMPLETE By: ��5M Date: 10/20/06 REVISED: 10/20/06 ACCESS REPORT For AMBER WOODS I 7 LOT SUBDIVISION UNADDRESSED SITE TAX MAP 1S1 36DD, TAX LOT 7500 & 7600 NOVEMBER 15 , 2006 This access report is a response to the requirements of Code Chapter 18.705.030.H. "Access Management": 1. An access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO (depending on jurisdiction of facility.) Four separate accesses will be examined for this project, all located within the constraints of Code Chapter 18.620, "Tigard Triangle Design Standards". Four lots (Lot 1, Lot 2, Lot 3 and Lot 4) will be developed along SW 69th Avenue in this MUE zoning district allowing attached multi-family residential units and referred herein as 'Access I'. Three separate 16-feet wide driveways, also part of this project, are located on SW 70th Avenue providing approaches to three individual attached multi-family lots. These accesses are positioned at the eastern boundary of the C-G zoning district, abutting the lots, which are in the MUE zone and are referred to as 'Access II'. Access I: Access I is a 30 feet wide driveway approach positioned on the west right-of-way line designed in accordance with the City's Standard Detail Drawing No. 141 for 'Standard Driveway w/ Landscape Strips'. Located 254.30 feet north of the intersection of SW Dartmouth Street and 69th Avenue; the access centerline is 224.30 feet south of the intersection of SW 69th Avenue and SW Clinton Street. Under a previous land use permit, a 20 feet wide concrete access was constructed with centerline of access 17.67 feet from the project's north property line. To accommodate the new alignment, the access will be reconstructed with centerline 20.00 feet from north property line. This alignment provides 57 feet separation from the nearby driveway to the north (11905 SW 69th Ave.). Serving four multi-family residential lots, the number of trips expected to be generated by the proposed access is calculated as: Land Use Base Unit PM Peak ADT ADT Range Single-Family Per D/U .75 9.95 4.31 —21.85 Condo/TownHome Per D/U .52 10.71 1.83— 11.79 Source: Instititute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Trip Generation 43 average daily trips with left /right turn-in and turnout movements allowed. Sight distance is unimpaired on 69th Avenue, a local street (25 m.p.h.) and no safety related deficiencies are identified on this 25-ft. wide paved roadway with no diminished LOS at either the Clinton Street or Dartmouth Street intersection. Three Page 1 of 2 other residential lots are served by .,Jt' Avenue on this block and observati.,,is made October 17, 2006 during evening peak hour counted 82 trips. Arrival rate for southbound vehicles at the Dartmouth/69th Ave. four-way stop intersection was intermittent. All queues were five or less vehicles, which suggests a 95th percentile queue between 100 and 125 feet. The driveway will be 205 feet from the stop sign and out of the influence of the queue. Access II: Access II is three separate 16 feet wide driveway approaches, serving Lot 5, Lot 6 and Lot 7, positioned on the east right-of-way line with 24 feet separation from centerline to centerline (8 feet separation from edge to edge). The City's Standard Drawing No. 140 for `Driveway Approach Locations' indicates 6 feet minimum between adjacent property line and driveway approach. The design shows driveways 2.2 feet from property line on one side and 5. 8 feet from the property line on the other side to allow connecting sidewalk path to the front door. This report requests approval from the City Engineer to allow the less than minimum while implementing the Standard Drawing 141, `Standard Driveway w/ Landscape Strips'. SW 70"' Avenue is presently barricaded at the north project boundary and no traffic is present, other than the occasional vehicle using the street for a turn-around. Once improved, 70th Avenue will connect Dartmouth to Clinton serving the three new parcels and two present residences with projected trips of 50 vehicles per day. The southerly most lot access, Lot 7, isprf frbm the Dartmouth/70th future stop sign. While the driveway is not outside the influence of the southbound queue, it is possible for vehicles to exit Lot 7 with reasonable delays. fAr �.PpP&T 5 4E.- to. ? 5 ' S 2J SW 70th Avenue was previously improved with an 18 feet half-street im ovement with curb & gutter, 3.5 feet planter and 8 feet wide sidewalk. Curb to opposing edge of pavement is 24 feet. The previous improvements constructed a 58 feet wide access which will be removed to allow the three approaches Endnote: Since the addition of the site traffic will have a negligible effect on traffic capacity and the southbound queue length on 69th Avenue and 70th Avenue, no improvement is required to mitigate the impact of the site development. Page 2 of 2 D( SCUSS. K( tit Vic Accomando, P.E. 16750 SW Timberland Drive Beaverton. Oregon 97007 Office 503-259-9308 Fax 503-259-9508 Cell 503-890-5483 accomando 1.msn.corn LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date: November 21, 2006 To: Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner City of Tigard, Oregon 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Project: Amber Woods Townhome Subdivision Tax Map 151 26DD Tax Lots 07500 & 07600 We are transmitting the following documents for your acceptance: (1) City of Tigard Planning Division Land Use Permit Application (1) Response to Completeness Review (3) Revised Narrative (3) Revised Impact Study (3) Access Report (1) Amended CWS Service Provider Letter (3) Sets, Sheets 1 through 10, 81/2"x 11" Revised Drawings C' ) Did �� ) Mia.l+cy trP NE-1Shbov (noovl IU• t.�c . . h MEMORANDUM T I GARD TO: Gary FROM: Shirley „kk RE: Amber Woods Fees DATE: 11/29/06 Gary, There seems to be some misunderstanding of the fees involved with this project. Below I have listed what was paid when this project was submitted as an SDR and the fees now that they have resubmitted this project as a Subdivision. Please check these over and let me know what is correct. Thank you. SDR SUBMITTAL SUB SUBMITTAL SDR $6,142.00 SUB $5,606.00 SLR 1,178.50 SLR 1,178.50 VAR (Spec. adj.) 132.50 VAR (Spec. adj.) 132.50 VAR (Dev. Adj.) 132.50 TOTAL: $7,453.00 TOTAL: $7,049.50 DIFFERENCE: $403.50 In the narrative, they show a difference of$235.00. Thus, the confusion. Thanks. Shirley CITY OF TIGARD 11/28/2006 , IIa q 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 3:15:30PM Tigard,OR 97223 503.639.4171 . TIGARE) 1 t Receipt #: 27200600000000004780 Date: 10/04/2006 Line Items: Case No "Iran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SDR2006-00009 [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 4,934.00 A SDR2006-00009 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 728.00 LI'°- SDR2006-00009 [LANDUS]SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 480.00 SLR2006-00009 [LANDUS]Application-Type II 1 00-0000-438000 1,027.00 j)7$'s SLR2006-00009 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 151.50' VAR2006-00083 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 17.00 \ �,�2 .50 VAR2006-00083 [LANDUS] Special Adjust 100-0000-438000 115.50 / Line Item Total: $7,453.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check DARTMOUTH TOWNHOMES KJP 2015 In Person 6,136.72 LLC Check DARTMOUTN TOWNHOMES KJP 2018 In Person 1,268.50 LLC Check VIC ACCOMANDO KJP 4168 In Person 47.78 Payment Total: $7,453.00 VT,? cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 LAND USE APPLICI ON Date:Project: ' 1 ✓boas S08).v6-�al.z. COMPLETENESS REVIEW I I COMPLETE 11NCOMPLETE STANDARD INFORMATION: ,Er Deed/Title/Proof Of Ownership Neighborhood Mtg.Affidavits, Minutes, List Of Attendees Impact Study(18.390) USA Service Provider Letter Construction Cost Estimate ❑ #Sets Of Application Materials/Plans Pre-Application Conference Notes ❑ Envelopes With Postage(Verify Count) PROJECT STATISTICS: •❑- Building Footprint Size ❑ %Of Landscaping On Site ❑ % Of Building Impervious Surface On Site Lot Square Footage PLANS DIMENSIONED: YyPF Building Footprint -f( Parking Space Dimensions(Include Accessible&Bike Parking)niq Truck Loading Space Where Applicable W Building Height ,- Access Approach And Aisle „2-' Visual Clearance Triangle Shown ADDITIONAL PLANS: 7 Vicinity Map Am-r Architectural Plan ,D Tree Inventory ,Er-Existing Conditions Plan , Landscape Plan ,e--Site Plan J1/c-e`" Lighting Plan TREE PLAN/MITIG�}TION PLAN: 0 ig<tt 1 ADDITIONAL RE'•RTS• (list any special reports) ❑ 4-,-- IBC ❑ RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: ❑ 18.330(Conditional Use) r' 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) N 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) ❑ 18.340(Director's Interpretation) ❑ 18.630(washington Square Regional Center) ele 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) ❑ 18.350(Planned Development) X 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) eZ. 18.780(signs) ❑, 18.360(Site Development Review) ❑ 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) ❑ 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) gi 18.715(Density Computations) 18.790(Tree Removal) 18.380(Zoning Map next Amendments) ❑ 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) /a1-' ` 1 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) 0 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) ❑ 18.797(Water Resources(WR)Overlay District) 18.390(Decision Making Procedures1mpact Study) ❑ 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) ❑ 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) ❑ 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) ❑ 18.740(Historic Overlay) 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) ❑�/ 18.420(Land Partitions) ❑ 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) Jv 18.430(Subdivisions) T 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) ❑ 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) ❑ 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) ❑ 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) ADDITIONAL ITEMS: / fit(C 4f5;4 ( c-.c..e.--c< 6,04 ''L4,15 kiwi I:\curpin\masters\revised\land use application completeness review.dot REVISED: 17-Jan-oi City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223 December 19, 2006 ,t Dennis Grayson 0 Dartmouth Development LLC 8790 SW Turquoise Loop T I Ga A K D Beaverton, OR 97007 RE: Completeness Review,Amber Woods (S D 2006-00012, SLR2006-00012) p,,,4 0 4 4.;, in 1�f GUc>6 -G=v 12e itAid Dear Mr. Grayson: The City of Tigard received your application for site development review on November 21, 2006. The proposed 7-unit attached multi-family residential townhome project is located on a .89-acre site bounded by SW 69th Avenue, 70th Avenue, and SW Dartmouth on tax lots 07500 and 07600, Tax Map 1S136DD. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the submittal materials and has determined that the following additional information is necessary before the application can be deemed complete: 1. Development Adjustments: You have applied for four (4) side yard and three (3) backyard setback development adjustments. Each adjustment is separate and requires a separate fee ($265 x 7 x .5 = $934.50. Please submit a check in the proper amount. 2. Development Standards: Your narrative is conclusary with respect to the coverage standards in Table18.520.2. for the MUE zone. Please revise your narrative to address this standard. It appears as though proposed lots 1 through 4 may exceed 80% coverage (including all impervious surfaces). In addition,proposed lots 5, 6, and 7 show 10-foot setbacks from the SW 70th right-of-way. However, 20- foot setbacks are required in front of garages. Please revise your narrative and plan set to address this standard. 3. Buffering and Screening Standards: In your narrative you identify a 10-foot buffer requirement between the proposed development and the adjacent single-family development. However, your site development plan (Sheet C3) shows an 8-foot setback north of proposed lots 1 and 5. If you cannot accommodate the 10-foot setback, please address TDC 18.745.050.A.3 and provide a detailed buffer area landscaping and screening plan. The Landscape Plan (Sheet C9) must be consistent with this plan. 4. Public Facility Plan Checklist: Please review the attached checklist for completenes9 and incorporate your responses in a revised plan set and narrative. (Not yet available)ca,vL'✓ 6z/ /o Once this additional information is submitted, staff will review the additional information to determine if the application is substantively complete. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your application, please don't hesitate to contact me at 503-718-2434. Sincerely, DZ./ Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner ENCL: Public Facility Plan Checklist C: SDR2006-00012 Land Use File Phone: 503.639.4171 • Fax: 503.684.7297 • www.tigard-or.gov • TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • a • C I TYI. OF 'j RD .L L ICI �' ..Hi , � .. .,c,:11.,.:.:4-?.74..::6.• . , PR -AIJL(cAON CONE REN � NOTES rs {4 wY4 Gaon • App H itin t o>tq�, Valid 19 S? (61 I IOntt1$) '� '1� Fommunity PRE-APP.MTG.DATE: j,' / O� L,�1+tw ( STAFF AT PRE-APP.: KI'N/Ge ` -In re- RESIDENTIAL APPLICANT: Tev?7� C Phone: {5v$ ?yn _ AGENT: ` n Phone: { ) PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: 4 9 6 ra, . TAX MAP(S)/LOT #(S): /5 4 D 0 v a „ a 0 NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: J JW I' EZc4Pi21 r ---2E—t SAS i, SP &vi SLR PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: 7 &r '_ it.,,.nL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: 4")! /°Z. Ole-91/am' ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: F- ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18._) MINIMUM LOT SIZE: --e9- sq. ft. Average Min. lot width:} Setbacks: Front 20 ft. Side /D — ft. Max. building height: 4:5- ft. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: ft. Rear_2a ft. Corner .20 ft. from street. GARAGES: Z0 ft. Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: .22, -2 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, INTERESTED (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please proposal. review two L ndf Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meetin is to be held prior to submittin. our a..lication or the application will not be acce•ted. P * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Residential Application/Planning Division Section Po,o 1 „f Cl X NARRATIVE [Refer to Code Chapter 18.3901 The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria. �?I IMPACT STUDY (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.0501 As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE AN IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. "X ACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.105 and 18.7651 Minimum number of accesses: / Minimum access width: 3D Minimum pavement width: ,ZK' WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7051 Within all ATTACHED HOUSING (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling SHALL BE CONNECTED BY WALKWAY TO THE VEHICULAR PARKING AREA, COMMON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILITIES. RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7151-SEE EXAMPLE BELOW. The NET RESIDENTIAL UNITS ALLOWED on a particular site may be calculated by dividing the net area of the developable land by the minimum number of square feet required per dwelling unit as specified by the applicable zoning designation. Net development area is calculated by subtracting the following land area(s) from the gross site area: All sensitive lands areas including: ➢ Land within the 100-year floodplain; ➢ Slopes exceeding 25%; ➢ Drainageways; and ➢ Wetlands for the R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5 and R-7 zoning districts. Public right-of-way dedication: ➢ Single-family allocate 20% of gross acres for public facilities; or ➢ Multi-family allocate 15% of gross acres for public facilities; or ➢ If available, the actual public facility square footage can be used for deduction. I EXAMPLE OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS: EXAMPLE: USING A ONE ACRE SITE IN THE R-12 ZONE(3,050 MINIMUM LOT SIZE)WITH NO DEDUCTION FOR SENSITIVE LANDS Single-Family Multi-Family 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 8,712 so. ft. (20%)for public right-of-way - 6,534 sq. ft. (15%)for public right-of-way NET: 34,848 square feet NET: 37,026 square feet 3,059.(minimum lot afea - 3.050(minimum lot area) 11.4 Umts Per Acre = 12.1 Units Per Acre *The Development Code requires that the net site area exist tot the next whole dwelling unit.NO ROUNDING UP IS PERMITTED. *Minimum Protect Density is 80%el the maximum allowed density.TO DETERMINE THIS STANDARD,MULTIPLY THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS BY.8. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Pano of Residential ApplicatoniPlanning Division Section 44 SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer Lb..ade Section 18.730) ;- STREETS: feet from the centerline of FLAG LOT: A TEN (10)-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK applies to all primary structures. ZERO LOT LINE LOTS: A minimum of a ten (10)-foot separation shall be maintained between each dwelling unit or garage. ➢ MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL building separation standards apply within multiple-family residential developments. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES UP TO 528 SQUARE FEET in size may be permitted on lots less than 2.5 acres in size. Five (5)-foot minimum setback from side and rear lot lines. ACCESSORY STRUCTURE UP TO 1,000 SQUARE FEET on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size. [See applicable zoning district for the primary structures'setback requirements.] ❑ FLAG LOT BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.730) MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 11/2 STORIES or 25 feet, whichever is less in most zones; 2'/2 stories, or 35 feet in R-7, R-12, R-25 or R-40 zones provided that the standards of Section 18.730.010.C.2 are satisfied. 'A BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.1451 In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the CITY REQUIRES LANDSCAPED BUFFER AREAS along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFFERS applicable to your proposal area is: Buffer Level A tr 00) along north boundary. Buffer Level along east boundary. Buffer Level along north boundary. Buffer Level along east boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: LANDSCAPING [Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 18.7051 STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. RECYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.755) Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Lenny Hing is the contact person and can be reached at (503) 625-6177. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 9 Residential Appi cat oni anning Division Section X PARKING [Refer to Code Chapters 18365 818.705) ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVEWAYS MUST BE PAVED. > Single-family Requires: One 1) off-street parking space per dwelling unit; and One (1) space per unit less than 500 square feet. > Multiple-family Requires: 1.25 spaces per unit for 1 bedroom; 1.5 spaces per unit for 2 bedrooms; and 1.75 spaces per unit for 3 bedrooms. Multi-family dwelling units with more than ten (10) required spaces shall provide parking for the use of guests and shall consist of 15% of the total required parking. NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. Parking stalls shall be dimensioned as follows: > Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet. 6 inches X 18 feet, 6 inches. ➢ Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet. 6 inches X 16 feet, 6 inches. > Handicapped parking: All parking areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned disabled person parking spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. BICYCLE RACKS [Refer to Code Section 18.765) BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. I/ :..D U .K SENSITIVE LANDS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.1751 The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive land areas and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. STEEP SLOPES [Refer to Code Section 18.115.010.C1 When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. CLEANWATER SERVICES[CWSI BUFFER STANDARDS [Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 3) LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table identifies the required widths: CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Paae 4 of 9 Residential ApplicatiorJPianning Division Section TABLE 31 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAUBESOLUTION a ORDER 96-44 S.L.OPE ADJACENT • WIRTII QF VEOfTATED �., SENSITIVEtAREA DEFINITION TO SENSITIVE AREA', : • : CO RRIDORPER.SIDE2 • Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% 15 feet 10 to <50 acres 25 feet 1 >50 to <100 acres • Existing or created wetlands <0.5 acre 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands >0.5 acre <25% 50 feet • Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres • Natural lakes and ponds • Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25% 30 feet 10 to <50 acres 50 feet * >50 to <100 acres • Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50-200 feet. Measure • Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow in 25-foot increments from the starting • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres point to the top of ravine (break in • Natural lakes and ponds <25%slope), add 35 feet past the top of ravine' 1Starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankful flow) for streams/rivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring boundary, and/or average high water for lakes or ponds, whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor,shall not serve as a starting point for measurement. 2Vegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 3The vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced to 15 feet, if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine. Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as provided for in the USA Design and Construction Standards. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. CWS Service Provider Letter: PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the R&O 96-44 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas, CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. • SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18380) SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.C.) A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Rana F"`o Residential Application/Panning Division Section • THE TREE PLAN SHALL ..•CLUDE the following: • ➢ Identification of the location, size, species, and condition of all existing trees greater than 6- inch caliper. ➢ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D according to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: • Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; • Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; • Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; • Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; ➢ Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and ➢ A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. JKMITIGATION (Refer to Code Section 18.790.060.0 REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: ➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. ➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. ➢ If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: • The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. ➢ The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. " CLEAR VISION AREA [Refer to Code Chapter 18.795) The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. The applicant shall show the clear vision areas on the site plan, and identify any obstructions in these areas. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division Section • 1 FUTURE STREET PLAN AND EXTErt.t0N OF STREETS [Refer to Code Section 18.810.030.F.1 A FUTURE STREET PLAN shall: Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition. The plan shall show the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include other parcels within 200 feet surrounding and adjacent to the proposed land division. ➢ Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and pedestrian facilities on or within 500 feet of the site. Where necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed. �] ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.810.060] MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2Y2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1% times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. n BLOCKS [Refer to Code Section 18.810.090) The perimeter of BLOCKS FORMED BY STREETS SHALL NOT EXCEED 1,800 FEET measured along the right-of-way center line except where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development. When block lengths greater than 330 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. CODE CHAPTERS 18.330(Conditional Use) 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) ►/18.765(Off-Street ParkinglLoading Requirements) 18.340(Director's Interpretation) 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) AG--18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) 18.350(Planned Development) 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) _4,C 18.780(Signs) _j 1 8.360(Site Development Review) 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) _ 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) 18.715(Density Computations) .J 18.790(Tree Removal) 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) _L✓18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) _ 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) t' 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) 72)8.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) ✓18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) _ 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) 18.81 O(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) _ 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) 18.740(Historic Overlay) 18.420(Land Partitions) 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) 18.430(Subdivisions) ✓ 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) P't}E . 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 9 Residential ApplicationPlanning Division Section ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: / f .if ..�.�......._ Lam f 775: O7/ , 4mm:dr br os'6 , • *w'7)c L • ' jr4 1464QC .Z�/ /Li � .fW -�=- r • /pi Ppizi 717 7 40 ,e Pas ie°.6 2.6 so PROCEDURE t/ Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. The Planning counter closes at 5:00 PM. Ma's submitted with an a• 'lication shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 81/2" x 11". One 81/2" x 11" ma• o a •ro•ose• •ro ect s a a so •e su•mitte• or attac ment to t e sta' resort or a•ministrative •ecision. App ications wit un o •e. maps s a not be accepte•. The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division Section The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal eriocd follows al and use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard I-� `� n tc� . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available fr the Planning Division upon request. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION [County Surveyor's Office: 503-648-8884] PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicants are required to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyors Office in order to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). • A 1 • : e con erence an• notes canno cover a o•e requirements an. aspects re ate• to site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: CITY OF TIGARD LA NIN DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: 503-639-4111 FAX: 503-684-7297 EMAIL (staff's first name)@ci.tigard.or.us TITLE 18(CITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE)INTERNET ADDRESS: www.ci.tigard.or.us H:\pattylmasters\Pre-App Notes Residential.doc Updated: 15-Dec-04 (Engineering section:preapp.eng) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 ReslderE,al Aoo'lca'ion;Planning D,vis�on Section 9 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES , ENGINEERING SECTION Q cCityofTigard,°�qm°t SfzapingA Better Community PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Map[sl: 1S136DD Tax Lofts): 1500&1600 Use Type: 508 The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: • SW 69th Avenue to 30 feet from centerline ® SW 70th Avenue to 30 feet from centerline ® SW Dartmouth to 35 feet from centerline plus 11 feet of preserve ROW SW to feet Street improvements: F] Half street improvements will be necessary along SW 69th and 70th Avenues, to include: • 18 feet of pavement from centerline, but not less than 24 feet of paved width ® concrete curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 12-foot concrete sidewalk OR 8 foot sidewalk and 4 foot planter strip ® street trees sized and spaced per Triangle Standards ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Other: CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 6 Engineering Department Section Half street improvements will be necessary along SW Dartmouth, to include: ® 22 feet of pavement from centerline ® concrete curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 6-foot concrete sidewalk with 7 foot planter strip ® street trees sized and spaced per Triangle Standards ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. ® Other: street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: I 1 feet of pavement concrete curb I I storm sewers and other underground utilities n -foot concrete sidewalk street trees n street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. n Other: n street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: n _ feet of pavement n concrete curb n storm sewers and other underground utilities n -foot concrete sidewalk - street trees —1 street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Other: 1 street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: I feet of pavement I I concrete curb storm sewers and other underground utilities I -foot concrete sidewalk n street trees street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 6 Engineering Department Section {l Other: Agreement for Future Street Improvements: In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to provide a future improvement guarantee. The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee: (1 .) (2.) Overhead Utility Lines: Fl Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW 69th Avenue. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) 8 inch line which is located in 69th Avenue and in the intersection of Dartmouth and 70th Avenue. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to extend the public sewer line to the north edge of their property frontage in both 69th and 70th Avenues. Water Supply: The Tualatin Valley Water District (Phone:(503) 642-1511) provides public water service in the area of this site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (South Division) [Contact: Eric McMullen, (503) 612-7010] provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 6 Engineering tlepartntent Section Storm Sewer improvements. All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. On-site detention is required. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on- site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $210. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ® Construction of an on-site water quality facility. Payment of the fee in-lieu. Other Comments: All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. 1) May want to install water services along both 69th and 70th for future use. 2) 18.705.030.H.1 Provide preliminary sight distance certification for proposed access points with Land Use application for completeness. 3) 18.705.030.H.2 The proposed driveway on 69th Avenue must be 150 feet north of Dartmouth Street (collector). The proposed driveway on 70th Avenue must be placed as far north as possible since the frontage is less than 150 feet. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee CITY OF TICARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 6 Engineering Department Section category. The TIF shall calculated at the time of buii a permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. Pay the T1F. PERMITS Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from the Engineering Department. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in City Hall. For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The Engineering Department fee structure for this permit is considered a cost recovery system. A deposit is collected with the application, and the City will track its costs throughout the life of the permit, and will either refund any remaining portion of the deposit, or invoice the Permittee in cases where City costs exceeds the deposit amount. NOTE: Engineering Staff time will also be tracked for any final design-related assistance provided to a Permittee or their engineer prior to submittal of a PFI permit application. This time will be considered part of the administration of the eventual PFI permit. The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security. Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows: NOTE: If an PEI Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. CITY OF TIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Engineering Department Section Master Permit (MST). . permit is issued for all single and Iti-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: -C-Q-�--- 3- 1 - 0 ENGINEERING DEPART ENT STAFF DATE Phone: (503)639-4171 Fax: (503)624-0752 document2 Revised: September 2, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 Engineering Department Section ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS . City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223 1 . . TIGARD February 6,2007 Dartmouth Townhomes LLC 8790 SW Turquoise Loop Beaverton,OR 97007 Re: Permit No. SDR2006-00009,SLR2006-00009,VAR2006-00083 Dear Sir/Ms.: The City of Tigard has canceled the above referenced permit(s) and enclose a refund for the following: Site Address: 1S136DD-07500 &1S136DD-07600 Project Name: Amber Woods Townhomes Job No.: N/A Refund: ® Check#49684 in the amount of$403.50. ❑ Credit card"return" receipt in the amount of$ . ❑ Trust account"deposit" receipt in the amount of$ . Notes: Originally submitted as Site Development Review and resubmitted as Subdivision. All fees transferred from original cases referenced above to land use cases SUB2006-00012, SLR2006-00012,VAR2006-00087 and VAR2006-00088;balance of $403.50 refunded to applicant. If you have any questions please contact me at 503.718.2430. Sincerely, Dianna Howse Permit Specialist Enc. I:\Building\Refunds\Administration\LtrRefund•CancelPermit.doc 01/16/07 Phone: 503.639.4171 • Fax: 503.684.7297 • www.tigard-or.gov • TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 City of Tigard TIGARD Tidemark Refund Request This form is used for refund requests of land use,engineering and building application fees paid by all methods. Receipts,documentation and the Ramat for Penrit A ction or Riterl form (if applicable) must be attached to this form. Refund requests are due to Tidemark System Administrator by Friday at 5:00 PM for processing each Monday. Accounts Payable will route refund checks to Tidemark System Administrator for distribution. Please allow 1-2 weeks for processing. PAYABLE TO: Dartmouth Townhomes LLC DATE: 1/17/07 8790 SW Turquoise Loop Beaverton, OR 97007 REQUESTED BY: Dianna Howse ST TRANSACTION INFORMATION: Receipt#: 2006-4780 Case#: SDR2006-00009,SLR2006- 00009,VAR2006-00083 Date: 10/04/06 Address/Parcel: 1S136DD-07500 &07600 Pay Method: Check Project Name: Amber Woods Townhomes EXPLANATION: Originally submitted as SDR,and resubmitted as SUB. Transfer all fees from above listed cases to SUB2006-00012,SLR206-00012,VAR2006-00087/888refund balance. REFUND INFORMATION: Fee Description From Receipt Revenue Account No. Refund Example: [BUILD]Permit Fee Example: 245-0000-432000 $Amount [LANDUS]SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 $403.50 TOTAL REFUND: $403.50 APPROVALS: If under$500 Professional Staff If under$5,000 Division Manager /'� ? If under$22,500 Department Manager If under$50,000 City Manager If over$50,000 Local Contract Review Board FOR TIDEMARK SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION USE ONLY Case Refund Processed: Date: /7 G 2 B • Aker. / ECS lrc 4-s✓1 s I:\Building\Refunds\RefundRequest.doc 09/15/06 CITY OF TIGARD 11/28/2006 • _ 111 I" 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 3:15:30PM • Tigard,OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD Receipt #: 27200600000000004780 O 116r iA;4'1 Date: 10/04/2006 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SDR2006-00009 [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 4,934.00 tf11 SDR2006-00009 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 728.00 LI qP" SDR2006-00009 [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,000/over 100-0000-438000 480.00 5t) SLR2006-00009 [LANDUS]Application-Type II 100-0000-438000 1,027.00\ Ili° SLR2006-00009 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 151.50 VAR2006-00083 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 17.00 2 ,50 VAR2006-00083 [LANDUS] Special Adjust 100-0000-438000 115.50 Line Item Total: $7,453.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check DARTMOUTH TOWNHOMES KJP 2015 In Person 6,136.72 LLC Check DARTMOUTN TOWNHOMES KJP 2018 In Person 1,268.50 LLC Check VIC ACCOMANDO KJP 4168 In Person 47.78 Payment Total: $7,f4533..00 p' cReceiot.rot Page 1 of I CITY OF TIGARD 1/17/2007 . . 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 9:43:23AM Tigard,OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD • .r—Pte.,412 6i Refund Receipt #: 27200700000000000198 Date: 01/17/2007 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SDR2006-00009 Refund- [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,0 100-0000-438000 (4,530.50) SDR2006-00009 Refund- [LRPF]LR Planning Su 100-0000-438050 (728.00) SDR2006-00009 Refund- [LANDUS] SDR$1,000,0 100-0000-438000 (480.00) SLR2006-00009 Refund- [LANDUS]Application- 100-0000-438000 (1,027.00) SLR2006-00009 Refund- [LRPF]LR Planning Su - 100-0000-438050 (151.50) . VAR2006-00083 Refund- [LRPF]LR Planning Su 100-0000-438050 (17.00) VAR2006-00083 Refund- [LANDUS] Special Adju 100-0000-438000 (115.50) Line Item Total: ($7,049.50) Refund: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check Refund DARTMOUTH TOWNHOMES 2015+ In Person (7,049.50) Refund Total: ($7,049.50) N. 1 O v ai s~ o . W -v -2 a `l h 0 Z w 6 ,3 a r 4 L 0 .4 G t, U t '§ f 8 v o vL � � o H Q CU x .4 � ± v 49 �' y, ,^ lay.] D-' `� ��( b r�" "C t‘ o 4; CID 74 e'n 0 . N a 9,. c' v 11 .s u 0 Q a4 0 a e w cReceipt.rpt y o O y . -• ... \ 1 CITY OF TIGARD 1/17/2007 . li r 9:46:10AM 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,OR 97223 503.639.4171 TIGARD . Receipt #: 27200700000000000199 '-(44-44-3-. Date: 01/17/2007 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SUB2006-00012 [LANDUS] Prelim Plat w/o PD 100-0000-438000 616.00 SUB2006-00012 [LANDUS] Prelim Plat w/o PD 100-0000-438000 4,366.00 SUB2006-00012 [LRPF] LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 624.00 SLR2006-00012 [LANDUS]Application-Type II 100-0000-438000 1,027.00 SLR2006-00012 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 151.50 VAR2006-00087 [LANDUS] Special Adjust 100-0000-438000 115.50 VAR2006-00087 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 17.00 VAR2006-00088 [LANDUS]Development Adjust 100-0000-438000 115.50 VAR2006-00088 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 17.00 Line Item Total: $7,049.50 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check DARTMOUTH TOWNHOMES DEB 2015+ In Person 7,049.50 LLC Payment Total: $7,049.50 cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 Planning Division TIGARD Request for Permit Action or Refund TO: CITY OF TIGARD Permit System Administrator 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 Phone: 503.718.2430 Fax: 503.598.1960 FROM: ❑ Owner ❑ Applicant ❑ Contractor ® City Staff (check one) Name: Dartmouth Townhomes LLC (Business or Individual) V ® I °Mailing Address: 8790 SW Turquoise Loop City/State/Zip: Beaverton, OR 97007 Phone No.: 503-740-2235 PLEASE TAKE ACTION FOR THE ITEM(S) CHECKED (✓): ® CANCEL PERMIT APPLICATION. ® REFUND PERMIT FEES (attach receipt,if available). ❑ REMOVE CONTRACTOR FROM PERMIT (do not cancel permit). Permit #: SDR2006-00009/SLR2006-00009/VAR2006-00083 Site Address or Parcel#: 1S136DD-07500 and 1S136DD-07600 Project Name: Amber Woods Townhomes Subdivision Name: Amber Woods Lot#: EXPLANATION: Originally set up as an SDR. It is now in land use as a Subdivision. Please transfer the funds from the voided cases to SUB2006-00012/SLR2006-00012/ VAR2006-00087/88. The balance of$403.50 should be refunded to Darmouth T/H LLC Signature: JiLLA Date: 11.42806 Shirley Trea ///alQ 7 Print Name: Refund Policy 1. The Director may authorize the refund of a) any fee which was erroneously paid or collected. b) not more than 80 percent of the application fee when an application is withdrawn or canceled before any review effort has been expended. 2. Refunds will be returned to the original Payer in the same method in which payment was received. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Rte to Sys Admin: Date By Rte to-$i'dg Admire: Date /17 02 By/ • Refund Processed: Date ///7/€ ) B ;,P Invoice Processed: Date By Permit Canceled: Date /// 02C By lid._ Parcel Tag Added: Date By Receipt#L')t-3"Yto Date �p6, Method r4_„J 4 Amount$ ?y53 oz) I:\Citywide\Tidemark\Forms\RegPerr itAction-Ping.doc Rev 02/27/06 ' , Cz* ArAsibw. / I . 7cS .O3c,, ' 7// z- / 7, 2f � 5' I / , / P. M , it 'im4- rfuto � _ .?-71.1r; 1 a io ---7-0 3c / 71w/ nictonrr-+ourH it. 72.t.gyzi7 , ..______ -iN /1 "e$4‘4.44 TWIT– €–°-----71----•-e --r-T ._„___----,.._____—________.... .. D � z ' Wo 22' > • o / U / S 89'51 '13" E 100.00' / 8' 74.00 / N 89'59'42" E , N �T / w t \ I 1 / A oo 22' —t` 10' oo 2,220 S.F. • / o0 26' �I� 20' 0.-01 R 40' w PORTION REAR 2 w 1 OF YARD 22' b TRACT "A" � oo N a N• • w 1.628 5: . o I- b 6 ' ? o co z � w '°0 22' 3 2 ' z o I . — 1 ,628 S.F. w O P NO JU oo N z I BLDG.--0- z w ENVELOPE 22' > a ° ►- w (TYP.) 4 / (7)j r W r 2,220 S.F. , :,.:4■1 80.rnowit-izoitivargi.j6. L . _E_ . 7z. _ . 70.00'1E39'59'42" E cr \ .----- 8 SIDE YARD . � / — _. : - /■ 0 \ SHED EXIST BARR CADE \ ■ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ S 89°51 '13" E 122.80' \ 70.02' 1 1 \ ' I \ 8'84 N 89'03'54" E 8 N . \1_ i E -Ltpl 0- .6' _._ 5 2 �' wE-1/°� 18' 2,267 S.F. REAR ` �� I~' 3C 6 YARD w -0. ► 0o w ~ I 40' � � � o 1Q 16' ° N f'. _ REAR id .4 g YARD . C. c� 6 ° / N �� R 20 �" 1 ,584 S.F. r _ —e 2 0o w BLDG. l b o w ENVELOPE —�� ' o ° (TYP.) o / 7 / N ° 2,042 S.F. '' 4 / .iiro '• i '.'-i`•��`r�t!'�i�,t•��.•� 5622�9 t .-._,,_ 48.31 ' / . \ J N 89'03'54" • ` R I /\ 8' SIDE YARD IN EXIST EXIST 8' W / 4' WIDE STONE ACCESS DEWALK TO STORM STRUCTURE , L,J w , . $ Page 1 of 2 Gary Pagenstecher - Amber Woods Proposal From: Gary Pagenstecher To: ACCOMANDO, VIC Date: 3/7/2007 5:25 PM Subject: Amber Woods Proposal CC: Bewersdorff, Dick Vic, Dennis, and Jack, As we discussed this afternoon, you have agreed to re-submit an application for site development review/sensitive lands review for a multi-family residential use in the MUE, at a maximum density of R-25 for the net buildable area, calculated as the net buildable area/1,480 sf per dwelling unit + any density transfer, pursuant to 18.715.030.A. Access will be 30 feet, 24-foot paved, entering at the northern-most portion of the property on SW 69th and SW 70th. Tigard Triangle Design standard setbacks of 0 to 10 feet will apply to the street facing elevations of proposed buildings. Internal setbacks are subject to the Commercial Development standards of 10-foot side yards and 20-foot rear yards. The C-level buffer standard (6 to 10 feet) will apply to boundaries of the subject property that border single-family use. No structures, parking, or accessways are allowed within the buffer. Multi-family buildings must meet the site development review approval standards in 18.360.090, as well as the Tigard Triangle Design standards for site, building, and landscaping. Parking must include the minimum required in Table 18.765.2, plus visitor parking, if applicable, pursuant to 18.765.030.E. 100% of fees already paid will be applied to the new SDR/SLR application upon written request to withdraw the current application. A new neighborhood meeting should be held. Consultant reports must be amended to reflect the revised proposal. I look forward to reviewing your revised proposal prior to submittal of the application, at your earliest convenience. Thank you, Gary P.S. Please forward to Dennis and Jack Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner City of Tigard 503-718-2434 GaryP©tiigard-or.gov file://C:\Documents and Settings\garyp.000\Local Settings\Temp\GW100001.HTM 3/8/2007 • 5' t G m ScEe� G It O r..4;eg „ 44% • /magi A- Patty Lunsford - Fwd: Amber Woods Development Review ;2°° 9 Page 1 From: Gary Pagenstecher To: Lunsford, Patty Date: Thursday, October 18, 2007 3:52:27 PM Subject: Fwd: Amber Woods Development Review Patty, Please update the worksheet accordingly. Thank you, Gary >>> "VIC ACCOMANDO" <accomando1 @msn.com> 10/18 11:00 AM >>> Gary, per our conversation this date, I am requesting an extension to the mandated 120-day review period for the above referenced project. We submitted the application predicated on the belief that the original Service Provider Letter(for condominium), would void the amended Service Provider Letter for a subdivision. A meeting with Julie Wirth this week at Clean Water Services offices revealed that the amended letter(subdivision) extinguished the original and it cannot be reemployed. Subsequently, we are asking CWS to amend the amended (sic)SPL. Julie advises that it will take approx. 10 business days. Therefore we respectfully request a three week extension for the City's allocated review time . Thank you, CC: Bewersdorff, Dick Cu � (1°11 °1'11S) Alea9 4,2.o*s